Author Topic: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation  (Read 37803 times)

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 97 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #75 on: June 21, 2018, 12:19:34 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #76 on: June 21, 2018, 12:31:22 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that. 

The only other options are (a) SP releases his own file of privately obtained dna, like from 23&Me, and (b) his privately obtained dna has been stored on one of the ancestral sites, but all of those sites require certifications before releasing anything ...  as in the recent California stalker-rapist case. 
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 12:39:42 AM by georger »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 97 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #77 on: June 21, 2018, 12:39:02 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #78 on: June 21, 2018, 12:44:04 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

Since SP has not been convicted or charged with anything he has no standing in a Court! He could get an attorney and file a request with a Federal Court but they would probably tell him they won't hear it. The FBI and the Justice Dept aren't Walmart for shoppers in the DB Cooper case! There must be some legal basis for involving a Court!

He could do this! Get a nuclear dna test from 23 % Me then pass it out to the media, or, store it on an ancestral site and give permission for public access ...  but even there people accessing the data on the ancestral site will have to pass the site's clearance guidelines.     
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 01:00:33 AM by georger »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 97 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #79 on: June 21, 2018, 12:57:30 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

That is incorrect. Releasing certain facts about a case of this nature does not require a court or judge's approval. More to the point, you're discussing process which has no bearing on whether Sheridan requests that his name be cleared by virtue of the DNA.

I predict Sheridan cannot and will not do it because there is no upside for him. Simply put, I predict he can't be cleared because the DNA is a match. I invite the FBI or anyone for that matter to prove me wrong.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #80 on: June 21, 2018, 01:05:37 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

That is incorrect. Releasing certain facts about a case of this nature does not require a court or judge's approval. More to the point, you're discussing process which has no bearing on whether Sheridan requests that his name be cleared by virtue of the DNA.

I predict Sheridan cannot and will not do it because there is no upside for him. Simply put, I predict he can't be cleared because the DNA is a match. I invite the FBI or anyone for that matter to prove me wrong.

Fine, then let Sheridan (or somebody with standing in Court) make some form of request and see what happens.

Ask 377 what he thinks. He's an attorney and knows the rules. 
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 01:13:55 AM by georger »
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 97 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #81 on: June 21, 2018, 01:12:49 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

That is incorrect. Releasing certain facts about a case of this nature does not require a court or judge's approval. More to the point, you're discussing process which has no bearing on whether Sheridan requests that his name be cleared by virtue of the DNA.

I predict Sheridan cannot and will not do it because there is no upside for him. Simply put, I predict he can't be cleared because the DNA is a match. I invite the FBI or anyone for that matter to prove me wrong.

Fine, then let Sheridan make some form of request and see what happens.

Ask 377 what he thinks. He's an attorney and knows the rules.

Let me clarify.

If the DNA is a hit (which I believe it is), the FBI will not release that for obvious reasons. If the DNA is not a hit, there is nothing preventing them from clearing an innocent man's name.

I think it's a moot point because I think Sheridan will refuse the request.
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #82 on: June 21, 2018, 01:20:57 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

That is incorrect. Releasing certain facts about a case of this nature does not require a court or judge's approval. More to the point, you're discussing process which has no bearing on whether Sheridan requests that his name be cleared by virtue of the DNA.

I predict Sheridan cannot and will not do it because there is no upside for him. Simply put, I predict he can't be cleared because the DNA is a match. I invite the FBI or anyone for that matter to prove me wrong.

Fine, then let Sheridan make some form of request and see what happens.

Ask 377 what he thinks. He's an attorney and knows the rules.

Let me clarify.

If the DNA is a hit (which I believe it is), the FBI will not release that for obvious reasons. If the DNA is not a hit, there is nothing preventing them from clearing an innocent man's name.

I think it's a moot point because I think Sheridan will refuse the request.

I have no standing in this, period.

Keep in mind if rumor is correct, all the FBI has is a partial or several partials and multiple contributors. Ckret said they could rule people OUT but could NOT rule people IN or prove a match, because there is no complete profile to compare with! Under those conditions even if SP has a full dna profile he can only be ruled out but not ruled in or proclaimed to be a 100% match. If what Ckret said is true SP can only be ruled out, not in. So this quest may be futile from the git-go.

(sorry I got interrupted). In other words he could fall in the crack of not being rule out, but no way to evaluate the degree of him matching, because there is no complete codis-13 profile the FBI has to match with! All the FBI says it has is one or more partials from multiple contributors. This kind of thing happens quite often in old cases where dna has been compromised.   

Still it will be interesting to see what 377 says about the rules in this matter. Maybe tomorrow since he has not posted tonight...
« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 01:39:20 AM by georger »
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
  • Thanked: 37 times
    • My Website
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #83 on: June 21, 2018, 01:48:34 AM »
The fact Sheridan was willing to undergo DNA testing is pretty good proof of his innocence. They couldn't compel him to provide a sample, and I doubt they'd go through the effort of obtaining a sample surreptitiously. He's a smart guy who knows his rights, but agreed to be interviewed by the FBI, by the History Channel, and have his DNA tested against the tie samples.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Thanked: 301 times
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #84 on: June 21, 2018, 02:03:57 AM »
There isn’t an active prosecution of SP so the fed court system
isn’t involved at all. It’s between him and the FBI. The FBI could respond to a request by Sheridan or formally decline or ignore him. All of those are legal.

If they responded with his test results they’d likely just give him the results not publicize them.

He could also file a FOIA request. A denial could be appealed and he would have the right to sue.

377

« Last Edit: June 21, 2018, 02:59:40 AM by 377 »
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #85 on: June 21, 2018, 04:21:21 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There isn’t an active prosecution of SP so the fed court system
isn’t involved at all. It’s between him and the FBI. The FBI could respond to a request by Sheridan or formally decline or ignore him. All of those are legal.

If they responded with his test results they’d likely just give him the results not publicize them.

He could also file a FOIA request. A denial could be appealed and he would have the right to sue.

377

But, even if they turned his results over to him, they would not turn Cooper evidence results over to him. This leaves him and experts with nothing to make a comparison with. Unless ...

Would they turn just 'his dna result' over, or actual 'comparison results' over? The latter is a clue to what the Cooper partials are they have been comparing people with. I doubt they would turn over the latter but who knows!   
 

FLYJACK

  • Guest
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #86 on: June 21, 2018, 11:31:49 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If a US Attorney were to charge Sheridan Peterson with the skyjack, I predict he would walk away a free man. The standard for conviction is and will always be PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the circumstantial evidence against him, even taken cumulatively, reaches that standard. Not even close. The FBI undoubtedly knows this. Remember, their role is not to "solve" the case but rather to present a prosecutable and winnable case. "Knowing" who Cooper is and being able to successfully prosecute Cooper are two very different things.

I had a client (now deceased) who the FBI "KNEW" had committed a serious crime but they didn't have enough evidence to prosecute. The US Attorney's Office instead went after him for federal loan fraud and won. The sentence was heavy because the judge probably shared the FBI's opinion that he had done much more. Although he was never late on a single mortgage payment, he had lied about sources of income on the loan application. It was like going after Al Capone for tax fraud when they couldn't prove anything else.

If Sheridan were charged, I'd volunteer to represent him pro bono. I am retiring soon and it would be a great retirement project. I believe I could get the case dismissed prior to trial based on the FBI's loss of the cigarette butts. The butts, if they had a good DNA sample, could convict someone, but they could also exonerate someone who was a possible match to the partial DNA found on the tie. Their loss is a loss of possibly exculpatory physical evidence, which is usually fatal to a criminal prosecution. That loss of potentially exculpatory physical evidence could be rendered harmless, however, by a credible and legally admissible confession or by the discovery of other unequivocally incriminating physical evidence.

And by the way, when you lose critical evidence, all the presumptions are construed against the party who lost it. Protests that the butts would not have had good DNA and therefore their loss should not result in a dismissal will very likely fall on deaf judicial ears.

377

Well written. I believe the FBI suspects they know who Cooper was...Sheridan.

It's a bold statement for anyone who is not with the FBI to say they believe what the FBI suspects.  A lot of people claim they are in touch with the FBI, but are they in touch with Carr or Eng-(retired)?  Getting people on this board to agree with a suspect, or some people on Facebook like the Recca folks did, is in a completely different world than getting the FBI and the majority of the general public to believe.  When Larry Carr or Curtis Eng come out and say that in their mind the case is closed, then I'll believe it.  I hope any book on the case sells well.  Any attention on the case is good press.  And if we are waiting for a conviction, even for Capone style tax evasion, then we are probably going to wait forever.  A 45 year old man in 1971 is now in his 90's, if he's still alive, which is unlikely.  Recca had his 15 minutes of fame.  There will be more people getting theirs, but it will still just be 15 minutes.

Indeed, claiming the FBI suspects Sheridan is a bold statement. Let me back it up.

1) The FBI has been unwilling to clear Sheridan as they have done with the only two other suspects, Weber and LD, both of whom are dead and presumably could care less. On the other hand, Sheridan is still alive (more on this in a moment).

2) The FBI speaks cryptically when asked direct questions about Sheridan and the veracity of his DNA comparison stating only that they have been unable to come up with evidence meeting the legal definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not, "we don't think he's the guy" as was done with Weber, LD, Rackstraw, McCoy and countless others.

Finally, I will be calling Sheridan tomorrow and asking him if he'd be willing to actually request that the FBI release their DNA findings concerning him. My guess is that he'll refuse. I'll let you know his response when I receive one.

That isnt how it works. The FBI doesnt have the authority to release evidence in an active case, regardless of what SP says. Only the Justice Dept can do that.

Explain to me how releasing evidence that clears a guy compromises their ability to prosecute someone?

Again, they cleared Weber and LD.

Evidence in a Federal case cannot be released to the public without authorization; no matter what it proves or does not prove. It requires a Court order from a Federal Judge and probably action by the Justice Dept. Sheridan's only option is to obtain his dna from a private source (23 & Me) and then he is free to do with it what he wants.

That is incorrect. Releasing certain facts about a case of this nature does not require a court or judge's approval. More to the point, you're discussing process which has no bearing on whether Sheridan requests that his name be cleared by virtue of the DNA.

I predict Sheridan cannot and will not do it because there is no upside for him. Simply put, I predict he can't be cleared because the DNA is a match. I invite the FBI or anyone for that matter to prove me wrong.

Fine, then let Sheridan make some form of request and see what happens.

Ask 377 what he thinks. He's an attorney and knows the rules.

Let me clarify.

If the DNA is a hit (which I believe it is), the FBI will not release that for obvious reasons. If the DNA is not a hit, there is nothing preventing them from clearing an innocent man's name.

I think it's a moot point because I think Sheridan will refuse the request.

My understanding is that the DNA was partial and can only exclude, not include. Also, the FBI never publicly eliminated Hahneman..  So, they have internal discretion and that discretion can't be used to infer "guilt", only lack of a "public" elimination.

I hope your approach shakes something loose though.
 

Offline 377

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Thanked: 301 times
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #87 on: June 21, 2018, 12:47:10 PM »
IF the FBI were to respond directly to Sheridan's request, the most they would give him is what they gave others, the binary results of the DNA comparison.

They would not disclose any details about the DBC partial DNA, just whether a comparison did or did not rule out SP. Getting the FBI or other federal agencies to respond to requests for info is usually futile which is why FOIA was put into law.

377
 

Offline EU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 97 times
    • DB  Cooper: The Definitive Investigation of Sheridan Peterson
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #88 on: June 21, 2018, 01:27:00 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

My understanding is that the DNA was partial and can only exclude, not include. Also, the FBI never publicly eliminated Hahneman..  So, they have internal discretion and that discretion can't be used to infer "guilt", only lack of a "public" elimination.

I hope your approach shakes something loose though.

The FBI didn't compare Hahneman's DNA, he died in 1991 before they had Cooper's tie DNA.

You are correct that the profile is partial. However, by definition, if the DNA can exclude suspects it must also be able to include suspects. The field may be large, for example 75% of suspects tested may be excluded meaning you have 25% who match the partial, but, those 25% cannot be removed.

I have actually tried to find out how strong the Cooper DNA profile is, meaning will it exclude 50% of random subjects or perhaps 95% of random subjects. However, the FBI will not say. Regardless, the DNA is inadmissible in a court of law even if it clears 99% of subjects. Technicalities aside, that would be critical data to have in hand for investigative purposes if for nothing else.

What we do know is this: Of the three compared, two (67%) have been cleared, one (Sheridan) has not. Why?
Some men see things as they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

RFK
 

Offline Kermit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
  • Thanked: 62 times
Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Reply #89 on: June 21, 2018, 01:39:47 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
EU/Lynn are with Sailshaw in choosing Peterson.  Here is a quote from back in 2014 from Sailshaw.  The piercing brown eyes made it to Wiki somehow too.  How hard was it to get brown contacts in 1971?  At some point Sailshaw thought Peterson was wearing contacts.  Below is his quote from Re: The DNA/The FBI/DB Cooper…Whats The deal? on October 11, 2014 at 11:54:06 AM.

Another aspect of DB is the disguise he use was so simple. He wore sunglasses to cover his eye color (what the FBI looks at to identify the suspect). The only time he took off the sunglasses was to show the Flight Attendants his eye color. They said he had "piercing brown eyes" which covered up hi actual blue eyes. No other disguise was necessary and it did the trick with the investigators.

Bob Sailshaw

Sailshaw had the right guy, Sheridan, but he tried too hard to prove it and took a few wrong turns.
U
Remember, Sailshaw insisted that Sheridan had quizzed him about the 727 aft stairs, but upon learning that he (Sailshaw) was only working on 737 air stairs quickly lost interest in Sailshaw. As noted in an earlier post I proved this was incorrect because neither the 727 nor 737 had flown yet.

Sailshaw also believed that Sheridan sent some of the news media letters claiming responsibility and taunting authorities. I do not believe this to be true. It doesn’t sound like the Sheridan I know. It doesn’t sound like the DB Cooper I know. There was nothing to gain and everything to lose if the real Cooper sent them.

Finally, the story about revealing his eyes to mislead witnesses because he was wearing brown contacts also doesn’t add up given the FBI files that pertain to the brief period of time when he wasn’t wearing sunglasses.

There is plenty of factual evidence pointing to Sheridan. Fantastic stories and explanations aren’t necessary.

I was just reviewing some of the thoughts that Sailshaw believed and I find some of his thoughts very doubtful! He actually said that he thought Cossey could have been involved in heist and that He might have been Cooper’s ground connection ! Really ? I find that to be quite far out there ! To each his own !