|
Post by Michael on Mar 4, 2006 9:05:56 GMT -5
Maybe its me but I find it extremely odd that CAL would let his Security Guard go, and especially for the reason he explained he did it.
This is where I become a fan of Kevin's strategy of examining this crime...all the events leading up to it seem to compliment it. Were these coincidences?
Once we come upon an event such as the Violet-Whateley-Fisch connection I think we need to sit on it until we have more. I do not dismiss it but I just don't have enough to consider it worthy of placing it within the scheme of things yet. I am quite sure they would take the train....I don't think it common that either the Morrows or Lindbergh would loan their cars for personal use.
The receipts might help here. What certainly doesn't is someone portraying newspaper clippings as absolute fact as we see coming from the other board (Script).
|
|
|
Post by kanneedwards on Mar 4, 2006 9:10:30 GMT -5
rick, wasn't it fortuitous for CAL that he didn't go to the dinner that night and really lucky for the kidnappers! It all worked out so nicely.
|
|
|
Post by rick for kathy on Mar 4, 2006 22:02:18 GMT -5
Hi kathy...yes it surely is an odd coincidence? At first blush one might just think the opposite: Oh My God...if CAL skips the NYU dinner and comes home early then the whole case will be foiled! But no, it all works out just like clockwork inspite of this "unexpected suprise"? As it so happens, it doesnt matter and Colonel Lindbergh WAS on hand to ruin the whole show. He gives the kidnappers a two hour headstart, blocks the Mountain Man Bush/ he blocks the bloodhounds and he blocks the interviewing of the servants. Brilliant sleuthing on his part? Today I invented the 4 mile radius rule. I seriously doubt the logic of bringing lil Charlie Jr "back inside the 4 mile radius" 72 days later. Therefore, the entire kidnapping should be found inside that radius--including the kidnapper(s) and Charlies hiding place. The #1 extortion gang, which never had Charlie anyhow, is in the Bronx. Who first conceived of the disconnect between the kidnapping and the blackmail? Walsh, Parker or Buster Keaton?
|
|
|
Post by rita on Mar 4, 2006 23:57:14 GMT -5
The child might have been hidden in the house, or taken that day to a facility, person who cooperated.
|
|
|
Post by rick for rita on Mar 7, 2006 6:17:02 GMT -5
Yes...If in fact it was Charlie found on Mt. Rose Hill and not just the flannel T with blue threads....then Charlie never gets too far from home. Shippels Shack, still not located in reference to Highfields or the rented farmhouse could be close by. It is so CAllous to dump any body along side a road for any reason that there is some evil eminating from someone who could do that. It feels like the mob or hate crime to me for this ending? So, who hates who enough to do this?
|
|
|
Post by Elyssa on Mar 8, 2006 20:34:49 GMT -5
I may have over looked this somewhere, but could someone tell me, What was the reason Cal gave for letting the security guard go?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 8, 2006 21:50:34 GMT -5
He told the man that he didn't want people to think he was afraid....
|
|
|
Post by rita on Mar 8, 2006 23:32:32 GMT -5
Rita for Rick I think it had something to do with CAL and Dr. Carrel in and out corllaboration with the Nazi's. If their Nazi Collaboration was not real but cover, maybee the kidnap story was nothing but cover also? Why has the kidnap crime evidence been allowed to dissapear, and by what authority?
|
|
|
Post by Elyssa on Mar 10, 2006 13:11:17 GMT -5
When was the security guard let go? By Cal saying they've taken him or something to that effect March 1 maybe he'd had threats made that no one knew about. If the threats were from a complete outsider you'd want them to know your family was protected, but if it's someone you know you would want them to think you weren't afraid of them.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 12, 2006 10:31:18 GMT -5
He was let go on November 1, 1931. This is one of those circumstances that is very hard to get past (for me).
|
|
|
Post by rick member on Mar 17, 2006 22:44:08 GMT -5
I dont think we are very much closer to the Truth than 1932. But no further/farther either? If we add up all the witnesses that said BRH worked all day and picked Anna up at the Bakery plus the missing pay records and lies at the extradition hearing...well then we know for a fact that BRH didnt head out for the Sorrel Mountains and climb any ladders. Specially since all the prints wernet his....so...whos left to perp the dirty deed? Kuchla, Fran and Ollie? A cast of thousands? I wonder if the actually snatcher is even on our top ten list: 1. Gow, Ellerson and Red Johnson 2. Charles Shippell 3. Fisch and the Piemen 4. Paul Wendel 5. Dwight Jr. 6. The Morrow Sisters--Constance or Lizz 7. Charlie Jr falls out the window 8. Dr. Alex Carrel 9. The Mysterious Mersman Nazis 10 CAL and Dwight Jr.
PS Kevin--I am with you on the Lindbergh Photo...show us the photo and its provenance or it dont exist.
|
|
|
Post by kanneedwards on Mar 18, 2006 9:08:24 GMT -5
rick, I agree there is much yet to discover. i think everyone discounts the suspect Wendel. i believe Parker was brilliant and had an impeciable reputation. If he said it was Wendel then there must have been good reason. the baby's body was found in his direction,wasn't it? Also his personality seems to "fit" the crime to me. He certainly was an anti-social personality disorder if I've ever seen one. Parker never recanted his story and neither did anyone else involved. Wilentz got to Wendel and the rest is classic "jersey justice"
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,655
|
Post by Joe on Mar 18, 2006 10:53:32 GMT -5
I believe Parker had no greater reason to really suspect Wendel than his own ego. Wendel was no saint and he may have even baited Parker, but this is the clearest instance of railroading within the LKC. Parker was obsessed with power and his own self-importance and probably wouldn't have batted an eyelash if Wendel for some insane reasoning on his part, had been convicted.
Joe
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 18, 2006 13:50:44 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you here Joe. Parker was a great man and a Superior Detective.
Its not my impression that Parker fits into any of these things. Parker truly believed Wendel was involved. There's a ton of things I don't think you are considering....probably because you don't have them available to you. One thing that comes to mind was Parker Jr.'s testimony about driving Wendel around the scene....
Once John's book comes out everyone will have so much more information on Parker to consider.
|
|
|
Post by rick member on Mar 18, 2006 21:47:35 GMT -5
We already know that Wendel wanted desperately to impress Al Capone as he had tried to do so repeatedly. I could imagine Wendel wanting to get Big Al a "get out of jail free card" by snatching Charlie. Also, Wendel was broke and may have thought this was his last chance to make some easy dough. If Charlie was injured in some dumb accident then Wendel might want to drop out of the gang. We should all recall that Wendel had represented our dearest friend Fisch in a narcotics or smuggling case in Trenton a few years earlier. Its rather dangerous to know Fisch or have coffee with him in regards to the LKC? Fisch still holds center stage for me/
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on May 12, 2006 22:38:55 GMT -5
This may be a stretch ~ smite me if needed. Firstly, that peculiar ladder! Three parts too tall for Hopewell and two sections too short . Baby at Hopewell instead of Englewood.How's the idea that the ladder dimensions( 3 sections) were intended for use at Englewood~perp gets word of change of plans, quickly regroups for the kidnap at Hopewell. (and I put this possibility together with my suspicions of O. Whately and V. Sharp involvement)
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 13, 2006 6:40:45 GMT -5
No smites for saying what you think, at least from me. I am not sure I agree that the ladder was too short or too long for Highfields. It depends upon what window and what entry method is used, and that is still open for debate.
I believe J Fisher put this idea forward, though I don't know if he was the first to do so. I wouldn't rule it out, but where is the evidence that the ladder in either 2 or 3 sections would have been more suitable for Englewood? I would have to see dimensions from grade to an appropriate window there for this idea to make more sense to me.
|
|
rick3 TrooupadourII
Guest
|
Post by rick3 TrooupadourII on May 13, 2006 6:59:41 GMT -5
No Kevin--smite me! When you think about it (?) it doesnt even appear that this particular ladder was made for climbing. With 19" rises it looks more like a ...Stage Prop. Combine this with the fact that it is both too high and too low for the window and it also "broke" doesnt exactly build our confidence in either the design or the builder now does it? Wonder what it was built for?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 13, 2006 7:19:15 GMT -5
Rick, I wouldn't even smite you. Really, do you think it resembles a musical instrument perhaps? Funny that I have been able to climb my copy, so has Kelvin and others.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 13, 2006 13:26:50 GMT -5
kevin.....I dont know for certain about the climbing? I think it is far more likely and explainable that the ladder broke on the way up not the way down? At least from the perspective that the Perp with insider help and directions could just walk out the front door. After all, why risk injury when you can use the stairs? There never were any "falling down marks" in the mud.
Maybe the very poor grade of North Carolina Pine chosen for this project, venture or "whatever" in 1932 lended itself to fracture. Maybe the quality grade was soo poor that it had too many knots? Or that it was missed graded? I suggest that this fact alone supports BRHs contention that he didnt build it and he wasnt there? The ladder was suicidal?
Maybe the perps were just way too heavy for the ladder and too dumb to know it until they were about 1/2 was up that it was going to shatter. When you order a ladder to be built for you for "whatever" you likely expect it to holde your own weight during the operation....but since Osha Regulations were not enforced during Prohibition apparently the customer was sold defective goods/ Too bad they didnt sue Samuelson--we could look up the case #!
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 13, 2006 14:12:58 GMT -5
That could be because the ladder did not fail (completely)
It is not so much the species and grade as the design and wood sizing. Of course Mahogany or Ash would have been a better choice.
Why? Are you aware of his ability as a ladder designer/builder?
You said before there was no evidence of a fall. Where is the evidence of a "shatter"? Were shards and slivers of wood recovered from the ground beneath the window?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on May 10, 2007 13:41:56 GMT -5
Any thoughts on the watchman that CAL let go?
|
|