Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 16:46:22 GMT -5
I have this book. It was written in 1932 and I did find some of the info helpful. Glad that you posted it.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Aug 12, 2019 23:41:07 GMT -5
Without time to read for a few days, is there anything you can share re: summarizing the very interesting statements?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 7:07:20 GMT -5
I have this book. It was written in 1932 and I did find some of the info helpful. Glad that you posted it. I liked how they questioned everything. They really did, didn't they. They covered all the "clews", as they spelled it, really well. I bought the book because of this early look at how the investigation was developing. Did you see how someone thought the kidnapper was bow-legged because of the foot impression found near the house? This same unnamed person, who had studied the human foot and created footwear, thought the sock impressions were made by someone wearing golf socks! Bow legs and golf socks! What a combination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 10:26:50 GMT -5
Yes! And what really got to me (besides CAL maybe not spending all the time he said he did in the library), was that everyone thought if CAL had allowed bloodhounds to track, it would have turned out differently. Why didn't he allow it??? Even Mrs. Morrow thought is was an inside job. CAL claimed he was reading in the library after he went downstairs from having a bath. Beyond that, we have nothing to really challenge that. From what I have read, it appears that Schwarzkopf shouldered the responsibility for not using bloodhounds. His reasoning at the time was: 1) There were none available. 2) He claimed to have been told that bloodhounds were not effective when the ground was wet. 3) The great number of newspaper men present made it impossible. The above comes from Liberty Magazine, March 19, 1938, The Crime - The Case - The Challenge, by Gov. Harold G. Hoffman So the question for me has always been - Did Schwarzkopf make this call on his own or did CAL have something to do with it? There were other search offers declined besides the bloodhounds.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 13, 2019 10:28:24 GMT -5
I liked how they questioned everything. A lot of the older books are absolutely worth reading. Some have unique information. Whether its true or not should be investigated but in some its the only place it can be found. Others were written by people who were in a position to know or witnessed certain events. Just that perspective alone is something to read about.
|
|
ziki
Trooper
Posts: 44
|
Post by ziki on Aug 13, 2019 15:16:17 GMT -5
Yes! And what really got to me (besides CAL maybe not spending all the time he said he did in the library), was that everyone thought if CAL had allowed bloodhounds to track, it would have turned out differently. Why didn't he allow it??? Even Mrs. Morrow thought is was an inside job. What I d on't get about the socks is that it was so muddy, the socks not only would be soaking wet, they would be extremely heavy and the accumulation of mud and wetness would cause feet to slip. I also think this socks needed special fixing to hold on feet and don’t get stuck in mud and slip off...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 7:12:28 GMT -5
The ground conditions around the Lindbergh house the night of the kidnapping were soft, wet and no doubt a bit slippery. One would have to walk carefully so as not to loose their footing. For me, this is what makes that bow-legged walk in golf socks so interesting. People like sailors adapt a similar way of walking in order to keep their balance when on a seafaring ship. The relaxed knees aid in stability putting more pressure on the outer edge of their foot. It was also the vertical weave of the sock which caught the attention of this footwear man. This weave helps to keep the foot from slipping horizontally inside a golf shoe. The ground was slippery that night. Did the kidnapper use a bow-legged gait to keep from slipping in those golf socks as he made his way from the house? The golf socks would have come up over the calf of the leg which would have helped to keep them in place while walking on the slippery mud. Hmmm. I wonder if Mrs. Morrow ever checked her golf socks for a missing pair!
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Aug 15, 2019 13:20:52 GMT -5
mike did you read godfrey burns book on the case
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 15, 2019 15:31:00 GMT -5
The only books worth anything are Fisher's. Look on Amazon. Everything else, unless it's some kind of rarity, isn't worth anything. Lots of people have gotten took on TLC over the years and it's still happening today, watch out everybody.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 16, 2019 6:57:36 GMT -5
mike did you read godfrey burns book on the case I don't quite remember when Sue shared that book with me... Maybe 2002 or 03 perhaps. But I read it cover to cover at that time, then again a couple of years later, and again just recently. I mention him in V3 but I don't use it as a source.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 16, 2019 6:59:36 GMT -5
The only books worth anything are Fisher's. Look on Amazon. Everything else, unless it's some kind of rarity, isn't worth anything. Lots of people have gotten took on TLC over the years and it's still happening today, watch out everybody. If you ever bothered to fact check either of those books you'd be singing a different tune. Some things are correct but there are mistakes as well as questionable content portrayed as fact when it shouldn't be.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 17, 2019 1:40:23 GMT -5
Maybe you should point out what's wrong with his books.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2019 8:27:30 GMT -5
Maybe you should point out what's wrong with his books. Fact is, there are too many mistakes to "correct." However, indirectly I already have. Compare the subjects and information in my books then cross-reference the sources/footnotes. Not just in Fisher, but in every book. I don't tell people what to believe, rather, I reveal what's truly at the Archives so it can all be considered. Some people don't like that because it harms their position. So for them its easier just to say " that's not true" or " I do poor research" or whatever. If you see something in his books that you believe ask me. I will let you know if it's right or wrong. The problem is that once someone locks themselves into a rock solid position there's no turning back. But there are many sources which, while they may not prove something, can definitely call any position into question. Like I said, no one back in the 80s or 90s ever dreamed we'd all be doing the amount of research that we are. So its easy for us to now be a Monday Morning Quarterback because we've spent time and had access to information none of these previous authors ever did.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Aug 17, 2019 9:02:57 GMT -5
back in the day jack, authors debated there books jim was on current affair and other stations with Robert Bryant. some of the books today say the same thing different forms.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Aug 17, 2019 9:06:21 GMT -5
jack, every book written on the case has mistakes. they point out jims because they don't like his point of view. I love when they honor scadutos book which is so bad with mistakes but they love his point of view
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 17, 2019 10:10:38 GMT -5
Part of my message got dropped. I think you should debate Romeo - Steve taking J.F.'s point of view and you countering it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2019 10:59:37 GMT -5
Part of my message got dropped. I think you should debate Romeo - Steve taking J.F.'s point of view and you countering it. Over the years we have. Each time the stakes being a beer. While he's hard to pin down, I do believe he owes me about a case by now.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2019 11:03:25 GMT -5
jack, every book written on the case has mistakes. they point out jims because they don't like his point of view. I love when they honor scadutos book which is so bad with mistakes but they love his point of view I don't think that's true Steve. Look, if I had only gone to the Archives for a month or two I don't think I could have ever even approached a book like Fisher put out. It's amazing actually. So that's to his credit. Next, since his book is regarded by many as the "gold standard" its going to get criticized more often. Ask about about any book, and I'll give you the truth. Makes no difference to me.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 17, 2019 11:25:56 GMT -5
Well enough jive, I'd like to see you do it again. You could just take a couple easy points - Since you seem to remember better what's been done, you choose.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Aug 21, 2019 8:51:43 GMT -5
mike, you owe me a whole truck
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Aug 22, 2019 9:55:48 GMT -5
Maybe you should point out what's wrong with his books. Hi Jack, I have no dog in this race, but I'd be more than willing to point out a few facts about Fisher's first book. Take a look at Chapter 1. It's 7 pages long. In those 7 pages, he makes 17 glaring errors that proves he was not dealing with facts. In fact, the very first sentence of Chapter 1 contains a mistake and it just gets worse from there. If you are interested, I'd be more than glad to list all 17 mistakes in Chapter 1. And if you go to the first page of Chapter 2, there is this: "By this time, Corporal Wolf and the others had found a chisel in the mud below the baby's window.Fact: The chisel was found ~75 from the house, close to where the ladder sections were found. There is a NJSP statement (and even a photo) to confirm this. This is followed by hundreds of additional mistakes throughout his book. Sorry to break it to you, but Fisher was not dealing with the facts. 17 mistakes in 7 pages is no way to write a non-fiction, true-crime book. That puts his book in the realm of fiction writing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 15:04:44 GMT -5
Since there is talk about Fisher's book here and the errors that appear in it, there is one photo I really like that he used in that book. It is the one of Charlie running that was from the summer of 1931. We talked about this picture in the past on this board and I found it at the archives today while I was there. I thought those who do not have access to Fisher's book might enjoy seeing this picture of Charlie. imgur.com/nmSakjo
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 16:20:02 GMT -5
That doesn't even look like Charlie at all. If I was not told that was a photo of him, I never would have guessed. That child changed so much so many times in his short little life. And you can see how large his head is compared to his little body. It is him, though and I agree that his appearance seems to change depending on the angle of photos and what he is doing in them. Jump ahead to 1932 and there are no pictures available of Charlie, so I think this photo draws attention to what physical changes Charlie must have gone through in the final months of his life.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 22, 2019 20:43:06 GMT -5
Well, Wayne, I'd say Fisher has a better record than the NJSP, so it just depends who you want to believe.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 23, 2019 7:12:08 GMT -5
Well, Wayne, I'd say Fisher has a better record than the NJSP, so it just depends who you want to believe. This is the biggest problem as it concerns this case ... who one "wants" to believe. I say never mind that. Look at the information, research it, then believe what's in the actual documentation. Do not rely on emotion. For example, there's something mentioned in both Fisher and Cahill. Cahill disagrees with Fisher then asserts it never happened. Fisher asserted it was never in the original documentation. BOTH men were wrong. For me to know this has nothing to do with my intellect or abilities over theirs. But it has everything to do with research and the amount of time needed to properly do so.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 23, 2019 12:59:57 GMT -5
A little late for that, Michael, but keep trying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2019 7:30:42 GMT -5
It's never too late to learn the truth about something Jack. It is sad that it has taken so long for so many facts to finally come out that were always available but never shared before. Michael's books are that window into the archives and its documents. I hope someday you get to go there. It is an amazing place! I just recently held the handkerchief that had been dropped by the St. Raymond Cemetery look-out (laundered of course!). This item was heavily investigated. Quite a few reports done just on this one piece of evidence from the case. The authorities had it and recognized it as evidence in the case. CAL had told them about this accomplice and the handkerchief he left behind. Wilentz never introduces this evidence because it shows there was an accomplice in this crime.
|
|