
A team of former FBI investigators claims to have identified D.B. Cooper - ccnafr
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/d-b-cooper-investigators-claim-theyve-discovered-skyjackers-identity-693912/
======
coltonv
If there's one thing I've learned from reading about a lot of conspiracy
theories for fun, it's that circumstantial evidence can seem right when
presented in the right way, even if it's completely wrong.

I think everyone should take a look at the Wikipedia article for theories of
who actually wrote the works penned to name "Shakespeare"
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_authorship_questio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_authorship_question))
and scroll down to the "Alternative Candidates" section. When you read one,
the circumstantial evidence looks perfect. Then you read another candidate and
you say "gee that sounds really valid too...". Obviously they can't both be
right, but each one presents circumstantial evidence that seems to connect
perfectly.

After you've red the alternative candidates, read the "Case for Shakespeare's
authorship", which is the case that it really was Shakespeare of Stratford-
upon-Avon that wrote the plays. There's some hard evidence (though not enough
to be 100% conclusive, it's probably 90% conclusive, and enough convince most
scholars) that makes the rest of the theories seem totally unfounded.

I went on a bit of a rant here, but hopefully my point comes across, that
circumstantial evidence is really quite far from real hard evidence. Unless
some guy comes forward with those bills with the correct serial numbers or
someone finds a body, it's going to remain an unsolved mystery.

~~~
mysterypie
I'm going out on a limb here to try to make a contrary point. (I'm not
defending the story about how they found the "real" D.B. Cooper, which sounds
feeble.)

You can reject the accepted theory (the standard explanation) if you can
falsify some part of it -- this is literally part of the scientific method.
Alternate theories arise because the accepted theory has serious holes in it.
Some of these alternate theories turn out to be circumstantial, some turn out
flimsy and silly, and lots turn out to be ludicrous conspiracy theories.
Reasonable people who hear the wild conspiracy theories often _wrongly_
conclude that the standard explanation must be right because the alternate
theories are so wacky.

To use you own example: The standard Shakespeare, the one from Stratford-upon-
Avon, allowed his children to grow up illiterate (this is an agreed fact among
Shakespeare scholars). For someone who valued the English language so much,
who was one of the greatest writers of the English language, it seems
unimaginable that he would not have made any effort to see that his children
learn to read and write. For me, that alone is enough to reject the standard
explanation (though I can cite other holes). It doesn't mean I can prove who
the real Shakespeare was. It certainly doesn't mean that I accept the crackpot
theories.

My point is that if the accepted theory has serious flaws, and you reject it,
that doesn't mean that you have to choose one of the crazy theories, or
circumstantial theories, or any theory. It's enough to say that the standard
explanation is wrong or deficient.

~~~
maxerickson
I dunno, someone not giving a shit about their kids is relatively plausible to
me.

~~~
hn0
Or, Shakespeare was completely consumed by it, to his detriment, and did not
wish the same for his children.

------
paulcole
> The first sentence, “I want out of the system and saw a way through good ole
> Unk,” was decoded to, “I want out of the system and saw a way by skyjacking
> a jet plane.” And the second sentence, “And please tell the lackey cops D.B.
> Cooper is not my real name,” was decoded to “I am 1st Lt. Robert Rackstraw,
> D.B. Cooper is not my real name.”

I wish they explained this in some level of detail that makes it remotely
believable.

~~~
jandrese
Obviously "Unk" is code for "skyjacking a jet plane", and "please tell the
lackey cops" is code for "I am 1st Lt. Robert Rackstraw". What's so hard about
that? The guy just has a very idiosyncratic set of code phrases that he was
clearly using in Vietnam.

I have to agree that the evidence in the article seems flimsy at best. Maybe
the book makes a better case for it, but I'd be concerned that it isn't one of
those things where someone who is 100% convinced about something doesn't
attribute every tiny little coincidence as concrete proof of their theory.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
If you're tuned into the right numbers station and know the Illuminati secret
handshake it all makes sense.

~~~
vidanay
I know the handshake and it doesn't make sense

~~~
jschwartzi
It's a different handshake now. They change it every time someone claims to
know it.

~~~
mcguire
It requires three hands and a left foot, now.

------
iambateman
The fact that “please tell the lackey cops" is code for "I am 1st Lt. Robert
Rackstraw" is absurd. “Unk” means “skyjacking a plane”??? I don’t know what
the codes they used in Vietnam were, but I don’t think they needed a code for
“a man is skyjacking a plane.”

Maybe there are details I’m missing, but it takes away from the legitimacy of
the claim in my opinion.

~~~
rconti
Yes, obviously there are details that are missing. The article doesn't have
any of the letters he wrote, and refers to a very complicated code indicated
by repeating words, none of which were in the article.

Even with the evidence, I'm sure it's far beyond me to assess it, but it seems
insane that people are dismissing a highly trained codebreaker's extensive
work because 2 specific sentences in a newspaper article cribbed from multiple
letters aren't immediately obvious to the layperson.

~~~
hcs
Photos of the decoding in question:

[https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DBC-
Letter-5...](https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/DBC-Letter-5-FBI-
WA-DC-WFO-DBC-WAPO-Letter-Mailed-12-15-71J3-1-300x147.jpg)

[https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/DBC-
Letter-6...](https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/DBC-
Letter-6-3-28-72-Typed-Note-Message-CodeB.jpg)

Definitely nothing obvious to this layperson.

Edit: just noticed the 3 71s in the first image, ok that's a little
interesting.

------
Boulth
Wikipedia had some more interesting info
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper)

The Bureau were more skeptical, concluding that Cooper lacked crucial
skydiving skills and experience. "We originally thought Cooper was an
experienced jumper, perhaps even a paratrooper," said Special Agent Larry
Carr, leader of the investigative team from 2006 until its dissolution in
2016. "We concluded after a few years this was simply not true. No experienced
parachutist would have jumped in the pitch-black night, in the rain, with a
200-mile-an-hour wind in his face, wearing loafers and a trench coat. It was
simply too risky. He also missed that his reserve 'chute was only for
training, and had been sewn shut—something a skilled skydiver would have
checked."[83] He also failed to bring or request a helmet, chose to jump with
the older and technically inferior of the two primary parachutes supplied to
him,[53] and jumped into a −70 °F (−57 °C) wind chill without proper
protection against the extreme cold.[110][111]

------
Overtonwindow
FWIW I think ol Mr. Cooper landed, but then died from exposure out there. Cash
was found on the banks of the Columbia river, but that could've been washed up
and buried over time. IIRC that cash was not loose, but in bundles, so its
very plausible it just got lost to the elements. The real kicker for me is
that money, more precisely, the rest of it. It's never been found in
circulation. Success and truly his survival would've been evident by the
spending of the cash.

~~~
Zhenya
Maybe be burned a bunch of it to try and stay warm? Especially if all the wood
was wet.

~~~
Overtonwindow
Good point. Not sure how well currency burns, but ...NONE of it has ever
showed up in circulation. Now...what would be really crazy is if all of a
sudden a twenty gets passed at a White Castle in Nevada, and all the alarm
bells go off, and suddenly we're all reevaluating everything. Personally, I
hope he made it.

------
blakesterz
I think they recorded most of the serial numbers of the bills? And it was
never spent? If someone was to spend that today, are those still in some
tracking system now so they'd be found? How long are things like that
followed?

~~~
everdev
The only counter argument that comes to mind is that in some foreign countries
US dollars are accepted. If that money is in international circulation is
might not be picked up. Although, one would assume that over time some of it
would make it's way back to the US.

------
pembrook
Every couple of years a new group comes out with their findings on this, then
it gets debunked. It's like Jimmy Hoffa's body. Easy stories for a slow news
day.

------
lifeisstillgood
I remember reading a different account that basically ended with, we found a
bunch of the money in a river, but never found the body, he died on impact.

I think the sheer brass balls of it will keep people interested, and the
"disappearance" will let the mystery run and run.

But Occam's razor says no money was ever found because he never got up after
reaching the ground.

------
dredmorbius
Vaguely related: the Cooper Vane, a true documented legacy of the incident.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_vane](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_vane)

------
dmichulke
Regarding the "code":

I'm pretty confident that the FBI is not the inventor of it, so obviously
there should be some information out there about "encoding a message to that
the encoded message is human language".

Obviously there's a mapping (assuming x,y are unknowns)

(x | "through good ole Unk") -> "by skyjacking a jet plane".

(y | "And please tell the lackey cops") -> "I am 1st Lt. Robert Rackstraw,"

Doesn anyone know candidates for this type of mapping?

~~~
d0gbyt3
Some more information i found: [https://dbcooper.com/2018/06/pi-team-coopers-
confession-foun...](https://dbcooper.com/2018/06/pi-team-coopers-confession-
found-in-letter/)

------
rmason
Although DNA didn't exist at the time the FBI later got a useable sample from
the clip on tie Cooper left behind. It was already used to rule out one
potential subject.

Why didn't all that FBI brainpower tail the guy and get a sample of his DNA
that could be compared? I kept reading in the story and it was never
mentioned. If the FBI refused to run the test well then you know they're
protecting him which I doubt.

[https://abcnews.go.com/US/db-cooper-dna-results-
match/story?...](https://abcnews.go.com/US/db-cooper-dna-results-
match/story?id=14258726)

------
hymen0ptera
There's one theory, notably absent, from the entire cavalcade of possibilities
that no one seems to highlight...

1\. D.B. Cooper boards the plane.

2\. D.B. Cooper reveals a bomb, and with it, his intent to kill everyone on
the plane, placing himself in control of their jeopardy.

3\. He then, _demands_ assistance, which involves the FBI. This, after placing
everyone's life in danger, with the threat of violence.

4\. The thing he asks for is absurd, and anyone who has ever used a parachute
would raise an eyebrow at accepting equipment from a hostile entity. Even the
FBI.

5\. Once handed to him, there will be no way for him to look at the equipment,
to see if it works, within the confined space of the plane.

6\. As long as the money is real, someone making demands like this would
expect the parachute to be real too. Especially, providing that their
experience and status as a parachutist remains at novice level, with no
specialization for preparing equipment.

7\. The FBI could have easily provided him with real money and a sabotaged
parachute, leaving him to plummet to his death. And why not?

There are obvious risks to this play. What if D.B. Cooper had been smart
enough to unpack and inspect the parachute before jumping out of the plane,
and then, what if he noticed the sabotage and blew up the plane?

That's the primary risk, there are other risks, and alternative options in the
FBI's corner in this story.

They could have also opted to have the fighter jets circle back and gun D.B.
Cooper down, before a working parachute reached the ground.

But, no matter what, no one seems to have considered the possibility of a
vengeful off-the-record FBI. Which, of course, we all know, definitely existed
back then.

------
lawlessone
>But he couldn’t fight 1500 years of brainpower on our team. We beat him. I
didn’t expect it, but it’s the icing.”

so why hasn't he been arrrested huh?

------
justwalt
When they say the investigation lasted from 1971-2016, what exactly does that
mean? Does that mean they were waiting for evidence to come their way, or has
there been a team working X number of hours every week trying to figure things
out?

~~~
mimimihaha
This is what I found on Wikipedia. I don’t know if it clears it up or not:

“The FBI officially suspended active investigation of the case in July 2016,
but the agency continues to request that any physical evidence that might
emerge related to the parachutes or the ransom money be submitted for
analysis.”

------
joejerryronnie
D.B. Cooper, going by a different alias, used the stolen $200,000 to finance
the initial version of a small, speculative "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash
System".

------
phthano
I read this book. Their evidence seems pretty strong.

~~~
gmiller123456
Is the article correct in stating that pretty much all of the evidence centers
around the six letters? IMHO, and apparently the FBI's too, that's a pretty
weak connection. It wouldn't be difficult for anyone, especially a CIA or FBI
agent, skilled in writing forensics to point the finger at someone else.

------
Lazare
Here's the problem:

1) "Rackstraw – a former Special Forces paratrooper, explosives expert and
pilot with about 22 different aliases – was once a person of interest in the
case, but was eliminated as a suspect by the FBI in 1979. His elimination was
controversial amongst the investigating agents, and he remained, for many, the
most viable suspect in what remains the only unsolved case of air piracy in
the United States."

Rackstraw is the obvious choice.

2) "Rick Sherwood – a former member of the Army Security Agency, which decoded
signals during the Vietnam War – cracked the codes. Rackstraw served under
Sherwood in two classified units, and Sherwood was familiar with his writing
style having deciphered some of his earlier messages."

They got someone who knew Rackstraw to look into whether it might be
Rackstraw.

3) "Using codes that only Rackstraw would have known, Sherwood honed in on two
sentences for analysis. The first sentence, “I want out of the system and saw
a way through good ole Unk,” was decoded to, “I want out of the system and saw
a way by skyjacking a jet plane.” And the second sentence, “And please tell
the lackey cops D.B. Cooper is not my real name,” was decoded to “I am 1st Lt.
Robert Rackstraw, D.B. Cooper is not my real name.”"

This person came up with a possible solution that fingers the exact target he
set out to finger.

That's fine as far as it goes, but it'd be a hell of a lot more convincing if
either they got a cryptographer with no knowledge of the case or individual to
come up with it, or if the target wasn't the obvious guy they were literally
looking for evidence against. Especially since the translations, as retold in
the article, seem awfully tenuous.

And speaking of those translations! "And please tell your lackey cops"
translates to "I am 1st Lt. Robert Rackstraw, "? Really? What sort of
code...is this exactly?

I mean, if we assume there's a code where the word "lackey" means "Robert" and
the word "cops" means "Rackstraw", and so on, then yes, that sentence _does_
mean what is claimed, but that's 1) a pretty strange code and 2) you could
just assume it's a different code where "lackey" means "Vladimir" and "cops"
means "Putin", and now it incriminates the Russian president. That there is
_a_ code that incriminates Rackstraw doesn't mean it's the code that was used
(if, indeed, _any_ code was used; the letters as quoted aren't especially
cryptic).

Alternatively...well, what _is_ the alternative? I don't see a lot of
potential ciphers here that yield the astonishing results claimed.

> “We now have him saying, ‘I am Cooper,’” Colbert told Seattle PI. “Rackstraw
> is a narcissistic sociopath who never thought he would be caught. He was
> trying to prove that he was smarter than anyone else. But he couldn’t fight
> 1500 years of brainpower on our team.

Maybe they needed a few more years of brainpower. (Also, if you believe the
story, it wasn't about 1500 years of brainpower, but the fact that they talked
to one guy who used to be Rackstraw's boss, and is claiming without proof that
Rackstraw used to use a code where "Unk" mean "hijacking a jet" and "lackey
cops" meant "Robert Rackstraw". I don't really believe that, but _if you do_ ,
then this is mostly just about talking to the one guy who just happened to
have the one scrap of secret info that identifies the hijacker, man, if only
they'd thought to talk to the prime suspects ex-boss from the very start!

In short: What a pile of nonsense and poor writing.

~~~
rconti
The article is poor writing, but I don't know how you can begin to assess this
without having the background the cryptographer has, and having access to the
6 typewritten letters in question.

To dismiss it all based on a brief newspaper blurb is insane.

~~~
Lazare
Right, but we got a fairly detailed description of what happened:

"Using codes that only Rackstraw would have known, Sherwood honed in on two
sentences for analysis. The first sentence, “I want out of the system and saw
a way through good ole Unk,” was decoded to, “I want out of the system and saw
a way by skyjacking a jet plane.” And the second sentence, “And please tell
the lackey cops D.B. Cooper is not my real name,” was decoded to “I am 1st Lt.
Robert Rackstraw, D.B. Cooper is not my real name.”"

If we trust the facts stated in the article, Sherwood applied a pre-existing
code used by Rackstraw to two sentences, each of which contained a hidden
meaning. So (according to the journalist!) we don't need the six letters, we
just need the two sentences. Which is...fine, sure, that could be a pre-
existing agreed upon cipher! But that tells us nothing; this isn't about
_crypto_ , it's about simple logic. Even _if_ the code exists (questionable)
and appears to match, that doesn't prove Rackstraw is DB Cooper, it just means
you can't reject the hypothesis.

> without having the background the cryptographer

As above, you don't need to be a cryptographer to evaluate these claims.
Further, the article doesn't claim he _is_ a skilled cryptographer, nor is
what he allegedly did cryptography.

As you say, the writing is poor, and the nonsense in the article might have
nothing to do with the actual claims being made. But what the article
describes is simply nonsense, and can be dismissed out of hand. Whatever is
happening, it's not what the author wrote.

And as others have noted, we actually know what's in letter six, and there's
just nothing there: [https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/DBC-
Letter-6...](https://dbcooper.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/DBC-
Letter-6-3-28-72-Typed-Note-Message-CodeB.jpg)

It's a letter from someone apparently claiming to have been trained by the
government, and who used that training to steal the money, which means it
could have been written by anyone who'd read a single news story about the
hijacking; nothing suggests it's from the actual hijacker. And crackpots
_constantly_ write letters like this after major cases, and as noted by the
article, it can't even be linked to the _other_ letters, much less the
hijacker, making it even less relevant. And yet _this_ is what the the article
_claims_ is the smoking gun? Please.

(Plus...it's just a letter, not the second edition of the Voynich Manuscript.
Doesn't mean you can't hide a message in it, but it does make it _much_ harder
to conclusively show a message was hidden.)

------
pansinghkoder
he did cameo in prison break

------
ataspinar
Anyone who has watched Prisonbreak already knows the answer.. old news!

------
iosDrone
Sounds pretty badass.

