|
Post by corrine on Apr 20, 2016 19:46:36 GMT -5
Amy- I think It depended where your house was located what school you would go to, not as many schools back then..I was told my fathers uncles went to P.S. 12 - P.S.12 replaced Union School # 1 in 1886 After the annexation of this section of Westchester County to New York City in 1895,it became P.S. 97 When the schools were renumbered according to borough,it became P.S. 12 - Dr John F. Condon is recalled as one of the most popular principals. The other schools in Throggs Neck were P.S.14 P.S.72 I think they were built in late 1920's not 100% sure what year they were built.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 8:39:00 GMT -5
Dr.John F. Condon was the principal of PS 12 in Westchester Sq Bronx, NY- I have a picture of him,with the baseball team. I'm not that great with the computer. Michael I hope you don't mind helping me share this photo.I just emailed you the photo can you help post it for me. Thanks so much Corrine for sharing this photo and thanks also to you Michael for your assistance in getting this picture posted. I never saw this picture before. Condon certainly loved sports and much of his free time was spent in activities revolving around athletics. From what I have read, Condon's longest tenure as a principal was spent at PS 12. Great picture!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 9:00:55 GMT -5
Amy- I think It depended where your house was located what school you would go to, not as many schools back then..I was told my fathers uncles went to P.S. 12 - P.S.12 replaced Union School # 1 in 1886 After the annexation of this section of Westchester County to New York City in 1895,it became P.S. 97 When the schools were renumbered according to borough,it became P.S. 12 - Dr John F. Condon is recalled as one of the most popular principals. The other schools in Throggs Neck were P.S.14 P.S.72 I think they were built in late 1920's not 100% sure what year they were built. I appreciate you sharing this information. Totally get what you are saying about house location determining what school children would attend. Sounds much like the way they do it today. You mention that Dr. Condon was a very popular principal. I wonder if that could have had anything to do with why he became involved with the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. This positive public image of an accomplished educator of children would play well in the public eye once he was revealed as "Jafsie". I know that the authorities had a list of all the students Condon had contact with and did some checking up on these students. Condon had claimed that the kidnapper who called him the evening of March 11 was calling from "Westchester". I have always wondered if that call could have been coming from the neighborhood of Westchester Square where PS 12 was. Condon's phone calls were never traced so I guess we will never really know where that call came from.
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 21, 2016 14:54:11 GMT -5
Amy- I think It depended where your house was located what school you would go to, not as many schools back then..I was told my fathers uncles went to P.S. 12 - P.S.12 replaced Union School # 1 in 1886 After the annexation of this section of Westchester County to New York City in 1895,it became P.S. 97 When the schools were renumbered according to borough,it became P.S. 12 - Dr John F. Condon is recalled as one of the most popular principals. The other schools in Throggs Neck were P.S.14 P.S.72 I think they were built in late 1920's not 100% sure what year they were built. I appreciate you sharing this information. Totally get what you are saying about house location determining what school children would attend. Sounds much like the way they do it today. You mention that Dr. Condon was a very popular principal. I wonder if that could have had anything to do with why he became involved with the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. This positive public image of an accomplished educator of children would play well in the public eye once he was revealed as "Jafsie". I know that the authorities had a list of all the students Condon had contact with and did some checking up on these students. Condon had claimed that the kidnapper who called him the evening of March 11 was calling from "Westchester". I have always wondered if that call could have been coming from the neighborhood of Westchester Square where PS 12 was. Condon's phone calls were never traced so I guess we will never really know where that call came from. I think the phone call to Condon, came from Westchester Sq. Somewhere near the train station was a phone booth. From -(Whittemore Ave by the Cemetery) to Westchester Square was about seven city blocks.Could be that the kidnappers lived near or by the Cemetery. If authorities had a list of all students Condon had contact with checking up on these students, I would love to see that list if one is around. Maybe one of my father's uncles are on that list.You never know...LOL
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 21, 2016 15:14:18 GMT -5
Thank You Michael
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 22, 2016 14:10:01 GMT -5
I appreciate you sharing this information. Totally get what you are saying about house location determining what school children would attend. Sounds much like the way they do it today. You mention that Dr. Condon was a very popular principal. I wonder if that could have had anything to do with why he became involved with the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. This positive public image of an accomplished educator of children would play well in the public eye once he was revealed as "Jafsie". I know that the authorities had a list of all the students Condon had contact with and did some checking up on these students. Condon had claimed that the kidnapper who called him the evening of March 11 was calling from "Westchester". I have always wondered if that call could have been coming from the neighborhood of Westchester Square where PS 12 was. Condon's phone calls were never traced so I guess we will never really know where that call came from. I think the phone call to Condon, came from Westchester Sq. Somewhere near the train station was a phone booth. From -(Whittemore Ave by the Cemetery) to Westchester Square was about seven city blocks.Could be that the kidnappers lived near or by the Cemetery. If authorities had a list of all students Condon had contact with checking up on these students, I would love to see that list if one is around. Maybe one of my father's uncles are on that list.You never know...LOL Hello Michael, I was wondering if you can help me / direct me - to how I can find some info on this ~ Authorities had a list of students Condon had contact with and did some checking on some students. Also do you happen to know the kids names that were in the photo, from Condon's P.S.12 baseball team.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 22, 2016 15:39:29 GMT -5
Hello Michael, I was wondering if you can help me / direct me - to how I can find some info on this ~ Authorities had a list of students Condon had contact with and did some checking on some students. Also do you happen to know the kids names that were in the photo, from Condon's P.S.12 baseball team. Corrine - That list is absolutely at the NJSP Archives. Sad to say but I did not xerox it. I remember almost doing it on two separate occasions but it was a huge list of many pages so both times I talked myself out of it. I am certain they did not investigate each and every person on that list. Some where looked at but only if they had a reason to. On the photo.... No ideas at all on that one.
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 22, 2016 18:04:22 GMT -5
Thank You Michael for the reply.- As you know I am not a researcher just interested in the case since the sixtys. I heard the Museum in Trenton N.J. houses an extensive research library. Is that research library open to the public for me to view ? - Not sure where the NJSP Archives is or located ? - also is that open the public to view ? Can you please give me some info on how I would go about finding this list, that I'm looking for.
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 22, 2016 20:43:03 GMT -5
Thank You Michael for the reply.- As you know I am not a researcher just interested in the case since the sixtys. I heard the Museum in Trenton N.J. houses an extensive research library. Is that research library open to the public for me to view ? - Not sure where the NJSP Archives is or located ? - also is that open the public to view ? Can you please give me some info on how I would go about finding this list, that I'm looking for. Michael, This information may help to find the missing - link I've been trying to figure out,for many years - as to why my great grandmother forbid my father to not ask any questions about The Lindbergh Kidnapping. Hey, maybe with some digging into research it may lead me to finding out the reason why it was forbidden to speak of kidnapping in her home.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Apr 23, 2016 4:18:39 GMT -5
Don't you wish you had a nickel for every time someone thanked you for something on here, Michael?
Thanks.
Neither Red Johnson nor Richard Hauptmann would most likely be accepted for a "Mastermind" style kidnapping plot. They were both illegal aliens so if either fell under any form of suspicion they could be incarcerated on that charge alone, and of course thoroughly interrogated 1932 style. Red would immediately be suspect as he was a part of the homes group.
Red most likely was not a part of some kidnapping gang because they would have advised him on some issues where he eventually fell short. They would have told him not to make any substantial purchases around the time of the crime - car. They would have told him not to call the crime scene on the evening of the crime - 8:45. They would have told him not to leave town the day after the crime - to brother's. Probably would have told him to dispose of milk bottles kept in his car.
Richard had a violent (use of gun) criminal history that included burglary and robbery, even second story burglary using a ladder. He most likely would have been convicted of TLC even if he didn't have wads of gold bills stashed in his garage. His history would have excluded him by the mastermind.
Of course if BRH did it on his own, why would he need a mastermind? He showed up on a Tuesday having no idea that the Lindberghs were never there on Tuesday - but he was because it was his wife's night to work. He luckily picked the right window, but not so strange because the shutter was faulty and may have shown it from the ground. Even if it didn't it's just a one out of three windows, so not such long odds.
If he had an insider, why even use a ladder? Instead of handing off, insider just drops baby about four feet for Richard to catch. So no insider.
He's thinking - there I did it, with almost no preparation!
So he gets away with it, and plays the negotiations by ear so lots of notes but eventually gets the money. Probably was laundering money initially, but gets greedy or sees cash going too fast, so starts spending them himself, and as Kevin once said, "he was gonna get caught sooner or later."
One note - I know he was planning on going back to Germany and believe he had his mother checking into whether he legally could or not. It sounded to me at the time that he was planning a solo one way trip. Earlier it was posted on this site that Anna was using him. I don't think so. I'm sure he could have had women if he wanted them. I've only seen a few pictures of him and have seen him with some cuties.
I'm sure Michael is shading his head now thinking about how stupid I am because of his new facts. I hope the "confession" is in volume one.
That would be a good new thread - have everybody guess who confesses, if that's what the eureka news is. You've given out a few clues so they'd be semi-educated guesses, and you could give out a few more clues.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 23, 2016 6:42:57 GMT -5
Thank You Michael for the reply.- As you know I am not a researcher just interested in the case since the sixtys. I heard the Museum in Trenton N.J. houses an extensive research library. Is that research library open to the public for me to view ? - Not sure where the NJSP Archives is or located ? - also is that open the public to view ? Can you please give me some info on how I would go about finding this list, that I'm looking for. The NJSP Lindbergh Kidnapping Archives are in the Museum but in a separate section. It is open to the public but requires an appointment made with the Archivist Mark Falzini. Mark is a great guy and a perfect man for this job because he's both knowledgeable and extremely helpful in every way. I recommend everyone, if they can, to visit the Archives. However, if you live too far away or cannot make it to the area then sometimes a phone call to Mark asking him for something specific can yield the desired results. Corrine, if you cannot make it I would call the Museum then ask for Mark. If you tell him that you are specifically looking for the list of Condon's former pupils he should be able to find it for you IF it's listed that way in the index cards. I say "if" because the files remain as they were originally put together. I once asked Mark why they don't re-file things to make it easier and he almost fell out of his chair. He explained that the integrity of the collections must always be preserved.... I suppose that's why Archivists usually have a History Major! However, because of the way these collections exist, it's why over the years I've found things that aren't indexed and/or in places one would not expect. And that situation can even stump Mark at times. www.njsp.org/about/museum.shtmlwww.njspmemorialassociation.org/museum/Lindbergh.php
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 23, 2016 7:10:41 GMT -5
Richard had a violent (use of gun) criminal history that included burglary and robbery, even second story burglary using a ladder. He most likely would have been convicted of TLC even if he didn't have wads of gold bills stashed in his garage. His history would have excluded him by the mastermind. I don't consider his history "violent." It wasn't Hauptmann who wielded the gun, and he always claimed it was unloaded. However by today's standards it would have been considered a violent act since the threat was made and the women had no knowledge as to whether or not it actually was... So it would be argued the fear of harm was real therefore it was a violent act. I don't like that and never did because today if someone robs a bank with a note it's considered a violent offense just as if they brought a weapon with them. To me, that's telling someone they should just bring the weapon. But I digress.... Not making excuses but it was Post-WWI Germany and there was a lot of this going on because people were legitimately hungry/starving. I think if someone could show me violence while in this country that would be something that I could sink my teeth into. If someone is a violent person there should be examples. Of course if BRH did it on his own, why would he need a mastermind? He showed up on a Tuesday having no idea that the Lindberghs were never there on Tuesday - but he was because it was his wife's night to work. He luckily picked the right window, but not so strange because the shutter was faulty and may have shown it from the ground. Even if it didn't it's just a one out of three windows, so not such long odds. Amandus Hochmuth would have stood a better chance then Hauptmann driving blindly to Hopewell then getting lucky in every way. My guess is he wouldn't have even found the house. There is absolutely nothing that suggests "luck" excepting the fact it can only be explained in that way if one wants to believe the Lone-Wolf Theory. I'm sure Michael is shading his head now thinking about how stupid I am because of his new facts. I hope the "confession" is in volume one. That would be a good new thread - have everybody guess who confesses, if that's what the eureka news is. You've given out a few clues so they'd be semi-educated guesses, and you could give out a few more clues. I honestly don't think anything is "stupid." It's important to go over everything in this way, step by step, to see what works and what doesn't. If, for example, in response to a claim that Hauptmann was innocent, one points to the attempted purchase at Cross Austin & Ireland Lumber Yard as an indicator of guilt, how then can they simultaneously say he was a Lone-Wolf? But they do, and that to me makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's important it gets brought up but embracing certain aspects then becoming silly about the others is counterproductive. We have to use what's in front of us or nothing gets solved. Yes, I have a ton of new material which I believe is important otherwise it wouldn't have been included. I expect there will be a lot to discuss.
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 24, 2016 12:29:59 GMT -5
Thank You Michael for the reply.- As you know I am not a researcher just interested in the case since the sixtys. I heard the Museum in Trenton N.J. houses an extensive research library. Is that research library open to the public for me to view ? - Not sure where the NJSP Archives is or located ? - also is that open the public to view ? Can you please give me some info on how I would go about finding this list, that I'm looking for. The NJSP Lindbergh Kidnapping Archives are in the Museum but in a separate section. It is open to the public but requires an appointment made with the Archivist Mark Falzini. Mark is a great guy and a perfect man for this job because he's both knowledgeable and extremely helpful in every way. I recommend everyone, if they can, to visit the Archives. However, if you live too far away or cannot make it to the area then sometimes a phone call to Mark asking him for something specific can yield the desired results. Corrine, if you cannot make it I would call the Museum then ask for Mark. If you tell him that you are specifically looking for the list of Condon's former pupils he should be able to find it for you IF it's listed that way in the index cards. I say "if" because the files remain as they were originally put together. I once asked Mark why they don't re-file things to make it easier and he almost fell out of his chair. He explained that the integrity of the collections must always be preserved.... I suppose that's why Archivists usually have a History Major! However, because of the way these collections exist, it's why over the years I've found things that aren't indexed and/or in places one would not expect. And that situation can even stump Mark at times. www.njsp.org/about/museum.shtmlwww.njspmemorialassociation.org/museum/Lindbergh.php
|
|
|
Post by corrine on Apr 24, 2016 12:34:36 GMT -5
Thanks Michael, I'll give Mark a call and see if he can help me. It's a three hour ride to Trenton for me LOL One way/ six round trip. If he cant help- maybe in a few weeks I will take the ride.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2016 9:40:53 GMT -5
So, Michael, I have a question about Red Johnson I hope you can comment on. In Mark Falzini's great book, "Their Fifteen Minutes" his opening chapter is on Red Johnson. In that chapter, he states that on March 13th 1932, the Newark Deputy Chief of Police Brex said Red Johnson was "cleared of all suspicion of complicity in the kidnapping". Regardless, Johnson would remain in police custody another 20+ days before being passed into the custody of Immigration officials. Thanks to Mrs. Morrow with her friends in high places, arrangements were worked out for Johnson to leave America. Mark also mentions in his Red Johnson chapter that Newark Deputy Chief of Police Brex wrote a letter to Secretary of Labor William Doak saying that "in 28 years as a police officer I cannot recall any subject who had received such a diversified investigation with nothing of an incriminating nature being discovered...When we turned over Johnson to your Immigration Officers simultaneously we exonerated Johnson from any connection whatsoever, directly or indirectly, with the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby."Clearly, the authorities couldn't stress Johnson's innocence more profoundly than that!! So I found myself wondering why, if Johnson was squeaky clean of any wrongdoing in the kidnapping. it was necessary for him to leave America? He wanted to stay in this country. Why wasn't he given the opportunity to apply for citizenship? He had started the process a few years earlier. Why not allow him to do so now? He isn't given that option, however. He either leaves "voluntarily" or he will be deported. He is not welcome to stay in America, even though he had not committed any crime, ever, apparently, except entering America illegally. Red Johnson's brother, Fred Johnson who lived in Brooklyn NY was also picked up after Johnson became a suspect. Fred Johnson was also in America illegally. He ended up needing and receiving the same help as Red did. However, for Fred the result of being here illegally would turn out differently. I found this article in a newspaper and when I read it, I started wondering why Red had no option to stay while his brother was given that option. Can you comment on this?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 26, 2016 19:02:34 GMT -5
I found this article in a newspaper and when I read it, I started wondering why Red had no option to stay while his brother was given that option. Can you comment on this? It appears to me that once Red was picked up by the Immigration Authorities on the warrant they issued his fate was sealed. The idea was to hold him as long as necessary for purposes other then immigration setting his bail at $50,000. Of course they would do an investigation and they told Lt. Snook that if there were grounds for deportation he could be held up to 6 months - adding that " arrangements could be made to delay the action." Snook wrote in one report: "Explained to Mr. Uhl that it was our desire to have Johnson taken into custody by the U. S. Immigration authorities and held in custody with the knowledge of no one except the New Jersey State Police and available for interview to that Department." So it then became a "deportation case" and Johnson's only way to be released would be bail. During the detention he saw the real possibility of being deported existed. If he had been deported he could never come back to the U.S. legally. So once others stepped in to assist he agreed to leave with the idea he could come back under the legal quota. There were politics involved on all sides of this.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 27, 2016 8:57:11 GMT -5
Well, entering America illegally was a crime then and still is today, and carries a penalty of deportation generally.
The major difference between then and now is that the federal government back then generally enforced that law as it was written. Today's government, in the interest of political pandering, conveniently looks the other way on most immigration crimes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2016 8:11:17 GMT -5
Well, entering America illegally was a crime then and still is today, and carries a penalty of deportation generally. The major difference between then and now is that the federal government back then generally enforced that law as it was written. Today's government, in the interest of political pandering, conveniently looks the other way on most immigration crimes. I understand the point you are making. So why do you think that Fred Johnson was allowed to register with Ellis Island authorities to open the path toward citizenship and Red Johnson was not allowed to do that? Fred had committed the same crime as Red Johnson yet we have two different outcomes. One brother can stay and one absolutely cannot. Why?? Why was it necessary to hold Johnson under a $50,000 bail amount? I think what Michael said in his post about this whole issue having political overtones is true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2016 8:38:01 GMT -5
Michael,
Concerning Red's brother Fred; he lived in Brooklyn NY. The first mailed ransom note(March 4) was mailed from Brooklyn NY. Surely the authorities looked into Fred's life. Did they check Fred's handwriting against the ransom notes?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 28, 2016 12:46:22 GMT -5
Concerning Red's brother Fred; he lived in Brooklyn NY. The first mailed ransom note(March 4) was mailed from Brooklyn NY. Surely the authorities looked into Fred's life. Did they check Fred's handwriting against the ransom notes? I think so Amy. I've been searching for my Fred Johnson file since you first brought this up but cannot locate it. I know I always say it's hard to find certain material, but it's been doubly hard since I wrote the book because I've really made a mess by displacing material. So since I can't locate the exemplar then I won't say with 100% certainty until I do. Why was it necessary to hold Johnson under a $50,000 bail amount? Certainly to ensure he could not make the bail. I know that I always praise your questions Amy but I wanted to do it again. The pit-fall that most Researchers fall into is that they are searching each source for specific items to fit into their personal narrative. When you simply read then let all relevant information fall into their places that is a great thing. If something stands out as "strange" you try to figure out what's going on instead of shrugging it off or make up some random explanation/excuse. Here's something I remember beyond all doubt: The Police planted an undercover man to work with Fred and gain his trust hoping he'd slip up and reveal information. You won't find that in any book, and those "Experts" who's only source is Fisher will probably deny it's true. (What other recourse do they have?)
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 28, 2016 14:39:43 GMT -5
Yes, I fully agree that there were political overtones in both the Fred Johnson and Red Johnson cases. The mere fact that there was a "Scandinavian Division of the Republican Party" interceding for Fred Johnson with the Secretary of Labor during the Hoover administration indicates the use of political clout on Fred's behalf. Pretty much the same was probably used in Red Johnson's case, since it seems as if the two brothers were represented by the same lawyer. BTW, that contact with the "Scandinavian Division of the Republican Party" was likely arranged by CAL Sr., whose late father was a Republican congressman of Scandinavian heritage.
So why did Fred get a seemingly better outcome than Red? One reason might be that Fred had a clean record after he arrived in the US, whereas Red may have had a minor criminal record. (Remember that episode of Red being busted in Palisades Park making love with Betty Gow?) Another possibility is that Red's case came up after Fred's, and perhaps the the government officials involved didn't want to suspected of giving too many favors to the same family.
BTW, did Fred Johnson live out his life in the US or did he go back to Norway as Red did?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2016 22:26:07 GMT -5
Here's something I remember beyond all doubt: The Police planted an undercover man to work with Fred and gain his trust hoping he'd slip up and reveal information. You won't find that in any book, and those "Experts" who's only source is Fisher will probably deny it's true. (What other recourse do they have?) That is amazing, Michael. I have never, ever seen that fact in any publication about this case. Now that high bail amount makes sense. They wanted to continue to investigate Johnson and have him right there should something be found. Thanks for sharing that. Truly, no one knows this case the way you do. You are the real expert when it comes to this crime and everything that revolves around it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2016 22:49:45 GMT -5
BTW, did Fred Johnson live out his life in the US or did he go back to Norway as Red did? Thanks for your thoughts on why one Johnson gets to stay and the other does not. It seems the authorities were not totally convinced about whether Red Johnson was involved or knew something about what happened to Charlie and they wanted to keep working on that angle. According to Mark Falzini's wonderful book, "Their Fifteen Minutes", Fred Johnson did remain in America. Red never returned to seek citizenship. Red did make it back to America once but not as a visitor. Mark says in the 1950's when Red was working on a freighter, the ship made a stop in America. Red was able to visit both his brothers (Fred and John) briefly. He had not seen them since 1932. Red lived out the rest of his life in Norway, dying in 1962 at the age of 57. Mark's book is a great source of information about not only Red Johnson but many other key figures in the Lindbergh kidnapping case. It is truly a must have book for all those interested in this case.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 29, 2016 10:20:50 GMT -5
You are the real expert when it comes to this crime and everything that revolves around it. Thanks Amy. I will say this ... no matter who much one knows they can always know more AND they aren't immune to making mistakes. That's exactly why the solution to this case will absolutely require a collective effort of diverse and differing perspectives.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on May 29, 2016 13:47:24 GMT -5
The crime is solved.
The government does not have an open investigation of TLC. That differs Lindbergh from other famous crimes such as Simpson and Ramsey, which theoretically could develop new information via various police agencies who are "still at work" on them.
Ref: That man (Kline?) from Thailand for example for Ramsey.
Anyone would have a tough (impossible?) sell reopening Lindbergh.
Back to Red though, did he ever publically state his involvement in the Lindbergh issue of 3/1/32, (I'm not sure he was involved in the crime) especially how he was treated by the police while incarcerated? I think that night he was out with another woman and didn't want Gow to know - as far as I've determined he never did explain himself (three different alibis including the suspicious Junges) for Tuesday night but must have satisfied someone because people that you wouldn't even think knew him stood up for him.
Must have had that charming Norwegian charisma.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 29, 2016 18:00:20 GMT -5
The crime is solved. The government does not have an open investigation of TLC. That differs Lindbergh from other famous crimes such as Simpson and Ramsey, which theoretically could develop new information via various police agencies who are "still at work" on them. Anyone would have a tough (impossible?) sell reopening Lindbergh. We've reopened it here - haven't we? Remember my point about people thinking facts don't exist if they're not in a book? Well they will be soon. Will the case be solved? I think so but that will be up to the individual researcher to decide. So don't worry, I am quite sure we'll still have much to discuss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2016 19:21:37 GMT -5
Speaking for myself, I think there is a huge question mark hanging over this case. Hauptmann may have been captured, prosecuted, and then executed for the kidnapping but the questions of how Charlie died, where Charlie died, and when Charlie died have never been adequately answered. There was a lot of conjecture and inference made about Charlie's death but Wilentz couldn't really prove the how, where and when of what happened to Charlie.
I am really looking forward to Michael's first book and what all his research can tell us about this crime.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on May 29, 2016 21:45:34 GMT -5
Oh, we'll always have plenty to talk about, I'm stating about officially. Anna tried to either have it reopened, or resolved differently with no luck. Courts are very sticky about "new evidence." They don't consider it new. Speaking of Anna . . . Speaking of talking, any answers about Red above?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 30, 2016 10:54:52 GMT -5
Back to Red though, did he ever publically state his involvement in the Lindbergh issue of 3/1/32, (I'm not sure he was involved in the crime) especially how he was treated by the police while incarcerated? I think that night he was out with another woman and didn't want Gow to know - as far as I've determined he never did explain himself (three different alibis including the suspicious Junges) for Tuesday night but must have satisfied someone because people that you wouldn't even think knew him stood up for him. He wrote a series of articles on his experiences - among them his rough treatment by Newark. I don't have Mark's book in front of me but I recall it was a pretty accurate account. Red had expected a date with Betty that night and was disappointed that she left. He went to the Jung's, went to call Betty, then went out for ice cream or coffee with them. This was all backed up. So far that's Red, Betty, and both Jung's who'd all have to be lying. Next, the Police also went to the "Court Confectionery Store" and interviewed a worker there named Jenny Thiesan who said two men and one women came into the store between 8:30 and 9:30 for about 15 minutes. She identified the German man as Johannes, and the other man as Red Johnson.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2016 21:05:28 GMT -5
He wrote a series of articles on his experiences - among them his rough treatment by Newark. When I checked Mark's book about this here is what he wrote: "In an interview with the Norwegian-American newspaper, Nordisk Tidende, Red Johnson was asked if the police gave him the third degree: 'The police in Newark have treated me in the best of ways, but in Hartford...they were brutal. I was questioned non-stop for hours. The detectives swore and yelled at me in every way, while they kept poking me with their knuckles, here, in the ribs and in the belly."
Mark also wrote that according to Red's daughter Else, the treatment by the Hartford police was much more extreme than he told the newspaper. Else said Red had marks on his upper body, front and back from cuts. These marks were as thick as your little finger. She also said that Red was kept in a cell so small he could not sit or lie down and had water dripping down on his head. I know that Hauptmann was beaten by the police which was nasty enough but what Else describes happened to her father sounds almost unbelievable.
|
|