metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
V3
Aug 10, 2021 11:03:17 GMT -5
Post by metje on Aug 10, 2021 11:03:17 GMT -5
One more observation: The ransom notes stated that the "kidnapping had been planned for a year already." The photo taken at John Mohrdieck's birthday party is dated March 1931. John would have celebrated his 25th birthday on March 12 of 1931. The kidnapping occurred on the evening of March 1, 1932.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Aug 10, 2021 18:21:22 GMT -5
One more observation: The ransom notes stated that the "kidnapping had been planned for a year already." The photo taken at John Mohrdieck's birthday party is dated March 1931. John would have celebrated his 25th birthday on March 12 of 1931. The kidnapping occurred on the evening of March 1, 1932. Yes and the ransom notes also said that Charlie was in good ( "gut" and "gute") care.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 11, 2021 19:53:25 GMT -5
Post by jeanne on Aug 11, 2021 19:53:25 GMT -5
Re: the photo of Joseph Cerardi and the older man tentatively identified as Paul Kelly. He looks more like the gangster Waxy Gordon (Irving Wexler), born in 1888. He was questioned in regard to Joseph Cerardi. I'll try to find his photo and post it.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
V3
Aug 11, 2021 19:58:48 GMT -5
Post by metje on Aug 11, 2021 19:58:48 GMT -5
Here's a photo of Waxey Gordon, and yes, he does resemble the older man in the picture with Joseph Cerardi. Attachments:
|
|
|
V3
Aug 12, 2021 3:51:49 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 12, 2021 3:51:49 GMT -5
Interesting suggestion! Waxey Gordon was a gangster associated with a Jewish mob in New York City's lower East side. He was involved in racketeering, bootlegging, and trafficking in narcotics. Michael quotes him in "Dark Corners" vol. 3 as saying the mob had nothing to do with the kidnapping, that the baby was dead (this before the body was discovered) and that the whole business had been conducted by a local maniac. Implication was Charles Schippell, or so it was thought. So how would Waxey know all this? He must have been familiar with the neighborhood and with the circumstances still undiscovered. He and Joseph Cerardi might well have had some relationship as the photo of the two of them would indicate. What a find! It bears more investigation. Waxey might have been the man with the round and unshaven face the guard Robert Riehl saw at the Woodlawn Cemetery. Waxey was convicted of tax evasion in 1933, so he would not have been around in 1934 when Cerardi was accused of imprisoning his wife Sophie-- who may have been kept in an attic because she knew too much and was apt to shriek something incriminating.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 12, 2021 7:01:54 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 12, 2021 7:01:54 GMT -5
Here again is the photo of Joseph Cerardi and the likely Waxey Gordon for the sake of comparison: Attachments:
|
|
|
V3
Aug 12, 2021 7:12:40 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by stella7 on Aug 12, 2021 7:12:40 GMT -5
I don't think he resembles him much at all. Waxy Gordon's head is a different shape, his hairline is different, eyes are completely different as well as the mouth. Maybe their noses are similar. Sorry, I'm just not seeing it.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 12, 2021 12:31:05 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by lurp173 on Aug 12, 2021 12:31:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
V3
Aug 12, 2021 17:31:27 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 12, 2021 17:31:27 GMT -5
Nevertheless, if you examine Waxey's statement, he knew the child was dead before the body was found. He knew that, even in this fairly remote area outside Hopewell, that Charles Schippell lived on (or owned and rented) property; he refers to "a maniac" by which he evidently meant Schippell. He also states that "no mob" committed the kidnapping. He has inside information here, so how did he learn of it? Why does he try to implicate Schippell? Perhaps he intends to divert attention from the real kidnappers by blaming someone else.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,646
Member is Online
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 6:36:04 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Aug 13, 2021 6:36:04 GMT -5
Nevertheless, if you examine Waxey's statement, he knew the child was dead before the body was found. He knew that, even in this fairly remote area outside Hopewell, that Charles Schippell lived on (or owned and rented) property; he refers to "a maniac" by which he evidently meant Schippell. He also states that "no mob" committed the kidnapping. He has inside information here, so how did he learn of it? Why does he try to implicate Schippell? Perhaps he intends to divert attention from the real kidnappers by blaming someone else. I'd suggest is was more like he believed the child to be dead. And a lot of people did, including Lucky Luciano and Al Reich, and that paying the ransom would be for nothing. Of course, locals would have been among the first of suspects, and especially any of them with some kind of criminal history, but do any of them have a conclusive connection to Richard Hauptmann, who we know for certain was guilty of involvement?
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 8:59:24 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 13, 2021 8:59:24 GMT -5
We need to keep looking for connections; there are still too many pieces of the puzzle still missing here after ninety years, and unfortunately some false leads. My research on Waxey Gordon began following your suggestion on an earlier post that locals needed to be investigated to see if any were involved with Richard Hauptmann. In "Dark Corners" vol. 3 Michael discusses the input of Waxey Gordon at the beginning of Chapter 3 entitled "Schippell's Shack." The chapter actually begins with a quotation from Waxey: "Even gangster Waxey Gordon offered his views. Weeks prior to the discovery of the child's corpse, reporter George Clarke spoke to him about the crime: Then Waxey told me 'George, you don't have to worry about the baby. That baby is dead. He was kidnapped by a local maniac who wanted revenge on the Lindberghs. The gangs had nothing to do with it'." Waxey did not mention Schippell (a local) by name, but an inference was made since he owned property close to the Lindbergh's residence and also adjacent to the place where the child's body was found. This seems to be a reasonable conclusion. Waxey also provides a motive for the murder, whether this was true or a matter of gossip. My point here is that Waxey, a racketeer who imports Canadian beer (and most likely some more interesting goods) to the US during prohibition, has some specific details regarding a relatively isolated spot like Hopewell in New Jersey. OK, so perhaps he did business in NJ, but the information he gave Clarke is specific in some of the detail, and this would indicate that he has a connection with someone in the area, whether a customer or a fellow dealer in his crimes. The information that he gave Clarke may not be true, but he obviously has some knowledge which he provides Clarke, knowing it will get some publicity under his name. The information he gives the reporter might be false, but he has his own motives for speaking out, and he may well wish to divert the investigators' attention away from the real source of the kidnapping-- which could include himself or the person connected to him and to the area, the person who gives him reports. Gangs used isolated areas for hide-outs and storage for loots, etc. The Schippell farm could have used as one of those, whether Schippell himself was aware of it. Schippell was from Minnesota, by the way. He was not a native New Yorker but married a woman from New York (Charlotte Kleimann) following his tour of duty as a sailor in WWI.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 9:24:33 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 13, 2021 9:24:33 GMT -5
I should probably add that Waxey Gordon's real name was Irving Wexler; he was a member of a Jewish mob, one headed at a time by Arthur Rothstein, the man who supposedly fixed the World Series in 1919. Charles Schippell was also Jewish but evidently not one who belonged to Waxey's mob, or at least was not on good terms with Waxey at the time Clarke was given information for his newspaper report.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 9:46:57 GMT -5
Post by Guest on Aug 13, 2021 9:46:57 GMT -5
I should probably add that Waxey Gordon's real name was Irving Wexler; he was a member of a Jewish mob, one headed at a time by Arthur Rothstein, the man who supposedly fixed the World Series in 1919. Charles Schippell was also Jewish but evidently not one who belonged to Waxey's mob, or at least was not on good terms with Waxey at the time Clarke was given information for his newspaper report. Charles Schippell was not Jewish. On his death certificate, the Latin Cross is check-marked, not the Star of David. He's buried in Farmingdale, Long Island. You can sign up at findagrave.com to see his gravestone.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 11:12:31 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 13, 2021 11:12:31 GMT -5
The dates given for the birth and death of the Charles Schippell are identical to those of the Charles Schippell who lived on Mt. Rose although no photo of the headstone in the Long Island Cemetery was displayed. The death certificate must br displayed on a different site. My source indicated that Charles Schippell was Jewish and born of a Jewish immigrant from Germany. His name appears on the Rosenblatt family website, and again the dates of birth and death here correspond to those of Charles. The name is said to be German (Levite in origin, Ashkenazic) and derived from the word for "shovel." The name in the Midwest is often spelled without the second "l" and sometimes in the US it appears as Shippel. Charles married a woman with a Jewish name, but that does not mean that he and his wife necessarily practiced the Jewish religion.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 11:40:11 GMT -5
Post by jeanne on Aug 13, 2021 11:40:11 GMT -5
Waxey maried the daughter of a rabbi. Whether he was observant is another question.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 13:21:18 GMT -5
Joe likes this
Post by lurp173 on Aug 13, 2021 13:21:18 GMT -5
Aaron, I agree with you completely that there is a need to keep looking for connections in the LKC, and no one can say that you are not trying. The kidnapping was certainly not a one man show. Schwartzkopf related to reporter DeLong very early on that the evidence showed the presence of at least three individuals at the Lindbergh house on the night of March 1st. I do believe that there is overwhelming evidence of Hauptmann's involvement, thus any "connections" that are being pursued have to ultimately have a Hauptmann tie-in.
However as to mobster Waxey Gordon, I can not envision him being involved in the LKC. Waxey was a typical strongarm gangster of the time who was making a great deal of money in the bootlegging/gambling (and ultimately narcotics) rackets in the NYC area. I believe that wealthy gangters like Waxey wouldn't touch a Lindbergh kidnapping caper with the proverbial 10 foot pole. Waxey was making far too much money (ultimately prosecuted on income tax evasion like Capon) to bring down all the law enforcement heat that a kidnapping of Lindbergh's son would create. I believe that Waxey's statement to reporter Clarke was simply Waxey attempting to repeat what law enforcement and the public had already thought about. Waxey was simply giving his two cents worth here in hopes of reducing the law enforcement pressure that was occurring in Waxey's area of illegal operations. Without any real details, Waxey was saying that the child is dead so stop all of this law enforcement searching, and that some crazy person in the Hopewell area committed this crime so keep your investigative activities in the Hopewell, N.J. area and not in NYC. Waxey and other NYC mobsters did not want the high police investigative activities that were occurring in the NYC area to continue. Like many mobsters of the day, Waxey was a gangster but he was not stupid.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 13, 2021 13:46:54 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by Wayne on Aug 13, 2021 13:46:54 GMT -5
The dates given for the birth and death of the Charles Schippell are identical to those of the Charles Schippell who lived on Mt. Rose although no photo of the headstone in the Long Island Cemetery was displayed. The death certificate must br displayed on a different site. My source indicated that Charles Schippell was Jewish and born of a Jewish immigrant from Germany. His name appears on the Rosenblatt family website, and again the dates of birth and death here correspond to those of Charles. The name is said to be German (Levite in origin, Ashkenazic) and derived from the word for "shovel." The name in the Midwest is often spelled without the second "l" and sometimes in the US it appears as Shippel. Charles married a woman with a Jewish name, but that does not mean that he and his wife necessarily practiced the Jewish religion. Aaron, where are you getting these facts? Have you actually looked at Charles Schippell's death certificate?
|
|
|
V3
Aug 14, 2021 6:29:21 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 14, 2021 6:29:21 GMT -5
Wayne, you make some good points here. Waxey was a smart man and wanted to direct attention away from New York and his own activities. He does, however, speak some truth. The child is dead and buried on a neighbor's property, someone who is might be considered a "maniac"--that person being Charles Schippell. This could hardly be a coincidence or a lucky guess. Waxey must have some knowledge of the action here. Why does he pick on Schippell? Does he have some grudge against him, or is Schippell simply a fall guy with no defense in Waxey's using him? Waxey speaks of a motive, a personal matter of getting even with Lindbergh, so again he has some knowledge of the situation. Schippell must have heard of or read Waxey's interview with the reporter and knew he could be in serious trouble. At that point he must have gone looking around his property and discovered where the child was buried. He told a police Lt. and actually showed him "where the body was dug up and put it out where it could be found." He showed the Lt. the tree marked with a broken branch where the hole had been dug. (Dark Corners, vol.3) So he moved the child's body once he found it and brought it to a place not on his property hoping he would then not be connected to the crime. He should, of course, have reported his finding, but in his panic he was worried that he would be seriously involved and charged with the crime. Waxey most likely had more information, and may have chosen Schippell as a fall guy and had nothing against him. Schippell also resembled Hauptmann, and if anyone had any suspicion or sighting of Hauptmann in the area, then it could be claimed that one individual (Hauptmann )was mistakenly identified.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 14, 2021 6:33:17 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 14, 2021 6:33:17 GMT -5
The information regarding the family backgrounds of Charles and Charlotte Schippell can be found on family trees and ancestry.com on-line. This is in response to Wayne's question. My earlier response was in regard to lurp's excellent observations.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 14, 2021 9:01:34 GMT -5
Post by Guest on Aug 14, 2021 9:01:34 GMT -5
The information regarding the family backgrounds of Charles and Charlotte Schippell can be found on family trees and ancestry.com on-line. This is in response to Wayne's question. My earlier response was in regard to lurp's excellent observations. What does your research reveal, aaron, if you don't mind sharing? If the dates don't coincide with Wayne's document then it's not Charles Schippell of Mount Rose, the ship's cook. There's even a photo of him out there somewhere in his Navy uniform around WWI. Although Charlotte was entitled to be buried with her husband in the Veterans Cemetery on Long Island, she or her daughter opted against it. She's buried in a single grave in Greenwood Cemetery in Hamilton, NJ. Her parents came from Germany. Her father was a butcher. They even lived on East 86th street in Manhattan at one point, the very heart of German Yorkville.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 14, 2021 11:34:23 GMT -5
Post by lurp173 on Aug 14, 2021 11:34:23 GMT -5
This is the photo that I have always seen of Schippell, circa 1920.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 14, 2021 11:51:19 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by Guest on Aug 14, 2021 11:51:19 GMT -5
This is the photo that I have always seen of Schippell, circa 1920. View AttachmentThank you lurp173 for posting this photo! Your files must be organized perfectly for you to have found it so quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Aug 15, 2021 7:58:43 GMT -5
This is the photo that I have always seen of Schippell, circa 1920. View AttachmentHi Lurp, I'm not trying to steal your thunder, but I have a higher res copy of the photo you posted. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
V3
Apr 15, 2023 22:00:48 GMT -5
Post by A Guest on Apr 15, 2023 22:00:48 GMT -5
Michael, I would like to ask you a question. I am reading V3, Chapter 3. In this chapter it talks about Joseph Cerardi. The NJSP started investigating Cerardi in 1932. They finally located him in Ridgefield N.J. in late 1932. They did surveillance and took photos and motion pictures of Cerardi and Maran. They showed these to Charles Lindbergh in December of 1932. On page 107 you share a report that says Lindbergh thought that the way Cerardi walked and ran in the movie, very much resembled the look-out at St. Raymond's cemetery. If Lindbergh thought this in 1932, why then did the NJSP wait until August of 1933 to bring Cerardi in for questioning?
|
|
|
V3
Apr 16, 2023 11:39:19 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Apr 16, 2023 11:39:19 GMT -5
Michael, I would like to ask you a question. I am reading V3, Chapter 3. In this chapter it talks about Joseph Cerardi. The NJSP started investigating Cerardi in 1932. They finally located him in Ridgefield N.J. in late 1932. They did surveillance and took photos and motion pictures of Cerardi and Maran. They showed these to Charles Lindbergh in December of 1932. On page 107 you share a report that says Lindbergh thought that the way Cerardi walked and ran in the movie, very much resembled the look-out at St. Raymond's cemetery. If Lindbergh thought this in 1932, why then did the NJSP wait until August of 1933 to bring Cerardi in for questioning? First of all, I am really glad you took note of this because I think its important. So many people say "there's no evidence" of anyone else involved in the crime. The Look-outs are certainly evidence of that. The issue I have are the sources. But it's those who claim no evidence who choose NOT to believe the witnesses. The same exact people who they profess their ultimate belief in their honesty. To answer your question, its been a while since I studied this topic so I'm a little rusty. My best answer would be they seemed to be watching and accumulating as much as they could before picking him up. He was surveilled and followed many times jointly and individually by the NJSP and Treasury Agents. It was on August 9, 1933, that his neighbor called police to let them know it appeared Cerardi was about to move because a truck took away a load of furniture from their place. As a result, Keaten detailed two men to watch his place overnight and pick him up in the morning for questioning.
|
|
|
Post by A Guest on Apr 22, 2023 13:41:51 GMT -5
Thank you, Michael, for your response to my question. I really have thought about how Larry Rue laid out a theory that Cerardi might have been stalking Charles, Jr. based on locations Cerardi had gone that seemed to relate to the Lindberghs.
I find this interesting because if the kidnappers had no inside information to base anything on, then such surveillance would have been absolutely necessary in the planning stages of this crime. A kidnapper would want to know all the locations where the child could be found and then check them out to see which one would provide the best place to carry out the kidnapping of the child. Cerardi moves to Maine where the Morrows have their North Haven home. He moves to Hopewell where the Lindberghs are building their home. He lives in Ridgefield Park, NJ not far from the Morrow's Next Day Hill home where he could monitor the comings and goings of the Lindberghs and their son.
I started to ask myself why, if Hauptmann was the kidnapper, is he not found to have done any surveillance anywhere before the kidnapping occurred?
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
V3
Apr 22, 2023 16:27:36 GMT -5
Post by hiram on Apr 22, 2023 16:27:36 GMT -5
In the photo Joseph Cerardi is actually the slender dark-haired man on the left. The other person looks like a mobster, as yet unidentified. Two two have obviously come to some kind of agreement but not about the kidapping. Cerardi spent three months at an old farm in Liberty, Maine in 1931 and three months on Schippel's farm (June to Oct) in 1932. The mob hid stashes of booze in old sheds, barns, and chicken coops for about three to six months until these were distributed. Someone trusted by the mob was hired to guard the stash and see that it was distributed properly. It's likely that Cerardi had this job, both in New Haven Maine and at Schippel's farm in Hopewell. While it was said that he was a poor man who blackened shoes in Central Park, this was probably a front. Cerardi left often for New York with the intention of meeting up with members of the mob for directions. He did so in the disguise of a poor man who blackened boots in order to avoid suspicion about the meetings. The mob also used "phony beggars," according to Gardner to avoid detaction and suspicion.
|
|