FLYJACK

He offered the tip money from the drink change he had 4 hours earlier... after receiving ransom money and after Tina claiming to return it due to a no gratuity policy. Quote Skyjack... "He fishes around the pockets of his pants for the $19 he received from Flo nearly four hours ago, on the tarmac in Portland, for the bourbon and Seven he ordered and spilled. He offers the change. Flo and Alice shake their heads. “Sorry.” “No tips.” He received the drink early in the flight and paid without offering a tip. After he had the ransom money the claim was that he offered tip money from his pocket...

Cooper offered the drink tip money AFTER the ransom was on board and about 4 hours after he bought the drink... After asking for some ransom money Tina said she handed it back claiming the no gratuity policy.. and she used the drink tip offer as an example. Problem,, Cooper hadn't offered the drink tip yet, that was later. Also, why did Cooper offer the stews drink tip money after he got the ransom and after Tina claimed the "no gratuity" policy to return some ransom packets.. Why would Cooper offer all the stews the drink tip money ($18) when he has the $200 k ransom and has already been told by Tina that they don't accept gratuities. IMO, the drink tip story is bogus or deceptive.

One other thing I find crucial... The missing bills... one packet was missing 20 bills. Why only one packet? the top one of a single bundle? Were they removed by a person or were they eroded away and just not accounted for?? One thing is for sure, the rubber bands were not "intact", there were fragments attached but based on the erosion of the packets and missing bills no way the rubber bands were "intact". I am not a fan of the suction dredge, I just can't see the money going through and ending up in that condition.. clamshell dredge is possible. The point I was making was the packets (100 bills each) went to Cooper in randomized bundles. How did TBAR packets get separated from their bundle but remain together? Either they were separated by a person prior or they landed as a single bundle and fell apart via erosion.

Cooper offered Tina a cigarette and she took one (at least).. 7 Raleigh's were identified and another one was assumed to be a Raleigh.. all attributed to Cooper. So, what happened to the cigarette Tina smoked? Was it one of those? Also... "It is felt Unsub was not an experienced criminal because of his mannerism exhibited after he received the ransom money. Unsub reportedly became somewhat childish, in his actions and comments while counting the money." How does Cooper count the money if it was randomized? Georger and Larry Carr got this wrong, Carr wrote.. "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." There are many credible reports that the bundles were randomized... not the packets (100 bills). Carr incorrectly assumed the packets were randomized. What does this mean... Everybody assumes the 3 packets arrived at TBAR independently but together. That would indicate that they had to be in some container or placed there. This is completely false. The money went to Cooper in packets of 100 and those rubber banded into random sized bundles. We know the packets were not randomized then only the bundles could have been randomized. So, how did the three TBAR packets get removed from their bundle?? It is possible somebody removed them after Cooper got the money or they landed on TBAR as part/all of a single randomized bundle. That expands the means by which the money could have arrived at TBAR. It is false to conclude the TBAR packets could have only arrived independently.. 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."

Georger wrote.. Parrotheadvol replied Exactly. There's no need to go there.

Tom Kaye found a diatom on 377's Cooper bill, Georger Id'd it as Asterionella. Asterionella is common in the Columbia River.. However, Asterionella japonoca is a spring and summer species while Asterionella formosa is a winter species... So which one is it? Coulmbia River diatoms...

Increasing public interest helps books, films and narratives, it doesn't help advance the case. The public does not have the knowledge and ability to discriminate and process all the information in such a complex case. They accept what they are presented as fact rather than develop their own conclusions. It perpetuates uninformed opinions.

The Cooper case is too complex for a film to do it justice... To appeal to the widest audience a Cooper film has to be "superficial".. These films/shows don't advance the case. It may be entertaining but I don't expect anything new. Increased public interest isn't my goal... it doesn't advance the case, it perpetuates misinformation.

"The fingerprint lifts made during the search of the interior of the aircraft in the area where the hijacker was known to have been, such as the rear door, the area around the door, the lavatory door, as well as the seat area, susceptible to dusting, were submitted for fingerprint examination, but no fingerprints of value were found on any of the latents thus obtained. "

I knew you would say this,, but there are two different issues here. First, I was pointing out the reason for the FBI's "possibly brown" claim = dark eyes. It wasn't meant to claim possibly blue... Flo claimed "dark eyes" if she was wrong that is another issue. Recalling eye colour is far more accurate than height recall. People have been using the "possibly brown" claim to advance blue eyes. For that to be true Flo had to be completely wrong. It is possible but it is really a different claim. To advance a blue eyed suspect Flo had to be wrong whereas height was an estimate. Second, the other difference is I wouldn't use eyes alone to eliminate. A suspect with blue eyes would have to have other overwhelming factors to remain included, none do/did. That is my beef with your height issue, you are using it as a single factor elimination.. even worse, you don't know Tina's actual height and you don't know if she had shoes on, you don't know the height of somebody recorded as 5' 8" while in shoes... too many variables. If I am 5' 8 3/4" no shoes, sometimes I write 5' 8" sometimes 5' 9" and I am about 5' 10" in shoes.. does that alone qualify for Cooper elimination. I remember Larry Carr saying that they weigh many factors to eliminate, it is never a single one. (unless it is way way off the description).

better,, "dark eyes", probably/possibly brown, the most common (or rarer black or dark grey) Eyes were dark,,, NOT possibly blue.

They said possibly brown, meaning "dark eyes", not possibly light or possibly blue. "From information the subject is described as white male, mid 40's, 5'10" to 6', 170 to 180 pounds, average to well built, olive or swarthy complexion, medium smooth, dark brown or black hair parted on left side, combed back, sideburns to low ear level, dark eyes, probably black or brown. Subject wore a dark suit,white shirt, with narrow black tie. He wore dark glasses with plastic rims (possibly prescription lenses) most of the time. He had dark overcoat and was described as cool and calculating. His voice was low. He spoke intelligently and was a heavy smoker of Raleigh filter tip cigarettes."

Witnesses do make errors... In the Hahneman hijacking the captain positively ID'd the wrong guy when shown pictures.. he looked similar to Hahneman. and just like the Cooper case witnesses thought the original sketch was good but not perfect.. We are relying on witness recall.. height is very poor for recall as there is no imprint or reference, it is subjective. Hair is actually very good for recall as that image is imprinted on memory. If we are going to list all military personnel with jump experience as legit suspects we will have a list so long it would be worthless...

Not Braden, he doesn't match the Cooper description, has unique features and there is no evidence other than his jumping skills.. "It is felt Unsub was not an experienced criminal because of his mannerism exhibited after he received the ... ransom money. Unsub reportedly became somewhat childish, in his actions and comments while counting the money." Braden isn't the type to become childish.

Nippon Soda used the "Sodium" method to make TI sponge... all production exported to the US... BTW,,, remember the tie was manufactured about 1964..

The Ti sponge did not match RMI,, the "salt" did. That "salt" can't be exclusive to RMI. sodium and Ti sponge is used in pyrotechnics... the round silicon spheres found on the tie suggest formed in a high temp,, perhaps a firework or hand held sparkler.. military flare/incendiary??

The "Mexican/Spanish" edition Dan Cooper comic (I bought) tracking shows it now in Los Angeles.. I should have it by the end of the week..

True, however the RMI Ti sponge was not found on the tie, the RMI "salt" was a close match but wasn't unique to RMI... The RMI connection is a theory in progress.

Lynn wrote.. "LOL There's a Hahnemann train? Sorry, his MO makes no sense in the later hijacking if he was Cooper. He changed everything Cooper did right; it's irrelevant whether he made the jump, lots of people did similar jumps. He had contact with the crew, was violent and threatening, let the passengers know he was jacking the plane - just doesn't make sense. He might have the skills, motivation, and looks to be Cooper, but why would he change not only an MO that worked, but his entire personality? No sale" This is riddled with assumptions and misinformation... and Lynn keeps repeating them from a position of ignorance.. This thinking is so problematic and ubiquitous, people drawing false conclusions from positions of ignorance or bias. Conclusions are your own but get the facts right. He changed everything Cooper did... There were some differences but those were caused by external influences. Overall, Hahneman's hijacking was very similar to Cooper's, far more similar than any other hijacking. Is it smart to repeat a successful hijacking exactly the same when authorities already had the game plan.. and had ramped up airline security? Lots of people did similar jumps.. huh what.. How many jumped out the rear stairs of a 727 with a ransom at night over a rural jungle/forest? How many were late 40's, no accent, no marks or tattoos, smoked, latin, swarthy, brown eyes, about 5' 10", thin build and about 170 lbs, dark curly/marceled wavy hair, brown shoes, collared white shirt, thin dark tie, dark suit, overcoat and dark sunglasses with a briefcase bomb?? or were ex military? Had substantial aviation knowledge? left an open chute behind? left a tie behind? asked for military chutes? demanded to fly to Mex? requested curtain and shades drawn? sat in rear and used interphone? demanded notes returned? had pills for the crew? etc... etc... Those describe BOTH Cooper and Hahneman... Are YOU freakin kidding me,,,, nodody should accept Hahneman as Cooper but to reject is irrational. He had contact with the crew.. He initially set up at the rear of the plane and communicated via interphone, he had personal contact with the crew when the FBI faked a mechanical issue and he knew they were messing with him. They forced him to transfer planes. He used the crew as a shield from snipers to transfer planes. Cooper was never put in such a situation. He was violent and threatening. The FBI documents do not convey this like the media reports, he engaged in casual talk. He allowed a stew suffering stress to leave. Unlike Cooper, all passengers knew he was hijacking the plane and some were aggressive toward him. He also had a legal drug which had an ingredient later withdrawn for inducing phycological side effects. Since all passengers were aware of Hahneman they would be prone to describe the event as traumatic. Cooper's passengers were oblivious to the hijacking. He let the passengers know he was jacking the plane. No, he didn't - the crew just announced it. The crew asked Cooper if they should inform the passengers. This was not demanded by Cooper or Hahneman. Why would he change an MO that worked. BECAUSE IT WORKED.. The MO was actually very similar, the changes were induced by the change in environment and circumstances. Since Cooper, airport security had been ramped up with screening and more air marshals. He had a briefcase bomb but it was never confirmed to be real. IMO, he had no bomb in there in case it was searched BECAUSE OF COOPER.. He needed a briefcase bomb threat and a gun. He changed his entire personality. They were messing with him from the start. He was given the wrong denominations which had to be replaced and then they faked a mechanical issue with the plane. Cooper was never messed with, he was fully accommodated. Cooper's environment and circumstances were completely different. A US official in Honduras at the time stated that Hahneman had planned his hijacking for a year,, that predates Cooper and indicates he was not a copycat as we have been told for years. Hahneman was falsely branded a Cooper copycat... and virtually no info on him was made public so nobody would look into him. It worked until now.

No steel found. There was a fragment of Stainless Steel mechanically mashed into a Titanium piece.

A tug mechanic wearing a tie,,,, I don't see it.. and there would be particles from that environment which aren't present on the tie, steel. oil, grease. The tie particles aren't consistent with a mechanic's environment. Tugs with CP Ti.. maybe. Those specific tugs? CP Titanium has many grades, I asked Tom Kaye which grade and he didn't know... The problem with the tie particles is there are so many particles you can make almost any environment fit some of them.. and the particles had 6 years to accumulate. The tie has become a Rorschach.. They are a good match for.. Electronics.. Dentistry.. Fireworks.. hand held sparklers for example. What is important is what isn't on the tie,,,, like steel.

and the tie was manufactured around 1965.. the particles had lots of time and environments to accumulate. Hahneman's neighbour said that Hahneman told him he worked for Philco/Bendix installing rocket systems on helicopters. This would have been in the mid/late 1960's. Hahnemen moved all over the world working on Military/Gov contracts..

My speculation is he used the tie to wipe his prints in the lav and/or the seat arm rests. and there was titanium on the 727...

The tie particle distribution pattern has been completely overlooked.. Like blood spatter patterns it tells us something about how the particles were deposited on the tie. Cooper tie under UV above compared to a vintage era tie. The vintage tie particle pattern is completely random. Cooper's tie has many horizontal lines (as worn) of dense particle distributions. How do you get those? Looks like about 6 lines.. An edged object is repeatedly contacting the tie in a sideways motion. I can't imagine how that happens while wearing the tie. There are similar marks on the rear piece of the tie. It seems unlikely that a particle rich object was repeatedly wiped across the tie at different heights while being worn, unless the object was heavy and repeatedly carried with both arms beneath and a sharp horizontal edge resting on the tie. However, some of the lines seem to be too low. It looks like the particles were deposited while the tie was not being worn. What are the possibilities.. The tie was used to wipe the particle rich object(s). The particles were deposited during storage. Expand the image, particle lines clearly visible..

The FBI kept 13 bills.. Brian and the Insurance company split the rest.. Tosaw got some from Brian. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1986/06/12/Teenager-gets-DB-Cooper-skyjack-loot/7227518932800/