kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2008 19:26:29 GMT -5
I thought I would start a thread regarding an issue which I will readily admit to not being expert at, the process of money laundering. Specifically I am referring to the actual process of taking Lindbergh ransom money and exchanging it for "clean" money and/or goods and services. Now it has been suggested numerous times that Hauptmann and Fisch were only involved in this aspect of the LKC. It seems to me that this idea carries some problems with it. If Hauptmann is only "laundering" the ransom money then my first question is, what is his margin? What would those Lindbergh ransom bills be worth on the street? I would have a hard time believing that this money, especially the gold certificates, would have much value in the metro area. That would mean that the $50 K that must be split among various participants would be worth quite a bit less than it's face value. How much less? Any guesses? Could one determine this value and make a comparison with Hauptmann or Fisch's finances? Is it likely that this was the scenario?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 1, 2008 7:53:16 GMT -5
There were many creditable (IMO) people who were brave enough to come forward with stories concerning Fisch attempting to launder money. Now one thing most of us do, or have done, is always associate this with Lindbergh Ransom money. I believe Fisch and others were constantly involved in other schemes, and/or hustles and these recalled attempts could involve those "other" things, Lindbergh Ransom, or both.
No one remembers Hauptmann doing this until the summer of '34, which of course is when he is easily caught from doing things which appear incredibly stupid for someone passing Lindbergh Ransom.
Rab's research is probably the best on this subject. His final conclusion, or my interpretation of it, was that $10,000 of the ransom when all of Hauptmann's figures are utilized, is still missing.
My issues are that I believe there are monies which exist prior to this crime which are being counted towards the ransom. There is a "missing" period of time in Hauptmann's books. There are things happening which do not appear to have the money available to occur. We have Hauptmann after the crime taking money from friends, acquaintances, and/or associates and then investing it in the market for them. When the money comes out and goes to them with their profit it appears this is all being counted towards his ransom totals.
There are many reports which insinuate this money was being brought to Europe where gold notes were worth more on the exchange there. Now if Ellis Parker was right and ransom was being sold at 40 cents on the dollar then someone going to Europe could really make some money.
I know that Hauptmann and Fisch definitely had a partnership in stocks and furs. Their goal was to make money through this partnership. Hauptmann appears to be the guy who stayed at the market all day investing money. It doesn't appear that he had the time to launder all of this money successfully, deposit all the clean money into his bank and stock market accounts, AND speculate all day in the financial district. It does appear that once he starts to try - the Police easliy track him down.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 1, 2008 8:08:40 GMT -5
I guess what I am asking is what the "street" value of that ransom money would be if one was engaged with buying or selling it. I mean say, for instance, that a person in possession of this money wanted to get rid of it by selling it to another willing to launder it. How much on the dollar do you suppose it would be worth? It seems to me that it wouldn't be worth much at all, especially the gold notes. But it also seems to me that the value of it might rise as diametrically related to the geographic proximity to the Bronx. I hear some theories which have Hauptmann and/ or Fisch acting solely as launderers and I am just trying to get a handle on the actual mechanics of this process. I would think it to be a negotiable transaction.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 30, 2009 17:09:10 GMT -5
So whatever happened to the rest of the money? Did it slip past Authorities who gave up looking for it? Was it burned? Was it tucked away for later? Were there any sightings afterwards? Any investigations? Any - anything? We just can't assume something. And if we do then its important to simply state it is an assumption and what we are basing that assumption on. There is so much out there folks. 9 years I've been combing through Archives in search of documentation and I continue to find new things each and every trip:
|
|
|
Post by Rab on May 28, 2009 7:25:24 GMT -5
I thought I would comment on this as it's of relevance to the discussion in the other thread around Hauptmann's and Fisch's finances.
I don't know what the street value would be of hot money, I suppose it depends quite how hot it was. Despite all the claims I'm not aware of any evidence that Lindbergh ransom money was available for purchase.
I think the more pertinent question in terms of whether Hauptmann was trading in hot money from March 1932 onwards is where did he get the money to buy the money. Even if we bought the ransom at 10c on the dollar that's still $5,000 that he didn't have. He was on his last legs financially by that point.
I'm not quite sure what you're referring to here. Is it the $4,000 that Hauptmann supposedly had at home? I did include that in my accounting of his income and expenditure (the one which showed approximately $10,000 "missing" from the ransom above what Hauptmann had and spent). I included it though there isn't a shred of evidence that it actually existed and in fact the available evidence points in the other direction. For example, if Hauptann had all this money at home why did he withdraw money from their savings account to purchase the car and pay for their "vacation" and why was the "vacation" done on such a shoestring. I could go on.
Rab
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 28, 2009 11:17:48 GMT -5
We have several people who claim Fisch was attempting to sell "hot" money. We, again, while considering the truthfulness also consider the opposite. This is a major problem that exists from all sides of this Case. Who do we believe and when do we believe them? Bias sets in and it very easy to believe what we want and shrug off what we don't.
Going back to Fisch selling "hot" money - if its true, we don't know its origins.
Frankly though, someone was laundering ransom. Was it Hauptmann? Was it Hauptmann only? Was it somebody else?
Fisch is an anomaly. He is rich but he's poor. He's industrious & hard working but he's a sham/scam artist. He is being swindled but is a Swindler. He was many things to many different people. What's the truth? Could it all be true?
He makes on one hand an easy candidate for a Co-Conspirator but on the other a Scapegoat. Do we honestly know when both he and Hauptmann met? Absolutely not. Part of Fisch's hustle was to keep certain people apart....to keep certain facts secret.....to remain "need to knows" exactly to those Parties needing to know only.
Next, Lloyd's book, The Case That Never Dies, inserts a new account to consider. Breckenridge's encounter with someone he thought was Fisch. While other's might be easier to dismiss, can anyone just as quickly dismiss Breck here? Did the Police follow this up or was this exactly what the Prosecution feared most?
I think I placed a couple of examples in my post in the other thread. The others are thoughts based upon tendencies, and other possibilities, etc. I believe it was you who first pointed out to me the huge deposits of change. Did Hauptmann gamble? Where was the change coming from? How does Hauptmann come into contact with $500 bill serials that he attributes to Fisch? $500s were used by Banks for transfers. Fisch was known to have possession of these in the past. We they selling $20, $10, and $5 to buy $500???
I don't think so.
The "trunk" money was taken into consideration by the Authorities (I've seen it in Peacock's notes) however, I think while considering it a possibility we should also factor in the other possibility - that its not true. Or even consider such a stash existed but not where & how its attributed.
I also see Hauptmann as a man willing to engage in "easy" money. When opportunities present themselves he takes them.
|
|
|
Post by Rab on May 29, 2009 11:40:04 GMT -5
Yes, we have people "claiming" Fisch sold hot money, in fact we have people claiming lots of things. I'm just not aware of any hard evidence. It's like with Steinweg. We only have his pretty confused testimony. Is that evidence enough? Not to me. We know how well gold certificate passings were investigated. None were traced to Steinweg. If some had been then we would have real evidence. Otherwise all we have is the fallibility of human memory and the complexity of motivations. So I don't think it's about believing somebody sometimes and not others - though I agree that there are mountains of case mythology built on such an approach. It's about whether we can take someone's statement and corroborate it with other known information or even independent statements. I think the change (coins) was a result of laundering, passing bills for small purchases. The same pattern was repeated in 1932 and 1934. In 1932 it was the Mt Vernon account and in 1934 Manhattan Savings. Same pattern but just different results: in 1934 it was the [then] more noticeable gold certificates that made the difference. I don't think he needed to make change in 1933 because I suspect he exchanged a significant amount during the gold recall. That kept him going. By 1934 he was low on funds and had to start converting the gold certificates he'd hoarded which were by then much more risky. I've said it many times - if he had got rid of all the gold notes in 1932 or early 1933 he would never have been caught. On the $500 question, we have discussed this in the past: lindberghkidnap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=news&action=display&thread=282#6091I don't know that it can be said that these were $500 bills. Serial numbers are not universally unique. As speculated in the thread, perhaps this was a partial list of bills which amounted to $500 rather than $500 bills. I agree Hauptmann would do anything for money. Rab
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 29, 2009 13:50:51 GMT -5
I consider it evidence but unless we had an actual bill then it couldn't be considered "hard evidence." Do I believe Fisch was laundering money? I personally do, however, I can in no way say it was Lindbergh Ransom.
We have more then his testimony. We have Police investigations and other people backing up the Gold Note assertion because he sold them to one person Frank Wilson was all over like a cheap suit. Apparently they recognized it was a real possibility.
True to my word I just found something new. According to what I found there was "excluded" testimony. I want to first verify this, if I can, then try to see if there's anything to it.
When do you think Hauptmann had time to launder all of this money while standing around speculating stock all day?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 29, 2009 15:59:08 GMT -5
What strikes me about the long California trip is that for someone in the trades such a long absence can be devastating. This was a time ( not unlike today) when there were too many people looking for too few jobs. That naturally makes it an employer or buyers market. No matter how good you are, if you are not available then someone else will take your place. Essentially you loose your place in the pecking order and if you contract directly you will loose jobs and potential jobs. Given that construction jobs have a lead time, what will happen is that you not only loose income from the time that you are away, but you will probably also loose potential work that will be ready when you come back. In short, it's a costly adventure and one that you might not recover from. What puzzles me is that Kloppenberg felt he could afford to do the same. I don't know, something just doesn't seem right about the whole thing. Add the absent records and it seems stranger.
BTW, on the issue of the "hot money" and "laundering". It's only "hot" if one is looking for it and that takes some appreciable effort. I have the original flyer with the serial numbers and have on numerous occasions attempted to identify gold notes on EBay. There's quite a few for sale at any given time. I'll tell you it is extremely time consuming and it's easy to miss a number. I know they later distributed a easier list but still, I really don't see how any merchant could stay in business if they checked all of the bills they received. I know once the gold notes were withdrawn it became easier, but it's still an arduous task.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2009 6:12:15 GMT -5
I will look into this a little more for you.
++++
What I found was a reference to testimony which was excluded from trial. I went to the Archives on Monday, consulted Mark, and searched for it but didn't have any luck. I think if this "exclusion" actually happened then its worth pursuing.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 3, 2009 16:39:20 GMT -5
Thanks Michael, I look forward to what you have or find. The "untouchables" in this case always intrigue me more than the "usual suspects" do!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2009 17:31:27 GMT -5
Questioning Hans Kloppenberg page 33: A: I worked for myself.. I worked sometimes for my landlord about fourteen days, and then I worked fixing furniture, something like that.
Q: Did you have your own shop? A: No.
Q: Where did you do the repairing? A: In other people's apartments.
Q: That was in 1930? A: Yes.
Q: Where were you working after that? A: That was for about two years. He goes on to say that he lived in the same apartment from August 1930 to Nov. or Dec 1932 with Dreissenger and Lempke. That means they managed the place while he was away for three months without his help on the rent. I will keep checking more stuff. There's mention of him in so many places that I am bound to find out more. Might want to check out the Trial Transcripts too. I don't remember everything he testified to.
|
|