I forgot about Derek. looking on the DZ it appears they acted quickly this time...I don't know what he posted this time. he's just venting as one would say..since they have an open membership he's going to be hard to stop.

All of this is nonsense. it appears Georger is pushing fly's buttons and it worked. who would believe the FBI knew Tina was involved or knew Cooper, it's foolish. he's more than welcome to have any theory but it will be challenged. Georger is wrong in the approach to that challenge though.

The 302's are a very good tool but one needs to go further. Eric is in the background doing just that. he going much further than reading two documents and claiming fact. a lot of people say a lot of negative things about him but fail to actually get to know him. I speak with him often on the phone. bringing up a ticket from 1989 isn't going to work either. especially, if you fail to have all the facts. Blevins can't compete with him on any level. he is weak and not business savvy. that leaves him to whine over and over like a broken record. he will tell you how it should be done but fail to prove it. that's a fact. every year he will claim to hold an event only to back out. I don't believe everything Eric says and we argue on the phone about it and laugh about it as well. if I'm wrong, it is what it is...If Eric is wrong the same applies. Tom Kaye is also working hard in the background. Tom's work is key to the case..

A lot of things are done in the background...I released the very first 302's years back. all done in the background.

ALL of this crap is nonproductive..

Shutter

I can clearly see wires and dynamite.

I forgot about Derek. looking on the DZ it appears they acted quickly this time...I don't know what he posted this time. he's just venting as one would say..since they have an open membership he's going to be hard to stop.

All of this is nonsense. it appears Georger is pushing fly's buttons and it worked. who would believe the FBI knew Tina was involved or knew Cooper, it's foolish. he's more than welcome to have any theory but it will be challenged. Georger is wrong in the approach to that challenge though.

The 302's are a very good tool but one needs to go further. Eric is in the background doing just that. he going much further than reading two documents and claiming fact. a lot of people say a lot of negative things about him but fail to actually get to know him. I speak with him often on the phone. bringing up a ticket from 1989 isn't going to work either. especially, if you fail to have all the facts. Blevins can't compete with him on any level. he is weak and not business savvy. that leaves him to whine over and over like a broken record. he will tell you how it should be done but fail to prove it. that's a fact. every year he will claim to hold an event only to back out. I don't believe everything Eric says and we argue on the phone about it and laugh about it as well. if I'm wrong, it is what it is...If Eric is wrong the same applies. Tom Kaye is also working hard in the background. Tom's work is key to the case..

A lot of things are done in the background...I released the very first 302's years back. all done in the background.

ALL of this crap is nonproductive..

Shutter

I appreciate the kind words here. Indeed, Shutter and I have had several calls talking about all kinds of things..usually while drinking beer or wine...it's amazing how smart we become with a few drinks.

I appreciate honest debate. I have never had a problem with anyone challenging my theories, after all, it forces me to think and defend them if appropriate. That is how progress is forged, whether one be a Cooper investigator or President of the United States.

Obviously cheap attacks and personal slights are pure BS. Additionally, the hypocrisy from some is stunning. It is amazing how the ones who complain the most about being attacked are the ones who attack the most.

I love this forum when there is honest and vigorous debate about valid issues and theories. Even Fly's recent theory involving Tina and the cash--although quite audacious--is praise-worthy to the extent that it's a theory put out there for people to debate. I may not agree with the theory but I certainly appreciate people having theories.

Happy Easter all!

Whoever it is, holy SHIT did I need that laugh. I'm still trying to stop.

Alright, laughing's over. The DZ is a river of gay porn right now. Don't need to know what's happening with the accomplice angle that badly.  Hope I didn't encourage it with my initial LOL.

Spammer dude over there must not recall that the thread tends to have Federal Agents on it.

WAIT!!! wouldn't it be great if Tina Mucklow was the spammer, and she knew that this was a great way to stop chatter about her on a page full of testosterone junkies???  Just post tranny porn and watch the page go dark. Well-played, imaginary Tina!!

Some day this virus will go away, and I'll get my regular sleep schedule back. And then you'll all miss me.

Examination of the Rataczak-Tina photo walking in stride part 2.

Is there any evidence of a rectangular object being concealed, within the left side bulging area of Tina's coat. Pixel density examinations in the 'bulge' area(s) show only natural fabric bending but no such rectangular formation related to a stack of bills alleged by FLYJACK . In addition isophot line analysis did not reveal any rectangular objects, or I would be posting them! See attached

It occurred to me a while back that Cooper wore shades for the duration of a hijacking. If it was me, I would want to see every detail of everything going on ahead of me. I mean, how could he tell if anyone was tiptoeing around up in first class when he glanced below the curtain?

Which leads me to ask: how likely is it that they were plain sunglasses versus prescription? A prescription comes with a person attached to it.

I've come across several references to a study done in 1971 that showed that 18 million Americans owned Prescription Sunglasses, which is roughly 9% of the population. Assuming that most of them are older, this increases the proportion of Cooper's age group who would own them. Let's say...20%? Rough guess?

So stats say it's probably a one in five that Coop owned script shades, and given that he took on a hijacking I'm betting he was wearing a pair. One of the stews got that feeling, too.

ID his shades in 1971 and with a little footwork you can close in on him.  So does anyone know if they were able to come close to positively ID'ing the brand? Shutter, you did some nice work finding info on the tie clip.

They might have been prescription and it’s worth looking into but why did cooper Don the shades? Was it to hide his eyes maybe but then why did he take them off at one point allowing them to be seen. Also the sunglasses made him stand out which would be a negative. Mitchell even said the first thing he noticed is cooper had sunglasses on and thought that was kind of weird. My opinion is he need the glasses some have said it was to acclimate his eyes for the night jump but I’ve matched 17 of the tie particles to welding fumes, people who have exposure to the welding arc can develop what they call arc eye which can make your eyes very sensitive to light. Mitchell said it was over cast but the sun was strong when it peeked through the cloud cover. I think cooper had arc eye and was sensitive to light and that’s why he wore the glasses.

Whether he was a welder or just a hack who saw a lot of TV, if they were script glasses, he could have potentially been identified by them. Too bad he had nothing but kids around him. If Lynn was his stewardess, Shutter was in 18A, Bruce was in the cowboy hat and Tom Kaye sold him the ticket, he'd have been caught.

I would have to be in Mitchell's position as pointed out. I watch people a lot, always have. still makes it harder when you don't know why you would be looking at someone and then asked an hour later. who was behind you or two people back at the store or at the gas station?

Flyjack believes more in the money exchange than the money in the pocket....one is more plausible than the other..