SA to SAC Los Angeles re LAPD officer's FD-71 tip on NORJAK suspect
Document date 13 September 1976
Report a problem
Email this to [email protected]
Id: Cooper-Part-61:232-233
Subject: Cooper Files: Cooper-Part-61:232-233 Document: Memo SA to SAC Los Angeles re LAPD officer's FD-71 tip on NORJAK suspect Id: Cooper-Part-61:232-233 Page: https://cooper.theunsolved.net/documents/Cooper-Part-61%3A232-233 What is wrong (title, date, type, which pages belong together, copies)? What does the scan show?
A person reads every report. Corrections are made by hand, to the data — titles, dates, names, which pages belong together — never to the scans, and they can take a while to appear.
FBI 164-81, Vault Part 61 pp. 232–233 (DB Cooper-25433–25434), Memo, dated 13 Sep 1976, serial LA 164-497-859 (as read from the transcript) — cooper.theunsolved.net/documents/Cooper-Part-61%3A232-233
OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 JULY 1973 EDITION GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum
TO : SAC, LOS ANGELES (164-497) (P) DATE: 9/13/76
FROM : SA [REDACTED]
SUBJECT: NORJAK OO: Seattle
---
Re Complaint Form (FD-71) of SA [REDACTED] dated 9/7/76.
A review of information furnished by LAPD Officer [REDACTED] in referenced FD-71 reveals the suspect referred to as [REDACTED] is probably identical to [REDACTED] who formerly resided at [REDACTED] California, with [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] was previously interviewed by SA [REDACTED] during investigation of [REDACTED] as a suspect in this matter in 1972. [REDACTED] photo was at that time displayed to witnesses and no identification was effected.
On 9/13/76, [REDACTED] was recontacted at her residence, [REDACTED] and advised she has not seen nor heard from [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] as she had advised during prior interview in 1972. She had never heard of [REDACTED] being referred to as [REDACTED]. She was of the opinion the information being furnished the FBI at this time is probably coming from a [REDACTED] name unrecalled, who [REDACTED] in [REDACTED]. This woman worked at [REDACTED] and knew she, [REDACTED] had talked to the FBI regarding [REDACTED] activities.
The facts furnished by Officer [REDACTED] closely parallel [REDACTED] circumstances in 1971-1972, however, are inaccurate and appear to be "playback" from someone who had talked with [REDACTED].
Officer [REDACTED] will be recontacted and advised of the results of interview of [REDACTED] on 9/13/76. He will be requested to ascertain from his source current location of [REDACTED] and if located, he should be interviewed. Otherwise, it does not appear additional investigation regarding [REDACTED] also known as [REDACTED] is warranted.
---
SEARCHED ___INDEXED___ SERIALIZED [REDACTED] FILED ___ SEP 1 3 1976 FBI — LOS ANGELES
---
crs/aml (2)
---
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan DB Cooper-25433
---
164 497-859
LA 164-497
---
On 9/13/76, Officer [redacted] was recontacted and advised of contact with [redacted] He stated he recontacted his source and ascertained that information furnished by his source was obtained 1½ to 2 years ago from a conversation between his source and [redacted] [redacted] stated his source has no idea of the current status of [redacted] and has no information regarding this matter other than what she recalls was related to her by [redacted] possibly two years ago.
---
Since the information furnished by [redacted] almost certainly relates to [redacted] and evolves from FBI contact with [redacted] in 1972, when [redacted] was investigated as a possible suspect in this matter, no further investigation appears warranted.
---
- 2* -
---
DB Cooper-25434
Serials: LA 164-497, LA 164-497-859