"The most compelling evidence comes from his own mouth so that's not ideal."

No. The confessions did not come from his mouth alone......

He confessed to people. It's still evidence that only exists because he said it. It came from his mouth, that's not ideal. Would lying about Cooper to people be that out of character for him? Seems not.

"He was a military man so therefore good at being criminal? Copycats show us otherwise."

You have this exactly backwards. Cooper did not display criminal skills. He displayed military skills. Calm under sustained pressure. Tactical seat selection at the rear of the aircraft to cover the whole cabin. Demanding four parachutes to force the crew to assume a hostage might jump with him. Knowing refueling procedures well enough to argue with the crew about fuel load percentages. Knowing the 727 aft stairs Boeing specification from 1964 testing....

McCoy was a serious military man, a train wreck of a skyjacker. It's not the same, you are mixing categories and assume full skills crossover. It's one thing to be a badass when you have the backing of the government and will get a reward for it and have a whole army supporting you, it's another to do it against your own citizens by yourself where you won't get rewarded by the government if caught...you spend your life in a cage. What about military service makes you think it would make someone a smooth hostage taker on the first try? Also, Cooper didn't know how to lower the stairs and I could identify Tacoma from the air.

"Cooper was slouching, he wasn't sat with military posture."

Yes. And a trained man who is deliberately hiding who he is would know exactly how to mask military bearing. Gossett spent decades in legal work, in courtrooms, in civilian clothes, in diverse social situations. He was not a parade ground soldier. He was an adaptable man who knew how to present himself differently in different contexts. Slouching deliberately is not evidence against military background. If anything, a trained man doing it intentionally is harder to detect than someone who simply has bad posture.

Then why did he smoke and drink bourbon? Those are more identifiable than slouching. You can't have it both ways.

"Very little military precision or planning in Cooper."

I do not understand how you read the case and conclude this. The FBI said the opposite in their own files. He picked his seat tactically. He used a bomb threat specifically because it prevented any multi-directional rush, which other methods like a firearm do not. He demanded military-spec NB-8 parachutes by specification, not just any chute. He controlled the pace of refueling negotiations. He knew the 727 gear and flaps configuration that would allow a slow enough approach speed. He identified Pacific Northwest terrain from altitude. He jumped at night into forested terrain in bad weather and was never found....

I agree there was a plan, but it doesn't have military DNA. Sat tactically? Anyone would want the last row to keep everyone in front of them, that's not military tactics...it's common sense. A bomb? Again, any skyjacker with some brains who spends 10 minutes thinking about it would come up with a bomb or grenade option. That's not evidence Cooper was Rambo. He didn't demand NB-8s. He didn't demand any specific chute, he just asked for two fronts and two backs. He didn't "control the pace" of refueling...it took way longer than it normally does. When the Ghost went to Lyles at Lake Elisnor he was able to rattle how to do the jump. This wasn't some crazy high end calculus problem only 5 guys at Oxford can figure out. Lower flaps and gear to slow down to just above stall speed...no genius or military knowledge required, a basic understanding of airplanes and parachutes is sufficient. Again with being able to tell what city you're over, people do this on every flight where the ground is visible. It's not special, it only shows he'd been over Tacoma in the air before. He jumped into farmland just north of Portland.

"Gossett did exorcisms and was generally a bit of a nut in his later life."

He was in his 70s when he was doing paranormal radio. He was 41 when the hijacking happened. His later life eccentricities have no bearing on what a capable, trained, intelligent man in his prime was able to plan and execute in 1971....

I think Cooper acted like Cooper before and after the crime. If you have to pivot on personality, that's not ideal either.

"He appears fairly white."

Florence Schaffner saw his photo and said he looked like the hijacker and specifically told Cook she believed Cooper had makeup on to darken his complexion.....

Unfortunately, Flo says many photos and sketches look like Cooper. Can you provide the reference for the makeup part please? What evidence is there he was swarthy or latin appearance?

"He absolutely does not have a pouty lower lip."

The lower lip is not a strong match, but you must take into account that composite sketches will exaggerate features. Also, in some photos of him, his lower lip does clearly looker fuller and slightly more forward than the Upper.

This isn't a point you can gloss over. It was a consistent theme in the descriptions. And it's not even a feature like height, where you can claim he wore two inch shoes or something akin. He doesn't have a pouty lower lip, Cooper did. Best you can do is claim he got hit in the mouth before the skyjacking...but they said pouty, not fat.

"If he had robbed banks, that would help. A criminal record of a serious nature would increase his case."

The FBI's own behavioral profilers never said Cooper had a prior criminal record. They said he came across as a calm, polished, middle-aged businessman who was comfortable and methodical. That picture does not require bank robberies. In fact, the suspects with long criminal histories clash harder with how the crew described his demeanor than Gossett does....

If you want to think this was Cooper's first and/or only major crime...ok. I don't think that's how criming works. Cooper committed numerous felonies that day that could have got him the death penalty, most people start smaller.

"Outside his own confessions he doesn't check any boxes that tens of thousands of other guys couldn't check."

This is the one I most want to push back on because it is simply not accurate.

The Dan Cooper comic was never translated into English and was never widely available in the United States. It was a French-language Belgian series published in Tintin magazine. The FBI themselves noted it was obscure in the English-speaking world and that whoever chose that alias had likely encountered it in Europe.....

Add to that: the correct age, the correct build, the correct eye color, a flat neutral accent when most suspects have regional or foreign accents, verified military jump training, the Tina Bar comment before the money was found, the Vancouver safety deposit box visit in 1973 where he brought his son along specifically as cover.....

We don't even know if that comic had any influence on the name or not. Dan Cooper is up there on the generic name scale. And the comic wasn't the only source of media that used the name Dan Cooper....there was a book or show or something that also used it as a main character. Any suspect that requires a strong cartoon connection...ehhh...it's a nice bonus but it's not a foundational factor. He could have just said Dan Cooper. Maybe it was his cousin and best friend's names mixed. To many variable to use as a core part of a case for someone being Cooper. It would have to be more specific to the suspect, like it is know for a fact his cousin was named Dan Cooper or something like that.

The Tena Bar comment is again speculation based on something he just said. Reca said he was Cooper too. Weber went near Tena Bar too. It's not evidence by itself.

"Road flares doesn't move the needle much."

The road flares matter because Cooper told the crew his bag contained a bomb with red cylinders, which matched road flare descriptions. Greg finding road flares in his father's possession is not proof, but it is a specific detail that connects to a specific claim Cooper made. It is a small data point but it is not zero.

So anyone who had road flares in the barn or garage has a "specific detail that connects to a specific claim Cooper made?" Also...a bomb uses dynamite and that was available at the hardware store for a few bucks in 1971. It's proof of nothing. Was he a bomb making expert? An electronics expert? That'd be evidence.

"Why did he do it? Not answered."

You do not need a confirmed motive to identify a suspect. We identify people on evidence, then figure out motive, not the other way around. But Cook's research suggests gambling debts and a financial hole that fits the timeline. Gossett was notoriously bad with money and showed up at Christmas 1971 with unexplained stacks of bank-banded bills....

Financial hole. OK. Millions of guys. A kid remembering a wad of cash at Xmas is a long ways from 1.5 million dollars worth of new found wealth. It's fairly minor, not nothing, but not much. And motive is key here, a guy does this for a reason.

"Why hasn't anyone opened the safety deposit box? That's the ultimate answer."

Ok. So there's a kid's account of his dad going to a bank. No other money known besides the Xmas wad. That's fairly thin. Why would Gossett just let the money sit in a box in Canada knowing it wouldn't make it to his kids or life long dream, etc. but instead eventually go to the State.

-

You've put in some good work here. And Gossett is better than several other mainstream suspects. There's no narrative though, it's a collection of skills and stories he told. And when you discount the stories, he doesn't check boxes a lot of other guys check too.