|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 25, 2011 7:32:03 GMT -5
you make more excuses for ellis parker. he thought he had all this power i dont think he was sick at all. he remended me of hauptmann on the stand laughing and joking when his ass was on the line. he was the mastermind with the wendel kidnap. he screwed up
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2011 16:37:40 GMT -5
No excuses - its just that I have studied everything. Did you know there was a hung jury in Kings County during the 1st Trial? Did you know they read the Grand Jury Testimony in order to get a conviction in the 2nd? Did you know that although the Defense argued immunity had been offered, Geoghan instead of testifying it did not simply put two Cops on the stand to say they didn't hear it offered? That's odd especially since Geoghan had obtained a conviction against someone for remaining silent in the face of accusations made by co-defendants which included him in their confession. Then here too, the Prosecutor does the exact same thing. Anyway in this case, the Court would rule the Prosecutor's failure to deny the accusation was - frivolous.
Is this frivolous really?
And so you have two Cops on the stand testifying for an Office run by Murder Incorporated that they didn't hear or see anything.
(See: NY Supreme Court, App. Div. 463, Second Department, Peo v. Weiss, 11-19-37)
Steve, 10 karma points if you can name these two Cops who were on the train with Weiss.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 25, 2011 20:47:02 GMT -5
ive studied to. they didnt give ellis parker 6 years for nothjing. i know they wanted to get him ouit when he got sick but thye facts remain he did a dumb thing into terying to have wendel say he kidnapped the lindbergh baby
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 26, 2011 8:33:50 GMT -5
What you had was a man who wasn't well, did have reason to suspect someone for their involvement, who was wanted man in NJ, trying to set up his return to New Jersey via psychological tactics. What happened next is only known to Bleefeld & Wendel because I can promise you that Parker didn't exactly know himself. Bleefeld was looking to sell Wendel's confession before any type of plan was made to pick him up. Bleefeld and Wendel seemed like old friends (not Captor/Victim) during Parker's trial. As John Reisinger pointed out, some of Wendel's complaints concerning why he committed the crime that are in Wendel's "forced" confessions are in Wendel's suite against Hoffman too. (This proves, at least, that Wendel WAS authoring the confessions.) The only evidence that Wendel was assaulted is when it was testified to, while granted immunity, that he was struck after bragging about emasculating the child with acid. Bleefeld plead guilty in exchange for his testimony for Kings County. Shlossman and Weiss had two trials. One was a mistrial, the second a conviction which was overturned on appeal. The Feds picked up the Case so they pled out striking a deal in exchange for their testimony against the Parkers. As a result, the Case in Kings County were dismissed. If you read Parker Jr.'s Kings County application to dismiss decision you will see its accepted that he wasn't even there when an alleged assault took place - this is Judge Fitzgerald acknowledging this on 2-3-41. There's is a lot to read. Grand Jury, Statements, Police Reports, Trial Testimony. Hundreds of thousands of documents. Take Wendel's application for reimbursement... He is asking for $2676 ($3 a day for witness fee) even though he was put up in a hotel AND scammed them with fraudulent bills! According to said examination, the following ensued: "He [the assistant district attorney] said - 'There are two ways There is a civil prison, we give you $3.00 a day, and if we put you in a hotel, I don't suppose you will want anything if you stay over there.'
"I said - 'For myself, no, but I want to live according to my station in life.'" [Matter of Wendel - NY Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County 1-12-40] This is the type of guy we're talking about. Then you take a guy like Parker, who was always on the "up and up." Wrote countless articles about not abusing suspects. Highly respected, and very successful. He's at the end of his career, and life - trying to solve this case in full denial that his health has gotten him to the point where he shouldn't have been doing anything except resting. He still had flashes of brilliance, but also showed serious wear and tear with confusion and irrational mood swings. Lloyd Fisher offered Parker money from the Defense fund to investigate some leads for him. Parker would sometimes have them chased down for him but always turned down the money. And so they nailed him to the cross when they couldn't nail Gov. Hoffman. A lot of this is in the Pardon we worked on. It's ashame Pres. Bush didn't really take a look at it. I truly believe if he did he would have signed it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 26, 2011 9:30:15 GMT -5
My reason for ignoring said communication of Mr. Goldstein, is that my suspicions that he was not properly representing me were confirmed after the aforesaid conversation with him at his home wherein he suggested to me that I falsely testify Wendel was taken to New Jersey by Murry Bleefeld and me by force, against his will, so that Federal authorities could indict Parker and Governor Hoffman and the so called higher ups. It seemed clear to me in so advising me, he is serving other interests than mine. [Harry Weiss Deposition 7-24-36]
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 26, 2011 9:43:20 GMT -5
its called saving your ass. nobody is going to convince me that the wendel kidnap was b.s. i read alot about it
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 27, 2011 8:54:29 GMT -5
Here is my question: How can you suggest immunity to whatever you apply to Parker everywhere else except him? There are a lot of unknowns, yet, you give 100% of your trust to Paul H. Wendel, 0% to anyone who counters his position, and 100% if they support it - simultaneously.
You no doubt know more then most, but if you read everything there is I am betting your rock solid conviction would loosen up a bit.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 27, 2011 16:39:45 GMT -5
no, im going with everything i read, ellis was guilty of this crime with his son. i firmly believe that
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 28, 2011 8:17:56 GMT -5
First thing I wanted to do was post a link to the Australian Red Cross. As I am sure everyone knows, they got slammed with serious floods - slammed being an understatement. If that wasn't bad enough, New Zealand was recently rocked with a major earthquake. [a href=" "] [/a] Next, I've posted a new poll. If you are a Member, please vote in it. If you aren't, signing up is both free and harmless and grants you access to all attachments, polls, and Member areas. Now Steve..... I understand what you are saying, but why not consider what you haven't read? Weiss fired his Attorney because he was trying to get him to lie in order to get the best deal. I believe this because its consistent with everything else I have AND the fact Weiss didn't have anyone represent him, or the money to hire anyone else at the time. We both know there was this "problem" they faced with the definition of 'kidnapping.' [Schlossman]: So we went in, and he started to talk about, well, whether he heard about Crater being knocked off or something like that, and Wendel passed some remark to the effect that everything he ever pulled he never got a dime out of it, even the Lindbergh snatch was just taken right "out of my grasp when I had everything in my hands."
We said, "What do you mean by that?"
He said, "Just as I was walking out with the baby a man stuck a gun in my ribs and took the baby away from me." [NY vs. Schlossman and Weiss, Trial Transcript, p. 399, March 9, 1937] You just can't study this man and not know this is classic Wendel. There is no doubt in my mind he said this. No doubt whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 28, 2011 19:47:15 GMT -5
i dont believe any of those jackasses
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 1, 2011 6:45:03 GMT -5
But you believe the biggest Jackass on the planet? The guy who actually tried to scam Al Capone?
I've got a great picture of him the papers were running at the time. The one is Scaduto's book is what we've all come used to but the picture they ran made him look like a choir boy.
Did you vote in the poll yet Steve?
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 1, 2011 7:45:48 GMT -5
mike, i know what paul wendel was, but ellis did in fact kidnap him and torture him to say he kidnapped the lindbergh baby. ellis was wrong and stupid. if ellis didnt get sick in prison would they have tried to pardon him? i have wendels book. as far as the poll goes it dont matter to me because there are to many other facts and evidence that did hauptmann in. i have pictures of them strolling down the atlantic city boardwalk back then
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 1, 2011 16:57:03 GMT -5
I don't believe Wendel was "tortured." I don't believe Parker "Kidnapped" him. Parker NEVER allowed torture. What would you have said IF Wendel did sue Wilentz for making him a promise that he would not be prosecuted? He was about to, and that is provable.
I also have evidence that he was trying to impress at least one other person that he did kidnap the Lindbergh child, and that was before Parker ever truly believed it himself.
Ellis was sick way before he went to Prison. See my earlier post.
I've got a copy of the original manuscript. The Liberty articles, and everything else. They contradict, and embellish. It's like comparing everything Condon said but sometimes even worse.
The poll is just for trivia sake. It's not to pin anyone down for anything. Any pictures would be cool to see - can you upload any?
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 1, 2011 19:55:20 GMT -5
he wasnt deathly sick, only when he went into prison. i will never believe that wendel was involved. i will send the pictures of the fisches in atlantic city
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 2, 2011 6:52:25 GMT -5
It may seem that way but its just not true.
I have some medical documents to prove otherwise. And the Pardon application contains an Expert's evaluation of his illness. It was a process that got worse and worse.
Thanks. I'll scan them and post them on the board when they arrive!
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 3, 2011 9:14:50 GMT -5
So Michael, why do you believe Parker got it so wrong? I thought he was a good evidentiary detective. What caused him to ignore certain hard facts and go after Wendell?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 4, 2011 7:05:45 GMT -5
Several factors coming together at the perfect time.
Parker was on the outside looking in. The NJSP jealously guarded their information, specifically to keep Parker in the dark so that he would not steal away the solution of this Case. (They even sent "Spies" and "Moles" to get information FROM him then report back to Lamb so that they not only knew what he had developed, but whether or not he had what they did too.
That was perhaps the most disastrous since Parker was more of "himself" in '32.
This leads me to my next point.... From about the beginning of this Case Parker wasn't the Parker of legend, and thus began the devolution of his abilities.
Next, it was always Parker's belief, as was just about everyone else at the time, there was a local aspect of the Crime. Wendel had purposely thrust himself into Parkers sites, intentionally, and while Parker may not have necessarily believed he WAS the culprit, he allowed Wendel to think he believed him when he said he was in touch with those who were - despite already knowing it was Wendel who had called him pretending to be a Kidnapper.
Parker works with Wendel for over 4 years as a "contact" man on this Case. As Parker's health deteriorates, Wendel's persistence gets stuck in his head. Sometimes he had moments of clarity but it always came full circle back to Wendel. There are some reasons for this but the old Parker wouldn't have been in this mess or have been "fooled" (if that's the proper term).
For example: When Kirkham was bringing Wendel back from White Horse Wendel told him he had been tortured. Kirkham knew Wendel's rep and did not believe him. Once Wendel saw this wasn't working, he then switch to the fact he "knew about three or four murders" he could tell about." When this caught Kirkham's attention he then moved on to the "Salamandra Murders."
This is classic Wendel, and if Kirkham knew this so did Parker - the healthy Parker. You see by 1935 Parker was real bad, and by the time of his trial, well, his testimony speaks for itself.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 4, 2011 7:46:58 GMT -5
mike, you really believe his lawyer would let him stand trial if he was that sick? i dont buy any of this, it sounds like poor excuses
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 4, 2011 16:58:38 GMT -5
They did try Steve.
First and foremost Ellis's problems were like a family secret. It just wasn't spoken about. Next, when it came time for a Defense he got hostile with his own Legal Representatives concerning his health.
Then you had former Gov. Silzer who kept getting into it with Judge Clark. Clark in turn went after the Defense every chance he got. Green blamed Silzer's conduct for the outcome.
Like I said, there is a lot here. I've been through it all and still need to review it all again. If you take up a position try to remain open minded that there is stuff you haven't seen yet. I was untying string on packages of material that didn't look like it had been opened since it was packed away. Yet here is material open to anyone who wanted to read it and I just don't think anyone ever did.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 5, 2011 10:18:02 GMT -5
Quick question to anyone who thinks they may know the answer: Why was Wendel under the guard of US Marshall's who were on "high alert" prior to the Federal Trial?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 7, 2011 8:23:09 GMT -5
I know we've gotten off topic of this thread but since we are already here we may as well continue on.
But before I do... John Trendley has taken a beating over the years. He is especially hated by those who believe Hauptmann did this all by his lonesome. They try to say he didn't qualify as a Expert even though he testified in some pretty serious Cases over the years. He even admitted error in one of them. Gleefully, this is pointed out by those who "hate" him. But what they do not point out is how he completely fooled an EXPERT by forging a document the EXPERT deemed real.
Here my friends is the real reason, because according to those who are supposed to know better - that just can't happen.
Ah, but it did, and that fact will rise from the grave like a Specter each and every time someone tries to malign Trendley.
They invent facts by saying the other Experts "quit" after examining the ransom notes.
That lie has been disproven YEARS ago by Lloyd's book. Myers and Malone never even examined the notes, and later, Myers would shop his services to Gov. Hoffman. So why did history, before Lloyd's book, record they saw the notes then left because they thought Hauptmann wrote them?
You be the Judge and also be the one to know the remaining Experts NEVER even had the time they wanted with the notes. I can say with certainty that none of them weren't called because they felt Hauptmann wrote them.
Does that mean he didn't? No. It means we have all the FACTS before drawing our own personal conclusions about stuff. We don't need BS to cloud our judgment.
Let the chips fall where they may thank you very much. Why do people think they need to invent stuff in order to be believed?
Now to my question above.....
It seems a new Prosecutor came to town in the City of Trenton. Andrew J. Duch (not to be confused with Andrew K. Dutch) and he informed everyone he would be prosecuting Wendel.
Geoghan knew there was a NY law on the books that would allow Wendel to legally be picked up in NY on Bail Jumping, and both he and Quinn decided to guard Wendel like he was the President of the United States in case Trenton came up to get him. Geoghan had made a deal with Wilentz that Wendel would be returned to NJ AFTER the Kings County actions. Wilentz made a deal with Wendel, but Duch was having none of it. And so, Wendel upon learning of this new issue, started screaming lawsuit against Wilentz.
Oh what a tangled web! I love it!
But its Gov. Hoffman and nobody else who is wrong - right?
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 7, 2011 19:32:37 GMT -5
your trying to sell john trendley to me? he made a ass out of himself on the stand. who cares who he duped. as far as wendel goes, you can never sell me that ellis parker was so sick that he didnt know what he was talking about at his trial. as far as meyers goes they saw what they were up against and im sure they saw some of hauptmans writings. they werent stupid, plus reilly couldnt pay them what they wanted. gov hoffman was wrong in sticking his nose in this case the wrong ways
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 8, 2011 6:48:04 GMT -5
Not trying to "sell" anyone. That's my point. However, its important to note all the facts & circumstances, both the true ones - and those ignored. There is much to his testimony that Reilly left on the cutting room floor. Hard to say if it was bad when most people don't have any idea what I am talking about.
By trial he was too far along. Which part of his testimony do you want to discuss? It's hard to avoid. Winking, laughing, being a hostile witness.... to his OWN DEFENSE LAWYERS! Steve, a good neutral perspective of Parker is represented in Hynd's article. Have you read it?
And what exactly makes you so sure? Neither he nor Malone ever laid eyes on those notes before they left. Lloyd is right, his source is solid, and I've found more since. Not only that, Myers later shopped his services around, and specifically tried to get on board of Gov. Hoffman's reinvestigation.
Do you know how many times Wendel was arrested, and what for - after Parker's Trial?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 8, 2011 19:10:34 GMT -5
Let me slip back to the Handwriting again. I am willing to bet, despite the absolute proof concerning the fact that NO Defense Handwriting Expert refused to testify because they saw those notes - that some will still continue to say that's what happened. It's like the Lawyer who believes the law is a secret that only they and other Lawyers understand. Everyone else can't possibly get it so they are disregarded. Why are people like that? Well its like this.... Some people actually believe they cannot be wrong. And if they are then people won't believe the other stuff they say. So they continue to repeat things regardless of whether or not it is actually factual. It's ignorance regardless of whether or not they believe it themselves. Think of the world being flat vs. round arguement. These people would still be saying its flat. This is exactly why its so damn hard to study this Case. Someone can be right about a point but support that point with inaccuracies which they refuse to let go off. Back to Trendley... What makes it tough is that the forger has to think of so many things at once, and he's usually too amateurish to realize it. He has to disguise or suppress every revealing characteristic of his won handwriting and there are many. At the same time he must include all the telltale characteristics of the handwriting he is trying to imitate and they, too, are myriad.
If he succeeds in doing all these things (and he never does), other pitfalls await him. It may turn out that the ink he used, or the paper actually wasn't available on the purported date of the forged instruments. Or he may (as a forger did in one case I investigated) trace a signature on a canceled check and accidentally let his pen fall into perforation holes, leaving "knots" to the signature to betray him. [Forgers Can't Win, by Clark Sellers, Washington Times Herald, 9-4-60] And so it is written by one of the Holiest of Holy. Here is a guy certain QDEs pray to before they go to bed. And yet - this damned John Trendley totally disproves it. All of it. Mr. Trendley can copy anyone's handwriting so well that the owner can hardly tell the difference. He has used this trick occasionally in courts. He will imitate the handwriting of his client, and then have it quietly submitted as part of an exhibit. Testimony of opposing experts loses its value when they 'positively identify" Mr. Trendley's writing as that of the accused. [Illinois Magazine, Robert Boylan, date unknown] So here we have an Expert duping other Experts. It's like being a Member of a Secret Cult then disproving they aren't really Jesus Christ's direct descendants. How dare he turn against his own people? Its why you'll see the occasional QDE go off on a childish rant against him. About how its "unfair" for the QDE to be "tricked." Wait a minute - Are you kidding me? Think about this..... A Forger is always attempting to fool someone. An "Expert" claims he can tell. But the Expert can't tell Trendley's from the real thing. I would think, in the name of Justice, Trendley would be congratulated for showing the Court that certain "Expert" can be wrong too. And as much as I love Trendley and the type of "control" he offers to a group of people who are just as human as you or I - his talents are certainly not unique. Sure, most aren't like him but what of those who are? And what of those who did nothing wrong sitting on the wrong side of the table from one of these so called "Experts?" Thanks but no thanks. Could you imagine if the CIA taught their Agents forgery techniques? Think they'd get away with it if they did?
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 8, 2011 20:02:13 GMT -5
theres so much evidence that ellis was behind this stupid ploy to make wendel confess. if he was so sick, why would his lawyer put him on the stand? are you telling me trendley was the real deal? the others didnt count? this is amusing.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 9, 2011 6:51:18 GMT -5
Does that include the evidence I sifted through? You see, its hard to evaluate evidence you don't see, but it makes it easy to ignore. I have put together important files on people involved in this conspiracy (am I allowed to use that word?) who are never mentioned in any book.
When I was researching the Handwriting I counted almost 400 Cases that Trendley was qualified as an "Expert" in. His skill at forgery appears unchallenged, instead, drawing venomous names instead of simply admitting he's fooled other "Experts."
And so, are people he fooled "Experts?" Instead of looking at the big picture its easier just to attack Trendley.
I agree Osborn S. was the best of them. But I also submit to you that he was not above being wrong either.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 9, 2011 7:28:00 GMT -5
im not attacking trndley, is that he did nothing to help hauptmann. the handwriting was to strong connecting hauptmanns handwriting to it. as far as the experts, i always read that clark sellers was the best one there
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 9, 2011 17:38:13 GMT -5
Where does Haring fall in all of this?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 9, 2011 19:17:44 GMT -5
Haring was supposedly a "rebuttal" witness. In reality, the Prosecution sewed up most of the Experts in order to prevent them from testifying for the Defense. Dare I say that whoever was paying the bills would probably get the desired testimony? Maybe not all, but you had better believe that it sometimes worked out that way - and the Prosecution knew it too....
The Prosecution was absolutely petrified that Farrar would stab them in the back so they hid him far away from the Defense.
Look at the Mowell Case for example. The "Experts" sent an innocent woman to prison, then other "Experts" got her out. She winds up dying from a disease she picked up in Jail but not before suing - and winning. Guess who actually penned out the questioned document?
Ever ponder how "Experts" see the same material then draw the exact opposite conclusion?
Two of the Ayatollahs (Stein & Osborn) were on opposite sides a few times. Who do you root for then I wonder?
Anyway, I have Haring's book, and a small file on both him and his son if there's anything specific you want me to look up just say the word.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Mar 10, 2011 7:14:04 GMT -5
well kevkon the reason they drew the same conclusion is because his handwriting was so similar to the notes with misspellings and other things, how could they they go to the defense. and this notion mike said about that the prosicution got all these experts to up against the defense is another untrue excuse. as for what i read haring was called by hauptmanns first lawyer tov look at the notes but couldnt come to the conclusion they wanted to
|
|