From that last FBI memo...interesting that the 717171684* is unknown as to reason.

They seemed to be trying to get prints from the various copies of the letter...unclear if they were ultimately successful or not.


The initials "CWH" and the date "12/14/71" on the lower right corners on the back of both the envelop and letter were placed there by WFO agent.

The significance of the number "717171684*", appearing next to the copy count in the lower left corner on the face of the letter, remains unknown"

Took a shot at deciphering the code and found it matches a military co-ord system, point in the Willamette Valley W of I5 and north of Eugene...

Still musing about this (which has been discussed to death)

I was just musing about all the crazy FBI memos detailing the microfiche covering the serial numbers of the money pool that the Cooper $200k came from, and the way start/stop numbers of unused bundles were documented, for removing from that list, to get the final list of bills sent to Cooper.

That is, the microfiche covered way more money than what was delivered to Cooper, and by providing start/stop numbers and saying there were 98 bills between the start/stop numbers, it reinforced that all the bundles were fixed size: 100 bills, strapped by bank bands

The story Ckret provided, of bundles being assembled on the fly and microfiched on the fly before going to Cooper, is ridiculous, because if they were microfiched on the fly, there would be no reason for the microfiche to contain serial numbers not given to Cooper.

The only possible way for Ckret's made-up story to make sense, was if they opened all the 100 bill bundles that were going to Cooper, and randomly rebundled them with rubber bands.

But we know from the Start/Stop numbers of unused bills, that the bundles (strapped) were already pretty random...just from looking at the Start/Stop of the bills not given to Cooper, which were random. We can assume the bills given to Cooper had similar randomness in their Start/Stop and intermediate bills. That's a reasonable assumption.

So why would they rebundle them with rubber bands in random amounts?

Cooper didn't ask for that.

Now maybe they would have torn off the paper straps for some reason, and wrapped in rubber bands. But that's just part of the made-up story by Ckret...it doesn't have any supporting data in the fbi memos.

I'm still amazed that people believe Ckret was passing accurate information, when he just made up a story. His interview of a bank employee around the same time provided no supporting information for his story. He just made it up.

The whole Ckret saga amazes me. He was just a gatekeeper on FBI memos, and he acted like his opinion meant something, when it didn't.
Now that we have the actual memos, it's more obvious how Ckret just caused problems, rather than helping solve them.

yup, that entire process was sketchy.. I tried discussing it here a while back but was ridiculed and shut down. Nobody seems to grasp how much of a clusterf***  it was.

The FBI created their bill list from the pre-NORJAK Micro and start/stop numbers. Then they admitted they were having trouble deducting the remaining $30k bills Cooper didn't get and asked the Bank for a second full micro list of all serial numbers. Meanwhile, after NORJAK those $30k of bills were reincorporated into a SECOND ransom fund. YES, the bank made a second ransom fund...  All those bills were micro'd and passed to the FBI to be checked against the first list, $300,000k worth. Confused yet. It gets stranger, the start stop range from the pre-NORJAK micro doesn't match the range for the post NORJAK micro.

Bottom line is..  The FBI list was 2 bills short and that indicates an error somewhere in the process. That FBI bill list cannot be 100% verified.

 

Another thought on bank bands vs rubber bands

If a large sum of money was kept in storage for a situation like this, it's unlikely they would have stored it wrapped in rubber bands, just because the rubber bands would start to have problems have a year or so. (how long was this money stored?)

So the whole rubber band story, seems to depend on someone testifying that the bundles of strapped money were opened up and rebundled with rubber bands before giving to Cooper.

But no one has been interviewed that said that (Ckret's interviewee didn't say that). And there is no memo that says that.

The only person who said that was Ckret.

Ckret conflated the terms bundles (group of packets) with packets (x100 bills)..

The bank guy told him rubber bands on bundles... not packets

I faintly remember the details in  two start/stop memos like you say. Are you saying they have inconsistent info? Will have to review again.

I think I posted here before somewhere..

The initial start/stop numbers were from left packets applied to the first pre-Norjak micro. The FBI requested the post-Norjak micro from the second ransom stash which included the $30k Cooper didn't get << they designated a range with bill numbers inconsistent with the first micro start/stop numbers. It is in the FBI docs somewhere.

Fly, someone that disagree's doesn't imply they are being "shutdown" as you are stating. you have told your theory over a hundred times which couldn't possibly imply being shutdown.

Shutter

Okay I'm going to post the 3 key memos describing the microfilm with the serial numbers.

We should all be able to get to the consensus truth, which is what Flyjack has tried to describe.

First memo, I call "microfilm 11_25_71" pages 1 and 2.
says first microfilm has $250,000. $230,000 of that are twenties
page 2 has 15 start/stop serials, which are 15 bundles of twenties that weren't given to Cooper, out of the $230,000
Each packet represented by the start/stop serials, had 100 bills.
(the microfilm having the bills in the order they were in each packet, so start/stop is sufficient to identify all bills in a packet)

Second memo, I call "new microfilm 11_26_71" pages 1 and 2
new film with 6 lots of bills, $50,000 per lot, $300,000 total
The money not given to Cooper is at the end of lot 5 or 6.
They specify the starting serials for lot 5 and lot 6, for that money.
They say you can take the serials starting where they say in lot 5 and lot 6, and get all the serials to be removed from the $230,000 specified in the first microfilm

This seems redundant to me, as the start/stop serials in the first memo should be sufficient to remove $30k from the original microfilm.

Third memo, I call "bill serial numbers 12_1_71" pages 1 and 2
seems to describe the final process used. The first microfilm which as $230,000 worth of twenties described, is used, and $30,000, identified by the start/stop serials of 15 packets of twenties, are identified again in this memo. on pages 1 and 2.

It's worth looking at these start/stop serials. You can see that the start/stop serials are relatively random with respect to each pair and each other. This makes me believe the full packets were random


2nd and 3rd memos in two subsequent posts

bill serial numbers 12_1_71 pages 1 and 2

The first memo specifies the 15 unused start/stop bundles as follows:

E 50344994A through E 50344506A
B 07656937B through L 05419634A
E 22084591A through L 66634223B
L 52807604A through E 01043096
L 19538120A through L 72360402B
G 98535159A through L 14348843A
L 34429987A through L 19556442A
L 33474929A through L 09819218A
L 38139808A through L 00934693
L 34346374A through I 33449321A
L 41197159A through E 12561826B
L 33639577A through L 20458S72A
J 02051511 through I 00466866
L 33410247A through L 32378753A
C 05722105A through G 16813690A

The third memo specifies the same start/stop serials, but in a different order:
L41197159A thru E12561828B
L33639577A thru L20458572A
J02051511 thru 100466866
L33410247A thru L32378753A
C05722105A thru G16813690A
G98535159A thru L14348853A
L34429987A thru L19556442A
L33474929A thru L09819218A
L38139808A thru X00S3U693
L34346374A thru L3344932IA
E50344994A thru E50344506A
B076S6937B thru L054X9634A
E22084591A thru L66634223B
L52807604A thru L0X043096
L19538120A thru L72860402B

I contend if you compare these start/stop serials, the start/stop pair are random with respect to the full set of 30 serials shown here, making it likely that each bundle had a random group of serial numbers

Conversely, I don't think you can show that the pairs of serial numbers, exhibit any obvious order, when chosen from the set of 30 serial numbers listed.