CooperNWO305

This conversation from a couple of weeks ago indicates that a number of witnesses had issues with the A sketch. Farrell may have made a mistake. But I feel like it is a jump to say there would have been no B sketch because of it. Also, some sketch artists if not all are trained to help witnesses remember details and to tease out little tidbits and build the sketch piece by piece. I have to assume the FBI knew that memories fade, and figured that into things. They believed the B sketch was the better representation. Whether Farrell made a mistake or not does not change that in my mind. If someone likes A, they are going against what the FBI truly believed. Do we know something the FBI doesn’t know? I don’t think so.

Let’s go to the A sketch. Bing. Prior to the B sketch starting to be made, how many witnesses do we have commenting on the A sketch? Witnesses/passengers/stews. Not getting into who is a better witness. What do we have? Even a Nancy House who could not help would have some input I hope. If I showed her a pic of OJ Simpson she would at least say it’s not him. I hope.

Weird that she goes from KK5-1 to Bing. Very different people. Maybe she was just all out of sorts from the hijacking. That's the Vortex. One thing we can agree on is that wwe may never all agree. I'd love to see some DNA come back and see how everyone argues about that. :) I hope I'm still alive.

But in May of 1972 the A sketch was readily available. I'm not seeing this the same way as you are, so I guess I'm the same as Flyjack. I don't see the checkmate. Can you comment on the pictures I posted? If Flo liked KK5-1, then why stick with the A sketch and not do the B sketch? Wouldn't her picking out KK5-1 lead them to do a new sketch and not necessarily her not liking the initial? In Flyjack's defense, there has been some shady stuff going on the past year, mainly with Vordahl. So to think there is an agenda is not some off the wall thought. I've stated that I think you've distanced yourself from the Vordhal stuff, but to be blunt, you were kind of Nicky's handler for a long time, and what he did reflected on you. You'll break out of that with your non-fiction book, but it is what it is. There are still fake FB accounts out there, and people joining groups twice. I'm finding it best to be careful about who I team up with.

Is this the sequence?

Good info. What has added to my interest is the introduction of some of the pictures and ID kit. The KK that Flo picked out..did any other witnesses like that one? If Flo didn't like the initial, but liked Bing, yet she picked out the ID kit picture, wouldn't that in itself discount the A sketch? The kit pic looks nothing like the A, granted it does not look like B either. But B at least looks like a person.

What is the timeline on this latest sketch discussion? Initial sketch done. I call it the Cliff Robertson or Bruce Greenwood for my own memory. Flo doesn’t like it and others. Flo asks to do a ID kit. She likes the pic made from the kit. When is Rose doing the Bing A? While Flo and Farrell are working together on the kit? Rose does the Cary Grant/James Bond/Dean Martin when? Why not just age and darken the initial? Why not do the same with Bing? The initial and the A were within days of eachother. When was B started? We know the finish date. Was A going on concurrently with B? I don’t think so. So why doesn’t Rose know that his A was ok supposedly? Wouldn’t he have asked that? I understand that memories close to the event are usually better, but even that discussion has its faults in that people love to say that people in crimes don’t remember. But some do. And there are a number of times we’ve used recent testimony as more gospel than old (Mitchell saying that he looked old and it was not really a skin anomaly). Yet in his 302 he indicates it was more than just an old guy. I don’t see sketches as the same thing as “what color was his hat” “what type of gun” etc. The sketches were a constantly adapting process. OleMiss you have been doing good research and I like talking sketches more than flight path. My rub with a number of folks to include EU and Colbert (not you) is that they use the sketch they like that looks like a random pic of their guy cropped and in black and white or poor quality and then put those side by side. I can do that with anyone. I can show people my old IDs like military or concealed carry and no one would recognize me, even I don’t. There is just so much going on with the witness testimony to get anything perfect. There is a lot going on with people trying to muddy the waters on the flight path, and I’d rather not see that happenwith the sketches if possible. Some of it is going on already with the green eyes of Jude to make it seem that Cooper did not have dark eyes. The FBI liked the B and it is 50 years later. Seems like the burden of proof is on those to disprove B and if B is put in question, then prove A or initial. I’m not buying that one mistake by one agent on a huge case would lead down the path that the main sketch was all wrong. Bing looks nothing like the KK. Bing looks like an alien or AI.

Are these pics of Catalano, Cooper, and Murphy in the 302s or are these scraped from the web? Are all of these 302s in one Vault release?

What are your thoughts on the Spreckel sketch? It seems very close to the Bing Crosby. Did he just agree with the others or independently come up with that? I don't think I ever saw this one. Good find.

Olemiss. Do you have the names for these redactions starting on page 24? All the talk about narrow or wider etc gets confusing in that they don’t say “make it wider by 2 centimeters” etc. It would be quite an undertaking, but it would be interesting to see a pictorial of what witness said what off of what sketch and if we knew what they meant by narrow wider etc or had the actual ID kit or Nat Geo pics as reference too. One could argue many points on these sketches given the lack of agreement. Some say Mitchell’s does not count or Flo’s because she was stressed or Tina’s because she claims she only saw him head on, and only with sunglasses. I can say that the other day playing poker, this guy took off his sunglasses and looked totally different. He was middle aged. This seems like a good undertaking to pursue. https://dbcooperhijack.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Various-Witness-Descriptions-2.pdf

I was referring to a news article about a bed sheet that was DB Cooper’s that he used as a batwing to fly to Tina Bar and then bury the money with it.

What if something else was wrapped around the bag, acting as a double filter, say something like a bed sheet?

What is the chemical makeup of silt? Silt is a term we’ve probably all used, but diatoms not so much until a year or two ago.

Interesting, I'll have to see the presentation. Do you know if it was filmed? I may email Tom for the PowerPoint. Didn't the Ingrams use dish soap to wash the bills? Please don't tell me this will perpetuate the "buried the night of the jump" theory.

If they say it was underwater the week before then that is huge. That Leonard Nimoy show happening a few weeks before is unusual.

I used depth charts religiously on my boat. The depth finder on the boat and the books. What I’m wondering is when the flood data says the river reached 16 feet, do we know what the baseline is? Like 16 feet from what? If the depth is 40 feet normally does it go to 56 or is it from a point close to shore. Tom’s diatom article said that the $ was found 9 feet up and we know the find was 40 feet in. Am I right to think that a river could rise 9 feet pretty easily?

Cook says that in the summer of 2012 he spent a week at Tina’s Bar, located about six miles downstream from Vancouver, WA, talking with fishermen, boaters and river lovers. After dozens of pleasant conversations and many discussions on the finer points of Cooper lore, he eventually met a fisherman who had indirect knowledge of a money find that pre-dated Brian Ingram’s discovery in early February, 1980. The fisherman, unnamed by Cook, says that he knew of two other fishermen, now adults but teenagers in 1980, who say that they had found money along the Columbia in the vicinity of Tina’s Bar. Cook located the two gentlemen and corroborated the story of the first fisherman. Cook says that the two boys – now in their mid-to-late forties and living in the Portland, Oregon area, but then aged 12 and 14 – had been fishing at Tina’s Bar for steelhead in January, 1980, one month prior to Brian Ingram’s discovery. The two teens say they found about a dozen pieces of 20 dollar bills buried in a small hole at a site the Cook later determined was about three feet away from the spot where Ingram found his money. The teen fishermen told Cook that the shards were all corner pieces of twenties, fairly similar in size, and that they knew the shards came from a twenty because each piece had the numerals “2” and “0” on it. Cook also says that the lads told him that they found a handful of similar pieces the following weekend about 100 yards downstream from their first find, and that the shards were lying on the surface of the sand, as if they had been washed there by the river current. At the time, the teens did not know the significance of their find and did not save the shards. Only later, after the Ingram discovery, did they understand the nature of their encounter. However, Cook has not disclosed why the teens did not tell authorities of their own money find.

There is some discussion on the FB group about the money find. One gentleman posted an article from Bruce Smith about some kids finding money particles before Brian. Not sure if it is accurate or not. It made me think of Unsurelock's posts on the Forum. Below is a link to one set, I can't remember how to cut and paste the link to just one post. He had written an article I think about using the corners of bills to pass off 1's as 20's. He also posted some pics of the FBI's $20 shards in little plexi glass containers. https://www.thedbcooperforum.com/db-cooper/tina-bar-money-find/msg20131/#msg20131 Article on Mountain News about a pilot chute and some money shards: https://themountainnewswa.net/2012/11/19/the-hunt-for-db-cooper-disclosure-of-parachute-find-at-tinas-bar-fuels-interest-in-baffling-case/ Article on the money shards: https://themountainnewswa.net/2012/11/16/the-hunt-for-db-cooper-new-evidence-on-money-find-sheds-harsh-light-on-fbi-investigation-but-excites-citizen-sleuths/

I'm wondering what to put the GPS in so it will float. A rubber duckie maybe? I'd probably spray paint it black so it would not stick out. Maybe some fishing bobbers? I can probably get the stuff by CC and bring it with me.

Here is a link to a GPS tracker for about $29. This one can be tracked from miles away, so I could drop it in the water near Vancouver, and track it from Washington, DC. I don't know if I could track multiple ones of these on one phone, but I'm guessing I can. My thought would be to set these up, wrap in plastic or put in something that floats, and drop 5-6 of these in the area and see what happens. We might not be able to simulate the money, but we could at least see where the currents brought the devices. It might take multiple iterations in that we can't simulate a flood until there is one. I would just need someone in the area to drop these. I would buy them, set them up, charge them, send them to Portland, and then we could go from there. I'm thinking I'd want these dropped near Battle Ground, maybe 2 or so, a couple in the Columbia, etc. Any input? Where would you want these dropped? https://www.amazon.com/LandAirSea-Waterproof-Magnetic-Personal-Location/dp/B06XVZ6Y4T/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?c=ts&keywords=GPS%2BTrackers&qid=1699295218&refinements=p_n_feature_two_browse-bin%3A554289011&s=gps&sr=1-1-spons&ts_id=617650011&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9hdGY&th=1

Searches for "cocaine in ocean" bring up a lot of articles of drugs and money. I remember one from Florida years ago. Essentially smugglers would have to dump their money or risk prison. River banks have all sorts of debris. A packet of money may sink in a tank, but maybe not in moving water. I was not aware there were left and right handed forks. Interesting.

I thought I had SlimKing on ignore, but I guess I didn't. After the long underwear comment, I definitely have him on ignore. Completely delusional. My consistent oberservation about the delusional people in the Vortex is "What other things in the world are they delusional about?" Flat earth? Bigfoot, the CIA, etc. He can try to post on the Facebook group but he won't last long over there.

History.net has this, but it may be from Toswaw. Maybe OleMiss can ask Bill to confirm. Bill Mitchell, a college student seated in 15A, reported seeing thermal long underwear extending into the gap between Cooper’s pant cuffs and the loafers he wore. I wear a lot of boots. If I wear Chukkas, which are anke high, you can see my socks if I cross my leg, or if shorter pants ride up. This is what it sounds like Cooper was wearing. If I had suit pant on with Chukkas and was wearing long underwear or a jump suit underneath, someone would notice for sure. When I wear engineer or motorcylce boots it is hard to see my socks at all, and certainly in cowboy boots they are not visible.

Is there any chance that any of the parachutes could have been bright red and yellow, or any color besides pinkish or green? Also, do we know when anyone first commented about Cooper wearing long underwear under his suit? I believe it was just Bill Mitchell, but I'm not sure if that is in the 302s or just in one of his interviews.

Any idea what the white para cord on the side two handles was for?