|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 7, 2021 12:48:34 GMT -5
This type of ladder is known as a "Cat Ladder." It is light weight and a relatively flimsy construction because it is not intended for use as a regular ladder. Its purpose is to allow workers to climb up to the apex of a sloping roof. It is laid on the roof tiles with the feet of the ladder in the gutter. The weight of the worker is borne, not by the rungs, but largely by the roof itself and the beams beneath. It is used by tilers and chimney repairmen. They are available commercially in various designs including some which correspond very closely to the home-made Lindbergh ladder.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 7, 2021 19:43:07 GMT -5
This type of ladder is known as a "Cat Ladder." It is light weight and a relatively flimsy construction because it is not intended for use as a regular ladder. Its purpose is to allow workers to climb up to the apex of a sloping roof. It is laid on the roof tiles with the feet of the ladder in the gutter. The weight of the worker is borne, not by the rungs, but largely by the roof itself and the beams beneath. It is used by tilers and chimney repairmen. They are available commercially in various designs including some which correspond very closely to the home-made Lindbergh ladder. Perhaps the basic design is similar but this ladder was designed for lightweight portability and a vertical climb, unassisted by an underlying supporting surface. And it was meant to be broken down and nested within a full sized sedan vehicle. There was little room for error in lateral or vertical force within the ascent and descent and although it exhibited a number of structural deficiencies that quite easily could have proven even more catastrophic, it was nevertheless deadly effective on the night of March 1, 1932.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 9, 2021 8:55:41 GMT -5
Hi Joe, Thanks for your prompt reply to my posting. We have to agree to disagree: the ladder was designed for portability as you say but in my view it was not designed for a vertical climb. The ladder, when found, was split near the dowel leading to the suspicion that this happened under load when the climber was on it. A duplicate ladder made by the NJSP also split in the same place when under load. Maximum tolerable load was quoted as only 120 pounds. This tells me (1) that this ladder had never been tested for conventional use before the 'kidnap' and (2) that it was manifestly unsuitable for use as a regular ladder. As Michael has said elsewhere (I paraphrase) "Why construct such a ramshackle unreliable ladder to carry out a 50,000 dollar kidnap?" It doesn't make sense. In your words: "it exhibited a number of structural deficiencies..which could have proven...catastrophic." Its like carrying out a bank robbery with a profoundly unreliable getaway car. The builders of the recently-completed Lindbergh house probably used cat ladders to do the tiling and roof work. I know they were questioned but..........Well, we'll leave it there. Thanks again for your comments. Stay safe.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 9, 2021 12:21:58 GMT -5
Hi Joe, Thanks for your prompt reply to my posting. We have to agree to disagree: the ladder was designed for portability as you say but in my view it was not designed for a vertical climb. The ladder, when found, was split near the dowel leading to the suspicion that this happened under load when the climber was on it. A duplicate ladder made by the NJSP also split in the same place when under load. Maximum tolerable load was quoted as only 120 pounds. This tells me (1) that this ladder had never been tested for conventional use before the 'kidnap' and (2) that it was manifestly unsuitable for use as a regular ladder. As Michael has said elsewhere (I paraphrase) "Why construct such a ramshackle unreliable ladder to carry out a 50,000 dollar kidnap?" It doesn't make sense. In your words: "it exhibited a number of structural deficiencies..which could have proven...catastrophic." Its like carrying out a bank robbery with a profoundly unreliable getaway car. The builders of the recently-completed Lindbergh house probably used cat ladders to do the tiling and roof work. I know they were questioned but..........Well, we'll leave it there. Thanks again for your comments. Stay safe. Thanks, and you're welcome. Can you comment on why the builder of the kidnap ladder might have gone to the trouble of building a cat ladder that also happened to nest together so precisely? For information, a duplicate ladder was also constructed to the same level of detail exhibited within the kidnap ladder, by Kelvin Keraga, who conducted an extensive study on the wood and ladder evidence, and it managed to support his weight over a number of full ascents and descents. www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/keraga.pdfI recall Kel was about 6 ft. tall and close to 200 lbs. (Kel, if you're reading this, please correct me if I'm too far off!) Wayward lateral motion and sudden impact were determined to be factors which were far more likely to wreak havoc within this design and construction. Regarding the actual kidnap ladder's deficiencies, there's simply no accounting for this type of Achilles Heel stupidity on the part of criminals at times. Hauptmann clearly built the ladder and he clearly placed the dowel holes too close to the ends of the rails. Further, he didn't think to reinforce these areas, a task that would simply have involved wrapping a few turns of wire around the rail ends to prevent splitting and failure. Quite an oversight, but he did manage to keep it lightweight and therefore, easy to carry.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 9, 2021 15:51:16 GMT -5
Hi Joe, My theory/opinion is that the Hopewell ladder was constructed by an innocent builder/roofer as a cat ladder never intending it to be used otherwise and certainly not in a "kidnap." In the depression of the 1930's, with money being tight, I imagine home-made on-the-job rough constructions like this were not uncommon. As a boy I saw home-made and very crude cat ladders on building sites in the UK in the 1950's. No health and safety regulations then! It nests together precisely, as you said, for convenience of transport. The separate sections, light in weight, allow easy hauling up to the roof where it is assembled in situ to the length required. Usually cat ladders have a large 90 degree "hook" at the top end which is hooked over the apex of the roof for added stability. If ever present, this has been removed from the Hopewell ladder to make it more believable as the "kidnap ladder." I was unaware of Kelvin Keraga's experiment and I respect the result. However it is a fact that the Hopewell ladder failed in use by splitting near the dowel, in my view because as a cat ladder, it was totally unsuitable for use "vertically." This, as I said earlier, indicates that this ladder was never tested for use "vertically" which it surely would have been if intended for use in the "kidnap." A feature of modern cat ladders, made in aluminium, is very narrow rungs, almost like rods and totally different to the steps on a conventional ladder. Being made of wood the Hopewell ladder also has a narrow "under-foot" surface. The reason is to provide convenient hand holds when working at a dangerous height. I have a photo of a modern aluminium cat ladder showing these features but I will have to consult the family computer expert, my wife, as to how I can post it. Incidentally, Hauptmann at his trial described the Hopewell ladder as resembling a musical instrument and this remark always puzzled me. It just struck me: a xylophone! Best regards.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 10, 2021 11:03:52 GMT -5
Hi Joe, My theory/opinion is that the Hopewell ladder was constructed by an innocent builder/roofer as a cat ladder never intending it to be used otherwise and certainly not in a "kidnap." In the depression of the 1930's, with money being tight, I imagine home-made on-the-job rough constructions like this were not uncommon. As a boy I saw home-made and very crude cat ladders on building sites in the UK in the 1950's. No health and safety regulations then! It nests together precisely, as you said, for convenience of transport. The separate sections, light in weight, allow easy hauling up to the roof where it is assembled in situ to the length required. Usually cat ladders have a large 90 degree "hook" at the top end which is hooked over the apex of the roof for added stability. If ever present, this has been removed from the Hopewell ladder to make it more believable as the "kidnap ladder." I was unaware of Kelvin Keraga's experiment and I respect the result. However it is a fact that the Hopewell ladder failed in use by splitting near the dowel, in my view because as a cat ladder, it was totally unsuitable for use "vertically." This, as I said earlier, indicates that this ladder was never tested for use "vertically" which it surely would have been if intended for use in the "kidnap." A feature of modern cat ladders, made in aluminium, is very narrow rungs, almost like rods and totally different to the steps on a conventional ladder. Being made of wood the Hopewell ladder also has a narrow "under-foot" surface. The reason is to provide convenient hand holds when working at a dangerous height. I have a photo of a modern aluminium cat ladder showing these features but I will have to consult the family computer expert, my wife, as to how I can post it. Incidentally, Hauptmann at his trial described the Hopewell ladder as resembling a musical instrument and this remark always puzzled me. It just struck me: a xylophone! Best regards. Hi Sherlock, I'd encourage you to have a good read-through of the Keraga Report, which reinforces those findings originally put forth by Arthur Koehler. IMO, the kidnap ladder was built solely for the purpose of reaching the Hopewell nursery window with either two or three of its sections, and the load weight estimations provided by investigators are highly-contentious. While structural support and strength were required, portability within a full sized sedan and light weight were key, and I don't believe the kidnapper(s) originally intended for the ladder to be left behind. I believe this all changed with its failure (the cracking sound heard by Lindbergh) upon descent and the restrained sense of panic the kidnapper(s) were thrown into as a result. There are many pieces of very-convincing circumstantial physical evidence that tie the ladder around Hauptmann's neck, including the origin of Rail 16 having been his attic, planer marks on the rails identically matching the ridges and nicks on Hauptmann's unsharpened planer blade, PPG nails of the same type as those found in a keg in Hauptmann's garage. As far as what "moosik instrument" Hauptmann was referring to, I've always been inclined towards trombone, based on the ladder's nesting sections that would have been slid out to effect the required dowel positions. Anyone else have other ideas what instrument it could have been?
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Aug 10, 2021 12:33:17 GMT -5
Joe, How about the German Scheitholt??
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 10, 2021 13:09:43 GMT -5
Seems quite possible Lurp, and would make sense for it to have been something of German origin.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 10, 2021 15:08:15 GMT -5
<https://www.laddersandaccess.co.uk/product/lyte-double-section-roof-ladders/> Hi Joe, Above is the reference to the site which has a photo of a modern cat/roof ladder. Made of aluminium, a two element nesting design, the narrow rungs and the hook for the roof apex are shown. Similar ladders can be found I'm sure on the websites of US suppliers. But what we really need is to show the Hopewell ladder pictures to a historian of past building techniques (at a University or building trades institute?) asking the question: "Is this Hopewell ladder similar to on-site constructed roof ladders from the 1930's?" In this way we have an independent opinion of an expert based only on the ladder and without reference to one theory or another as to how the crime was committed. Having read many books, Dark Corners, Suspect No 1 etc I am familiar with the arguments supporting Hauptmann's guilt, just as I am with those supporting his innocence. My career in research taught me that its unwise to be wedded to a particular interpretation of the facts, especially here where the "facts" are almost 100 years old. For this reason I'm not betting the ranch on it being a cat ladder. But I need an independent expert's opinion to convince me one way or the other! A trombone! I never thought of that Joe but you have a point with the sliding motion between the ladder parts. Lurp's suggestion too is a good one. Will be interested to hear of other suggestions.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 11, 2021 12:12:38 GMT -5
<https://www.laddersandaccess.co.uk/product/lyte-double-section-roof-ladders/> Hi Joe, Above is the reference to the site which has a photo of a modern cat/roof ladder. Made of aluminium, a two element nesting design, the narrow rungs and the hook for the roof apex are shown. Similar ladders can be found I'm sure on the websites of US suppliers. But what we really need is to show the Hopewell ladder pictures to a historian of past building techniques (at a University or building trades institute?) asking the question: "Is this Hopewell ladder similar to on-site constructed roof ladders from the 1930's?" In this way we have an independent opinion of an expert based only on the ladder and without reference to one theory or another as to how the crime was committed. Having read many books, Dark Corners, Suspect No 1 etc I am familiar with the arguments supporting Hauptmann's guilt, just as I am with those supporting his innocence. My career in research taught me that its unwise to be wedded to a particular interpretation of the facts, especially here where the "facts" are almost 100 years old. For this reason I'm not betting the ranch on it being a cat ladder. But I need an independent expert's opinion to convince me one way or the other! A trombone! I never thought of that Joe but you have a point with the sliding motion between the ladder parts. Lurp's suggestion too is a good one. Will be interested to hear of other suggestions. I'd certainly encourage you to seek a professional opinion whether or not the kidnap ladder might have been designed as a roof ladder. for this purpose though, I don't believe you can omit the circumstantial physical evidence that clearly placed this ladder around Hauptmann's neck for the primary purpose of kidnapping Charles Lindbergh Jr.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Aug 12, 2021 13:49:38 GMT -5
Hi Joe, Thanks for your encouragement; I will seek an independent opinion and let you, and the forum, know the result. I just discovered that the sections of a commercial wooden cat ladder are joined together with steel tubes. These are rectangular cross section and slide half way onto the end of the rails where they are secured by lateral bolts. The top section end rails then slide into the other half of the tube and are secured in the same way. A much more secure method than those pesky dowels. May be a clue that the ladder builder had to make do with what he had available at the time. Best wishes, Sherlock.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Aug 12, 2021 16:52:24 GMT -5
Or how about a xylophone? It's tapered and it has "rungs."
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 13, 2021 6:40:48 GMT -5
Or how about a xylophone? It's tapered and it has "rungs." Both you and Sherlock mentioned xylophone and I think I tend to agree as well, especially if the tuned bars were made of wood!
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Aug 22, 2021 16:14:34 GMT -5
Hi Joe, The Ladder Association (UK) is a non-profit organisation founded in the 1940's. Today it provides education, training, technical and legal advice to the ladder industry. I wrote to the LA for their opinion on "our" ladder. Their technical manager replied. I described the ladder including dimensions, 3 element nesting design, mortice joints etc. Attached was a photo showing the 3 elements resting against a low wall, side by side. I said the ladder may have been used to access a bedroom window in the commission of a crime. It was found lying on the ground nearby. I deliberately did not mention the Lindbergh case because I wanted an opinion on the ladder itself in isolation, away from any theories about whodunnit. He was reluctant to even use the word "ladder" to describe it, at one point referring to "pieces of wood." The current Euro standard for ladders is 150 KG load bearing capacity, roughly 3 times that measured on the Hopewell ladder. Inter-rung dimension is 30 cm maximum vs 50 cm measured at Hopewell. I quote: "The gaps create a considerable ergonomic challenge to the user unless he was particularly long-limbed (!), and/or a professional athlete." He went on to suggest that it may not be a ladder at all as it falls so far short of common sense strength and safety expectations, let alone today's high standards. I interpret these remarks from the independent expert to mean that in his opinion there is no way that this ramshackle "ladder" was built specifically for commission of this crime. It was too weak, challenging to climb, and downright dangerous to use. It was good to receive this opinion from outside the Lindbergh Case bubble.
I am pursuing my (current) theory that it may have been made for use as a cat-/roof ladder. This could be either: (1) by Hauptmann when working on the roof of the garage he was constructing at this time, (2) by a roofer during construction of the Lindbergh house. Maybe it was acquired during a week-end visit by Lindbergh to the building site to check on progress of the construction and left at the kidnap location as a prop/decoy to direct attention away from ideas of an "inside job." It could of course have a different origin.
Incidentally if you Google "Home made roof ladder" you will find a video of a chap called Jerry making one from pine wood. He even rip saws the rails from a wider board! Its all there : the slats as "rungs" and the mortice joints. Enjoy!
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 23, 2021 4:08:50 GMT -5
Hi Joe, The Ladder Association (UK) is a non-profit organisation founded in the 1940's. Today it provides education, training, technical and legal advice to the ladder industry. I wrote to the LA for their opinion on "our" ladder. Their technical manager replied. I described the ladder including dimensions, 3 element nesting design, mortice joints etc. Attached was a photo showing the 3 elements resting against a low wall, side by side. I said the ladder may have been used to access a bedroom window in the commission of a crime. It was found lying on the ground nearby. I deliberately did not mention the Lindbergh case because I wanted an opinion on the ladder itself in isolation, away from any theories about whodunnit. He was reluctant to even use the word "ladder" to describe it, at one point referring to "pieces of wood." The current Euro standard for ladders is 150 KG load bearing capacity, roughly 3 times that measured on the Hopewell ladder. Inter-rung dimension is 30 cm maximum vs 50 cm measured at Hopewell. I quote: "The gaps create a considerable ergonomic challenge to the user unless he was particularly long-limbed (!), and/or a professional athlete." He went on to suggest that it may not be a ladder at all as it falls so far short of common sense strength and safety expectations, let alone today's high standards. I interpret these remarks from the independent expert to mean that in his opinion there is no way that this ramshackle "ladder" was built specifically for commission of this crime. It was too weak, challenging to climb, and downright dangerous to use. It was good to receive this opinion from outside the Lindbergh Case bubble. I am pursuing my (current) theory that it may have been made for use as a cat-/roof ladder. This could be either: (1) by Hauptmann when working on the roof of the garage he was constructing at this time, (2) by a roofer during construction of the Lindbergh house. Maybe it was acquired during a week-end visit by Lindbergh to the building site to check on progress of the construction and left at the kidnap location as a prop/decoy to direct attention away from ideas of an "inside job." It could of course have a different origin. Incidentally if you Google "Home made roof ladder" you will find a video of a chap called Jerry making one from pine wood. He even rip saws the rails from a wider board! Its all there : the slats as "rungs" and the mortice joints. Enjoy! I don't believe the kidnap ladder was designed and built for anything other than the purpose it served. Rail 16, with it's four cut nail holes, is clearly identified in the Springfield news photo of the same ladder, dated March 2, 1936. It was later determined that Rail 16 originated from evidence exhibit S-226, a length of southern yellow pine used as a toe-board for the attic floor within the second floor apartment of a house rented by Richard Hauptmann. One of the attic rails demonstrates the exact same series of almost-microscopic nicks and voids from one of Hauptmann’s wood planes, which he never thought to have re-sharpened. Whether Hauptmann originally built this as a “cat ladder” seems irrelevant to me. Not to belabour this point but could we also not consider here that it might have been built as a trellis to support his tomato plants, based on one person’s opinion it could not have supported a man in a vertical climb? Could a botanist or professional gardener somewhere, not then be consulted to support this notion? What remains here is that Hauptmann built the kidnap ladder and it was used on the night of March 1, 1932 to kidnap Charles Lindbergh Jr.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Aug 23, 2021 6:32:20 GMT -5
The wood in the ladder had not been stored outside in the weather, according to the experts. This did not appear to be controversial and led to the assumption that it had been made for one purpose. Possibly it was built for one purpose and then used for another, by someone who needed a ladder for the kidnapping, borrowed or stole it, but did not understand its limitations.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 23, 2021 10:23:55 GMT -5
I agree with the points you raise. I too tend to think the ladder was built for another purpose as it is unsuitable for safe use vertically (see above). It was then either taken for (risky) use in the "kidnap" or was unused and left deliberately at the crime scene to suggest an "outside job" rather than an "inside job."
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Aug 23, 2021 12:04:00 GMT -5
It looks as if we are heading in the right direction. Thanks. Question: Does anyone have any information regarding the ladder Hauptmann used back in Germany when he climbed to the mayor's second story for the purpose of robbery? He was arrested for this crime, and I think did time. He could well have built this ladder himself, having completed the program of study for carpentry prior to his service in the German army.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Aug 23, 2021 12:07:11 GMT -5
Regarding the question just posted. I was hoping we could make a comparison of the ladder used for the robbery in Germany and the ladder used in the kidnapping. If Hauptmann was skilled in carpentry, he might well have constructed a stronger (or more appropriate) ladder for the crime he committed earlier.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 23, 2021 12:32:31 GMT -5
I agree with the points you raise. I too tend to think the ladder was built for another purpose as it is unsuitable for safe use vertically (see above). It was then either taken for (risky) use in the "kidnap" or was unused and left deliberately at the crime scene to suggest an "outside job" rather than an "inside job." If the ladder was to be left behind, why bother lugging it 75 feet from the house to the location it was found? IMO, that essential piece of circumstantial physical evidence was intended to be removed from the scene. It was only it's unexpected breakage due to poor design not fully understood by its builder, that threw this planned kidnapping and ransom process into a state of controlled panic and added a high degree of urgency to the retreat. The kidnapper(s) obviously tried to be thorough but very quickly, priority one became the removal of the child, so the ladder was abandoned. The chisel was accidentally dropped at the same spot. All of this tells me one person would have been capable of pulling off the abduction. Otherwise, two kidnappers would have left nothing behind but their footprints. Unless perhaps, one of them was a woman originally intended to care for the child.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 23, 2021 12:42:37 GMT -5
As far as I'm aware, it hasn't been demonstrated conclusively that Hauptmann during the commission of his house robberies in Germany, ever entered a second story or with a ladder. Regarding the kidnap ladder he built, he certainly could have made it stronger, with rungs more ergonomically spaced closer together, using hardwood and pre-drilled with screws instead of nails. These entirely-reasonable considerations though would have made the ladder much heavier than it's 37 lbs. and weight was a key consideration, given the distance by foot from nursery to vehicle on Hopewell-Wertsville Road.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Aug 23, 2021 14:18:22 GMT -5
The account of the burglary of the Mayor's house was one of four crimes with which Hauptmann and his confederate Fritz Petzold were charged, found guilty, and sentences to prison. The record can be found in the records of the County Court of Bautzen, June 17, 1919. Hauptmann was sentenced to five years and one week for the four crimes but was released early and given parole. He stole "300 marks and a silver watch from Herr Schierach, burgomeister (mayor)." The account includes the description of the use of a ladder to gain access to the second story, according to Douglas Linder of the UMKE School of Law in his "Biography of (Bruno) Richard Hauptmann." My point was Hauptmann, being a professional carpenter, would not have climbed an inappropriately constructed ladder to commit any crime, whether burglary or kidnapping. One rail was constructed of a board with several nail holes in it. The presence of nail holes in a board weaken the construction and make it dangerous when holding weight. Even those of us who are not professional carpenters know this to be true. So the individual who used the ladder to kidnap a child was (1) ignorant of the nail holes, or (2) did not understand that the ladder was not built for climbing as it would not sustain much weight.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 23, 2021 14:52:04 GMT -5
Hi Joe / Metje, Thanks for all your comments. "The ladder was purpose built for the kidnap" I disagree. It was manifestly unsafe, unsuitable, comprised 3 elements when only 2 were needed etc etc (see above). Take 2X6 foot sections of commercial ladder, 2 steel rectangular cross-section tubes to connect them (a method used today), and the job is done. Weight? Yep, could be an issue but a 3 element ladder was taken to Hopewell so is this really a deal breaker? "Whether Mr H made it as a cat ladder is irrelevant" I think it is relevant. If he used a ladder previously made for use only on a roof then he was a fool. And I do not think Richard Hauptmann was a fool. He was a jobbing carpenter, often working on buildings and construction projects. He was very familiar with ladders; it is unlikely that with his experience he would use a roof/cat ladder for the already risky kidnap. "It may have been a trellis for tomato plants based on one man's opinion......unsuitable for vertical climbing." The "one man" is the technical manager of a ladder industry consultancy. I dare say he knows more about ladders than we do, hard as that is to accept for some people. He is the expert witness. Yes, they are not always right but until someone more believable comes along I will take his word that this ladder was unsuitable. He didn't say it couldn't be so used, anyone can get lucky, but it was a very risky prospect. "Could a botanist be consulted to support this notion.." I didn't contact the Ladder Association to support any notion about the ladder or the crime. I wanted an objective opinion from an expert on the ladder and only the ladder. Details of the crime were deliberately withheld.
I have no problem with people having reached fixed views on this case. Those who think Hauptmann is guilty may be right. Nobody would be more delighted than myself if one day, with a smoking gun revealed, it was proved to all Forum contributors that he was guilty. But until that day comes I hope that we, including myself, who have doubts can be allowed to pursue, examine and sometimes abandon our avenues of enquiry without ridicule and sarcasm from the "opposing" camp.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Aug 23, 2021 14:56:43 GMT -5
As far as I'm aware, it hasn't been demonstrated conclusively that Hauptmann during the commission of his house robberies in Germany, ever entered a second story or with a ladder. Regarding the kidnap ladder he built, he certainly could have made it stronger, with rungs more ergonomically spaced closer together, using hardwood and pre-drilled with screws instead of nails. These entirely-reasonable considerations though would have made the ladder much heavier than it's 37 lbs. and weight was a key consideration, given the distance by foot from nursery to vehicle on Hopewell-Wertsville Road. Hauptmann's and Petzold's file at the county court in Bautzen (Record No. 1A95-19) does not mention the use of a ladder during the commission of their crimes. That myth was created after Hauptmann's arrest and perpetuated.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 24, 2021 7:59:53 GMT -5
As far as I'm aware, it hasn't been demonstrated conclusively that Hauptmann during the commission of his house robberies in Germany, ever entered a second story or with a ladder. Regarding the kidnap ladder he built, he certainly could have made it stronger, with rungs more ergonomically spaced closer together, using hardwood and pre-drilled with screws instead of nails. These entirely-reasonable considerations though would have made the ladder much heavier than it's 37 lbs. and weight was a key consideration, given the distance by foot from nursery to vehicle on Hopewell-Wertsville Road. Hauptmann's and Petzold's file at the county court in Bautzen (Record No. 1A95-19) does not mention the use of a ladder during the commission of their crimes. That myth was created after Hauptmann's arrest and perpetuated. Thanks Guest, I know Wayne had previously also posted this information.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,713
|
Post by Joe on Aug 24, 2021 9:03:11 GMT -5
Hi Joe / Metje, Thanks for all your comments. "The ladder was purpose built for the kidnap" I disagree. It was manifestly unsafe, unsuitable, comprised 3 elements when only 2 were needed etc etc (see above). Take 2X6 foot sections of commercial ladder, 2 steel rectangular cross-section tubes to connect them (a method used today), and the job is done. Weight? Yep, could be an issue but a 3 element ladder was taken to Hopewell so is this really a deal breaker? "Whether Mr H made it as a cat ladder is irrelevant" I think it is relevant. If he used a ladder previously made for use only on a roof then he was a fool. And I do not think Richard Hauptmann was a fool. He was a jobbing carpenter, often working on buildings and construction projects. He was very familiar with ladders; it is unlikely that with his experience he would use a roof/cat ladder for the already risky kidnap. "It may have been a trellis for tomato plants based on one man's opinion......unsuitable for vertical climbing." The "one man" is the technical manager of a ladder industry consultancy. I dare say he knows more about ladders than we do, hard as that is to accept for some people. He is the expert witness. Yes, they are not always right but until someone more believable comes along I will take his word that this ladder was unsuitable. He didn't say it couldn't be so used, anyone can get lucky, but it was a very risky prospect. "Could a botanist be consulted to support this notion.." I didn't contact the Ladder Association to support any notion about the ladder or the crime. I wanted an objective opinion from an expert on the ladder and only the ladder. Details of the crime were deliberately withheld. I have no problem with people having reached fixed views on this case. Those who think Hauptmann is guilty may be right. Nobody would be more delighted than myself if one day, with a smoking gun revealed, it was proved to all Forum contributors that he was guilty. But until that day comes I hope that we, including myself, who have doubts can be allowed to pursue, examine and sometimes abandon our avenues of enquiry without ridicule and sarcasm from the "opposing" camp. Sherlock, first of all I wasn’t attempting to impart ridicule or sarcasm here. What I did was make a light-hearted point that another person could look at the kidnap ladder and find a use for it they might deem entirely more suitable than a means of conveyance designed to enter the Lindbergh nursery. Secondly, you may want to consider your own quote as follows, when implying “fixed views” opposite what is expressed here not as opinion, but fact. “This type of ladder is known as a “Cat Ladder.” It is light weight and a relatively flimsy construction because it is not intended for use as a regular ladder. Its purpose is to allow workers to climb up to the apex of a sloping roof. It is laid on the roof tiles with the feet of the ladder in the gutter. The weight of the worker is borne, not by the rungs, but largely by the rood itself and the beams beneath. It is used by tilers and chimney repairmen. They are available commercially in various designs including some which correspond very closely to the home-made Lindbergh ladder.” Yes, the kidnap ladder was quite unsafe, but it wasn’t entirely unsuitable, as it did accomplish the ascent into the nursery. The problem was in the coming down, where the added weight of the child and probably an additional degree of instability on the part of the descending kidnapper, obviously taxed its structural properties to the max and beyond. The problem I see within your argument is that if this was originally a “cat ladder”, then why didn’t Hauptmann, its builder, just come forward right away and say, “Ja, I built that ladder for a roofing job, and it mysteriously disappeared afterwards”, or some other excuse. Authorities could then have confirmed all of those points of identification within its construction, ultimately proven by Koehler and which proved conclusively Hauptmann’s role within its build was at the very least, a major one. They then would have attempted to run down any and all locations where Hauptmann claimed he had actually used what you believe was a cat ladder, which is where I believe they would have run into a dead end. I’m certainly not aware of any roofing work including tiling and chimney work ever done by Hauptmann or others he might have lent this ladder to. If you know of any, can you please provide sources?
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Aug 24, 2021 11:20:13 GMT -5
There are some serious questions remaining re: the ladder used in the kidnapping. Hauptmann considered himself a professional carpenter, witness some pieces still on display. When he saw the ladder in court and asked if he had built it, he replied, "I am a carpenter," implying that no professional carpenter would create such an object. The nail holes in Rail #16 supposedly matched nail holes found in an attic space where a board was missing. Nail holes in a board placed in a construction weaken the structure. A professional carpenter would know this and not use such a board in a ladder used for climbing. The ladder may well have been made by an amateur, or it may have been constructed for a purpose other than climbing or holding weight. The ladder did break, but one cannot assume for certainty that it was the child's weight that made the difference. The ladder may have fallen over and broken when it struck the surface below it. It may have broken when someone handed the child out the window to the person on the ladder and then immediately climbed onto the ladder which could not support the weight of two persons plus child. There are several possibilities. The ladder may well have been made for another purpose but was borrowed or stolen by a person who was ignorant of its original purpose. It also may have been used only for staging, as has been suggested. Hauptmann said that he did not build the ladder, so he then would not claim it had been borrowed. Consider that Charles Schippell, the man who owned land near where the body was found, was a "handyman" who owned tools, including at one time a chisel identical to the one found at the site of the kidnapping and which he said was missing. I am not suggesting that Schippell was the kidnapper, but someone could have stolen a ladder that he had made, esp. if it was a ladder constructed for work on a roof, which may well have been the original purpose of the ladder used in the kidnapping. One can speculate, but speculations are not necessarily true. One has to keep looking for evidence beyond the assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Aug 24, 2021 15:19:10 GMT -5
Hi Joe, No offence taken. In fact the guy at the Ladder Association did speculate that it may have been made for non-ladder uses, one of which was horticulture! That's taking it a bit far in my view. Its obviously intended as a ladder, but in my view a poor one. He didn't mention tomatoes. In my paragraph of "fixed views" which you quote, I would change only the first sentence to: "This design of ladder strongly resembles a cat ladder." The rest of the paragraph is just a factual description of cat ladders. I never said Hauptmann built this ladder. I proposed it as one option, one which I find unlikely. Although on the other hand Hauptmann was nearing completion of the garage - there are photos showing it with a roof completed already. I sometimes try to put myself in the position of the suspect and ask myself what I would do faced with a $50,000 kidnap project. With the options of (1) making a ladder from scratch and (2) using two 6 foot sections of a purpose-built commercial ladder I would choose No (2). It would be quick, more reliable in use, transportable and unremarkable should anyone see it. If acquired carefully (stolen?) it would also be untraceable to me. Why anyone would prefer to construct his own ladder in these circumstances is beyond me. Your earlier point Joe about why the ladder was dragged to the undergrowth 75 feet from the house if it was intended as a plant/decoy is a good one. An external kidnapper may have hoped to delay its discovery until daybreak giving more time for his escape. But if was left as a decoy it makes no sense - why hide it? Regarding "Fixed views:" Its human nature to be trapped into a certain view of this case. I'm guilty of this but I always try hard to leave a space for alternative views. Any remarks I make should be seen as my current view - subject to change when supported by evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Aug 24, 2021 16:23:30 GMT -5
Horticulture -- ladders used to whitewash greenhouses to shade plants.
Greenhouses were all over the place on Long Island in the 1920s and 1930s, and ladders that were similar to the Lindbergh kidnap ladder were built and used to climb up the slanted sides of greenhouses to whitewash the windows, replace glass, remove leaves, and a whole host of other reasons.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Aug 25, 2021 5:04:30 GMT -5
Hi Joe, No offence taken. In fact the guy at the Ladder Association did speculate that it may have been made for non-ladder uses, one of which was horticulture! That's taking it a bit far in my view. Its obviously intended as a ladder, but in my view a poor one. He didn't mention tomatoes. In my paragraph of "fixed views" which you quote, I would change only the first sentence to: "This design of ladder strongly resembles a cat ladder." The rest of the paragraph is just a factual description of cat ladders. I never said Hauptmann built this ladder. I proposed it as one option, one which I find unlikely. Although on the other hand Hauptmann was nearing completion of the garage - there are photos showing it with a roof completed already. I sometimes try to put myself in the position of the suspect and ask myself what I would do faced with a $50,000 kidnap project. With the options of (1) making a ladder from scratch and (2) using two 6 foot sections of a purpose-built commercial ladder I would choose No (2). It would be quick, more reliable in use, transportable and unremarkable should anyone see it. If acquired carefully (stolen?) it would also be untraceable to me. Why anyone would prefer to construct his own ladder in these circumstances is beyond me. Your earlier point Joe about why the ladder was dragged to the undergrowth 75 feet from the house if it was intended as a plant/decoy is a good one. An external kidnapper may have hoped to delay its discovery until daybreak giving more time for his escape. But if was left as a decoy it makes no sense - why hide it? Regarding "Fixed views:" Its human nature to be trapped into a certain view of this case. I'm guilty of this but I always try hard to leave a space for alternative views. Any remarks I make should be seen as my current view - subject to change when supported by evidence. Ho-age always believed, and I tend to agree, that the ladder (and note) were planted where they were to function as kind of a blinking neon "WE WENT THIS WAY" sign. The note by the window points to the window as the exit point, then the ladderer (in direct line of sight from the window) points to them trying to show how they exited and left the property. From what I gather, he believed it all to be very clear misdirection.
|
|