georger

Is this why Georger got excited about the Giddy picture and having Dental records? No. Giddy? What a pity. Its all projection on your part.

Well he was a good looking man, with a good looking wife - you! This Seattle photo is nice because it shows his lower denture pattern. You see? Im about physical evidence, when I can get it. Thanks for the dental photo!

These are nice photos. No doubt about it, Duane was a good looking man ... some would saay a hunk. But notice how manly his features are compared with Cooper. Compare the chin structures, Cooper delicate lips and nose compared to Duane's (especially in mid age). Duane was a good looking man and he knew it, a charmer - he had positive traits as well as negative. But the features and cranial proportions are different. No way around it Jo. As I have said multiple times ... if I thought for a second Duane was Cooper based on physical traits I would have said so months ago ... and stuck with that. Let me also say, we both know Tina described Cooper as being sad or having a sadness about him, a sad look perhaps? Look at the original Cooper sketch. Note the eyes. The artist tried to convey a note of emotional neutrality or sadness? That is the reported scenario I have and I think the artist pulled it off, at least to my eyes. I think the sketch is a remarkable artifact that will pass down through the ages. It caught the notice of editors at LIFE Magazine and that is one reason they published it - they thought the image was a statement. G.

Not excluding the scenario that the "escape" may have been to the hereafter that very night. Or...out of the country. Both scenarios have been discussed extensively here. exactly. But the Death Woods and the Big Slurp are convenient excuses where there is no evidence whatever that happened. Im saving the rest to last ...

OTOH...while we're generalizing.....consider the sketches that look just like the guy and they capture him...(John Lutz comes to mind) Or consider the sketches that look like the composite and then they capture some poor shmuck that looks similar to the composite who the witness then also identifies in a lineup so he spends decades in prison before DNA rescues him. I'm sure someone on this board has the real stats but I say six one....1/2 dozen the other. Doesn't make the case. Point being....barring a money find in a significantly relevant location, or missing videotape found in a vault somewhere of the actual heist, or other facts of the case that the public has not been invited to be privy to leading to a solve.....what we are left with are descriptions by eye witnesses, characteristics of the criminal's actual reported behavior, (and perhaps less valid, but surely of some import - profiles derived from actual witnessed behavior), and finally, the official composite drawing(s). This is all I see that's left to differentiate one set of circumstantial "evidence" from another. Anything I missed? Larry said the odds were better, that the sketches were a good general description of Cooper based on highly "consistent" witness agreement, then the FBI had the artist omit certain specific features off the sketches. So odds maybe as high as 8-in-10 with specific undisclosed features being held back. In addition, Larry's remarks about the dna analysis were specific, especially to an informed ear. He used the words "partial" and "exclusionary" which under the 13-loci CODIS system the FBI uses, has specific meaning. I can almost guess at what loci there may have been a problem and the implications of that, especially given other remarks agents have made (including Gutt's remarks to Blevins). Blevins and Jo are alike in that they both have a bias not wanting the FBI to have reliable genetic data or finger prints, or anything else! In that way Cooper could be anybody. Both Blevins and Weber are trying to keep their doors open. So, look at this from a different point of view. Reasonably reliable description and sketches, finger prints, some dna evidence and possibly more ... and still Cooper escaped. Ponder that scenario for a while.

The fact that criminals often do not look like their sketches has been discussed many times here. The candidate pushers never fail to bring that arguement up, like all good used car dealers. Jo even goes so far as to come up with her own image of Cooper. Duane was Cooper. Its pointless to even try to talk to these priests!

So you are saying ALL sketches given by the FBI are false, and only YOU have the correct description of Cooper - who by coincidence happens to look like Duane ! You got your description of Cooper by what method? Ju Ju board? And you concocted your comparison of mouths/lips as a true representation you say is DB Cooper ?

Could you elaborate on the exact "action" that was made with his mouth? as well as the "slant" on the forehead? Action Jo alledges ie Being Angry ................ dont laugh. Its another one of Jo's claims and attempts to invent evidence - see her post below along with her original photo composite trying to show Duane's mouth was Cooper's 'surly' mouth and expression. In fact, Jo is NOT using the mouth from the original sketch for her demonstration but one she selected from one of her favorite 'remakes'. Jo always rigs the deck in her favor when she can ... I have posted her composite and the original mouth from the original sketch in a composite below... The problem is: the original FBI sketch does not show that angry look Jo claims! The FBI sketch is neutral. See that original sketch attached. BTW you can search this thread using the search box. I used /cooper mouth/ to find Jo's post. As for a 2 hour Pasternak interview with the artist? Never heard of that before. Jo or Sluggo should post a link, if it exists at all. Keep in mind: its a fact the FBi has never released all of the physically defining traits witnesses testified to. All sketches omit those traits. There also are no official side views of Cooper which were released. If anyone has this Pasternak interview with the artist please post it! Here's Jo's post-toastie re- mouth/angry/FBI sketch/ skyjack71 Dec 21, 2008, 1:40 AM Post #6265 of 23409 (4635 views) Copy Shortcut Registered: Nov 12, 2006 Posts: 2993 Re: [Orange1] Getty Images: 1971 Cooper Sketch [In reply to] Can't Post -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To are you saying both Duane and Cooper had some kind of tic? ------------------------------------------------------------ No. What I am saying is that the artist was trying to depict a action or expression that Cooper made with his mouth the very same action/expression Duane did when he was aggravated. Although Cooper was not nasty he was letting them know that he meant business and that he was NOT happy with the way things where going ... Best expressed by a specific facial action. Look at the old Rose composite and the Shaffner composite and a prison photo of Duane on intake in 1960. He was not very happy - the lip comparisons of those 2 old Composites with the mouth of Duane 11 yrs before. We can Credit Safecrack for this photo. (This post was edited by skyjack71 on Dec 21, 2008, 1:44 AM) Attachments: CooperMouth.jpg (30.5 KB)

Mary is one tough librarian. When she saw the 1964 header for SLP, which listed Petey's former occupations as (M)marine, smoke jumper, logger, writer, editor of various newspapers, and technical writer for Boeing, she said, "What a load of b....t" Mary gave me half a dozen names of colleagues of Petey who are still alive and in the Kirkland-Redmond area. That's on the list of things to do. Nevertheless, the pix I saw today seemed reasonably similar to the pix that Snowmman had provided of Petey - the pix from the University of Missouri, a yearbook, I believe. Also, Bob says that a friend of his researched Marine Corps records and found no trace of a Sheridan L. Peterson having served in WWII. Here we go again. We worship at his feet only to find he has no shoes! Manikins all. Will Kenny pleeeez phone home!

On another tack... Georger, apart from the ears, if you look at Jo’s frankenweber composite, it seems to me the cheekbones are very different? Could it look that way from smiling or is this a fundamental bone structure thing? I think all of Duanes basic features, proportions, underlying bone structures are different than that attributed to Cooper. But these structures and the proportions change with aging. We know that. The best comparison is to compare similar age grouped photos with the 1971 sketches. The 1971 FBI sketches are the baseline and set the basic features and proportions one must compare with. Any large variance from that baseline ... then there is a problem. Duane's beackward sloping forehead and ears are two obvious examples of variance from what the sketches show. To the extent the sktches are an accurate general description of the man, then they must be taken seriously and used as the baseline for all comparisons, otherwise they are frankly useless? Based on the sketches alone, one could throw out a ton of possible candidates. Moreover, if the skertches are accurate they reflect to some extent an ethnic origin and possibly other traits. On the other hand we know agents considered people which based on their photos fall outside of the general 'description' the sketches portray. That could mean several things: some agents ignored the description(s), agents purposefully searched a wide net, etc. To me the sketches and the physical description convey a rather distinctive set of physical traits. It's a face I would remember. It falls into a catagory I would remember. I have struggled to keep this separate from everything Jo bombards us with. If I thought for a second Duane matched critical aspects of Cooper's face I would have said so long ago ... and been in Jo's corner.

It would help if you would keep it to a few questions at a time. I will try to answer the ones above, though. Margie Geestman probably didn't find out about the hijacking until some time afterward, if KC and Bernie were involved. Even today, she doesn't want to admit KC did it, although she consistently points to Bernie as being involved. There are two reasons. First, she liked Kenny quite a bit. They were friends for almost thirty years. Second, she has an unreasonable fear of the FBI. That was obvious. You can't convince her that the statute has run out. I tried. Howver, you could tell (during her interviews) that she knew everything, but she was unwilling to drop the dime on Kenny. (Have to ask: have you read the Revised edition of the book yet? Many of these answers are there.) Vanishing for days DID create some suspicion. Helen Jones said she was certain that KC and Bernie would be investigated by the FBI, and was surprised they never did. Bernie's own sister admitted that she thought Kenny was the hijacker right from the beginning. She is also the lady who ID'd the photo of the tie as one belonging to Kenny, testified he sometimes wore a toupee (but not after November 71), and freely admitted receiving $5,000 in cash in April of 1972 from Kenny. The money was physically delivered to her home by Bernie...who also put Kenny onto the Bonney Lake home via his friend Joe Grimes. Even Bernie admitted all of this was true. Five days? There are a few easy scenarios here. Maybe it took a few days for the hijacker to find his way back to the freeway. Maybe he got lost for a while. Perhaps they decided to cool it at Paradise Point State Park while half the cops in Washington and the Army guys were tearing the countryside apart looking for Cooper. Who knows? BTW: I think I mentioned that Skipp Porteous has an advance galley copy of Geoff Gray's new book. Porteous says that Gray talks about all the suspects, but it was obvious WHY Gray and Crown Books pulled it from last year's Summer Catalog and instead set it up for an August 2011 release. He had to rewrite the parts about Kenny. Porteous says that its also obvious that Gray favors KC as the guy, although he talks about all the major suspects and doesn't specifically state that he believes KC did it. Remember...Gray was the guy who did the NYM article, and he was fairly convinced at that time that KC might have had something to do with it. Perhaps once he saw Blast, and the pictures, and the documents, and the witness testimony.... You say all of these people consistently thought KC was the hijacker and Geestman was involved. But what brought these people to that conclusion? They sound like a bunch of lunatics and conspiracy theory makers to me ? And Margie Geestman is affraid of the FBI? ??? From what I have read including your notes, none of these people said a word about their suspicions over the years. It was Lyle Christiansen who according to Gray and you etal, first named Kenny as being Cooper, with Lyle looking for a movie contract in New York City. That is what brought him to Porteous and eventually to you. No proof, just the accusation. And a meeting with a movie producer! In the meantime all of these folks in Washington are mum! So in a very real sense these folks in WA are all late-comers ... with a story to suddenly tell. You wander in and suddenly there are "witnesses" galore who all knew Kenny was Cooper. And Kenny is gone unable to say a word. How convenient for everyone! Did any of these good-people bother to inform Kenny while he was alive, including his own brother? Why didnt Lyle go straight to the FBI vs a movie producer ? (The unibomber's brother did!)

me too - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Kilgallen and of course there is this: http://www.jfkresearch.com/morningstar/killgallen. htm Blevins needs to give up on KC and concentrate on Killgallen instead.

Georger get it straight. Duane said "Oh, F--- Let it die with me". After I questioned his jumping out of a plane and ONLY AFTER I did NOT understand what he was talking about - after he tried to tell me what he was talking about - the Dumb Blonde Sydrome was holding on hard. He never IMPLORED me to STOP. NOT one time. He was very frustrated I didn't understand what he was talking about. correction noted - mole comes off too - ears stay the same - genetic.

(1)That is really rich coming from you Jo!! Conspiracy theories and twisted logic don't count as substance and reason. And (2) just because you do not want to face up to the truth of something does not make it "without reason". If you cannot see (and many posters have countless times made you try to see how stupid - sorry there is no other apt word - it is to demand that anyone (FBI, us, whoever) prove someone was "not" Cooper, then you truly are desperate. Again, no other word is apt (and in fact your own posts show that desperation - go back and read them). And Georger is right about your story changing. One simple example: your early posts have no certainty about what you saw in the air ticket you found; your later ones do. You yourself have said it was lost so it is absolutely impossible that you could have reason for that other than that it is what you want to believe. There are more examples of this "development" of your story. Incidentally, Jo, have you managed to prove (and proof is not conjecture or half baked stuff) that Christiansen was not Cooper? That Gossett was not Cooper? That Peterson was not Cooper? Could you start trying, properly, so that you can see how ridiculous your demands are? And surely you realise that (a) not everyone confesses to their crimes and (b) sometimes people confess to crimes they did not do. And in any case, there are still a good number of people who do not necessarily believe that Weber said what you said he did - not that you are lying, but that you may have misheard. We have no independent witnesses to confirm he said what you say he did. Why is this more plausible than Gossett's alleged confession? Farflung - you have far too much time on your hands, but that was great and I am waiting for part 2 Recall: Jo said Duane told her to STOP! Implored her to STOP! And "let it die with me!". I suppose that has changed too ?

Stereotyping? That would be you, not me. Don't try to weasel out of what you said already. Your own words are right there above my head. You are saying that maybe Kenny and Bernie were having a 'rendezvous' (frankly, a big laugh) over the weekend of the hijacking, and I already explained why that idea is impossible. And why exactly in your mind is KC's sexuality a 'central fact'? Because gay people are always honest, or have never pulled off a crime? Helen Jones, her daughter, and Margie G all put KC and Bernie together for at least five days over the date of the hijacking. They WERE supposed to be at Jones' house to eat, just like the previous year, and that's where they were the next Thanksgiving in 72. In the case of Jones and her daughter (very credible witnesses, by the way) I have these statements on tape. In fact, Jones was the last person I interviewed and she turned out to be one of the best witnesses about KC and Bernie because she knew them so well. In fact, 13 months after the hijacking, just before Christmas in 1972, her house caught fire and was damaged. Bernie lent her the Airstream trailer and her family stayed in it until the house was repaired. Then Bernie sold it to a guy who took it to Arizona. None of these things makes KC and Bernie the guys. Not for sure. But it's just another piece of circumstantial evidence against them. You should be asking yourself why Bernie bothered to drive down 120 miles from the Port Angeles area to do the interview with Decoded and then refused to answer where he was on the weekend of the hijacking. I can tell you the answer: He had no answer. Not one he was willing to admit. And he wasn't gay, and he wasn't out with KC on some 'rendezvous,' unless you mean a trip to the Portland Airport. The only reason he agreed to appear on the show in the first place is because History Channel caught him in more lies than Pinnochio and he basically had no choice. There is no baseline for Pinnochio. It's all allegory. There is no baseline for Geestman (you have given) because it's all your allegory. You havent presented one thing that ties these guys to the hijacking. Why does it takes 5 days (or more) to hijack 305, right in your own back yard? At least Teddy Mayfield got home fast in time to call Himmelsbach. Wouldn't vanishing for 5+ days raise suspicions? If Geestman's wife investigated enough to find out Geestman was with Kenny for the missing 5+ days, why did she fail to ask Kenny where they were and what they were doing, and jump immediately to "Kenny was Cooper!" ? You say Kenny was calm and cool and tough. What accounts for Kenny jumping up and down like a child and exclaiming, when the money was delivered on the plane? Why did Kenny offer bundles of money to Tina knowing a stew could not accept it? Did Kenny just suddenly lose it? Give us some other examples of Kenny having a split personality, losing it, and being a bastard. Or, did Kenny hijack flight 305 as a favour to Geestman? Was Kenny impersonating Geestman? I fail to see Kenny having a grudge sufficient to risk going to prison for the rest of his life, or taking a risk especially after he had survived WWII. Most guys just wanted to settle down and build a stamp collection, and spend weekends at the park fishing, watching sunsets, and getting a testosterone fix?

So you are back on this hobbyhorse because you cannot find any proof. She never left the hobby horse, and never will. The only thing to do is ignore it. The same applies to Blevins and KC and his stereotyping. Cooper simply escaped the net for one reason or another. But I get a kick out of these tiresome folks who come up with a name and ten anecdotes and then basically say: "prove he wasn't Cooper". They might as well be saying: "Prove he wasn't Cooper because he wasn't George Washington". I ask Blevins about Kenny being gay (I never said Geestman was gay, did I !) and Blevins immediately jumps to: 'Georger is a homophobe'. And cows are marigolds because they seek grass ? Jo has done everything in her power to degrade and diminish AND CHANGE the evidence so saying 'prove Duane wasn't Cooper' makes sense also, in her strategy. The problem in Duane's case is we have very strong proof he not only was not Cooper but "could not have been Cooper". Still Jo persists. Its her whole life. The only mystery in Jo's life is herself. Not Duane.

"After repeatedly smearing people with falsehoods, THEY AND THEM AND WE claims "the things that we are saying ... are true" What are YOUR CREDENTIALS !? Who set you up to be judge and jury and hangman? HIMMELSBACH !? Sluggo? Blevins? JWT ? Tina? Ingram? Duane was a smear-mechanic. The nut doesnt fall far from the tree, does it ?

I meant a REAL manuscript. That's a book cover. Lightning Source? How little you know. They are the printers and distributors for Ingram, the biggest database for book titles in the world, not a second-rate outfit like iUniverse, for example. Or that ridiculous place they call Lulu Dot Com. College and university presses use LSI, as well as thousands of publishers worldwide. They do short run, POD, eBooks, and make it possible for publishers to release titles at 55% off the retail and still make a profit. Try doing that at Lulu. (*laughs*) On a side note, Print on Demand is rapidly being adopted by the big publishers as well. All of the big boys in the trade now have accounts at LSI so they can keep titles in stock without having to fill up their warehouses. It's cost-effective. I really like you, Farflung. This is the first time I've ever seen you look uninformed on something. And I still want to see a manuscript from you. Forget about Cooper. I have an idea you have things to say on a number of subjects. Whatever you come up with, I'm sure it would be good. You and Rebecca Latyntseva are the only two people we've ever made an open offer to. (Rebecca is the author of the controversial time-travel story 'Red Monkeys,' which is included in our new sci-fi release) You pride yourself on being "informed". And don't hesitate to let us know you are "informed". Your arrogance is well-known and established. How could an 'infomed' person omit the central fact that KC was gay? And that at least some of his relationships and events in his life were because he was gay, in a setting where being gay was perhaps frowned upon? How could you mistake a 'rendevouis' for a weekend with another gentleman as a plot to hijack an airplane - the fanous DB Cooper hijacking no less ? That's what I want to know. A person with your self proclaimed 'informed' background does not make such a choice without a reason. What is the reason or the facts you have so far refused to disclose, after months of avoiding the issue while also claiming we are ignorant (compared to you) ?

It's like being on Groundhog Day around here. I pretty much gave up on people around here after I posted up the '25 Best Reasons We Believe Ken Christiansen was DB Cooper' post...and it was completely ignored. No one really addressed a single point. All they did was dismiss the post in its entirety. Where art thou? Man of Constant Sorrow_ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKLm7-KrQdM&feature=related

I empathize, G. Going back a few posts or so, do you have any names or specifics on who did what from the Vancouver FBI office on the evidence retrieval down at Tina's Bar? It sounds like you have a very comprehensive grasp on the subject. On a somewhat related part of the case, do you know what Tina was doing across the river in Gresham at this time - or just before? Do you have any information on why Tina left the area, and did the money find have anything to do with her departure? Any wacky rumors from that wonderfully loquacious family of yours? and I sympathise Bruce. Im a rat saying this to you in particular because very early you helped me out with one lead and I have yet to pay you back with something worthwhile. I owe you. That said I still must demur. I gave you a few hints along the way that were worthwhile. Maybe we can discuss this in PMs? Its your call ... but I recognise my debt to you. As for the 'Tina was in Rome the day before the discovery' story. I know the tale Its been repeated here several times. Im surprised Blevins didnt make hay out of that - actually expected he would? Oh well. All I will say is "correlation is not causation" especially in this particular instance. Tina might as well have been on Saturn in terms of the money at Tina Bar. That is my (and other people's) firm opinion. who have studied the matter. PM me and we will discuss more. Have a good holiday. Convince Blevins he is on the wrong track and has omitted vital social facts! Read Farflung's post(s) and take them seriously. Thanks. G.

With all due respect I think this line of reasoning is ridiculous. I just don't see anyone's livelihood or privacy being overtly affected by the legitimate particulars of this 40 yr old case unless they want it to be. Those that don't seek it out may be inconvenienced, might even feel harassed by some, but except for that, seems that those people that get dragged into this case appear to either have nothing to hide or they could give a rat's tail about it or they get a little kick out of seeing their name in print. It sounds good in theory. In practice it can be a whole other bag of worms - not to mention some people are just plain paranoid in the first place (especially these days). Here's a concrete example. (keep in mind I have no position of authority at all. I have to hope people will talk and if they won't there is nothing I can do except demur as politely as possible. I have to try and protect everyone in the whole transaction including myself, and some information I must keep private or I risk complications which would undermine the very privacy Im seeking to preserve. It is a very sticky business at times. While I enjoy talking to people, sometimes it does backfire with unintended consequences, especially when the topic shift to ... DB Cooper. The mere mention of Cooper tends to set sterotypes spinning, especially with people in the State of Washington.) A potentially valuable witness died in 1997. My task is to find close associates of that person who will talk freely. It takes forever to identify one such person with whom, the original witness 'might have' confided. I finally work up the courage to call that person and no sooner do I identify myself the subject retorts, "Oh! You are related to THAT side of the family." and the lady hangs up. A series of calls follows from me to people who might be able to explain (untangle) exactly what the lady is referring to. After three long weeks of screwing around it turns out there was some secret prior marraige' which my witness thinks I am related through (but I'm not!), so I call the woman back and make a fumbling attempt to coinvince her, "No. I'm not related to 4th degree Aunt Maggie. I'm call about Margie who you knew before she died in 1997". My potemtial witness replies, "Well let me talk to my husband about this before I say anything". The next day I get this (secret) phone with someone I cant even identify saying: "If you are who you say you are call Harry and he will talk to you". But I have no idea who Harry is! WHO IN HELL IS HARRY? That was two months ago and I'm still sitting here scratching my head wondering what to do next, or if this issue is even worth the monumental effort I'm having to expend just to get to some body to call me back anonymously saying, "Call Harry if you want to know about Aunt Edith! HARRY WHO !? And this can happen over and over again ... It's no wonder it took Blevins 2 years to nail down just the few suppositions he relies on, if he encountered anything like I have encountered, almost routinely. Interviewing can be exceedingly difficult. I hate interviewing people!

We are not allowed to talk about that - and Blevins wont discuss it or the possibility, in any event. Why admit data that is counter to an arguement? Why admit data that says Kenny had two feet? And why speak about Kenny and Lyle and their relationship, at all? Hector and Achilles disappeared for a weekend, and it brought the whole damned city down!

Georger: I also addressed his 25 points with 25 points for Weber that equaled or exceeded his own opinions regarding his subject. His points are only for profit - and a book. He took 2 yrs to do his investigation. reply] We all commented on Blevins 25 reasons. I dont think Blevins gets it? That may be the sum of the whole thing.

I pretty much gave up on people around here after I posted up the '25 Best Reasons We Believe Ken Christiansen was DB Cooper' post...and it was completely ignored. No one really addressed a single point. All they did was dismiss the post in its entirety. I addressed all 25 at least five times and you chose not to reply. I guess its: "Fayyur to commmunebate." Have it your way. Adios.

First, within 120 days of the hijacking, most NW banks had given up even LOOKING at their twenty dollar bills. List was 34 pages of non-sequential numbers, 10,000 total, with several rows of numbers per page. It was a nightmare. You should know this already because Agent Carr already admitted it in his radio interview. (available at the DB Cooper WIKI page) I can also tell you haven't read the book. Do you think I can lay out all the evidence against Kenny in a post? Not that I haven't tried. Documentary evidence? The pictures are in the book. As far as the Raleighs and Kenny and Helen Jones, it wasn't the cigarettes that was the most important testimony from her. It was the fact that she put KC and Bernie together over the weekend of the hijacking. Did you notice on Decoded that Bernie refused to answer where he was when the hijacking occurred? Doesn't matter. Helen Jones (and her daughter, who confirmed) says that three weeks after the hijacking she ran into KC in Sumner and he wouldn't explain why he and Bernie just split town like that. Then she said she always thought the FBI would question them, and she was surprised they never did. There's more, but it's all in the book. As far as the loan, Bernie, his sister Dawn, and Margie Geestman all admitted to it at different times, and yes...we do have the mortgage record and tax records from the house she purchased. Have you been abducted by an alien from another planet and cant say anything new? You have repeated the same vacuous drill now 26,904,458 times. That is the same number of times the same spot on a 15 inch tire hits the same spot on the road every 20,000 miles. Congrats. Play it again Sam. Gag me with a spoon. SAY SOMETHING NEW! CAN YOU NAME THE PR4SIDENTS!?