FLYJACK

Not sure,, If I share it publicly, it will blow up this case and be stolen by others... I need to protect this for now. It is never seen evidence from a witness that can be used to eliminate a suspect but not necessarily point to a specific individual suspect.. It narrows down the suspect pool to a very very small cohort. I think it is the biggest piece of case evidence I have seen in decades..

The new evidence I have really rules out all the high profile suspects... (not that this evidence is actually needed)

Really mixed on these docs... good to see people we know but there isn't anything new.. They never move the ball.. always a rehash of what we know or often misinformation. usually disappointing, and a movie about Tina in the works... meh.. I am working on something that presents a real solution with new information.

The FP is 2 miles W of Bald Mountain

Bald Mountain not mentioned.. The tattered pants found 25 feet up in a tree were found at Green Mountain, ruled not linked to Cooper.

Nobody ever said PDX was on the westside.. PDX is roughly in the middle of Portland on the North edge, the "FBI" flightpath goes on the west of PDX and the west side of Portland. There is no conflict here. You keep making straw-man arguments.

The "FBI" flightpath has the plane passing on the west side of Portland and west of PDX... So, that is consistent and in no way supports the WFP. I really don't think you have any argument whatsoever for your WFP theory.

I understand very well, When I asked you about your WFP, you claimed the "FBI" map can be dismissed because no airliner would fly like that.. your argument was essentially that the "FBI" map was not legit. So, it was your argument and clearly you can't defend it. The map wasn't created by the FBI but was used and presented by the FBI so is referred to as the "FBI" map. We all know that. We also know it is plotted points connected by hand drawn lines.. it is a crude representation of the path. It can be smoothed within the 1 mile error to represent the path of a jet. The smoothing does not increase the accuracy and is not intended to do so, it only demonstrates that given the 1 mile error it does represent the smooth path of a jet rather than the jagged and abrupt path we see. Rataczak said he was hand flying the plane and Portland ATC said it was up to 2 miles E of the center of V-23.. So, your argument and dismissal of the "FBI" map is not justified in any way.. in evidence or reasonable inference.

That comment is intellectually dishonest and just discredits you... Everybody knows the FBI map is unsmoothed plotted points and no way supports your western flight path theory.. Nobody needs to convert you, your argument exposes you.

Wrong, the airliner did not stay on the center of V-23 per Portland ATC. It was hand flown by Rataczak not on autopilot. You just can't dismiss something because you have the facts wrong. The jagged and abrupt nature of the "FBI" map is because it is 1 min incremented plotted points.. somebody just joined the points, it is not the actual path. It is a crude representation. It can be smoothed out within the 1 mile plotting error to accurately reflect a jet's path..

Not the WFP.. The most Eastern point on the "FBI" path is a few miles from a creek that connects to the Washougal, but it is a tiny creek, more like a ditch, goes into Lacamas Lake. Very hard to imagine money that sinks making its way all that way, across the lake down another small creek to the Washougall and into the Columbia..

Not simple, that isn't the actual path, it is a connect the plotted dots made to roughly represent the path,, there is a 1 mile error in it. If you take the 1 mile error and extend the points within the error, it can be smoothed out to represent what a jet path would look like. Something like this.. The pink line is within the plotting error.. may not be exactly the path the jet took but close.

How can it be dismissed..

and have you moved from that position from 2010...

Interesting,, What does this mean.. "once airborn".. did he say this in the air or before or both??

No we don't know.. FBI files and witnesses were all over the place.. "black rain-type overcoat or dark topcoat;" Mitchell said raincoat.. A raincoat is water-proof or water resistant while an overcoat is for warmth.. It was probably a raincoat given the weather/temp but it may be a distinction without a difference. He probably put the chute on over the "raincoat",, but witnesses never said.

I don't think they want it solved, there is no prosecution now.,, they want the public narrative to be that Cooper lost all the money and died in the jump.

Ulis just did a podcast.. Yikes, Ulis still making lots of errors.. said he did a new show maybe out this/next month. Still flogging his crazy burial/retrieval theory.. complete nonsense. Pro tip, set to 2X speed.

Yes, the hypocrisy is that the FBI trashes speculation and claims the investigative high ground then they speculate to provide a solution.. Sometime in 1972 they shifted to publicly pushing the Cooper died in the jump theory.. a convenient solution if you haven't solved the case.. it is also PR against hijacking, if people believed Cooper got away with it more may try it. The dredge,, IMO, problems with the dredge theory are having the money go through it and end up in the condition it was found.. seems very unlikely. Also, you have to explain how the money got into the river in the first place,, that is the more important question than how it got onto the shore. We know the money doesn't float and sinks and the money spot was under water yearly. High water was in Spring. The best explanation is that the money was pushed along the bottom (in Spring) when the River level was above the money find spot and it became embedded there. There are many theories for the money getting into the River but the Washougal is way way down the list..

Plato's cave...

because it is hard to communicate specifics later.. For example,,, what if Cooper said "when we reach Mexico" flaps down, wheels down etc.. but Tina didn't write down "when we reach Mexico".. It always bugged me that he knew about aviation and fuelling but got the range wrong..

Great question, I have been wondering if his demands were misinterpreted by Tina in her notes for the pilots... maybe he wanted the configuration later (Mexico) or when he signalled it.. Maybe she wrote the note in a way that was not what Cooper intended.. We will never know..

To FBI Director.. Prints of no value.. case closed

Found it.. Preparations were made to land at Yuma (prior to Reno) and Mazatlan, Mexico....