jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 27, 2010 23:25:38 GMT -5
Look at Hauptmann's books. He dumps about eight thousand dollars rather quickly. Then the rest settles. Now where did the eight thousand come from?
He didn't dip into savings. That shows in the books.
Had to be from outside sources - Fisch?
So Fisch comes up with eight thousand to cover Hauptmann's losses re: stock market.
Wait, there's more - Hauptmann looses another eleven thousand dollars betwen Jan 1 1932 and Jan 1 1933 - so who pays that off? Lets say Fisch - so Fisch has now covered about twenty thousand of Hauptmann's stock marhet losses - so far. But Fisch isn't gone - he may be dead but not gone - so he covers another twelve thousand of Hauptmann's losses! All total Fisch (if you believe the story) covers about eighty thousand of Hauptmann's losses regarding the stock market.
These are numbers that you investigators can look up if you don't believe them.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 28, 2010 7:53:55 GMT -5
I've always believed Fisch is in the "mix." But just when is the important question.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 30, 2010 20:11:12 GMT -5
OK - I've got an idea - I'll send you $ 20K and you can give say $ 10 free to each new contributor - and then Kev can match my $ 20K and we'd have lots of cash to go. I know Kevkon will want to keep this site going, so as soon as you get his OK (and I see a copy of his money) you get my approval - and certified check!
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 30, 2010 20:40:36 GMT -5
When (per: Michael is interesting). Hauptmann quit regualar work in April or 1932 and Anna in December of 1932. He was apprehended in September of 1934. That means a rough two years of non-regular earnings with considerable expenses in between - especially Anna"s trip to Germany. Generally we're talking roughly two years of non-dependent (regular job) earnings. So their approximate savings at their point of non-dependence were $ 5K. And they're paying for their apartment - say lower $ 200/month is $ 2400.00. That's already half. So they gotta eat - $ 100 a month for food? That's another over two years as $ 2400 so now $ 2,800.So the trip to Florida, radio, etc. - another $ 3,000 maybe? Could be. But how could Hauptamann have money in the bank after that? Perhaps because there were seventeen "books" about BRH dealings and only two were presented by the prosecution.I'm not a Hauptmann fan. but if (wait I might be a Hauptmann fan) he broke even on his market deals and with Fisch he could have done this.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 30, 2010 21:10:08 GMT -5
Hmm: Actually works out if he broke evenly in the stock market and with Fisch. As I recall he only lost on paper 6 K in the market. Realistically thinnking Fisch must have contributed something or it was a complete scam - Fisch would be in for 2 K. So BRH is now down only 4K from balance.Balances are always off ( especially brokerages - you have to look at them) by at least 10% and it could be Richard was behind on keeping up with Fisch - could be an easy balance here, Michael. Or, at most BRH behind only about $ 3 K - that after accepting $ 50 K ransome and passing $ 30K? Doesn't add up. It doesn't even add up if he'd passed only $ 20 K or $ 10 K ransome. He never had punch in the marlet - punch means that you have enough capital invested to override your margin - in effect don't get a margin call.
Hauptmann was called continually - that's why he was there always.
I'm not saying that Richard is right or wrong - just presenting.
What do you think. Kevkon - oblivious to wright or wrong? - Somebody was behind Hauptmann! SS? Junges? Fisch? Kloppelbergh? Who went back - who didn't go back - who got caught - has it ever been investigated?
|
|