Nicholas Broughton

That’s very well possible G. Speaking to the Ingrams as extensively as we have, I think we both understand the importance of their description of the money and how the rubber bands were stuck to the fibers those bills. The rubber bands need to be in a high temp environment to enter that gooey melt phase so they can get stuck on the money how the Ingrams described. Just like the money itself the rubber bands also tell a story. A window into the money’s history as you so eloquently put it. I can tell you that a group of us have put Cooper bands that TK sent us around pieces of plywood and put them outside in the PNW throughout the summer in different scenarios and not once did they enter that gooey melt phase. These are all the days the temp got above 100 in Portland 1972-1979.

Well stated G. I’m with ya 100%.

Tom’s 2023 analysis of the money shows that the rubber bands were on the ends and the center opened up and let the diatoms in and the very edges could also open up and let the diatoms in. If that bundle is rolling on a sandy river bottom there is no way silt (smaller then diatoms) and other debris aren’t getting lodged in the middle opening and outside crevices. The middle opening and outside edge crevices quickly close up when it gets out of the water. There not open for sand debris to enter in it’s water logged condition while in situ on the sand bar. I think your smart enough to get the no silt thing. You just choose to believe it doesn’t mean anything because it clashes with your theory . Cooperites no longer subscribe to the natural arrival via spring flood because of this finding. Tom Kaye - “So being this clean kinda says this money was never exposed to the water in the way you’d think.” Whether you choose to accept it or not it puts further constraints on how the money got to tbar.

I’m just going as far the evidence supports, which is that the money bundle fanned out in CR river water before it ended up where Brian found it. Not only are you going beyond what the evidence supports but you are doing so knowing contradictory evidence exists. Tom is on record of saying that the money was exposed to clean Columbia river water. Rolling along the river bottom doesn’t make for clean water environment. That 4 layer fragment came from inside the stack. We know the money was already wet when it arrived. Brian pulled the money out in three separate packets that he describes as soggy clumps that he initially thought was drift wood. When the Ingrams put them in the plastic hot dog bun bag…. the three packets stuck to each other due to the moisture, forming one solid clump. It took a solid effort by the Ingrams to peel the bills apart from what Brian has told me. So any crap that got deposited in between the bills while the bundle was fanned out in water, would of remained trapped when the bundle comes out and closes up like a clamshell. The money tells a story and you can either chose to listen to what it’s saying or be a flyjack and come up with your own version of events, thinking you know better. “and, nobody has shown the mechanism to produce the erosion pattern on the packets in situ... nobody” And you haven’t shown that the abrasion pattern on the bills is consistent with tumbling/rolling on a sandy river bottom. “the uniform abrasion pattern on the packets is consistent with a tumbling/rolling action.” I have no dog in the tena bar mystery. If Tom had found it filthy in between the layers of that bill fragment then I’d find your theory super plausible and even most likely. Tena Bar is a a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma and I think that was the intention.

“I posted what the facts suggest,, others are making up nonsense that is not supported by anything but their imaginations..” Again you are the one doing what you accuse everyone else of. What are your “facts” for the money tumbling along the Columbia River bottom exactly…. the rounded corners are a fact but offers no evidence for how they got like that, it could of very well have been just degradation in situ as evidence by the holes in the bills which would not happen from rolling in the river (TK’s current stance). So what else ya got? Palmer’s theory? Not a fact. Here is an inconvenient actual fact though for your theory. In 2023 Brian gave Tom bill fragments to analyze. One of the fragments was made up of 4 layers of bills. Tom presented his findings from his forensic analysis at CC23 and of note, he found it to be remarkably clean in between the layers of the fragment…. no soot, silt, mud ect. How in the hell is that consistent with tumbling along a sandy river bottom? How does that action happen, with out shit from the river bottom getting deposited between the bills in the bundle? We know the bundle had to have fanned out in the water to have picked up the diatoms. Silt is smaller then diatoms. In August 1972 three boys find 10 and 20 dollar bills in bottom of Willamette River by the riverbank in Cottage Grove, OR. No match to a nationwide check of the serial numbers. A year later, since no one had filed a successful claim, the boys split the $2,360. This article talks about all the mud and silt on the bills when they were found. Now I know you’ll probably cite the fact that the Ingram’s washed some of the money to keep your theory breathing but I asked Brian myself specifically about the 4 layer fragment and he said it was virgin and not part of what they washed. It makes sense because there is no salvaging that for spending and it had no serials on it. Even if it did get washed, a rinse in the sink isn’t leaving it as spotless as Tom found it to be. That would require a surgical effort with certain tooling. According to Tom the layers were pretty well stuck together, it took some serious work from him to separate them, so he could look inside.

My view is if it’s not in files then it PROBABLY (more likely then not) didn’t happen. I’d think (I know assuming, shoot me) any discussion between Cooper and the crew regarding the range is significant enough that it be in the files. We know not everything made it into the files but even knowing that….it be a major outlier for this not be. We’re both technically assuming here. It’s just a matter of which assumption is the better one aka more likely to be true based on known information and logic. I think everyone in here but you applies this metric. Again. I’m just defaulting to what we know to have transpired in the documentation we have. To suggest something could of happened that really needs to have happened to validate your theory is a reach and a desperate attempt at defending your position imo. My inference is based on examples in the files of how Cooper reacted in other instances when he felt the crew were either wrong about something or something they told him didn’t pass his smell test. I gave three examples: plane taking off with aft stairs down, parachute delay, and refueling delay. Whether he relented or not is irrelevant, the take away is he spoke up in all three of these instances. Something you seem to want to ignore for your theory. Round peg meet square hole. You are suggesting he either did something completely different from his established MO (said nothing when he knew the crew were wrong) or he followed his MO but the exchange is just not in the files for whatever reason (outlier). Either one of those scenarios has a very low likelihood attached to it for obvious reasons. Anyone can think outside the box and come up with a theory to address an incongruent data point in this case that can only be dismissed with assumptions and feelings or what I like to call logic. Does that make it any good though? I’ll argue NO and give an example. When Eric found that bedsheet on Tina bar. I showed him a picture of Lyle Cameron with a homemade wing suit made from a bedsheet in the 1960’s as a joke. That inspired a theory for him though and he thought it could be related and that’s how he landed near Tina bar. He is trying address an incongruent data point (money find) in this case by thinking outside the box, same as you are with this theory. He dropped the theory when Tom tested the bedsheet for Diatoms and found nothing which meant it couldn’t of been there since 71. But the theory remains relevant for my example. You can’t disprove this theory with evidence. Some early “birdmen” like Clem Sohn and Leo Valentin claimed to have glided for miles on the wing suits they invented. Cooper could have conceivably made a homemade wing suit that worked. He was able to craft a true to form bomb. So who’s to say he couldn’t of made one. Just as you say we don’t know what transpired between Cooper and the crew regarding range well we don’t know the contents of his mystery bag either. It could of been wing suit components for all we know. So you can’t disprove it with with facts and evidence. Only on assumptions and feelings. Does this make it a good theory? Hell no! That’s a bad barometer. I’m all for outside the box thinking. If there is any case that needs it, it’s certainly this one. So we encourage you to go back to outside the boxlandia but return to us with something else because this one ain’t it Fly.

To relent typically implies some level of resistance or prior opposition. Cooper needed to offer resistance or opposition to the range limitation claim by the crew for it to support your theory and for the other examples your citing to be valid. No evidence for that. Cooper stating that the 727 could take off with the stairs down is in both of Tina statements. To us mere mortals that qualifies as evidence. But I guess in super sleuth Fly’s mind we are missing something here? Somebody made a mistake…. "Cooper would have spoken up" that isn't evidence, you don't know what he was thinking.” Not claiming it is nor do I have the ability to get in his head. I’d classify it as a logical inference. You’re a goofy fella Fly…. criticizes people for guesswork when your entire premise is a total shot in the dark made-up guess.

BINGO

Let’s look at more apples to apples comparisons. I’ll give two examples. One where he probably thought the pilots/crew were just wrong and one where he probably was thinking LE funny stuff. When the pilots actually told him something about the aircraft he knew wasn’t true…. that it could not take off with the stairs down. He pushed back on that and had a back and forth with the crew over it…. even made it a point to state that plane could take off with the stairs down before compromising. He seemed to relish the opportunity to show off his knowledge. Same thing happened when he asked what the hold up was on the ground and was told in error that they were just waiting on the chutes to be delivered from McCord. He stated that McCord was either only 20 miles or minutes (unclear which) and it shouldn’t be taking that long or whatever. Why would it be any different if he thought the crew was wrong or the feds were trying to pull a fast one on him when it came to the range limitations? Especially since a range error by the crew or funny stuff by the feds in this instance would be more central to his original plan (if it was Mexico) then the other two circumstances I just mentioned. He also was having none of it when it came to the fueling delays which is another instance he probably perceived as funny stuff. He KNEW it shouldn’t be taking that long and that had him more unhinged then any other time throughout the skyjacking. I completely agree with you that Cooper would of spoken up about it. He didn’t go through all that trouble to make at the very least a true to life bomb down to the correct wiring to have him in the drivers seat just to give up the wheel when he didn’t need to. It makes no sense. I think we can all see that’s where this theory falls totally flat on its face.

Bang on. It’s cherry picking at its finest. Let’s just toss out the height estimate given by the witness who had the longest observation time of him standing, in like you said a known setting to him and not knowing he was a skyjacker, that got within inches of him when he handed him his ticket. Why? Because he thought he probably wouldn’t recognize him again by face…. has nothing to do with his height. Pretty delusional reasoning for discounting Hal’s height estimate IMO. I think Hal being honest about that makes him an even more credible witness.

Spot on…. I completely agree.

Thanks G! You have forgotten more about this case then most will ever learn. I feel like people point to this when dismissing the grudge as just part of the conversation and mistakenly attribute Tina to bringing the word up when it was in fact Cooper. Whoever this guy was he had an ax to grind. Maybe nothing specific as his comment suggests but just in general. The system? Society? The current state of affairs in America? Did he want money sure but I think he was striving for something more. There are less bold ways to acquire 200k criminally. He is on the low end dollar wise as far as parajacking ransom requests go. Cooper imo was a peculiar and complex individual. A man with strong opinions and convictions. Like lxchilton said it’s too general to narrow down the suspect pool but I think it should be baked into the psychological profile of Cooper.

Thanks. Well this seems to conflict with Fly’s declaration that Cooper would not have known where he was. Since we don’t know who he was…. he could of been a Boy Scout!

Cliff is actually very well versed on NORJAK. He took part in the Washington State Historical Museum Cooper exhibit and multiple Cooper Cons. I have had the pleasure of speaking with him at both the CC’s he attended. He has discussed the case with Cooperites and industry insiders alike. Even people involved with SAGE asking what radars would of been involved in tracking 305. He has an intellectual curiosity about the case, make no mistake. Another excerpt from his CooperCon 21 panel discussion. Cliff: “I talked to a lady who I work with at the museum of flight who was a northwest orient stewardess and she wasn’t on this flight, didn’t really know the pilot but in her talking to other stewardesses about this, she said the pilot made that kind of maneuver because he didn’t want the airplane blowing up over the city and so that’s why he avoided the airport and avoided the downtown (Portland metro) area as that black line shows (pointing at the FBI/Air Force map on stage behind him).” This sounds like a much more logical option if you wanted to avoid major cities then flying a route you’ve probably never flown before, that’s a 129 statue miles longer, requires more reserve fuel (already flying dirty), loosing a degree of freedom incase of an emergency in a very sketchy and foreign flight config.