Little Rock to Seattle and Los Angeles re possible charges against persons publicizing Cooper case
Document date 5 October 1977
Also filed at: Part 40 pp. 296–297 · Part 121 pp. 65–66
Copies may differ in what was redacted.
Report a problem
Email this to [email protected]
Id: Cooper-Part-62:123-124
Subject: Cooper Files: Cooper-Part-62:123-124 Document: Teletype Little Rock to Seattle and Los Angeles re possible charges against persons publicizing Cooper case Id: Cooper-Part-62:123-124 Page: https://cooper.theunsolved.net/documents/Cooper-Part-62%3A123-124 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 62 pp. 123–124 (DB Cooper-25687), Teletype, dated 5 Oct 1977, serial LA 164-497-959 (as read from the transcript) — cooper.theunsolved.net/documents/Cooper-Part-62%3A123-124
LRO 004 27820 16Z RR SE LA DE LR R 051700Z OCT 77 FM LITTLE ROCK (164-22)(P) TO SEATTLE (164-812) ROUTINE LOS ANGELES (164-497) ROUTINE BT CLEAR
---
TELETYPE ROOM Oct 5 | 2 PM '77
---
NORJAK (A). OO: SEATTLE.
RE JACK BRYANT COFFELT.
RE LITTLE ROCK TELETYPE TO SEATTLE AND LOS ANGELES, OCTOBER 3, 1977.
[REDACTED] WAS RECONTACTED EVENING, OCTOBER 3, 1977, AND ADVISED THAT THE ALLEGED [REDACTED] OF JACK BRYANT COFFELT MAY OR MAY NOT ACTUALLY [REDACTED] OF COFFELT BUT IN EITHER CASE COFFELT WAS NOT D. B. COOPER. [REDACTED] WAS ALSO ADVISED THAT THERE WAS APPARENTLY NOTHING ILLEGAL [REDACTED] ENTERING INTO [REDACTED] OR OTHERS, HOWEVER, IF THE REAL D. B. COOPER GAINED KNOWLEDGE OF THE INVESTIGATION IN THIS CASE AND FROM THAT WAS ABLE TO FURTHER
---
164-497-959 [illegible] all 3 J. [guess: C.] Alston [guess: ger]
---
DB Cooper-25687
---
b6 b7C b7D
PAGE TWO LR 164-22 CLEAR ELUDE IDENTIFICATION AND APPREHENSION, THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT CRIMINAL CHARGES COULD BE FILED AGAINST THE PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE PUBLICIZING OF THE CASE.
[REDACTED] STATED SHE RECALLS CLEARLY WHAT HAPPENED ON NIGHT OF HIJACKING, AND [REDACTED] FURNISHED BY [REDACTED] RESEMBLE COOPER IN SEVERAL RESPECTS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WEIGHT. SHE DESIRES TO SEE MORE RECENT PHOTO OF COFFELT THAN ONE TAKEN AT ATLANTA IN 1948 IF SUCH IS AVAILABLE.
ON OCTOBER 4, 1977, [REDACTED] RECONTACTED SRA, FAYETTEVILLE, ARK., AND ADVISED [REDACTED] [REDACTED] AND WOULD SEEK FBI APPROVAL BEFORE DOING SO. [REDACTED] STATED THAT [REDACTED] STATED HE WAS CONTINUING WITH "PROJECT" AND WAS GOING TO SELL HIS STORY BASED ON AN AFFIDAVIT FROM [REDACTED] CLAIMING THAT WHEN [REDACTED] [REDACTED] OF COFFELT IN DENVER, SHE IDENTIFIED [REDACTED] AS COOPER. [REDACTED] DENIES THIS, AND [REDACTED] CONTEMPLATES LEGAL ACTION AGAINST [REDACTED] IF THE ALLEGED AFFIDAVIT IS USED AS BASIS FOR STORY, PUBLICATION, AND FILM PRODUCTION. BT
Serials: 164-812, LA 164-497, LA 164-497-959, LR 164-22
Similar documents
Very similar text — possibly a copy redacted differently, or another memo written from the same template.