|
Post by rick on Feb 23, 2006 23:27:23 GMT -5
Kevin--everybody in this case seems to act crazy? 1. The infamous CJ bluffs CAL/JFC w/o Charlie or him being alive? 2. CAL/JFC pays $50K for Charlie sight unseen? 3. BRH pays for gas w/ ransom money in his own car? 4. Somebody throws Charlie out of a car on Mt.Rose Hill? there must be a problem with the drinking water in the tristate area? All these activities including the alledged kidnapping are TTT high risk/
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 24, 2006 7:57:58 GMT -5
We have little disagreement there.
|
|
|
Post by rick for kevin on Feb 24, 2006 12:40:25 GMT -5
Lets agree to disagree. The highest risk activity was to for CAL/JFC to take over 4 weeks to come up with the ransom and then at the 11th hour withhold $20K? This may have turned a simple kidnapping into a felony murder? Maybe this is why the Lilliput pistol was buried in the garage along with the Gold Certs/
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 24, 2006 12:58:09 GMT -5
"The highest risk activity was to for CAL/JFC to take over 4 weeks to come up with the ransom and then at the 11th hour withhold $20K? "
The highest risk factor(s) in this kidnapping/murder/extortion crime are; 1) Targeting such an incredibly high profile victim 2) Entering a house filled with people awake and about 3) Even thinking of making any personal contact which is unnecessary. There was no need for the CJ & Condon meetingsto occur. 4) Giving away your location to the authorities by responding to an ad in a local paper and conducting all activities within this area. 5) Even thinking of becoming involved with a loose cannon like Condon
I still don't understand why you subtract Breckinridge from the equation as he is instrumental in all decisions involving negotiations and has Lindbergh's complete trust.
|
|
|
Post by rick on Feb 24, 2006 15:06:10 GMT -5
Kevin....well if we arnt on the same page we are on opposite sides of the same page...essentially I agree! I dont subtract Breckenridge (BRK) from any analysis. He was babysitting Jafsie for CAL. Keeping in mind that when Charlie turned up on Mt. Rose the cops thought Condon was in on it. Michael has already offered that the original kidnapping was a huge risk--if not impossible, well, so was the extortion and the payment.....for Charlie that is. The risk was to CAL for not dealing direct/
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 24, 2006 16:50:50 GMT -5
Rick, perhaps we are on a similar page. We just happen to speak a different language. I am really not all that focused on who did what, although I do find it interesting. My chief fascination with this case lies in how things were done. That is what has caused me to re-create some of the evidence and investigate it. Personally I think the method of who-done-it, while entertaining, ultimately is a dead end. We could all sit around and what-if-this and what-if-that to the end of time and get nowhere imho.
|
|
|
Post by rick on Feb 25, 2006 2:42:13 GMT -5
Kevin...by how things were done like how the ladder was designed and built or how the Singnature was discovered and done? Well, this evidence could also lead to Why this way and not that way and then ultimately Who? The physical evidence is concrete. Its a perfectly logical approach. I like to focus on the persons and their "means, motives and opportunities". The list of persons telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this case is very small. I hope you get a lead on the complexity of the Symbol. Holes, colors and markings are quite anal and indicate a fear of someone copying the notes....which was done anyways when Rosner took the nursery note to NYC. Photostats were available....just not on line.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 25, 2006 7:39:34 GMT -5
Rick, I respect everyone's right to focus on whatever they find compelling about this case. Obviously the fact that so many are still intrigued by it shows a certain feeling that "justice" was not served here. My only objection is when a total disregard for evidence is employed so that a particular agenda can be "advanced". There have been enough writers and books who have done this already.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Feb 25, 2006 9:31:27 GMT -5
Rick, Mickey Rosner took a hand drawn reproduction of the nursery note, (Robert Thayer's artwork) and by no means an accurate rendition, into NYC to show around.
In the meantime, the second legitimate note arrived with the exact hole spacing, symbol details, same writing, train of thought, paper and envelope type, as the nursery note. The link was forged there and continued with no pretenders surfacing and being considered seriously.
Joe
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 25, 2006 9:46:25 GMT -5
Yes, no matter how you try to slice this pie you can not get away from the fact that Herr Hauptmann and the notes are inexorably attached. Dismiss all the other evidence and put it down to police framework and you still have BRH creating his own noose with this unique signature.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2006 11:35:16 GMT -5
I disagree.
I have yet to see undeniable proof these notes were written by Hauptmann. All the Experts who conclude with a degree of certainty use the "requests" which by todays guidelines would not be allowable.
Also, who has seen Thayer's copy? I think it would be hard to say what it was or looked like without doing this. One thing I must say is that it would be hard to exactly duplicate the precise location of the holes in all of those notes with a copy of the note and exact hole spacing. I would think over time the spacing would "wonder" slightly but of course this is my own personal opinion - I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2006 11:54:07 GMT -5
Here is one of the documents Joe. It's the best I could do since my copy isn't that great. If anyone is having a problem viewing either of the new pictures I have posted please email me, send me a PM, or post.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 25, 2006 14:38:50 GMT -5
Michael, how many contemporary handwriting experts would say that Hauptmann didn't write the notes? How about throwing out the requests and only using the conceded writings.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2006 18:35:45 GMT -5
I don't know of any. They all seemed to have utilized them in order to come to that conclusion. At one time I believed a man by the name of William Degen, used by the NJSP to prepare for Bryan's Experts, had concluded Hauptmann wrote them but w/o using the "requests." However, I recently found something which seems to indicate that he too utilized them. He wrote a 20+ page report I am still trying to get my hands on to this day.....
Now we have this guy (Script) who used to post on my old board but has retreated to Allen's board where he can post unopposed. He seems to agree with whoever is on his side of things but disagree with whoever isn't. We used to debate certain points in which he told me in no uncertain terms that I was wrong and because he was an Expert he knew that I was. Then when Kel put out his (terrible) handwriting report, in one part it re-stated a fact I had always claimed was true but "Script" had argued against. Suddenly, now that Kel said, in essence, this was true - then it was now true in Script's eyes too...
Additionally, in our earlier debates it seemed to have come out that Script concluded Hauptmann wrote the notes based upon xerox copies in newspapers and pictures in Haring's book. To me that's absurd so needless to say I don't hold his observations in high regard....In fact I don't even bother to read them when they are sent to me. I think he recently did this again with a letter Hauptmann wrote which isn't at the Archives but in old copies of newspapers....that was probably the last of his posts I read.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Feb 26, 2006 9:32:03 GMT -5
Michael, do you know when Keyes interpreted the ransom note symbol? Pre or post- Hauptmann arrest?
Keyes' interpretation seems to be flavoured highly with a combination of some researched astrological-type meaning and blunt symbolism. I think he's indicating the two air-minded people are Charles and Anne Lindbergh, and the symbol represents a foreshadowing of their child's ultimate fate. Lindbergh was an Aquarius and Anne one day removed from Gemini. (both air signs)
I think he's hit on the relevance of the connecting circles right, ie. joining together in a highly personal sense. I think that's where his and my take on this symbol part ways though.
|
|
|
Post by kanneedwards on Feb 26, 2006 9:49:59 GMT -5
in geneology interlocking circles represent marrage. I don't feel this symbol has any "deep" psychological meaning but it was used for some reason. I see it more as a personal sign that someone would be very familiar with. sort of like we might use a password that means something to us.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Feb 26, 2006 10:08:20 GMT -5
The basic genealogical meaning for the interlocking circles is togetherness or intimate relationship. In the case of the ransom note symbol, I find this interpretation germane to the kidnappers' perceived intentions towards the child.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 26, 2006 11:14:42 GMT -5
Keyes began his research on this angle in late '32 into early '33.
|
|
|
Post by kanneedwards on Feb 26, 2006 15:03:49 GMT -5
joe, do you think Hauptamnn was into geneolgy? I can't see someone who would be interested in geneolgy also planning a kidnapping. I'm going with the gypsies, tramps and theives.
|
|
|
Post by rick on Feb 26, 2006 16:04:22 GMT -5
Hello? I have concluded like any rational, logical person, that the symbol is the Vesica Pisces. www.halexandria.org/dward097.htmWe can all debate on and on forever, like most related issues never resolved, where it came from and who in the group conceived of its relationship to the LKC. Its not the Arms of Krupp, or the Trigamba, or the secret sign of Kappa Delta Pi at Amherst College. It is in fact by design the Vesica Pisces with the Jesus Fish right smack in the center. It could be the singnature of CJ or it could have the deeper meaning of Dudley Schoenfelt? That does not change the two interlocking circles with the "football of Mary" in the center. There is only one Christian Church associated with the LKC so it would be reasonble to include it in our neverending search for the Truth. And a mystical Church at that in Harlem at: members.aol.com/lindytruth/temple.jpg
|
|
|
Post by kanneedwards on Feb 26, 2006 17:29:10 GMT -5
Rick, Sorry, I think that there is a possibility you are right; however some things worry me. First, I don't necessarily agree that the temple was a "christian church" more like a "spiritual church" Fisch wasn't christian, he was Jewish and I'm not sure he would know about this symbol, I also don't think the symbol was used to make a statement just something the writer knew and recognized. Finally it seems this symbol was used by more than one group. These were people who couldn't even write unless they were pretending to be illiterate and then why use a sophisticated symbol? I am just curious about the whole thing. I really think some of the meanings are so obscure that on a few people would know of them. maybe it is an indication that the writers were much more schooled than I'm giving them credit.
|
|
|
Post by rick for kathy on Feb 27, 2006 10:02:08 GMT -5
Well, there is plenty of room for doubt in something this complicated. It is still my understanding that the Temple of Divine Power is Christian in origin. I agree its pretty weird. But Mary Cerrita and Peter Biratella were clever enough to send a telegram to CAL very quickly and get a screening in Princeton Junction in 5 days. Almost as if to say they "saw the whole thing coming"? Then Mary just happened to nail JFC, the baby in Hopewell and the note to Breckenbridge. Pretty good. Since just about all the bit players seem to hang out at the mystical Temple acrossed from Fischs rooming house including two CALs insiders that happen to turn up dead. It would be my observation that Mary Cerrita chose the Symbol and Fisch thought it very clever to include his nome de plume/ I doubt Fischs cons were dependent on Judaism--just cash and carry. Even Condon was hooked up here somehow. Everyone but BRH? Or so it would appear.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 27, 2006 11:33:06 GMT -5
If we go back to the "singnature" for a moment, I believe there are still things to be learned from them. I know Joe has done extensive testing to come up with the method of making the holes and I think he may be on to something here. I have been more interested in the mechanics of the signature as a whole. I mean just how was it made? I have found something interesting here. Using a machinist dial calipers I was able to conclude that those two "squiggly" lines are all within .05 of an inch in distance from each other. I would say that this is beyond the accuracy one could achieve by free hand drawing. So I believe there was some sort of template or object used to create them. They also seem to correspond to the holes. It would seem that Hauptmann( sorry Michael) used a template of some kind for the holes and the "squiggly" lines but not the circles. Any ideas?
|
|
|
Post by KATHY FOR RICK on Feb 27, 2006 12:21:16 GMT -5
Rick, I'm not disagreeing about the temple and the weirdos there. I think they may have been more spiritualist (cons) which might fit in with the gypsies (think crystal balls and fortune telling). the site I found indicated that a gyspsy symbol for "don't give up" or "this place is not safe" was two interlocking circles. might have been used by this group. Hardly a profound meaning but one shady characters might have recognized. the FBI files say they Berritella and Cirrito held seances which doesn't sound like Protestant or Catholic that i know. Again why 6 days after the kidnapping why were they allowed to be heard?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 27, 2006 13:33:24 GMT -5
It seems that there are two distinct points of view regarding the signatures. One holds that the unique signature is both a method of identification as the one and only kidnapper and additionally a form of self expression with a psychological derivation. The other point of view sees this signature as a form of identification with a group or movement, perhaps even containing a secret message. The problem as I see it with the latter view is that we know the holes are primarily meant as a method of authenticity ( "specialy them 3 holes"-note#6). The circles and "squiggly" line seem to be a reinforcement of the uniqueness of the signature. It seems unlikely that the writer would give himself away here, at least to me. So I think that while they may have some meaning to the kidnapper, they would not be meant to convey any meaning to anyone else. What would be the point anyway? I still believe that the signature becomes more of an important point to the kidnapper because he knows it is essentially his only collateral.
|
|
|
Post by rick for kathy on Feb 27, 2006 14:14:49 GMT -5
Well, one might quess that they had someone on the inside that knew what would work to get to CAL or Breck or Rosner etc. and what would not. Hundreds of solutions and pieces of obscure mail literally poured into Highfields so one might opine that it was very clever to send a "telegram". But a telegram shows a slightly higher level of understanding as to what was required to get in. The chances of Ceriita and Biratella bridging the gap purley by accident is zero...especially since they already knew most of the players. Mary and Peter stayed in the game for a week or two while Rosner and Madden drove them around Hopewell looking for the house on the hill. Two rather obscure mediums from Harlem should not have gotten this red carpet treatment purely by accident...and they knew Fisch. Ill check up on the Christian connection as I know I read it somewhere. In the 30s a Temple covered all the bases.
|
|
|
Post by rick for kevin on Feb 27, 2006 14:22:08 GMT -5
Kevin...Im not in either of your camps as defined? All I am saying is that the two interlocking circles are not what everyone had quessed they were......Trigamba three legs, sign of the Mafia, Red Blue and Hauptmann, Red, Betty and Violet, German machine guns, lock and keys on some law books ad nauseum. All these quesses were dead wrong. Two interlocking circles in this specfic pattern are by definition the Vesica Pisces seen for over 2000 years. After that....everyone is able to make up thier own individual meaning and significance. Thats all. There are many many examples to prove this point. Knowing WHAT it is may or may not tell us what it represents or WHY a super complicated symbol was needed. Charlies fingerprints, or voice on the telephone, or photo would have done it for me? Hands down. It could be the SIGN of knowing Charlie is dead already and you cant prove you have him?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 27, 2006 15:30:28 GMT -5
Well, I think you are engaging in a bit of semantics here. If you are asserting that the circles represent the Vesica Pisces then you are effectively stating that there is a meaning to the signature beyond that of an authenticator. So in essence the signature has a dual purpose to identify or authenticate the actual kidnapper(s) from impostors and reveal an affinity or message. If that is the case then it stands to reason that the rest of the signature, the holes, the colors, and the two lines also have a dual function and somehow relate to the identity of the author. That is a much different scenario than a signature constructed purely for it's complexity and uniqueness which may include some subconscious , though unintended, personal elements.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 27, 2006 17:19:51 GMT -5
So I think that while they may have some meaning to the kidnapper, they would not be meant to convey any meaning to anyone else. What would be the point anyway? I still believe that the signature becomes more of an important point to the kidnapper because he knows it is essentially his only collateral. (Kevin)
***No collateral for the last note however. If we are to believe Condon, the person with the symbol-maker took it away. If not was that because the CJ didn't expect the request of Jafsie and didn't have time to take his table apart? If so why is the note made as if it was done with time to spare?
I think when we get involved in discussion as it relates to Hauptmann sometimes we tag the crime in the singular instead of the plural. And if we do that then the others outside of the one who has the symbol-maker may actually identify with the symbol for whatever symbolic meaning it may possess - if it did possess one - among their group.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 27, 2006 17:36:22 GMT -5
The collateral I spoke of is not required for the final note as the deal is done. My point is simply this; if you are holding an empty hand, that is you don't actually have the thing that you are negotiating an exchange for, would you not want to strengthen your bluff by removing any doubt that you are indeed the one and only party to deal with and as such must have the child? Notice the sense of bewilderment in note #6 regarding this. Come on you know we are the kidnappers because of that signature what more do you need? Well normally one might reasonably expect some proof that the victim is alive, but in this case that is not possible. The next best thing is some pajamas. I am assuming you are refering the Mersman when you say table. I think the jury is far out on that still.
|
|