Both, the $303k was publicized right after the hijacking and a year later when recovered..


My "guess" is that the $303k was the initial payment to Hahneman in $100's that they could readily obtain.. the much larger $500 and $1000 bill payment was harder to get and took some time. The total Ransom was much much larger than the $303k..  the FBI press release after the recovery a year later is slightly misleading.. it says the $303k given was recovered, not that it was all the money given to Hahneman. It also presses the point that hijackings are not lucrative.. they had to push that narrative to dissuade others..


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

MANAGUA FOR LEGATT

1.   FOLLOWING IS FULL TEXT OF PRESS RELEASE ON THIS SUBJECT
ISSUED IN JACKSONVILLE,  FLORIDA ON MAY 8:   QUOTE:
" THE MONEY PAID IN CONNECTION WITH THE HIJACKING OF AN
EASTERN AIRLINES FLIGHT IN MAY OF 1972  HAS BEEN RECOVERED
AFTER AN EXTENSIVE AND EXHAUSTIVE JOINT INVESTIGATION BY
THE FBI AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
( FDLE).
" WILLIAM M.  ALEXANDER,  SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE OF THE
UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

PAGE 02   STATE  088847

JACKSONVILLE,  FLORIDA,  OFFICE OF THE FBI,  AND COMMISSIONER
WILLIAM L.  REED OF THE FDLE,  IN A JOINT RELEASE TODAY,
ANNOUNCED THAT THE DOLS 303,000  WHICH HAD BEEN PAID TO
FREDERICK WILLIAM HAHNEMAN ON MAY 5,  L972,  AT DULLES
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,  CHANTILLY,  VIRGINIA,  IN CONNECTION
WITH THE HIJACKING OF EASTERN AIRLINES FLIGHT 175  FROM
ALLENTOWN,  PENNSYLVANIA,  TO MIAMI,  FLORIDA,  HAS BEEN
RECOVERED BY AGENTS OF THE FDLE AND THE JACKSONVILLE OFFICE
OF THE FBI.

" UPON RECOVERY OF THE MONEY,  A CHECK WAS MADE OF THE
NATIONAL CRIME INFORMATION CENTER,  FBI HEADQUARTERS,
WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  WHICH DETERMINED THE SERIAL NUMBERS
TALLIED WITH THE RANSOM MONEY PAID IN CONNECTION WITH THE
HIJACKING.

" ON MAY 5, 1972,  EASTERN AIRLINES FLIGHT 175  WAS
HIJACKED BY A LONE ARMED GUNMAN WHO DEMANDED AND RECEIVED
DOLS 303,000,  PARACHUTES,  JUMP SUITS,  HELMETS,  KNIVES,  AND
2,000  BENSON AND HEDGES CIGARETTES.   AFTER THE MONEY AND
EQUIPMENT HAD BEEN PLACED ABOARD THE AIRCRAFT,  THE
HIJACKER PERMITTED THE PASSENGERS AND ONE STEWARDESS TO
DEPLANE.   THE AIRCRAFT BEARING SIX CREW MEMBERS AND THE
HIJACKER THEN TOOK OFF AND LANDED AT NEW ORLEANS,
LOUISIANA,  WHERE THE HIJACKER AND SIX CREW MEMBERS BOARDED
ANOTHER AIRCRAFT.   DURING THE EARLY MORNING OF MAY 6, 1972,
OVER THE JUNGLES NEAR A SMALL TOWN OF YORO,  HONDURAS,  THE
HIJACKER BAILED OUT THROUGH THE LOWERED REAR DOOR.

" THE HIJACKER WAS LATER IDENTIFIED AS FREDERICK WILLIAM
HAHNEMAN,  A 49- YEAR- OLD EASTON,  PENNSYLVANIA,  MAN.   ON
JUNE 3, 1972,  HAHNEMAN SURRENDERED TO AUTHORITIES AT THE
AMERICAN EMBASSY IN HONDURAS AND HE WAS SUBSEQUENTLY
RETURNED TO THE UNITED STATES.   ON SEPTEMBER 29, 1972,
HAHNEMAN WAS SENTENCED IN U. S.  DISTRICT COURT,  ALEXANDRIA,
VIRGINIA,  TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT.

" ALEXANDER AND REED STATED THAT THE MONEY WAS BEING TURNED
OVER TO EASTERN AIRLINES OFFICIALS.

" THE FBI SAID THIS RECOVERY SHOWS THAT HIJACKING AN
UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

PAGE 03   STATE  088847

AIRPLANE FOR EXTORTIONATE DEMANDS IS NOT VERY PROFITABLE.
SINCE JUNE 4, 1970,  THERE HAVE BEEN 27  HIJACKINGS WHEREIN
THE HIJACKERS'  EXTORTIONATE DEMANDS AMOUNTED TO DOLS
121,944,100  OF WHICH DOLS 6,656,250  WAS ACTUALLY PAID.
OF THE RANSOM DEMANDS PAID,  ONLY DOLS 2,200, OOO REMAINS
OUTSTANDING,  DOLS 2,000,000  OF WHICH IS PRESENTLY IN
LITIGATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE NOVEMBER 10, 1972,
HIJACKING OF A SOUTHERN AIRWAYS FLIGHT.   THE REMAINING
DOLS 200,000  WAS PAID TO A STILL UNIDENTIFIED HIJACKER
KNOWN ONLY AS D. B.  COOPER WHO HIJACKED A PLANE ON
THANKSGIVING EVE, 1971,  AND BAILED OUT SOMEWHERE OVER THE
STATES OF WASHINGTON OR OREGON.   THE DOLS 200,000  PAID TO
D. B.  COOPER IS THE ONLY MONEY UNACCOUNTED FOR."  UNQTE

2.   LEGATT MANAGUA WILL PROVIDE FURTHER DETAILS.    ROGERS


UNCLASSIFIED
NMAFVVZCZ

The problem that I have with your theory is that it seems like you're saying that the FBI neglecting to say that it was "all" of the money is an indication that there was more money than that.  This would be fine, except that I'm pretty sure that the story about him trading back an equal amount from the original $303k came from FBI statements.  If your theory is true, that would mean that the original FBI story was a lie.  If that's the case, then it's tough to say that the FBI omitted information to mislead people into thinking that the $303k was "all" of the money.  Based on what I believe is your theory, the FBI obviously didn't have a problem with lying about the amount at the time of the hijacking.  So, why would they have a problem with it after the $303k was found?  My guess is that it's more likely that the person who made the statement just neglected to specify that it was the full ransom.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Also, I think Shutter made a really good point about Hahneman back in post 2586 of this thread.  The quote was:

"I don't see a lot of his MO being similar...he's violent, he used physical force. he spoke more with the pilots than the stews...nothing matching..

This guy demanded larger bills, all Cooper did was show displeasure when he didn't get the knapsack he requested..his pattern would of made them replace the bag with what he originally requested (knapsack) Hahneman probably would of made them leave the stairs down no matter what they said...
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 10:48:03 PM by Shutter »"

Sending back the original ransom for larger bills, requiring him to wait several hours, was a really risky move.  I feel like having the bills delivered in the wrong type of container, and having to jerry-rig a harness for the ransom (the whole point of the hijacking) seems like a much bigger problem than adding a few pounds of weight to the bag by using smaller bills, especially since $500 and $1,000 bills are a lot tougher to introduce back into circulation.  I can't see how a guy who would sit on a plane for hours just to get the right denomination of bills would have previously accepted a ransom in the wrong kind of container.

That having been said, I could see a scenario in which Hahneman asked for a ransom, fully expecting to express dissatisfaction with whatever was delivered.  Then, when the money was delivered, made the complaint about the denominations to get them to bring a second bag of money onboard.  When the second bag was brought onboard, he could have refused to give up the first, increasing the total take.  If that had happened, I can see the FBI being embarrassed, and wanting to cover it up.

I disagree with Shutter.. the similarities are overwhelming, there are differences but the circumstances are as well. You wouldn't expect them to be identical, especially (if) the second time around. There is nothing that eliminates Hahneman as Cooper.

The $303 grand is a small fraction of the total ransom.. if he demanded replacement and kept both that doesn't come close to the total..

The FBI also faked a mechanical problem with the plane in attempt to delay Hahneman. He demanded another plane instead of a repair. They backed up another plane and Hahneman had to move from one to the other. That made him vulnerable to sniper's.. he held the Captain close at gunpoint to make the transition.

This was a time when hijackings were frequent and it makes sense that the FBI wanted to downplay them. In this case they vastly understated the ransom and later the recipient. The $303 grand recovery a year later may have been a partial recovery or pure propaganda.

The takeaway is they lied.. and they must have looked at Hahneman for NORJAK but they have never said anything for or against. They covered-up key facts about the 1972 Hahneman hijacking and IF Hahneman was Cooper and the money went to the same place they would have had to cover that up as well. I suspect Hahneman and his cousin, a UN voting member cut a deal.. Hahneman got a light sentence and the CIA had influence at the UN... NORJAK was buried, the FBI shifted to a "died in the jump" narrative.

It is not proof that Cooper was Hahneman, but if he was it explains why there was no connection made by the FBI. You'd expect the FBI to at least explain why Hahneman wasn't Cooper, they never did.

and those Cooper cigarette butts disappeared...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Also, I think Shutter made a really good point about Hahneman back in post 2586 of this thread.  The quote was:

"I don't see a lot of his MO being similar...he's violent, he used physical force. he spoke more with the pilots than the stews...nothing matching..

This guy demanded larger bills, all Cooper did was show displeasure when he didn't get the knapsack he requested..his pattern would of made them replace the bag with what he originally requested (knapsack) Hahneman probably would of made them leave the stairs down no matter what they said...
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 10:48:03 PM by Shutter »"

Sending back the original ransom for larger bills, requiring him to wait several hours, was a really risky move.  I feel like having the bills delivered in the wrong type of container, and having to jerry-rig a harness for the ransom (the whole point of the hijacking) seems like a much bigger problem than adding a few pounds of weight to the bag by using smaller bills, especially since $500 and $1,000 bills are a lot tougher to introduce back into circulation.  I can't see how a guy who would sit on a plane for hours just to get the right denomination of bills would have previously accepted a ransom in the wrong kind of container.

That having been said, I could see a scenario in which Hahneman asked for a ransom, fully expecting to express dissatisfaction with whatever was delivered.  Then, when the money was delivered, made the complaint about the denominations to get them to bring a second bag of money onboard.  When the second bag was brought onboard, he could have refused to give up the first, increasing the total take.  If that had happened, I can see the FBI being embarrassed, and wanting to cover it up.

I disagree with Shutter.. the similarities are overwhelming, there are differences but the circumstances are as well. You wouldn't expect them to be identical, especially (if) the second time around. There is nothing that eliminates Hahneman as Cooper.

The $303 grand is a small fraction of the total ransom.. if he demanded replacement and kept both that doesn't come close to the total..

The FBI also faked a mechanical problem with the plane in attempt to delay Hahneman. He demanded another plane instead of a repair. They backed up another plane and Hahneman had to move from one to the other. That made him vulnerable to sniper's.. he held the Captain close at gunpoint to make the transition.

This was a time when hijackings were frequent and it makes sense that the FBI wanted to downplay them. In this case they vastly understated the ransom and later the recipient. The $303 grand recovery a year later may have been a partial recovery or pure propaganda.

The takeaway is they lied.. and they must have looked at Hahneman for NORJAK but they have never said anything for or against. They covered-up key facts about the 1972 Hahneman hijacking and IF Hahneman was Cooper and the money went to the same place they would have had to cover that up as well. I suspect Hahneman and his cousin, a UN voting member cut a deal.. Hahneman got a light sentence and the CIA had influence at the UN... NORJAK was buried, the FBI shifted to a "died in the jump" narrative.

It is not proof that Cooper was Hahneman, but if he was it explains why there was no connection made by the FBI. You'd expect the FBI to at least explain why Hahneman wasn't Cooper, they never did.

and those Cooper cigarette butts disappeared...

I see where you're going with this, but I feel like any signs of FBI cover-up in the Hahneman case would be much more easily explained by the embarrassment that there surely would be if they were stupid enough to bring a replacement bag of ransom money onto the plane, and end up losing that, too.  Nobody wants to look like a Keystone Cop.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The total ransom was much much higher than double the $303 grand..  and it doesn't make sense that Hahneman asked to replace the money to save 5 lbs weight..

The total ransom was much higher than double the $303k in your theory.  That doesn't disprove a part of the official story, or any other theory, unless it's proven to be a fact.  What I'm saying is that I don't think Hahneman cared about saving the 5lbs weight.  If they had brought him the original ransom in $500s and $1,000s, he could have said that he needed $100s, because the larger bills are too traceable.  I think the theory that his plan was to find a problem with the ransom no matter what, in order to take two ransoms, is much more likely than the idea that he took a huge ransom, and then returned a small fraction of it in exchange for a lighter sentence and political favors from a member of his family.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

also,
the recipient of the ransom was a huge embarrassment to the US.
and
the FBI/FAA didn't want to encourage more hijackers (by disclosing the real ransom amount which was probably the highest ever at that time).

The recipient of the ransom being a huge embarrassment to the US assumes that your theory of who it went to is true, and that a payoff to a government official is more embarrassing to the government than having some random person extort them for a huge chunk of money, and get away with it.  I have issues with both of those things.  I'm not saying that they are impossible, but do you really think that the CIA couldn't find a better way to come up with the amount of money that a couple of bank branches can produce in 5-6 hours?  I would think that there would be easier ways to come up with the money if they wanted to pay someone off.  In fact, there must have been an easier way for them to get the money, even if your theory is true.  If the second dollar amount was really so much larger, where did they get it, and how did they account for it not being returned when they had said that the ransom was recovered?  I also think that they wouldn't have added fuel to the fire with the skyjacking trend, by letting someone get away with a skyjacking just to pay someone off.  I can't see that being viewed as less embarrassing than possibly being caught paying off a government official in another country.

I think that your theory is intriguing, but I feel like it's a tough sell without an explanation of where the extra money came from, how they were able to get away with not returning it, and why they didn't just go to that source in the first place instead of staging a skyjacking.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

1. AT 1500 HOURS MAR 4, STEWART DITZEN OF PHILADELPHIA
BULLETIN CALLED AMB SANCHEZ AND ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT
RECOVERY OF WILLIAM HAHNEMAN RANSOM MONEY IN EAL SKY-
JACKING. HE IS DEVELOPING STORY AS TO HOW MONEY WAS
RETURNED IN MAY 1973. AMB SANCHEZ ADVISED THAT ALL
OF HAHNEMAN DEVELOPMENTS, INCLUDING MONEY RECOVERY,
TOOK PLACE BEFORE HIS ARRIVAL IN HONDURAS.

2. DITZEN SAID HE HAD DISCUSSED CASE WITH EX-CONSUL
MCLEAN (NOW RETIRED) AND WITH AMB RYAN. HE ASKED IF
THERE WERE ANYONE ELSE AT POST WHO WAS FAMILIAR WITH
CASE AND WAS REFERRED TO DCM DAVIS. DITZEN SAID
HE WAS INTERESTED IN DETAILS OF RETURN OF MONEY
AND ASKED WHAT DAVIS KNEW. DAVIS SAID HE COULD
NOT COMMENT ON MATTER, THAT FBI AND FLORIDA CRIME
CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

PAGE 02  TEGUCI 00913  042211Z

COMMISSION HAD MADE SOME STATEMENT, DETAILS OF WHICH
HE COULD NOT EXACTLY REMEMBER. DITZEN SAID THAT
STATEMENT MERELY SAID ALL THE MONEY WAS RECOVERED
AND WAS "BARE BONES." DAVIS CONFIRMED THAT AS HIS
GENERAL RECOLLECTION. DITZEN ASKED WHETHER DAVIS WAS
UNKNOWING, OR SIMPLY WOULD NOT COMMENT, AND WHETHER
EMBASSY HAD PLAYED ANY ROLE IN EPISODE OF MONEY RECOVERY.
DAVIS REPLIED THAT THE FBI STATEMENT WAS THE GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION ON THE SUBJECT, AND IT WOULD HAVE TO STAND
BY ITSELF. DITZEN NOTED HE HAD HOPED FOR MORE COOPERA-
TION, BUT RANG OFF WITHOUT PRESSING POINT FURTHER.
SANCHEZ


CONFIDENTIAL

That is not the evidence/proof I have of a higher ransom and identified recipient.. I won't disclose that here publicly. I have an exact amount and individual recipient identified from a primary source.

That document just confirms that the FBI ransom statement is all they will disclose. Virtually nothing. compared to other hijackers they have disclosed almost nothing.