Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2016 14:22:32 GMT -5
Michael, I know that you have mentioned previously on this board that detailed testing of rail 16 and the attic board S226 would prove concretely that these two pieces of wood were one. So I have some questions. 1) Was this type of testing available in the 1930's? 2) If so, why didn't Koehler perform such a test? 3) Did the defense team ever consider having one of their wood experts do such a test? I came across this article in a newspaper, The Milwaukee Journal. It is about an offer from the archaeology department of the University of New Mexico offering their services to Gov. Hoffman. They claim they would be able to determine quickly whether the wood from the ladder and the wood from Hauptmann's attic came from the same piece of timber. If that were true, where were these people in 1932, 1933, 1934 and especially 1935? The defense could have used this expertise. Why would these people wait until Hauptmann's execution is imminent to make this offer to aid Gov. Hoffman? How sincere are these types of offers? Are they just attention getters? Did Gov. Hoffman even bother to talk to these people?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 21, 2016 18:50:43 GMT -5
So I have some questions. 1. Yes. 2. Koehler did what he personally believed was sufficient to draw a conclusion. 3. The Defense couldn't get anyone near the ladder to make any test. If that were true, where were these people in 1932, 1933, 1934 and especially 1935? The defense could have used this expertise. Why would these people wait until Hauptmann's execution is imminent to make this offer to aid Gov. Hoffman? How sincere are these types of offers? Are they just attention getters? Did Gov. Hoffman even bother to talk to these people? It seems to me these offers were motivated by Newspaper Articles where it mentioned the Governor was going to attack the ladder evidence. The sincerity should be based on a case by case evaluation of the offer. For example, one offer came from Bjarne Pedersen who offered to use "kemelestro" on the ladder claiming that chemical measured tannic acid levels in the woods. I'm not sure if it was legit but the Governor said he was willing but couldn't get the ladder in order to make the test. Another man, Alfred Akerman wrote to Gov. Hoffman telling him he believed Koehler's testimony was conjecture. Akerman was the real deal having earned a Masters in Forestry from Yale in 1902, and worked in that Science up until the time he wrote the letter to the Governor at which time he was a professor of forestry at the University of Virginia becoming the Forest director in 1935 (he continued in that capacity until sometime in the 1950s). Here is Hoffman's response to the person mentioned in your post above:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 13:44:39 GMT -5
So I have some questions. 1. Yes. 2. Koehler did what he personally believed was sufficient to draw a conclusion. 3. The Defense couldn't get anyone near the ladder to make any test. 1) So there was testing available at that time which could prove conclusively whether those two boards had been one. It just wasn't done. 2) My biggest problem with Koehler's sufficient conclusion about rail 15 and S226 being one is that there was a missing one inch piece that would have linked the two together. It was never found. Instead, we have an artist's rendition of how that piece must have looked in order to connect the two pieces of wood. Cleverly drawn but it is not factual evidence and should not have been treated as such by the court or the jury. 3) This answer is so distressful and also infuriating at the same time. Not being able to have a major piece of evidence against your client examined (before testifying) by the people who would be called to testify about that evidence seems unbelievable in today's world. Thanks, Michael, for posting that response letter that Gov. Hoffman wrote. He sounds very appreciative of their offer. I also like what you shared about other people who came forward to run tests on the wood. This letter also gives an insight to how Gov. Hoffman viewed the wood evidence. My eyebrows went up when I read, "I am personally of the belief that the board and the ladder rail were never in the Hauptmann attic floor." Wow! That statement could be interpreted a number of ways. I think Gov. Hoffman chose his words carefully when he wrote things. He must have had good reason for believing that. The other point in Gov. Hoffman's letter which I especially noted was the following, "These exhibits are being guarded very jealously by the prosecution agencies. I have only been able to see these exhibits once and then they were produced in the presence of the Attorney General, the Prosecutor of Hunterdon County and the six officers of the State Police." Perhaps I do not understand the power structure of government, so please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Attorney General, the Prosecutor of Hunterdon County and the State Police fall underneath the office of the Governor of the State. I guess what I am asking is, doesn't a Governor of a state have rank over such people? Gov. Hoffman mentions the coming change in the situation and then he might have a freer hand in ordering testing. The case has been tried, a verdict rendered, the appeal process completed, the prisoner executed for the crime, so why does Gov. Hoffman have to wait a while longer to pursue more detailed testing of the ladder wood and attic floor board? Does this hesitation have to do with politics?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 22, 2016 14:33:53 GMT -5
1) So there was testing available at that time which could prove conclusively whether those two boards had been one. It just wasn't done. My answer applies directly to the Douglas Tree Ring analysis. I couldn't say whether or not it would have proven a conclusive match. Even today, the Experts I corresponded with OR read things they've written say invasive study would be needed. I don't think there was ever any 100% guarantees about it, but they said it was needed. I guess what I am asking is, doesn't a Governor of a state have rank over such people? Technically yes. Although I don't think he could "fire" an Attorney General without some lengthy and difficult procedure. Politics did play a major part because there were people on both sides in positions of political power/authority. Gov. Hoffman mentions the coming change in the situation and then he might have a freer hand in ordering testing. The case has been tried, a verdict rendered, the appeal process completed, the prisoner executed for the crime, so why does Gov. Hoffman have to wait a while longer to pursue more detailed testing of the ladder wood and attic floor board? Does this hesitation have to do with politics? I personally believe that he's talking about once Schwarzkopf was gone it would be easier for him to get to the bottom of it. The head of the State Police should have been the Governor's biggest ally, yet, he was just the opposite when it came to this matter.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 27, 2016 13:41:30 GMT -5
Considering that the Hoffman letter to Brand was dated a mere four days after Hauptmann's execution, Hoffman must have been thinking that there was a terrible miscarriage of justice, since the ladder would have been the main piece of evidence to put Hauptann on the Lindbergh property at the time of the purported kidnapping. If Hoffman had thought that the ladder rail evidence was fake, he should have been morally obligated to publicly say so in no uncertain terms and publicly called another meeting of the Board of Pardons immediately after the visit to the attic in March 1936, while Hauptmann was still alive. As it was, he offered nothing to protest Hauptmann's execution at the time it did happen.
|
|