|
Post by rick3 on Apr 14, 2008 8:08:15 GMT -5
Val O'Farrell was a former ace detective and head of a detective agency bearing his name in Spring 1932. O'Farrell spent months studying the LKH. One of his views was that vis-a-vis Jafsie, McClean, and Norfolk gangs was that the kidnap and these extortions were "separate and apart". (Daily News May 27, 1932). lindberghkidnap.proboards56.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1174305054O'Farrell opined that the search for the kidnapper(s) should begin and end in Hopewell NJ. Not such a bad idea. A local crime. But O'Farrell also thought that Charlie jr, or his double, was dumped on Mt. Rose Road within 30 minutes of the crime. We should all give up on this falsehood and move on....its impossible. The strawman that more searches would have turned up Charlie's body where it was found on the nite of the crime should also be abandoned....permanently;. Alan Hynd, Ellis H. Parker and Al Dunlap did their homework and calculated the daily temps from March 1st to May 12th--daily averages and monthly averages DO NOT PERMIT THE EXTENSIVE DECOMPOSTION OF THE BODY FOUND BECAUSE IT WAS TOO COLD OUTSIDE IN HOPEWELL DURING MARCH, APRIL AND MAY. t temps above 50 approaching 70F are required. (unless CJr had already been dead for 3-5 months?--Dunlap) Therefore, although O'Farrell had some interesting theories about the crime...the fleeing kidnappers DID NOT "see the lights come on at Highfields, panic and dump Charlie along the Princeton Hopewell Road on the nite of March 1st, 1932". Why, because weatherwise it is a climatic impossibility. Now, obviously, this punches a huge hole in the Lone Wolfe Prosecution of the State, although it is still possible that BRH drove around with Charlie Jr. in the wooden trunk on the back of his Dodge and brought him back later on so that his body could be returned to the Family after the ransom was paid in the Bronx? It is also high time we all abandoned this Alice In Wonderland Fairy Tale. We need to develop and discover a whole different explanation for Charlie Jrs. return to Hopewell at some later date....and possible MOTIVES for doing so? Michael--what are the references to Henry Ellerson's car burning up in the Palasades, NJ the day before the baby was discovered?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 14, 2008 12:11:55 GMT -5
Like it or not the, the trail leads to the Bronx. The "complex" symbol and Hauptmann make it so.
Why does one have to negate everything based on the location that the body was found? Who says it was "dumped" there?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 14, 2008 15:45:31 GMT -5
Kevin--whats not to like or dislike? This is a "kidnap-murder" case? Like it or not the, the trail leads to the Bronx. The "complex" symbol and Hauptmann make it so. Why does one have to negate everything based on the location that the body was found? Who says it was "dumped" there? - As you can see from the quote below--tha main attraction to the Bronx for 30 months is Jafsie Condon:
- Its not really the location in Hopewell thats the problem, its the cool weather conditions that inhibits extreme decomp for 72 days. So although Charlie Jr. may have been dumped elsewhere and moved to this site later by Charlie Shippell--that elsewhere has to include "heat"above 70 degrees, eg indoors.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 14, 2008 17:02:29 GMT -5
Good to see someone is left to keep the "hoax" fires burning, Rick! It's not Jafsie who makes the Bronx kidnap central, it's the note writer. How scientific do you think this weather/body analysis is? I mean just how much faith can you put in this given the other variables and the lack of thorough data on body composition rates at the time? Shippel?? So is it a local crime or a Bronx crime?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 14, 2008 18:57:32 GMT -5
Although there was a Bronx element to the crime, I don't know if I am willing to give up on a local connection as well.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 14, 2008 19:35:31 GMT -5
I guess it all depends on how one defines a "connection". I still don't put much stock in the decomposition estimates. Just too many unknowns.
Still, a predator is a predator and they usually hunt in familiar territory.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 15, 2008 9:10:51 GMT -5
Good to see someone is left to keep the "hoax" fires burning, Rick! It's not Jafsie who makes the Bronx kidnap central, it's the note writer. How scientific do you think this weather/body analysis is? I mean just how much faith can you put in this given the other variables and the lack of thorough data on body composition rates at the time? Shippel??So is it a local crime or a Bronx crime? Kevin--all Biodeterioration and decomposition are microbial processes. Mostly bacteria and fungi. Microbiology is my degree and profession. So, I can speak to this subject with the same confidence you speak about ladders. Temperature is the most important control of microbial processes--irrespective of substrate. So we put our cultures into the fridge at 35F to inhibit growth indefinitely. Once you estimate the daily temps for 72 days you can make the call. I would say it is iron clad and you can take it to the bank. As a point added in proof--you seldom end up with a " blackened skeleton" even out in warmer temps so an additional "hint" that heat is involved in the degradation of the baby. Its not witchcraft--its real Med School Forensics. See here..... web.archive.org/web/20010803012225/www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/body.htmlAs for the now famous symbol and ransom notes--CAL and Rosner confounded their origin immediately by taking them FROM Highfields TO THE BRONX in search of an extortion plot or gang?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 15, 2008 11:37:52 GMT -5
Even an expert's determinations are only as good as his information. I can give my opinion, for example on the ladder construction and break, but it still is only an opinion and since there is so much unknown that has to be factored in. No one knows what environment the child was subjected to for that entire period. And just as Michael often points out regarding handwriting, one can only go so far with photos. So I don't see anything near a slam dunk regarding the body. Could you testify in court under oath regarding this? I just don't see that the information is adequate.
A copy of the note is a far cry from the original. How, for example, would you explain the tear match in the sheet? The perfect hole alignment? The language? The order in which the "singnature" was made? Etc, Etc. That's a tall order for a quick forgery from a copy, even the original, for that order. Also I thought you have often previously have claimed that the Mersman was used as a template. Did they carry that off to the Bronx as well?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 15, 2008 15:31:03 GMT -5
SCIENCE VERSES PRACTICAL COMMON SENSE IN CRIME DETECTION by Al Dunlap, Editor of The Detective, Chicago, IL 1931 (pages 322-327)
There seems to be a pretty well-defined controversy raging in the country between some of the exponents of science on the one side and a few of the old-time detective heads on the other. This was exemplified at the Duluth convention of the International Association of Chiefs of Police when Captain Duncan Mathewson, for many years the very able and successful Chief of Detectives of the San Francisco Police Department, arose and said: "Much has been said and published about the educated college policeman and detective and it is all bunk. Give me the practical detective with actual experience in handling criminals and criminal cases and with ten such men I will do more work than any college professor or so-called expert can do with one hundred of his trained nuts. Most of those that I have seen couldn't put a harness on a mule, let alone catch a crook." Then he added, "There is an overabundance of self-styled scientific detectives and crime experts in this country. They would have a gullible public believe thy are so scientific that the crooks would respond to engraved invitations to visit police headquarters and surrender. Just how long the public will stand for this rot is a question."
Whereupon, Captain Donald Leonard of the Michigan state Police, an equally able crime investigator, came to the rescue of science, took umbrage at Captain Mathewson's remarks and advocated the fullest use of modern scientific methods in the detection of crime. This clash of argument between Mathewson and Leonard is merely one surface indication of the controversial question is uppermost in the minds of the American public and that crops out constantly in the press and at various conventions of public officials. In my humble opinion, it is just one of those misunderstood problems in which each side is right from his own viewpoint and both sides wrong unless their conclusions are properly qualified.
In this discussion , I am limiting the conception of "science" to those various branches of scientific research that we hear so much about in connecting with modern crime detection such as biology, pathology, toxicology, bacteriology, parasitology, and the like. And by "practical common sense" I have in mind the natural aptitude for crime investigation , the genius and skill for getting results displayed by experienced detectives of the so-called old school.
For the past several years, this country has been flooded with highly colored reports, aiming to show that in Europe they have some kind of magic wand called science with which they are able to solve all crime mysteries and that all there cops and detectives are scientists; whereas in this country the old fashioned detective is ignorant and incompetent and should be displaced by college-trained scientist. Every police station in Europe is pictured as a great crime laboratory wherein the detective soles crime problems just as a chemist in America analysis bootleg liquor. Almost invariably these fiction stories lay particular stress upon the seemingly miraculous accomplishments of Scotland Yard through the use of their elaborate crime laboratory.
About a year ago I had occasion to travel through seven European countries and view at close range the alleged miracles performed by their scientific crime laboratories. It might surprise the American public to learn that Scotland Yard has no scientific crime laboratory of any description: that their detectives are not scientists and that exactly as we do in America, that is, employ the services of a specialist such as a chemist to analyze blood spots and the like. In this respect , at least, the police department of Rochester with its modest crime laboratory is far superior to Scotland Yard. And so is the police department of nearly every progressive city in America. As for the limited few crime laboratories that do actually exist in the various countries of Europe, the quantity and quality of equipment used and the results accomplished, are decidedly disappointing in view of the extravagant claims that have been publish and broadcast throughout the civilized world. Europe has produced several brilliant and outstanding authorities in various phases of scientific crime investigation and they have made important contributions to the literature of the subjects treated. So has the USA. But with two or three exceptions, their much boasted crime laboratories are generally overrated and bear a striking resemblance to our old-fashioned dime museums originally started by PT Bar-mum and containing wax figures of characters such as Jack the Ripper and Jesse James. Much of the wrong impression now prevalent in America about the European miracles wrought by science are unquestionably due to the interesting reports of cases solved by analyzing the wax from the suspects ears and scrapings from under his fingernails. These reports are not doubt, authentic and true: but the fact remains that probably not more that one case n ten thousand could be solved , especially in our larger cities by this particular methodology.
As against these stories, our experienced detective can point to numerous cases solved purely through common-sense methods and without wasting valuable time and money examining ear-wax and fingernail scrapings. I shall cite 2 cases:
Several years ago, a brutal murder of a coed student took place at night on the campus of Northwestern University at Evanston, Ill just north of Chicago. It was a so-called baffling crime mystery, With all the great scientific minds of Northwestern available, it was decided that this crime should be solved by science. The various professors got together for a conference , went into a huddle and became "scientific detectives". They photographed the scent of the crime , searched thoroughly for clues, analyzed the soil and everything found nearby and adjured to a future date for a further scientific conference/ meanwhile, an old-time Irish detective assigned to the case by the police department, using only practical common-sense methods gained by long experience, solved the crime, brought in the murderer and had a complete confession--all within 48 hours. He simple noted carefully the description of the watch missing from the victim's handbag: then found where a small boy purchased such a watch from a local bootblack for 50 cents. The bootblack was the murderer.
Another murder occurred a few years ago in Camden NJ. When John Smith, Chief of Police, arrived at the scene, a crowd had gathered and two of his men had a suspect handcuffed. They advanced scientific reasons for believing they had the right man. Chief Smith, an experienced investigator was not satisfied. He questioned various bystanders. Incidentally, he observed a stray dog scampering about the scene. He paused a moment, then gave the dog a vigorous kick in the rear. The dog ran down the street with Chief Smith hot behind. At last the dog turned into an alley and through the back door of a shanty. Entering the shanty, Chief Smith found a surprised local man crouching in the corner and exclaiming that he didn't mean to kill the other man.
Numerous cases of this sort that happen in everyday police work tend to indicate that practical common-sense methods still have an essential place in crime detection work. ....It is almost axiomatic that any person is better of with a college education that without one, but unless a person is endowed by nature with the true detective instinct, all the college training in the world will not make him or her a successful crime investigator. In the lanquage of Shakespeare: "You cant make a silk purse out of a sow's ear".
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 15, 2008 16:07:33 GMT -5
You typed all of that??
So are you saying that your scientific analysis is inferior to intuition? I have no problem with that, as long as the dog you kick doesn't bite you instead of leading you to a solution.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 16, 2008 6:58:13 GMT -5
Before we abandon Charlie Jr in the shadows of the cold, dark woods I want to mention one other controversy. How far was Charlie Jr's body(?) from the roadway? - Al Dunlap (Was the Body of Lindbergh Baby Found?) says only thirty feet! And he went to the site immediately when the News broke in 1932! So he was there/
- Ronelles Hoax Board says 45 feet?
web.archive.org/web/20010803012225/www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/body.html
- Jim Fischer (The Lindbergh Case) says 75 feet?
- Lloyd Gardner (TCTNDies) says "less than 100 yards"?(isnt that the size of a football field)
- Anthony Scaduto(Scapegoat) 75 feet ([page 62)
- The NJSP diagram showing the body was way far in between the streams is pretty far in....maybe 150 feet?
- Who is right? Does it matter?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 17, 2008 1:56:17 GMT -5
I also found two sources, one in a newspaper, that located the babys body 75 feet from the telephone wires strung to Highfields for the new phone connects. But we dont know exactly where the phone lines were strung? Possibly down the gravel road that runs at an angle South off of Hopewell-Princeton Road and down nearto Shippell's (aka Sheppel, Schoepfel's) shack which was also listed as approximately 1/4 mile from the gravesite? All this activity makes the surroundings more interesting: - The telephone lines were mentioned in a letter to Cheif Williamson on March 10th and brought to light by Ellis Parker. The anonymous writer from upstate NY was abandoning the kidnap and heading back to Canada. Parker reasoned that the body was returned after the stringing of the wires?
- This area also played some role in the kidnapping of Garrett Schenck by the PI John J. Devine from Penna. "Shortly after the Lindbergh kidnap, a Hopewell fish monger suspected by private detectives of being a participant in the crime was seized in NJ, carried to Pennslyvania and held there for 76 days" Dutch, p151.
But this case did not constitute a violation of the Federal Kidnap Statute because no ransom was demanded"?(JEHoover)
- One reason offered for this kidnap during the Trial of Divine et. al. in central Pa was that Schenck had seen two cars along the road in the vicinity of the baby dump the day before Charlie Jr. was found? Apparently, no followup on this was published?
- So all of this added together makes this particular location and the distances between the roads, the telephone lines, Shippels shack, "the holes dug" and the baby's body pretty important. Surprizingly, I have never seen any map or drawing pinpointing the relative locations of these various aspects of the crime?
- Even the distance of the baby's body from the road is up for grabs? Dunlap went there and says 30 feet, Gardner says less than 100 yards in his book?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 17, 2008 5:18:52 GMT -5
These were the lines run to Highfields for the NJSP. Troopers would cruse past them and look for anything suspicious to ensure no one was trying to tap into them. It's why I don't believe the bag was on the side of the road until sometime closer to May 12th.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 17, 2008 6:56:17 GMT -5
Rick, I thought Schenck was from Far Hills. No matter.
Instead of focusing on how far the body was found from the road and when the bag found it's way to the road, why not spend a little time looking at the spot where the body was discovered and the unique characteristics found there? The body was not in a grave nor was there evidence of prior excavation. It was a shallow depression with leaf clutter. Now look at what is immediately adjacent to that spot. Go to the source.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 17, 2008 8:53:08 GMT -5
Kevin--yes exactly Why not.....? Thanks for the hot tip? As a matter of fact I have been to the site as directed by the NJSP twice.....its a slight hillock in a "V" between two streamlets? It doesnt always look like the news photos? - Its next to impossible that the burlap bag "found its way all by its lonesome to the road"?? Loose that idea.
- As for this hot lead: "why not spend a little time looking at the spot where the body was discovered and the unique characteristics found there? "K-con
- How can anyone look at "the spot" if noone agrees where it is exactly, preferably, in the 21st century by GPS?
- You sure are good, just like the Mersman, of making wild suggestions to others you dont want to follow thru on yourself?
- Give me a break....you remind me of my 2nd wife and her honey-doo lists?
- "No matter"
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 17, 2008 9:53:40 GMT -5
How could you have visited the precise site if you are questioning where it was??
Your right Rick, ignore my suggestion. It's far too relevant to actually discovering something. Keep rehashing the old stuff from bad sources. How's that going anyway?
As for following through with my suggestions, I have for the most part. Have you?
I'd say more, but I am getting tired of this stupid acrimony.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 17, 2008 15:28:48 GMT -5
Never fear the unknown Kevin--Ive worked out a compromise: - 30 ft seems a little too close to the road for me(Dunlap)
- 300 ft seems way too far from the road for me(Gardner)
- But luckily, 300 is one order of magnitude larger than 30ft.
- And so on a logarithmic scale....or bellshaped curve the middle would be......log of 300 = 2.48 X 30 = 74.3! whew!
- So Im going to go with 75 feet from the road! Just right!
- this might then account for the telephone lines actually running down the side of the main road? 75ft away! Viola!
- and about 15' flex could account for measuring from the center or the edge of the road too?
- Its called the Goldilocks and the Three Bears Compromise/
- I also looked on zillow.com to see the actual site but there are just too many trees.
- If the heavy hitters and experts can't agree how can thee and me?
- Acrimony be damned!
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Apr 17, 2008 15:53:57 GMT -5
Hi Rick~~ (your reply #11) Agreed. Have often thought how fascinating a map would be showing relationship of those sites you mentioned. Highfields/Featherbed Ln/the town/Mt Rose grave site/Shippel's shack (where he said the hole was dug), with the distances showing. The map you submitted was good, as far as it went and I keep a copy of that at hand. Somehow there just oughta be a way!! It would surely help my perspective and, I feel sure, others who could never go there.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 17, 2008 22:09:24 GMT -5
Like I said, it's not the distance that matters. It's what lies at the distance.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 18, 2008 6:03:44 GMT -5
There are possibly conflicting reports concerning whether the child was placed into a "depression" and convered with leave or a very shallow grave was "scooped" out and the leaves were either place on top or blown there by the wind.
I believe Walsh said it had be "scooped" out but I'd have to check.
Have I posted Trooper Carmony's map yet? If not let me know and I will.
**Proboards is going to do a "Software Update" on the board in the near future. I don't know how long or if it will improve the board... I kinda like it the way it is now.... Cross your fingers.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 18, 2008 6:51:53 GMT -5
I would have to say negative to an attempt at digging or "scooping" out a grave. There are several reasons why I say that. Besides the most obvious one , that digging a "depression" is just nonsensical. If you are prepared to dig a grave, you dig one. You don't dig a "depression" and you don't fail to complete the most important backfill. Digging in the woods at that time of the year means the excavated soil gets on top of the leaf clutter. It also means that surface roots get severed. And if you are dumb enough to pick a spot near a tree, you will be expending more energy severing roots than actually digging. This organic material either gets mixed together when you backfill or it stays on top of the leaf clutter if not. Look closely at the pictures of the body and of the scene. No excavated material and the leaf mat is still undisturbed. So is it believable that the body was placed in a "shallow depression"? Does that even make a little sense? What, was that a gesture of consideration ? Because it sure wouldn't achieve the purpose of a burial.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 18, 2008 14:06:04 GMT -5
Hello Michael....I actually found my copy of Trooper Carmody's report dated May 13th 1932. Its pretty weird that he found part of a New York World Telegram & Son newspaper dated March 1st 1932 at the foot of a tree about 50 yards into the woods from the spot where the baby was found? What possible purpose could that have had "out in the middle of nowheres" other than to reinforce the identity of the baby body? I don't know? Did Carmody estimate how long he thought the newspaper was out there?
II. I also wanted to mention, just in passing, that if you draw a straight line from Highfields to White Cloud Farm on Cold Soil Road that exactly in the "red middle" is the finding place of the baby's body on Mount Rose Hill nearto Shippells shack. This is somewhat reminiscent of some cockamamie idea put forth by--maybe Jafsie, that if you positioned one Symbol hole over Next Day Hill and one over BRH's house the middle hole was over.....the Hudson River? Yet another fascinating mystery to contemplate.....
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 19, 2008 7:27:13 GMT -5
Putting it all together; Maybe the gang were having their coffee and reading the morning paper on the Mersman table they set up in the woods after using the holes to make the note and determine the exact spot to place the body. That would also explain the later repairs the table needed, it was being moved around constantly in rough conditions.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 20, 2008 7:17:54 GMT -5
Al Dunlap, Startling Detective, May 1933, quoting from The Official Statement of the NJSP after the finding of the body (page 63):
"Statements of William Allen and Orville Wilson say that the body was pretty well concealed by leaves and dirt. The skull had a hole about the size of a quarter just above the forehead"
This hole can be clearly seen in the photo of the body 6 pages past p.210 in Gardner...The Case that Never Dies.
Thats a pretty big hole? Big as a mouse or mole!
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Apr 20, 2008 8:09:29 GMT -5
Hey guys, like Condon said to the cops when he saw Chetel, "Boys, you are getting hot!" Now let me just add my own input here while I'm picking up on the collective energy. I think the Mersman table brace was also used as a kind of spacial variance and remote viewfinder with the first and third holes being utilized. The group of kidnapers would pass it around the table taking turns, each determining the best location for disposal of the body. Of course, one would certainly have found it difficult to drink coffee while holding the brace up to one's forehead and all, so why not employ the missing thumbguard and use it's ribbon to tie it firmly in place? It only makes sense after all. A consensus is reached, a shallow depression located, the leafblower brought out and Bob's your uncle, it's off to the Union Hotel to meet up with William Allen and Orville Wilson for a big platter of Hauptmann Fries. Alright, I know it's bit farfetched, they didn't have leafblowers back then...
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 20, 2008 8:29:39 GMT -5
Good points, Joe! I wonder if the bag found by the road was utilized as a makeshift coffee filter?
Watch out, though. These type of theories seem to be reserved for only a select few and you may get "Smitten" ( or is that smote?) for your effort.
Rick, are you suggesting that the rodents may have been involved? That could explain the undisturbed Nursery and lack of fingerprints! Kelly should have checked for "droppings" instead of latents.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Apr 20, 2008 9:06:51 GMT -5
This Kevin, is exactly the kind of synergy we need to see more of when discussing the case. I hadn't even thought about the burlap bag in this whole scenario. Do you know the year instant coffee was invented? If the Mt. Rose meeting preceded that date, there's no question we have a slam dunk on your coffee filter theory. As a Red Rose tea drinker myself and considering the bloodstains found on the bag, can you see the alternate possibility connection I'm starting to evolve here, ie. I was there in a past lifetime?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 20, 2008 9:42:37 GMT -5
You may be right, Joe! I hadn't thought about the tea connection. You know the thumbguard would be a perfect tea bag holder. I seem to remember reading that Lindbergh loved his coffee. Perhaps this kidnapping was an attempt to blackmail him into switching camps and promoting the drinking of tea. Let's remember where he eventually moved to and what that nation is known for. If so,this is truly a global conspiracy to change the drinking habits of ordinary Americans and swing the monetary and political pendulum toward the tea producing nations while destabilizing the coffee moguls in Latin America. It also might help explain Condon's trip to Central America.
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!!
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Apr 20, 2008 10:11:32 GMT -5
Excellent Kevin, I just intuited we were on the verge of victory. And it appears now that the British are set to invade America again, so clearly you'll be wanting to get down to your local recruitment office. Didn't Jack recently say "two if by sea?" How did we miss that? I'm dumbstruck. Sir, we have just solved this case.
(yawn)
Mmmm, so what's next? I'm kind of partial to Cornwell's solution to Jack The Ripper, any other suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 20, 2008 11:28:14 GMT -5
Actually, its not even necessary to dig out your copy of Gardner to see the perfectly round hole in Charlies Skull: Look here.......over on the right edge... web.archive.org/web/20010803012225/www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/body.htmlweb.archive.org/web/20010803012225/www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/body.htmlThis just goes to show you how misdirection works--look over here, then look here and miss the obvious. David Copperfield would be proud....so would any magician worth his salt. I wish I could think of just one way, short of drilling, to get a perfectly round hole in that location....maybe a lead plug from a shot gun during deer season? Seems unlikely......deer season is in the Fall. Maybe this is the Hole in the Hauptmann Case--Major Frank Pierce was talking about?
|
|