Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by georger on Today at 04:21:21 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There isnít an active prosecution of SP so the fed court system
isnít involved at all. Itís 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 theyíd 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!   
2
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by 377 on Today at 02:03:57 AM »
There isnít an active prosecution of SP so the fed court system
isnít involved at all. Itís 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 theyíd 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

3
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by andrade1812 on Today at 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.
4
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by georger on Today at 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...
5
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by EU on Today at 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.
6
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by georger on Today at 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. 
7
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by EU on Today at 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.
8
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by georger on Today at 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.     
9
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by EU on Today at 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.
10
DB Cooper / Re: DB Cooper: The Definitive Investigation
« Last post by georger on Today at 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. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10