Memo · Re comparison of two suspects with NORJAK UNSUB Dan Cooper · 26 March 1975 · page 2 of 2AIType, title and date: machine-written — generated by an AI model from the transcripts, and it can be wrong. The scan is the source; the transcript is machine-generated from it.
Document date 26 March 1975AIDates: machine-written — generated by an AI model from the transcripts, and it can be wrong. The scan is the source; the transcript is machine-generated from it.
The scan is the source; the transcript is machine-generated from it.
[REDACTED]
---
that it had been buried by members of [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] and that
the money [REDACTED] This was
his story concerning the money throughout and it
would appear that this is the valid basis for his
story inasmuch as [REDACTED]
a number of individuals [REDACTED]
had been involved
[REDACTED] in the Eugene, Oregon area. In
view of the [REDACTED] it would appear
that if he knew that the money had in fact come from
a hijacking, he would have indicated this.
---
In addition to this, [REDACTED] was an individual
who spent whatever money he could make and [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] He had held num-
erous jobs on a part time basis [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] related jobs
and it would appear that if he had in fact knew of the
location of the buried money, he would have obtained
this and spent it in order to improve his life style.
---
In view of the above, it does not appear that
either [REDACTED] is identical with the Unsub
in Norjak (Seattle file 164-81).