|
Post by rick3 on Jun 8, 2010 1:38:33 GMT -5
So, my colleque, PhD student in Entomology takes a two day Time of Death seminar last week in Indiana...using dead pigs: - the first part of the body eaten by maggots is the HEAD/FACE--why?
- because it has the most entry holes...nose/eyes/mouth/ears.
(and CJr has an open fontenale and another hole behind ear+)
- The pigface is eaten clean in 2-3 days...above 50degrees or so.
- The baby found on May 12 "looks exactly like CJr" to cops and coroner Swaze--except not to CAL, Betty or Van Ingen?
- this suggests he was found after only 2 days...not 72. Who brought him back there? and why? Garrett Schenk?
- maggots probably wont eat embalmed organs? see Theon Wright (but maggots love mud)
- "Science always trumps Authority" Stephen Hawkings for Galileo
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 8, 2010 19:43:20 GMT -5
You're saying what is exactly wrong about what happened. In the first place it doesn't even matter who the child was. It could have been any kid with the same results. So in the end he is dead - that's the problem. The deal is not how is he dead, Rick - it's WHY And why, if anything, would there be any reason to keep him alive? That's the enigma - the thing which Michael is scouncing on bit by bit. Noso by Noso, Listen man, if J Edgar had anything to do with this, and he virifiably did, it's major crime, not some whodone from hodunk! So it is much more than they're saying that it is - we gotta figure how much more.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 8, 2010 19:45:57 GMT -5
Why would J. Edgar Hoover be involved in, or involve himself in some slapstick comedy?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 8, 2010 19:52:05 GMT -5
He never would - because if it turned out to be some stupid little crime he would look foolish. So there's a lot more there than BRH.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 9, 2010 5:56:37 GMT -5
This is a good angle to pursue Rick.
I think we need to find out the exact reasons why something may not have occurred which should have.
We also have to figure out what was meant by "embalmed" when the word started to be tossed around. Would animals eat some parts of an embalmed body and not others? Why some organs missing and not others. What could have caused the discoloration?
Pick your colleague's brain and see what you can come up with.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 9, 2010 7:51:51 GMT -5
I think it comes down to three possibilities:
Very short time on Mt Rose Hill....the eyeballs should be first to go. See photo in Gardner p. 210 +6; the skull should be bone clean in 3 days...no dimples. (75%) Think of it this way...if the body was put out say May 1st...there would be no tissue left by May 12th...just a skeleton.
The upper body receives more embalming fluid than lower body & extremeties? The odd condition of the body is a puzzle. (25%)
...or a combination of BOTH?
If the burlap bag was left as a marker(?)--the finder should go find it quickly before it blows away?
Charlie Ellerson still needs to explain how his car caught on fire; do we have an exact date or news article?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 9, 2010 16:39:08 GMT -5
We don't know how the bag was found - police notes regarding that have not been seen by me anyway. Michael? Eyes would be gone quickly just by worms. So if the body wasn't in the woods where was it? So Michael tells us of insider information about "buzzard watch," but if there was no body there would be no buzzards. Who would give a S if the body was or wasn't found? Why not just leave it (him) be gone? To decide a potential estate? Is Lindy looking worser and worser? Why would a kidnapper care to risk bringing the body back? If this was some kind of family crime this would make sense - as it stands about a legid. kidnapping it certainly doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 10, 2010 6:00:21 GMT -5
It's mentioned in two separate reports. Det. Fitzgerald seems to be the first one who noticed it as he pulled up to the "grave site" with Chief Wolf of Hopewell: Upon arriving there we got out of the car and about ten feet from where our car was parked on the road there was a burlap bag lying.
Unless there is a report hidden away in the basement of the Hopewell PD or in the attic of Wolf's descendants I believe this was the first mention of it.
Correct. Of course buzzards are indicative of anything dead. It shows were they aware of the possibility, so if they noticed buzzards they would follow it up.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jun 10, 2010 6:45:45 GMT -5
i think sue campbell discovered that fitzgerald stuff at the jersey city library. we went after and we took picutres of fitzgeralds picture colleection. sue found a picture i havnt seen before of hauptmann on the couch with his arms around greta henkel
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 10, 2010 17:17:49 GMT -5
The great Gerta. Everybody talks now about Hauptmann as if he's some kind of saint who died for an obscure cause. He doesn't look particularly saintly to me and you BRH lovers can just come on up and there are twenty bad things about him for every good one. Lets just say that Hauptmann was a good father and a good man - then why take some guy along with you on your honeymoon? His wife just wasn't talking and he paid the bills so she shut up. BRH was a three dollar bill!
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 10, 2010 17:22:44 GMT -5
And so was Hoover - does that figure in though - they electrocuted him - to get rid of a talker? He had plenty of chances to talk but he didn't say anything except for small comments which can be found in the records. For example he actually said he couldn't talk because it was such a major crime. Now if he was innocent why would he give a S what kind of crime it was?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 11, 2010 5:50:41 GMT -5
Sue finds a lot of great stuff!
This further supports my point that I am always trying to make.... Just when you think you have everything there's something else to be found. One would expect something of major significance to be sitting right along side of the other documents in the NJSP Archives - but that's not always the case.
Peacocks documents came by way of donation. Even then, this document proves it didn't include all of his material because it wasn't in the lot.
It's why I am so critical of Fisher, having spent so little time at the NJSP Archives, and making claims that would require a lifetime there.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jun 11, 2010 12:28:15 GMT -5
how can you say that? fisher went to the njsp archives before mark was ever there. monier never went and all fairness to scaduto, the files wernt released yet when he wrote his nonsense book. im going top california saturday, id like to research hoages collection at ucla if my brother lets me
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 11, 2010 17:18:00 GMT -5
Why rag on Fisher? His was the most interesting and best selling and probably the best first read to get some full knowledge of all the L books.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 11, 2010 17:44:57 GMT -5
two points to consider:
Embalming is the practice of delaying decomposition of human and animal remains. Embalming slows decomposition somewhat, but does not forestall it indefinitely. Embalmers typically pay great attention to parts of the body seen by mourners, such as the face and hands. The chemicals used in embalming repel most insects, and slow down bacterial putrefaction by either killing existing bacteria in or on the body themselves or by "fixing" cellular proteins, which means that they cannot act as a nutrient source for subsequent bacterial infections. In sufficiently dry environments, an embalmed body may end up mummified and it is not uncommon for bodies to remain preserved to a viewable extent after decades. Note: embalming of the head and upper torso seems a reasonable conclusion.
2 The Fontanels 1 The anterior and larger fontanel remains about the same size for the first year of life then diminishes and closes about the twentieth month. The posterior closes in about six weeks In rickets, hydrocephalus, hereditary syphilis and cretinism the fontanels and sutures remain open after the normal time limit abc [Fig 2 Paget's Disease Edes a Before onset of hyperostosis cranii 6. After onset of hyperostosis cranii c Later still] a Bulging fontanels mean increased intracranial tension hydrocephalus hemorrhage meningitis or any acute febrile disease without dyspnoea 6. Depressed fontanels are seen in severe diarrhoea wasting diseases collapsed states and acute dyspnoeic conditions. Note: severe illness resulting in open fontenales and swelled cranium also seems like a reasonable conclusion....However--since this was never well documented or made public it could be another red-herring?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 11, 2010 21:21:19 GMT -5
So would CAL see this situation as being somewhat severe and needing action or would he just ship the kid off to the looney bin like every other family did? Why would CAL be different from everybody else?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 12, 2010 7:23:45 GMT -5
Steve,
It's in his preface that he was only there a handful of days. That ain't enough and explains why he made so many mistakes.
Good luck at UCLA and let me know how it turns out!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 12, 2010 7:33:11 GMT -5
Let me ask you what the purpose for this would be... only the upper toro & head?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 15, 2010 8:14:11 GMT -5
Let me ask you what the purpose for this would be... only the upper toro & head? Well, its not really a purpose--its an outcome of where the coroner stickes the trochlear tube...probably in the arms? The upper torso gets more formaldehyde, and thus the fluid stays in the upper body so it looks nice in the coffin--and it saves time and money too! Legs and feet, if still present, are covered by clothing. II. So, how long was CJr "in the bag"--clearly long enough for hair and feet bones to fall out? - "days"...just long enough to transport the body to Mt. Rose Hill dump site?
- "weeks" ...long enough for decomp in the bag...say in a car trunk?
- we cant really tell, or where he came from? Is it still possible that Charlie Schippel moved the body, based upon his proximity to the dump site? And his penchant for digging holes?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 16, 2010 18:47:40 GMT -5
Embalming is a process which would be done for a reason. Embalming is anything used to treat the body to preserve or keep it from decaying. It could be anything that achieves that. However, if this is the case - did it work? Would the animals eat the limbs and some of the organs?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 17, 2010 2:40:09 GMT -5
Good question...we are trying to explain why the cheeks, eyes and face (external) weren't eaten by maggots; and why the liver (internal) wasn't eaten by varmints and scavengers?
Clearly there was ample means, motive and opportunity since the lower half torso and extremities are missing and the brain is soup.
The best explanation seems to indicate "embalming" of the corpse as reasoned by Theon Wright....OR a very short stay in the woods on Mt. Rose Hill?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 18, 2010 5:57:15 GMT -5
Rick, do you really believe that? It's more like a one-line guess. The heart remained as well. The facial muscles were in good shape too.... I suppose my point is this: What do we have, besides a heart, a liver, and a face that's less deteriorated then the rest of the body?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 18, 2010 17:32:27 GMT -5
Michael....I believe the scientific/forensic evidence--blow flies and maggots dont lie like the people involved. I am more than eager to explore all alternative explanations: - the body was kept indoors in a closed container away from blow flies and maggots? like a cedar chest?
- face into a plastic bag or frozen for 72 days? [but brain is soup-implies long term putrification-]
- Paul Wendell dusted his upper body w/ chems in his basement? [cant dust internal organs]
- Its not CJr? [its a plant--designed to fix March 1st as TOD]
- Some clever method was used to confuse time of death? Yes, I agree embalming isnt especially clever? [But only if you get caught] Any tissues well vascularized would get more chemical.
"...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever corpse remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 19, 2010 7:05:44 GMT -5
The body it seems would have had to be kept away from insects but in temperatures high enough for bacterial action.
But doesn't insect infestation occur well before 2-1/2 months? There's also the theory Kevin raised - the body possibly being under water.
And without insects - we would have a slower decomp when, by all accounts, he was deteriorated at or more then he should have been excluding the head, heart and liver of course.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 19, 2010 7:16:00 GMT -5
Michael--insect/blowfly infestation occurs immediately outdoors above 50F. Bones are picked clean in 3-5 days.
I am also wondering if we if weavent been sold a red herring as to just how well preserved the face in fact was? The purpose being to try and sway public opinion that even though Dr. VanIngen couldnt identify the corpse--it WAS or had to be CJr?
If we look carefully at the coffin photo in Scaduto, page 160+2 (or Wright: p.99+2), we see a totally skeletinized corpse? No skin, only bone, with no recognizable facial features. It doesnt look like anybody? "IT" hardly even looks human.
Is there an obvious disconnect/disparity between the Gardner photo in the woods w/ eyeballs, cheeks and dimples VS. the coffin photo in Scaduto/Wright? How can the ribs be picked clean and face remain essentially untouched? Doesnt add up?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 21, 2010 3:53:48 GMT -5
So where do we seem to end up here:
1. Body way too decomposed for outdoor temps (Parker, Hynd and Al Dunlap). The missing element...warmer temps?
2. Face and head not consumed by maggots outdoors. The missing element...time...not outdoors more than 2-3 days tops.
3. Conclusion: Skeleton was decomposing indoors in warm temperatures for 12-70 days and dumped into woods just 2-3 days before discovery. Time enough for scavengers to eat half/
4. What psycho-person(s) would hide the body indoors for 2+ months and then return it to its rightful owners? And what was thier motive? Cui bono? Was the dump site "staged" for any particular reason?
5. This body dump & discovery appears totally disconnected to the Extortion in the Bronx; Condon; or CJ? [The ransom had been paid on April 2nd]
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 21, 2010 6:36:51 GMT -5
It's an interesting theory to a puzzling situation that I don't believe has ever been properly addressed.
The problem is that I am no Expert, and when I make inquiries I get responses that help but would basically need those Professionals to dedicate some of their personal time beyond the quick "matter of fact" replies. Know what I mean? So I don't like going to the well too often, knowing how busy my own schedule is, so I don't reward someone who has been kind enough to help by pestering them.
And so here we are.
I've offered suggestions in the past. Some have been mine and some had come from the thousands upon thousands of letters/report/memos I've read which made suggestions about where the baby was, or is, or had been - to see if any of those may have had a basis of truth behind them .... which may explain our dilemma.
It appears to me, and again I am no Expert in this field by any stretch, that the child is in an advanced state of decay. If there wasn't so much written on the weather not being hot enough to cause it then I would be ok with it.
But then we have the facial muscles, liver, and heart almost "protected" (if that is the proper word) from the abuses that afflicted the corpse via animals, and due to the smell - bacterial infection.
The variable of water was offered by Kevin to consider.
There has to be a situation where all of this comes together. At present I am still not aware of any.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 21, 2010 9:53:22 GMT -5
Too many variables to draw any conclusions. Was the body buried or submerged? How long was it in the bag and how would that effect decomposition? etc, etc.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 24, 2010 8:42:26 GMT -5
Are you implying these climatic estimates are biased/or spun? The temps are temps...whats "so much"? More than other topics? Most books and articles, either ignore these issues completely, or just blindly accept the original conclusion...laying there since March 1st? Too many variables to draw any conclusions. Was the body buried or submerged? How long was it in the bag and how would that effect decomposition? etc, etc. Its a bit too self-serving and defeatist to "just give up"? Water would retard the advanced decomposition--seems unlikely since it works in the wrong direction...colder than air..,we need to apply incubator temps for bactieria. Was the burlap bag sufficient to keep out blow-flys and maggots? Leaving only microbial decomposition? But what picks the bones clean? And who dumps out the body-out-the-bag right before its found on Mt Rose? [not the kidnappers--its too stupid] Maybe it was designed to bring CAL home from his 19-day yachting vacation with Curtis--going essentially no wheres... Aside: Two guest VIPs mentioned the Lindbergh Ladder at the Centennial Celebration of the Forest Products Lab yesterday! Ironic...
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 24, 2010 15:14:22 GMT -5
Self serving would be pursuing a direction which is unsupportable by the evidence at hand in order to prove a predetermined position. I don't advocate that in the least. In this case the evidence is extremely weak or completely missing. There's also a lot of contradictory claims such as the body was too decomposed or not decomposed enough, depending on who you listen to. I'm certainly no expert on this subject but I do see a tremendous range of variables at play. For example,was the body initially buried? Was it protected from exposure? Could the ointments applied to him that night have had an effect? In short, I don't see much that can be determined conclusively other than the body was in that bag for some period of time.
|
|