|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 2, 2014 9:27:01 GMT -5
well my friend kelvin keraga built a replica by hand with hand tools. I got to climb it at the crime scene against the house. I am to heavy for the ladder I went half way. besides who was going to catch my fat ass if I fell. however if your under 200 pounds I see no problem climbing into the window. its not easy coming down out of the window though. as far as samuelson, I don't really know the outcome of his claims I have newspaper articles but I don't think he was connected to the ladder. I will have to read up again maybe mike knows more
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Dec 2, 2014 17:16:31 GMT -5
Don't see how that could have been done, except by pure luck.
Can you please elaborate on which procedures the police could possibly have used to pick out Hauptmann's auto license card or driver's license registration out of the tens of thousands on file, before his license plate number was written down by the gas station attendant days before he was apprehended? Remember, all the looking through the cards had to be done manually back then, since there were no computers.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Dec 2, 2014 17:24:22 GMT -5
The observation here is that it would be practically impossible for anyone but a light, tall, long-legged and acrobatic individual to have used such a flimsy ladder with the rungs so far apart, mounted or not mounted. Furthermore, there was no evidence that we know of at the Lindbergh house of the ladder ever being mounted.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 2, 2014 18:35:52 GMT -5
You're both missing the point which is clearly laid out in my posts.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 2, 2014 18:42:45 GMT -5
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. As usual, I remembered more over the course of 24 hours that I think would be misleading if I didn't post... Pope actually cut one of these joists open in front of the Court of Pardons predicting the Fibers surrounding the nail holes would be "loose and stringy" and once he did was proven to be correct. His claim was they should have been "compact, smooth, or oxidized." However, I have nothing to show a 'control' or comparable joist was cut open to show what would be expected. My position remains the same when considering all the variables I mentioned earlier.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 2, 2014 21:45:19 GMT -5
mike I think hoffmans investigators plugged the holes so he can show wilentz the nails wouldn't go in when they all were in the attic. I suspect arch loney, gov hoffmans wood expert had something to do with it
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 3, 2014 13:14:03 GMT -5
I thought that too - there was also "grit" in the holes.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 4, 2014 6:32:18 GMT -5
mike I think hoffmans investigators plugged the holes so he can show wilentz the nails wouldn't go in when they all were in the attic. I suspect arch loney, gov hoffmans wood expert had something to do with it Steve, The depths of these holes were being measured way before A.L. even made a trip up there. Ho-age was one of the first to take note of the depths of those holes. If you saying it was Wilentz's idea to remove those joists so the holes could be checked that wouldn't be true. That suggestion came directly from the Governor's side. So if they had plugged the holes on purpose the last thing they'd want is for this action to take place.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 4, 2014 8:34:07 GMT -5
no mike I didn't say wilentz did that I just said it was shady on the governors part about those nailholes. we know he was a thief and forger in later years I wouldn't put it past him
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 4, 2014 17:49:34 GMT -5
no mike I didn't say wilentz did that I just said it was shady on the governors part about those nailholes. we know he was a thief and forger in later years I wouldn't put it past him What's worse Steve: Embezzlement or Tampering with Defense Witnesses during a Capital Murder case? How about using testimony that is known to be false during a Capital Murder case? So you see, it's not logical to argue this in one place if you aren't prepared to do it everywhere it applies.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 4, 2014 19:30:52 GMT -5
I think what parker and Hoffman did was worse. I think hauptmann got what he desearved. the evidence was to strong
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 6, 2014 10:52:08 GMT -5
I remember there were some questions about the the thickness of a ladder board (rail 16?) in one of the Hauptmann not guilty books. Were those resolved by the men who did the definitive investigation (from the attic)?
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 6, 2014 15:22:01 GMT -5
my friend kelvin keraga did a very detailed study of rail 16, a great report on it
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 6, 2014 19:41:32 GMT -5
Romeo: Is that study in these pages?
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 6, 2014 20:15:13 GMT -5
no I have a copy if you want me to send you a copy
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 7, 2014 10:27:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Dec 7, 2014 11:09:07 GMT -5
thanks jack can read it
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Dec 7, 2014 14:12:46 GMT -5
Thanks Michael.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 8, 2014 17:52:46 GMT -5
I remember there were some questions about the the thickness of a ladder board (rail 16?) in one of the Hauptmann not guilty books. Were those resolved by the men who did the definitive investigation (from the attic)? The original claim that a difference in thickness between Rail 16 and S-226 came from Wood Expert Arch Loney. Measurements were taken in Koehler's presence and he was asked to explain this difference. Koehler's response was this: He agreed S-226 was thinner in places but not "anywhere near 1/16 inch." He suggested measuring the thickness, not at the edges but near the adjoining ends because Rail 16's edges had been trimmed off. When measured in this location he said Rail 16 was just "a shade thinner." He claimed this was due to "uneven shrinkage" because the board was of "low quality" and had been "poorly dressed." Professor Hazeltine claimed his measurements showed that Rail 16 and S-226 were the "same thickness as nearly can be stated."
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 12, 2015 16:05:58 GMT -5
To All:
I'd like anyone to explain the significance of each of these attic board findings made at the climactic scene at Hauptmann's former Bronx attic, on March 25, 1936, where Gov. Hoffman and Wilentz's respective investigating teams confronted each other face to face. This was one week before Hauptmann was executed. Strangely, despite these new findings discovered that seem to be exculpatory on the issue of the origin of Rail 16, Hauptmann went to his death quickly thereafter. (The material in italics is quoted from Lloyd Gardner's "The Case that Never Dies," paperback edition.)
Leon Hoage's tape measurements revealed that Arthur Koehler's original floor plan of the attic had been in error. Koehler had plotted out the attic to show that the carpenters who first laid out the attic had placed twenty-seven boards exactly in the right place so that the distance from the eaves on both sides was precisely eleven feet, four inches. His document was yet another "proof" that Hauptmann had taken a board from the attic to build the ladder. Hoage found, however,, that with the twenty=seven boards in place, the distance from each side was not equal; it varied by at least four or five inches.
(Can't understand why these specific measurements would make a difference, other than their general impact on Koehler's expertise and credibility.)
Hoage charged that rail 16 could not have been part of the original attic floor because even when one accounted for the supposed planning it was still too wide.
(Too wide or too narrow? I thought that rail 16 had been allegedly narrowed from its original width as a floorboard in order to construct the rail of the ladder. The floorboard would have been too wide to be used as a ladder rail?)
Next there was the question about the number of nails in S-226 and rail 16. Hoage asked Koehler how many surface nails there were in the other boards; when the wood expert from Wisconsin started to look, Hoage raised his voice - "don't look!" Wilintz turned on the governor's man like a wildcat. Who did he think he was? "I'll be goddamned if you're going to talk to Koehler that way." ... That board was the first one laid, Koehler said, and therefore, since all the others would be pushed up next, it had to have many more nails than the others, all driven through the surface. The governor's group argued as one that no board needed that many nails, even if it was the toeboard. There were twenty-four nail holes in the joist where the board- or boards - had been. Moreover, there were many more nail holes driven through S-226 than rail 16, even accounting for their different lengths. How is one to account for the difference? The possibility that rail 16 was fabricated evidence loomed up so that it could be plainly seen in the dust and tumult, it one wanted to look. (Endnote: There were fourteen nails in the 136 inches of S-226, or one every 9.7 inches, while in rail there were nine nails in 106 inches, or one for every 11,7 inches. In S-226 five of the nine joists contained two nail holes, and in rail 16 only two of seven joists contained two nail holes.)
(Didn't the original rail 16 have only four nail holes? Furthermore, there seems to be one more nail hole in the joists (total of 24) than there are nails in the two boards combined. How can they explain that?)
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Jan 12, 2015 16:51:10 GMT -5
this is old nonsense about rail 16. pictures taken in 1932 match current pictures before they even knew about the attic. they put rail 16 against the joists and the nailholes matched perfectly. I was up in that attic and I cant see the police doing any funnystuff because it was a bitch to get up there through that closet. yes rail 16 had four nailholes on it in 1932
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 16, 2015 10:54:55 GMT -5
(1) Pictures taken in 1932? Who would have had reason to take any pictures of Hauptmann's attic 2 1/2 years before he was arrested?
(2) Regarding the photo of the two adjacent floor boards in Lloyd Gardner's book, (A) would anyone know when the photo was taken and (B) was that photo presented as evidence by the prosecution at the Hauptmann trial?
(3) Granted, it was a tight squeeze to get up to the attic. But I can't see the relevance of that fact to either Hauptmann's capability of doing things in the attic or Bornmann's capability of ripping off part of a board, which in fact he admitted that he did.
(4)Who made the extra nailholes in rail 16 between the time the ladder was first found and the time rail 16 was looked at in the former Hauptmann attic in March 1936, and WHY WERE THOSE EXTRA NAILHOLES MADE?
|
|
|
Post by garyb215 on Jan 16, 2015 13:16:49 GMT -5
The 1932 pictures of rail 16 clearly define it as part of the kidnapping ladder we have today. For me I can't doubt that. It all relies if board S 226 match consistency to the attic. Doesn't it? The nail holes and grain of wood match.Thats a given. Bornmann was playing around in the attic and even took a board out. Even cut it to fit his car to take it away. So in my mind the only way Bornmann could fake the evidence is to find the board elsewhere and place it there. Why would anyone including Bornmann do that? Let alone the ability and the odds to do that. The only way would be if the investigators knew who made the ladder then conspired to protect him (if it was someone else other than Hauptmann). Then use that against Hauptmann.The chances of that are just not thinkable. Are they? I've resigned myself to believe made a ladder and it was used in the kidnapping but continue to believe Hauptmann had only a role in the scheme as major as it may be. There is just so many bits of the case that are beyond one person.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Jan 16, 2015 17:13:51 GMT -5
no hurtable, I meant they took photos of rail 16 before Hauptman was arrested. I don't think any hanky panky was done up there, but we know Hoffman and his cronies tried a fast one but didnt get it done by filling the nailholes with sawdust
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 16, 2015 17:32:39 GMT -5
Even if you buy the argument that rail 16 originally came from the Hauptmann attic, no one on the prosecution team ever connected any of the other rails nor any of the rungs used in the ladder to Hauptmann. The ladder was made out of at least four different species of wood. So how would Hauptmann have obtained any of the other pieces of wood that went into the construction of the ladder? The prosecution never even offered a guess on that!
Furthermore, if there were four nailholes in rail 16 in 1932 when the ladder was found on the Lindbergh property, how did it come to be that by March 1936, when investigators from both AG Willentz's team and Gov. Hoffmann's team were in the attic at the same time, the board purported to have been rail 16 had NINE nails in it (hence at least nine nailholes). How did it come to be that at least five additional holes in rail 16 were made in over that time frame between March 1932 and March 1936?
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Jan 16, 2015 17:49:28 GMT -5
your so wrong hurtable read kevin karagas report of 6 years of research on rail 16
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 16, 2015 18:07:44 GMT -5
I've resigned myself to believe (Hauptmann) made a ladder and it was used in the kidnapping but continue to believe Hauptmann had only a role in the scheme as major as it may be. There is just so many bits of the case that are beyond one person. Absolutely beyond one person. Even if you buy the argument that rail 16 originally came from the Hauptmann attic, no one on the prosecution team ever connected any of the other rails nor any of the rungs used in the ladder to Hauptmann. The ladder was made out of at least four different species of wood. So how would Hauptmann have obtained any of the other pieces of wood that went into the construction of the ladder? The prosecution never even offered a guess on that! This isn't true Hurt. Koehler lied on the stand in order to connect up Rails 12 & 13 to Hauptmann: lindberghkidnap.proboards.com/thread/319/selective-amnesia
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jan 16, 2015 19:24:46 GMT -5
And as to different species of wood being in the ladder, wasn't there a scrap pile of lumber in Hauptmann's basement, which contained leftover wood from the house's construction and/or some attic floorboards that could've been pulled up and discarded after electricians had been doing some work up there? I mean, it always struck me as weird that Hauptmann would've cannibalized his attic to build a ladder when, being a carpenter, he would've had access to all kinds of lumber, but wouldn't this basement scrap pile solve that?
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 16, 2015 21:09:58 GMT -5
Was the basement scrap pile you bring up ever mentioned at trial? Does it appear in any of the police or prosecution documents or exhibits? Does anyone know what species of wood were present in that scrap pile?
Even more significantly, why would a carpenter build such a shoddy ladder that hardly anyone could climb without the ladder breaking, that had rungs placed so far apart so that only a very tall person, if anyone, could use it, and that consisted of at least four different species of wood? It just doesn't make sense. And oh, yes, Hauptmann's fingerprints were not on the ladder (nor were footprints consistent with his found on the Lindbergh property.) Wilintz's alleged MO(s) for the purported Hauptmann kidnapping are simply illogical - including the chisel, on which no blood was found, as a murder weapon.
The appropriate jury verdict for Hauptmann should have been not guilty as charged for kidnapping and murder, with a recommendation to remand Hauptmann back to New York to face the extortion indictment. But of course, that would have been very politically incorrect.
BTW, I stand corrected on rails 12 and 13, re which you point out that Koehler lied. But there are still all the rungs and three other rails of the ladder which were never linked to Hauptmann.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Jan 16, 2015 21:31:08 GMT -5
the fact is rail 16 fit on the joists and the nailholes lined right on target. I think Hauptman went up the ladder he built and did the crime. ive been hearing this rehashed stuff for 20 years
|
|