SafecrackingPLF

First, I just want to say there's been some ridiculously GREAT posts lately by the DZ community. Thanks, you guys really make it a pleasure to discuss this topic. Okay, now to respond to what you said NickDG... The reason (and I'm projecting what I know into their minds) is that Cooper specifically told Tina to go into the cockpit and not to come out. Something happend, I can't remember what at the moment, that caused Captain Scott to phone to the back of the plane using the intercom and ask Cooper if everything was okay and if he needed anything. There was silence for several moments until Cooper reached the intercom and said everything was okay and he did not need help. My assumption is that he was in the middle of doing something (maybe trying to figure out the slipstream?) and he heard that intercom and decided to respond. They didn't want to risk upsetting Cooper so they did NOT use the intercom after this (maybe they should have once they approached Reno). Essentially it's like that old joke where the robber tells you to go count to 300 or something before you do anything... meanwhile the robber is long gone. Short answer: Fear. That's why no one went back there to put the stairs back up.

I'd add one more thing to my assertion that Cooper was poor due to multiple DNA on the tie. The simple fact that it was a clip-on would insinuate a less sophisticated Cooper. I can't speak to how things were in 1971, but a grown man wearing a clip-on tie as part of his regular job/dressing up just doesn't sound right to me. I could be way off here, and I know it. I will say with some confidence though, that a guy who wears a clip on does not have the sophistication that a person who wears a regular tie has. Call it socioeconomic background, call it hating the feeling of a tie (which you wouldn't get from a clip on) but I just don't see a life long business professional wearing such a tie. Take these two factors: clip on & multiple DNA, and I'm thinking Cooper wasn't too well off economically. A black raincoat would also suggest lower economic status. Most high end business professionals & executives didn't wear black raincoats, they wore beige. (for reference, see some of Malloy's older writings) I also don't see a reason why he needed to remove the tie, since it was a clip on. The only thing I can think of is that it would allow him to loosen his collar. Is his collar that intrusive in putting on the harness? I'm not sold. I'm just not sold on Cooper feeling so uncomfortable with a clip on tie, that he takes it off and then grabs everything else he brought with him except the tie.

The DNA on the tie proves one thing (if he truly wore it)... Cooper was poor. He either purchased this second hand or he stole it. How else do you have multiple male donors? The only other reasonable answer is that the evidence was mishandled at some point in the last 36 years.

I didn't mean to imply that Cooper thought fingerprints could be lifted from fabric... otherwise he would have thrown away the cigarettes, unless those were planted too (though I'd doubt this). What I meant was the clasp or the clip. I agree with you regarding better choices of items to leave behind other than people saw him wear a tie & it's reasonably conclusive that Cooper wore the one left behind. What other item would be better to leave behind? His attache case (that he carried on?) a phony pair of shoes? Maybe the battery to the bomb? What I'm getting at is there's not too many items that Cooper could have left behind if the goal was to leave exculpatory prints and have them reasonably linked to Cooper. A tie, with the clasp still on it & having been used/worn by multiple males could easily fit the idea... but it assumes Cooper thought prints could be lifted from the metallic portions of the tie. What about the drinking glass??? You mentioned it was partially spilt. Was it wiped clean? Is that how it spilled? Did the alcohol that spilled ruin the possibility of getting prints? Was the glass wiped??? Answer this and you might be able to destroy the idea that the tie was left behind purposely with the intent of leaving exculpatory evidence. If Cooper leaves his prints on that glass, then the idea of him purposely leaving the tie to mislead authorities (or get himself reasonable doubt should he ever get caught) goes flying out of the plane just like Cooper. It would get really far fetched to think that Cooper retrieved someone else's glass from a different flight and brought it with him to plant on flight 305. Do you think there's any relation to any of the donors on the tie? In other words, are two or more of the donors genetically related?? It's a long shot.

Was the tie on the seat, or in the pouch on the rear of the seat in front of him? If it was found in the pouch, then I'm assuming the FBI looked at all the passengers who sat in that area from (DC? Did the flight originate from DC?)... still, even if they didn't, the odds of someone on an eariler flight wearing a similar tie & clasp leaving it in the pouch would be fairly remote (1:1,000,000).

Well, Cooper didn't know how to lower the stairs. Having them down on take-off solves that little problem. I agree with you here. My initial thinking is that he wanted to jump right away into a urban/suburban area, not necessarily the heavy woods. This would imply his escape plan involved the SeaTac area or at least that region (Tacoma, Seattle...)

I understand the DNA cannot prove a person was Cooper but that it can exclude. That part I totally get. What I'm saying is: Ok, I'm following here. The tie belonged to Cooper, this much I think we can safely say with near 100% (99.99999999%). Only if Cooper actually wore the tie. That's the part I'm questioning. I realize from your standpoint the odds here certainly would favor that he did wear it. What I'm saying is that 1. We have a multiple donor tie 2. It was left with the clasp on, and 3. Cooper carried a paper sack with him onto the plane, and 4. from what I've heard, this is the only evidence he left behind What I'm suggesting is that there's some possibility this tie was left behind purposely. If it was left behind purposely, then we have to ask why. Did he simply not care? Did he think it didn't matter? Or, did he have another idea when he left it behind? I don't know! I'm trying to figure this out. Right now, I'd put it at least 1:5 chance Cooper left this tie thinking exculpatory fingerprints would be found on it. If my probability is anywhere close to reality, that would mean at least a 20% chance that Cooper's DNA is not on the tie. That's all I'm saying... we can maybe say with 80% certainty that anyone tested against the tie isn't cooper (if they don't match a donor) but we cannot say with 100% certainty.

Mark, Good points. Would it have been safe for Cooper to assume they'd give him emergency rigs and not some other (paratrooper) gear? From the sounds of it, you say yes. My primary question is if Cooper wanted to jump at low alt (Seatac) or if he planned all along to jump in mid west to SW Washington. He had to of thought at least somewhat to a getaway. Ckret, how many bankrobbers do you know of who never think about getaway? I'm sure there have been some idiots, but for someone putting at least this much thought into it, he had a plan A. Was his plan A to jump at low alt, or was his plan A to jump in mid Washington? Or did he not care one way or the other?

He referenced the distance of McCord from TACOMA and not the airport? Hmmm. I find this interesting. I find it interesting because his statement seems to put his point of reference in Tacoma and not Seattle (which SeaTac is a suburb of). I was going to crack a joke... it may not have taken that long back then, but today... that would take at least 3 hours at this time of day (3-5pm), ha ha ha.

Ckret, VERY helpful. As you can see, there has been a lot of misinformation out there over the years. Him not specifying what type of chute certainly eliminates the professional jumper. Now we're talking about someone with limited experience. It also ressurects the idea that Cooper may have wanted to jump in the SeaTac area, not the woods.

It's assumed this was the tie Cooper wore that night and that he took it off inorder to put on the harness. Is this true? Do we know for fact, not that the tie belonged to Cooper (because that's very evident) but that it's the tie he was wearing during the crime? If what you're saying regarding Tina watching him harness up, then you'd know if she also saw him remove the tie. Personally, I still find it extremely suspect that Cooper purposely removes the tie with the clasp still on it. The fact that the tie was permanently damaged by the clasp is not really conclusive to Cooper having a habit of always leaving the clasp on the tie. Clasps nototiously ruin ties, even after wearing it only once. Further, multiple DNA donors only allow other possibilities to enter into the equation, such as: the tie was second hand, the tie was stolen from prison or commune, or the tie was grossly mishandled by authorities leading to multiple DNA. If the tie was not mishandled, then that leaves us with the first two... a second hand tie or one that was used by several people (I say prison because I'm trying to think of a place where multiple people would need to borrow a tie)... if Cooper knew that someone other than himself had used that tie, it's quite possible, and I'd argue more probable given that the clasp was left on it (you generally remove a clasp first before you remove a tie) that Cooper purposely left the tie inorder to leave exculpatory evidence. Unbeknownst to Cooper, the clasp was too small to retrieve any prints. I don't know, maybe I'm way off in that, or maybe it's on the mark. However, personally, I'd be unwilling to accept any DNA results unless we know with 100% certainty that 1. We have Cooper's DNA and 2. We know with 100% certainty we have a suspect's DNA. The only way to know 100% on either is to have multiple matches from different pieces of evidence. Do we have that? Not yet. DNA, so far, has been good, but not verified. If we cannot say with 100% certainty that we have Cooper's DNA & any suspect to test against, then we cannot say 100% that anyone is or isn't Cooper based on that testing alone. If the tie was a plant, then you'll probably never match a suspect against it, even with multiple donors. The tie would exonerate everyone whether they did it or not.

Great Post NickDG! I think you're right about an experienced jumper wanting either his own gear or specified gear. McCoy, for example, brought his own gear. Speaking of McCoy, Ckret, I agree with your conclusion for different reasons. From what I've read his alibi for Thanksgiving was weak. Still, he does not match the description including his age, he's far too experienced to fit the profile, and he has different signatures to the crime (such as growing out his facial hair before the jump and then shaving it afterwards). In the McCoy book though, it has a brief description of the indictment against Cooper where it describes side burns... Ckret, what information are you aware of regarding sideburns on Cooper? NickDG, going off of what you've posted... that Cooper obviously knew something about skydiving but wasn't all that experienced, does that support how he specifically said not to get the chutes from McCord? Personally, I would say yes because he might have known he needed something good for freefalling... and if he needed something good for freefalling, then my theory about Cooper wanting to jump right at take off near SeaTac would be totally incorrect (yes?). Plus, Cooper jumping right away would make it easy to be seen and subsequently caught. Maybe the idea that Cooper wanted to jump in the SeaTac area just doesn't hold water given what we know... Cooper asked the chutes NOT come from McCord, and if he did jump at low alt right upon take off, there was good odds someone would have seen him. Maybe Cooper wanted to jump in SW washington all along??

Skydivejack, my apolgies, NickDG suggested Cooper tied the bag of money to his chest and threw the dummy. You're the one who thought he attempted to use the front chute to stuff money. So he tried to stuff the front pack that he already tore open... now that makes some sense. I'm perplexed that he doesn't figure out the dummy chute is sewn shut and probably less work to stuff it full of cash. It appears Tina saw exactly how Cooper was planning on jumping with the money. I didn't know this, I had always thought it was speculation about him wrapping the cords around the top, etc. He allowed her to see a lot.

I like your line of reasoning. My only addition here is that the cut up reserve chute is no good only with the harness that he jumped with. The one left behind might (Ckret?) have had the D rings needed. If this happens to be the case, then you must ask yourself, why would he cut up the good reserve when he could have just switched harnesses to use it? Maybe he got antsy and decided the hell with it. In other words, maybe he was short on time and didn't want to take the time to get out of the harness and strap on another just so he could use the reserve. Or, maybe NickDG's original idea is correct... that Cooper just wanted to stuff the front pack with the money. It's possible, that was his plan all along.

I'm the furthest thing from an expert, but I'd still like to chime in. I was mistaken when I asked Ckret about two "blips". He corrected this. I was under the impression that there was a loss of pressure when the stairs lowered. From Ckret's response, I gather that the cabin was not pressurized. Though I do know the cockpit said something about an "ear popping experience". The blip, from what I've gathered, was actually a bit of an odd response by the plane. They figured this was from a sudden change of lift properties of the plane when the aft stairs recoiled due to removal of Cooper & immediate air drag pushing the stairs up. 2 jumpers would not really explain the dummy chute. One wears a backpack and the other wears a dummy chute? Better than this would be to use both back chutes and jettison all other chutes as to leave no questions, but this didn't happen. As for the crew hoaxing the whole thing... an interesting thought. They were never happy with the first composite sketch, if this was a fraud, why be upset with the Bing Crosby sketch? It should suffice. Plus, the money found on the river... that's quite a perplexing thing for a conspiracy. Someone actually has to dump that money... and then, why, and how? Another thing too, is that Tina was a devout Catholic, and for her to be an accomplice to larceny... I'm not thinking so. But those are my few cents.

The obvious question... Why select the NB-6 over the 26' Steinthal 60-9707? 1. NB-6 cannot mount any of the front packs, dummy or otherwise. One seems like a logical choice for the sport jumper, the other??? Is the NB-6 good for freefalling? I'd love to know the pros/cons to this chute. Why not use the NB-6 to cut the cords for securing the money and then use 60-9707 along with the front pack he DID cut up? Was he just unaware of what he was doing? Or, did he rethink the whole front pack thing when he realized how heavy the money was? Or was he uncomfortable with the 60-9707? Didn't Cooper specify sport chutes verses military ones? Maybe someone can run us through Cooper's probable thought process when he sees these four chutes, the NB-6, the dummy, the 60-9707, and the one he actually cut up. Put it this way, you're in his shoes, what are YOU thinking? Keep in mind, maybe he didn't realize the dummy was a dummy, as Ckret said, he looked them over and didn't really say anything "such as, this one is garbage"

Great points by the both of you! The moon half full, though we don't know where on the horizon it was at 8:11. I'm sure there's a way to figure it out. Still, being able to see the pack fly & trying to see the pack fly are two different things. If he does throw the pack, does it really matter if he sees it or not?? In other words, he may have THOUGHT "it's worth a try, let's see if I can figure out the slipstream." To decide if he actually jumped with a faulty pack or not, I'll pose the question... without D rings, does this mean he could not harness it? If it's not harnessed, then how would he jump with it on?

Thanks. this explains what I must have read somewhere about the front chute not being able to attach properly. You realize though, this means NickD's idea of Cooper throwing the front chute to guage the cross wind becomes much more realistic than Cooper thinking he had a safe reserve to wear.

I had that same thought as to why he might throw something off like that, but then, not having experience of my own, I thought maybe this would be unnecessary. I enjoyed your analysis of the dragging bag. I'm thinking he probably makes his initial jump holding onto the bag. Maybe it's not needed, but that's what I'd do (but I have no experience). Still, if that bag gets above him during the fall, that would certainly be problematic, and as you mentioned below him when he lands, that also would be problematic.

NickD, Good takes. I can buy into it. I've also heard that he may have tried to cut open the chest pack inorder to use it to hold the money (I personally don't believe this). I had also heard that because the chest pack was a dummy chute, that somehow it wouldn't attach properly to the good chute (I also don't necessarily believe this, though I don't know enough to dispute it). Finally, I've also heard the theory that he didn't strap the money bag to his chest, that he actually cinched it to his waist and let it drag onto the floor, once the chute deployed, it would hang beneath his feet. Would this hinder his landing? Especially say he did something like a plf type of land? Maybe you're right. If so, this would likely mean that he 1. Harnessed up, strapped the cash to his chest 2. Worked to lower the stairs, needed some help, then got it okay 3. once the stairs were lowered, he grabbed the remaining chest pack, but not the remaining primary pack, and threw it off the stairs before he lept. I don't see why he grabs the chest pack and throws it, but then again, that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Thanks for posting. That is one of about 4 news clips released. I believe the Seattle PI has put out maybe 2 additional ones. The clip you posted features the Home Team, newscasters familiar to those in Seattle. As Ckret has confirmed on this message board, Cooper cut up that pink chest chute and then jumped with the dummy chute. It was after these news broadcasts that Ckret posted to the forum. I for one am glad he's here. There's been so much myth and misinformation handed down over the years, it's certainly nice to have someone who can verify or correct these.

OMG! I'm in shock. I had read someplace where one of the captains (not Scott, the other one) not sure whether to believe the bomb threat, went back and sat next to Cooper. He apparently described Cooper's eyes, even though he was wearing shades at the time. According to what I had read somewhere, the captain looked at his piercing eyes through the tinted shades and immediately took him seriously. I'm not sure if that story is true or not, but still... Those eyes in that picture... put it this way, I wouldn't want to mess with that guy! I also find the similarities between that sketch and the photo un-nerving. I know Cooper didn't have a widow's peak, but the rest of it, from the cheeks to the nose & mouth, holy smokes! I'm feeling a bit motivated. Wow.

Ckret, Was there anything in any of the eyewitness testimony that would indicate whether Cooper was right handed or not? Were the questions and reports of the witnesses that detailed? I'd be curious to know which hand Cooper used to smoke, drink, and open the brief case. Back to the tie for a moment, if I understand you correctly, you mentioned multiple male donors, is this correct? Ckret, In about two weeks I will visit the regional library near the Cooper landing area. I will look at some maps & if I can, I wil attempt to find where that Tena (or Tina) bar. As I stated earlier, I will post anything of interest. I will also look at a topography map and use the landing area (blip that occured at 8:11 pm) to check for streams/creeks/rivers that might feed into the Columbia from there. I'm hoping they'll have the resources for this. Am I safe to assume the crew noted two distinct times, one when their ears popped (stairs lowered) and the other a blip, presumably from recoil of the stairs?

Ckret, I'd like to add that Shaffner spent at least 20 minutes sitting next to the guy. This is not a case of quick events preventing accuracy. What I was referring to (and I know it wasn't what you were responding to) was poor photo-line ups. Everyone always goes to Florence with a picture and asks "is that him? is that him?" this is a horrible way to do a photo line-up. I'm not saying you can't trust it, just it's very poor procedure and after 36 yrs, I would listen to what she says, but I wouldn't give it the weight it would deserve if it were 1973. You mentioned Tina joking around with Cooper. I swear I read in Tusow's book that Cooper had relaxed so much once he got the money that he actually offered some to Tina. This must be false... I must have been hallucinating when I read that book because I doubt it's in there.

We only "know" certain things, and a lot of what we know has been tainted by the media and handed down through myth. If we're to put logic and deductive reasoning into this, then we need to know the facts. I'm not sure if it's PDX or SEA, but I've seen a shoe shine set up to this day in one of these airports. The only way a boarding pass or ticket stub would be faded is if it were in sunlight. I have several movie stubs from 15+ years that are very legible, but they're in a ring box stuffed away in a drawer. I've had stubs wear out in a matter of months sitting in my wallet or on my desk. From your description of the boarding pass, it was not in very much sunlight and probably was never kept out in the open and probably never had the chance to fade much. As for the cash that was found, I cannot come up with any theory that would work against the idea that Duane threw money into the river near the I-5 bridge in the Fall of 79, just months before Brian found money in Feb of 80. In my mind, your scenario fits quite well with what we know. Like I said before, if it didn't happen that way, then it likely happened in a way very similar to it. There's only so many ways we get four bundles of cash just a few inches below the surface of sand right at the water's edge like that, especially 8+ years after the fact. Orange1, in Skyjack71's 4th smiley, she mentions a person who contacted her and swore up and down that the tie & clasp was intended to implicate someone else. This would have had to been long before the past few months when we knew there actually was a tie left behind. From what I've read on this forum & a few others, (correct me if I'm wrong skyjack) but this same guy also told her they were all part of a group who practiced skydiving. But of course, skyjack also states she discounted much of what that guy told her, so who knows. Ckret, that seat that was removed should be in the Smithsonian! Ckret, I do have a follow up question about the tie. Was it found with the clasp on it, or off of it? I followed what you said regarding the permanent indent on the tie, but I'm unclear as to a few things... how strong is the clasp? I've never worn a clasp because they are notorious for ruining a tie, the clipping mechanism indents the tie like you mentioned. If that clasp was on the tie for any length of time in the evidence box, then surely it would now have a permanent indent on it. If you're looking at the tie now, it would be next to impossible to know when the indent became permanent. None the less, I can easily agree that the tie could have been ruined already when left behind on flight 305. This would be especially true if this was indeed a second hand tie, or even just an old tie.