|
Post by Michael on Oct 1, 2007 5:22:44 GMT -5
Interestingly enough, I was sent a couple of posts on the LKT site one of which was a question involving Rev. Burns. As anyone who reads this board knows, Sue provided the answer to this question some time ago in a series of informative posts about him. And so it seems obvious the person posing this question on the other board wasn't aware of this fact. Why? Because when someone was able to quickly answer it, based upon Sue's post, the person who asked the question seemed to become over emotional lashing out at the person answering the question! Ultra sensitive to say the least - but for what reason? I guess everyone was supposed to pretend they didn't know and wait to be enlightened? Who the hell knows.... Then of course the next post coming from another of that Granfalloon - but where does he get his information? Here is my post from September '06. You'll notice my source is listed and is in full compliance with Kelvin's rulebook: Here is another interesting fact(oid) which I just came across in a magazine article written in 1936....
The convict who escaped from Georgia, John Burns, who later became famous for his story, I Was a Fugitive From a Chain Gang then pardoned by Gov. Moore (Master Detective p87) was none other then Preacher Vincent Burn's brother.
Vincent Burns was the man who claimed he was "confessed" to by the Kidnapper and made the famous outburst in Flemington which led to his ejection from Court. (Michael) Anyway, its nice to be a part of a board where none of these "shenanigans" go on. If a question is asked I surely want as many answers/ideas that anyone has. If your source is the LKT then by all means cite it. One should always cite their sources and you won't be attacked for doing so - ever.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Oct 1, 2007 14:50:26 GMT -5
The Georgia Fugitive--New York Times October 21, 1934
"It will be recalled , in fact, that the present Governor of New Jersey, less than 2 years ago, refused to honor the extradition requisition of Governing Russell of Georgia, for the surrender of one Robert Burns who had became widely known through his book "I am a Fugitive From a Georgia Chain Gang".
" Governor Moore (NJ) wrote no opinion, but apparently based his decision on the arguments presented on Burn's behalf by the counsel of the ACLU. That Burns Georgia sentence was disproportionate to the crime which he had committed , that the punishment which he had undergone and to which he would be again subjected was unduly severe, that he had rehabilitated himself and was entitled to retain his freedom" end quote
Note; Isn't it fascinating how many known criminals benefited from the LKH? By now we have lost count?
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 4, 2008 13:37:30 GMT -5
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,930855,00.html Monday, Mar. 23, 1936 In Palisade, across the Hudson River from Manhattan, members of a nondenominational Union Church last week dismissed their spectacular pastor, Rev. Vincent Godfrey Burns, 42, ostensibly for having called them "cutthroats, skunks, snobs, greedy aristocrats." Pastor Burns has an equally spectacular brother, Robert Elliott Burns, who fled from a Georgia work camp, wrote a book about it (I Am a Fugitive From a Georgia Chain Gang), three years ago persuaded Governor Moore of New Jersey not to send him back. Year ago, toward the close of the trial of Bruno Richard Hauptmann in Flemington, N.J., Preacher Vincent Burns leaped-up in the courtroom, babbled something about a man having confessed the Lindbergh kidnapping to him. Rushed out of court, Mr. Burns tried unsuccessfully to sell a 10,000-word account of the "confession" to the Press. Said he: '"I am not a seeker of publicity." Two days later he turned up successively in three theatres in Queens, N. Y., performed a marriage on the stage of each, made a speech about the Hauptmann case.
|
|
|
Post by fgreenwiscedu on Jun 30, 2008 9:37:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 16, 2008 15:34:52 GMT -5
New Jersey's Histories Mysteries
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 13, 2022 19:25:36 GMT -5
I just took another look at the J.J.Faulkner letter to Gov. Hoffman. The handwriting resembles that of Charles Henry Ellerson, esp. the capital "C" and capital "E" . Has anyone compared the handwriting of CHE and JJF? The diction of the letter resembles that of a minister, as already has been observed. Perhaps Ellerson wrote the JJ Faulkner letter with the help of Rev. Burns. Note the use of "yea" and the emphasis on guilt, typical of ministers, not the usual emphasis. Ellerson may well have been paid for his role in the kidnapping and exchanged the gold bills at the Federal Reserve Bank. He also may have noticed the "J & J. Faulkner" card on the dumbwaiter when gambling with (Baker) Bacpn.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Feb 13, 2022 20:09:58 GMT -5
I just took another look at the J.J.Faulkner letter to Gov. Hoffman. The handwriting resembles that of Charles Henry Ellerson, esp. the capital "C" and capital "E" . Has anyone compared the handwriting of CHE and JJF? The diction of the letter resembles that of a minister, as already has been observed. Perhaps Ellerson wrote the JJ Faulkner letter with the help of Rev. Burns. Note the use of "yea" and the emphasis on guilt, typical of ministers, not the usual emphasis. Ellerson may well have been paid for his role in the kidnapping and exchanged the gold bills at the Federal Reserve Bank. He also may have noticed the "J & J. Faulkner" card on the dumbwaiter when gambling with (Baker) Bacpn. Hiram, Can you please post some of Charles Henry Ellerson's letters that you're looking at here? Thanks!
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Feb 13, 2022 20:52:56 GMT -5
I am having some problems trying to move images to the board right now, but for starters, take a look at the capital E in "Excellency" in the letter and the capital E in "Ellerson" in Charles Henry Ellerson's signature in his FBI statement. Then compare the capital C in the word "Capital" in the J.J. Faulkner letter (fourth line from the bottom) and the capital "C" in the name Charles as signed in his FBI statement. You may be able to detect other similarities. I'll keep trying to transfer the documents to the board.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Feb 13, 2022 21:08:14 GMT -5
I am having some problems trying to move images to the board right now, but for starters, take a look at the capital E in "Excellency" in the letter and the capital E in "Ellerson" in Charles Henry Ellerson's signature in his FBI statement. Then compare the capital C in the word "Capital" in the J.J. Faulkner letter (fourth line from the bottom) and the capital "C" in the name Charles as signed in his FBI statement. You may be able to detect other similarities. I'll keep trying to transfer the documents to the board. Hiram, Are these Ellerson's signatures you're talking about?
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Feb 14, 2022 4:47:49 GMT -5
Yes, Wayne. Thanks for your help.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Feb 14, 2022 5:50:45 GMT -5
Michael posted a copy of the J.J. Faulkner letter on the thread "J.J.Faulkner Letter." It's the first post on that thread. Perhaps someone could drag the image over onto this thread for the sake of comparison.
|
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Feb 14, 2022 19:03:25 GMT -5
Above can be seen the first page of the J.J. Faulkner letter to Gov. Hoffman. I am not someone who has knowledge of graphology, but it does appear that the handwriting on the two documents, Ellerson's statement to the police and the letter written by the alias J.J. Faulkner appear to be very similar. I suggest that Ellerson wrote the letter to Gov. Hoffman with the help of Rev. Vincent Burns. The diction appears to be that of a minister or priest. Few persons then would write "yea" in the sense of "Yea, i say unto you. . ." Also the mention of greed, a major sin, is mentioned. The "gardener" who had problems with guilt visited Burns twice, once in March of 1932 and again at a later time. It would have been at the second visit that the letter would have been written.
|
|
|
Post by bernardt on Feb 15, 2022 8:27:48 GMT -5
Has the handwriting on the J.J. Faulkner letter ever been compared with the writing found on the table with the "confession" found in South Plainfield, N.J.? There seems to be some resemblance here also though the latter was written in German.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 15, 2022 9:40:08 GMT -5
Above can be seen the first page of the J.J. Faulkner letter to Gov. Hoffman. I am not someone who has knowledge of graphology, but it does appear that the handwriting on the two documents, Ellerson's statement to the police and the letter written by the alias J.J. Faulkner appear to be very similar. I suggest that Ellerson wrote the letter to Gov. Hoffman with the help of Rev. Vincent Burns. The diction appears to be that of a minister or priest. Few persons then would write "yea" in the sense of "Yea, i say unto you. . ." Also the mention of greed, a major sin, is mentioned. The "gardener" who had problems with guilt visited Burns twice, once in March of 1932 and again at a later time. It would have been at the second visit that the letter would have been written. I mentioned in both V3 (p457) and somewhere on this board that Cassidy, before Hauptmann's arrest, actually said Ellerson " could" have written the ransom notes. Take that for what its worth especially knowing that NO handwriting expert believed that Hauptmann wrote the JJ Faulkner slip while many of these same people DID conclude he wrote the notes.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 15, 2022 10:00:16 GMT -5
Has the handwriting on the J.J. Faulkner letter ever been compared with the writing found on the table with the "confession" found in South Plainfield, N.J.? There seems to be some resemblance here also though the latter was written in German. I'm certainly no expert myself, but according to the rules and guidelines, its not supposed to be possible to compare two different languages. Ideally, they need a standard that contains some of the same words, written around the same time, etc. Of course nothing would surprise me nowadays. Meaning - someone could (or has?) emerge claiming to be an expert who disagrees or claim they've developed a new method to do so. If that is true, it would give me even less confidence than I already have. Admittedly, its been a while since I've gone thru the various guidelines but what would have to happen is for the table confession to be compared to a suspect's German standard - then identified. Next, they would have to compare this persons English standard to the Faulkner slip and make an identification there as well.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 16, 2022 19:54:51 GMT -5
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Feb 17, 2022 7:58:44 GMT -5
Thank you for posting the Ellerson letter, Michael. The handwriting on the letter bears only a slight resemblance to that of the J.J. Faulkner letter which bears a slightly pointed hand. Ellerson's is rounded and may be similar to that on the table. We'll keep looking and perhaps will find more information.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Mar 30, 2022 4:32:24 GMT -5
Charles Schippell was in New York on March 1, the night of the kidnapping. He returned to the farm near Mt. Rose on March 21, as he claimed. On that date Rev. Vincent Burns said that a "gardener" came to his service and made some kind of confession. Perhaps the "gardener" was Schippell on his way back from New York stopping at the church in New Jersey for the Palm Sunday service. He stated at one time that Lindbergh had threatened to kidnap his little girl. Perhaps the kidnapper approached him and asked for his assistance, claiming that Lindbergh was planning to kidnap little Charlotte and that it would be in Schippell's best interest to get Lindbergh out of the neighborhood by an attempt to kidnap Charlie. The handwriting on the J.J. Faulkner letter of Jan. 1, 1936 does not match that of Henry Ellerson. Schippell's handwriting is more pointed and may resemble the handwriting on the J.J.Faulkner letter. Has any comparison been made here?
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Mar 30, 2022 8:19:42 GMT -5
The route running from Hopewell to Princeton was said to be a lane for rum runners. These bootleggers sometimes use old structures on farm to store their cargo. He did not live there consistently, and actually--as has been pointed out--his mother-in-law owned the property. The burlap bag found near the body had held chicken feed. Schippell was a handyman of sorts with tools. He may have been asked to build the ladder, which was obviously not done by a professional. He was missing a chisel, so he said, like the one found at the site of the kidnapping. He could have made the ladder and taken his family to New York, leaving the ladder for someone else to pick up the evening of March 1.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 5, 2022 15:09:51 GMT -5
The handwriting on the J.J. Faulkner letter of Jan. 1, 1936 does not match that of Henry Ellerson. Schippell's handwriting is more pointed and may resemble the handwriting on the J.J.Faulkner letter. Has any comparison been made here? I've never seen any evidence that it was.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Apr 30, 2022 5:33:12 GMT -5
Vincent G. Burns claimed that a man came to him on Palm Sunday, March 20, 1932, and confessed to him that he played a part in the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby. Burns attempted to interrupt the Hauptmann trial and was ejected from court. Michael discusses this in Dark Corners Vol iv. Attached is a newspaper article published following that episode along with a photo of Rev. Burns.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Apr 30, 2022 5:47:40 GMT -5
The newspaper article posted above was published in the Asbury Park Press (New Jersey) dated Feb. 13, 1935.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 30, 2022 8:32:24 GMT -5
The newspaper article posted above was published in the Asbury Park Press (New Jersey) dated Feb. 13, 1935. Hope you had as much fun reading this chapter as I did writing it! Its also in this chapter where I reveal that Hoffman mostly likely killed himself.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Apr 30, 2022 10:45:12 GMT -5
Yes, I did enjoy reading the chapter on Vincent Burns. Thanks much. it was indeed enjoyable. I thought the Board might llike to see the photo and the newspaper article also to go along with it!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 30, 2022 19:14:48 GMT -5
Yes, I did enjoy reading the chapter on Vincent Burns. Thanks much. it was indeed enjoyable. I thought the Board might llike to see the photo and the newspaper article also to go along with it! I sure enjoyed both! Let me ask you a question Hiram (and to anyone else who'd like to answer or give their opinions), do you think someone actually confessed to Burns or that he was making it up?
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Apr 30, 2022 21:34:02 GMT -5
That is a very interesting question! Vincent Burns was blessed with an unusual personality and probably, like Condon, liked a good deal of attention. Some persons will perform an act to get attention; Burns may have been one of those. He did seem to change, or at least add to, the story he told. Perhaps someone did come to him to admit some action in the kidnapping, and Burns embellished the story considerably, adding detail as he went along. If someone did make a confession of sorts on Palm Sunday of 1932 in order to repent or cleanse his soul, it was probably not the Number #1 member of the kidnapping gang. As an aside, there appear to be quite a number of suspects who have serious emotional or mental problems--such as Duane Baker (Bacon), Charles Schippell, Joe Cerardi, and even others. The kidnapper had to be clever enough to stage the scene involving the Temple of Divine Power duo and also the scene Uebel reported at the St. Raymond Cemetery. These people with the mental problems would not have the mental capacity to put these scenes together. I think we need to keep looking for #1. Burns did not see this person. Number #1 would have been more intent on getting away with the crime, not in confession or repentance.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 8, 2022 12:55:02 GMT -5
I think we need to keep looking for #1. Burns did not see this person. Number #1 would have been more intent on getting away with the crime, not in confession or repentance. I'm still of the position as I wrote on page 218-9. My guess is that someone confessed about something and it gave him the idea to run with this thing as a way to get himself involved. The fact he was quite willing to say it was Hauptmann, then shift gears in order to appeal to the Defense is quite telling to me. His last word on it, pointing the finger at Schultz, is just another tactic so often used by people who are lying. If there was anything to it, Hoffman would have backed him up or at least hinted he was a possibility, but as we saw, quite the opposite occurred.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on May 8, 2022 19:35:26 GMT -5
Rev. Vincent G. Burns waited until 1972 to publish New Light on the Lindbergh Kidnapping Mystery: An Autobiographical Account, but the day after his court outburst Burns said outright that he had a book in the works!
Burns: "I've got to live and I'll sell my 10,000 word manuscript to the highest bidder!"
According to The Philadelphia Inquirer for February 13, 1935, Burns said that 75% of the book was finished. He just needed to add the part about the Flemington court disturbance.
I'm not sure about Burns, but have read that he was a self-promoter and publicity-seeker -- one of his former classmates described him in those terms.
Another thing to think about -- could Burns have interrupted Wilentz's train of the thought as he was wrapping up his summation? Maybe Wilentz was about to say something that would have unintentionally acquitted Hauptmann? I don't think Wilentz had cue cards to refocus, certainly not a teleprompter!
Edward Reilly vehemently objected to the interruption, and alluded to the idea that it may have resulted in the guilty verdict.
|
|
|
Post by bernardt on May 9, 2022 5:28:39 GMT -5
Reilly was another one who liked attention. H may have blamed Burns for the verdict in order to excuse his own poor performance.
|
|