FLYJACK

Why are you being so difficult.. this should be simple for you. Trying to establish a more accurate timeline,, 1965 Big Boy robbery.. ?? jumps Bond,, assume shortly after robbery 1965/66 ?? abandons family, travels around ?? settles in Wa ?? extradited to Wi, given parole, goes back to his pregnant girlfriend in Wa Jan 1971 works at Dam in Wa 1972 returns to Wi What are those years with the ??... When did he abandon his family and when did he return to his pregnant girlfriend? What years?

I know the claim about working on the dam... That isn't my question.. You claimed he lived in Wa State, you are the Reca expert here,, when exactly did he leave his family in Mi to go to Wa and when exactly did he return to Mi.. This should be very simple for you to answer.. Stop dodging and answer the question. The claim.. In 1965 Peca was caught for the Big Boy Robbery in Mi. On bail/bond he ditches his family and goes to Wa.. changes his name to Reca. He is extradited back to Mi and receives probation. He returns to his pregnant girlfriend in Wa... Works at Dam Jan 1971 Later, in 1972 he ends up back in Mi. So, exactly when did he first flee to Wa after the 1965 Big Boy deal.. Exactly when was he extradited back to MI.. and when did he return to Wa after being given probation.

Are you calling me ignorant? I know the claims. He left his family in Mi after the robbery. I am just trying to confirm something. The precise dates he was in Wa vs Mi. Your evasiveness and refusal to answer confirms everything about the Reca narrative.. Clearly, you are afraid to commit to an answer.

Why are you afraid to answer the question. Is it because you know the answer..

When did Reca live in Washington State,, the exact dates...

Ted Braden military file shows height is 5' 7".. I believe military records are measuring barefoot height...

Not always.

The Amboy chute is NOT Cooper's regardless of Cossey's nonsense. The serial number on the card found on the plane for the missing back chute is #60-9707 July, 1960... The Amboy chute serial number is 307551 Feb 21, 1946

99.9% probability the museum chute is a 26'.. Confirming it or even finding a 28' canopy is completely irrelevant to this case. The potential forensic value is immeasurable.

Of course you know you are wrong.. potentially contaminating an important source of evidence goes against everything you have complained about for years.. don't be ridiculous. More science.. It is like opposite George..

You know you are wrong.

No, there is potential Cooper DNA on that chute container pocket, don't screw it up by handling it more than necessary..

Did a deep dive on this years ago,, I don't have the sources handy. Emerich said black X.. Then Parachutist article with Cossey said large X with red closing flaps.. https://parachutist.com/Article/the-secrets-of-db-cooper-part-one-notorious-flight-305 After that article the X became a red X in the Cooper world... not before. There never was a red X. The red flaps were conflated with the X...

It had a black X and red closing flaps.. Got conflated to a red X..

My theory for the dummy chute is that is was suspicious, it was not full and had no riggers seal.. So, Cooper tossed it.

Robert99 has said in the past that the museum chute is NOT an NB-6.. He believes by "appearance" that it is stuffed with a 28' canopy. However, the container is a P2-24', not a 26' and with a 26' canopy it looks stuffed. It seems unlikely that a 24' container would have a 28' chute.

Ground told crew chutes coming from McChord..

"appears" It is a 24' early 40's P2 container.. so a 26' canopy in a 24' looks more stuffed.. I don't know if a 28' canopy can even fit in a 24' container.

Cossey filled out the card with 26', it was repacked twice after Hayden got it back and never changed, the container is a 24'... can you even stuff a 28' in a 24' container.. Hayden just wanted minimum chutes to meet regulations.. he was never going to use them. There is no evidence that is anything other than a 26' canopy.

Repeat from file #64.. I still find it amusing the FBI couldn't read the packing card properly.. 226 is not the type, it is the serial number.

Interesting info.. I always thought Cooper was vulnerable with only a bomb.. and might have had a concealed weapon. If people didn't think the bomb was real he needed a backup.. even if just for confidence. Imagine if somebody said hey that bomb is fake.. he'd be done.

The Hayden description file was dated the 25th... Another description disseminated on the 25th added a tan harness and flat circular chute to that description of the missing chute. It also included a description of the front chute.

Both back chutes were later described as having the same tan cotton harness,, with the exception of Cossey's description.. Why would one be called "civilian luxury type" and the other "military" if they had the same harness.

You can't disagree with something that is unknown. Do you think Hayden used the term "civilian luxury chute"? when he denied and rejected it and said they were both military and "identical". The front chute description was before they talked to Cossey on the 25th.. that came from somewhere, either Cossey was contacted by somebody earlier OR somebody who handled the chutes before they went on the plane described them. For the backs, that description by Hayden is either in full or in part from somebody else. Either somebody who handled the chutes or a call to Cossey or a mix of both. I do lean towards those descriptions being from somebody who handled the chutes before they went on the plane.. it makes sense that somebody documented the descriptions.. but it is possible somebody talked to Cossey on the phone earlier than 3:30 PM on the 25th,, we don't know. because that "museum" chute has no labelling and could be mistaken for a "civilian chute" vs a military chute with a label. Neither Hayden nor Cossey would have INCORRECTLY called it a "civilian luxury chute" but somebody who handled it before it went on the plane could have. They would have also noted the fray and the burp sacks. What does that mean.. the initial descriptions would be attributed falsely or at least partially to Hayden. Hayden also said he never looked at the canopy, he wouldn't even know it was white. The attribution of "flat circular" on the 25th to Hayden's description is odd.. if is was from Cossey they would have added the colour and the front chutes to the doc.. that suggests they had mixed up several descriptions..

So, you are speculating.. which is necessary given the gaps in knowledge.. But, it still doesn't make sense. If they got in touch with Cossey by phone after 3:30PM on the 24th and he gave them chute descriptions,, why would they add only "flat circular" to Hayden's description, nothing else and not the front chutes. He knew one was a dummy at this time. Nope. Something else happened.