Author Topic: General Questions About The Case  (Read 426171 times)

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9298
  • Thanked: 1020 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #105 on: January 16, 2015, 08:54:16 PM »
It's right here?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

And here...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 08:57:28 PM by shutter »
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
  • Thanked: 140 times
    • My Website
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #106 on: January 18, 2015, 01:24:24 AM »
According to Wikipedia, skydivers today get a main failure about 1 in 750 times. Anyone know what the main failure rate in the 1970's was?
 

FLYJACK

  • Guest
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #107 on: January 18, 2015, 01:46:37 PM »
what happened to the briefcase?? theories,,,

and what was the parachute pack made of,, not the chute itself..
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #108 on: January 18, 2015, 03:10:16 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
According to Wikipedia, skydivers today get a main failure about 1 in 750 times. Anyone know what the main failure rate in the 1970's was?

I don't think statistical averages count here.  You had better be ready for a main failure on your first jump.  In the early 1960s, and using modified military surplus equipment, I had a neat failure (complete inversion of the canopy) on my ninth jump.  Amazon states that she came down on her reserve on her 10th jump.  I think 377 had a lot more jumps before having to use his reserve.

Robert99 
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #109 on: January 18, 2015, 08:06:43 PM »
And you guys want me to try skydiving?

Some friends!
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #110 on: January 18, 2015, 10:18:59 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And you guys want me to try skydiving?

Some friends!

Bruce, You can't really appreciate the joys of skydiving, or flying either for that matter, until you have had the daylights scared out of you a few times.
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
  • Thanked: 140 times
    • My Website
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #111 on: January 18, 2015, 11:35:57 PM »
Uh, so that's a "No, I don't have those numbers."?
 

Robert99

  • Guest
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #112 on: January 18, 2015, 11:52:33 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Uh, so that's a "No, I don't have those numbers."?

The number of jumps per main failure data probably doesn't exist.  I do not know of any such records being kept.  In my case, the only recording done was the entry in my skydiver log book and my autograph in my rigger's log book.  He was also my instructor.  Of course, I did provide him with some refreshments of his choice.
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
  • Thanked: 140 times
    • My Website
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #113 on: January 19, 2015, 12:41:10 AM »
Thanks, I kinda figured there wouldn't be any, but I wanted to make sure.
 

Offline Olemisscub

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #114 on: March 05, 2015, 11:56:57 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
what happened to the briefcase?? theories,,,

I'm curious about this as well. I guess there are only two options really. Either he tied it to himself or he just threw it out of the plane at some point before jumping. Of course throwing it out could lead to it being found and possibly traced back to you, so maybe you would want to take it with you.

But that leads me to wondering how much he really cared about leaving evidence behind. On the one hand you have him being cognizant of the fact that he needed to get the note back (which is what famously sunk MCoy) but then you have him leaving the tie for whatever reason, possibly as an oversight or maybe he just didn't think that it was worthy of being a clue so he didn't care about leaving it behind. I don't fault him for leaving the cigarette butts because DNA evidence wasn't really a thing yet.
 

georger

  • Guest
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #115 on: March 05, 2015, 01:26:20 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
what happened to the briefcase?? theories,,,

I'm curious about this as well. I guess there are only two options really. Either he tied it to himself or he just threw it out of the plane at some point before jumping. Of course throwing it out could lead to it being found and possibly traced back to you, so maybe you would want to take it with you.

But that leads me to wondering how much he really cared about leaving evidence behind. On the one hand you have him being cognizant of the fact that he needed to get the note back (which is what famously sunk MCoy) but then you have him leaving the tie for whatever reason, possibly as an oversight or maybe he just didn't think that it was worthy of being a clue so he didn't care about leaving it behind. I don't fault him for leaving the cigarette butts because DNA evidence wasn't really a thing yet.

Well, this is an interesting area and contradictory.

While dna wasn't a fully developed forensic science yet, many aspects of bio forensics and particle forensics (& finger printing) were! Cooper takes his note but leaves other personal evidence. Makes no sense.

If the titanium and other (machined?) particles on the Cooper tie connect Cooper to a technical-industrial environment where education and training are common, and he still leaves 'palpable forensic evidence' ... then there is a contradiction. Add in his presumed technical awareness implied by his notes and technical negotiations with the pilots! Is Cooper technically aware but forensically stupid!? Has he absolutely no familiarity with law enforcement forensics, but knows metallurgy?  Something doesn't add up ... or maybe he didn't care? Maybe he asked for his note back just to demonstrate who was in control vs. anything to do with his finger prints etc?

It is almost as if he is operating with tunnel vision, if he is a technically savvy person. What is the point of taking his note if he leaves his finger prints all over the place, and his tie, and the match book, and his cigarette butts! Today that would be enough evidence to convict Cooper 50 times over and it wasn't much less in 1971 should the FBI chosen to do full and exhaustive forensics in his case in 1971.

No, there wont be any dna analysis in 1971 but there will be blood typing and 20 other bio markers, all from saliva on the butts! Any educated person would know that. Moreover, any deeply educated person would know that the near future was going to include "dna analysis"!
 
[edit] This is one of the most interesting and potentially important aspects of the case, to me. What rational was really driving Cooper based on who is actually was - his Identity? At length, he said he had a grudge. Maybe the money wasn't really that important to him? He leaves real evidence behind that can identify and convict him.

Who is this guy!? What explains his attention to details on the one hand, and total myopia on the other hand? Is this guy from Mars!? He either is not being rational, or he is! And that goes straight to his Identity.




 
« Last Edit: March 05, 2015, 01:49:42 PM by georger »
 

Offline andrade1812

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 622
  • Thanked: 140 times
    • My Website
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #116 on: March 05, 2015, 03:04:28 PM »
It was thirty years before the FBI could do any DNA testing, 40 years before someone took a look at the particles on the tie. That's a pretty good head start.

As for any of the other bio-markers, who knows. I think it's asking too much for Cooper to be well-read on forensics, especially in an era of Dragnet (not CSI).
 

Offline Bruce A. Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4365
  • Thanked: 465 times
    • The Mountain News
Re: General Questions About The Case
« Reply #117 on: March 05, 2015, 07:35:41 PM »
DNA was first used as a forensic tool in the mid-1980s, in the UK, according to a recent Netflix docu that I watched. It took about another 5-10 years for techniques to be perfected and for LE to realize what they had.
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9298
  • Thanked: 1020 times
moving
« Reply #118 on: March 05, 2015, 09:44:24 PM »
As agent Carr stated, he might of had enough experience to be dangerous to himself for thinking he could do it. you have to be in a serious bind to either hijack a plane, or rob a bank. either way it's not normal thinking by any means. they believed he was a criminal in the past. they don't think logically. you should know that one.....I've jumped back and forth on the fence for a while. he made it, no, he died. I just don't know  :-\
« Last Edit: March 05, 2015, 10:20:48 PM by shutter »
 

Offline Shutter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9298
  • Thanked: 1020 times
Re: moving
« Reply #119 on: March 05, 2015, 09:52:18 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I guess I'm basing this on your average criminal, or someone with limited military service, meaning not having any jump experience, but obtaining knowledge thinking he know's enough. asking for front and back chutes puzzles me. the clothes he wore, and the shoes. some say a smoke jumper did it. would a smoke jumper dress like that?

I suppose he could have had skydiving apparatuses in the bag he carried on the plane, so maybe he changed shoes before he jumped? Maybe he had an old school leather helmet in his bag? Or gloves? Or goggles? Tina last saw him what, 20 minutes before he jumped?


I'll have to look again, but the bag was small. goggles and gloves perhaps....