Simply put, it isn't accurate. There is absolutely no evidence supporting a broad and deep shard field. What you have is sloppy, and obviously inaccurate, language from Schroeder (spelling ?) when interviewed by a TV reporter. The reporter himself even states that very few additional money pieces were found, and near the surface, in a later segment. Moreover, they actually display the totality of what was found and it amounts to only a few pieces. Not to mention, these "phantom" shards are not in the FBI's possession.
What we have is a classic case of someone being taken too literally. In fact, Schroeder innocently enough exaggerated the context of what was found at Tena Bar by the FBI. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing--film footage, evidence in FBI's possession, witness testimony from Fazio's, etc--backs up the notion of a shard field that was broad and deep.
Hold on there, cowboy, me thinks you are painting this picture with too broad a brush.
Does Dorwin Schroeder exaggerate or simply not get his facts down? Yes; ie: part of the briefcase found, a 60-yard shard trail on the surface that a "blind man could follow," etc. But he has been consistent in claiming a significant shard field, and at depth.
Plus, SA Mike McPheters says that he, too, found shards of size where he was digging, and inferred that other FBI agents digging with him also found shards.
Further, Himms definitively states in his book that he and his team found sizeable shards down to a depth of three feet and he posted a pix - yes, its resolution is not fine enough to make a judgment on its corroborative nature - but that is three FBI agents claiming to find shards up to 2-3 inches in size, in large numbers, down to a significant depth.
If that is NOT true, then what is the motivation or circumstances driving them to either lie, or misstate the circumstances?
OR, did a third party abscond with the larger shards, leaving behind only the itsy-bitsy pieces now in the evidence locker that are, frankly, inconclusive. The tiny stuff may be only the product of days worth of screening of T-Bar beach sand, or detritus from years of file friction on larger bills - or something else entirely - or some combination of all three potentials.
As for saying, or inferring, that the video taping by KATU-TV does not show sizeable shards is not correct in my view. In the videos I've seen, Schreuder clearly shows a 2-3 inch shard in his hand and then placing it in a plasticine evidence envelope. It appears that other agents also have a few of these envelopes. Hence, there are at least 6-10 such pieces, approximately, of evidence somewhere.
That
somewhere - is the real issue. Then,
who put them there and
why. That may be the BIG TRIFECTA of the money find.
If there is a cover-up, it may be a really big one. If so, it might explain lots of other things, such as Sheridan Peterson's true identity, and his actual reasons for traveling in political hot spots with his children for decades. Remember, his secret bank accounts may not be stocked with NORJAK loot, but rather paychecks from Uncle Sam or other black op agencies for services rendered in Iran, China, Nepal, Japan, Papua New Guinea, et.al.
It could also explain why KATU-TV doesn't want anyone to see that video any more. Perhaps at the next conference we could have our DBC attorneys grilling KATU-TV's attorneys why they obstructed a federal investigation for over 40 years, and are currently participating in a sustained cover-up from legitimate journalists and researchers.
Or maybe I should pull a Michael Moore and show up at KATU-TV studios with a film crew and demand to see the video.