FLYJACK

There are reports that they requested both front and back from Issaquah but the backs weren't needed as they secured them from Hayden. We can only speculate here, but I think Cossey initially believed that his back chutes were taken from Issaquah, they weren't. He was told a Pioneer was left behind and he described his other chute as the custom NB6/8. Soon after he would have figured out that his back chutes were not used. IMO, he never supplied his records because it would show his description was wrong. In the FBI files, it does claim that Cossey owned the back chutes, it also states elsewhere that the back chutes came from Hayden, it does not state that Cossey owned the chutes prior to Hayden purchasing them. Cossey claimed they were his back chutes and he had never heard of Hayden. I believe the FBI got confused, they knew Cossey packed both of Hayden's back chutes May 21, 1971 and relied on him as that was all they had. However, Cossey was initially mistaken then lied to cover up his error. Adding to the confusion was the ownership of the the front chutes. FBI agent Larry Carr interviewed Cossey around June of 2008 and he believed the back chutes came from Cossey's home. I haven't been able to sort out the McChord chutes, I assume they asked McChord but they didn't have them, refused or made an excuse.

Checkmate Blevins.. The FBI did investigate KC and because the FBI files are incomplete you don't know how much they did. There is far more on the FBI investigating KC than on Hahneman.. You can't have it both ways,, admit it, by your logic either both KC and Hahneman can't be Cooper or they both can be.. you can't pick and choose. You are cornered, the only way out is to admit your error. Step up or forever lose all credibility.

So, the FBI did investigate KC in 2004 and KC was never discovered to be Cooper... You claimed Hahneman wasn't Cooper because the FBI would have figured it out. If you believe KC is Cooper and he was investigated then you can't reject Hahneman OR you must reject both. Checkmate Blevins, you can't have it both ways.

Yes, accurate... Putting all the info together, this may not be exact but close. Cossey is contacted at home about getting 2 back and 2 front chutes. He tells them to grab the two fronts and two of his backs from Issaquah. Linn Emrich is contacted to obtain the chutes at Issaquah. Hayden is contacted and sends his two back chutes in by cab. Linn Emrich grabs a good front reserve and practice front reserve which he claimed was an error. Back chutes are no longer required from Issaquah. The police drive the two front chutes in to Seattle Airport. The back chutes are described as a tan luxury and an olive drab with tan cloth harness. The two fronts and Hayden’s two back chutes go to the plane. Cossey is contacted and told that a tan Pioneer back chute was left behind. Cossey claims his other chute was a NB6/8 nylon sage green container and nylon sage green harness 28 FT. The packing card for a Pioneer SN 60-9707 is found in the chute left on the plane. Either Cooper put it there or somebody in Reno did. The chute SN 226 is noted in FBI files as being forwarded from Reno. That confirms it was the one left on the plane. Chute SN 226 was eventually returned to Hayden and subsequently repacked. Cossey packed SN 226 and SN 69-9707 May 21, 1971. Hayden purchased the chutes from a surplus store and they had the chutes repacked by Cossey. BOTH OF HAYDEN'S BACK CHUTES PACKED MAY 21, 1971 BY COSSEY PER FBI. SN 226 and SN 60-9707 both packed May 21, 1971. Chute SN 226 was returned to Hayden,, chute SN 60-9707 is missing. The FBI asked Cossey several times for his records. Cossey claimed he gave the FBI all he had. He didn't. Cossey later claimed his back chutes were sent from his home and that he owned the back chutes and he never heard of Hayden. They weren't. Cossey claimed his back chute left on the plane was returned to him. It wasn't. Cossey described his back chute left on the plane as a B-4 sport freefall chute. It wasn’t. What happened,, Cossey thought the two back chutes were his from Issaquah and gave the FBI the description of the chute he assumed Cooper used based on a tan Pioneer being left in the plane. Cossey's back chutes were not sent from Issaquah. Cossey must have figured this out but never admitted it, instead he changed his story to support his error. When it became more public that Emrich only supplied the two fronts Cossey changed his story to the chutes being sent from his home. There is no evidence other than Cossey’s assumption that the chute Cooper used was his NB6/8 nylon sage green container/nylon sage green harness 28 FT. All the chutes found were rejected based on Cossey’s description. The Cooper chute may have been found already and rejected due to Cossey’s description. The FBI relied on Cossey’s assumption, they must have figured this out eventually. The packing card found on the plane missing a chute is likely the one Cooper used..

So far, I have identified 80 TBAR bills from many sources.. including the top bills from 11 of the 12 Ingram stacks. (remember they kept 4 bills and handed them over later so the top ones may not be the actual top ones) B09090997B 1963 A TBARC13871652A 1963 A TBARD27112759A 1969 TBARE41933578A 1969 TBARE61102414A 1963 A TBARE65330757A 1963 A TBARF07553334A 1969 TBARG00061029B 1969 TBARG03072381B 1969 TBAR Kept by Ingrams later turned inG21056376B 1963 A TBARG45632911B 1963 A TBARG54783796B 1963 A TBARI03006119A 1969 TBARI03389775A 1963 A TBARI06638737A 1969 TBARJ09534759A 1969 TBARJ12657135A 1969 TBARJ16396253A 1969 TBARJ20209868A 1963 A TBARK03654750A 1969 TBARL01781113A 1969 TBARL01842041A 1969 TBARL02882111B 1963 A TBARL03160387B 1963 A TBARL03166965B 1963 A TBARL04461895* 1963 A TBARL06832736A 1969 TBARL10919321A 1969 TBAR Kept by Ingrams later turned inL12650395A 1969 TBARL12907861A 1969 TBARL19629118B 1963 A TBARL20210452A 1969 TBARL20211452B 1963 A TBARL20301456A 1969 TBARL29575638A 1969 TBARL29859540B 1963 A TBARL30008289A 1969 TBARL32700814A 1969 TBARL32987392A 1969 TBAR Kept by Ingrams later turned inL34047759A 1969 TBARL34212082A 1969 TBARL34403254A 1969 TBARL34458940A 1969 TBARL34589413A 1969 TBARL34628654A 1969 TBARL34641262A 1969 TBARL36246726A 1969 TBARL36692532A 1963 A TBARL38138140A 1969 TBARL38513685A 1969 TBARL43214579A 1969 TBARL47621840A 1969 TBARL48603996A 1969 TBARL48628301A 1969 TBARL49839325B 1963 A TBARL51079019B 1963 A TBARL51236377B 1963 A TBARL51303841A 1969 TBARL55066857A 1969 TBAR Kept by Ingrams later turned inL57110577A 1969 TBARL66606663B 1963 A TBARL68886415B 1963 A TBARL69210458B 1963 A TBARL72525838B 1963 A TBARL72738527B 1963 A TBARL73000558B 1963 A TBARL75500928B 1963 A TBARL86567062A 1969 TBAR 11 OF THE 12 STACKS TOP BILL H27412938A 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 I02442844A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 I02591811A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L09781412A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L20452751A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L20848242A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L30706882B 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L35399523B 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L53307222A 1969 TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L55376548B 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 L55479078B 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 FRAGMENT FOUND ON TOP E06379503* 1963 A TBAR TOP BILL OF 12 FRAGMENT .

KC was investigated in 2004. Now, are you going to take back your nonsense and apologize or double down on wrong. You can't have it both ways Blevins. Your assumptive argument against Hahneman also applies to KC.

Blevins, The ultimate irony is that KC was investigated in 2004,, you reject Hahneman because he was looked at but don't apply the same standard to KC.. hypocrisy and irrational. I don't believe being investigated rejects a suspect.

You see, he did in 2004 and you don't even know it. I'd post it for you but you are too disrespectful. The worst evidence, the lowest grade is personal opinions,,, that is the KC case. No evidence. Sketches aren't photographs but KC isn't swarthy/olive complexion, latin in features and characteristics.. that is the basic requirement for any Cooper suspect. The FBI revised sketch A because some witnesses thought it was poor and they wanted to add the olive complexion and more age.. The FBI stated that sketch B is the most accurate. You simply reject the facts to maintain your narrative. You are not a serious person.

Just a fact, you aren't worthy. You just aren't a high level thinker and you are disrespectful. Regardless, I can't give details and have a very good reason. I have told some people privately. Clearly, if you concluded Hahneman could not be Cooper based on your lack of knowledge and gross assumptions then why do you keep pestering me about details. Both you and Georger have the same problem, you both judge a suspect based on the advocate, not the facts. It isn't my responsibility to educate you on the facts, I am not selling anything. Your attacks on me are irrelevant as to Hahneman being Cooper or not. Your argument is I won't give you the evidence I have so Hahneman isn't Cooper.. this is literally void of logic and insane. I actually prefer people reject Hahneman. Yes, you know KC isn't Cooper, he doesn't match the description at all.. he did resemble Sketch A but that was revised to the more accurate Sketch B. The case for KC is nonsense. You can patch together a similar case for thousands of people.. you did a lot of work patching together one for KC. In 2004 Lyle told the FBI he had no evidence. HINT, there is none.

Clueless Blevins. I haven't been pushing Hahneman, what I do is correct misinformation. You keep bringing him up because you know KC isn't Cooper and you are threatened.. You make crazy assumptions and have no facts. I have a very good reason not to go into details, besides you aren't worthy.

Do I have your permission?

I can say whatever I want and you can think whatever you want, that doesn't need to be said, SNOW. It is comments like yours that remind me why I don't share most of my research.

Robert, You don't have a grasp of this issue so your logic is wrong. You have consistently used Hayden's story to disprove Cossey. Hayden can be 100% accurate and Cossey can be 100% accurate. Both could have sent in chutes, only two were used and both assumed their chutes were on the plane. However, Cossey's story fails not because of Hayden's story but because of the other evidence. So, ironically your summary above is accurate (except that Emerick should have also ID'd the dummy) but the logic you used to get there is faulty. and it is not the whole story... For 50 years, investigators used the Cossey supplied Cooper back chute description. If that description was wrong the chute may have been found. That could tell us where Cooper landed and if he pulled and potentially survived.

They are separate issues in theory but when you add in the other evidence it becomes clearer. I found that the chute Hayden got returned was sent from Reno, that confirms SN 226 was left on the plane.. Tosaw reported that Cooper checked the packing cards.. that isn't confirmed in the FBI files but they do claim SN 60-9707 packing card was found in the remaining chute.. SN 226. The FBI confirmed that both of Hayden's chutes were packed by Cossey May 21, 1971 matching the dates for SN 226 and 60-9707. Those two cards most certainly represent both of Hayden's chutes. So, we have two packing cards, same date matching Hayden's two chutes found on the plane. SN 226 was returned to Hayden, the other missing. It isn't direct evidence but close. But, the real problem is we have assumed that Cossey owned the chutes prior to Hayden, he has never claimed that and there is no evidence for it. Cossey claimed he directly supplied his chutes. The belief that Cossey owned the chutes prior to Hayden is a made up assumption based on nothing. Essentially, the ownership Cossey claimed was him supplying the back chutes and with the two packing cards from the plane matching Hayden's chutes Cossey's claim is false.

This has been the assumption for years... as it seems plausible. But,, Cossey claimed his back chutes came from Issaquah. Cossey changed it to.. his back chutes were sent from his house. Cossey also claimed his back chute left behind was returned to him. Cossey never admitted the chutes came from Hayden. He always maintained they were his and came from him. What has happened is we have previously assumed Cossey must have meant he owned the chutes before Hayden got them but he has never actually claimed that.

According to the FBI, Hahneman demanded and received 2,000 Benson & Hedges cigarettes in cartons.. He left some behind, not sure how many.

Robert, It is true, there are several 302's that claim Cossey owned the chute used by "unsub".. Of course, the problem is that info came from Cossey and he provided no records. 302's are not conclusions. This is the thing, Cossey assumed the back chutes were his early on, they weren't. Cossey must have realized he was wrong but kept lying... that means all the chutes found were rejected based on a comparison to the wrong chute, that description from Cossey.

I get tired of misrepresentations and straw-man nonsense. Georger does this all the time. I never claimed to know when Cossey made the chute or how many dummy chutes existed between Sheridan's time at Issaquah and Norjak. When you process all the information it is extremely unlikely the dummy chute Sheridan is referring to is the same one that Cossey made that went to Cooper. If you want to believe something else go ahead.

The date.

The Amboy chute doesn't match the SN 60-9707 card found on the plane.

UNBELEIVABLE.... You still missed it... this is getting ridiculous.. This is my last shot at it Blevins after this you are on your own. REAL SIMPLE.. a fifth grader can get it. The FBI was looking for the wrong chute because they were relying on Cossey's description. The Cooper chute may have already been found and rejected because of Cossey. Get it. All the chutes found and rejected need to be re-checked. There were many that were rejected because they didn't match Cossey's description of his NB6/8.

You completely missed it Blevins.... blind as a bat. and you call it BS and fluff because you are clueless.... crazy. You can read so it must be comprehension. The Detlor report is ENTIRELY irrelevant. Explain how we know that the chute Cooper took was Cossey's sage green/sage green modded NB6/8? I'll help you, it was Cossey's assumption.. get it. There is no other evidence to support the claim that was his NB6/8 sage green/sage green chute. Cossey claimed the chute left behind was a freefall sport chute, it wasn't. He got that one wrong. He never said the chutes were Hayden's, he always claimed they were his. Maybe he just assumed and made an error initially but he must have figured it out at some time. Two back chute packing cards were found SN 226 was returned to Hayden and SN 60-9707.. Cossey, NB6/8 sage green nylon container sage green nylon harness 28 FT white, modified handle. This may be the actual chute Cooper used.. this does NOT match Cossey's description of his chute.

I see you still fail to understand the chute problem.. You need to ask yourself,, if Cooper used one of Hayden's back chutes.. (SN 226 was returned) and there were two packing cards found (SN 226 and SN 60-9707) and Cossey's description of the remaining chute as a freefall Sport chute was wrong. and Cossey claimed his two back chutes were taken from Issaquah then changed it to his home. and Cossey never provided his chute records. and Cossey never met Hayden. and Hayden bought the chutes from a surplus shop. and Cossey claimed Cooper used his customized NB6/8 provided by himself. and Cossey is a proven liar. and Cossey is the only source for the description of the Cooper chute. and Cossey's initial chute description at his interview did not match the earlier chute descriptions. then, how do we know Cossey is correct that Hayden used his custom NB6/8 chute.. If Cossey was wrong and it looks likely... then they were looking for the wrong chute and it is probably the chute that belongs to the SN 60-9707 card. The Cooper chute may have been found and rejected based on Cossey, not the Amboy chute.

I don't know when Cossey made it or how many existed but I do know that there were many years between Sheridan's account and the use of the chute for Norjak that Cossey claimed to have made. I also know that Sheridan's assumption that the NORJAK chute was the same one he used many years before is not knowable by Sheridan. I also know the first account of any colour for the X was Black in Tosaw's book. I also know that the first account of a red X was in 2009 on DZ after the Parachutist article with "large X and red closing flaps".. I also know that Sheridan's first mention of a red X was after it was mentioned on DZ. He read DZ. I can also prove that Hillary Clinton didn't use her own private server, she used Bill's and shared it with high level Clinton Foundation operatives. The FBI covered that up for her, she lost anyway.

on the titanium... The pieces were CP titanium or commercially pure titanium not an alloy.. This is very important as titanium alloys can be found in many applications. CP Titanium was used in places like electronics, dentistry and even for ducts, water systems, blades mounts, seal repair kits, firewall etc. on the Boeing 727. It is possible some of the particles may have been picked up in the plane. To definitively track them down is impossible. One was a cp titanium nano rod or piece of micromesh.. perhaps some type of filter screen or wire. The other one had a piece of SS mechanically mashed into it. The 727 has CP Ti and SS valves near the lav.