FLYJACK

FBI.. witness memories became corrupted by the sketch. 1976 “A review was made of investigation conducted to date and the possibility of redoing any of same. Reinterview of witnesses at this time was considered to be unproductive as this has been continuous upon various displays and it was felt that at this time they were now relying on artist's conceptions rather than individual memory."

Cooper asked for "small bills" according to this FBI 302,,,

I have tried to find the source of the McCoy ransom money,, was it a similar bank stash?? Strapped..

I give up, Georger is still in outer space on this.. For everyone else.. The money went to Cooper in 100 bills each, packets or as Himmelsbach called them "straps" which refer to bank straps of 100 bills each. The bills were all random SN order and recorded in physical sequence. Each individual packet/strap was then rubber banded into random count bundles "to make look hastily prepared".. The TBAR money was found as it was given to Cooper, 3 packets of 100 bills each in the same order. (One was missing a few.) Since the money went to Cooper in bundles of packets/straps to land on TBAR separated they must have been separated between Cooper receiving them and the find. Tosaw theorized that the 3 packets were the ones Cooper handed to Tina. However, since we don't have the location of the rubber band frags on the TBAR money it is more likely the 3 packet/straps landed on TBAR in one single rubber banded bundle. The problem is the terminology isn't consistent and accurate, people have confused and conflated formal and informal terms, packets, straps, packages and bundles. Once you get beyond the labels and sort out the money process it becomes clear.

NO Georger, you are injecting your nonsense AGAIN.. I was never forced to admit there were rubber band fragments on the bills, I always claimed there were. You assumed I rejected rubber bands altogether because you fail to understand your own logical error... I had claimed there was no evidence the rubber bands were around each individual packet not that there were no rubber bands frags found. What I was exploring was whether the rubber bands were around each individual packet of 100 bills or potentially all packets holding them together as a single bundle. There is no evidence that indicated where the rubber band fragments were.. clearly they were not "intact" and I have read an unconfirmed report that 1 packet didn't have any rubber bands. The takeaway is, the money went to Cooper in packets/straps of 100 bills per and those were grouped and rubber banded into bundles. TBAR money was found in three packet/straps of 100 bills in the same order AND they were likely deposited as a single rubber banded bundle. The dominant assumption that the TBAR could have only arrived as three separate packets/straps is false. To arrive separately they must have separated at some time prior, it is more likely they separated on TBAR rather than get separated before and end up all together. If the TBAR money landed as one bundle then the means by which it arrived changes... The money was strapped into 100's then they were grouped and rubber banded into random count bundles. The money most likely arrived on TBAR as one single bundle from the river.. as the rubber bands deteriorated the 3 packets fell apart slightly. Tina, Himmelsbach and the Bank rep all suggest bank bands were used for the packets.. clearly, rubber bands were used for the bundles.

What a nauseating buffoon you are Georger.. I know people used different terms.. that is the whole POINT.. that is why the error was made in the first place. I never claimed Tina used "packet" or any official bank term, you are making up crap strawman args to obfuscate the issue. The 302's are written by agents,, one wrote.. referring to the Bank representative. "He stated the bills were made up of packets of $2000 each...." Take the L, Georger. YOU LOST. You can call the 3 TBAR packets cumquats if you like, you are still wrong. The 3 TBAR cumquats were NOT random counts. The money went to Cooper in packets of 100's, each packet grouped and rubber banded into bundles. TBAR was found in 3 packets of 100's in the same order,,, deny it all you want. I was going to write out a more detailed explanation but why bother... waste of time. Georger has too much screwed up to correct and who cares..

Georger, still doubling down on stupid... If the Cooper bundles were "randomized" by the bank employee.. Then it was either the packets (some think bundle) or the group of packets (bundle) that were randomized.. you can call them whatever you want for analysis.. The Bank that supplied the money called them "packets". But lets call them X to make this really simple.. Either the group of 100 bills = one X was random or the grouping of a number of X was random. Since the TBAR groups of 100 bills X was not random but in 100's then the group of several X's must have been random.. The packets were not randomized (count), they were micro'd in 100's, given to Cooper in 100's and found on TBAR in 100's. The grouping of packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. Georger/Carr were wrong and Georger's ego still can't admit it. Georger claimed the Bank never used the term "packet".. I posted 3 FBI references of it and he still denies it... Winning an argument is more important than the facts. Not only do you have the facts wrong but your argument is completely irrational. Take the L, Goerger, you lost. You always lose. You are an ignorant and arrogant lazy thinker who resorts to lies to win an argument. No wonder you have developed no suspect after over a decade (other than Ted Kaczynski based on a grudge) and spend most of your time trashing, smearing and lying about virtually everyone (EVERYONE) associated with this case in a desperate attempt to be relevant... discredit and drag everyone else down to make your own lack of accomplishment look better. Everybody knows it, most don't say anything to avoid being attacked. Georger is the biggest problem with Shutter's forum, a toxic fraud incapable of any semblance of honest debate.

It nails the fact that the FBI considered evidence too weak to bring a case without Cooper cooperating... In other words, without Cooper cooperating there is no prosecution or legal resolution. Most people do not understand this.

This nails it.. 1. Witness identification weak. (1976) 2. Case extremely difficult without Cooper cooperating. (1976) 3. Witnesses now relying on sketch rather than individual memory. (1976) P 19818 "Eyewitness identification was considered weak at that time. Nearly 10 years have passed since that conference. The conference came to the conclusion that "if COOPER was to surrender to authorities now or in the near future, it would be extremely difficult to make the case if he was uncooperative." P 19824 “A discussion ensued as to the present strength of the eyewitness identification to which Case Agent _______ responded that it was weak." P 19825 “A review was made of investigation conducted to date and the possibility of redoing any of same. Reinterview of witnesses at this time was considered to be unproductive as this has been continuous upon various displays and it was felt that at this time they were now relying on artist's conceptions rather than individual memory."

FBI file #48 is up. https://vault.fbi.gov/D-B-Cooper%20/d.b.-cooper-part-48-of-48/view

The Cooper bill site is still up.. you can check bill#'s here.. http://www.check-six.com/lib/DBCooperLoot.htm I have all the 9998 Cooper bills in a spreadsheet with approx 70 of the TBAR bills #'s identified from various sources. The published FBI Cooper bill list was sorted alphanumerically... it would be nice to find the list in original order.. then we could ID the 3 TBAR packets and numbers.

(EU) Eric Ulis is a liar and a fraud... a slimy used car salesman. He actually stole my tie research which I had posted publicly for everyone and claimed it was his work. He then twisted it to fit his Sheridan Peterson narrative.. I left out one piece of info that dates the tie to 1964, not 63. When I challenged him, he called me a liar and troll for about a year now. He got caught and had to discredit me.. He claimed Sheridan had a numbered account in Singapore,, I discovered that Singapore Banks never enacted the legislation. Ulis just changed it to a Swiss account... that is backfilling a narrative. Not only is he dishonest but his alternate flight path - Sheridan Peterson narrative is garbage. There is no evidence for any of it beyond the fact that Sheridan was a top level jumper.

I agree, though we are theorizing TBAR, I can't imagine Cooper doing this. Money thrown into a river would be discarded to be never found.. Hahneman visited his estranged family in Pennsylvania for Xmas '71 then immediately booked it to Honduras to establish residency... He hadn't been a Honduran resident since he was a child but did weeks after Norjak.. I have been looking for Cooper bills in Central America, if they were circulated there nobody would have checked them.

I had perviously caught Georger lying about Tina evidence and he just ignored it when I challenged him on it. He'll do the same, talk big and run away when proven wrong. The money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills, they were rubber banded into random sized bundles. The FBI claimed the TBAR money was in the same sequence so the Carr/Georger argument is completely busted.. it just makes no sense. How does a packet go to Cooper in a random count then get found in 100's. It doesn't. The 3 TBAR packets were NOT random counts. The bundles aka groups of packets were. The TBAR money was 3 packets part/all of a single rubber banded bundle. The location of the rubber band frags was never identified. They could have been from individual packets or the single bundle itself. The rubber band frags were NOT "intact" as described, they could have only been fragments on the top or bottom of packets. The 3 packets likely arrived on TBAR as one single rubber banded bundle (as Cooper got them) that separated slightly on TBAR as the rubber bands deteriorated.. https://www.fbi.gov/video-repository/newss-scientists-hunt-for-d.b.-cooper/view at 1:53 “Brian Ingram, who discovered ransom money in 1980: We are out here making a campfire, my father and I, and that’s when we discovered the three packets of $20 bills, later to be proven as ransom money of D.B. Cooper." I have several theories but the best fit is the money was discarded upstream of TBAR within a few years of the discovery. The best speculation for that scenario is: Tina kept the money she was handed by Cooper and in the Spring of 1979 the money was tossed as a single rubber banded bundle into the river, likely into the Willamette near Eugene where Tina resided. Possibly discarded by her brother in law. The money tumbled along the gravel bottom for 2-3 weeks to end up on TBAR. That is the short version for now there is a more detailed argument for this. If that is what happened it doesn't tell us who Cooper was but it tells us something else very important. A strapped packet of 100 bills is also called a "strap". 7:19 in video Himmelsbach.. "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."

Georger once again demonstrates his lack of case knowledge. To defend his gross error and inability to admit it.. Georger writes... "REPLY: Packet is not a formal banking term! No bank including the US Federal Reserve has the slightest idea what Flyjack means by "packet". All said packet is NOT a formal banking term. No bank organises its money in "@packets"! SeaFirst could not have delivered its ransom money to Cooper in packets ... because SeaFirst doles not have the faintest idea what a packet of money is! All say Flyjack has invented a term which has no meaning in reality!EU should take note of this fact for his next invention/speculation about the Cooper ransom. " Georger is 100% wrong.. never ever trust anything that comes from Georger. So, we look at the FBI Cooper files... which destroys Georger's dishonest and ignorant screed. Checkmate, Case closed.. PACKETS, PACKETS, PACKETS. You lose, admit you have been wrong and move on.

This is getting silly... Georger still doesn't understand the "packets".. this is so simple. The bills were all in a random SN order.. so random means count for this discussion. Larry Carr claimed the 3 bundles found were each in random counts. He was wrong, they weren't random counts and they were really in "packets of 100 bills each". He claimed the bundles were random counts and rubber banded. This is correct but because Larry incorrectly thought the "packets" were "bundles", his conclusion was wrong. He incorrectly applied the correct premise to the packets instead of the group of packets, the bundles. This is why it is crucial to correctly identify "packets" and "bundles".. Larry and Georger screwed this up 10 years ago and he still can't see the obvious error. Remember, the money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills each. Those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. How did the money go to Cooper in packets of 100 each and get found in random counts... it didn't. Larry and Georger conflated the terms "packets" and "bundles" to erroneously conclude the packets were a random count.. they weren't. The bundles were a random number of packets. Those packets were rubber banded into random sized bundles. So, a single bundle may have 3, 4 or 5 packets of 100 bills each rubber banded into one bundle. Cooper received 100 packets of 100 bills each. Those individual packets were rubber banded into bundles. Each bundle had a random number of packets,, perhaps 3s, 4s, 5s per bundle. It is very likely the 3 TBAR packets of 100 bills each arrived as 1 rubber banded bundle. As the rubber bands deteriorated the 3 packets of 100 bills each separated slightly. The claim that the three packets only arrived on TBAR separately is bogus. For 3 packets to arrive at the same spot independently but together limits the means by which they could have arrived. More likely, they arrived in one bundle and the possible means by which they arrived is expanded. Since the FBI had the bill sequence on Micro they could easily compare and determine the TBAR bill count. What happened to the few missing bills.. 1. The bills were removed before deposit on TBAR. Potentially spent into circulation. 2. The bills were worn away due to erosion, perhaps they were on the top of the top packet in the single bundle. 3. The bills were taken, removed or kept after the money was found before the FBI got the money.

Re: TBAR bills.. The money went to Cooper in packets of 100 bills, they were rubber banded into random sized bundles. The packets themselves were not a random count. Larry Carr was wrong. The TBAR money was 3 packets, 100 bills each (one missing a few, either removed or worn away).. The FBI had the micro images of the bills in order. It would be easy to determine how many bills by checking the identifiable serial numbers at the start/stop of each packet of 100. The FBI did not need to identify every bill's serial number in between to get a total number. The most interesting thing is the missing bills.. were they removed prior to or post discovery or in some natural erosion??

No Georger, you are making an assumption.. the FBI did not record serial numbers for every bill found, you are making that up, many were fragments not individually identifiable.. That is proven by looking at the auctioned bills, not all have an identifiable serial number. PCGS just Identified bills that were not complete or identified within the packet. The FBI had the sequence per packet and could determine the total count based on that. The FBI didn't need to ID each bill or fragment with a serial number to get a total count. You have conflated two different things based on a false assumption. You assume that the FBI count of 280 was determined by identifying 280 serial numbers. That is false. They had the packet sequence on micro and concluded 3 packets of 100. (A few missing from one) 35 additional serial number were identified, that doesn't mean there were more than 3 packets of 100.. but if you want to believe there were more than the 3 packets of 100 based on your false assumption go right ahead,,, false assumptions have never stopped you before.

Georger wrote... "A 2018 article by CoinWorld You are not allowed to view links.Register or Login says that 35 more serial numbers were found by conservators working on the Ingram money, than the FBI previously counted. That brings the Ingram find to $6500." This is a common and often repeated misunderstanding and needs to be clarified. This happened in 2008 when 35 additional serial numbers were identified from fragments. It was not 35 additional bills, just newly identified numbers from fragments. https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-currency-notifies-fbi-of-d-b-cooper-serial-numbers The TBAR bills were 3 packets of 100, a few missing from one but in the same order as given to Cooper per micro recording. The FBI did not identify every bill by the identifiable serial number but they had the sequence. PCGS identified previously unrecorded serial numbers from fragments within the 3 packets, they did not find additional bills. Claiming more than $6000 was found on TBAR is erroneous. The FBI had the sequences and it could easily determine the number of bills without identifying each and every serial number.

Have you checked the attic?

It has been called both.. there isn't an "official" correct one so I usually use TBAR.

That is Tina's story.. she also claimed it was against company policy and ALL the stews rejected tip money,,, but that event hadn't happened yet, it was later. But, why would that short comment appear in her local paper.. it has no context and there is no reason to reveal FBI info right before a big search operation. March 8, 1972... Tina's local paper. CYA "TINA MUCKLOW sister of MRS. LEE DORMUTH of Lower Makefield Township was offered a bundle of $20 bills by a hijacker and rejected the offer Miss Mucklow was a stewardess on the Northwest Airlines flight last November in which a hijacker took $200,000 ransom and parachuted out of the plane over the wilds of Oregon. She said she didn't accept the money because it wouldn't be right." FBI files.

Flo served Cooper the drink... Tena Bar is a coincidence.. it is a natural garbage trap from the river.. Tina moved to upstream of TBAR 1978/79. Tina wasn't offered money, SHE ASKED FOR IT. We don't know the exact amount,, a package or bundle (of packets?)..??

This is hard to imagine.. The Cooper hijacking case has gone on for almost 50 years, that is extraordinary. There are reasons why it wasn't solved and those reasons are also extraordinary. If it was simple, it would have been solved long ago. It would be irresponsible and reckless to not consider the theory that Tina kept the money she took from Cooper. The only "evidence" we have that she returned the money to Cooper is her claim and strange story.. Only Cooper and Tina know what happened to that money. .

Now this is an odd coincidence... On March 8, 1972 a short note appeared in Tina's local Bucks County Pa newspaper.. It read.. "TINA MUCKLOW sister of MRS. LEE DORMUTH of Lower Makefield Township was offered a bundle of $20 bills by a hijacker and rejected the offer. Miss Mucklow was a stewardess on the Northwest Airlines flight last November in which a hijacker took $200,000 ransom and parachuted out of the plane over the wilds of Oregon. She said she didn't accept the money because it wouldn't be right." This wasn't the same story she told the FBI. Tina claimed she requested some ransom money and TOOK it, she returned it claiming gratuities were against company policy. Lee Dormuth, Tina's brother in law was an FBI agent. Coincidentally on March 8, 1972 an FBI memo announced that the military was going to do a search for Cooper... a search was conducted weeks later. Why plant that story right before a search? Well, if Cooper and the money was found and some money was missing... Tina has covered her ass... That planted story in the newspaper makes no sense, otherwise. There is no reason for it to be published, it was withheld evidence, it had to be a pre-emptive CYA leak probably managed by Tina's FBI brother in-law..