FLYJACK

Even though the FBI low side description was updated to 5'10" from 5'9" they were using 5'8" as an inclusive threshold.. They may have just gone with Tina's height description.. But that makes sense because Cooper was seated almost the entire time and most (self) reported heights are without shoes.. or about an inch low. I argued this with Shutter and he would never accept that Cooper could be a suspect "recorded" under 5'10"... the FBI disagrees.

Here Al Lee recalled that Tina was 5'6" she was actually 5'8" and he saw her standing right in front of him.. Cooper was seated nearly the entire time.. When Flo noted he was 6'1" she probably never saw him standing. Flo was the outlier, she might never have seen him standing. Tina made a trip out of the plane when Cooper went to the Lav. She saw him go into the lav but he was seated when she returned. So, Cooper's height was estimated largely while he was seated except for a brief moment. Hahneman was different, he was forced to switch planes, he had to get up and walk from one plane to another surrounded by the crew.

Not so.. Both had a similar range. An FBI agent had Hahneman at 5'10"-6' For Cooper Tina said 5'10-6', Flo was 6'1 then later 6', Mitchell and Gregory were 5'9". Lysne was 5'10"-11, LABISSONIERE was 5'10", Spreckel 5'10"... Spinal Tap Stonehenge was 18"... 5'10" is the sweet spot.. the estimates tell me he wasn't noticeably tall or short. The initial FBI Cooper description was 5'9"-6', that was changed. The FBI biased the higher range for some reason, maybe favouring Stews but that is subjective. Cooper was seated almost the entire time.. IMO, Hahneman was 5'9.5"-10" in shoes.. that puts him within spec.. And these height estimates were based on recall, not very accurate.. studies show that people aren't really very accurate recalling height but they select an average height based on other characteristics.... race, class, age, body shape etc.. Studies show recall of hair is more accurate. Hair is a visual imprint, height is an estimate. Regardless, he is close enough to include.

I am grumpy because I am being pressured to unnecessarily publicly disclose my research... I have been collecting this stuff for 6 years and initially disclosed it as I went but was completely trashed for posting facts.. I stopped for several reasons. I have exclusive Cooper stuff as well. It probably doesn't make sense now but releasing info will undermine my ability to advance this case... it jeopardizes my ability to get more information. I am on the 1 yard line 4th down and every time you guys bring up H I feel like I am penalized 10 yards. I have much more info than everyone and that has given me completely different perspective. I can't discuss things adequately without disclosing my info and disclosing info undermines my research... a catch 22. As a lawyer, is it smart to disclose your case before you get to court? The problem with Hahneman isn't his lips or his height... it is something else that I am trying to resolve. Something that has three capital letters.

When the FBI screened Elsinore suspects they used 35-55 years old and 5'8"-6'1" as a criteria..

Nov 25, 1971 Air Force Map received from McChord.. Nov 30, 1971 Radar tracing of course from Boeing

When somebody starts with "Not to be argumentative" they usually are..

Are you calling me a liar? Again?

The sketches are just sketches... an underbite, maybe. Who knows. Everybody knows about Hahneman's draft cards, he was probably between 5'8" and 5'9" and rounded up or down at times.. in shoes he was probably about 5'10".. I have witness estimates for him from 5' 9" to 6'... almost the exact same range as Cooper. The original Cooper description was 5' 9" to 6', later changed.. Cooper was seated almost the entire time and some of the witnesses had him at 5' 9".. Bottom line height estimates during recall are not that accurate.. when asked to recall, most people guess in hindsight. He is on the short end of the range but within spec.. the fact that the witness range for his hijacking almost matches the Cooper range indicates that.

You do have to rationalize it, that is the rule.. You can't tell complexion from a B & W image.. If MANY witnesses liked that image that fact can't be ignored.. Clearly, it tells us that the Sketch B is not as accurate as you seem to claim.

You still can't rationalize many witnesses liking the hoaxer image, clearly thin upper and lower lips.

First the lips, that isn't the Cooper sketch, it is an enhancement which has greatly exaggerated the lower lip.. But, the sketch is also a comprehensive based on the input of all witnesses,, it is not exact but the best representation based on all inputs.. The 302 early description states "thin lips" and in Gray's book Flo says "thin lips". One instance says thick lower and thin upper.. what does that mean exactly, thick, fat?. "Pouty" means sullen or protruding lips, not necessarily fat. The sketch artist was trying to portray a protruding lower lip, that is very tough in a front face sketch. poutyin American English (ˈpaʊti) ADJECTIVE 1. sullen; sulking 2. protruding said of the lips But, the argument ends when many of the witnesses believed the hoaxer image was a good likeness,, upper and lower lips are thin. This image was liked by many witnesses,,, there is no way to resolve or rationalize that and claim Cooper's lips were much fatter. The nose,, there are different descriptions from witnesses,, narrow to wide, mostly "wider". The nose in the sketch is average.. I also have undisclosed evidence that Cooper's nose was slightly wider than the sketch portrays... IMO, Cooper's nose was like the sketch or slightly wider.. not narrower. Remember, the sketch is a composite of witness's recall, it is not exact, an average, which is why many people are a close match, of course that doesn't make a suspect Cooper... It is only a starting point... The FBI discussed making a profile sketch and a full body sketch, that would have been very helpful. The front sketch perspective is very limiting...

It has nothing to do with his cousin.. I am currently writing up everything into a report/dossier. and I hate writing,, the amount of information is overwhelming.

I couldn't find one online so I bought the magazine with the article off Ebay..

Max wrote an article about "disappearing" in the early 60's..

Cigarette brand study... 2006-2011 data https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4743742/ Recent studies have suggested that about 1 in 5 smokers report switching brands per year. However, these studies only report switching between brands. The current study estimated the rates of switching both within and between brand families and examining factors associated with brand and brand style switching. Conclusions Nearly half of smokers in the US switched their cigarette brand or brand style within a year. Switching between brands may be more price-motivated, while switching within brands may be motivated by price and other brand characteristics such as product length.

Raleigh's were given out to military in WW2,,, I have been trying to find out if they were available in the Vietnam war, either through rations or for private purchase.. Would somebody, military or not have access to Raleigh's in Vietnam 1965-1971..

The warning sign was not to use a radio in a blast area, not that it would trigger a wired electronic detonator. Historically, it was known, where do you get that over generalization from.. maybe in the military but not Joe average. Of course Cooper was referring to the electronic fuse or detonator,, per witnesses.. It doesn't prove he had explosives knowledge but it does suggest he did. I am not claiming he was an explosives "expert" but had a level of knowledge above average.. Clearly, he did if the bomb was real.. even building a fake bomb requires knowledge. That is the stronger argument based on the evidence. To argue he had none and was bluffing has no merit, a guess. I hear this often in this case.. Cooper was bluffing about this or that... while anything is possible there is no evidence.

Belair also had Raleigh coupons.. (1966 ads)

Dan Cooper comics are not rare in Canada.. There are currently 10 Dan Cooper comic listings on Kijiji Canada... all in Quebec. Kijiji is a general online buy and sell classified service in Canada.. sort of like Craigslist. https://www.kijiji.ca/b-canada/dan-cooper/k0l0?rb=true&dc=true Facebook has a dozen or so.. Quebec.. https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/montreal/search?query="dan cooper"

Does anybody know if electronic detonators alone would be enough to bring down a plane??

Witnesses.. "the hijacker had indicated the bomb had an electrical fuse" "She stated that at one time he commented that "the bomb" he had was electrically fused and he certainly hoped the crew would not generate any electrical currents which would trigger it." "He told her it was an electronic device and suggested the aircraft radio be used as little as possible. He said he didnt think radio transmissions would bother it, but wanted to let the crew know." c-123drop.mp4

C-123 Vietnam c-123drop.mp4

Not exactly the same.. you saw a sign but did you know why... Cooper built a real or fake bomb with electronic detonators, he claimed.. He had to have some "explosives" knowledge. IMO, if the detonators were real the bomb was probably real.. What is interesting is that he said the radio might effect it and to use the radio as little as possible, he didn't say don't use the radio at all.

That is an issue with observational evidence.. vs facts.. You can always raise doubt with observational evidence but then you have nothing left.. Blevins claims Cooper wasn't Latin/Swarthy but he just had a tan.. Edwards claims Cooper was White not Latino... Observational evidence is valid, it just needs to have context. This case is dominated by observational evidence. Even the FBI admitted in 1976 they didn't have the evidence for a prosecution without Cooper's co-operation..