Power and control is somewhat like heroin, once you have had a taste of it, you want more.  The more you have, the more you need to be satisfied.  For some, it can become an addiction.  When it is denied, the addicted can lose impulse control and become hostile.  It is apparent from the info released to the public that he was most comfortable when he had power and was in control.  He articulated that there would be no tolerance to him being toyed with, no “funny stuff”.  An example of his impulse control failing is the gruff tone taken with the refueling delays, his calm demeanor was undermined by a perceived threat to his successful completion of his operational plan, being denied power and control. 

This could be applied to possible behaviors to be on the lookout for that he may have exhibited within a community before and after the event.  He would likely be an individual who people may describe as being “controlling” and “easily angered” when he “did not get his way”.   He may also boldly invest much effort into bringing people around to his way of thinking.  He may manipulate thoughts and opinions of associates by trying to convince vs. merely conveying information.  People who questioned his point of view and authority or vetted his claims of fact could be witness to his predatory anger and vindictive retaliation.  Documentation may exist that demonstrates a long standing pattern to this behavior.

Some people have a hard time hiding that they have something to hide.

Power and control is somewhat like heroin, once you have had a taste of it, you want more.    There is no evidence that Cooper had a control or power addiction. In fact the very opposite may be the case.  He issued specific instructions for people to follow vs. shouting/threatening/boasting/arguing or hysterical confused orders combined with bullying. etc.

Cooper said he had a grudge. Those are not the words of a control person or power addiction. Cooper may have seen himself as a classless victim who had never had much power in his life - a person used to taking orders? We just dont have enough details. If the particles on the tie are his, then he may have been part of a large power structure, with little personal discretion ?

Different hijackers have handled the issue of 'control' differently, using different devices. (1) In Cooper's case he chose a bomb and the threat of a bomb (he showed the bomb and explained its operation methodically, to certify his claim.) – bombs are a fairly strong determiner/deterrent to interference which need little elaboration  (2) He issued concrete demands that were logical and possible to fulfill.  (3) He requested/demanded cooperation. The President of NWO (Nyrop) complied quickly - issued an Order for no interference.  (4) Cooper was quiet and non-demonstrable so as not to alert or excite passengers! He made no loud announcements to passengers. He worked specifically through stews and nobody else.  (5) After noting Flo's initial reaction he got rid of Flo (sent her to the cockpit!) and selected the quieter, calmer, more rational Tina to be his companion and communicator. He rejected and nullified Hancock probably because of her age and her supervisory role between stews, but he answered her questions in a straightforward manner sufficient to keep her informed. (6) Cooper maintained distance between himself and everyone else except for Tina. (7) DB Cooper was not Donald Trump on a power trip!

Those are not the actions of a power addict celebrating power. Cooper is a methodical person exercising control by recognition of a system in which specific people are in control of the plane who can satisfy his demands quietly with deliberation, when given instructions without any conspicuous disturbance or involvement of others inside the plane. That requires a ton of patience and personal control on Cooper's part ... which is part of his personality profile.  [For example a personality like the Unabomber could never have kept himself together long enough to duplicate the social intelligence Cooper demonstrated .]

Examining the origins of the information pertaining to the pursing of the lips would indicate that an important piece of information may have been inadvertently released to the public.  It is worth consideration as it is indicative of tardive dyskinesia.  The action of the mouth in this case is described as having relaxed and firm positions that may appear when pulsating in rhythm to resemble a goldfish while oxygenating the gills.  The action, when observed, is variable between a subtle twitch when he is calm and relaxed to a rapid pulsating increasing in intensity as excitement or concentration increases in intensity.   It is a permanent involuntary action that persists into old age.  Tardive dyskinesia may be an unintended side effect of the 1st Generation anti-psychotic medications and may be indicative of prior abhorrent behaviors of the fugitive that may have attracted the attention of medical professionals in the time period prior to the hijacking.  If validated, it provides a characteristic of the fugitive that would be a valuable tool for people to spot him at a radius far beyond the effectiveness of the composite drawings and other descriptions of the physical characteristics of the hijacker.  It is an eye-catching behavior when observed even from a distance. It would be valuable holdback information as it speaks volumes about him.

tardive dyskinesia. Yepper, that looks and acts just like him. Along with his crippled right foot and missing left arm! Do you sit around and make this stuff up? 

One other thing that I don't believe I've mentioned here relates to the alligator tie clip DBC left behind.

I have always referred to the tie clip as a cheap, imitation mother-of-pearl, clip. Additionally, when Tom Kaye described finding gold on the tie he ascribed it to the tie clip and other jewelry that he apparently wore on the tie--which I somewhat discounted because I believed the tie clip probably was not actually plated with real gold.

All of this said, I was at Tom's place a few weeks back and brought the tie clip--and accompanying cufflinks--that I have that is precisely the same as the one DBC left behind with the tie. While there, Tom actually tested the tie clip and cufflinks and determined that indeed they were both platted with real gold. So, Tom was right, the traces of gold found on the tie can be attributed, at least in part, to the tie clip that he wore with the tie.

Also, I checked and learned that the tie clip--and cufflinks--feature real mother-of-pearl, not fake as I had assumed.

My point being, I'm not really sure how "cheap" the tie clip and its accompany set of cufflinks, tie tack, and money clip actually were. Perhaps this accessory set was actually a little more upscale?

Do we know how much the tie clip cost back in that time period?  The first thing that comes to mind is "why have a cheap clip on tie, but a fancy tie clip and cuff links set?"  It would be an odd combination, maybe the clip was a gift.  I often wonder what would have happened if the FBI had shown a picture of the tie in 1971, would someone have come forward who recognized it?  I suspect it was used as a holdback.

Just a personal observation about a tie clip.  When I've worn tie clips or tacks, it has been more to keep my tie in place for say a picture, or in an outfit I really don't want the tie to be moving around in.  If I was wearing a tie more often, say for work, I would not usually use a clip.  I wonder how popular tie clips were back then?  If Cooper was around machinery, then a tie clip would likely not be unusual.

Liquor sales soar during shutdown - 

I think that there is a tendency to look for connections among things that usually don't exist.

People rob banks for a reason. The reason being that they want money.

DB Cooper extorted $200K because he wanted $200K. Moreover, it's safe to assume that he wanted to get away with it...that he didn't want to get caught.

Therefore, may I suggest that sometimes a skyjacking and extortion is nothing more than a skyjacking and extortion. After all, I have yet to identify a single bank robber that ever robbed a bank for anything other than the money.

I think that there is a tendency to look for connections among things that usually don't exist.

People rob banks for a reason. The reason being that they want money.

DB Cooper extorted $200K because he wanted $200K. Moreover, it's safe to assume that he wanted to get away with it...that he didn't want to get caught.

Therefore, may I suggest that sometimes a skyjacking and extortion is nothing more than a skyjacking and extortion. After all, I have yet to identify a single bank robber that ever robbed a bank for anything other than the money.

Even with having a decent amount of regular work on my plate, I still have a lot of time on my hands.  Take away travel, the bars, sports, the gym, and it does not leave one with a lot to do.  So I'm a little more invested in these conversations than I might be on a regular day.

It may be as simple as he wanted $200,000.  That's a lot of money though.  Over $1 million.  Who needs that much money and does not make it on anyone's radar for gambling debts, major medical expenses, etc.?  I guess if he needed only $10,000, might as well ask for $200,000.  But why not rob a bank instead?

Had any other criminals staged robberies with the intent of getting this much money in the past?  What comes to mind for me is an art heist, or a big con.  Some would agree with me that this hijacking was different in so many ways than the garden variety crime. 

Yes, bank robbers rob banks for the money.  But an airplane hijacking with so many chances for error, and no guarantee that the money would be there?

It could be simple.  He needed the $.  My opinion is there is just something more here than "He just needed the money."  For some reason I thought of Andrew Dice Clay right there.  Again, too much time on my hands.

DB Cooper dead or alive, when found, the money problem may be answered.