kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 21, 2006 16:50:31 GMT -5
Of all the aspects and characters in this case none seems to be as puzzling to me as Jafsie. I just don't know what to make of this guy and I certainly can't get a bead on him. While there are countless examples of his peculiar actions the two that always seem to stand out the most for me are the hour and fifteen meeting with CJ and the police line up fiasco. The hour plus meeting at Woodlawn is puzzling to say the least. On the face of it I don't see how it is possible and yet Reich was there to witness it, at least the time. How could you talk for that long with a total stranger and especially under those circumstances? Yet Condon seems to only have a few minutes worth of information. It is like the Nixon tapes, what has been erased here? Then there is the famous police line up to consider. What I find really strange here is the actions by Condon in attempting to identify Hauptmann. Why does Condon speak to him in German and order military parade maneuvers? Did he know Hauptmann or CJ was an ex German soldier? Condon never said so before and that would have been very helpful info to reveal after the ransom exchange ( or even before). Did Condon know more about Cj from his long conversation at Woodlawn or is there another source? Any ideas here?
|
|
|
Post by rickIII trooper II on Apr 24, 2006 15:22:28 GMT -5
Kevin....because Gang #1, the Bronx Blackmailers, never did have Charlie, at least not alive, I can only imagine from the lengthy time frame that Condon is trying to talk CJ into continuing on with the kidnap hoax to achieve return of the body. Although Condon keeps saying he wants to see the goods, there is apparently no reasonable fall back position to prove that Charilie is alive--ie fingerprints, photos, t-shirt, phonecalls, birth marks etc? Maybe the boad deal excludes the easiest means of proving Charlie is still alive??? No cell phones? CJ says OK then post "Baby is Alive and Well" in the NY american tomorrow for my boys?
Boats contiunue to be of interest after Jafsie throws the ransom over the fence. Around the 12-13th of April the NYtimes reports Condon continues going on mysterious missions with a suitcase?? At one point it is reported that he boards a boat in Long Island Sound and meets a woman and John and Doc and gang of 5 on the boat? Pretty far out? Was this really Curtis? I dont know?
For me the wierdest thing about Condon is his IDs? At first John is a Scandanavian sailor? (think Red Johnson). then CJ says Red Johnson is inocent? Then Condon starts describing Fisch, flapping ears, hacking cough, shourt in stature 135 pounds. Later Condon describes John Gorch or Paul Wendel who look alike. Condon goes to Philly to ID Gorch? Is there anyone in this case at all not described by Condon as Cemetary John? yikes
|
|
|
Post by rick3 Trooper II on Apr 25, 2006 10:12:16 GMT -5
Kevin....in answer to your 1st question...it came to me in the shower this morning:
Someone previously guessed that Condon was "keeping all of his options wide open" when it came to his descriptions of CJ! This suggests that Condon was talking to himself or was waiting for CJ to set up the Patsy> in short Condon was lying. Clever though not to commit too early.
In other words, if and when someone got arrested and charged with the kidnap....Condon would then say "thats him"! Its easy to see that JFC had covered nearly every ethnic group and height and weight and accent. Condon meets CJ early on in the process on maybe March 12th? So at that time noone is a suspect yet except Red and Betty.....who are declared "inosent" by CJ?
So--if Red Johnson is the kidnapper, Condon can say "hes CJ"? (oops hes in jail?) but if Isador Fisch or Nosovitsky is arrested, then "hes CJ" too, and if Paul E. Wendel is arrested then he can say "hes CJ".
Why not BRH? Maybe Condon did not know he was a leading candidate? Or never thought he would be charged and extradicted? Does Condons fickle nature prove kidnap hoax. Maybe so? In certain ways yes.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Apr 25, 2006 15:06:23 GMT -5
In my opinion the problem with Condon is he lived his life to try to impress everyone to how great he was. In doing so he would lie and warp to a tall tale the truth. In this case when every angle and every peculiarity is important Condon causes more mystery and mis directions.
Its easy for someone to see a viewpoint he was involved. Though my thinking is that he might of hid details, might of hidden information including a someone he knew involved only to the hope of becoming a hero. In doing so he might have dug so deep that to come out with everything he knew would make himself look like an idiot rather than the hero he tried to be.
I will continue to look at him but it will always come back with more questions than understandings. Almost to the point the kidnapper(s) had it all over him and manipulated his personality to a T.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 25, 2006 18:57:21 GMT -5
I don't see how it is even remotely possible to talk for over an hour with someone and not even be sure if he is German. What did they talk about , boxing?
|
|
|
Post by rickII Trooper III on Apr 25, 2006 20:49:22 GMT -5
Kevin....early accounts even took the time to 1 hour and 40 minutes. All stories change dramatically and Mark Falzini is working on a time line of Condons tall tales...changing with each retelling. the only ting I that comes to me is from an earlier post on the defunct Board...Condon was supplying information as well as phishing for it. JFC needs CJ to stay in the hunt. Maybe CJ never went to Highfields so Condon had to describe the setup and the crib and safety pins et al. Then CJ says=="didnt I put the ransom note on the crib"? Maybe JFC had to convince CJ that the ransom was still up for grabs even thought this group did not have control of Charlie.../maybe some kind of double payoff or exchange had to take place for CJ to find Charlie. who knows when Condon is lying all over the place whats the Game. Condon reported goes on secret missions after the 1st payoff--maybe with the remaining $20K? And when did JFC go on the boat in Long Island Sound? "Would I fry if das kinder is tot?" says CJ in a Scandanoovian accent. "Noways" replys JFC...."hes alive and well"! who wrote this script/
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 27, 2006 8:39:53 GMT -5
Did Al Reich at least confirm the time Condon was MIA at Woodlawn? It could be possible that Condon is creating these stories simply to compensate for what he didn't do. Braggarts usually are over-compensating for their perceived deficiencies. The truth may be that Condon was scared as hell and spent that time building up his nerve. It might also be that CJ wasn't the elusive and passive figure here. I still find his actions at the line-up to be very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by rickII TRooper3 on Apr 27, 2006 8:54:33 GMT -5
Kevin...heres another wierd question...its #2 on Lou Wedemars list of 50: Why did Condon follow the man with the hankerchief? During the 15 min when CAL and JFC were waiting both saw this man. Then when jFC was exiting St. Raymonds, the man goes by and Condon follows him around the curve in the road. But while the man was still there CJ hails Condon from inside the cemetary wall? CAL and JFC were never asked to explain this during the Trial. Also, there were at least two secret trips by Condon in which he evaded his followers. One reported by Eads to Connectitcut and another April 18th to a boat in Long Island sound reported by the NYTimes. In the latter he meets "Doc" and "John" together. These trips got buried. As did Charlie Jr.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 27, 2006 18:44:55 GMT -5
Everything about Condon and the cemetery meetings is odd. But then, so is Jafsie.
|
|
|
Post by rickII Trooper III on Apr 27, 2006 19:54:18 GMT -5
Kevin: who hired Condon, who invited Condon to Highfields, who supported Condon, who put his only first borne sons life solely in Condons hands, who gave Condon a free pass, a free hand to advertise 33 times in the NYC papers, a free get out of jail free card and a free vacation in Panama? Who believed in Condon from March 8th to May 11th? Who took one week to find Condon thru the Bronx Home News totally by accident?
|
|
|
Post by elyssa on Apr 29, 2006 12:17:10 GMT -5
john f condon-cemetery john - are they one and the same? Maybe jafsie was talking about himself when he spoke of cemetery john. could be that's who lindbergh named his second son after. It would make sense, that lindbergh wanted to pay tribute to the man who saved his a--...
|
|
|
Post by RickIII SkepticII on Apr 30, 2006 6:19:59 GMT -5
Elyssa/ there are an awful lot of Johns in the LKC. Does John Condon pick his own name for CJ? But then there is also Curtis that meets John and Lars and Hilda in Cape May NJ. Its easy to remember and implys we are all engaged in some form of Intercourse. I stumbled on an interesting factoid in Walshes accounts in the Jersey Journal in November 1932. "Only Condon and Lupica have laid eyes on the kidnapper"! (end quote) This should be a huge revelation to all those who believe the key eyewitnnesses Hochmuth and Whited 2 years down the road. Of these two we could believe Lupica and he cant provide any + id.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 1, 2006 9:01:07 GMT -5
This is an excellent observation....
I believe Condon was brought into the case to confuse and insulate. He almost cracked when Walsh had him over a barrel but politics got in the way. Once he refused to identify Hauptmann, it was only then he caved in knowing he would be named an accomplice after being threatened by both Police and Prosecution.
|
|
|
Post by wcollins on May 7, 2006 14:27:19 GMT -5
Condon's behavior, well-noted by Kevin, does raise questions, does it not, about whether this was a simple crime at a rural locale?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 8, 2006 6:50:55 GMT -5
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Condon knew more than he revealed.
|
|
|
Post by wcollins on May 8, 2006 8:00:17 GMT -5
Condon's service as umpire in the Bronx, old "eagle eye," as he liked to be called tells us something about his notion of himself as the arbiter. From that position he feels he has the right to call the plays. His reputation was widespread in the area.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 8, 2006 9:01:58 GMT -5
he had a reputation as a nut. i think he had that nickname "jafsie" dreamed up long before he hit the lindbergh home. dwight morrow sr. knew condon before the baby disappeared, actually when the object was constance.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 8, 2006 16:32:54 GMT -5
Yes, its more then a well intentioned "Patriot" at work here..
We agree here, in fact I think most do. If not I would love to hear some theories against this assertion. Kevin, why do you think Condon was holding back?
I've found differing opinions as to his personality.... "Jafsie" wasn't the only "code" Condon used. Thomas, can I ask the source for DMS knowing Condon before Charles Jr. was snatched?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 8, 2006 20:56:23 GMT -5
Michael, I am not sure I would say we disagree on many issues. It is just that my method of understanding and learning is to challenge and discover the veracity of one's propositions. I really try to hold all reasonable possibilities open and not discount them. But I do like to see how well an idea is formed and how it stands up under scrutiny. So what do I think about Condon's holding back? Well that is a tall order. It is interesting when you read the FBI files which cover so many figures in this case. When it comes to Condon you can almost see the agent struggling with his description of this strange man. Personally, I think Condon is a man who is use to being in a superior position. I also think he harbors an insatiable desire to save the day, not unlike Don Quixote. I am not sure, though I don't dismiss it, that he has any criminal tendencies. I absolutely don't believe most of his storytelling regarding CJ and tend to believe he is engaging here in self aggrandizement. I cannot see anyone in their right mind considering him for an accomplice.
|
|
|
Post by rickII skepticIII on May 8, 2006 21:11:05 GMT -5
...and noone in their right mind with a sane attorney would pick John F. Condon as a go-between to recover any family member you wanted back? Arthur Koehler was about 5 minutes from nailing Rail 16 to Condons garage? All he needed was some square nails. He forgot the exact address?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 9, 2006 6:43:27 GMT -5
And who picked him?
Built with Southern Yellow Pine ??
|
|
|
Post by wcollins on May 9, 2006 8:21:55 GMT -5
Condon would seem to be one of those people whose quest for fame has always been frustrated. The term "accomplice" or "criminal" does not apply him, just as "dupe" or "eccentric" would seem too easy a term as it implies dismissal. He is involved in mysteries, some of his own making. Anyone watching him perform for his "roundtable" of young men night after night would see a person who, with careful manipulation, could be used effectively -- because once entranced (or enchanted) with the idea that he repeats like a Buddhist prayer cycle, "put the baby's arms around the mother's neck," he can never be dis-enchanted. The kidnap "singnature" intrigued him more than any other person in the case. Did the kidnapper know of his background in this regard? There is still the mystery of why he thought the letter he received was "it." Had he been forewarned some way?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 9, 2006 21:07:24 GMT -5
Condon's trial testimony indicates this doesn't it? Here he admits on the stand he saw the symbol before he even opened the letter on which it was located. The tired old agrument that Condon was lacking his faculties just can't be applied selectively.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 10, 2006 7:09:51 GMT -5
The problem with Condon as a source is one that Michael has rightly brought up with others in this case, maybe even more so. Do you accept everything he says or reject it all as fabrication. Picking and choosing selectively is hazardous and subject to prejudice.
|
|
|
Post by wcollins on May 10, 2006 7:53:14 GMT -5
Picking and choosing is usually a dangerous occupation, agreed. But do we all tell the truth all the time? Do we all remember everything we do? And get it right when we do? This problem with the human condition is why we have cross-examination at trials. Some are better than others at this, and some witnesses are better able to evade cross-examiners than others. By all accounts we have, Condon was extraordinary in this regard. I think both prosecution and defense attorneys played it very close with Condon (despite their boasts) because they were concerned about his unpredictability. Doesn't it seem quite remarkable, then, that it was his identification -- more than any other thing at the trial, that turned the case? Today, the forensic evidence would play a bigger role -- but Condon's involvement would be probed much more effectively than defense attorneys (or the prosecution) at the time of the trial. The question remains: once contact had been established with Breckinridge, as it was -- why was Condon brought in as an intermediary? If we accept some of the prosecution testimony, BRH was seen watching Condon during the negotiations. When did that observation begin? If Condon is so completely unreliable and little more than a stumbling blowhard, why would someone watching him employ him in this fashion? And if BRH did not know anything about Condon, why would he use him on the basis of a letter to a newspaper? These are delicate, very delicate, negotiations if the perp is to get his money, because he knows the child is dead. Breckinridge is a straight-foward sort of man -- a lawyer of standing and a former high federal official. Can anyone see Breck sitting with a kidnapper for an hour or more in an inconsequential talk? No. Can anyone see Breck as being more pliable in terms of rejecting police lookouts -- if CAL had said no dice, play it straight? No. Note what CJ says (supposedly) on the telephone. Do you sometimes write for the papers? Is this a Condon invention, or does the perp really want to know if he has the right party?
Until some of these questions are addressed, any dismissal of Condon as an eccentric who comes through in the end for the prosecution does not satisfy our desire to understand this case.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 10, 2006 9:51:51 GMT -5
The pint I am making in regard to Condon is that he is so prone to exaggeration and outright fabrication that taking his statements is a questionable practice. However, like Hauptmann ( another excellent liar) one can try to discern if a kernel of truth exists which the lies are entwined around. That is not always easy without corroboration. And in Condon's case I think he actually believes his own hype, which can make finding the real truth even harder.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 10, 2006 19:43:21 GMT -5
I believe Condon was known and brought in by at least one person in this gang to do exactly what he did. As I said before - who better to confuse the situation and insulate the Principals involved here. Of course picking and choosing is subject to prejudice - everything we post is - but its up to us to see if the point holds true against any rebuttal or scrutiny. My original point was that whenever I see Condon saying or doing something which hurts his integrity it seems some rush to his defense with that argument that he was "old" or "confused" etc. etc.
What I am saying is if the man has "lost it" in this manner then this must be applied evenly across the board.
I truly believe Hauptmann was telling the truth about Condon when he said he had the keys to his cell and interpret this to mean he could have solved it himself if he told all he knew.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 11, 2006 2:53:36 GMT -5
There is at least one additional reason to assume that Condon is in on the con-spiracy to fleece the $50K--what I would call the it The Acute Risk of Arrest Factor.
The Lindbergh Baby has been missing for 12 days....and now YOU are going to meet with a go-between in Woodlawn Cemetary? Yikes...who is crazy enough to do that? With or without direct ccontrol of Charlie....CJ risks direct contact with the Police! In the Constance kidnap case the money was never picked up--likely due to fear of capture. Even in Woodlawn, CJ runs the risk of some hot-dog Cop arresting him outta nowheres. Sure, the lookout helps, but even the lookout could have been nabbed. Why a face-to-face at all for that matter. Does meeting CJ prove the Hoax of the Century...espcially the 2nd time when CAL is in the immediate vicinity? And that Condon is a trusted and known commodity.
I would quess that CJ would know for certain that Charlie has yet to be found! And to be dumped later using the burlap bag for a road marker. BUT why return Charlie Jr at all??? It would have been far more smarter to take the ransom money from Condon and then bury Charlie forever "out at sea"where he would never be found/ Why was Charlies body dumped on Mt. Rose Road? Quo benefetus?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 11, 2006 6:54:38 GMT -5
That is like using the lit end of a fuse of dynamite as a candle. Exactly the point I brought up in regard to how no pro would even consider such an unnecessary risk. A dead drop ( no pun) could accomplish the same without the risk.
|
|
|
Post by wcollins on May 11, 2006 9:26:10 GMT -5
"That is like using the lit end of a fuse of dynamite as a candle. "
I don't know how to "box" quotes yet, so old fashioned quote marks will have to do. It is interesting here to see what is in this sentence. It suggests, as in the latter part of the response that "no pro" would engage Condon in lengthy conversation. This raises once again the question of why Condon in the first place -- unless the perp was totally ignorant of him. Which I don't believe. Or that the perp was an amateur. And, as we have often seen, for an unaided amateur to succeed requires the most marvelous succession of events - click, click, click like tumblers on a safe. The rest of the crime does not indicate that it was an amateur, in the sense of an unprepared perp. Any amateur would be scared to death at Woodlawn, and not stay longer than to find out the money was not there. Amateur is a tricky word.
Remember -- once again -- a contact had been made with Breckinridge. A dead drop could have been set up using Breck or one of his many agents (who were with him from the beginning of the case). Someone told the perp that Breck was not a good idea -- early on in the case. We do have our medium visiting don't we, and the conversation in the Princeton Hotel. Remember the little Freudian slip about "they" paid for our ticket.
|
|