And while Sheridan talks about it as Vietnam documentary...which parts of it are...it tends to be dominated by the autobiographical tragedies that lead up to being in Vietnam, and various grudges.

And ends with a parachute jump.

Now you would think the parachute jump then leads up to something dramatic, but it doesn't

The book ends with this reference to the two schizophrenic characters that are both actually Sheridan: (Grant Olson and Vince Grecco)

"Do you know Grant Olson?" Huu Bien asked.
"Yes, I know him." Grecco said. "I know him quite well."
"He is an American too." Huu Bien said. "He's a good man. The only one I met.
The rest were bastards"
"Don't be fooled," Vince said "He's the worst"


It's an odd way to end the book. Kind of self-loathing by Sheridan.

"Snow" you should post this stuff in EU's thread on Sheridan, then he can counter your points..

Yeah I could, but i'm not really interested in EU's point of view.

Well depends on what you think is evidence?

I suppose you could say there is stuff that flows from suspects and stuff that flows from FBI or related to things about the hijack.

Pretty much everything is "evidence" isn't it? Other than the group pissing contests.

Emrich comments on the idea that he has a suspect. Where would the newspaper article on that belong?

Well depends on what you think is evidence?

I suppose you could say there is stuff that flows from suspects and stuff that flows from FBI or related to things about the hijack.

Pretty much everything is "evidence" isn't it? Other than the group pissing contests.

Emrich comments on the idea that he has a suspect. Where would the newspaper article on that belong?

this thread can contain just about anything related to Cooper...

I'll tell you when a comment needs to be moved...

It also bothers me that the only time Sheridan grew a beard, was in the '70s.
I believe that picture of him with the beard is when he was in Saudi Arabia in the '70s?
I seem to remember him saying it may have been a passport or visa picture. Forget.

I suppose being in a Muslim country could explain it.

But why choose that picture to put on the back of your book? It was from after Vietnam. It was long ago.
Why pick that picture? It can't be that Sheridan only had that one picture of himself.

So: Why grow a beard in the '70s  (and no other time I'm aware of) and why use a picture with a beard on your book, from the '70s?
He uses it on his current twitter account profile, too. Weird.

This is just scratching the surface on Sheridan.

Sheridan grew his beard in Nepal, perhaps before the hijacking.

Don't forget about the pearl handled gun and five $20 bills referenced before he jumps.

I'll take this opportunity to say that I was somewhat insulted by Snow's comment that I have brought nothing new to the Sheridan conversation. Beyond being a dick comment it's just flat out wrong.

My discovery regarding the DNA is significant...Remember, everyone thought Sheridan had been cleared by virtue of his DNA. I also pointed out the "possibly brown" eye color comment from the FBI.

I suppose my conversation with Sheridan regarding the cufflinks is no big deal either. Furthermore, I know Snow is aware of the numbered--which is the same thing as secret--bank account...and that Singapore is not an accurate location.

I consider the daisy chain comment critical. Again, this is analogous to someone who was accused of stealing a purse stating the purse had a lime green wallet in it. Where does this type of statement originate? Isn't it worthy of asking "How could you possibly know that?" Remember, I confronted Sheridan directly about this comment.

I have also talked with Mary Jean Fryar and discussed what I learned from her at length. Including that Sheridan's oft repeated comment about showing his passport to her is not true. Furthermore, I have stated that she told me that the FBI couldn't verify how he managed to make ends meet during his 2 1/2 years in Nepal. Furthermore, I verified from Sheridan himself that the only reason he eventually relented and gave the DNA sample is because he thought he would be handcuffed and taken to jail on the spot.

I could go on and on. But at the end of the day, I'm staking a flag in the ground and asserting that in my mind Sheridan Peterson was likely DB Cooper. Moreover, I have explained precisely how I arrived at this belief. Feel free to debate the merits of my points, don't ever accuse me of bringing nothing new to the table or implying that my work is little more than "plagiarism lite."

Ok, I can see that.
Sheridan wants to say the book is about Vietnam.
But if you try to give it any serious analysis, it's about a series of personal offenses to him, or minimally descriptions of motivations...that lead up to justifying the final jump in some way that's really not clear.

Sheridan is an accomplished writer. He went to school and studied under an accomplished writer of western lit.

On its surface, the book is just bad writing. That's what makes it so weird.  It's a lot of words and he claims there are subplots, and his ability to recapture dialog from his past is amazing, and detail. His memory is amazing. I'm sure some are fictional details, but not many.

It just doesn't really make any sense

EU

Your claim that you somehow got Sheridan to admit something about cufflinks is ridiculous.
You make it sound like he's some schoolkid you can trick into admitting something he isn't aware is a admission or something.

really, do you think he's that much of a dufus?