kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 2, 2012 14:20:00 GMT -5
Well, I have seen you make some pretty stupid claims and yet I am sure you are smart.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 15:24:54 GMT -5
Michael,
I believe Bornmann's first trip up to Hauptmann's attic was on September 25, 1934. He reported finding nothing on that trip. Bornmann then makes a second trip to the attic on September 26. He brings along two police carpenters and Detective Tobin. It is this trip that he notices the missing piece of floorboard that would become rail 16 of the kidnap ladder. Did Bornmann ever have the attic photographed as he originally found it before he ripped out what would have been the adjoining piece of floorboard? I think he locked that piece in a closet in Hauptmann's apartment after he removed it from the attic. I have only seen pictures where the entire length is missing from where rail 16 would have started right up to the wall with the window. It seems to me that a photograph of the attic as it was on September 26th, before anything was done to it by Bornmann, should have been made.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 30, 2014 16:16:00 GMT -5
I believe Bornmann's first trip up to Hauptmann's attic was on September 25, 1934. He reported finding nothing on that trip. Bornmann then makes a second trip to the attic on September 26. He brings along two police carpenters and Detective Tobin. It is this trip that he notices the missing piece of floorboard that would become rail 16 of the kidnap ladder. Did Bornmann ever have the attic photographed as he originally found it before he ripped out what would have been the adjoining piece of floorboard? I think he locked that piece in a closet in Hauptmann's apartment after he removed it from the attic. I have only seen pictures where the entire length is missing from where rail 16 would have started right up to the wall with the window. It seems to me that a photograph of the attic as it was on September 26th, before anything was done to it by Bornmann, should have been made. Amy, There is no picture of the Attic on the 26th or prior to that because nothing had been found at that time excepting: Nothing of value was found with the exception of several small pieces of wood and shavings and several cut nails that my possibly have a bearing on the case. Everything concerning the discovery of a missing piece which had been part of S-226 on these dates is completely false. S-226 wasn't discovered until much later, however, Bornmann back-dated his Report to make it look like this discovery happened earlier then it actually did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 16:44:06 GMT -5
Well, Michael, I am trying to wrap my head around this! I know that you cannot elaborate because of your book but if you can, could you say why it would be necessary to backdate his reports? What difference would it make if this discovery happened weeks later, say, when he had Koehler up to that attic?
Did Bornmann actually find the writing in the baby's closet(serial numbers, Condon's address and phone number)on September 25th or is this wrong also??
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 30, 2014 17:17:02 GMT -5
Well, Michael, I am trying to wrap my head around this! I know that you cannot elaborate because of your book but if you can, could you say why it would be necessary to backdate his reports? What difference would it make if this discovery happened weeks later, say, when he had Koehler up to that attic? I can elaborate. I've openly discussed this in the past but I think it was forgotten about, disregarded, and/or shrugged off. It seems obvious to me its important to claim it was immediately located to avoid any question about the evidence. The funny thing is that in doing so they created more questions. But the fact is they were looking for Ransom Money and not wood concerning the ladder. Bornmann saw the nails and small pieces then scooped them up as an afterthought because of his dealings with Koehler. It's once the nails finally make their way to Koehler that triggers future events in that regard. Did Bornmann actually find the writing in the baby's closet(serial numbers, Condon's address and phone number)on September 25th or is this wrong also?? No I am fine with the date on this. Of course anyone could challenge it based upon the fact they were willing to fudge their dates, as I indicate above, but I have all (4) Reports - to include the original - so I pretty much know what happened when I compare them all against one another as well as against what everyone else wrote in their Reports too.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Oct 30, 2014 17:19:15 GMT -5
amy I think inspector Bruckman found the writing in the closet. I met his grandson on the Lindbergh tour some years ago
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 18:49:08 GMT -5
According to Schrager's book, The 16th Rail,(page 151) Bornmann was on guard duty over Hauptmann when Lamb sent Bornmann to Hauptmann's apartment because Lamb had read a note written by Koehler, so he sent Bornmann, who had been Koehler's wood investigation partner to the apartment. Bornmann wrote in a report that Lamb told him he was to meet with Detective Tobin and two police carpenters to conduct a thorough search of the house and the garage and "to pay particular attention to any wood that might be the type that was used in the construction of the ladder." Schrager does not give a date for this quoted report.
The report doesn't say anything about looking for money! Is this report of Bornmann's another backdated report?
The nails that Bornmann found in the attic, were they different from the nails used in the ladder?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 18:52:03 GMT -5
amy I think inspector Bruckman found the writing in the closet. I met his grandson on the Lindbergh tour some years ago Thanks Steve. I think Bornmann found only the serial numbers on the closet door. You are right about Bruckman finding the address and phone number on the closet door casing. I checked Gardner book on this and he confirms that it was Bruckman who found all the writing in that closet and called it to Bornmann's attention.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 30, 2014 19:38:22 GMT -5
According to Schrager's book, The 16th Rail,(page 151) Bornmann was on guard duty over Hauptmann when Lamb sent Bornmann to Hauptmann's apartment because Lamb had read a note written by Koehler, so he sent Bornmann, who had been Koehler's wood investigation partner to the apartment. Bornmann wrote in a report that Lamb told him he was to meet with Detective Tobin and two police carpenters to conduct a thorough search of the house and the garage and "to pay particular attention to any wood that might be the type that was used in the construction of the ladder." Schrager does not give a date for this quoted report. The report doesn't say anything about looking for money! Is this report of Bornmann's another backdated report? It sounds like the "revised" edition of his 9-25-34 Report. Here's something from Hoffman's 1936 interview with Bornmann: Q[Ho-age]: ...Did Kramer come right up after you pulled that up or was he with you? A[Bornmann]: Kramer, Tobin and Enkler were all there together.
Q: He had his hammer with him? A: Yes, sir, they had their hammers. They were there for the purpose of pulling up any board or opening up anything.
Q: They were just scouting for boards? A: No, not for boards. We were looking for money. The nails that Bornmann found in the attic, were they different from the nails used in the ladder? They were the "cut" nails, and were different from the nails in the ladder. Koehler said once he got them he checked them with the original holes in Rail 16 and noticed they fit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 13:48:01 GMT -5
I am reading Bornmann's trial testimony and I have some questions:
Excerpt from Trial Testimony pages 2153 and 2154. Wilentz is questioning Bornmann about the missing piece of wood in Hauptmann's attic.
Q(Wilentz) - Well, there was no floor board there, was there?
A(Bornmann) - There was no board, and upon examining it further, I found that there were nail holes still in the beams, and between the 7th and 8th beam here, there was a small quantity of sawdust.
Q(Wilentz) - Now, where was that saw dust?
A(Bornmann) - That was between the 7th and 8th beam, right down in here, laying on the plaster.
Q(Wilentz) - Referring to the end of the piece of rail that still was on the floor, is that what you mean?
A(Bornmann) - Yes.
Q(Wilentz) - In between the two beams at the end of this rail?
A(Bornmann) - In between this 7th and 8th beam; it was also on this adjoining board there, a small indentation made by a saw where, when this board had been sawed off, the saw went into it.
My question about the above exchange is - Was it ever determined whether any of Hauptmann's saws made the cut in the attic floor that created the saw dust and indentation in the adjoining floor board?
Excerpt from Trial Transcript Page 2154. Wilentz is asking Bornmann about the attic floor board that had a missing piece.
Q(Wilentz) - Now, did Mr. Enkler and Mr. Cramer do anything to the remaining board in the attic when they were there with you?
A(Bornmann) - No sir. After examining that board I then removed about nine foot of this.
My questions about this exchange between Wilentz and Bornmann are: Does this 9 foot piece of attic floor become States Exhibit 226 used during the trial? Is this the piece of wood Bornmann had put in the downstairs bedroom closet and locked up? I find myself wondering why he removed this piece of wood at that time. Why didn't he wait for Koehler to look over the floor and make a preliminary determination about this piece of wood while it was in its original state as part of the attic floor?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 31, 2014 17:58:25 GMT -5
My question about the above exchange is - Was it ever determined whether any of Hauptmann's saws made the cut in the attic floor that created the saw dust and indentation in the adjoining floor board? No. The only comparison made were the saw cuts created when cutting out the recesses for the rungs. Koehler claimed he could determine the width of those cuts due to the fact the recesses were chiseled out and some were made deeper then the depth of them. Here, and only here, does Koehler attempt to tie in one of Hauptmann's 11 point saws saying it could have been used to make those cuts. My questions about this exchange between Wilentz and Bornmann are: Does this 9 foot piece of attic floor become States Exhibit 226 used during the trial? Yes, but I am not sure exactly how long it was off the top of my head. At some point the end of it snaps off when it is eventually pulled up. Furthermore, someone would eventually cut it down so that it would fit into the car for its eventual transportation to New Jersey. Is this the piece of wood Bornmann had put in the downstairs bedroom closet and locked up? I find myself wondering why he removed this piece of wood at that time. Why didn't he wait for Koehler to look over the floor and make a preliminary determination about this piece of wood while it was in its original state as part of the attic floor? I honestly think that's what really happened, and I personally conclude it wasn't removed until that day of Koehler's visit. There are several sources to consult about what happened, and when, but there are also conflicting sources concerning what happened to S-226. Was it removed and locked up in the closet, or was it removed and brought to the NJSP Headquarters? I can show both happened, yet, that board cannot be in two places at once. You see, when they fudged their dates they weren't exactly on the same page when writing their Reports.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2014 10:19:49 GMT -5
It is unbelieveable that Koehler and Bornmann didn't try to do this. This cut is the one that was supposed to be made by Hauptmann when he went into the attic to get the piece of floorboard the would become the infamous Rail 16; the ultimate piece of ladder evidence that tied Hauptmann to the ladder and the Hopewell house. They should have been anxious to make such a match between a Hauptmann saw and the cut floorboard. I think their failure to do this just strengthens the Purdy-Klein theory that electricians cut that piece of floorboard to run those electrical wires.
I agree with this. When Koehler is sent for in late September 1934 he goes to the NJSP Troop C headquarters to examine all the things that were brought there for him to examine, wood from Hauptmann's garage and basement, Hauptmann's tools, a triangular wood bracket that held up a shelf in Hauptmann's garage, some cut nails from the attic. I see no mention of an attic floorboard removed by Bornmann. In fact when Wilentz presses Koehler the first weekend in October about what he would be able to testify to in front of a grand jury this is what Koehler tells him:
1) He could talk about the tracing of the ladder rails 12 and 13 back to the National Lumber and Millwork Co. in the Bronx. Since Hauptmann had done work for them, he felt this was a compelling connection.
2) He could discuss how the cut nails Bornmann found in the attic(no floorboard mentioned) fit perfectly into the holes of rail 16.
3) He could testify that Hauptmann's largest plane had nicks in the blade that made marks exactly like those on the ladder rungs and rail 16.
This is what he was ready to testify to. It sounds to me like Koehler had not seen the attic or the floorboard wood yet. Are we supposed to believe that the piece of attic floorboard Bornmann claimed to find and remove before Koehler ever arrived back in NJ, was still standing locked up in a closet in Hauptmann's Bronx apartment?? Seriously???
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 1, 2014 19:07:12 GMT -5
Keep in mind that Koehler didn't arrive to Troop C until the 28th, and did not receive anything from that search until the 29th. He makes a detailed study of those items from the 1st thru the 4th of October. Nothing is mentioned about S-226, in fact, he is still offering theories about the origin of Rail 16 might be in his Report. A later report has Koehler saying they brought S-226 back to the Bronx from Troop C on his first visit to Hauptmann apartment while Bornmann claimed they retrieved it from the closet where he had locked it up. It's stuff like this that causes so much speculation as to the legitimacy of this evidence. Fortunately, when one knows the true situation then it's easy to see they did find this evidence but were lying about when it was discovered. It's why its so important to always give the true account of the situation then let the chips fall where they may. Making it seem as though this was immediately discovered, as a way to neatly tie a bow around it, shows without a doubt they were willing to cross the line but not in the way most people envisioned... At least not concerning Rail 16 anyway.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 2, 2014 9:13:04 GMT -5
the only thing I have to know is part of the ladder came from his attic and wood experts today back koelhers work. I tied a bow around it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2014 10:13:52 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2014 16:46:42 GMT -5
Michael, Here is a picture taken by Ronelle of the attic floorboard removed from Hauptmann's attic. The writing on this board says that it was removed from Hauptmann's attic on October 9, 1934 not September 26, 1934. Present were Koehler, Bornmann and Tobin. Do you know if this writing was done on that date or was this writing added later? www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/atticboard.jpg
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 6, 2014 18:34:35 GMT -5
The writing on this board says that it was removed from Hauptmann's attic on October 9, 1934 not September 26, 1934. Present were Koehler, Bornmann and Tobin. Do you know if this writing was done on that date or was this writing added later? It was Police practice to sign and date a piece of evidence on the day it's discovered. What you are noticing is one piece of several that have led me to conclude S-226 was never "discovered" on 9-26-34. I am going to muddy the waters a little further by saying I am not 100% sure about the 9th and think there's a chance it was actually the 10th. Anyway, here's another picture of S-226 showing both Enkler and Cramer also signed and dated it for the 9th as well:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2014 23:12:00 GMT -5
Thanks for the additional picture with the police carpenters signatures on the board. I see what you are saying about how the officers would sign and date a piece of evidence. I am really baffled as to why Bornmann would write about finding and removing that board from the attic on September 26. Maybe he was just trying to claim this find for the NJSP and not have to share it with Koehler.
Can I ask why you think this attic board discovery might have been made on the 10th instead of the 9th?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 7, 2014 17:24:10 GMT -5
I am really baffled as to why Bornmann would write about finding and removing that board from the attic on September 26. Maybe he was just trying to claim this find for the NJSP and not have to share it with Koehler. I really do believe it was to prove he immediately saw it the first time he was up there instead of having to explain why he did not. It was about simplifying it's discovery, just like we see with the chisel. It was easier just to say they were all found in the tool box instead of explaining some were found elsewhere. Again though, this is merely my opinion. Can I ask why you think this attic board discovery might have been made on the 10th instead of the 9th? Back when I went through all of this trying to discover whether or not Rail 16 was "framed" I read and compared everything there was at my disposal. Both the Reports and Testimony don't seem to support that Attic scenario as it involves Tobin, Enkler, and Cramer specifically on the 9th. Their names aren't mentioned in either Bornmann or Koehler's Reports for this date as having been with them. However, their names are all over both for the 10th. I believe it's Cramer's testimony that adds to this mystery further (I'd have to check). Its been a while since I dedicated any time trying to solve this particular point, but I brought it up because I don't like to make it look like I am in total agreement with something when I possess a degree of uncertainty. What I am convinced of was that both Bornmann and Koehler did go into the Attic on the 9th so Koehler could see where those nails came from. I am also convinced they both returned on the 10th with Rail 16, and that Enkler, Cramer, and Tobin were with them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 10:11:46 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me on this.It doesn't change the value of this wood evidence whether it was done on the 9th or 10th of October. It seems that there was a lumping together of various activities, especially when it came time to testify about things in court. Perhaps Wilentz wanted a more orgainized presentation, so things were joined together to appear they occured that way. I am not saying this is an OK thing to do. If you are willing to do that, what else might you be willing to do to make sure everything works the way you want it to? Something to think about!
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 1, 2014 6:37:09 GMT -5
Off topically, perhaps you or Michael know this Amy. Were all of the extra (newer) nail holes - about twenty - in Rail 16/S 226 attributed to the electricians?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2014 18:06:31 GMT -5
Off topically, perhaps you or Michael know this Amy. Were all of the extra (newer) nail holes - about twenty - in Rail 16/S 226 attributed to the electricians? Ok, Jack, I am not aware of 20 extra holes that were new on Rail 16 or S226(attic board). I have been doing a quick read through some of my stuff on these boards and I come up blank. How did you hear of these holes??? Michael, can you comment about this.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 1, 2014 19:20:07 GMT -5
It's in Norris pp. 221-3.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 1, 2014 20:40:51 GMT -5
jack, I own a small piece of one of the attic boards in that attic
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 1, 2014 20:52:24 GMT -5
VCOOL Steve. Did you get it from Hoffman?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 1, 2014 21:09:44 GMT -5
Off topically, perhaps you or Michael know this Amy. Were all of the extra (newer) nail holes - about twenty - in Rail 16/S 226 attributed to the electricians? The Electricians were never interviewed. The conclusions I've drawn about the removal of what would be Rail 16 by the Electricians doesn't have anything to do with the nails in Board 27. The position that there were too many holes in that Board boils down to why Koski, and/or his two Finnish helpers, chose to use that many nails. The Governor claimed that some were "new" because the wood fiber was "springy." In the event he was right which joists contained contained the holes where the fibers were springy? He doesn't say, and I've never been able to find the answer. What's factual is that most of the joist holes had a mix of wood fiber, saw dust, and attic dust in them preventing the nails to go flush. These joists were cut out then brought to Columbia University to be split open and examined which was overseen by Prof. Work who was considered a neutral observer. Once the fibers and dust were removed from these holes they were all deep enough to accommodate the full depth of those nails. These "plugs" appear to have been a result of both the Police pulling out and replacing the nails repeatedly for investigations and photos, along with the Governor's Investigators doing the same, repeatedly, with nails and other probes. Since the Rail 16 portion of Board 27 was almost immediately removed by the Electricians, I would expect the fiber to be a bit more springy in those joist holes (if it was even possible to have determined such a thing back then) but Hoffman's comment isn't enough to use as proof of anything at all.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 1, 2014 21:45:33 GMT -5
no jack gov Hoffman was full of crap in that attic. I got it when I was up there when my partner gave me a piece of board that was given to him by the owner 9 years ago
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 1, 2014 22:38:52 GMT -5
Hoffman said he had a few of the split pieces but I always figured the police had the rest of the board - heck, you got it Romeo! Just another amazing day of Lindbergh kidnapping study.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 1, 2014 23:37:47 GMT -5
I don't have rail16 pieces or the main boards just a random piece and its southern pine like the rest of the attic
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 2, 2014 8:17:56 GMT -5
Steve: Do you know if Samuelsohn was ever definitely linked to the ladder or to Hauptmann. People are a little confused about the quality of it's construction. It wasn't meant to be a leaning ladder. It was what I call a supply ladder, mounted to a wall or roof which, because the widely spaced rungs was climbed quickly by construction workers. I don't know why Samuelsohn would would have use for such a thing but he told someone (police?) that he built it as well as Condon's box. Now part of the wood is definitely linked to BRH so has there ever been a link between the three men? The ladder would have worked if held straight up and down, and Hauptmann has very good alibi, so I have been figuring that somebody came to Richard and says he needed a ladder in ten minutes and BRH gave them that one - possibly with instructions on how to use it. This would make him a major participant in the crime because he'd know at least one person who did it. Also the construction of the ladder doesn't seem to be of finishing carpenter (hauptmann) quality but it may be of Samuelsohn's. If the fingerprints were only compared to known criminals - perhaps only in NJ since was all handled by NJSP - all three men would have been missed. Remember Hauptmann could have been caught sooner if the police had the gumption to closely examine auto license cards and DL applications. Jack
|
|