FLYJACK

Not a tie pin.. the back clasp doesn't match the tie mark.. maybe worn elsewhere like shirt pocket. back of that pin.. but there are lots of corporate pins out there.

You wouldn't wear both a clip and a pin... Most pins are flat and would not leave such a large impression, but not all.. There are pins with a bevelled or raised base.. if you don't know that then the indent would appear to be a burn.. finding tie pins with a wider base that match that impression changes that perception. and the pin that was worn with this tie was not the common flat back type,, this is significant. polyester vaporizes when burned.. you'd see a hole and Tom would have recognized a burn.. Add it all up.. IMO,, it isn't a burn, it is from a less common bevelled/raised back tie pin, probably corporate and worn for most of the time prior to Norjak when the particles were deposited.. Find that uncommon pin shape from circa 1965...

What does Tom say? a cigarette burn is obvious.. he wouldn't have missed it.. That spot is center, where a pin would be. A cigarette burn in polyester creates a hole, not an impression. Look up cigarette burn on polyester, the material disappears/vaporizes creating a hole. That looks like an impression from some type of pin.. the base of the pin would be wider or tapered making it somewhat unique.. most are flat. Here are some vintage tie pins with a beveled/protruding base.. BTW,, I have always believed based on the impression that the tie was worn with that pin for years and the MOP clasp was thrown on later for the hijacking.. The person wearing the tie when the particles were acquired was wearing a pin.. not the MOP alligator clip.. Probably a corporate pin... This is a vintage RCA pin,, it would make the same impression..

Looks like it could be in pics but Tom handled the tie.. Tom would have identified it as a burn.. My guess is no,, Tom would have noticed it as a burn when he handled the tie, maybe ask Tom.. Another image shows a surrounding indentation, that indicates some type if pin was attached.. not a burn. Tom believed it was a tie tack impression/hole, he handled it and would have noticed if it was a burn..

We heard that before but it was with Clorox.. ??

The diatom research indicates.. it doesn't prove anything... Tom's conclusions are speculation. Edwards is still trying to push the narrative for Cooper jumping into the Columbia.. He is trying to make the evidence fit his conclusion.. Edwards ignores and distorts the jump evidence to do it.. he is creating doubt in the diatoms to support his bias. You can always find doubt especially in this case... The evidence supports the "FBI" jump zone between about the Lewis R and Battleground and in context with the diatom evidence indicates that the money went into the Columbia at a later (Spring/Summer) time. The money was also found in the upper layer with fresher debris.. a pop can that didn't exist in 1971. Like much of the Cooper case these things can never be proven. Cooper was separated from some or all the money and 3 packets were found on TBAR.. The evidence strongly supports the "FBI" flight path. The evidence strongly supports the "FBI" landing zone.

Ulis gets ambushed... Interviewer tried to tie 9/11 to DB Cooper... Half way through interview goes sideways..

Strange.. in 1996 after the Cooper Vane.. and it opened 2 ft.. https://www.spokesman.com/stories/1996/jan/18/twa-jets-door-drops-open-at-35000-feet/ A stairwell on a TWA jet popped open during a flight, and a crew member with a tether around his waist to keep him from being swept out had to pull the hatch closed. None of the 72 people aboard were hurt. The Boeing 727 was flying at 35,000 feet, at least 100 miles from its destination of San Antonio Tuesday night when a cockpit light indicated the rear stairway under the tail was open. The crew discovered it had dropped about 2 feet. A bulkhead door between the stairway and the passenger compartment prevented the cabin from losing air pressure. The captain took the plane down to 3,000 feet to permit a crew member to reach behind the bulkhead door, grab the stairway handle and pull the stairs shut, said TWA spokesman John McDonald said.

Moon phase.

"No funny stuff or I'll do the job" always sounded odd.. The "job" should be successfully hijacking the plane, in that phrase the "job" is blowing up the plane and people.. it doesn't make sense. The "job" in that context is a failure.. Portland sunset was 4:33 Nov 24, 1971.. Cooper wanted a night jump, the 5:00 PM demand plus turnaround is well beyond civil twilight end and about Nautical twilight end.. These times are purely technical based on the angle of the sun but due to the overcast weather at the time it would have become dark even faster after sunset. Astronomical twilight is irrelevant here. Cooper planned a night jump.. otherwise he would have taken a much earlier plane.

The original description of the chute Cooper used was olive drab with tan cotton harness. Cossey claimed his NB6/8 was sage green nylon container and harness.. The 302 above was based on an in person interview with Cossey on the 26th.. when Cossey would have been aware that the chutes were from Hayden and he was the rigger. Cossey must have talked to the FBI before that interview. There is a 302 that states they were tying to get a hold of him on the 25th but couldn't up to 3:30.. but I suspect they talked to him by phone before that in person interview.

It is the best and most logical explanation.

You would think,,, take it to the next level.. that means they were looking for the wrong chute and rejected many found over the years based on Cossey's description.. Cooper's chute might have been found and rejected.. and how can they have two backpack packing cards from the plane and not realize one was the chute Cooper took.. and further the FBI wants the money or the chutes.. if they don't have the chute description correct they won't be able to ID any chute.. Seems either there is a game being played or gross negligence.

Cossey claims he had Issaquah send in his two personal backpacks, one freefall rig (B-4 sport rig) and an NB-8 emergency rig... this is BS and the FBI never caught it. Cooper never used Cossey's NB6/8... both chutes came from Hayden. He used Hayden's Pioneer #60-9707... he likely chose it over the other #226 because it was 3 years newer. and for 50+ years they were looking for the wrong chute. So, this has spun so far away from reality,, Cossey claimed the NB6/8 had a hard to find the ripcord because the handle was flat.. Gryder has used Cossey's "hard to open" claim and moved the handle to right side based on Larry Carr's misunderstanding... all to use as evidence for the chute he claims he found to support McCoy being Cooper.. Completely nuts.

In all three images of Vince Petersen his hair is parted on the wrong side, the right.

It doesn't make sense that Cooper would open the dummy after already having the good front open.. and if he opened the dummy for some reason there would be pieces left behind,, why toss the remaining parts. IMO, Cooper tossed the dummy whole because it didn't have a packing card, didn't have a seal and felt tampered with...

Could be, everything I read referred to harnesses being worn and chutes attached for bailout, no distinction between front and back was made. Though some pilots wore rigs. But, the point I am making is Cossey's story doesn't really make sense.. He gave instructions for his non steerable military bailout back chutes and front chutes to be picked up from Issaquah, we know the backs came from Hayden, but the problem is Cossey claimed his back chute didn't have D rings. So, why send Cooper front reserves with no harnesses that couldn't be used. Having fronts sent without harnesses and back chutes from Hayden with no D rings is understandable as they wouldn't know if they had D rings or not... Emrick was told backs weren't needed. but Cossey arranging for his back chute to be used with no D rings and sending fronts with no harnesses does not make sense.. if Cossey knew fronts and backs were required then why send fronts that couldn't be used with his back chutes. See the problem,,, Cossey was wrong about his chute being used then lied about it.. Cooper didn't use Cossey's NB6/8 sage green nylon container and sage green nylon harness..

Another interesting thing is the back chute left on the plane returned to Hayden is a WW2 era early 1940's P2-B-24. The harness is a 1957 Pioneer "quick fit"...

True, but there are two issues.. The terminology Cooper used for his request may give us insight into his experience.. and the evidence supports Cossey's description of the chute Cooper used as being false, that means they were looking for the wrong chute and Cooper's chute may have been found. Cossey claimed his chute had no D rings.. then why was Cooper given front reserves with no harness and why would Cossey have personal non steerable bailout rigs.. answer, he didn't.. Cossey thought his chutes were grabbed from Issaquah but before Emrick sent them in, they obtained Hayden's chutes and only the fronts were sent.. but Cossey didn't know that when the FBI called him about the chutes left on the plane. Cossey described his chute he thought was used, but it wasn't. Conclusion,, Cossey initially believed his back chutes were used and he gave the wrong description for Cooper's chute, they weren't, Hayden's were used. Cossey discovered his error within a day but never corrected it. So, Cooper's chute may have been found but rejected because it didn't match Cossey's false description.

Typically, the harness only was worn by the crew, then the front or back chute would get attached for a bailout.. but for some planes pilot's wore their bailout rigs..

Halo started in the late 50's.. but, that is why he became a Cooper suspect.. his Vietnam jump experience.

For bailout backs standard location is the left side.. these guys might have gear or equipment that makes the right side better.. 5 HALO jumps late 1970 to Oct 1971.. https://sogsite.com/halo-jumps/

The outlier is the few combat Halo jumps in Laos,, both front and back chutes... first one in late 1970, third June 1971. If Cooper knew about those, it may have been his inspiration. https://www.coffeeordie.com/macv-sog-halo Look how many guys have a right side pull..

WW2.. multiple chutes means either not all..

The reason given was that since it was thanksgiving eve they couldn't get the authorization from the right people in time.. that may have just been an excuse but they also contacted Cossey and Hayden.. Remember, they only had a few hours to secure the chutes..