With a sense of flair and panache, some crimes go down in history because of the way they were done, solved or not. They'll forever be remembered for the style of the crime, the brazenness to pull such a stunt, and they will be remembered for the particular person that would do such a thing. DB Cooper was one of those men, and in a small way, people have all struggled with the term criminal as writers, even investigators, respect his daring.
During the afternoon hours of November 24th, 1971, a very normal, nondescript man calling himself Dan Cooper went to the counter of Northwest Orient Airlines in Portland, Oregon. He bought a one-way ticket on Flight #305, headed for Seattle, Washington, paying in cash. Thus began a series of events that would become one of the great unsolved mysteries in FBI history.
Cooper, a quiet man by accounts, appeared to be in his mid-forties and wore a business suit with a black tie and white shirt. How, very James Bondesque of him, considering what he was about to do. He ordered a drink, having a bourbon and soda, while the flight was waiting to take off. Shortly after three o'clock that afternoon, Cooper handed the flight attendant, then known as stewardesses, a note indicating he had a bomb in his briefcase and wanted her to take a seat next to him.
The shocked and worried stewardess did what was asked of her. He would open up a cheap attache' case and show her just a glimpse of wires and red colored sticks before demanding that she write down what he told her. Soon, she was walking a note to the captain of the plane, demanding four parachutes and $200,000 in twenty-dollar bills.
Once they were on the ground in Seattle, Cooper exchanged the 36 passengers on board for the parachutes and the cash. Cooper did keep several crew members as his hostages as the plane took off again, ordered to set a course taking them to Mexico City.
The most bizarre thing would happen somewhere between Seattle and Reno, Nevada, a little after 8:00 p.m. that evening. The hijacker did the incredible when he jumped out of the back of the plane with a parachute and the $200,000 in ill-gotten gains. The pilots were able to land safely, but Cooper had disappeared into the night and his ultimate fate remains a mystery.
There are many plausible theories out there as to who DB Cooper really was and where did he end up after his heroic jump from the flight in 1971. Some of them point toward an old U.S. Army soldier who had a criminal record, Robert W Rackstraw. Others have been brought forth by the family of a man who passed away, allegedly leaving a clue that he was in fact the notorious hijacker. Still, nobody knows for sure. One of the greatest questions was of his survival and when a portion of the money was discovered buried along Columbia River, it appeared Cooper did survive the daring air escape.
In recent times scientists have been looking into the recovered money, found near the river, to determine if the bills were in the water, suggesting Cooper may not have survived. Will science and algae someday be enough to solve the case?
“So, Suddenly, the light bulb came on and we wondered if we could use the different species of diatoms that we found on the Cooper bills a long time ago to determine when the money got wet and when the money landed on the bank of the Columbia.”
Tom Kaye-2020
Did Cooper survive, and if so, what in fact happened to him? Nobody really knows for certain as scientists, investigators, and armchair detectives all continue the hunt for D.B. Cooper, the hijacker that got away.
About the Creator
Jason Ray Morton
Writing has become more important as I live with cancer. It's a therapy, it's an escape, and it's a way to do something lasting that hopefully leaves an impression.
Keep reading
More stories from Jason Ray Morton and writers in Criminal and other communities.
The People of The State of California VS Orenthal James Simpson-An Unsolved Murder
I'll never forget going down to the main floor waiting room at Cottage Hospital in Galesburg Illinois on a warm summer day in June of 1994. I was there to visit my great-grandmother and desperately needed a break from family squabbling. In the waiting area I, like those already there, was distracted by the ongoing car chase playing out nationally. Knowing that it was unusual for a car chase to be covered coast to coast I stopped and listened to the reporters, amazed by what I heard; the Los Angeles Police were chasing down O.J. Simpson as a suspect in his ex-wife's murder.
By Jason Ray Morton 5 years ago in Criminal
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 5 days ago in Criminal
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.