|
Post by rita on May 27, 2006 1:06:21 GMT -5
Very interesting on Susan's revelations of Samuelson's description of more than one person picking up the ladder wood. Does this mean that Wilentz deliberately hid some kind of conspiracy? I wonder about percentage statistics on kidnapping of famous people, because most cases I've read about were kidnapped by terrorists or opposing political figures?
|
|
|
Post by susancandy on May 27, 2006 1:49:10 GMT -5
The Lindbergh Kidnap Case was a landmark case for the United States, in that , as I am sure you know Congress passed the Lindbergh Kidnap law, making it a federal offense to kidnap anyone. Terrorists as we know them were not, I feel, in the US in the early 30's. All the terrorists that I have read about in the late 19th or early 20th usually acted alone. In the early part of the 20th century people were kidnapped all the time. I know that Wilentz was hiding something but I have not yet found out what. My feelings on this are shake the tree very hard and then stand back and see what falls out. You have to take this case step by step, disassemble it and slowly with major research put it all back together in the proper perspective and there still might be some answers to be found.
|
|
|
Post by rita on May 27, 2006 3:06:54 GMT -5
It seems that some political machine masterminded the kidnap. There was a battle line drawn between Linbergh Family and the Roosevelt's as Lindbergh had expressed dislike for Roosevelt until his death. It seems to onlookers strange that Lindbergh went directly to Rosner to retrieve his son, but that would have been the most direct route if the people behind the kidnap were the Kennedy, Roosevelt, Onassis, Bootleg Connection which CAL interfered with and opposed.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 27, 2006 5:48:59 GMT -5
Susan/ thanks for your comments. If confirmed, Abraham Samuelsons story literally "blows the lid off the LKC"!
Its easy to see that neither the prosecution or the defense would want to hear from Samuelson at the Trial of the Century. The NYTimes reports--"cabinet maker will not testify" in Jan 1935?
1. If BRH comes in to order the ladder wood "with a female companion" 3 days before the snatch--well thats not too good for Reillys "Fisch story".
2. If two other men pick up the ladder wood, say on Monday Feb 29th, well that speaks volumes about the Lone Wolf Theory of the prosecution.
3. The simple fact that Condon, Jafsie, CJ lies thru his teeth about who made the mystical ransom box speaks volumes about his veracity as a witness in this case. He has known Samuelson "for years" and later reveals to Oursler that he knew all about BRH ordering the ladder wood (see Gardner page 374-375).
4. Only two weeks separates the ladder wood purchase from the ransom box purchase? "From the same cabinet maker in the Bronx". What a coincidence?
5. It might appear to the untrained eye of a new recruit that a key witness is being buried by both sides of the aisle in 1935. Whos going to blink first: VDers or Hauptmenites?
6. Since Samuelson appears totally upfront and honest about his testimony have the BOI, NYSP, NJSP known the identity of the woman and 2 men who came into his shop for 75 years?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 27, 2006 10:58:09 GMT -5
I think you will find the LKC tree to be quite robust and deep rooted so I doubt the method of trying to shake it will yield much (of course there are always the LKC squirrels waiting to drop a few nuts on your head). To gather any fruit from this tree you must climb up into the canopy and discover what lies hidden among the leaves and branches.
Anarchists, black hand, KKK, abolitionists, etc etc
That is one big "if"
Exactly who is it good for? It doesn't speak volumes about the intelligence of our "masterminds" either.
.
Wouldn't that depend on just how many cabinetmakers were in the Bronx and their specific location?
Hauptmenites, that's good!
|
|
|
Post by rick3 skeptic 4 on May 27, 2006 12:25:13 GMT -5
kevin "556" I exalt thee! For adding to your total posts!
kevin
the squirrels always chase the nuts too! Most phiolososphical?
masons, prohibitionists, perverts, priests, etc
Not really, even you must admit that if BRH "orders" the ladder wood, and two other guys pick it up then it will surely be astounding to discover that i) all this was known by the prosecution in 1934-5 and ii) some amongst us have known it for years. We could obviously begin to speculate who the woman was (Betty Gow, Violet Sharpe, Gerta Henkel, Lena Aldinger or someones wife? ) and the 2 men as well (Digrasi and Schleser)? Likely a couple of crooks that scared the Beehesus outta AS.
Not really, unless there is only 1? This would surely firm up the notion that Condon knows someone in the kidnap gang as per Michael.
Thanks/ it would have been more PC to say: strict constructionists vs. activist judges?
Oh PS/ this isnt an "us vs. them" exercise its sposed to be a search for Truth?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 27, 2006 12:35:03 GMT -5
I still have to put together a Samuelsohn "time-line" so bear with me until I get some time to do so. I may need Susan's help to correct me if I get something wrong, or if she has additional information told to her by Samuelsohn that I don't have listed in any of the reports....
After reading your post I went to my files to check out the subpoenas and trial bills to see if Samuelsohn was listed and found nothing.
Now it should be remembered that Wilentz paid Curtis and his Lawyer Pender to be on "stand-by" in the event the Defense was able to produce evidence that involved more then one person in this crime. Curtis was to show up to Court and testify one of the men he dealt with was Hauptmann. This was first mentioned in A & M's The Crime of the Century and my research shows its true and Pender is listed as having rec'd $65.00 from the State.
Fisher, who was one of Curtis's Lawyers during his trial, also thought about bringing Curtis in - simply to enter into record that he had been convicted of dealing with a Kidnap Gang and thereby undermine the State's position that Hauptmann was a "Lone-Wolf" because obviously both can not be true yet Hunterdon County already had one conviction and sought the other from the opposite position.
So I was thinking maybe the State had Samuelsohn on a "stand-by" role quite similar to the one Curtis enjoyed.
Anyway, if Samuelsohn was in Court then someone issued a subpoena and it doesn't appear from my records that the State did so. This leaves the Defense who, by all newspaper accounts, were slamming him as an "attention seeker." Maybe Susan knows if he did he make it to the Flemington Courthouse who issued the subpoena and/or gave him a trial pass.
Back though to why the State wouldn't use him..... Because if he was selling Hauptmann actual pieces of lumber used in "the" kidnap ladder then it undermines Koehler's testimony which links National to that lumber and Hauptmann. It may also have confused the jury concerning Rail 16 and definitely ruined the "Lone-Wolf" angle. Remember, they need Hauptmann killing CJr. on site while in the commission of the Burglary.
Thanks Kevin. So much for that idea.... However - it may be something along these lines. I think as it stands, with your angle and area of expertise, you are the boards best bet to figure out what all of this lumber may have been purchased for as cut in this way. I still think if it isn't "the" ladder then its connected to the case somehow. Samuelsohn was certain. Another fact to support him is how specific he was concerning the amount of lumber especially when he knew the ladder was only (3) sections.
I think so as we appear to be thinking outside of the box (no pun intended) which I think is necessary if we are going to have a chance to solve this particular angle.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 27, 2006 13:40:28 GMT -5
Samuelsohn account and why more info could clarify matters. We all have our methods of discovery and mine is simply to attempt to put myself in a similar position and go through the actual process or event in question. Now I take this account of someone going to Samuelsohn's shop and requesting 4 pc of 1" x 4" x 7' pine and put myself in that situation. If someone did come to my shop with this request my first response would be; What is this wood for? I , and any other cabinetmaker would have to ask this question for several reasons. One, I would need to know the appropriate grade of wood to select. Is it paint grade or will it be natural? Is it structural or is it cosmetic? More importantly, though, is the usage of this wood in terms of the final product. If I was told it is to be used as trim or for a general construction project I would kindly direct the customer to the nearest lumberyard where they can select or have the yard man select for them all the 1" x 4" s they may desire. The only way I could justify this order is if the customers required this wood for a cabinet or furniture project. here lies the essential difference between joinery and carpentry. For general carpentry purposes most wood milled and sold by a lumberyard will suffice. However, for cabinetmaking and fine woodwork this off the shelf wood is unsuitable in it's present form. It is cupped, bowed, twisted, and uneven. The first step in cabinetmaking is to "straighten" all this wood out by the use of a jointer, saw, and planer. Thus to end up with a straight 1" x 4" suitable for cabinetry you must start out with a board thicker and wider which will be planed down and jointed to the finish size. It is a time consuming process and can sometimes waste a lot of wood, but it is necessary. Needless to say it also makes that 1" x 4" a lot more expensive than it's counterpart sitting on a lumberyard rack. That being said, I don't see how Samuelsohn could not have asked this question. So I am immensely puzzled by the story of him acquiring a 1" x 12" to rip down. All he is doing is providing that which could be ready bought at any yard. How can he even make any profit on this? The other aspect of this story which seems odd to me is the very fact that Hauptmann, a trained carpenter, could make such a request from a cabinetmaker without feeling like an idiot. If a local carpenter came to my shop and requested this order I would have to think the guy doesn't have both oars in the water. And, believe me, word of that type of thing gets around
|
|
|
Post by mjrichmond on May 27, 2006 14:50:28 GMT -5
<<<Back though to why the State wouldn't use him..... Because if he was selling Hauptmann actual pieces of lumber used in "the" kidnap ladder then it undermines Koehler's testimony which links National to that lumber and Hauptmann. It may also have confused the jury concerning Rail 16 and definitely ruined the "Lone-Wolf" angle. Remember, they need Hauptmann killing CJr. on site while in the commission of the Burglary.>>>
With all due respect, Michael, if Samuelsohn could testify that he sold the wood for the ladder to Hauptmann, they did not need Koehler's "findings" regarding National and it would not have changed any testimony he could give re: Rail 16.
As you know, most of what Wilentz produced at trial attempted to connect Hauptmann to the extortion because they had little to connect him to the kidnapping itself (hence the "lone wolf" theory). Samuelsohn could have changed that. The fact that Samuelsohn claimed someone was with Hauptmann when he bought the wood would not have changed the theory or the importance of Samuelsohn's testimony. The State would just argue that the person happened to be there and was not connected to the crime. (If prosecuting this case, I could even turn the argument to my advantage.)
Think about it - according to Samuelsohn, he could make the only direct link between Hauptmann and the ladder. Not between Hauptmann's attic and the ladder or between a particular lumberyard and the ladder. Between Hauptmann, himself, and the ladder. That makes him the single most important witness Wilentz had. Not some kind of "back-up", but the one and only witness who could literally place the ladder (or at least the wood for it) directly into Hauptmann's hands.
If the story as repeated is accurate there is no waySamuelsohn would have avoided the stand.
Mjr
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 27, 2006 15:40:36 GMT -5
I think we are looking at this a little differently. If Samuelsohn is called to testify it "scraps" all of Koehler's testimony concerning the ladder. Next, with Samuelsohn comes the cross-examination possibilities you just don't have with Koehler on the stand. Furthermore - put Samuelsohn on the stand and now you have to deal with the fact Condon lied to Police about him. This now calls into question their "Star Witness's" creditability. Additionally, you would have the exact same thing going on that is now taking place here, that is, why Hauptmann is using a Cabinet Maker to purchase these items? Sure, you could try to argue away those individuals seen with him but that's easier said then done if you are trying to prove Hauptmann is the only culprit here - especially when no one believed that claim. And if you scrap the "Lone-Wolf" scenario then you open the door to doubt concerning the actual murder and the technicalities which comes with the idea of multiple confederates - not to mention how it ruins their data "proving" Hauptmann had the entire $50,000. I think it turns out to be a bigger can of worms then the State wanted to deal with. He did ask what this was going to be used for and the only reply was 'for a certain purpose.' Excerpt from the famous HALLAM report: "Why was Samuelson not called upon to testify when he says that Hauptmann ordered the wood cut for the ladder, but that two other men called for the completed work?" Here is a photo that (I think) Sue shared with me some time ago:
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 27, 2006 16:39:54 GMT -5
You would have me beat hands down if you could manage to post under one name. What's with that anyway? Oh, and don't forget all your posts on the other boards.
Didn't mean to be philosophical there, just metaphorical.
]
There is that big "if" again
I would say there could be a lot more than one and Samuelsohn could still be the most convenient.
What about "Hoaxster"
Oh PS/ this isnt an "us vs. them" exercise its sposed to be a search for Truth? rick?
Please
Michael & MJR, I will leave you guys to wrestle over the legal stuff ;D
So how does he proceed with a non- answer like this? Does he guess what grade of wood to purchase? Does he try and straighten it out? Try going into a local cabinetmakers shop, there are some excellent ones around New Hope and make this request. I already know what response you will get. And why does Samuelsohn purchase a 1" x 12" ? Is he getting paid for the waste as well?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 27, 2006 17:47:01 GMT -5
Kevin "560"--I exalt thee again! For seeing the humor in answering everything I said with absolutely nothing! Try content.
The Samuelsohn Issue is getting better and better. And as yet, noone is disputing any of it! In the first place, Samuelsohn is clearly right out in the open with no axe to grind. Just like Dr. Erasmus Hudson the fingerprint expert and Ben Lupica! Now whom did they testify for?
For anyone who suspected unfair play in the LKC before this takes the cake. Withholding a prosecution witness who doesnt accentuate the Party Line. Although at first blush it further convicts BRH, "he only orders the wood" as far as we can tell? The other two guys pick up the wood. Even I could defend the orderer until such time as the other two testify. And speaking of "fingerprints"--were Samuelsohn, and the Two Pickup Artists prints on the ladder? This would have been good stuff.
Now on top of this, Samuelson recognizes the wood a week or two after the kidnap from photos in the news. If the pickup men are Mobsters, then this seals his lips.
BUT, our star witness, Jafsie Condon tells Fulton Oursler from Liberty magazine that he knew that BRH ordered the ladder wood from Samuelson. WOW! Now that wood be a revelation? What exactly did Jafsie know and When pray tell did he know that? The whole case is now spinning in midair? I think at that moment Jafsie would officially become an unindicted co-con-spirator? Now JFC is compounding the lie about the ransom box.
For all those who cut Hoover and the BOI out of the LKC, this whole fiasco was uncovered by Agent Thomas H Sisk in his effort to find who made the box in September 1933. The box which was never recovered unless its the one still sitting on JFCs desk?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 28, 2006 6:47:26 GMT -5
Thanks Rick! And doesn't contact the police?? With a child's life at stake??? Not even an anonymous tip? ?? So Hauptmann and Co are mobsters? Even assuming this IF remember a child's life hangs in the balance. I don't know about you, but I would have to contact the police, there simply is no option here for an honest person with a conscious, regardless of the consequences. FYI regarding the selection of Samuelsohn. Keep in mind that many cabinetmakers do not operate an open shop. That is they are not available to the general public and don't deal with walk-in trade. So if you take all the cabinet shops in the Bronx and filter out those closed shops and then filter out the least convenient you might find the selection of Samuelsohn to be not so much of an odds breaker. So how does he proceed with a non- answer like this? Does he guess what grade of wood to purchase? Does he try and straighten it out? Try going into a local cabinetmakers shop, there are some excellent ones around New Hope and make this request. I already know what response you will get. And why does Samuelsohn purchase a 1" x 12" ? Is he getting paid for the waste as well? I guess an analogy is this; you need some 9mm rounds for target practice and instead of going to the local gun/ ammo / sporting goods store, you pay a visit to a custom gunsmith shop. He doesn't stock ammo, but he does custom re-loading. You don't exchange any niceties, you simply ask fora box of 9mm ammo. To which the gunsmith asks; What do you want it for? To which you respond; For a certain purpose. No more is said, no contact info is taken, the gunsmith simply says ok and calls up the local gun/ammo/ sporting goods store and orders a case of the most common 9mm ammo, then puts aside a box for you. Does this seem plausible ?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 Trooper4 on May 28, 2006 7:12:42 GMT -5
Kevin/ Im totally with you on this one! Its not making good sense!
I was just going to write you and ask: Can Samuelsohn recognize the ladder wood in newpaper photos. heck he cant even tell the species? Is he recognizing the grain? Sounds implausible to me?
If BRH is trying to cover up all his tracks with gloves and phoney handwriting then whats he doing ordering the ladder "in person" when the wood expert can recognize the wood? And His Face!
Condon is a bit too quick to jump onto the "BRH bought the ladder wood" band wagon later on. Condon tells Fulton Oursley that he knew Samuelson before the snatch for years? What? No wonder Myra Hacker tells the media we arnt talking about that anymore?
I think there is a boloney sandwich in here somewhere? I cant see it but I can smell it/ Lets say that Abraham doesnt want his name involved--well then why doesnt he send an anonymouse letter? Or phone up from a booth to Save Charlie?
happy Memorial Day!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 28, 2006 7:49:17 GMT -5
This is my fault... I sit with an entire folder of information in front of me and should realize most don't have access to what I do. If you look at my other posts concerning Samuelsohn you will see that he claimed to have been told exactly what they wanted, including drawing paper with measurements on it. They asked for "cheap" lumber. I brought up the specific question concerning "what" these pieces were to be used for simply to answer your question - at face value.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 28, 2006 8:11:11 GMT -5
Even so, how does one reconcile his lack of response to the authorities? Gang or no gang, intimidation or not, I still can't believe that in this most publicized crime with a child's life in jeopardy and every law enforcement officer in the tri-state region mobilized, that Samuelsohn or any other honest citizen would not have somehow found a way to inform them. Here the possible threat posed by the kidnapper(s) must surely be out weighed by the conscious of the cabinetmaker. Also consider that it would be understandable, as a witness, to fear for one's life whether you inform or not.
|
|
|
Post by mjrichmond on May 28, 2006 10:37:52 GMT -5
<<<If Samuelsohn is called to testify it "scraps" all of Koehler's testimony concerning the ladder. >>>
Only the part about National. Nothing else would have to change.
<<<Next, with Samuelsohn comes the cross-examination possibilities you just don't have with Koehler on the stand.>>>
Really? Why? Does Samuelsohn have something exculpatory to say (like Hahn)? If Samuelsohn says something other than what he told the police Wilentz would not have had to worry about it, would he. After all no one got to see what any of the witnesses told the police. If Samuelsohn is the reasonable, trustworthy, confident person he is portrayed, cross would not be a problem. What could he say that would so important that they would keep the damaging testimony out?
<<<Furthermore - put Samuelsohn on the stand and now you have to deal with the fact Condon lied to Police about him. This now calls into question their "Star Witness's" creditability.>>>
Have you seen anywhere other than reports, statements, or later books where it is revealed Condon claimed not to know who built the box? If not published at the time, no one would know that he lied, would they?
<<<Additionally, you would have the exact same thing going on that is now taking place here, that is, why Hauptmann is using a Cabinet Maker to purchase these items?>>>
That would have been a good questions. In my opinion, however, that is not enough to keep out the only testimony linking Hauptmann, himself, directly to the ladder and therefore the kidnapping.
<<<Sure, you could try to argue away those individuals seen with him but that's easier said then done if you are trying to prove Hauptmann is the only culprit here - especially when no one believed that claim. And if you scrap the "Lone-Wolf" scenario then you open the door to doubt concerning the actual murder and the technicalities which comes with the idea of multiple confederates - not to mention how it ruins their data "proving" Hauptmann had the entire $50,000. I think it turns out to be a bigger can of worms then the State wanted to deal with.>>>
I disagree, Michael. This evidence would have been too important for Wilentz not to use and talk his way around. As I said, it would be the only evidence connecting Hauptmann and the ladder - and therefore the kidnapping, itself.
Mjr
|
|
|
Post by mjrichmond on May 28, 2006 10:41:05 GMT -5
<<<And as yet, noone is disputing any of it!>>>
I am.
Mjr
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 28, 2006 11:25:38 GMT -5
Mjr and kevin/ OK, one hour of spinning and hottub have cleared out the cobwebs? DYBT? I think the Samuelson-ladder testimony is a red-herring or just plain contrived. Its just too far out there. [Which simultaneously makes susancandy baloney as well?] Michael raises the issue of Curtis and his attorney waiting in the wings to dispute or add to "extra members of any gang"....so maybe that whats Abrahams role as well? Backup Insurance. You know how easy it is to get confused in the LKC: like Norfolk VA and Norfolk CT; or New Haven, North Hartford and North Haven? Well I think thats whats in play here too? Frist off, Samuelson comes on board only making the "ransom box"...well thats confusing enough with the Antique Ballot Box up in Jafsies office and the 5 rare woods, and the size equal to a shoe box? BUT also in one account (?) and extra or second ransom box is oredered? Sure, but what for? Since the ;money doesnt fit in it? Then, out of a clear blue sky, the ransom box maker supplies BRH with the ladder wood? Do You Believe That? I dont think so? Just far too convenient? Its not to wonder that Myra and Dr. John head for Panama on that one? Also, AS makes multiple ladder replicas, many of which are only 2 feet tall? DYBT? Lets see now, if you were a Jewish Polish Immigrant and AG Wilintz wanted you to say that BRH ordered the ladder wood--well what would you say? "I dont think so"? Since Condon is baloney, Curtis is baloney, Means is baloney and the $50k ransom for a $30 million dollar baby is baloney...well then AS and the ladder wood is baloney as well! I might just as well echo that YES-- kidnap of the Lindbergh baby by a bunch of amateurs from the Bronx is also baloney. In the NYTimes report of 14 Jan 1935 BRH comes into AS's shop on 20 Feb and "two young men" pick up the lumber on 27 Feb? Who would just let their identities "go" for 75 years? Both Condon and AS think its within their power to withhold names in a kidnap/murder/ execution? That right there is baloney. Two pees in a pod?
|
|
rick PS for mjr and kevin
Guest
|
Post by rick PS for mjr and kevin on May 28, 2006 13:29:05 GMT -5
hello guys/ I like your arguments but you aint seen nuttin yet?
Just waite until you see the Timeline!
Thomas H. Sisk discoveres Abraham Samuelsohn "one whole year" before BRH gets arrested? In September 1933! Whats going on with that?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 28, 2006 14:00:53 GMT -5
What do you think is up here? Perhaps "Susancandy" can shed some light on this whole affair. Personally, I an becoming more doubtful.
|
|
|
Post by gary on May 28, 2006 14:30:04 GMT -5
I think there is merit to the story. I've been looking at Samuelsohn over a year now. I have no problem with accepting it. There is no reason to lie. He doesn't seem to have the inertia of publicity or reward. I also have no problem, if it so, to accept Hauptmann improved or built the ladder.
I feel Wilentz felt had enough evidence to nail Hauptmann and was not willing to take a risk on this. First of all it may suggest a gang which Wilentz wanted no part of. Secondly it suggests doubt who built the ladder.
I am a little confused if Samuelsohn built the ladder or if the pieces were ordered by size for someone else to build. His relationship with Condon would be good to know. If Condon is a friend perhaps he respected Samuelsohn's fears and tried to protect him from those fears. This would answer the peculiarity he had when asked about Samuelsohn.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 28, 2006 15:24:01 GMT -5
What or where is it ? Where is this wood, for that matter?
Are you sure? Does it have to be a lie? What would you call not coming forward with information regarding a child's life and a crime? Is that not a lie by omission? Would anyone on this board act this way?
In such a politically important trial? Is there ever enough evidence for a prosecutor?
If he did he is a lousy cabinetmaker.
In short, you can't have it both ways. Samuelsohn is law abiding and honest. Samuelsohn stands by while a child is murdered. Samuelsohn is a craftsman. Samuelsohn is a wood butcher. Samuelsohn is a reliable witness. Samuelsohn is an un -reliable witness. What is the truth here?
|
|
rick private detective
Guest
|
Post by rick private detective on May 28, 2006 20:30:28 GMT -5
well now, I have a few questions?
1. did Abraham recognize the wood by the pattern of his saw cuts...it wood not take a "rocket scientist" to realize that you are notching for ladder rungs? I suppose thats possible. Does the $14.00 include sawing? Rungs and all? For a 3 parter? With dowels? 3 days before the LKC?
2. Does BOI agent Sisk and JJ Manning know right aways that Samuelsohn also saw bRH or someone unknown "order the ladder lumber" or is that kept secret until 1934? If Samuelson identifies BRH 3 times then its before AG Wilitz goes for the death penalty and the lone woof theory?
3. So what if Death House O'Reilly thinks hes a publicity hound--hes testifying against his client? Are AG Wilintz and DHOR picking the witnesses together...like Hilda Braunlich?
4. One step forward and two steps back? The Lindy Shuffle/
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 28, 2006 21:22:27 GMT -5
Hmm/ well Im having a few second thoughts? Lets assume for just a moment that susancandy is legit and that Abraham is telling the Truth. Could this blow the Prosecutions case? Maybe Michael is being too kind about the damage it could do to Bornmann and Koehlers wood discoveries? Possibly prove even perjury and a frame of Rail 16? That could be bad for the Prosecution==right?
But waite--what about the timeline? when exactly does Abraham spill the beans? September 1933 or September 1934 after BRH is arrested? This is the critical question. "timing is everything'? One thing we can be certain of is that AS did not cut Rail 16 out of BRHs attic!
It does not make much sense for all the hullabaloos about Rail 16 if Abraham can nail BRH to the ladder. But maybe, just maybe, Abraham does not come fully forward until after December 1934? How do we know when--since AS has all but been buried for 75 years. There are no questions about Abraham Samuelsohn in Gov Hoffmans inquiry or in the 50 questions of Lou Wedemar in January 1936? Why cause nobody knows? Only since Gardner's expose! Kudos!
3. Minor point--why did all the cops handle the Lindbergh ladder, including Bornmann, if they thought that someone might raise some 500 prints including thiers. [Because Kelly got nothing when he tried?}
|
|
|
Post by susancandy on May 28, 2006 21:48:54 GMT -5
My name is SusanCandy, no last name if thats okay. I am the oldest grandchild of Abraham Samuelsohn. My Mother, Florence, was his daughter. I lived with my grandparents during WWII, until 1949 when we moved into our house, but my Dad got sick in 1950 and the grandparents moved in with us so Mom could go to work. They lived with us from 1950 until 1967 when Mom & Dad sold the house. I left in 1964 to get married, but stayed in the same city. We were a very close family and being the oldest, I spent quite a bit of time with the folks, especially Grandpa and more so when I started to drive because he never drove a car. In NYC he used public transportation and in the South all of us drove, so we drove the folks.; We, AS and I spent many hours discussing this case and from first hand experience I must tell you to fully understand the case, you have to get into the head of someone who lived in that time. It was a different time and place, not like the late 20th or early 21st century that we live in. He spoke in broken English with a foreign and NY accent. He wrote like he spoke and I have spent the better part of 40 years translating somethings he left for me on his family history in Eurpoe and I still have not completely gotten it. Please do not misunderstand me, he was a very well educated man, apprenticed at 9 years old to a woodworking guild, he studied in Italy and Germany and spoke Polish, English, Italian, German, Russian & Yiddush. He used to write Yiddush letters to my Grandmother Candy in California because that was all she could understand. He was a very accomplished woodworker, knew his trade very well, took pride in his work and most of the furniture in my home and my brother's was made by Abraham Samuelsohn, in addition to an ivory bracelet with 18kt yellow gold guards on it that he carved for me in 1950 and I just donated a guitar that he made to our historical society here. He made the "Golden Eagle Piano Legs" and the music stand on the Steinway that sits in the East Room of the White House today in 1934 by commission from President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was bright with a great sense of humor, twinkling blue eyes behind those glasses, stubborn, intelligent and a great artesian. He was proud of his children and grandchildren and loved us all very much. He even had the good fortune to live long enough for me to make him a great-grandfather. The weekend before he died he and my Grandmother babysat for my son. My daughter is named for him: Adrea Robin, this is a honor in the Jewish Religion that you name a child after a person who lived a long and productive life and they live on through that person. Believe my Adrea is very much like her great grandfather, Abraham Samuelsohn. Her birthday is May 13th, his was May 17. We lost him at the age of 87 on March 9, 1972. My grandmother, Sadie, died in 1985 at the age of 100, my Mother died in 2001 at the age of 87 and my Uncle Marty, his son, is still alive and going to be 91 next month. He is very much like Grandpa. He just retired. He still drives and has a girlfriend that he has lived with for the last 25 years.
What I know of the case, the Lindbergh case, is first hand from my Grandfather, but what I don't know is alot more than that. I have been researching and reading for the last three months. It is time to tell his story, so if I don't respond to your questions, please understand that I am writing a book about Abraham Samuelsohn and will tell his story. I will answer what I can in the best way I know how. My husband and I will be up East the last two weeks in October so I can do my research more effectively. I want to go to the NJSPMusesm and hope to meet many of the people interested in the case, researching it and discussing it. We also have a son in NYC and a granddaughter, so I would like to see them also. In the meantime, I will be happy to discuss what I can with you and please understand that if I don't answer a question, I am not being snotty, I just can't right now. Thank you all. I think you do a wonderful thing by discussing this case. I think that we get a clearer understanding of how things work: i.e. I have always felt that to go forward in your life, you need to respect and understand where you have been in the past.
In closing, I would like to tell you a cute story about Abraham Samuelsohn, my grandfather. As you probably all ready know, he smoked. When he got older the doctors told him that with congestive heart failure, he would do better not to smoke, but he couldn't give it up. I mean, he did for my grandmother, but I had a poodle when I got older and he used to love to walk that dog because he could smoke and not get yelled at by my Grandmother. Time and again after dinner, he would go into his bathroom, which was right off the dining room and when my Grandmother would yell at him, "Abram, have you been smoking again", my grandfather would yell back NO, open the door to the bathroom and the smoke would come rolling out, but he wasn't smoking.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 29, 2006 6:44:21 GMT -5
Thank you Susan for that information. You have verified some of my thoughts regarding your Grandfather's training. I hope you can share as much information as possible, as this story is so confounding.
First, I have to admit that I am still quite confused about the specifics involving this story of Hauptmann and Co and the connection to Mr Samuelsohn. I have been searching for answers and seem to be getting contradictory results, so perhaps some help would be appreciated.
First, the order; (3) or (4 )pieces 8" or 10" in width, and about 14' in length and that he cut these boards up into (24) pieces, six or eight were about 6' long or a little longer and about 3-3/4" wide. When finished there were about (8) long pieces about 6' and over in length and all pieces about 3-3/4" wide. The rest of the pieces were short pieces and were in 3 lengths and he did not recall the exact length.
Now I would have to eliminate this next "find" because it is the wrong width and is Clear Pine which is much more expensive and certainly not "cheap" lumber;
Then we have the number of pieces ordered; is it 24 or 22? Why not 17? And where do the extra pieces end up?
Now the price that Samuelsohn charged for this project. I have read $14 to $23. That seems awfully high for common pine which has only been ripped and planed. It seems more like the cost of a completed project ( this is over $200 in current value). Can someone clarify this?
Regarding the "scraps" that Samuelsohn kept and the mis-identification of the wood species; Is it believable that he would have kept the "scraps" aside for so long and remembered their source yet forgotton what wood he ordered? Where are his reciepts for the wood and the project?
The issue of Mr Samuelsohn not coming forward with his info without a direct threat or act of intimidation seems incredible to me and I think it requires a lot more explaining. After the body was found and it was apparent that these kidnappers were murderers, it would be obvious to anyone that any witness's life would be worthless. Also, I would say that the whole Samuelsohn account would have to verify the "lone wolf" theory, after all Hauptmann has been caught but if there are others at large Samuelsohn is still in as much danger as he was in 32.
|
|
Son of Bill OReilly
Guest
|
Post by Son of Bill OReilly on May 29, 2006 7:25:04 GMT -5
Kevin--that for certain is one of your best lines ever! We are now entering the "No-Spin Zone"!
"Abraham Sameuelsohn's testimony verifies The Lone Woof theory?" Wow!
Good One! I dont think it verifies anything at all yet? After all it was buried and never heard by anyone? AS was not called to testify! Hello/ Anybody Home???
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 29, 2006 7:32:19 GMT -5
Is that you Rick? You are losing valuable post points! PS Interesting timing of your posts ;D
Anyway, you disagree? If I am being told that Mr Samuelsohn did not report this whole affair to the police ASAP because he feared for his life, then what conclusion do you draw from his change of heart? Does it indicate to you that there are still gang members at large who can still get him ? Remember, I didn't open this can of worms and I am still very much in doubt of it in general.
Regarding that lumber order, it would work out to 24 pcs if 4 pcs of 14' length were used. But why so much extra?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 29, 2006 11:05:03 GMT -5
Hi Kevin/ Im surprized at you...i would only admit to Son of John Stewart?
Anyhoo...lots of things can change over a year or two. For instance "the two young toughs" that pick up the ladder wood might be dead, committed suicide, died from TB, or been deported to Norways?
Thusly, if BRH is the soul remaining threat well then, his activities have been severely arrested.
We all awaite the Time Line/
|
|