|
Post by Wayne on Jan 18, 2018 9:05:01 GMT -5
There are a number of sources out there and I know it's also in Jim Fisher's first book.
Hi Joe, You're right, Fisher mentions the dinner on pages 173 and 174 in The Lindbergh Case. But you have to be careful with Fisher, he does quote Jafsie Tells All as his only reference to this dinner. If you read the JTA pages, you'll see that Fisher misquotes Condon's account several times, even making up dialogue that is not in JTA. Fisher's book is, as he even said, partly a work of fiction, so you can trust his generalities (the dinner, if it did happen, was in late March 1933) but not the specifics (much of what Fisher claims happened there). The bottom line is that Condon's account of the dinner is the only first hand account of the dinner. No one else who was there confirmed it...not CAL, not Anne, not Ollie, not Elsie, not Myra.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 18, 2018 15:10:30 GMT -5
Fisher's book is, as he even said, partly a work of fiction, so you can trust his generalities (the dinner, if it did happen, was in late March 1933) but not the specifics (much of what Fisher claims happened there). Exactly right Wayne. Some people take his books as the word of God almost, but it's all just a mix of facts, half-truths, fiction, and guess-work. There is a method and reason behind anyone's statement.. this is a universal truth. People who have mental issues can sometimes be irrational. Irrational behavior is not a method. People backed into a corner sometimes talk or act emotionally. That is not a method either - it is a reaction that is not thought out. There's more examples but you get the point. One could look at what Condon said then try to apply these excuses to explain them. But that wasn't the case because there was an actual method behind it. Your treatment of Betty Gow painted her in a pretty unflattering and one-sided light, without offering any tangible connection between that behavior and her potential complicity within this crime. I do look forward to your second book, as I have enjoyed the first one a great deal for it's research value, and will certainly offer my perspective on your treatment of John Condon. Well, the book is called the "Dark Corners" for a reason. That reason is why I brought out new facts. I didn't personally create those facts - they always existed. So I let the chips fall where they may. That's all. If there had been new material where she was exactly how history misrepresented her I would have used that to show history had been right. But alas, she was not that person we all came to feel sorry for. Quite the opposite. So I think it needed to be mentioned. The woman was thrown out of Princeton for God's sake! Lloyd Fisher once said " truth is never slander" and he was right. Anyway, I do look forward to your position on the new material. Although he knows a lot, I can promise you that there will be material Steve does NOT know about.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 18, 2018 19:55:32 GMT -5
Now if this dinner did occur, one would presume it would have taken place at the Morrow estate in Englewood. Wouldn't Betty Gow have also been there, taking care of little Jon at that point?
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Jan 18, 2018 20:52:29 GMT -5
Now if this dinner did occur, one would presume it would have taken place at the Morrow estate in Englewood. Wouldn't Betty Gow have also been there, taking care of little Jon at that point? Hurt, You're batting 100. According to Condon in JTA (p. 211 ), "Late in March of 1933, I received an invitation from Mr. and Mrs. Lindbergh to have dinner with them at the home of Mrs. Lindbergh's mother, Mrs. Dwight Morrow, at Englewood, New Jersey." No mention of Betty Gow is mentioned at the dinner or afterwards in JTA. Here's my biggest problem with Condon. In both JTA (and in his earlier Liberty articles) Condon gives endless accounts of what he did. The dinner with CAL is a good example. After BRH is executed and the case is closed, Condon writes his memoirs. Now, if he is lying how come not one person -- CAL or Anne or Keaton or Walsh (who hated Condon) or Schwarzkopf or anyone else -- why didn't someone read Condon's book and say, "Hey, that didn't happen like that! That old bastard is lying!" To my knowledge, not one person who was there proved that Condon was lying. Eccentric as hell, yes, but a liar, no. Hopefully Michael's chapter on Condon will solve this conundrum once and for all.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Jan 18, 2018 22:26:40 GMT -5
Now if this dinner did occur, one would presume it would have taken place at the Morrow estate in Englewood. Wouldn't Betty Gow have also been there, taking care of little Jon at that point? Hurt, You're batting 100. According to Condon in JTA (p. 211 ), "Late in March of 1933, I received an invitation from Mr. and Mrs. Lindbergh to have dinner with them at the home of Mrs. Lindbergh's mother, Mrs. Dwight Morrow, at Englewood, New Jersey." No mention of Betty Gow is mentioned at the dinner or afterwards in JTA. Here's my biggest problem with Condon. In both JTA (and in his earlier Liberty articles) Condon gives endless accounts of what he did. The dinner with CAL is a good example. After BRH is executed and the case is closed, Condon writes his memoirs. Now, if he is lying how come not one person -- CAL or Anne or Keaton or Walsh (who hated Condon) or Schwarzkopf or anyone else -- why didn't someone read Condon's book and say, "Hey, that didn't happen like that! That old bastard is lying!" To my knowledge, not one person who was there proved that Condon was lying. Eccentric as hell, yes, but a liar, no. Hopefully Michael's chapter on Condon will solve this conundrum once and for all. Condon’s lies and dishonesty are pretty epic. That Hoage document proves it, albeit in a very verbose way. What good would it serve anyone actually involved to come out and publicaly correct Condon? The case was done and closed, officially.
|
|
|
Post by feathers on Jan 18, 2018 23:15:40 GMT -5
Amy mentioned in a previous post that Condon and Hauptmann both used the same boat house. I know Condon used a rowboat in his infamous "dunking" but I am don't think it had to do with that location. One thing I do know is that Dixon himself said that he never remembered Condon coming to his boathouse. Although City Island was a pretty small and "tight" community, I don't get the impression he was lying. Also, Condon did not enjoy the high regard that people nowadays seem to assign him. So while some residents of CI would possibly "cover" for him, during some of the investigations there were persons who flatly told the cops he was a fraud. I know this ship has sailed, so to speak, but Reich confirmed at trial that Condon had a rowboat. He was also reported as rowing to school every day in 1919 and in 1921 got his students to build a rowboat he christened "the Rose of Columbia" for a contest for the Bronx Home News (they lost).
Perhaps more to the point, Walter Winchell claimed in a column on September 26, 1934, that "... Hauptmann was and perhaps still is a member of two boat clubs on City Island - frequented by Dr. Condon..." The grammar of that sentence is a bit confusing - it is not clear Winchell is saying if Condon frequented the boat clubs or just City Island. I leave it to everyone to decide what Winchell's word is worth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2018 8:34:27 GMT -5
I know Condon used a rowboat in his infamous "dunking" but I am don't think it had to do with that location. One thing I do know is that Dixon himself said that he never remembered Condon coming to his boathouse. Although City Island was a pretty small and "tight" community, I don't get the impression he was lying. Also, Condon did not enjoy the high regard that people nowadays seem to assign him. So while some residents of CI would possibly "cover" for him, during some of the investigations there were persons who flatly told the cops he was a fraud. I know this ship has sailed, so to speak, but Reich confirmed at trial that Condon had a rowboat. He was also reported as rowing to school every day in 1919 and in 1921 got his students to build a rowboat he christened "the Rose of Columbia" for a contest for the Bronx Home News (they lost).
Perhaps more to the point, Walter Winchell claimed in a column on September 26, 1934, that "... Hauptmann was and perhaps still is a member of two boat clubs on City Island - frequented by Dr. Condon..." The grammar of that sentence is a bit confusing - it is not clear Winchell is saying if Condon frequented the boat clubs or just City Island. I leave it to everyone to decide what Winchell's word is worth.
Thank you feathers for this awesome confirmation about Condon having a boat. I knew about a boat from the FBI summary which claimed that Condon had a boat on City Island that he and his wife used when they stayed in their bungalow there. Exactly where this boat was stored, I didn't know. I just assumed it might have been Dixon's Boat house. Thanks for sharing your excellent research.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 19, 2018 9:19:59 GMT -5
I know this ship has sailed, so to speak, but Reich confirmed at trial that Condon had a rowboat. He was also reported as rowing to school every day in 1919 and in 1921 got his students to build a rowboat he christened "the Rose of Columbia" for a contest for the Bronx Home News (they lost). Perhaps more to the point, Walter Winchell claimed in a column on September 26, 1934, that "... Hauptmann was and perhaps still is a member of two boat clubs on City Island - frequented by Dr. Condon..." The grammar of that sentence is a bit confusing - it is not clear Winchell is saying if Condon frequented the boat clubs or just City Island. I leave it to everyone to decide what Winchell's word is worth. The ship has never sailed as it relates to the facts! Thanks for posting this and correcting me on this point! Thank you feathers for this awesome confirmation about Condon having a boat. I knew about a boat from the FBI summary which claimed that Condon had a boat on City Island that he and his wife used when they stayed in their bungalow there. Exactly where this boat was stored, I didn't know. I just assumed it might have been Dixon's Boat house. Thanks for sharing your excellent research. You too Amy! So we now have two sources that can be pointed to which say he owned that boat. This is a perfect example why our Board and our discussions are so important. Hopefully Michael's chapter on Condon will solve this conundrum once and for all. I try to avoid JTA! as a stand alone source because it cannot be trusted. Even if such a dinner occurred, whatever Condon wrote about it would only contain a very small part of the truth. As to your question... I agree with USC 100%. No one on the State's "Lone Wolf" side of things would ever want to create "doubt" as it surrounded Condon. Taking down Condon, at any point after the conviction, would be like shooting themselves in the foot by ultimately undermining their own position. Fact is, Condon only testified against Hauptmann because of the very pressure those same people put on him to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Jan 19, 2018 9:57:56 GMT -5
Anchors aweigh (from the Liberty series, part 9) --
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 19, 2018 10:06:20 GMT -5
Perhaps more to the point, Walter Winchell claimed in a column on September 26, 1934, that "... Hauptmann was and perhaps still is a member of two boat clubs on City Island - frequented by Dr. Condon..." The grammar of that sentence is a bit confusing - it is not clear Winchell is saying if Condon frequented the boat clubs or just City Island. I leave it to everyone to decide what Winchell's word is worth. What I can tell you is that Hauptmann only belonged to (1) Boat Club and that was Dixon's. I know this because of the police investigations. They went to each and every club on that island and in the area - some more than once.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Jan 20, 2018 11:53:00 GMT -5
Hi Hurt, As promised, here are the first 2 pages of 4 from JTA regarding Condon's dinner with CAL (the other two will follow):
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Jan 20, 2018 11:57:05 GMT -5
...and the last two pages:
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Jan 20, 2018 13:21:34 GMT -5
Hurt, Here are the 3 paragraphs from Loss of Eden (pages 272-273)--
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 21, 2018 11:30:57 GMT -5
To Wayne and All:
Note that in the Loss of Eden paragraphs, Milton has no footnote or end note references to anything supporting her idea that the Condon-Lindbergh dinner, as she said actually happened, was an attempted set-up by Lindbergh and Schwarzkopf in which Condon was to ask for more money for Lindbergh to show that he was a bad guy in the kidnap plot.
Also, several days later, as Milton states, Lindbergh allegedly cleared Condon at a meeting of federal and state law officials. Is there any record of such a meeting of law enforcement officials taking place with Lindbergh at about this time (March 1933) or do you think that Milton was fictionalizing on these points?
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 22, 2018 9:52:24 GMT -5
jim researched his case just as good as anybodys. he didn't have a website to get out of the starting gate like many authors did to ronnelles
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 22, 2018 9:55:45 GMT -5
no but you never know rich might do it again in the near future. if you want copies of any picture of where dixons boathouse, condons house, his violin shop was let me know
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 22, 2018 9:58:50 GMT -5
I had the pleasure of talking to joyce a couple of times many years ago, nice lady. I heard she passed away but cant confirm it
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 22, 2018 10:01:58 GMT -5
I don't know if he owned that boat, I think somebody told me years ago that he posed in that boat for the press. I may be wrong
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 22, 2018 10:04:15 GMT -5
I have photos of the police digging around where his locker was on city island
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2019 13:04:38 GMT -5
But another of Condon's "memories" is that AFTER Charlie's body had been found, he wrote a note to CAL and Anne and asked CAL for the safety pins THEN - but he had said previously he took them when he "knelt beside the crib" when he slept in the nursery that night. According to Condon's book, Jafsie Tells All, he claims on the morning of March 10th, after sleeping in the nursery, he surveyed the room. He went to the crib and handled the pillow and then his hand traveled down upon the blanket and he felt something metallic and he saw the two large safety pins that pinned the bed-clothing securely to the crib mattress. Condon then removed them and placed them in a little canvas pouch that he had in his pocket. He then continued looking around finally making it over to the French window area where there was a wooden box that had doors on the front. He opened the doors and discovered Charlie's toys. He started taking them out. One by one he took out the wood carved miniature animals that belonged to Charlie's Noah's Ark, focusing on the lion, the camel and the elephant. Unexpectedly, Lindbergh walked into the room at this time and Condon had to explain what the heck he was doing. He apparently secured CAL's permission to take the animals along and then decided to tell Lindbergh that he (Condon) exercised some "French Leave" and removed the two safety pins from the crib without permission and was going to take them with him! After explaining his plan on how he would use these things, CAL said to Condon, "Take them along, by all means." So the story goes as to how Condon came into possession of those safety pins!!
|
|
|
Post by denadenise1963 on Apr 17, 2019 22:51:19 GMT -5
thanks stella since I have so many pictures id like to do a picture book on the case titled before and after. people over the years told me these Lindbergh kidnap books don't have enough pictures. that's what id like to do since ive been to most of the sites and was lucky enough to photograph in hauptmanns house and attic I would definitely buy a copy too. How great to have then and now photos of all these places and people associated. It would be an excellent companion piece to almost every book ever written on the LKC.
|
|