|
Post by vovina on Feb 4, 2009 9:56:15 GMT -5
While trying to make sense of the various factors stemming from the nursery note, I went back to Lloyd Gardner's narrative in " The Case That Never Dies " and performed a " thought experiment " - change one factor to see what emerges.
Imagine if the nursery note vanished before being discovered ( blown out the window or under items in the nursery etc. ). Where would the initial physical evidence lead ? We have Lindbergh's neighbor Kristofeck's dog baying and chasing something on the Lindbergh property around 9 pm. Besides the ladder we have a 3/4" Buck Brothers' wood chisel. Next, local tracker Oscar Bush finds two sets of tracks from the ladder to Featherbed Lane with two sets of tire tracks - along with the dog tracks in a looping adjacent pattern. Bush also assists in the experiments the next day with the ladder and observes (pg.114 )concerning the distances between the laddertop and the nursery window: " Most of us mountaineers is pretty lightfooted - but the guy who accomplished that trick could get a job as a circus acrobat anytime. ". Squire Johnson finds the shack of Charles Schippell (pg.116 ) another Lindbergh neighbor. Schippell is described as a powerful man, psychotic - having unusual weird obsessions and hallucinations with a wild violent temper. He is also ambidextrous and is reported to be able to climb like a monkey. Johnson also finds wood that looked like it was used to build the ladder that Schippell claims to have purchased from the National Lumber Company. Johnson finds Burlup Bags identical to the one found near the baby's body. Johnson finds a dark green Paige Sedan covered in a lean-to built against the shack. And he finds a complete Buck Brothers wood chisel set missing only the 3/4" chisel. Schipell, like many of the woodsy Lindbergh neighbors, is angry that Lindbergh has taken over prime hunting grounds and prohibited communal hunting - this during the depression when the addition of game to the diet spells the difference between a comfortable poverty and near starvation. Kristofeck's dog is familar with the night time activities of local hunters - hence the baying rather than threatening barks. So without the nursery note and the attending chaos surrounding the ransom, it is highly probable that Charles Schippell would have been the prime suspect.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Feb 4, 2009 18:23:18 GMT -5
Hi Vovina, I certainly did find your "thought experiment" of interest. You processed through it so well. Recently I'd been thinking maybe somewhat akin to that category. That is if Lindbergh hadn't called the police. Guess what? I cannot get off the proverbial "square on"! ===== On another note: Do you have a take on JJ Nosovitsky?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 5, 2009 7:09:56 GMT -5
vovina....this is a very creative thought: The Great Paradigm Shift - Alot of first hand local clews were just overlooked or swept under the rug? We might call this Phase I of the kidnap investigation?
- But almost immediately, by a coordinated series of strange events--the entire investigation leaves Hopewell and Highfields and moves to NYC and the Bronx? Lets call this Phase II?
- We can put almost all of this onto the weird antics of Dr.Jon Condon? He acted like the Mother hen who leads the barking dogs away from the nest with a broken wing? Was Condon paid to do this since he accomplished it almost singlehandedly? If so by who?
- Anyways, the effect was that Oscar Bush, Squire Johnson and Charles Shippell, among others, were never heard from again?
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Feb 5, 2009 9:14:45 GMT -5
Mari;
Thank you for the kind remarks ! And I can't tell either from the existing accounts what possibly might have occurred had Lindbergh not called the police: one can construct mutually exclusive lines of action - which doesn't aid a thought experiment ( LOL ! ). My limited familarity with the Noso materials means that my impressions are not as informed as I would like. Still I think he may be the link between the direct kidnappers and whatever Gaston Means and Norman Whitaker are up to - there are probably odd classified documents in the US Naval Intelligence files from World War 1 concerning Noso that connects Aleister Crowley's British operations, Whitaker, Means working for the Burns Agency supposedly " with " the German spies, and Noso's own operations. Mr. Spence would be a great help here !
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Feb 5, 2009 9:20:20 GMT -5
rick3;
I am glad you found the thought experiment to be of some use. And it makes me wonder why the dog that normally slept under Charlie's crib was left behind that weekend while the other dog, sitting with the Lindberghs, showed no reaction to the row neighbor Kristofeck's dog was making on the property at 9 pm ?!?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 5, 2009 17:27:49 GMT -5
Great idea for a thread Vovina! The "what if's" are so plentiful here..... Additionally, we have posted a ton of information on Schippel in older posts. One thread is here: lindberghkidnap.proboards56.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=113&page=3Just run a search on the various spellings of his name and you will come up with even more. He is a good suspect - especially since the child was found very near his place and all of the other stuff Lloyd writes about in his book..... Schippel even showed others a hole in the ground alleging the child had originally been buried there then dug up and moved to where the corpse was found - Waxey Gordon told George Clarke the child had been taken and killed by the local "Mad-Man" well before the child was discovered. While Waxey didn't mention him by name, many in Hopewell did refer to Schippel as the Local Crazy. I know Rick and Dena have both had their sites on him in the past.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 6, 2009 9:00:53 GMT -5
vovina...3 interesting points about Shippell: - Arthur Koehler was still checking his tools and wood planes in 1933? Thus he remained a suspect for years.
- Shippell had the impression/fear that CAL was going to hurt his daughter Dorothy--who had same name as his wife?
- Shippell had a nervous breakdown the nite BRH was executed and had to be Institutionalized?
- Shippell may also have seen or found something critical in the LKC even if he wasnt involved directly--maybe accidentially.
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Feb 9, 2009 9:06:59 GMT -5
And Hochmuth, who was partially blind with failing eyesight due to cataracts, and Ben Lupica are the only " eyewitnesses " putting Hauptmann in the vicinity of the crime: yet the initial impression of BOTH was " Lindbergh must have got window cleaners. " ( note the plural ). What was it about the way the ladder sections were in the vehicle that lead to this Identification - before the bogus arm-twisting to ID Hauptmann ? Next, Gov. Hoffmann had his doubts about Hauptmann as kidnapper because none of the plastercasts of the footprints came anywhere close to a match of Bruno. At the most, Hauptmann was involved in Shakedown # 1, just as Means and Whitaker were involved in Shakedown # 2. The problem becomes is there any physical evidence at the crime scene, other than the lines of inquiry from the nursery note, that implicates Hauptmann alone and excludes Schippell plus a possible confederate ?
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Feb 9, 2009 17:39:09 GMT -5
Did any investigators at the time check whether or not there actually were Window-washers working near the Lindbergh estate on the date in question ? Given the fact the car went into the ditch ( Hochmuth ) and performed a bizarre " eyeballing " ( Lupica ), it wouldn't surprise me if the possible Window-washers were graduates of the Howard, Fine, Howard school of manual labor !
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 9, 2009 19:31:30 GMT -5
They did follow up on Lupica's sighting by searching for Dodges of that year. That turned up nothing so they let that lead go cold until Parker resurrected it. The "window-washer" type clue was searched in the local immediate area. The Hochmuth stuff came after Hauptmann's arrest and believe me when I tell you that no one actually believed him.
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Feb 11, 2009 9:30:19 GMT -5
I can't locate a note I had concerning the ages of Schippell's daughter and wife - both named Dorothy. And while trying to track that down, I had a memory flash that may be of interest.
My chess tutor, Fritz Donath, was one of the particpants in the 1956 match between the Cedar Valley Chess Club and Dubuque Chess Club that Norman Whitaker referreed. In 1969 the magazine " Chess Life And Review " ran a cover picture/story of Whitaker - Fritz had this issue in his game room and remarked " What an old crook ! ". Being a curious 13 year-old, I asked for particulars. Fritz recounted the meeting in 1956 and gave Whitaker's exact lines ( which I found odd at the time but then dropped into a memory-hole ): " A Lindbergh baby is still alive today. They didn't call him ' Lucky Lindy ' for nothing. He couldn't keep his pants zipped up. " And from other vulgarisms, both in conversation and correspondence reported in Hilbert's Whitaker biography, Fritz's retelling seems exact ! My confusion was thinking " A Lindbergh Baby " was " The Lindbergh Baby " ( charlie ). Recalling from Gardner that Sen. Morrow objected to Lindbergh as a son-in-law because of CAL's reported womanizing and bizarre relationship with his mother, and that Schippell was agitated that daughter Dorothy was being threatened by CAL, a possible hypothesis is that " Lucky Lindy " had gotten ' lucky ' with one or more of the Schippell women resulting in a " Lindbergh Baby ". This kid was farmed out by underworld types who were blackmailing CAL for ' child-support '. CAL refused to pay or fell behind in payments while at the same time threatening Dorothy Schippell, which sent Mr. Schippell over the edge. Given CAL's illegitimate German children, and reports of other " eugenic experiments ", the womanizing seems highly probable. The elderly gent awaiting the results of a possible DNA match with the German Lindberghs may be in for a surprise - he could be CAL's son, but not be Charlie ( the evidence looks very strong that the body found was that of Charlie ), even if he is close to Charlie's age ! So this may be the secret that Norman Whitaker would drop hints about in obscure locations among chessplayers unfamilar with the Lindbergh Kidnapping case. Converging interests, not a " lone wolf " or a highly planned " conspiracy ", appears to me to be the best way to account for Schippell, Hauptmann and friends, Noso's gang, and the Means/Whitaker operations. But facts and more facts are the only way to verify/falsify such an account !
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 11, 2009 18:30:17 GMT -5
I don't have my Schippel file with me but I seem to recall his Daughter was very young. I will check it out when I can unless someone else posts it first.
|
|
|
Post by rikc on Feb 12, 2009 22:26:47 GMT -5
I would guess Schippells daughter was 12 in 1932. Her HS Graduation appears on the front page of the Hopewell paper later in the 30s...Im guessing 1936-38? I have a copy someplace/ When the 7 kids turned up in Germany and Xharlies bones were returned to the family...well....questions should be forthcoming about a DNA match there too?
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Mar 30, 2009 8:24:24 GMT -5
I am trying to find out if the 3/4 " Buck Brothers wood chisel was ONLY sold in a set. The other info I am trying to track down is the volume of business done by the National Lumber Company just prior to the kidnapping. Both would help clarify the physical evidence found at Hopewell and at the Schippell's residence.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2009 12:38:35 GMT -5
Hi Vovina The Buck Bros chisels were quite common and sold individually and in sets. It would be easy to purchase new or used. I had something on National sales, but given my chaotic files I don't know where it is. Maybe Michael could help.
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Mar 31, 2009 8:59:25 GMT -5
Thank you, Kevkon, for the data on the Buck Brothers chisels: I am trying to isolate some physical evidence at the crime scene that would either a) exclude Hauptmann b) exclude Schippell or c) point to their corroboration in the crime. At least they appear to be mentally maladjusted types that would " feed " on each other like the two drifters in " Of Mice And Men ".
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 31, 2009 14:20:02 GMT -5
Here are some excerpts from Sgt. Zapolsky's Report in the Winter of '33: Engaged in Lumber, Sash, Trim Doors, Paints and Glass. Sales are mainly for cash. Caters entirely to local Carpenters, Contractors as well as Home Owners.
Merchandise is principally that of finished lumbers, carrying only a small stock of paints and kindred items. And from Sgt. Haussling's Report about two weeks later: The examiner states that no record of individual sales are kept; all of the business being on a cash basis and there is no way of determining any particular sale. The examiner stated that the business is just about eeking out of existence for the proprietors who have also made substantial loans (about $9000) to the concern since its organization. The examiner stated that there was no record of any large sales to contractors for the purpose of building and that in his estimation this business was of the neighborhood type.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 31, 2009 16:41:28 GMT -5
No problem Vovina, let me know if there's any way I can help. I made a replica of that chisel for Mark Falzini at the NJSP Museum, so I know it well. I could go either way as to ascribing it's ownership to Hauptmann. The sharpening of the blade certainly didn't coincide with any other tools of Hauptmann, though the overall condition of the chisel would fit him.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Apr 1, 2009 18:23:17 GMT -5
I wonder if Shippel ever got his tools back(?) Tools he felt had been mixed in with Hauptmann's. I believe tools were rigged like so much else in this case.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 5, 2009 4:40:24 GMT -5
vovina--this thread centers on the night of March 1st and early investigations. .....it has always been some sort of mystery why the Nursery Note was left on the window sill?? Even CJ couldnt get that right@Woodlawn? The thought has crossed my mind that since the climber did not or could not enter the Nursery by means of the suicide ladder or Cirque De Soleil acrobatics acrossed the sill and trunk (Houdini was already dead)....he/she merely climbed the ladder, looked in and left the note on the Sill to create the illusion of a kidnap? [the only person we know for certain entered the Nursery was JFC 10 days later!] Al Dunlap reported that the first Police Chief on the scene saw NO evidence of entry into the Nursery?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 6, 2009 8:03:14 GMT -5
I see (3) options: - John wasn't in the Nursery to know.
- Condon lied about what John said.
- The note had been moved from the crib by someone.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Apr 7, 2009 8:08:53 GMT -5
Michael--my pick would be: Door #1 CJohn wasn't in the Nursery to know primarily because the same double-speak was used with the safety pins snatched by JFC.- Condon never once told the Truth--only half-truths?
- It is less likely, also, that the Nursery Note was moved from the crib to the far window ledge--in the dark, and there were no insider fingerprints found on the envelope when dusted? Was everyone wearing gloves that evening?
- We have still to figure who CJ really was--if any-one? Condon saw a group of 3 at St. Raymonds?
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Apr 7, 2009 16:04:04 GMT -5
Then there is an interesting theory proposed by kevkon that condon and cj were the same person - the cemetary chat being to himself - which may make the choice of doors identical ( LOL ! ). Were there any photos taken of the initial sets of footprints in the mud beneath the nursery window ? Remembering that Anne Lindbergh claimed to be in that exact area earlier in the day - in order to account for her track next to the two " kidnappers "- perhaps a forensic anthropologist could tell by computer enhancement if Anne's track was made at the same time as the other two by depth/mass soil disturbance analysis.
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Jun 3, 2009 7:53:14 GMT -5
I am trying to find the references that made the claim that neither of the two sets of " male " footprints found at the ladder, and leading away from it, belonged to Hauptmann. Was this claim made in relation to shoe-size and/or shoe-type ? One wonders if possible kidnap " suspects " were then excluded on the basis of the plaster casts. Of all the evidence found directly at the crime scene, the footprints are the most puzzling - and troubling !
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2009 17:13:24 GMT -5
It's in Kennedy's book (and I think Scaduto's) that Hauptmann's shoe-size didn't fit. It's in the source material as well. Lloyd's book, The Case That Never Dies proved a cast at Hopewell was made for the first time. Here is a post I put together a while back: The Police did everything they could to tie Hauptmann to these prints. They took all of his shoes, which are still at West Trenton by the way, and they even visited his Shoemaker. In the end the casts were "tucked away" and never admitted as evidence. Once the Defense brought it up (they read about the existence in the newspapers), they were told they would be produced but by the Trials end they still hadn't been. If you need me to quote or post some of the reports let me know and I will dig some up for you. BTW - Have you read, or are you interested in The Red Web by Blair Coan?
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Jun 4, 2009 7:48:34 GMT -5
I haven't read " The Red Web " (yet) but it looks like there may be some leads linking up to the Crowley materials and the Whittaker/Means operations contained in the work.
Thank you for the information on the footprints - at least we know they didn't belong to Hauptmann ( because of the police investigation ) or Whittaker ( who was in jail in Florida ). Does anyone know Jafsie's shoesize ( LOL ! ) ?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 4, 2009 17:23:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Jun 17, 2009 7:55:24 GMT -5
Thanks for the source materials. There are a few leads in the texts, however Coan can't tell the differences between home-grown rads, parlor pinks, and Bolsie Intelligence Operatives. Without the documentation, the leads get thin. As was said in Iowa during my childhood " It's tough sledding with no snow " !
|
|
|
Post by vovina on Sept 17, 2009 8:26:12 GMT -5
In his work " Young Stalin ", Simon Montefiore, by using newly openned U.S.S.R. archives, covers the use of kidnapping ( and bank robberies ) for raising funds by Communist revolutionaries. These expropriations in Czarist Russia were used to keep Lenin and company in money while in exile. J.Edgar Hoover pushed for making kidnapping a federal crime because of these considerations, but used the supposed mistakes of local law enforcement in the Charlie grab as a pretext.
Was Wellington Henderson perhaps planning a Red fund-raiser by targeting Charlie - with Gaston Means and Norman Whitaker hot on his trail ? Given Hauptmann's German Communist Party connections, and his petty crook background, he definitely matches the profile of a Red fundraiser - in the style of Stalin's gang in Czarist Russia.
But I keep puzzling over the muddy footprints at the outdoor crime scene. The first impression is that Mother Anne was in close contact with the two unknowns. One has to weigh the probabilities of her being, in the day, at the very spot where the ladder was placed. And we know that the neither of the two unknowns was Hauptmann since the plaster casts didn't even come close to matching his shoe-size.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 18, 2009 5:57:56 GMT -5
It's just so hard to say what the truth is as it relates to Means. I keep researching him and come up with more and more lies. Occasionally he throws in stuff, like someone he met in prison, but the tales he spins with those names attached is anything but the truth. I am beginning to think that the truth behind Means lies completely away from anything he mentioned - ever.
Even after he was in prison. He was a model Inmate according to every Guard interviewed. Additionally, Means did a very odd thing - he told every Snitch he came across a different story as to where the money was hidden. Just this alone was tying up the FBI running down the various false leads which were provided as a result. (I've got a myriad of multiple page reports about complete BS!)
Keep looking however, there might be something which leads us to something else. If I see it then I will most definitely share it with you!
|
|