Slashdot Mirror
FBI Accepts New Evidence in 46-Year-Old D.B. Cooper Case (dailymail.co.uk)
An anonymous reader quotes the Daily Mail:
The FBI is looking at an 'odd bit of buried foam' as possible evidence in the cold case investigation into criminal mastermind D.B. Cooper, according to private investigators. The potential evidence was handed over to authorities last week by the team of sleuths who believe the foam made up a part of Cooper's parachute backpack, the New York Daily News reports.
Cooper, one of the 20th century's most compelling masterminds, hijacked a Boeing 727 at Seattle-Tacoma airport in 1971 and held its crew and passengers hostage with a bomb. Once his demand of $200,000 cash -- the equivalent of $1,213,226 today -- was reached and transferred onto the plane, Cooper had the crew take off before he parachuted out over the dense Pacific Northwest woods and disappeared.
The discovery of the foam comes just weeks after the FBI uncovered what is believed to be part of Cooper's parachute strap, which private investigators claim could lead authorities to his stolen fortune. In addition, the FBI also received three 'unknown' pieces of fabric that were found close to where the alleged parachute strap was located.
The 40-member cold case team is being overseen by a former FBI supervisor. At one point they essentially crowdsourced the investigation by requesting help from the general public, and the team now says they've found a credible source -- providing information substantiated by FBI field notes -- which has led them to this new evidence.
The discovery of the foam comes just weeks after the FBI uncovered what is believed to be part of Cooper's parachute strap, which private investigators claim could lead authorities to his stolen fortune. In addition, the FBI also received three 'unknown' pieces of fabric that were found close to where the alleged parachute strap was located.
The 40-member cold case team is being overseen by a former FBI supervisor. At one point they essentially crowdsourced the investigation by requesting help from the general public, and the team now says they've found a credible source -- providing information substantiated by FBI field notes -- which has led them to this new evidence.
Imagine what all that cash will be worth now with all that interest over the years.
Last year the fact that the FBI had closed the case made headlines, and now there are 40 people working on it?
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us...
OK, looking at the press release, the "redirected" "resources", I suppose the FBI only officially closes a case when the perp is caught...
when a man could just purchase a ticket with bills, and hop on the plane, without having to even give his real name. These days, if you're taking the plane in America, you will be treated as a terrorist.
(And yes, I do remember the time when two planes took down three buildings, the last of which went from structurally intact into a pile of rubble in its own footprint, in a 7 second free-fall due to some fires on the second floor.)
Is this really the priority for the FBI? Is there no current crime to pursue? Or is this evidence that the fall in the crime rate in recent years has left the FBI without enough to do?
Conspiracy theories aside, the evidence points to him being killed when he bailed out of the plane. Some mastermind.
why continue the case?
Because it's good practice for more recent cases?
I'm no detective or anything but I can imagine that these skills are "use it or lose it" like any other. If they aren't doing anything of a higher priority then why not?
I can also imagine that there is matter of pride. There's someone that got away and finding out who did it, even this far in the past, does prove something, doesn't it?
I vaguely recall an argument, from the UK I believe, on the funds spent by the military picking up lost hikers and skiers. Some politician thought this was a waste of government resources. A high ranking officer explained that if the military was not doing this service they'd have to concoct drills of similar difficulty to keep the people trained. Doing this service effectively cost nothing, kept people safe(r), and was an effective recruiting tool. Sending out civilians in a jeep instead of military in a helicopter would look cheaper at first but it'd also save no money in the end since the helicopters would be flying anyway. If war breaks out those same people would be picking up downed pilots and doing medical evacuations of wounded soldiers.
Let the FBI go dig in the mud looking for rotted bank notes and bits of a parachute. If in the future they need some experienced people to find a suspect in a "hot" case then we know where to find them.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Given that there isn't enough money to investigate every case to the nth degree, someone has to make decisions about what is to be the priority. Who can that be if it is not the FBI itself? The only alternative would appear to be a political appointee - which seems worse.
Given that there isn't enough money to investigate every case to the nth degree, someone has to make decisions about what is to be the priority. Who can that be if it is not the FBI itself? The only alternative would appear to be a political appointee - which seems worse.
You could have the investigative agency need to get a court to sign off on closing a case, for example. You could also have priorities allocated by a committee that includes some people (whether voting or non-voting) from outside the FBI. Like maybe a citizen representative, or a victim representatives, or someone from DOJ outside the FBI, or a local law enforcement representative. For any large organization, there's more than one way you could reasonably set priorities, but you need to figure that out in the context of law and of organizational politics that are far beyond whatever will be discussed about them on Slashdot.
Real lawyers write in C++
Let the FBI go dig in the mud looking for rotted bank notes and bits of a parachute.
It isn't the FBI doing this, it is some group of people who felt look forming their own Mystery Club. I don't know if they have a Great Dane, a Revolutionary-era Ghost, or an unfrozen Caveman, but they might have a van with a psychodelic theme.
See you went on a diatribe for nothing, because you couldn't bother to look up the facts, just went with your feelings.
I prefer that psychos who hijack planes, hold the passengers hostage with a bomb threat, and manage to make off with $200k in ransom money get caught and brought to justice. Isn't that what the law is supposed to do?
Isn't that what the law is supposed to do?
The law already punished him. The law of gravity.
I don't see the fuss over tax money spent on the investigation. It's one person cataloging efforts from interested citizens. It's a mystery that can provide new investigation techniques for future crimes even if it results in nothing.
I would have more of a problem if they found the guy and decided to waste money in prosecuting after all this time.
The FBI "claims" that no other money in the case was ever found other than beside that river ten years later. Not sure if I believe them. But there are many ways to launder money especially involving insurance and fires.
I think it's reasonable he was a woodsman and knew the area. He probably did have googles; and at least light gloves which are not that hard to conceal. Probably had a few well concealed hidden caches near the rivers for changes of clothes and supplies. Maybe an inflatable raft. Hiked to some spot downstream of the river and hid the money before bugging out. I'd hide it in a tree. Probably had an accomplice waiting on the ground in case he hurt himself and to clean up his trail afterward. I can easily see someone taking a few bundles of money and camping out by the river only to be approached and hiding the money in the sand and then thinking the better of it to just leave it.
Once the investigation cost passes the current value of the money stolen, why continue the case?
If we're sure that Cooper is dead, then I agree that it's ok to stop the investigation.
But if there's a chance that he's alive, then I'd like to keep investigating the crime. Cooper hijacked a plane, and took people captive and threatened them. He shouldn't get away with that. We should send a message to potential future criminals that if they hijack, kidnap and threaten, then we won't stop hunting them down.
Interesting XKCD picture here.
I hear the Taliban is available.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Because they don't want to think people can think they can wait out prosecution. I agree that, at this point, it's entirely useless. And I promise you, many times the amount of the stolen money has already been spent (and I'm talking tax dollars).
Stupid sexy Flanders.
It makes no sense to investigate a case older than 30 years. The perpetrator will likely be dead or senile and if the case goes to court they likely won't be able to defend themselves - no witnesses will be reliable that long after the case and any material evidence will likely be lost.
Like the Alcatraz escapees. Even tested as being possible by Mythbusters.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I bet you FBI has never heard of this evidence, let alone accepted it. This is a guy selling his book. The sources are The Daily mail and NY Daily, both known for their responsible reporting of the facts.
why continue the case?
Because it's good practice for more recent cases?
I'm no detective or anything but I can imagine that these skills are "use it or lose it" like any other. If they aren't doing anything of a higher priority then why not?
I can also imagine that there is matter of pride.
Good practice, no. There are plenty of cases you can work on today to get good practice. It's not like there's a crime shortage.
Pride is a part of it, so is disincentive. Criminal law is generally about two things: retributionism and consequentialism. Punishing the guy because you are angry with him and he deserves it (retributivism) is very rarely a sensible motive--it's mostly petty revenge because someone offends our notions of right and wrong and to hell with whether it makes sense. There are lawbreakers we may WANT to lock away for decades or to kill, but it's not always helpful. Consequentialism (side-constrained by a requirement that the defendant is also supposed to be guilty) tells us to punish the guy so he doesn't do it again, and to scare the hell out of the next ten guys who think about trying it. This is why it's much harder to plea-bargain a high-profile case; not only does the prosecutor want to look good, but because the hope is that the punishment is enough to discourage others from engaging in the bad act.
Oh, and sometimes the public believes there's rehabilitation. Occasionally there are nods toward it, and certainly there are attempts to reduce recidivism, but generally criminal law theory recognizes that rehabilitation in not really a meaningful component of the modern criminal justice system.
Real lawyers write in C++
He's still very much alive, and doesn't look nearly as old as he is. His current alias is "Tommy Wiseau", and is infamous for making a bad movie named "The Room" using the money he stole in the hijacking.
https://xkcd.com/1400/
We should send a message to potential future criminals that if they hijack, kidnap and threaten, then we won't stop hunting them down.
Ever? Witnesses say the man was in his mid-40s. Should we keep hunting him down after the case is 60 years old (another 14 years from now)? But that time, he'll be well over 100 years old. How about when the case is 80 years old? By that time, he'll be around 125. At what point do you think we should give up "hunting him down" because there's no way he's still alive?
Most likely, he didn't even survive the hijacking, and either died during the parachuting from exposure, or shortly after on the ground since he jumped at night, during a rainstorm, over a dense forest, with no protective clothing. His body was probably eaten by animals. I like to think that he somehow made it anyway, but even if he did, he's probably over 90 years old now if he's still alive.
Do you want to keep trying to hunt down Jack the Ripper too? Maybe he's still alive! He'd be over 150 now though, but we should never stop, right?