You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

           As per some earlier posts...Although sunken debris rolling along the bottom of the river ends up on the Oregon side of the river, that is not necessarily true of debris floating on the surface. At least according to what Hager told me that he had observed. I believe the tides or maybe shipping traffic wake or maybe a combination of factors would sometimes cause surface debris to end up on the Tena Bar side of the river. He also stated that back in those days there was a lot of debris coming thru Tena Bar. Hager said that the debris usually did not stay there very long.

The notion that debris, beginning on the north bank of the river between the I-5 and I-205 bridges, could not reach Tena Bar is repeated again and again without any evidence. Meanwhile, here is a map of a marine debris along that area of the river:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The group that collects this data is the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership. Here's their phone number and email:

503-226-1565
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I encourage anyone to reach out to them and ask them about debris on Tena Bar.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

           As per some earlier posts...Although sunken debris rolling along the bottom of the river ends up on the Oregon side of the river, that is not necessarily true of debris floating on the surface. At least according to what Hager told me that he had observed. I believe the tides or maybe shipping traffic wake or maybe a combination of factors would sometimes cause surface debris to end up on the Tena Bar side of the river. He also stated that back in those days there was a lot of debris coming thru Tena Bar. Hager said that the debris usually did not stay there very long.

The notion that debris, beginning on the north bank of the river between the I-5 and I-205 bridges, could not reach Tena Bar is repeated again and again without any evidence. Meanwhile, here is a map of a marine debris along that area of the river:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The group that collects this data is the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership. Here's their phone number and email:

503-226-1565
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I encourage anyone to reach out to them and ask them about debris on Tena Bar.

Can you give us a screen shot of this map showing the TBar area ?

This is crazy. The person peddling this nonsense is playing games. There may be more debris collecting on the Oregon side (due to current patterns) but debris obviously collects on the Fazio property side of the river. That is documented.

What is not proven is that the Ingram money 'flowed' to Tina Bar from anywhere else. Dredging spoils however were heaped on TBar in 1974. That could be the source of the money and other debris found on Tina Bar. If the bundles of money eroded out from 74 to 1980, then the money is joined by later newer debris, as Palmer found in his excavation. It is very straightforward.

In any dredging scenario, the question is how did Cooper money wind up on the bottom of the Columbia, between mile markers 46 and 47 to be dredged up later with a few bundles deposited in the spoils at Tina Bar ? We conjecture the Ingram bundles were in the money bag and are the only survivors of the dredging auger, along with a few fragments also found in the area of the Ingram find but at lower depths. Very likely, the Ingram bundles and the fragments found in the area of the Ingram find at lower depths, are all due to the original deposition scenario. There really is no other explanation. The Ingram bundles and the fragments found at lower depths must 'all' be part of single event which brought both articles of money to Tina Bar at the same time.     

A poll of Agents who worked the 1980 excavation found that a majority favored the Dredging Theory over Himmelsbach's press released Washougal washdown explanation. More recent polls of the public produced a 70% result in favor of the dredging theory . . .

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Timeline on Parachute Documentation

I'm working up a timeline for what the FBI knew about the parachutes and when they knew it - all thanks to FJ and his uncanny eyeballs that pored over the 302s.

1. The FBI had the basics on the parachutes on the night of the skyjacking: one agent, SA Reese Chipman, is documented as saying the back chutes were "in ordinary military olive drab green containers, approximately 2-3 feet long and 15-18 inches wide." This report was time-stamped at 12.25 am, 11. 25.71.

2. The official description of the back chutes - one a civilian luxury chute, tan in color, and a second chute of military olive drab color enters the FBI documentation on the night of the skyjacking, 11. 24. 71. They cite Hayden as the source, but he refutes that notion.

3. Another 302, dated Friday, 11. 26. 71, states that the FBI got a call at 12:21 am that morning from an AP reporter named "Clossy" claiming that he had spoken with Earl Cossey earlier on Thanksgiving Day, 11. 25. 71, and learned of the dummy chute. Clossy was calling for confirmation.
This shows that Coss was involved early in the game.

4. On Friday, 11. 26. 71, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Seattle's afternoon newspaper, announces that Norman Hayden is the owner and provider of the two back chutes.

5. Coss "announces" himself at the FBI Seattle office during the day on Friday, 11. 26. 71, and begins the "military, sage-green, NB-6" narrative for the used back chute. However, he is unable to deliver the serial numbers for either chute and the FBI begs him for the numbers "discretely" for the next year. Coss tells the FBI that he has already given them to the Bureau, which is false, apparently.

6. At this time, the Reno evidence retrieval team announces that the "not used" back chute found on Flight 305 has the packing card serial number SN 6-9097.

7. In 2014, I travel to Norman Hayden's shop in Renton, WA to inspect his "not-used" chute and it has the packing card SN 226.

8. Currently, Fly Jack and others surmise that the packing cards got swapped somehow on 305 prior to landing in Reno. Perhaps DB Cooper pulled one or both, and switched them for some reason. Bottom Line: both back chutes aboard 305 were packed by Cossey but owned by Hayden.

9. Still undetermined is how the early descriptions of the back chutes reveal two different looking parachutes. Hayden told me in 2014 that he never spoke with the FBI and remembers the two back chutes as being identical.

10. Robert Blevins finally makes a meaningful contribution, as his interviews with Norman Hayden have been shared with Fly Jack. In those notes, RMB reveals that Norman told him that he bought the back chutes in 1968 from an aviation surplus supply shop that is no longer in business, and they arranged for Cossey to pack the chutes prior to sale.

Bruce, here is some additional information that might be of interest to your investigation as discussed above.  Take a look at the packing card that was returned with the Hayden backpack.  The number for Cossey is 1579638 which is an FAA certificate number and was probably issued to him about 1960.  I have an FAA pilot certificate number that is about 350,000+ numbers lower than that and it was issued to me in 1951.

I can't make out the name of the individual who packed the Hayden backpack in 1982 and 1986, but the FAA certificate number is 532-42-4217 and that number is actually his Social Security Number.  Sometime prior to 1982 the FAA started using the SSN as the certificate number rather than issuing their own number.  But by 1967 the FAA was back to issuing their own numbers again due to the criminal abuse of those SSN's.  So the last Hayden rigger apparently never bothered to get his FAA certificate reissued with an FAA number rather than his SSN.  The FAA experiment with the SSNs only lasted a few years.

A few years ago, Shutter and I discussed the above matter and I think it was Shutter who managed to discover that the above SSN was still active and that the individual lived in the Seattle area.  I don't believe it was pursued past that point.  But if that rigger is still alive and kept packing records, then he might be able to provide new details about the Hayden backpack.

Bruce, if you want to try to contact the above rigger, please be a gentleman and don't alienate him.  He might be able to identify the canopy that is in the Hayden chute.  Other than this, the only way to determine the canopy is to open the container and take a look.  If Hayden bought the chute in 1968, then it is 53 years old and will never be used as an emergency parachute again (unless someone is crazy).  The WSHM should not have any big objection to opening the container.

Also a few years ago, RH2 told me that Cooper jumped with an NB-6 parachute.  I happened to own an NB-6 until the late summer of 1971.  There are a number of unique features with the harness, container, pilot chute, and main canopy and RH2 told me that Cooper's parachute had those features.

Bruce, check into the above if you want, but again, please don't alienate the rigger.  He doesn't owe us the time of day.

FULL DISCLOSURE:  I personally don't think it makes any difference what parachute Cooper jumped with and I do not understand why some people are trying to make a federal case out of this.

...
Bruce, if you want to try to contact the above rigger, please be a gentleman and don't alienate him.  He might be able to identify the canopy that is in the Hayden chute.  Other than this, the only way to determine the canopy is to open the container and take a look.  If Hayden bought the chute in 1968, then it is 53 years old and will never be used as an emergency parachute again (unless someone is crazy).  The WSHM should not have any big objection to opening the container.

Also a few years ago, RH2 told me that Cooper jumped with an NB-6 parachute.  I happened to own an NB-6 until the late summer of 1971.  There are a number of unique features with the harness, container, pilot chute, and main canopy and RH2 told me that Cooper's parachute had those features.

Bruce, check into the above if you want, but again, please don't alienate the rigger.  He doesn't owe us the time of day.

FULL DISCLOSURE:  I personally don't think it makes any difference what parachute Cooper jumped with and I do not understand why some people are trying to make a federal case out of this.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

...
Bruce, if you want to try to contact the above rigger, please be a gentleman and don't alienate him.  He might be able to identify the canopy that is in the Hayden chute.  Other than this, the only way to determine the canopy is to open the container and take a look.  If Hayden bought the chute in 1968, then it is 53 years old and will never be used as an emergency parachute again (unless someone is crazy).  The WSHM should not have any big objection to opening the container.

Also a few years ago, RH2 told me that Cooper jumped with an NB-6 parachute.  I happened to own an NB-6 until the late summer of 1971.  There are a number of unique features with the harness, container, pilot chute, and main canopy and RH2 told me that Cooper's parachute had those features.

Bruce, check into the above if you want, but again, please don't alienate the rigger.  He doesn't owe us the time of day.

FULL DISCLOSURE:  I personally don't think it makes any difference what parachute Cooper jumped with and I do not understand why some people are trying to make a federal case out of this.

A couple of things:

1. I think the name of the rigger who packed Norman's not used chute after Cossey did is named Wes Jepsimine, I believe. I think I've already gone looking for him, unsuccessfully.

2. The parachute issue tells us more about the FBI than it does about DB Cooper, in my view. However, I believe it is still a critical issue.

3. Ralph Hatley told me a lot of stories about Cossey, but I never heard him say that he thought DB Cooper used an NB-6.

Bruce, suggest you check with Shutter on both the rigger search and if any progress has been made in getting the WSHM to open the Hayden chute.