Post by Michael on Mar 5, 2009 18:04:38 GMT -5
Let's look at the evidence in a fair and objective manner shall we?
Now, did the NJSP lie under oath about any of the testimony? I won't answer this for you but lets suppose (for just 1 example), as even Jim Fisher admits, Hauptmann was brutally beaten by the NJSP/NYPD as asserted by the Defense. Next, we can all plainly see that when Agent Sisk witnessed this, he instructed all FBI men not to participate.
Now, let's examine the "request" writings with this in mind.
Both Hauptmann and Kloppenburg claimed the "requests" were coached. The fact that Hauptmann had been told how to spell during certain sessions, allowed to see copies of actual notes, and told how to form letters is supported by several sources.
It was Scripted who originally said no, no, never..... His original position was rock solid:
Now, Agent Turrou (FBI) is writing this. This should then be given the added weight it deserves based upon the beating scenario should it not? Now, in all fairness, the requests that he is referencing was not used in Court, but let me ask you this: If the FBI was willing to do this - would not the NJSP/NYPD?
On these, that apparently Turrou was giving, Hauptmann was copying and words from the journals, and ransom note words were being injected. On these exemplars Hauptmann was adding curlicues to "y"s or crossing "t"s in different ways as apparently he was instructed to do.
So the point here is - if he is doing this on these exemplars, is it unreasonable to think similar things were going on concerning the others, to include the one's we are now discussing? Maybe it wasn't the "y"s or the "t"s but the spelling or the formation of other letters.
I have to make mention of Keraga's "Handwriting" Report here. In this report he references Lloyd's (The Case That Never Dies) reference to communication between Sellers and Schwarzkopf. Before this, people like Script were still in denial. Suddenly, once Keraga posts his "report" to his Granfalloon, then Script must acknowledge:
Let's evaluate this statement first....
While he finally accepts Hauptmann was told to spell he tries to color the evidence to his liking by saying they told him to spell (correctly). Next, its not an "evil act" and they should still be used regardless. That's very interesting.
What the Seller's letter says:
Now Folks, what would make Sellers ask this question? He is seeing it but he needs Schwarzkopf to erase this for him....
(omit)
Now is it beyond a reasonable expectation to believe Schwarzkopf may be staring at his handwriting case going up in smoke and doing "damage control." Even so, he is admitting to much more then I believe is allowable - especially since anyone who ever concludes Hauptmann wrote those notes relies heavily upon this "requests." Would it be a reach to say he isn't exactly being 100% forthcoming when considering the lies told concerning Hauptmann's beating - among many others?
I have said time and time again and again that I am 50/50 concerning the Ransom Note writing as it relates to Hauptmann. If you take away these tainted requests I don't see where any Experts are conclusive about the situation - except of course Script who had drawn his conclusion from the pictures in Haring's book.
So, for me, he doesn't count.
Now according to Keraga's "report" he takes a cheap shot at me saying I refused to show him where this type of coaching taints the requests. I had, on numerous occasions done so and I will do it again.
Just for one example:
Of course there are many more - for those who really want to find them.
Now, did the NJSP lie under oath about any of the testimony? I won't answer this for you but lets suppose (for just 1 example), as even Jim Fisher admits, Hauptmann was brutally beaten by the NJSP/NYPD as asserted by the Defense. Next, we can all plainly see that when Agent Sisk witnessed this, he instructed all FBI men not to participate.
Now, let's examine the "request" writings with this in mind.
Both Hauptmann and Kloppenburg claimed the "requests" were coached. The fact that Hauptmann had been told how to spell during certain sessions, allowed to see copies of actual notes, and told how to form letters is supported by several sources.
It was Scripted who originally said no, no, never..... His original position was rock solid:
- Hauptmann was never told how to write any letters.
- Hauptmann was never instructed how to spell.
- Hauptmann never saw any of the notes.
Let's address point #1 - The "formulation" of letters.
"Hauptmann writing continuously for two hours, interjecting a word from one of the ransom notes now and then supplying him with fresh pencils and material for copying. He had just finished a stretch with the Congressional Record and had started on the Wall Street Journal when I could see that he was tiring. It's fatiguing for a man to work constantly at adding curlicues to "y"s or crossing "t"s in different ways. Both of us were exhausted. I had done straight duty for thirty-six hours, and Hauptmann hadn't slept that night.
[Where My Shadow Falls, Agent Turrou p122]
Now, Agent Turrou (FBI) is writing this. This should then be given the added weight it deserves based upon the beating scenario should it not? Now, in all fairness, the requests that he is referencing was not used in Court, but let me ask you this: If the FBI was willing to do this - would not the NJSP/NYPD?
On these, that apparently Turrou was giving, Hauptmann was copying and words from the journals, and ransom note words were being injected. On these exemplars Hauptmann was adding curlicues to "y"s or crossing "t"s in different ways as apparently he was instructed to do.
So the point here is - if he is doing this on these exemplars, is it unreasonable to think similar things were going on concerning the others, to include the one's we are now discussing? Maybe it wasn't the "y"s or the "t"s but the spelling or the formation of other letters.
Point #2 & #3 - Spelling & Seeing the Questioned Document
I have to make mention of Keraga's "Handwriting" Report here. In this report he references Lloyd's (The Case That Never Dies) reference to communication between Sellers and Schwarzkopf. Before this, people like Script were still in denial. Suddenly, once Keraga posts his "report" to his Granfalloon, then Script must acknowledge:
Kel, I agree with you that Hauptmann should not have been helped at all with his spelling (to spell correctly) when he wrote the request writing. I also agree that even though it is at variance with one of the request writing procedures it doesn't make the request writings worthless or unuseable. Helping Hauptmann to occasionally spell a word correctly certainly isn't framing him with the handwriting. Even this is interpreted as an evil act? (Script)
Let's evaluate this statement first....
While he finally accepts Hauptmann was told to spell he tries to color the evidence to his liking by saying they told him to spell (correctly). Next, its not an "evil act" and they should still be used regardless. That's very interesting.
What the Seller's letter says:
I would appreciate knowing, at your earliest convenience, whether or not Hauptmann saw the anonymous threat letters previous to the time that he did the request writing for the officers, and whether or not any instructions were given him at any time while he was doing the request writing, either as to the manner in which he should form any of the letters or as to the spelling.
I would like to know whether or not there were any special instruction given to Mr. Hauptmann on the request writing written September 20, 1934, on the photograph you have marked #5. The first five lines on this page have a different pictorial appearance then the remaining lines on the same page.
[Sellers to Schwarzkopf, 10-24-34]
Now Folks, what would make Sellers ask this question? He is seeing it but he needs Schwarzkopf to erase this for him....
"....Hauptmann's request writings concerning "the boat Nelly between Horse Neck Beach and Gayhead" were dictated to him from a circular showing this note. He was not given an opportunity to examine this circular in detail, but it is possible that he may have seen it casually....
(omit)
Occasionally when was stuck as to spelling and would ask how to spell a word he would be told; in general, however, he was told to spell it as best he could. He was not given any instructions as to the forming of any of the letters."
[Schwarzkopf to Sellers Letter 10/26/1934]
Now is it beyond a reasonable expectation to believe Schwarzkopf may be staring at his handwriting case going up in smoke and doing "damage control." Even so, he is admitting to much more then I believe is allowable - especially since anyone who ever concludes Hauptmann wrote those notes relies heavily upon this "requests." Would it be a reach to say he isn't exactly being 100% forthcoming when considering the lies told concerning Hauptmann's beating - among many others?
I have said time and time again and again that I am 50/50 concerning the Ransom Note writing as it relates to Hauptmann. If you take away these tainted requests I don't see where any Experts are conclusive about the situation - except of course Script who had drawn his conclusion from the pictures in Haring's book.
So, for me, he doesn't count.
Now according to Keraga's "report" he takes a cheap shot at me saying I refused to show him where this type of coaching taints the requests. I had, on numerous occasions done so and I will do it again.
Just for one example:
[/i].[/blockquote]Obtaining Dictated (Requested) Known WritingsA few cardinal rules in taking dictated known writings:
DO NOT coach the writer on how to make the letter forms
DO NOT show him/her the questioned writing.
DO NOT show him/her ANY handwriting (or even typewriting) and tell him/her to copy it.
DO NOT help the subject with spelling or arrangement
[Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation (Guidelines)]
Of course there are many more - for those who really want to find them.