Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2019 15:12:56 GMT -5
In the end this might not have been a ransom bill, but by looking more closely at it anyway we are no worse off for doing so. Actually by doing so we learn MORE not less. And I think the post below proves that...
Apr 2, 2019 13:31:34 GMT -5 @amy35 said:
In that earlier article I had posted, it mentions that Ella DeCornille was only at this bakery for two weeks when this bill sighting occurred. Great free publicity for your store, isn't it!I think you are right, amy35: Mrs. DeCornille's story was likely a publicity stunt for her new bakery because the story she told couldn't have been true. All of the serial numbers of $20 ransom bills published in the press by April 12, 1932, started with at least two zeros (e.g. A 00196927 A), while Ella DeCornille's started with 03.. (B 03387539 A). She must have had one of the booklets that were circulated to banks and post offices at her disposal, likely given to her by an employee, and picked out a serial number at random from a page in the middle. Finding the mystery woman's bill in that booklet of 55 pages on the spot would have required immediate memorization of the number and then several minutes more to actually find it in the booklet. I doubt that the lady would have waited patiently for that to happen. Mrs. DeCornille's most obvious lie was to say that she had discovered the serial number in a newspaper clipping kept on her counter, which just could not have happened.
Thanks for sharing this message from your friend. I think this is a great explanation about that $20 "ransom" note. Your friend is very sharp!! So I thank you, Friend of Michael's, for sharing these points with me and the board! This is another good reason why this board and everyone who shares their thoughts and knowledge on it, are so important!