Document date 12 April 1972AIDates: 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.
Another copy of this document is the primary, most legible copy: read it.
FBI 164-81, Vault Part 94 p. 135 (DB Cooper-42194), Teletype, dated 12 Apr 1972, serial PD 164-41-939 (as read from the transcript) — cooper.theunsolved.net/parts/Cooper-Part-94/pages/135
Transcript
The scan is the source; the transcript is machine-generated from it.
SU 164-24
PAGE SEVEN
---
NEAR AIRPORT WITH BEACON AND IMMEDIATELY BEYOND, FARM LAND THUS
PROVIDING EXCELLENT BEARINGS FOR JUMP.
---
IN NORJAK CASE, UNSUB VERY INSISTENT UPON RETRIEVING IN-
STRUCTIONS AFTER READING BY PILOT. IN UAL CASE, SUBJECT LIKEWISE
INSISTENT UPON RETRIEVING INSTRUCTIONS. ADVANCE PREPARATION OF
FLIGHT PLAN INSTRUCTIONS IN UAL CASE COULD LOGICALLY REPRESENT
REFINEMENT OF M.O.
---
INTERVIEW OF SISTER-IN-LAW OF UAL SUBJECT INDICATES SUBJECT
HAD ADVISED HER THAT IF HE WERE EVER TO BE INVOLVED IN HIJACKING,
HE WOULD NOT SPEND ANY OF HIJACKED LOOT FOR MANY YEARS BECAUSE IT
WOULD BE MARKED WITH SUBSTANCE THAT WOULD BE VISIBLE BY USE OF AN
ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT AND HE WOULD NOT SPENDSANY OF THE MONEY FOR MANY
YEARS BECAUSE HE BELIEVED HE COULD NOT BE PROSECUTED AFTER SEVEN
YEARS FOLLOWING THE CRIME.
---
INTERVIEWS OF ACQUAINTANCES OF SUBJECT IN UAL CASE INDICATE
SUBJECT OBSESSED WITH IDEA OF HIJACKING AND CONTINUALLY BROUGHT UP
DISCUSSIONS WHEREIN HE ATTEMPTED TO OBTAIN OPINIONS AS TO WHAT THE
OTHER HIJACKERS HAD DONE WRONG IN THEIR OPERATION. THESE ACQUAINT-
ANCES DESCRIBED SUBJECT IN UAL CASE AS NOT PARTICULARLY EXPERT