FLYJACK

Matches were ubiquitous back then.. you could pick them up anywhere, having 1 book wouldn't be a factor. 302's are written from agents notes so they aren't precise. and.. Tina getting them from a cabinet isn't a typical error, it was either completely made up or true. I do lean slightly toward true but wouldn't bet on it.. if it wasn't true then Tosaw was outright lying, I can see an error or misunderstanding but not an outright lie.. there was nothing to gain by it.

DO NOT accept Cunningham's timeline, it is NOT correct. He is out by 2 minutes at the Columbia.. Do NOT let this misinformation become case evidence. This case is tough enough already. and the number of bills was estimated at 290/$5800, they did NOT find more bills they identified more serial numbers, that it NOT the same thing.. Originally they did not identify 280 complete bill numbers then find more. The estimated 280 bills, they were not all complete serial numbers. All they did was complete some of the unidentified serial numbers using fragments. They did not add to the 280. They did not account for all 300 bills. One packet was smaller. Likely some eroded but can't rule out a few were missing. Not likely, but possible. It is likely there were 3 packets of 100 bills each $2000 = $6000 but they did not account for all of them,, and did not fully identify all the (280) serial numbers. Also, the Skychef matchbook... Tosaw interviewed Tina and says in his book that she grabbed them from a cabinet when Cooper's matchbook ran out. While Tosaw does not get absolutely everything correct this may be the source of the Skychef matches and not Cooper. Weather.. There is no precise weather/wind data for Cooper's jump time and location,, we have general reports some distance and time away.. The FBI weather data was applied as a proxy, it was not precise. Best indication was the wind in the area was shifting between SSE to SSW around that time.

You need to challenge your own bias and logic.... because you have some things very wrong. Being wrong isn't a big deal but using that ignorant position to attack others is. Take a step back and re-evaluate. I know you can do better.

No, not dox, silly I have case information that will make you look ridiculous. But calling me hideous is duly noted... it indicates your frame of mind.

No, I don't need for those claims to be true. They support an explanation for Cossey's error, not facts. We test claims against other evidence,,, Cossey's description of Hayden's missing rig fails when tested against other evidence. However, Cossey's later claims that he was describing HIS rig fits. False equivalency.. Your logic is messed up and inconsistent, you accept Cossey in one instance when there are conflicts but then reject it later when it fits. Then you strawman it by asserting the later claims are necessary to question Cossey's early description. False. Layers of deception.. Be very careful Ryan, I have undisclosed information that will make you look really bad. I am really tired of this nonsense. You clearly have some bias that has overcome your objectivity. I think you actually believe what you are saying, but it is not logical, that tells me it an emotional argument. Believe what you want I don't want to participate in an irrational discussion.

It is absurd.. you can always create doubt in anything with enough imagination. There are reports that Cooper checked the cards,, that would explain the card found in the wrong pocket. But, you of all people should know that you don't just accept an unsubstantiated claim as fact, especially when there is contradictory evidence.

1. not documented. 2. yes, documentation no images and I also considered some conflation but only 24' ripstop and rigger matches.

It isn't caution, it is not being realistic... Caution is NOT accepting Cossey's claim. I am not ignoring anything. We aren't in court. This is the investigation stage.. Problem with your analogy is that both of Hayden's rigs were packed by Cossey May 21, 1971.. both cards are accounted for and marked Cossey May 21,1971. One rig was recovered and one is missing. One card matches the found rig and one card is missing a rig.. The card without a rig must belong to Hayden's missing rig. The only way that card doesn't belong to Hayden's missing rig is if there were 3 back chutes.. we know that didn't happen. When you have conflicting info you look for the point of least resistance,, If only one thing, Hayden's 28 foot attribution was some type of error then everything else fits.

Has your account been hacked? You keep making absurd claims. You discard claims that are not contradicted by evidence then you accept claims as fact because they are not disproven when there are contradictions.. have your cake and eat it too strategy.. pretzel logic.. Cossey's claim IS NOT FACT.. it is NOT corroborated.. IT IS contradicted by Hayden and the packing card. Cossey LIED about his records.. More than enough to toss out Cossey's claim.. If you want to accept it, go ahead. I DON'T CARE. Your position is irrational.

NB6 is a claim by Cossey, a claim is not a fact where I come from... That claim is contradicted by the packing card and Hayden... you know evidence. Since we have exactly ZERO corroboration for Cossey's claim it is worthless. I don't have to invent anything. You must have some bias here because you aren't being rational about this issue.

Rataczak did tell Soderlind at the time he thought the oscillations were Cooper jumping. Also 5 or 10 minutes after 8:05 is 8:10-8:15. Rataczak is trying to pinpoint the location using a range based on marked times.. From 8:05 last contact with Cooper to his call with Soderlind. "not yet reached Portland proper" refers to the Soderlind call not the oscillations/jump.. If that call was "shortly/minutes?" after Cooper jumped and before Portland and in the suburbs,, then Cooper's jump was before the suburbs of Portland. Now, what exactly did he mean by the suburbs of Portland..

He demands proof of negation,,, which isn't a rational standard. It is goal seeking. But he has the burden of proof backwards, there is no corroboration of Cossey's NB6 claim.. only conflicts. Burden of proof is on the affirmative. He wants it to be an NB6.... that was very very unlikely. We can't say for 100% certain because we don't know the model of the missing chute but there is nothing to indicate it was an NB6 other than Cossey's claim and there is contradicting evidence.. He is speculating to create doubt that all the contradictory evidence is just a series of errors... It is Rorschach, just see the evidence you want that fits your imagination.

Where is that,, I have seen that he likes the quick fit harness. Not that he disliked the other one. Hayden's recovered chute has a newer updated green harness..

Nope... weak speculations

That doesn't prove conflation.. His chutes may have had the same quick fit harness..

No.

Agree, he pulled, he survived with possibly some injury. Cooper got non-steerable emergency back bailout rigs, probably did not expect that. If you bring your own you can guarantee a freefall rig. Unlikely Cooper used an NB6.. (based on Cossey) There were trackers at the time, not GPS but radio beepers. They ping on an emergency frequency for 24-36 hours. If he pulled at 2000 ft his drift would be less than a mile. Since the FP map has 1 mile error then Cooper would have landed very close to the FP.... It was not Ted Braden. He was the badass of badasses, Cooper wasn't. Ted has dimples, less hair, crooked mouth and a very winkled forehead. Cooper's presence and demeanour does not fit Braden. Cooper was unmemorable. Agree, Cooper had many miltary jumps.. not Braden level but more than a few.. Cunningham's FP timing is incorrect. Ignore it. Sketch B is the closest likeness.. no question. Cooper jumped between the Lewis R and Battleground. Plane pitched at 8:09, that was Cooper reaching the bottom of the stairs. Oscillations increased violently culminating in a pressure bump, That is within minutes of the reported oscillations. 8:11-8:15 at most.. The case is solved, just nobody can put a suspect on the plane. YES, either bomb was real or if fake made by somebody who knew explosives. Money was not planted. No way.. Nobody buries cash in that environment and close proximately to the River, high water line. Many better places and ways to cache it if Cooper wanted to. No, the Government doesn't need to get money from hijacking planes. The CIA has lots of ways to make money. Elsinore ghost, Cameron was embellishing a person he met... walked it back, it is in the 302's. Cooper asked for notes and matchbook because of the writing on them.. not prints. Cooper did care about leaving prints. Weirdly, I heard females prefer violent true crime.. Cooper was a strategist.. Barb was NOT Clara... Letters are too short for stylometry,, random noise. If Clara was legit then the initial contact with Gunther was legit, at least a real person, hoaxer or Cooper. It is just really strange that a hoaxer(s) would disappear for ten years make contact and not ask for money. Skip was not Cooper, his massive forehead creases eliminate him. No way...

We don't know that harness it is a conflation. That is your speculation. No they aren't similar... an NB6 is not similar to Hayden's Pioneer. If you got a pair of bailout rigs to meet regs, you would get two similar, not completely different. There were maybe a dozen WW2 era rigs that are different models but very similar. Olive Drab and Sage Green are not the same.. In 1971 a nylon NB6 was maybe 15 years old, it would not have faded.. it would not be mistaken for a much older faded Olive Drab. Before you got into the case you didn't have a military parachute.. you make a huge assumption that Hayden didn't know what Olive Drab was.. not valid. Today, an NB6 might be 60 years old, then maybe 15. So, now you have to discount 4 things Hayden said to make it an NB6... um, nope You want it both ways, cherry picking parts from Hayden's description and from Cossey's... This all works with only one error in Hayden's description, maybe from him maybe from the agent. In my assessment of all the evidence, with all the conflicts the 28 attributed to Hayden is the single item that if an error makes everything fit. To make it an NB^ you have to have a half dozen errors.. 1 error vs 6... I go with the 1 I am 99% that Hayden's missing rig was not an NB6. knowing the model isn't a big deal but it would mean that the FBI using Cossey were looking for the wrong rig. That is the take away.

Yes, it actually does negate an NB6.. Cossey was the only source for the claim.. nothing corroborates it. Hayden's description doesn't match an NB6.. Olive drab with tan cloth harness. Hayden said the chutes were the same/similar.. An NB6 is nothing like his Pioneer. I think Hayden called it military because it was Olive Drab. That tan one was a civilian version. There were many models that were very similar. The WW2 military chutes were Olive Drab,, later NB6's were Sage Green.. The packing card doesn't really match it either,, a 24' conical in an NB6 container is unlikely and it does not confirm an NB6.. So, it is very unlikely it was an NB6... that is where I started this. Either the 24 or the 28 is wrong.. A 28 matches a flat circular. The card called the 24 a conical.. On balance if one is an error it is most likely Hayden..

If you discount EVERYTHING Cossey said then there is no NB6, that is what I have been claiming. I was just reconciling Cossey's erroneous narratives. Hayden's description conflicts with the packing card... I think Hayden's description is correct except the 28'... that could be some type of error by Hayden or the agent. It was claimed only once,, while Cossey repeated it over and over... So, he meant it. I think the packing card 24' carries more weight than Hayden's 28'..

We know Cossey is unreliable, we don't know when he first talked to the FBI or somebody.. These FBI documents are incomplete and unclear. My reconciliation only needs him to have given his missing chute description before he learned about Hayden's chutes being sent and that must have come from the FBI. Unless he assumed the chute Hayden got 6 months before and misremembered.. I doubt it,, but possible. If it was the evening of the 25th then everything still fits... If the in person meeting with the FBI on the 26th was early enough, Cossey may have given his description then learned about Hayden later in the same interview.. the FBI would not have known Cossey was unaware of Hayden. Or, Cossey gave the description in a call prior to the 26th meeting.. they had to have talked to him before that in-person meeting. No, I can't prove it but the files and the info we have can't disprove it. Was Cossey ever compensated for his expertise??? I do think that Cossey was caught in an error that he couldn't come out and correct. He lied about and kept his records from the FBI.. Years later, the case cooled off for Cossey to feel safe enough to shift his story to fit his error rather than shift toward the truth. He benefits by doubling down, not by correcting his error. Cossey's narrative is telling us what his error was.. These aren't random lies, these are calculated to convert his initial error to a fact at a time when he feels he can get away with it.... some are true descriptions of his personal chutes, not Hayden's The chute left behind was returned to him and is cherished,, (he always had his, never got Hayden's) The "Pioneer" was a freefall rig,, (his was, Hayden's was a bailout rig) Also called the Pioneer a sport rig,, aka steerable (Bruce) (his Pioneer B-4 was steerable not Hayden's) The "Pioneer" was a B-4,, (his was, Hayden's was a civilian P2-B-24 container with a military canopy) One was a Cadillac, the other a VW,, (Hayden said they were similar) The NB6 was a Pioneer,, (it was never called a Pioneer, only Hayden's chute left behind was called a Pioneer and it was) They were his personal rigs,, (they were Hayden's) The NB6 was thinner,, (Hayden's P2-B-24 is a very thin civilian model) He told Carr the back chutes came (by cab) from his house,, (perhaps because Carr knew only the fronts came from Issaquah and backs came by cab) Cossey's NB6 was modified, an altered Ripcord (Bruce, a rigger wouldn't alter one for Hayden) Cossey said he owned the chutes and never heard of Norman Hayden. (Bruce)(Hayden wasn't public for many years) Cossey claimed Northwest paid him for the chutes (fronts maybe)

Sure, he could have been describing the reserve he thought was taken. The description was generic, not really accurate.. for the dummy. Never mentioned it was sewn either.. if it was Emrich's description he didn't say it was a dummy. How would Emrich describe a chute he couldn't even identify as a dummy when he grabbed it. Not likely. It doesn't even matter, this isn't required even if that description was from Emrich it doesn't change anything.. Whoever gave that front chute description, Cossey or Emrich did not know it was a dummy. It had to be form either Cossey or Emrich. I lean toward Cossey because of the "flat circular" attribution to the missing back chute in the same doc, and Emrich's inability to ID that chest reserve when he grabbed it. If it was Cossey that proves he talked to somebody before the in-person 26th interview, but if it was Emrich it does NOT prove he didn't. 26th Cossey supplied all four chutes.. and dummy is noted.

That isn't necessarily from Cossey. The quote is from Cossey but the Hayden statement from the FBI..

It is documented that Cossey owned the chute in the files, but that isn't entirely reliable. But how did Emrich unknowingly grab the dummy if he knew them so well. Doesn't add up.

That was my point.. Cossey learned it was a dummy on the 25th. The reporter talked to Cossey late aft or night of the 25th.. That description was earlier on the 25th. Presumably, he would have learned between those events.