FLYJACK

Yes, all or part lost... Hahneman was in the US Dec 71 and fled to Honduras Jan 72 to establish residency there. He got an ID with Honduran citizenship, an altered name and an incorrect birthdate. He was hiding.

Darren interviewed the numismismisistister "money guy" he said if the money were spent in the US something would show up.. Hahneman fled to Honduras weeks after NORJAK, if he was Cooper then the money went to Honduras and was stashed and/or spent.. never to show up in US circulatiion.

Also, the FBI did not want to publicly release the manor in which the money was packaged as only Cooper would know.. they state that. That info was a hold back. "information only known to us and the hijacker" Bundles were randomized,,, (not packets of 100) IMPORTANT: The money was found in packets of 100's in original order not random count, evidence is the bundles were randomized and that must have been done with rubber bands. "bundled into several sizes the time of the hijacking" "appear that it was randomly done" "bundled".. "randomly done" I posted this before but it is important.. 7:19 in video Himmelsbach.. Money was given to Cooper strapped in 100's and bundled with rubber bands.. "There were ten thousand twenty dollar bills assembled in straps of a hundred bills to a strap and individual straps held together with rubber bands."

No, Hayden was never consulted. He never saw his chutes inside the containers.

Yes, I posted that vid here before.. Also Tina, bank type bands and bank bands one bundle

Yes, the float test was done long ago.. needs to be redone. Tina handled the money and said bank style bands, the bank manager is noted in the FBI files saying bank bands and Himmelsbach said straps... I noticed Ulis is claiming the rubber band frag was in the middle, I have never found any evidence for that.. Somebody should ask him for a source.

I should address this in more detail.. I don't need to produce anything for you... or anyone, where do you get this rule from? Hahneman turned himself in but had hidden the money and he wasn't talking. When he went to court he plead guilty to reduced charges. There is evidence that he worked on CIA contracts as a radio/electronics engineer, he had a high level security clearance... I think they cut a deal, he did 12 yrs. They had to give him some time in jail for his hijacking. Hahmenan and his high level connection had leverage here. The CIA was under scrutiny at the time for illegal activities and Hahneman would be bad publicity if his connections got out. You keep saying I have no evidence, I do have evidence lots of it. Just because I won't share it doesn't mean I don't have it.. on what planet is that logical. In fact, I have so much that it is overwhelming and it would take a massive amount of work to present it properly. It would be investigator malpractice to drop a suspect based on assumptions... that is what you are demanding. BTW,,, last year I solved a 45 year old cold case from my computer at home. It involves a celebrity and they were all set to make a documentary but COVID messed that up as it involves international travel to Japan. Blevins, have you ever actually solved a famous crime??? has Eric??

Did you catch Tom Kaye's diatom research... It suggests the money entered the River in Spring and was buried soon after... Spring only diatom, no winter diatom's.. That would indicate a delay from NORJAK to entering the water, a Spring 72-79... and a brief exposure to the River during that same Spring. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-70015-z

A few years back I realized the dominant narrative did not make any sense.. how could the money go to Cooper, get randomized (count) and end up in 100's and the same order as given to Cooper as claimed by the FBI.. It can't.. So, I realized that Carr mixed up bundles and packets... the packets of 100's were not a randomized count, the rubber banded bundles of random count packets was.. The FBI list has been re-ordered alpha numerically and without the original bill order we can't check their curation of the list. I have the about 80 Cooper bills noted in a spreadsheet and they are dispersed quite randomly throughout the 9998 bills. WE can't do much without the original bill order. Another thing is the custody of the money vs the micro.. the bank was in control of them and we can't confirm that the micro matched the actual bills given to Cooper.. Theoretically, the bills can appear on the Micro but not be given to Cooper.. I don't think this is the case but we can't check it. For example, there was an airline extortion before NORJAK for $25,000, the person was caught in Portland and the money was never recovered. If, for example the money was taken from the bank stash then replaced but the micro wasn't updated then those bills would appear on the micro but no longer be in the stash.. The TBAR.. The evidence indicates money was given to Cooper in 100 bill packets of circulated $20 bills of random SN number sequence. The packets were likely bank paper strapped and those packets rubber banded into bundles of a random count of packets.. That means the rubber bands were at two places around the bundle. Now, the paper bands are not made of the same material currency is and it would deteriorate within months or less if there was abrasion along the bottom of the River. I believe Brian when he said there were rubber band fragments, we have no evidence for the location or any description of those fragments.. After the money lands on TBAR, the regular paper bank bands if still attached deteriorate quickly, and as the rubber bands holding the bundle deteriorate the packets separate slightly.. but there would still be rubber band fragments attached to the top and bottom packet. It all makes sense and is consistent with all the evidence. The FBI claimed it was one bundle, in the same order and form as given to Cooper. This flips the dominant narrative that the money could have only arrived as three independent packets of 100,, this is inconsistent with form the money was given to Cooper. For this to happen then the packets must have been removed from their bundle after being given to Cooper. Further, if they were in bank bands there would be no rubber bands frags found,, So, it is more likely the money landed on TBAR as one single rubber banded bundle of packets. That completely changes the means by which it could have arrived. For example Ulis claims Cooper buried the money because three independent packets were found together. Others, claim the money had to arrive in a bag or container because the three packets were independent. Further, a single bundle would never go through a dredge intact. Once you realize the single bundle was more likely, it opens up the means of arrival. I believe it came from the River. It doesn't float. The money spot was often underwater in Spring and some Spring between 72 and 79 the money entered the River and tumbled along the bottom to the money spot under the water. At that time, the money spot was effectively the river bottom. The money would be packaged something like this.. but $20's

Unfortunately for you, Mr Blevins. The case for KC is extremely weak speculation but since KC DOES NOT match the basic description for Cooper, he is eliminated. You brag about the FBI files being useless... Cooper was universally described as having a dark/swarthy/olive complexion and Latin/Mexican/Indian descent, features and characteristics... that nails Hahneman exactly. That alone doesn't prove he is Cooper but... It eliminates KC and most other suspects. NOBODY said suntan (in November). Here are the receipts and I stopped part way though the files.. I think the point is clear. FBI PART 8 P 18 Complexion: Olive, Latin appearance, medium smooth FBI PART 8 P 21 average to well built, olive or swarthy complexion, medium smooth, dark brown or black hair parted on left side, combed back FBI PART 8 P 177 Complexion: Olive, Latin appearance, medium smooth FBI PART 8 P 179 ALL OFFICES ARE TO BEAR IN MIND WHEN CAPTIONED CRIME WAS COMMITTED ON NOVEMBER 11, 1971, UNSUB AKA D. B. COOPER WAS DESCR!BED AS BEING A WHITE MALE, t1ID·FORTIES, 5• 10" TO 6' 0", 170 POUNDS, OLIVE COMPLEXION, AND LATIN APPEARANCE. FBI PART 9 P 666 The intent of this change to the artist's composite is to more clearly show UNSUB's age and swarthy complexion. FBI PART 9 P 862 WHITE MALE, AGE 40S, HEIGHT 5'10'' TO 6'0", .. 170 TO 180 POUNDS, COMPLEXION OLIVE, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH, HAIR DARK BROWN OR BLACK, FBI PART 9 P 919 ALL OFFICES ARE TO BEAR IN MIND WHEN CAPTIONED CRIME WAS ON NOVEMBER 11, 1971, UNSUB AKA. B. COOPER WAS DESCRIBED AS BEING A WHITE MALE, 5 ' 1 0 " TO 6 ' 0 “ , 170 POUNDS, OLIVE AND LATIN APPEARANCE. FBI PART 10 P 1304 complexion olive, medium smooth FBI PART 10 P 1531 DESCRIPTION OF THF. SUBJECT OBTAINED BY INTERVIEW WITH STEWARDESSES AS FOLLOWS; WHITE, MALE, AMERICAN, OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE FBI PART 10 P 1683 OLIVE-TYPE FBI PART 10 P 1683 said that the man appeared to be Latin descent FBI PART 10 P 1752 OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE FBI PART 11 P 1922 FOLLOWING COMPOSITE TAKEN FROM INTERVIEWS OF WITNESSES WHO WERE IN A POSITION TO SEE UNSUB. RACE, WHITE; SEX, MALE; AGE, MID FORTY'S; FIVE FT TEN TO SIX FT . , ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY TO ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY POUNDS, AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH COMPLEXION, DARK BROWN OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK; SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL; EYES, POSSIBLY BROWN, FBI PART 11 P 1982 DESCRIBED AS WHITE, MALE, MID FORTIES, SEVENTY TO ONE EIGHTY, OLIVE COMPLEXION, OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON SMOKED RALEIGH CIGARETTES. FBI PART 11 P 2036 Mr. MILNES said the hijacker was described as white, male, American, olive complexion, Latin appearance, black hair, normal hair style parted on left, age middle forties, six feet tall, 170 to 175 pounds, average build, brown eyes. He was wearing a black suit, white shirt, narrow black tie, black rain-type overcoat, black dress suit, and was carrying a dark briefcase. FBI PART 11 P 2039 Race: Caucasian, believed to be of Mexican-American descent with possibly some American Indian blood FBI PART 11 P 2047 UNSUB described as white male, mid-forties, five ten to six feet, one seventy to one eighty, olive complexion, latin appearance, dark brown or black hair combed straight back in normal style, parted on left, smoked Raleigh cigarettes. FBI PART 11 P 2056 that he has average eyes, of Latin appearance, with a sort of disinterested look FBI PART 11 P 2135 CHEEKS TOO FLAT, SHOULD BE MORE ROUNDED TO GIVE MEXICAN-AMERICAN APPEARANCE. FBI PART 11 P 2224 WHITE, MALE, MID 40's, 5'1011 TO 611 , 170 Tel 180 lbs., AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, OLIVE COMPLEXION, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH, DARK BROWN OR BLACK HAIR, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK, SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL, POSSIBLY BROWN EYES, DURING LATTER PART OF FLIGHT PUTr DARK, WRAP-AROUND SUNGLASSES WITH DARK RIMS. LOW VOICE, SPOKE INTELLIGENTLY; NO PARTICULAR ACCENT, POSSIBLY FROM MIDWEST SECTION OF THE U.S., HEAVY SMOKER OF RALEIGH FILTER TIP CIGARETTES, WEARING BLACK OR BROWN SUIT; WHITE SHIRT; NARROW BLACK TIE; BLACK DRESS SUIT; FBI PART 11 P 1987 COMPLEXION: OLIVE, SWARTHY, THE LATIN TYPE FBI PART 11 P 1841 COMPLEXION: OLIVE, LATIN APPERANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH FBI PART 12 P 2367 MID-FORTIES; OLIVE COMPLEXION; BROWN EYES FBI PART 12 P 2442 average to well built, olive or swarthy complexion FBI PART 13 P 3119 Complexion: Olive, Latin appearance, medium smooth FBI PART 13 P 3159 which he feels more closely depicts the nose and cheeks of the unknown subject, whom he feels was of Mexican-American dissent with possibly Indian blood. FBI PART 15 P 4092 COMPLEXION OLIVE, LATIN APPEARANCE, FBI PART 18 P 5497 RACE WHITE, SEX MALE, AGE MID FORTIES, HEIGHT FIVE FEET TEN INCHES TO SIX FEET, WEIGHT ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY TO ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY POUNDS, BUILD AVERAGE TO WELL BUILT, COMPLEXION OLIVE, LATIN APPEARANCE, MEDIUM SMOOTH; HAIR DARK BROWN OR BLACK, NORMAL STYLE, PARTED ON LEFT, COMBED BACK, SIDEBURNS, LOW EAR LEVEL; EYES POSSIBLY BROWN. FBI PART 19 P 5934 "Enclosed is an artist's conception of the hijacker who extorted two hundred thousand dollars from Northwest Airlines on November 24, 1971. This man is described as follows: "Race-white; sex-male; age mid-forties; height-five feet ten inches to six feet; weight-170 to 180 pounds; build-average to well built; complexion olive, latin appearance, medium smooth; hair-dark brown or black; normal style, parted on left, combed back; sideburns, low ear level; eyes-possibly brown. FBI PART 26 P 8545 He was unable to determine from the photograph the complexion of ______ but again emphasized the hijacker had a swarthy or Latin type complexion and it appeared to him might have such a complexion. FBI PART 26 P 8574 OLIVE OR LATIN COMPLEXION· Key witnesses generally agree that unsub had an "olive or Latin" complexion.- One witness indicated a Mexican-American or possibly Indian complexion and characteristics. In addition, unsub expressed a desire to go "anywhere in Mexico”. FBI PART 26 P 8881 She thereafter remained in the cockpit where she prepared thirteen pages of notes concerning the hijacking and in which she described unsub as in his fifties. She later said he appeared to be of Latin descent. FBI PART 26 P 8882 believed unsub was a Mexican-American. She bad a short encounter with the unsub prior to her deplaning at Seattle FBI PART 27 P 9104 To date 475 suspects have been developed based·on appearance, as well as other features. Many of the suspects were developed because of their resemblance to the artist's composite of UNSUB. A 9reat number of these suspects have turned out to be in their 20s or early 30s, with light or fair complexion. According to witnesses, UNSUB's age is in the mid-40s and his complexion is olive or Latin in appearance. The artist's composite clearly· looks like a man in his late 20s or 30s and his complexion is difficult to determine from the black and white sketch. FBI PART 27 P 9390 In NORJAK case, • witnesses describe subject's complexion as olive, Latin appearance, medium smooth. FBI PART 27 P 9327 In view of the fact that unsub in this matter had a swarthy complexion and was tentatively identified by several witnesses as possibly having Mexican ancestry, the following lead is being set out: FBI PART 28 P 9541 lacks the Mexican or Indian characteristics that ____ noted in the hijacker. FBI PART 28 P 9559 further advised that the hijacker definitely had some Indian or Mexican blood in him. He would guess about one quarter Indian or Mexican blood. FBI PART 28 P 10037 FACIAL FEATURES: Should reflect a Mexican or Indian ancestry FBI PART 29 P 10072 similar Mexican-type facial features FBI PART 33 P 12115 indicated that the unsub's complexion was somewhat swarthy indicating that he might have possibly been an American Indian or Mexican American. FBI PART 34 P 13102 In view of the fact that UNSUB in this matter is possibly of American Indian decent, the following leads are being set forth pursuant to referenced communication:

Dude, I have the receipts and I have good reasons for not sharing them. I have thousands of pieces of information. FACT,, Hahneman was redacted,,, you were what you call it.. WRONG, OUCH Just because you and Eric were motivated to make your cases public doesn't mean everyone has to. Besides, your attack on me and my research is irrelevant, what I say or do or release doesn't impact whether Hahneman was Cooper in any way. He either was or wasn't and you can't prove he wasn't. I tried and I can't prove he wasn't. You have this irrational obsession claiming that because I don't release my research then Hahneman wasn't Cooper.... this is insane. Your claim that he wasn't because the FBI would have figured it out and told everybody is conjecture, not fact. You do understand the difference. The FBI looked at KC years before you and you sent your KC case to the FBI and they didn't do anything, by your logic that proves he wasn't Cooper. oops.. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.... I wouldn't eliminate any suspect based on the actions of the FBI. Even Eric shouted over and over that often in cold cases the guilty person was previously looked at by investigators... Let's bring up Eric,, he finally eliminated Peterson based on Cooper smoking and Peterson not, that was a fact not speculation... get it. How can Eric be a better investigator when he has got everything wrong. Like your narrative, Eric's narrative is based on conjecture.. I started looking at Hahneman to eliminate him but I found no facts that did. If you have actual facts that eliminate Hahneman please let me know...

Robert, you can't win this, you need to understand you've already lost. It is a fact, there was a very high level intervention on Hahneman's behalf... above the FBI. That doesn't mean the FBI as a whole knew Hahneman was Cooper, the FBI doesn't work like that. You keep making these irrational assumptions. No, I don't think the FBI as whole knew Hahneman was Cooper or covered it up. The intervention would have been isolated at the very top from higher up. You use the label "conspiracy theory" to discredit... It is meaningless drivel.. Most things are actually conspiracies.. The term "Conspiracy Theory" was invented as propaganda by the intel agencies to discredit critics. A conspiracy is an act to conspire, an act or agreement toward a common end. That can be applied to virtually everything. It is a propaganda term. Applying the label is meaningless. Further, the other fact you ignore is that the FBI made a gross error for Hahneman, one that would eliminate him from NORJAK. However, I don't know if it was a legit error or FBI misinformation or if they did use it to eliminate him. So, we know the FBI is not perfect, they make mistakes, they are also influenced by political factors. Hahneman is redacted from FBI Cooper files.. long after he died, there is no reason to redact him as all other dead suspects are named. The FBI files are riddled with the names and investigative detiails of major suspects except Peterson because he just recently died and Hahneman who died 30 years ago.. The prints here were not confirmed Hahneman's, they were from the plane he hijacked. They compared those to NORJAK's. REDACTED.... I believe this is likely Hahneman's name redacted, he was identified and in custody before this time,, I filled in the redactions and it fits. Of course since it is redacted I can't prove it. And no you are wrong.. as usual, half the male population did not match Cooper's description. Your incredibly biased mind is both exaggerating and only considering the sketch not the full description. You even stick to sketch A even though the FBI clearly stated that sketch B is the most accurate. Sketch A should be trashed. The best clue and one everyone ignores is the description as dark/olive/swarthy complexion and Latin/Mexican/Indian appearance, descent and features.. and we haven't even got to the age, hair, lips,,,, It just amazes me that almost everyone ignores this.. not really. That alone eliminates KC and most Cooper suspects.. Pack your bags and head over to the UFO forum... you lost, all your KC stuff is null and VOID. KC is not Cooper.... you know it. I know it, everybody with a pulse and a basic understanding of the case knows it. BTW,, I am using you as a foil to get this info to everyone else, not to change your mind.

I have the entire list of 9998 Cooper bills in a spreadsheet matching the alpha numeric list published by the FBI... that FBI list was re-ordered, it does not match the order as given to Cooper on the Micro. We do not have that original order. I have checked all the start/stop numbers, they are not in there. You guys have to remember there were two bank emergency stashes and two different Micros sent to the FBI.. The 15 packets left behind and not given from the initial bank stash given to Cooper was immediately incorporated into a second bank stash. The entire Micro for the second emergency stash was requested by the FBI as they were having trouble deleting the bills not given to Cooper based on the initial 15 pairs of stop/start numbers. The second Micro had a range of bills to be deleted and that had an error on one of the bills. Was that error material,, no way to know.

Georger claims bait money is never sent out in paper straps... he cites experts and protocol. Georger is manufacturing a premise to influence perception. Richard Floyd McCoy ransom money in what,,,, paper straps. Even though the evidence strongly suggests paper bands were used it isn't really material. Carr believed that the packets were randomized in count. CKRET.. "November 29, 2007 · Report reply The money was packaged in varying amounts, so one bundle would have $500.00 another $1,000.00, there was no uniformity to it. I have been searching for the evidence report from the lab but have not found it yet, lots of files to go through. When I get it you'll be the second to know." Here he makes two errors, 1st he is referring to the packets of 100 as bundles and 2nd they were not random counts, they were in 100's.. Georger and Carr got this wrong a decade ago and this error plagues the case today. The important takeaway is the individual packets (100 bills) were not randomized in count, the rubber banded bundles of individual packets was. That means the money went to Cooper in individual packets of 100's and those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. What does that mean,, the TBAR money likely arrived as one rubber banded bundle of several packets (100 bills each). And that means the idea that the money could have ONLY arrived on TBAR as three separate packets thereby limiting how it got there is BUSTED. Welcome to 2017.... strapped packets were not opened and recombined.

That is interesting,, Snowmman is reviewing the bills and money,, I went over that years ago and was smeared ridiculed and told to shut up.. yup, everybody got it wrong. I already sorted this out.. Carr and Georger got this completely screwed up. I do have all the 9998 bills in a spreadsheet and identified about 80 of them as TBAR bills. Yes, that took some time. The money was in packets of 100's in random sequence. Evidence suggests it was in bank bands and then rubber banded into bundles. The bundles were randomized and rubber banded, not the packets (of 100) but the bundles of packets. Carr and Georger got this wrong, the packets (100's) were not randomized in count, the bundles of packets were. So, the money went to Cooper in packets of 100's (random sequence) then rubber banded in a random number of packets into bundles. Therefore, money found on TBAR was likely from one bundle of packets rubber banded, not three individual packets. The FBI list.. what a mess. The FBI got the Micro with images of all the bills from the bank stash including bills that were not given to Cooper. The FBI was given the start and stop bill numbers for the 15 packets (of 100) that Cooper did not get and were told to deduct those and all in between. Now, the bank immediately made a new emergency stash including those 15 packets on the Micro that did not go to Cooper.. The FBI told the bank they were having difficulty making the Cooper list and asked for the Micro of the new bank stash to check the against the first one.. Confused yet.. The bank gave the FBI a range for those bills on the Micro which had an error in it. Somehow the FBI came up with their list from two Micro lists of two emergency bank stash's.. The FBI list is re-ordered to be alpha numeric, it is not in the sequence that was given to Cooper which was random. We don't have the actual bill order as it was given to Cooper. Further, the FBI list is 9998 bills or two short. That is likely due to an error in deducting a start stop set of bills. Takeaway, the money went to Cooper in packets of 100's of non-sequential random $20 bills, each packet rubber banded into bundles of random packet counts. The TBAR money most likely arrived as one bundle of several packets not three individual packets. The FBI list was re-ordered and likely contains an error. It is very unlikely but theoretically possible that the TBAR money never actually went to Cooper but was part of the money not given to Cooper and put in the new stash. The problem is the chain of custody and tracking was all done by the bank, not the FBI. We have no way to check and confirm that they were accurate. We know that the Cooper bills were on the Micro but we can't confirm 100% that the 1st Micro less the 2nd was accurate. I am sure Georger will read this and distort it into some nonsense to cover for his decade old error. Geoger does not have permission to use this post in whole or part.

KC is a disaster, there is nothing there. He doesn't even fit the description. If your suspect isn't olive/swarthy/latin in appearance and features you have a real big problem. Stick a fork in your case for KC, he is done. I think you already know that. I am not pissed because of your question, I am pissed because of your lies and misinformation. You keep making assumptions that are just wrong and claims about me that are false. That would piss off anybody. The question is legitimate, I asked it myself, if the FBI looked at Hahneman then why wasn't he uncovered. That is were I started... Why wasn't Hahneman Cooper.. was he eliminated, if so why.. I thought there must be something obvious to eliminate him but as I uncovered information he became more likely not less. I already mentioned that I found a gross error made by the FBI and I also found very high level intervention on behalf of Hahneman. I have proof of both. Also, McCoy's hijacking was at the same time, perhaps the FBI focussed on him as Cooper. You make the assumption that he was eliminated. There is no evidence of that. If he was, we don't know if it was accurate. This case is extraordinary and something extraordinary occurred for Cooper to not have been uncovered by the FBI. Hahneman matches the Cooper profile and description virtually perfectly, better than any other suspect. Hahneman is redacted from FBI files while others (who have died) are not. Hahneman committed a nearly identical crime. FACT, the FBI made a gross error and there was very high level intervention on Hahneman's behalf.. and Hahneman was not a copycat, US official said his plans to HJ predated Norjak. Based on that, a real investigator would ask why Hahneman was not Cooper.. an amateur would assume he wasn't with no evidence whatsoever.

Yes, Tosaw claimed in his book that Cooper removed the packing cards. I think there were two cards found, but the inspection of Hayden's back chute will confirm. Cossey's recall was the only source for the Cooper chute being his NB6/8, he never produced his records. If he was wrong and the chute was the 60-9707 then it may have been already found. read more here.. https://themountainnewswa.net/2021/07/29/db-cooper-fbi-documentation-on-the-parachutes-gets-another-review/

No, you have contradicted yourself so many times I've lost track.. You twist what I have written to fit within your warped reality.. You ignore actual facts and assert assumptions.. most wrong. You just make up stuff out of thin air.. straw-man nonsense. You project your own failure on me.. you released your Cooper research and failed.. I don't care to release mine and it is driving you crazy. You seem threatened. You are experiencing cognitive dissonance.. the process of enlightenment when you come to the realization that all your Cooper work is wrong. Instead of acknowledging that you have it all wrong, you are lashing out at me for not disclosing my research. Now, you claim with no evidence whatsoever that I have nothing.. << this is psycho stuff. Be thankful some fools are willing to give some scratch for your nonsense, Ulis made money too, at least he finally admitted Peterson wasn't Cooper, I respect that.

The chute SN 60-9707 was described as a 24 ft from the card. Here a 24 ft chute was found but rejected as they believed the Cooper chute was 28 ft from Cossey. If Cossey was wrong about his NB6/8 being used it may have been a 24 ft SN 60-9707.

You have a very loose relationship with reality... seek help

You are so clueless it is beyond belief... It's like trying to reason with Sybil... she faked it.. You brought up Hahneman after I pointed out the protruding lower lip evidence, not me. Another fact you just deny... I have said it over and over,, I am not here to convince anybody of anything. I have enough evidence to convince ME that Hahneman is the best Cooper suspect by a long shot. I have been trying but can't forensically put him on the plane. You have just repeated the lie that I think LEO is stupid.. I have never said that, you just make it up because you don't know what you don't know. You claim you don't make up stuff then you make up stuff.. see a pattern here. CRAZYTOWN You want to dismiss Hahneman but you can't because you don't have any facts so you make up a narrative, a proxy that is irrational. Blame me for not giving you proof then you can dismiss him... that people, is insane. You are a joke, your reasoning/logic, your research, your ignorant assumptions.. are incompatible with reality. Go look for UFO's... the Cooper case is not for you. Say what you want about Hahneman but stop lying about me.

Making up stuff... I was referring to your bogus comments about myself and Hahneman. Your KC is an open book and there is nothing there. Lots of work but no results. Probably in running for the weakest suspect of all. Understand this,, then take a hike. I do not owe you anything. I am NOT going to give you my research. You are not worthy. It is not my responsibility to educate you... Sorry, I am not researching this case for you, I am doing it for myself. Just because I won't give you my research doesn't mean I don't have any. You can think whatever you want about Hahneman with your limited knowledge but you crossed the line when you manufactured false claims about me. I did not bring up Hahneman, you did.. when you tried to dismiss the Cooper protruding lower lip evidence with your ridiculous backasswards logic about height.

Hard work doesn't mean quality, the KC case is as weak as it gets. You know he wasn't Cooper. Here is what I think, you are a moron... Why, You make completely false assumptions and 100% bogus claims,,,, because you don't actually know anything. You make errors that I correct and you just keep going with same ones and add new ones. A never ending sewer. I am not interested in correcting your garbage. It is far too time consuming and no upside for me. YOU ARE JUST MAKING UP STUFF... So, get lost.

I am not going to argue with a moron.

Your statements make no sense, the stews told the sketch artist the same thing, Cooper had a protruding lower lip. That makes it more reliable not less or the same as height estimates.. Your argument is backasswards. A protruding lower lip is something objectively seen, height is a subjective estimate. Do you understand your error? I really don't like to have to unwind your messed up logic for you. And I have said that Hahneman is the best suspect based on the evidence I have short of forensics putting him on the plane. Based on all the evidence I have, I believe he was Cooper. I have tried but can't put him on the plane, no suspect can be put on the plane. Now, I would never expect others to accept Hahneman as Cooper without having all the info I have, but to reject him with VIRTUALLY NO INFORMATION is intellectually ignorant. You know nothing about Hahneman or what the FBI believed or didn't or if what they believed is even accurate. You also assume the FBI didn't make errors or wasn't influenced by outside sources.. I have evidence of both. What you have expressed is a BIG FAT logical fallacy... You have made assumptions about something you have zero knowledge about to reach a predetermined conclusion. I despise this type of thinking, it ends valid intellectual inquiry. Essentially, your lack of knowledge is your argument. This is amateur thinking. You should ask yourself, if Hahneman pulled off a virtually identical crime, matched the unique description perfectly, was virtually erased from public discourse and FBI files and was falsely labelled a copycat then why wasn't he Cooper. That is where you start. You don't start with he wasn't Cooper because the FBI didn't tell us he was. That is insane. The FBI admitted that they had no case without Cooper's co-operation due to lack of evidence. No, you aren't picking on me, you are only discrediting yourself and becoming completely irrelevent. Your arguments are ignorant unfounded assumptions or completely backasswards. Seriously, I have thousands of pieces of information, it would take me a month to pull it all together into a presentable form and I am just not interested. So, keep your blinders on, ignore the evidence and bury your head in the sand.