|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2010 6:04:48 GMT -5
After he exhausted his legal remedies they continued any avenue they could (e.g. meeting with the Governor) until Mrs. Hauptmann died. Whether or not he "grandstanded" that's a very long time to spend your own money on this situation. Think about it - this guy was knee deep into this Case back when Kerwin first came on scene. No book - no nothing. "I know who"
Her lawyer, Robert Bryan, said he has evidence that the kidnapping of 20-month-old Charles Lindbergh Jr. was "an inside job" that may have resulted from an intimate relationship between a member of the Lindbergh family and a servant of the aviation hero.
"I know who did it and how many people were involved," Bryan said before the start of the hearing. [AP - 11/23/86]
|
|
|
Post by gary on Aug 17, 2010 14:06:52 GMT -5
Thanks Michael. Is that as far as it goes? No names I guess.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Aug 17, 2010 15:12:27 GMT -5
i guess bryan changed his tune when i talked to him 10 years later
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2010 16:49:39 GMT -5
I don't think so Steve. By telling you he didn't think Lindbergh was involved simply would eliminate him as one on Bryan's suspect list..... "We think we have the case solved," Bryan said, declining further comment, except to say that the motive he subscribes to is "totally unrelated" to previous theories. [AP - 2-3-87] Gary, I have never seen anything where he names names.... I think I know what his theory was though, and I believe he also had a local in his sites as well. But its all conjecture on my part.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Aug 17, 2010 17:56:47 GMT -5
what list? i think moniers book and behns book put him behind the limelight
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2010 18:13:42 GMT -5
Steve,
You said Bryan told you he didn't think Lindbergh was involved. Then I posted the newsaper articles which prompted you to say he must have changed his mind by the time he spoke with you.
What I was saying was that his newspaper articles are general and if he told you that then eliminate him as one of Bryan's suspects.
And so, whoever he is referring to in these articles - it isn't Lindbergh. We can say that since he told you it personally.
So my position is that he didn't change his mind it just never included Lindbergh in the first place.
Bill Norris spoke to him. I think I remember it being in his book.... I'll have to get it out and see if I can find the reference.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Aug 17, 2010 18:39:53 GMT -5
okay, but why did he stop his quest? thats the 64000 question
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 18, 2010 3:41:52 GMT -5
No. Michael you're about the last person I would consider an idiot. But I do think you allow your reasoning to be shallow at times.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Aug 18, 2010 3:47:35 GMT -5
Notice the "declined further comment" part. Just like the Gov. - these guys are glory seekers just like Lindbergh himself was. Why would you fly the Atlantic on your own in a small plane, even today, unless you were after glory. It's like swimming the English Channel - nice but pointless except for the ink.
|
|
|
Post by hunley2 on Jan 6, 2011 0:31:06 GMT -5
Okay...back to the blue thread. Supposedly this was a secret not given to the public. S0, who knew about the special blue thread? Betty Gow and Ann. How many others do you all suppose leaked this information? But I am sure that no one but Betty knew exactly the make and feel of the thread...the color, ...probably turned the spool over to the authorities....but if Curtis knew this early, wonder who he got it from? It seems odd that Betty hand sewed this night shirt to begin with.....seems she was doing many things to call attention to things this particular night. She noted the time twice from her wrist watch, sewed a special shirt with a distinctive silk blue thread, and so on...seems like her actions were prompted to recall certain times and stories later.... when necessary.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 6, 2011 17:21:40 GMT -5
Anyone who was in the house could have potentially known about it.
Or, as you suggest, this item could have been included with an intent other then what we, and the Police, were led to believe. If that theory is true, then it could mean whoever advised and/or conspired with Betty knew about it too - if Betty wasn't acting alone (within this theory).
|
|
|
Post by hunley2 on Jan 6, 2011 23:49:23 GMT -5
Thanks Michael for keeping the conversation going with me. The board stays up great when you get respones...even if they do not always agree. I like reading your post and thoughts. You seem to think everything through before you reply...keeps me interested and focused, always second guessing myself. Do you feel Betty's details are unordinarily vivid and unnatural for this night? Or was it common practice for rich people to have their NURSES handstitch clothing for the baby with an odd silk thread? Also the glancing at the watch for the exact times of events?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 7, 2011 7:08:53 GMT -5
The blue thread has always given me reason to think on this. I saw it before it was removed and it was still a very unique and striking color.
However, I've always personally believed the child was never meant to be returned. I believe the corpse was brought back from where ever it had been so it would eventually be discovered. A couple of reasons for this..... the idea the "Gang" either splintered up, or because Lindbergh had been painted into a corner having negotiated with multiple parties.
So, without the corpse, Lindbergh would be doomed to continue on this path forever. If he doesn't, then he it wouldn't look so good.
And so, I can't have it both ways, or if I can, then it means there must be a variable to satisfy both. But the more complicated this gets then the more unlikely it becomes.
|
|