|
Post by Michael on Jul 25, 2016 17:40:21 GMT -5
"I am Innocent": A Statement in the Death Cell Don Heinrich Tolzmann
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2016 20:45:33 GMT -5
Wow! The second book this week!! Plus there will be your book, Michael. 2016 is turning out to be a banner year for Lindbergh Case books.
I am so getting this book. I have never read Hauptmann's autobiography.
Thanks for posting this!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2016 22:42:07 GMT -5
Michael,
I started reading this book that Mr. Tolzmann published. In his introduction I read something that made me heartsick and dumbfounded at the same time. Mr. Tolzmann said that Mark Falzini had photocopied for him all the pages of the autobiography that was available at the archives. Tolzmann then inquired of Mark about the missing pages in the autobiography copy he received. Mark emailed back that they didn't have those pages in the carbon copy at the archives. Mark also told Mr. Tolzmann that all of Lloyd Fisher's papers had been burned by Lloyd's law partner and Lloyd's widow in the 1980's when Anna Hauptmann started filing her law suits in New Jersey.
We can only imagine what was contained in those files. Hauptmann trusted no man the way he trusted Fisher. I wonder why it was determined it was better to burn all those papers. Could there have been concern that Anna Hauptmann's attorney might have sought access to those files? Any thoughts on this???
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 15, 2016 5:25:55 GMT -5
We can only imagine what was contained in those files. Hauptmann trusted no man the way he trusted Fisher. I wonder why it was determined it was better to burn all those papers. Could there have been concern that Anna Hauptmann's attorney might have sought access to those files? Any thoughts on this??? It's a great question. Since Fisher had died, it's hard to know if this was something he would have wanted, or, at least may have talked about doing if the situation arose. For me it makes no sense because it was Anna who wanted the material although some of the stuff Fisher wrote about, and rec'd replies to, included quite a bit of "extra" stuff concerning their thoughts or opinions of specific people that nowadays would amount to the outrages comments contained in the DNC emails. So the efforts might have been more about embarrassment, and less about hiding facts. I certainly would have liked to see all of his material - remember, he later became Hunterdon County Prosecutor and had his Chief of Detectives run down any clues or tips that came into that office as well. (I've always thought that specific material may actually still exist somewhere in their attic or basement). You will also remember that I sometimes post documents penned out by Fisher, and that is because those copies exist from other sources (e.g. Gov. Hoffman, Ellis Parker, etc.) So if something was written to someone else, or from someone else to Fisher, they could still exist from that side of it. From all that I have discovered, and from what seems to come "out of nowhere" from time to time it appears there is so much out there to find and learn from. But this example shows that as time goes on, there will actually be less out there for us to find.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 16:09:15 GMT -5
Thanks Michael, for sharing your thoughts. Lloyd died in 1960 so all his files on the case were kept for 20 years before being destroyed. It is such as loss. It is like losing a whole segment of this case. I sure wish you could have researched through all his material too. You could have done so much with it. I thought about this when I got home today and I don't know if you know the answer but I will ask anyway just in case you might know. Did Fisher have possession of the subpoenaed files the defense received from James Fawcett or were they eventually returned to Fawcett?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 16, 2016 20:02:20 GMT -5
I thought about this when I got home today and I don't know if you know the answer but I will ask anyway just in case you might know. Did Fisher have possession of the subpoenaed files the defense received from James Fawcett or were they eventually returned to Fawcett? This is something I have never been able to determine Amy. I know the Courts ruled in favor of the Defense forcing Fawcett to turn over his books and papers that the Defense deemed " competent or material in the preparation and presentation of the appellant's defense." Although I remember that Silken's diaries were turned over, and that Fisher at one time had them, I cannot say what else was given, or if Reilly kept the material after he was fired. There was a stipulation in the Court Order which said the material was to be returned to Fawcett at the completion of the trial though. With Silken's diaries....they belonged to Silken and were only loaned to Fawcett so that might explain why Fisher had them after the trial. The key here would be to see all of the Fawcett files, which we know exists, but is in private hands. Since he was only in the case from September to October it wouldn't be anywhere near what Fisher had before it was burned, however, I believe it would still be important to review.
|
|