|
Post by sue75 on Feb 27, 2010 11:06:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Feb 27, 2010 11:14:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Jun 3, 2010 19:32:40 GMT -5
I'm sticking this here because Emil Kemeny was an interpreter at the Essex County Courthouse where Arthur Jones was tried (twice?) for murder. Kemeny, from Hungary, was Bruno Richard Hauptmann's interpreter. library.syr.edu/digital/guides/k/kemeny_em.htm
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 28, 2011 9:37:18 GMT -5
Jeffrey Newman was the reporter who interviewed Arthur Jones in an Alabama prison in 1976. Jones shows up on pages 94 & 95 in Jim Fisher's Ghost of Hopewell.
Here is the citation in Fisher's book on page 171:
Jeffrey Newman, "Charles Lindbergh Planned His Baby Son's Kidnapping -- He Didn't Want the Baby Because It was Malformed," National Enquirer, 12 Oct. 1976, p.71.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And here is Newman's blog entry from last year:
jeffreynewmanlaw July 21, 2010 at 12:03 am
I interviewed Arthur Jones for several hours one afternoon, several years ago, when I was a reporter for The National Enquirer. His conversations with Bruno Hauptmann are depicted in Under the Sycamores and is worth reading. Perhaps no one will ever be able to uncover the truth about what happened, or whether Jones was being truthful about what Hauptmann said. I can only say that sitting with Jones and asking him questions, listening to his measured responses, I believe he was telling the truth. Jones was a lifer, having been sentenced to prison when he was 20. He had lost his leg to diabetes and sat, his stump visible, a patient thoughtful man who spoke with a halting stutter but in full blossomed sentences. Jones had survived many years in a place I might not be able to live for a few years. He had a ready smile and seemed to me to have a clear memory of Hauptmann. His record confirmed he had been on death row with Hauptmann. The rest needs to be dredged back from time.
Jeffrey A. Newman Jeffrey.newman1@gmail.com
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 29, 2011 5:56:13 GMT -5
Nice find Sue - it certainly is something anyone interested in what Jone's said would want to read. It's a step by step process....
First, we must "weed-out" the dark clouds who shrug off ANYTHING that doesn't fit in with the Lone-Wolfer Hauptmann did it mentality. Doesn't matter what it is - if it assaults their personal belief then, of course, it isn't worth reading. And so they'll say or do anything to dissuade everyone and anyone from taking a closer look at it themselves. Frankly, I don't get it but its a consistent and undeniable pattern among their ranks. "Of course - this, and its been floating around for 50 years - that."
Sounds like someone who really knows their stuff but when it boils down to it - what they rely on is just Jim Fisher's book, and what they "think" should be true. Throw in a few invented conversations and a newspaper article being misrepresented as a Police Report and (POOF!) an "Expert" is born.
The bottom line is this: Do not believe anyone unless you personally feel comfortable with the conclusion. Even with all the research I have done over the years does not qualify me as the "end all." I've made mistakes, and will be the first to tell you I don't know everything. But yet, here again, you will find those who are always right. It's hard to evaluate a source when they have no source of their own.
Could Jones be a hoax? Absolutely. Could he be telling what he believes to be the truth? Sure could. And so, if you consider the 2nd option then you have to try to understand and make sense of it. Just going through that process could lead you directly to option #1. But again, its an individual process and no one has the right to tell you what to believe through the old "if you believe this then you're stupid" routine.
Most especially those that do.
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 29, 2011 19:40:58 GMT -5
Maybe Jones is 50-80% right? Time and fading memory could have distorted recollections of his encounters with Hauptmann? Hey, Michael, I didn't know that the above blog entry was posted on Jim Bahm's website, along with a photo of Jim and Jeffrey Newman. beneaththewintersycamores.com/JimBahmmeetsJeffNewman.aspx
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 1, 2011 8:29:00 GMT -5
Exactly my point. You look into the possibilities yourself. We've got a great group here where almost always someone who states a position gives it as their own while welcoming differing opinions & challenges. "Elsewhere" you have people actually telling, shaming, or name-calling them into accepting their perspectives. Once you see the actual basis for their beliefs (e.g. Fisher's Book, Misrepresentations, Ignorance, Invented Conversations, Imagination, etc. etc.) then you'll see its the height of hypocrisy. The first step in this mystery, for me, was to prove Jones was on Death Row with Hauptmann. I recall one (or more) in the Lone-Wolfer Granfalloon saying he wasn't. If I had been foolish enough to accept that nonsense my search would have ended right there. Why would anyone try to stop research based upon these types of actions? And so with the most important fact secured, I then moved on to what I felt was necessary. It's what everyone must do, and if not, then leave the door open until you can close it. Don't let me, or anyone else determine what you believe or do not believe. There is just way too much information out there for any one person to be right about everything 100% of the time. To suggest otherwise means you are not in full possession of your mental faculties.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 1, 2011 9:08:48 GMT -5
It's great to see someone actually using a progressive method of verification or elimination. If more people did, there would be a lot less wasted time and more progress. Now for the second and more difficult step, was it physically possible or feasible for Jones to communicate with BRH while on death row? Did the layout and construction of the cells allow for two men to carry out extended communications without the other inmates or guards knowledge? It seems to me that the entire credibility of Jones relies on the claim that he and BRH had a method of non-verbal communication and that it was quite extensive. My first thought on the feasibility of this is that they would have to be in adjacent cells. But what about other inmates? Would they not be privy to these communications? Would they ignore BRH spilling the crime given the immense public desire to know? These are the details that can make or break the camels back.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 3, 2011 17:13:20 GMT -5
There is no doubt in my mind that anyone on Death Row could have interaction. I have no problem with this claim. The main thing he is saying is that it was a "secret" communication based upon a code they made up stemming from math which Jones claims Hauptmann assisted him with. This too seems probable to me, and I see this type of stuff all the time - not this specific code but others.
The reason Jones claims this was necessary was so they didn't have to talk openly about it where others could hear.
I do however have problems with some of the other things he is claiming. It appears to me, that if he is truthful in claiming Hauptmann confided in him, that he is either screwing up some of it or filling in the blanks with his own material.
What we should do, if anyone is interested, is go line by line with the letter that's posted on the NJ website then offer opinions about what it says.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 4, 2011 7:24:50 GMT -5
Ok, but to keep things alive and for my own curiosity, wouldn't the physical environment of that particular death row and the relative location of BRH and Jones cells be important in determining the likelyhood of their "secret" yet audible communications? Do you have a plan of that death row of the period and do you know where both of these men were?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 4, 2011 17:24:30 GMT -5
We all remember that Simon was killed by Harris while in the Rec Cage. However, everything I have ever read was that back in 1935 they never left their cells and did everything there - to include Rec. Let's not forget the NJSP strategy during the trial in Flemington. Guards were forbidden to speak to Hauptmann. This was done primarily to prevent a relationship from forming. In Trenton, no such rule existed, and I've read where some of the Guards became quite friendly with Hauptmann - some even suggesting they believed he was innocent. Death Row has a skylight. Along one wall there is the door. Along the other there are two tiers - each with 9 cells on them. Hauptmann was in Cell Number 9 on Death Row. That Cell was at the end of the row on the bottom tier. Bruno Richard Hauptmann while awaiting his appeal two weeks hence from conviction for the slaying of the kidnapped Lindbergh baby, composes music, his attorney, Egbert Rosencrans, disclosed today. "Hauptmann composes the words and some of the music," said Rosencrans, "and three other inmates of the Trenton death house join him." The death house quartette," Rosencrans said, includes one Negro who has an excellent voice. Rosencrans reported that from their cells the condemned men dictate games of pinochle and checkers. They cannot see each other, but their normal speaking voices are plainly audible along the short corridor that runs the length of the death house cell block. [Associated Press, 6-5-35] According to Colonel Kimberling, Hauptmann's neighbors in the death house now are William Henry Jones, a Negro, a Jew named Zeid, and an Italian, Favorito. Zeid and Hauptmann do most of the talking, the warden says, although their cells are not adjoining. [Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune 9-16-35]
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on May 5, 2011 8:25:03 GMT -5
See the Airman and the Carpenter by Ludovic Kennedy and Murder of Justice by Wayne Jones for some glimpses of Hauptmann and the State Prison in Trenton.
Airman and the Carpenter:
"Today the death house in Trenton is no longer in use; but along the length of its empty, echoing cells...There are two tiers of nine cells each, one above the other...Each cell measures 10 by 9 feet and ...There were times in the old days when every one of the eighteen cells was occupied by condemned men... There were six other prisoners in Death Row when Hauptmann arrived, but to avoid incidents the warden had placed them all on the top tier, with Hauptmann alone on the bottom tier in Cell 9, next to the execution chamber." (page 352)
"On March 15, three men on the top tier...now there were only three men left with Hauptmann in Death Row." (page 354)
Murder of Justice:
"Once inside the prison gate, we turned to the right and entered through a little door, New Jersey's death chamber. As the the door opened the beam from a prison guard's flashlight fell directly on the chair in which Hauptmann was later to die. Death Row is separated from the death chamber by an iron door." (page 845)
"The...cell block located at the other side of the prison, he was led to Cell Number 9 located on the lower tier. In the upper tier were six other convicts who also faced death by electrocution.
"He had been moved out of cell 9...he mentioned that Charles Zeid, who was scheduled to die the same night, had not been moved from the cell he had occupied.
He asked me especially not to tell her about moving him from one cell to another." (page 907)
"...three of the seven prisoners on the top tier of the death house cells, while passing his cell on their way to the execution chamber, all paused to shake his hand as they bid him a final farewell." (916)
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 5, 2011 17:53:15 GMT -5
I could be wrong Sue, but I remember reading somewhere in my files that Kimberling said there were people housed on the bottom floor. From what I recall, he said the cell immediately next to Hauptmann's was open. I think at various times differing situations existed. Cell 9 was definitely the closest to the chair, and Hauptmann would yell out some religious blessing to those as they marched their last steps to the terrible fate.
As far as notes being passed I have no doubt about that situation existing either. Not only did Hauptmann play cards and checkers with the other Inmates he also played with the Guards. If the Warden was cool with Guards playing games with the Death "House" Inmates then I have to also believe there wouldn't be a problem for them to pass math tutoring worksheets between cells either.
Additionally, they had a system known as "kiting." It's termed that way because of the notes on a string being tossed back and forth. I've seen it done myself and you wouldn't believe how good these guys are at doing it - and inventing new ways to improve its methods. I've never heard anyone use the term "Kite" but that's how its referred to in the books so I will keep it simple.
So for me I am ready to break down Jone's letter piece by piece to see what we can collectively come up with.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on May 5, 2011 19:23:57 GMT -5
ny times article march 16, 1935---hauptmann sees three go to jail----three men who walked to the electric chair at stae prison tonight recieved a final handshake and a parting prayer from richard hauptmann, "pray to god" was hauptmanns message to his condemned death house mates, who all paid the supreme penalty for their crime within twenty minutes. the triple execution left four men, including hauptmann in the death house. those who died in the chair were connie scarpone 26 years old, michael mule, 24, and george destefano jr 25, for the murder of john szeytkowski, from whom they tried to take 500 dollars.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 6, 2011 5:54:08 GMT -5
Good find Steve. I've got some more on the Death House men, stemming from Hoffman's research into whether or not he had the authority to reprieve/stay Hauptmann's execution. And there was something that happened after Hauptmann too....Murlock (??) comes to mind but I'd have to go and seek it out.
If everyone is okay with the possibility that Jones & Hauptmann could communicate in the way described by Jones I'd like to dissect his letter. But only if those issues are resolved first.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 6, 2011 8:04:00 GMT -5
By all means proceed with the letter, but I am still skeptical of the communication. Not that I don't believe it possible, more that I don't see it remaining only between BRH and Jones. If BRH is willing to spill the story in this manner and under those circumstances, I'm certain the others on Death Row are listening.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 6, 2011 19:02:26 GMT -5
I think the main method of communication was alleged to have been by and through the "code" but let's wait until we get to that part of his letter. Before we even do, you make a very good point about something. Why would Hauptmann ONLY confide in Jones? Even the quote from Kimberling says he spoke to Zeid the most.... And so why didn't he confide in Zeid? Here are my thoughts on this first point - I think our options are the following: A. He did confide in someone else if not more.
B. There is a reason why Hauptmann only confided in Jones.
C. Jones is lying. *If Option A: Those "others" he told were executed. *If Option B: Perhaps Hauptmann trusted Jones to honor the agreement. OR Perhaps Hauptmann knew about Jone's appeal and felt he had the best chance of escaping the chair. *If Option C: Jones could be making the whole thing up. OR Jones could be embellishing the story to enhance his role in it.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 6, 2011 19:29:54 GMT -5
There a couple ways to see if Jones is lying--does he come up with some true facts we didnt know/? One that fascinates me is "the blood on the ransom money"...this goes almost unnoticed and unreported? Why cover this up since...Edward Dean Sullivan (The Snatch Racket) reported the same thing in a magazine article only he did not know whose its was.....BRH says Condons? Is this plausible? Maybe BHR was paid to provide false information about the snatch?
Also, Im not so certain Charlie Schleser is the best pick for Charlie________(fill in the blank). I think Charlie Ellerson was married and could have filled the same bill being one of Reds roomates and a handy chauffeur? Does the Bahm letter say its Schleser?
Can Jim Bahm confirm the provenence of his letter from Jones? He should publish the entire letter so we can compare it to the one Jones sent Gov.Brandon Byrne. I noticed some identicle sentences when the Byrne letter is compared to the snippet on the Sycamore website even though they were written 26 years apart! Note the position of the words <forget it...> on page 5. Note how 11 becomes II?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 7, 2011 7:55:52 GMT -5
Rick, you've touched on (3) things all of which we are going to need to discuss. I am going to hold off on commenting on the first (2) until I reach them in the letter. My method of approaching this letter is to go slowly, from beginning to end, piece by piece. If I jump I think it will be harder to tackle. I am going to try to figure out whether or not he lied, embellished, or was mistaken at just about every point we can come up with - starting with Kevin's observation right from Jump Street concerning why Jones was selected by Hauptmann.
Along those lines you point out something that must be remedied as we begin. Was Gov. Byrne's letter different? I believe its the exact same letter.
Anyway, of course I am not going to dictate how to approach this so if everyone else disagrees with my angle of attack we'll proceed by addressing the most interesting points first. I'll just go with the flow the best that I can.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 7, 2011 9:10:44 GMT -5
I well understand the logic of methodically dissecting the letter, but there may be as much merit in looking at the larger picture. What does Hauptmann gain ( or lose) by the story as told by Jones? Why would BRH keep it secret? How would only one (Jones) receive the story and keep it secret when anything related to the LKC at the time was money ( or parole) in the bank?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 7, 2011 18:07:56 GMT -5
Michael...maybe thats the best part.....the two letters are very similar in many respects.....but just from comparing the dozen or so lines shown above the Behn website its easy to see they are not identicle? Individual lines are similar.....but the the Byrne letter does not say to take the letter to the New York Daily News and get paid for it! If the two letters were in fact identicle--then all bets would be off Behns explanation as to how he got his letter? Behn should show his cards...eg the whole letter...
Certain authors, namely Joyce Milton, said the servants were all involved...the primary flaw in the Bahm account is getting BRH, Fisch and Schleser involved in the "kidnap" proper, when more likely they were only gang #2 in the Extortion in the Bronx...masterminded by Condon.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 8, 2011 18:54:55 GMT -5
In his letter, Jones is saying he is putting down what he "remembers" to be true. He also explains the shower was in front of his cell so he was able to speak directly with Hauptmann on "bath" day. Additional to this they used the math "code" and passed some notes in books. Jones also claimed the day he left the Guards allowed him to talk to Hauptmann while waiting to be picked up by the Sheriff's office. For me this stuff is all legitimate possibilities. And it could have ALL happened without anything being actually said the way Jones is telling it, or it could have had nothing to do with the kidnapping as well... These are those things we must try to determine. But the basis for it all is here in my opinion. We have the situation, and the means to make it so. We know in fact he did keep what he knew "a secret." Now if we believe Jones is both telling the truth and accurate about this point then it was because of two things: 1. Protect his family. 2. Because of Gov. Hoffman's visits. Sue's post above may assist in answer "why Jones?" lindberghkidnap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=698Parole for blaming Lindbergh? Not in my opinion - in fact, more likely the opposite. Money? Possibly, and it appears he did get paid for this story. I think the real question is why did he wait until he did? We may never know, but would it help you if I could prove he went to the Police with this story first? This is important and a good point. It's something that someone who admits they don't know "everything" about the Case shouldn't have ANY idea about - or even know. I look at this and think what other obscure or little known items does he list in his letter? Then, going back to the blood, why does he use Condon to explain it when the nature choice would be to blame Fisch's hacking cough? Schippel, or could it be that he isn't remembering the right name? Schlesser, by the way, was a "spy" employed by Wilentz to pretend to be a Defense Witness then report back to him what happened. Even on the payroll under a dummy name.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 9, 2011 7:38:29 GMT -5
I wanted to quickly add-on to my points concerning why Hauptmann kept this a "secret." Now, if we believe Jones, he was only semi-literate while in the Death House. His ability to read, write and do math was limited (according to him).
And so, I keep asking myself: Where does he come up with the Governor's visits as one of the reasons why Hauptmann was keeping quiet? I know of two sources for this explanation outside of his: 1. I have something in writing from the Archives where Wilentz is blaming Hoffman's visit for giving Hauptmann a reason to lie, and therefore the Governor's meddling is the exact reason why he doesn't confess. Next, I have something similar that comes from Leibowitz. He tells Lloyd Fisher that its both Fisher's and the Governor's fault Hauptmann hasn't flipped on his Confederates.
Now, if Jones isn't really getting this information from Hauptmann then is he reading it somewhere? Or is he hearing it somewhere else other then from Hauptmann? These are MY options because I don't see it as JONES'S invention. The idea is coming from somewhere. It could be that Hoffman wrote about it in his Liberty Series and Jones read it or had someone read it to him. Or it could be in something Leibowitz wrote or said on a radio program. There's so much out there so these are possibilities I would never shrug off.
The same holds true (for me) as it relates to the blood on the ransom money.
Now look, as we move through this letter there are certain things that just cannot be true, so I certainly do not want to give the impression I am 100% here on any position. I will call it as I see it concerning ALL of the content. An example is that Violet was in Hopewell on March 1, 1932 - which we all know is most definitely false.
But if we know it, then Jones should know it too. So I look for alternative explanations in order for any of this to be true. If none of it can be then I will be the first to declare that as my final position.
I think we should all also consider that Hauptmann himself was lying to Jones. I haven't seen this mentioned as an option yet so I wanted to throw it out there.....
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 10, 2011 19:25:59 GMT -5
I must admit Im haveing some trouble following the direction of this thread? - Who benefits from all this then or inbetween or now? I really cant tell unless the whole exercise is designed to lead everyone on yet another wild goose chase? At first blush...noone at all benefits except maybe the actual kidnappers? If there were any?
So, in short, cui bono? Certainly not Arthur Jones or BRH?[unless Jones bargained his way out of a certain death sentence with the info?]
- So, lets conjecture, if the Jones letter just isnt true(?) then does this lead away from the real perps? What for since noone heard it for...well....1976-1932 = 44 years? Whose even alive?
- Was there really blood on the ransom money? Who says and wholse was it then....why was it buried? Who says Fisch can cough up blood....thats not exactly like cutting your fingers? Was the blood ever tested or not (in a case with zero forensic evidence?)?
- the easiest thing to do is just discount the whole thing as hogwash.....but I dont think thats going to be true either...its just a bit too involved and complex for that route?
- Maybe as with Condon, LKH, LKC, etc the truth lies in the middle somewheres/unless there is money involved?
- Violet Sharpe isnt a very good example of solid truth? During the period March 1st to June 10th she lied about where she was on the nite of the snatch. Only after her death, did her unofficial fiancee Septimus Banks (or was it Ollie Whately?) say she was out with Ernie, Elizabeth Minners etc. At no time did Violet come face to face with Ernie Brinkert or the three amigos from The Peanut Grill? Thats a pretty slippery slope...
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 12, 2011 5:54:34 GMT -5
I think the idea is that Jones would benefit financially in some way. Otherwise, he is honoring his word and friendship which developed in the Death House. And then there's the other option which one simply finds the need to set the record straight regardless of the outcome.
Some of it had traces of blood. I could look this up if need be.
I know the Death Row Inmates weren't allowed the newspapers. But since Jones had left before the execution then its possible he read them once he left or afterwards.... I think its important to read Hauptmann's letter to his Mother which he wrote very near his to his death. Additionally, while on Death Row he wrote his Auto-Biography (in German) so I'd like to review these things to see if somewhere there's a clue as to what Hauptmann may or may not have told Jones.
And so you have this "story" Hauptmann wants the public to know at the time and the supposed "truth" he wants Jones to know for the future.
I am not necessarily looking to say Jones is telling the 100% truth, but what I am looking for is something to show there may some value in it....that is, Hauptmann did share something with him. Right now, even if he did, I am having a hard time figuring out what might be true.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 14, 2011 11:29:39 GMT -5
Michael..well, there always might be a bit more here than meets the eye....but I just dont see the point in Jones fabricating or lying? if he tried to tell this Fisch story he would have been strung up in a tree? There is hardly any money to gain from a Death Bed Confession in 1976? Looks like if any money was to be had, its being had right now by Jim Behm? [As an unreferenced work of pure fiction, I dont see how he backs up any of his fill-ins any better than Jones? ]
It would be an equally interesting story to find out how Jones managed to dodge his death sentence in 1935? The last time a black man dodged a death sentence in Illinois he was pardoned enmasse by Gov. Dan Ryan in 2005? Maybe someone in power noticed that Jones had buddied up to BRH in 1936 and sprung him?
The only author to openly mention the blood on the ransom money was Edward Dean Sullivan author of The Snatch Rackett...once his magazine article caught my eye I wondered how everyone else missed such a potentially key point?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 14, 2011 14:12:28 GMT -5
Rick,
There are file upon files of "Nut" cases who wrote in and/or reported pure fiction at the NJSP Archives. Some are motivated by revenge, for money, an delusional attempt at "glory," and others are just crazy. It's hard to make sense of irrational behavior but it happens, and quite often I might add.
I finished re-reading Hauptmann's December letter to his Mother last night. No real connection or clues to tie in what Jone's is saying. Only that he appears to be saying he did not kidnap or murder the child. Both of these things can be true if what Jone's is saying is also. But usually when people write like this they betray their hands (e.g. Wendel) and I just don't see it in this letter - at all.
Next up for me is the Auto-Biography. Maybe here I will find what I am looking for.
The other thing that Jone's does which bothers me is offer up "proof" for his position but never follows through with it. Why not? He says he knew where 2K of the ransom was hidden and would produce it. If he does then we know he's legit - but he doesn't. So instead the exact opposite happens... It seems to show he's full of it - so why the offer in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on May 14, 2011 19:29:57 GMT -5
Michael,
the best idea in this letter is that Condon should have been the first person arrested....and long before BRH passed the Gold Cert! He was a prime suspect of the ulitmate con long before that...just axe Harry Walsh? Condons lies must number into the 1000s at this point and Arthur Koehler was checking out his garage for Rail 16? Someone estimated JFC was interviewed over 1000 times and no records were made of his evasions and double talk? If I had to offer a quess--its that Condon told BRH "the coast is now clear to spend the ransom"in 1934? JFC even discovered his own private boat gang in Throggs Neck with a leader named either Doc or John...
Do you have any take on the Gov Hoffman taking any bribe for providing BRH with another 30 day extension? especially $50K? Thats an interesting puzzle as well...& such a clever idea?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 15, 2011 10:15:10 GMT -5
Condon should have been arrested. There were two main reasons why he wasn't:
1. Lindbergh
2. Jealousy among the different Law Enforcement Agencies
No evidence whatsoever, and it doesn't make sense (to me) if you figure in all of his efforts AFTER the execution.
I believe I have the Case. Let me know if you want me to dig it up.
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on May 15, 2011 12:31:31 GMT -5
Jones was granted a new trial because, like in the Lindbergh case, the procescution changed their theory during the trial. At first Wilentz said Charles Junior met his death while the kidnapper and Charlie were descending the ladder. However, in the summation, Wilentz says that Hauptmann murdered the baby in the crib. "A week old opinion of the court granting a new trial to a Newark negro was cited in support of this contention...it was unfair to inject a new theory in a murder trial after the case had proceeded on a different theory because it deprived the defendant of his right to cross examination on the new theory." news.google.com/newspapers?id=zEklAAAAIBAJ&sjid=casFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3129,2948322&dq=lindbergh+newark-negro&hl=en I'd also like to learn the details of Jones's second trial.
|
|