FLYJACK

Go and find images of buried money... nothing looks like this. The uniform erosion of TBAR is definitely from tumbling/rolling. The tumbling/rolling along the bottom is the best theory by a long shot.. nothing else is even close.. this is the easy part. You need to accept it, resistance is futile.. I lean towards it being only three packets vs five in a single bundle.. no more money was found and it is hard to imagine another bundle or two coming out from inside a rubber banded bundle to disappear somewhere. We can also assume the rubber bands still had their elasticity when it went into the River. As for how it got into the River, that is tougher one to noodle. It travelled some distance along the bottom so TBAR itself is out of the picture. Did it fall from the plane over the Columbia, perhaps in the overcoat left on the stairs.. Diatoms? Did somebody toss it in the River to dispose of it? Is it money Cooper gave to the stews or for a ride,, Did somebody find it get scared and toss it? Did it get mistakenly tossed into the dump next to the Columbia River at the confluence of the Willamette? Was it hidden in something? Did it get moved into the River by natural means? Was it moved from downstream via clamshell dredge/barge then dumped into the River? They did this.. Does this indicate Cooper survived,, not really,, Does this indicate he lost the money in the jump, not necessarily,,

I have put the piles back into the packets...

You never are.. the Palmer team was there and they believed the money came from the River and the wear indicated a rolling.. I agree, I have never found any images of buried money that looks anything like the TBAR wear. They had a hydrologist who never even mentioned the possibility of human burial. The TBAR money wear indicates a rolling along the bottom. There is no evidence for a plant and it makes no sense. It is not a reasonable theory. If you guys want to remain in denial be my guest.. The hard part is figuring out how it got into the River..

Sure, finding Cooper doesn't depend on a bunch of things.

No, the rubber bands were not compromised, the money was, it was wet. And the rounded wear was on the ends of the packets.. indicating a tumbling end over end,, the rubber bands around the middle would not have the same impact. Haven't you been paying attention.. This is simple stuff..

um, it is in the Palmer report, have you read it. Tell me what you know that they didn't.

River rocks are round for a reason.. abrasion I am sure if the money kept rolling for long enough the rubber bands would eventually break. River rocks don't roll on sandy bottoms like money would... they hit each other. The money sinks due to density but if the density is barely more than the water it will sink but still have a buoyancy and be moved easily in the water. A rock is more dense and needs far more current to move it. Buoyancy is key factor for movement in a river.. Comparing rocks to linen/cotton is silly. and for the money, the ends were missing/rounded the most, not the top and bottom or through the center of the stack.. the erosion matches tumbling or rolling exactly as the Palmer report states. If the bills eroded in situ the erosion pattern would be different. If you want to keep deny it, go ahead. I am not interested, there is no debate here..

It gets pushed along the bottom by the current,, it would have some buoyancy and not take much to move it.. rolls to its position when the water level is above that spot effectively making it the bottom. That spot is well below flood stage and often covered by water.

It makes sense to me and the Palmer team. The money was wet and the rubber bands would have less impact with the bottom due to their location,, the money would roll end over end causing a rounding just like the TBAR money..

Nope, the bundles were wet and rolling along the sandy bottom would round them off without affecting the rubber bands. Rubber bands stay on because they are elastic and stretched, the bills were wet,, so they didn't need much impact to round them off. It makes perfect sense. It made sense to the Palmer team and it makes sense to me. The Palmer report identified the rounded off edges as indicating a rolling motion in the River. Simple physics. The bills did not rot elsewhere. they were rounded off tumbling along the bottom, the shards came off of the remaining stack. The shards were not from the outer edges they were from the top/bottom bills interior. Your shards argument is invalid. I have seen many images of buried money and none looked as uniform as the TBAR money. I am 99% convinced the money rolled along the bottom for some length, at least a few miles. Human burial makes no sense.. to claim it only needs a reason is a huge problem. There is zero evidence and contradictory evidence. both of you guys are using your own assumptions, not the evidence. both you guys claim that river tumbling makes no sense or is laughable when the it is in THE PALMER REPORT. AND the Palmer team including the hydrologist NEVER even mentioned human burial as a possibility.

Georger, The only thing laughable is your lack of case knowledge after almost 15 years on this case.. The Palmer report identified the rounded money as indicating a rolling motion in the River.

I don't think TBAR will ever be solved,, just some theories ranging from nonsense to possible.

Human burial makes no sense. It is in the worst spot and what for? You are still making up a theories.. TBAR was accessible but not a common place with easy access, some locals and fisherman. Look at a map of Frenchman's Bar.. a road in and parking. The money was rounded off about 50% around the outside of the packets. I have seen buried money images and it doesn't look as uniformly eroded as TBAR money. The shards don't account for the outer erosion. Palmer suggested tumbling, we don't know for sure but it is consistent with tumbling end over end. The money looks like a wet bundle rolled end over end along a sandy river bottom. The absolute simplest theory is that it went into the river and was pushed onto TBAR. The closest public access beach upstream is Frenchman's Bar about 2 miles away. There is nothing to indicate it was human buried for any reason. and we aren't 100% certain the money was ever given to Cooper,, maybe 98%...

Yes, money bundles sink, but they still have buoyancy even on the bottom. That area of the river is sandy with almost no snags (I posted a video of the river bottom off TBAR) and a bundle can be pushed along the bottom by current. So, I like Frenchman's Bar as an entry point,, 2 miles upstream, same side of river, easy access with a parking lot.. Probably tossed into the river inside a paper bag or container.. which could float for some time. Maybe sinks,, money gets rolled onto its spot when the water is above the spot (usually Spring time). and no the money spot was well below flood stage. If I recall the flood stage starts at 11 feet, the money spot is about 6 feet. You don't need a flood, just high water above the money spot. The burial/plant thing doesn't make any sense, it is the worst spot to bury money. If you wanted to bury money there are a million better spots close by. Also, the bills were rounded off edgewise which suggests tumbling like along a sandy river bottom. End over end. What I really wish we knew,, did the money arrive closer to the hijacking or closer to the find?? that would help immensely.

TBAR was used by some locals.. not a common "public" place.. Frenchman's Bar 2 miles upstream was a popular public beach area with parking. The money spot was at the high water line often underwater, Fazio's said in 1980 that it was recently underwater. The money was found feet from the bordering property.. It is not a place to plant money intended to be found. But, the stew money is one of my top three TBAR theories... I just don't see anyway it was planted to be found or TBAR had any "Tina" meaning.. in my stew theory it was just discarded upstream to get rid of it.. probably tossed at Frenchman's Bar in a brown paper bag. Landing on TBAR was just a coincidence.

Fact is.. you don't know what he said or what he meant, you are assuming.. I pointed out earlier that he might have been referring to Minnesota "Nice" describing the people which was a subtle form of racism pre-Norjak.. If he was that might tell us something about Cooper. But you choose to ridicule something that you don't even understand. You do this to remain relevant.. Nobody knows what he meant, except Cooper.

The money offered to the stews ending up at TBAR is a valid theory but it is not reasonable that "Tena" Bar was related to "Tina".. There would not be any expectation of that money to be found, it was a one in a million random event that Brian found it. If somebody wanted to send a message they would have hung it from the Tena Bar sign or put it in some place so obvious it would be found. TBAR money was not meant to be found. Ryan's restaurant analogy is off.. the money would not have been left inside on the table, it would have been tossed in the garbage out back, not meant to be found. The highest probability is that the money came from the river, either discarded and tossed in upstream or unintentionally introduced into the river.. Extremely low probability, it never went to Cooper and the FBI ransom list is wrong.

Georger often plays fast and loose with the facts... and makes assumptions. Tina's 302 does not say that Cooper said "Minnesota is "very" nice country" It reports that.. after she said she was living in Minneapolis.. He INDICATED that MINNEAPOLIS Minn, was very nice country. So, neither Georger or Ryan actually knows his words or what he meant. Nobody does. He was actually responding and referring to Minneapolis.. which is a city. This is Tina's interpretation,, Cooper could have meant many things.

He was given 200k... The bank ransom stash was actually 250k but 20k was in $10's.. So, the micro list created by the bank and given to the FBI had ALL $250k on it. The FBI could ignore the $10's but had to eliminate 1500 $20's on the list that didn't go to Cooper. The FBI most likely eliminated the correct 1500 bills but we can't double check their process. So, there is still a very small possibility they messed up the elimination of those 1500 bills not used for Cooper and went back into a second bank ransom stash. They even admitted they were having difficulty. It is interesting but can't be resolved without the full original micro from the bank.

Extremely unlikely but possible based on the process the FBI had to use to create the ransom list.. Most people assume the bank just gave a perfect ransom bill list to the FBI, they didn't.. They gave the FBI a micro image list that included 1500 $20 bills that Cooper did not receive. and only 15 sets of start/stop numbers to deduct those 1500 bills. the FBI admitted they were having trouble deducting the bills. There is room for error. Small but there. The 1500 bills on the micro list given to the FBI was immediately put back into a new 2nd bank emergency money stash.

"TBAR money may be from another crime" That was my investigation many years ago... it is complex It is theoretically possible that the TBAR money never went to Cooper... extremely unlikely but possible based on the way the ransom list was curated by the FBI. The bank had previously recorded $230,000 in $20's in 100's and in physical order of bills. Not numeric order. $200,000 was grabbed for Cooper, leaving $30,000. The recorded microfilm had all $230,000 bills on it. The bank sent the entire list to the FBI with 15 packets start/stop numbers for the money NOT GIVEN TO COOPER.. those 1500 bills were to be removed from the FBI list. So, the FBI had to deduct 1500 bills based on the 15 start/stop sets of numbers.. Meanwhile the bank immediately put the 15 packets into a new bank ransom stash and recorded all the bill numbers. The FBI was having trouble deducting the 1500 bills from the initial list and asked for a list of the 1500 bills not taken for Cooper. The entire NEW micro list was sent to the FBI with start/stop bill numbers.. there was an error in those numbers. Somehow the FBI eventually came up with the list. So, the process to create the ransom list was convoluted and by elimination. If the FBI or the bank made an error using those 15 sets of start/stop bill numbers then money not given to Cooper and to the new bank stash could have theoretically made it on the FBI list.. If that money was later used for a ransom it could have gone to TBAR.. So, it is theoretically possible that the FBI list was flawed die to its curation and bills not given to Cooper were on the list. Those bills were part of a new bank ransom stash. This is extremely unlikely but theoretically possible. When people claim it is a 100% fact that the TBAR money was Cooper ransom money, it isn't. It depends how accurate the FBI was in removing the 1500 bills (15 packets) from the micro list and they admitted they were having trouble figuring it out. We don't have the original micro of the bills in order to double check what the FBI did to establish the final ransom list.. did they remove the correct 1500 bills.. the final list we see has been re-ordered alpha numerically.

If you believe Cooper was 6 ft tall that is fine... you run with that. He might be, but he might be 5-9 as well. Fact is, the FBI and the evidence does not support your opinion that he can't be under 5-10. Is a suspect with a reported height of 5-9 and 5-10 in shoes also eliminated in your opinion..

Really, you keep claiming I have "confirmation bias" to discredit me. Disagreeing with you and agreeing with the FBI and the evidence is confirmation bias, something you just make up because I don't accept your opinion. Funny, you are trying to discredit me in a unhinged screed claiming that you don't... You need a break...

TBH, I don't care what your opinions are,, what makes me respond is when you lie and try to discredit me.. you try to discredit me claiming I have a confirmation bias when I am just in agreement with the FBI.. that is insane. You do it because you have no facts to back up your opinion. Fact is, it is irrational based on the evidence to claim Cooper can't be under 5-10.. then use that fallacy to ridicule suspects. Even a suspect reported at 5-9 is probably 5-10 in shoes.. If you believe he was 6 feet (reported 5-11 without shoes), that is different and I could care less..

Stop digging.