|
Post by Michael on Feb 18, 2016 18:01:42 GMT -5
You bring up the crux of my original question with this comment. Mustoe was given permission to work with Gov. Hoffman so doing so on the tab of Monmouth County doesn't come into play here. When applying your example to Parker, is Parker actually working for Gov. Hoffman as an active member of the "re-investigation" team or is he working independently when investigating the Lindbergh case and just sharing things with Gov. Hoffman on his own and not from the capacity of his county office? Parker would have every right to look into the Hauptmann case privately, wouldn't he? Judging from everything I have I think the answer is that he did all three. It's hard to explain but I honestly believe that. There were things he was doing as the Chief of Detectives that was related, things he was doing privately (like working with Wendel), and things he did for the Governor at his request. Knowing and understanding the New Jersey 1930's laws is very important in order to evaluate whether activities fall within the perimeters of existing law. With the prosecution and conviction of Hauptmann, the state of New Jersey considered the Lindbergh case closed. Since we know that Gov. Hoffman was not in lock-step with Wilentz and Schwarzkopf, and Hoffman feels that more investigation should be done to find the others who were involved with the kidnapping and death of Charlie, did the laws of New Jersey, at that time, support this re-investigation of a closed case? From everything I've read I am reasonably certain he could order the State Police to continue to investigate. Remember he did not keep Schwarzkopf and after Kimberling took over he continued investigating the case at the direction of the Governor. I believe if it was somehow "illegal" Wilentz would have made this known. Here's a copy of Hoffman's original letter to Schwarzkopf. As you can see it seems what he is telling him to do appears 100% legit: Attachment DeletedAlso, even today in New Jersey we have a really bizarre case that many people believe should be re-opened. Sometimes posting things that occur in different time frames are misleading but I believe it's something worth pointing out: www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20160212_Former_NJ_governors_want_state_to_reopen_Sheridan_investigation.htmlWho first brought up the idea the kidnapper went out the front door. Was it Curtis or Wendel? Between the two of them.... unless there is something I haven't seen then it's clearly Curtis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2016 11:28:49 GMT -5
Gov. Hoffman's letter to Schwarzkopf makes the case perfectly for why more investigation needed to be done. New Jersey wanted (and no doubt the Lindberghs also) to close the books on this case permanently. Unfortunately, this course allowed other guilty parties to go unpunished. If there hadn't been such a rush to get Hauptmann convicted and executed, a more thorough investigation might have produced results that yielded the identity of others. The news article you link to about the Sheridan case is an excellent one. The same reasons sighted in this article for seeking a re-investigation of what happened to the Sheridans parallel with the Lindbergh case; the quality of the investigation, questionable autopsy findings, unanswered questions and a rush to close the case. Thanks for posting the letter and for that article. I shall keep tabs on what happens with the Sheridan case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 7:55:16 GMT -5
Referring to our personal conference of yesterday, you will be perfectly justified, in case you get contact with the kidnappers of the Lindbergh Baby, in agreeing to carry out the terms of the signed statement of Colonel and Mrs. Lindbergh published in the press. The agreed upon money will be paid and nothing concerning the transaction will be given out to the police in case the baby is returned safe and sound.
Hundreds of requests come in every day to Col. Lindbergh for a signed statement authorizing individuals who believe they can get in contact with the people holding the baby to act for the father and mother in making negotiations. Naturally they cannot comply with all of these request and they take the position that their signed statement given out to the press should be sufficient guarantee.
I have conferred with Col. Lindbergh and i know that there is nothing in his attitude in conflict with the views expressed by you in your statement to the press. [A. J. MacNab, Jr. to Chief Detective Ellis Parker, 3-9-32] Michael, I have wanted to ask you about this older post you made about Ellis Parker. Obviously Lindbergh was following what Parker was saying to reporters about the kidnapping and discussed it with Col. MacNab. This quote makes it clear that there was a conversation between MacNab and Parker. It seems they want to make sure that Parker understands the ground rules should he make contact with the kidnappers. Regardless of what Schwarzkopf felt about Parker's involvement, Lindbergh and MacNab are in contact with Parker. You have already shown that Gov. Moore opened the door for Parker's participation in this case; is the conference between MacNab and Parker sort of a backdoor invitation to Ellis Parker to work on the kidnapping case as long as he follows the way Lindbergh wants it done? Also, since this conference (between MacNab and Parker) is happening at the time Condon's letter was appearing in the Bronx Home News, could there have been concern about Parker learning about this offer and then investigating it himself? Just curious, with everything you know about Ellis Parker, if he had been offered the go-between role instead of Condon, would he have ever passed that money like Condon did without the return of the child? Would he have done this if Lindbergh asked him to?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 15, 2016 16:52:05 GMT -5
You have already shown that Gov. Moore opened the door for Parker's participation in this case; is the conference between MacNab and Parker sort of a backdoor invitation to Ellis Parker to work on the kidnapping case as long as he follows the way Lindbergh wants it done? Also, since this conference (between MacNab and Parker) is happening at the time Condon's letter was appearing in the Bronx Home News, could there have been concern about Parker learning about this offer and then investigating it himself? Just curious, with everything you know about Ellis Parker, if he had been offered the go-between role instead of Condon, would he have ever passed that money like Condon did without the return of the child? Would he have done this if Lindbergh asked him to? It's important to note that Parker was never taken into the official investigation. For him, this was merely a matter of professional courtesy. He was covering his bases to ensure no one, such as the NJSP, could claim he was overstepping. The reason Gov. Moore originally invited Parker into the case was that he was afraid Parker would have done it anyway, learn important information, then keep it to himself. Parker really was considered one of the best Detectives so the fear wasn't that he'd interfere or tamper but that he'd make people look stupid. The idea was to ask him to look into it intending to be advised concerning what he knew or would turn up - then it would be passed on and the credit could be shared accordingly. It was all one big "game" and no Official wanted to be the one blind-sided by Parker's potential discoveries. To answer your question - no. Parker wouldn't have done anything of the sort. He would have advised against it then removed himself from that position if told to do it anyway. But honestly the Kidnappers would have never allowed it. They wanted a person they knew and trusted. Dealing with someone like Parker would have scared the hell out of them - and defeated the purpose.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 17, 2016 12:45:36 GMT -5
Was it ever determined if the coal dust found on or in the burlap bag near Charlie's body was from prior use (inside bag) or had come from late (outside bag) use of the bag?
I'm sure Parker's earlier solved crimes were investigated to see if he'd kidnapped, confined, tortured and sent suspects to mental institutions in the past. Did anyone ever publish any downside information about Sr.? I couldn't find any on a cursory look.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 17, 2016 18:05:27 GMT -5
Was it ever determined if the coal dust found on or in the burlap bag near Charlie's body was from prior use (inside bag) or had come from late (outside bag) use of the bag? The original use for the bag had nothing to do with coal if that's what you're asking. I'm sure Parker's earlier solved crimes were investigated to see if he'd kidnapped, confined, tortured and sent suspects to mental institutions in the past. Did anyone ever publish any downside information about Sr.? I couldn't find any on a cursory look. The Cunning Mulatto says there had been a previous kidnapping credited to Parker. I believe it's even mentioned in John's book using that as his source (I'd have to look to be sure). However, that was a complete fabrication. Up to the point of the Wendel case Parker spoke out against such tactics and was completely consistent in his actions. During the Federal Trial, in an effort to show a past practice, Quinn brought up the story as represented in that book - but it was disproven by the Defense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 14:18:25 GMT -5
Michael, I am going to link a story in this post. I think a similar article might have been posted somewhere on this board before but I could not locate it. The article talks about the possibility there was a Cape Cod connection to the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. My reason for posting this has to do with the part concerning Ellis Parker. This article says that Leigh Matteson became close with Ellis Parker during the investigation of the kidnapping and that he (Matteson) brought the theory that the kidnapping was done by one man who was born and raised in Germany to Parker's attention. The whole profile Dr. Schonfeld developed was shared and also about checking the auto registrations in the Bronx for that unique "x". I spent time going through Reisinger's book to see if Parker and Matteson did interact but I could not find anything to confirm it in that book. I would like to add this info into my Parker folder but only if it is true. Do you know if Parker and Matteson discussed the kidnapping in 1932? Here is the article: www.capecodtoday.com/article/2016/03/04/2473-March-4-1932-Cape-Cod-and-Lindbergh-kidnapping
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 22, 2016 15:06:16 GMT -5
I spent time going through Reisinger's book to see if Parker and Matteson did interact but I could not find anything to confirm it in that book. I would like to add this info into my Parker folder but only if it is true. Do you know if Parker and Matteson discussed the kidnapping in 1932? Without saying how "close" they got I do know they definitely interacted. The full contents of the letter quoted in the article is: August 17, 1932
Dear Friend:
How did you make out with Dr. Condon? Write me.
Have you finished checking up on the licenses in The Bronx?
Very truly yours,
Ellis Parker, Chief of Detectives.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 21:41:04 GMT -5
Without saying how "close" they got I do know they definitely interacted. The full contents of the letter quoted in the article is: August 17, 1932
Dear Friend:
How did you make out with Dr. Condon? Write me.
Have you finished checking up on the licenses in The Bronx?
Very truly yours,
Ellis Parker, Chief of Detectives.
This is great, Michael! I knew coming to you for verification was the right thing to do. You actually provide the contents of the letter confirming the contact between them. I am really glad to know that Parker had this man as a resource. I shall file the article and a copy of your post in my Parker file. Thanks so much.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on May 13, 2022 22:30:30 GMT -5
What Happened to Ellis Parker? Liberty Magazine - Publication Date: May 7, 1938 What really happened to Ellis Parker, the small-town detective with the world-wide reputation? In his forty-four years as Chief of Detectives of Burlington County, New Jersey, Ellis Parker became known as the greatest detective in America. Michael, Could you please re-post this article?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 14, 2022 10:07:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on May 14, 2022 10:26:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 14, 2022 12:33:10 GMT -5
The Parker article starts on page 40. There’s also Ann interesting article starting on page 27 written by Lanphier about Lindbergh’s practical jokes.
|
|