FLYJACK

It is not a DOCUMENTED fact... hyperbolic. Mitchell did not have real input on the initial production of sketch A. I assume they didn't eliminate Flo completely from B, just elevated Mitchell and reduced her input. The files don't have everything... they are mostly summaries and not primary docs like the sketch artist interviews with witnesses. Those are on forms. The benzedrine isn't in the FBI docs.. did it not exist. I trust that the FBI told Galen, maybe they lied to him. Fact is,, you are assuming he is lying with no proof to make your argument.. I have no doubt that Mitchell played a bigger role in B v A, Flo was emotional and B was different from A.. by logical inference.. Mitchell's input accounts for most of the difference in the sketches. Galen's claim fits in this framework.

It isn't an obnoxious argument,, it isn't really even an argument.. I heard this many years ago from Galen who worked closely with FBI back then, long before any sketch A v B debate. Why would he make it up. The only argument is whether you trust Galen on this or not.. I trust Galen more than most of the people in the Vortex.

What I meant was it came from Galen but from elsewhere... not Bruce's book. I am not being called out for anything,, either you trust Galen on this or not,, This goes back years.. long before the sketch A v B debate. So, no bias or agenda. Rataczak also said Flo had problems during the hijacking.. lending credibility. I believe Galen, he worked closely with the FBI years ago.. and don't see anything in the files that contradict it, your claim that the files prove it untrue are false. If you don't beleive him that is up to you.

It isn't in the files, I never said it was. Hard for you to believe but not everything is in the files. It came from Galen, not from Bruce's book, I got it elsewhere. He was working closely with the FBI at one point.. I believe him. Rataczak also said Flo was a problem. As for sketch B they elevated Mitchell and diminished Flo's input. Maybe that is why it was different.

So, Mitchell wasn't sure he was the last passenger to board. It was probably Gregory. Mitchell was close to the last.

Yes, Flo was believed less reliable due to being too emotional,, Mitchell was relied upon more for sketch B. I know you have said she was the best witness, she wasn't considered that by the FBI.

Flo is probably right,, but Dan Cooper was just another passenger when he boarded and not drawing attention as he did when he was the "hijacker".

Classic embellishment.. he also said Cooper had the briefcase on the right seat and his right hand on it.. This is stuff from the media.. Michael didn't see.. His story is not what he saw but what he thinks happened many years after the fact. Dan Cooper was probably the second to last to board, possibly last.

I don't know what he wants, he is incapable of communicating anything of substance. He seems to think he is the arbiter of Cooper truth.. Does he want me to leave a forum he trashed and rarely used or does he wants me to do some Cooper media and give away all my research... or is he just fronting for others. I think he disagrees with something and can't articulate a counter argument so he just uses insults. Doesn't matter, he is irrelevant. I feel bad for the Cooper people who have to deal with this guy.

Ironic, from the guy obsessed and repeatedly lying and attacking me personally. What debate did I lose, Nicky.. What position do you have all figured out that I have wrong. Something must be eating at you. You throw out and hide behind insults because you are incapable of an adult discussion.

No, it is not dispositive obviously,, Maybe 90% of the info in this case is not dispositive. However, it has value. The reliability of Alice positively identifying prescription lenses is greater than misidentifying regular lenses. She could be wrong but the likelihood of being correct is higher than her being wrong.. The goal is to find a qualified suspect, that means ticking boxes and inferences, if you go through the files some suspects were noted if they wore prescription sunglasses.

It is a double standard,, if I choose to keep stuff private that is my choice whether it is a debate or otherwise. YOU guys trashed me for it.. I wan't debating Nicky when he trashed me for not doing media. Nice try Ryan. I have no problem with other people keeping stuff private because everybody does it and that is their choice.. Absolutely a double standard.. debate or not.

Prescription lenses for sunglasses....

I have no problem with that, everybody has stuff they want to keep.. The difference is YOU GUYS call me a liar, afraid and try to smear me when I don't share everything.. A double standard. Nicky has effectively admitted his own hypocrisy...

A problem with Tina's claim.. Tina claimed she saw Cooper standing in the rear when she went to the front. She said the lights were out in the rear,, it was dark out then as well. Tina also said she never saw Cooper's eyes he wore sunglasses the entire time.. So, how does Cooper see in the dark with sunglasses on... Tina...

I MIGHT be correct,,, it is beyond obvious and it is clear in most images of him and that video of him. Clear severe forehead lines and many significant bumps,, probably why he wore a "beard" to hide them.. So, why then do you keep minimizing the OBVIOUS extreme wrinkles and bumps on Skip's face. You just lose credibility. I'd understand you don't want to offend Limbach because he is your friend but be realistic. For Hahneman, you are just wrong.. he is a good match for the description just not in your opinion. You keep using one poor newspaper image of him or the sketch, I have many images, some you don't have and he could pass for three completely different people depending on the pic used.. Some witnesses for his hijacking were shown his pic and said definitely not him.. His hairstyle changes and his weight fluctuated making his face change substantially.. He has a generic unmemorable look.. He looks very close to Murphy and one pic I have he looks like that Canadian guy you posted "Willows" in another.. I also have that undisclosed witness image of Cooper that matches him 95%.. So, your opinion is just wrong. It is an assumption based on limited information. You said he was the worst match on the planet... No, he isn't. So, go ahead and tell the world he looks nothing like Murphy who the witnesses really really liked. Go ahead tell the world these guys don't look similar.. Spreckel hairline down per witness.

Cooper had normal forehead lies,, Skip has severe forehead lines.. Ryan keeps minimizing this by claiming Skip had normal forehead lines.. NO, these are not normal forehead lines, not Cooper, and Skip had many large bumps on his face. NOT NORMAL. VERY UNIQUE..

Ryan's height analysis/opinion is highly flawed... His probability distribution is wrong. I would like to have the source for this study... these witness reliability studies vary greatly based on the methods.. the subjects in these studies are exposed to the same event, they were not for Cooper. The Cooper witnesses unlike these studies were not exposed to the same event/experience and have different confidence levels.. Two saw Cooper at the terminal not aware he was to become a hijacker,, they both said they wouldn't be able to ID him,, Virtually no confidence. Alice did not see Cooper standing. Some confidence. Three male passengers knew Cooper was suspicious but only saw him seated. Males are better at sizing up other males than woman are. Some confidence. Flo only saw Cooper standing when he boarded,, he was not a hijacker at that time. She saw him seated but the FBI thought she was too emotional to be reliable.. Some confidence. Tina saw Cooper seated and standing. She said he was seated the entire time except for the brief time when he went to the lav.. She also saw him standing when she went to the cockpit but the lights in the rear were out. Confidence medium. Ryan gave all these witness who saw Cooper standing the same confidence level and ignored those three that saw him seated. The FBI's initial description had Cooper from 5-9.. they updated to from 5-10 based on Tina seeing him standing. This wasn't the criteria used by the FBI for vetting suspects, they used 5-8 as the lower bound. Since almost everyone self reports their height without shoes,, an inch needs to added to account for shoes.. The reported height is an inch less than observed with shoes. So, Tina's 5-10-6' should have the highest confidence level however it suffers from sample size error. One person. One person is not reliable. Tina's observed is actually 5-9 to 5-11 reported height. Ryan claims to understand this but doesn't actually. So, Ryan has a sample size error, confidence error and probability distribution error. For example, in a normal distribution the Cooper data assuming all inputs have the same confidence (they don't) indicate 5-10.5 at the peak (5-9.5 reported), tailing off to the sides.. or probability drops either side,, Ryan's distribution peaks at 6 and drops to zero at 5-10.. this isn't valid even if all inputs have the same confidence level and they don't. Since the Cooper height inputs have a wide variation in confidence the probability distribution confidence is low. Ryan is effectively relying on low confidence data and comparing it to a study where all participants have the same experience. The fact is the FBI used 5-8 as the lower bound for valid reasons. I am not claiming Cooper must be under 5-10, based on the witnesses he could be from 5-8 (reported) to 6 foot... There is no evidence or valid argument to claim Cooper could not be under 5-10 reported height. Since the witnesses did not have the same experience they have different confidence levels, that needs to be accounted for,, however Tina having the highest confidence level exhibits sample size error.. one person.

WAY too short..

Is this Skip's Towncraft Snapper? or this that another pic because this tie is too short to be Cooper's tie.

Ryan, What study is this.. it is not consistent with most others.. Need to see the methods..

Of course it is better to have the passengers go out the back.. when you have a gun and control the doorway. The crew could have run off the front during Cooper's hijacking with Cooper at the rear.

Tina went to the front approx 4 minutes after takeoff.. The rear lights were OFF... when she went forward and last saw Cooper standing About 8:00 Tina saw the stair light go on... shortly after Cooper said he was having trouble with the stairs.. that indicates the lever was moved out of the up/lock detent a second time...

That is a good point,,, these podcast/videos are for Cooper people... doing something for the general public is a completely different ballgame... I have discussed Cooper with top level media off the record and you need to build a base foundation of case facts just to start.. very challenging and time consuming. I imaging Ryan has faced this issue with his book,, balancing a Cooper audience with the public audience level knowledge. But Nicky's whining is a red herring, it makes no sense to criticize me for not doing Cooper media, Georger hasn't done any either. I have done more media by reach than anyone in the Cooper world.. So, it isn't the real issue, Nicky is threatened and is throwing anything he can grab at me in a tantrum because he can't articulate his fear.. just lies and misinformation to discredit. Nicky represents the toxic nature of the Vortex that undermines the advancement of the case.. he needs an intervention.

HAHA,, no nothing like that.. I have facts.. not speculation..