|
Post by Michael on Feb 7, 2011 8:42:41 GMT -5
Kevin, you have convinced me through your research that all (3) sections of this ladder were employed, by design, in the commission of this crime. You are undoubtedly the best Researcher on this angle - having already solved most of the mystery behind it (which was unknown for about 80 years until then) specifically by not allowing any bias to get in the way.
Now, we may have touched on this before but I wanted to bring it up again so that I may clear up the loose ends.
I've read in many places the idea that the ladder had originally been constructed in (2) sections having the 3rd added later. I believe even the exact section is in question, and it's even been argued Rail 16 was a "replacement" rail for the 3rd section.
One theory was advanced by Mickey Rosner (or accepted by him) that the "length of the original ladder was made by measuring the distance perpendicular with the ground and the maker forgot that a ladder must lean against the wall at an angle."
What I am trying to determine is if you (or anyone else) believes ANY of the sections were made at different times, and if so, what the explanation might be. And of course if not - why not?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 8, 2011 8:59:56 GMT -5
I don't for the very simple reason that only a knucklehead like Rosner would think that someone who was capable of making a ladder wouldn't know how to figure the length. I don't think anyone can say with certainty what the exact sequence of construction was or whether there were changes made. Personally, I think that the evidence shows that it was paramount to Hauptmann that the ladder could not be traced back to him. I know that's ironic, but it's one more reason why I am certain he didn't play carpenter in the attic. In any case, he would not want to spend too much time handling the ladder since doing so would increase the chance of leaving a print.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 8, 2011 18:52:04 GMT -5
your certain? then who took the board ouit of the attic, it clearly wasnt planted kevin keraga proved that in his report
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 9, 2011 7:06:17 GMT -5
Steve,
Keraga's report doesn't prove anything. Some of what's in it supports the position that both S-226 and Board 27 were both one piece.
His supposition, theory, speculation - call it whatever you like (just call it what it is) - that Hauptmann went into his attic for it is just a conclusion he's jumped to.
Almost a decade ago, Rab offered up a theory that no one wanted to be true. So they all quickly dismissed it without researching that angle.
Some 7 or 8 odd years later, Kevin comes along with a neutral perspective and proves Rab's theory without ever knowing he presented it in the first place!
Keraga's research is impressive, but it wasn't without mistakes, omissions, and yes - speculation. Much of that speculation has now been disproven by Kevin.
So in the end, believe what you want, but the real truth of the situation is there for the taking thanks to Kevin (and Rab).
The lesson here is to look at things without an agenda. If you want to show that no one LIED before you start something you are going to slant in that direction. If you want to call people REVISIONISTS or claim whatever they say is SPECULATION then how in the hell can you turn around, revise the facts of the situation AND speculate, in the form of historical fact - what really happened?
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 9, 2011 7:41:49 GMT -5
didnt prove anything. speculation? how about examining wood from hauptmanns attic and digging up photos of before and after that clearly proves the ladder wasnt altered and it wasnt planted in hauptmanns attic. we know the wood came from hauptmanns attic he lived there he had the ransom money it gets tireing after 20 years of that specualtion that he had nothing to do with building the ladder. the whole attic looks like rail 16 i have pictures and to plant evidence there would have been a impossible task in my opinion
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 9, 2011 8:51:59 GMT -5
Steve, I think you are just misunderstanding this a little. There is almost no doubt that rail 16 came from the Rausch attic. Koehler did a pretty good job of showing this and Keraga did an excellent job of taking it a step further. At this point, only someone who is in complete denial could believe that rail 16 was not once part of that attic floor. The second issue is how it came to be part of the ladder. This is where there is more speculation than proof. It's also where a lot of the misunderstanding comes from. The evidence shows me that that board was removed long before the ladder was built. This was most likely done when the electricians were adding a circuit in the ceiling. More than likely it ended up as scrap in the Rausch Basement and it's just as likely that there is where Hauptmann scavenged it along with other boards to make the ladder. As for the police "planting" the wood, I can't see anyway that could have occurred and I have never heard or read anyone claiming such a thing that could show how it could have been done, let alone prove it. Anyway, if it's more comforting to believe that Hauptmann went up 3 floors to cut up his landlords floor, so be it. Michael started this thread to clarify the order of construction of the ladder. I would still say it was built as a 3 piece ladder, even though the first section is much different than the other two.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 9, 2011 16:57:39 GMT -5
I was never ready to actually conclude they were a match until Kevin properly explained what happened. After all, you had Kelly telling McGill the NJSP framed the attic evidence which is one of the many reasons why Dr. Hudson defected to the Defense. And so, without any sense being made of it, and no conclusive evidence (when all the Experts I communicated with told me invasive study would be required to do that), I wasn't ready.
Now with the totality of the circumstances, along with a proper and complete logical explanation - I can't think up an argument against the match.
And so each and every piece has snapped into place.
So why'd Kelly say the evidence was framed? Well, what exactly does that mean anyway? Does it mean what those who want Hauptmann innocent want it to mean or could it mean something else? Obviously, if he said it, and Hudson's actions prove to me that he did what could possibly be "framed" if not for Rail 16?
How about the scenario? How about re-writes or certain untrue or "fudged" claims to avoid the idea that this piece of wood was actually anywhere else but in a place ONLY Hauptmann could get to it? Knowing it probably originally came from the attic, and knowing Hauptmann was involved, might the Police have "made sure" the best possible situation existed in order to prove it was Hauptmann, and not Fisch or some other acquaintance, taking the wood from the basement where they would have access in addition to Hauptmann? The Reports themselves prove this to me. That's the "frame up" when it comes to this evidence.
And it seems to explain why so many people over the years believed there was something "planted" concerning the ladder or attic. They never considered a lesser offense.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 9, 2011 19:11:00 GMT -5
well kevkon many people said it was planted through the years. being im one of the lucky ones who was in the attic hauptmann didnt go three floors to go to the attic. he rented the upstairs of this house and had acess to the attic via a linen closet. you would have to take the shelves out and climb on the wood that holds the shelves. what a rotten design. they put a attic stairway i guess many years later. thats how i got up there
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 10, 2011 8:04:48 GMT -5
well kevkon many people said it was planted through the years. being im one of the lucky ones who was in the attic hauptmann didnt go three floors to go to the attic. he rented the upstairs of this house and had acess to the attic via a linen closet. you would have to take the shelves out and climb on the wood that holds the shelves. what a rotten design. they put a attic stairway i guess many years later. thats how i got up there Sure, if he built the ladder in his Kitchen. I figure he would use the Garage and given the often told tale of him breaking the rail and needing a replacement at the last minute, that makes for a 3 story climb. The fact that the access was through a scuttle in the Linen Closet only makes that tale taller.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 10, 2011 21:51:32 GMT -5
kevcon i learned years ago that all the books in the world cant give you the feel of a case then going to the actual spots that are connected to the crime. my opinion on this is i dont believe hauptmann built anything in the attic. i believe he took a piece of wood from up there and brought it to the garage to shape his ladder. the tools were differnt in those days. he would have hassled himself to built it up there dragging alot of tools. the issue of the third section can be debated but its hard to pinpoint what reall y was built first. if i knew it would be the last time i would be in the attic i would have taken more pictures
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 12, 2011 8:13:56 GMT -5
You were lucky Steve....
The evidence that everyone who wanted Hauptmann to have climbed into his attic to cannabilize that floor, and leave the rest hanging over the joist, overlooked the evidence that Kevin evaluated in order to draw his conclusion.
Getting back to my original question: Is it possible, for any reason, that a Carpenter asks for measurements from someone else? If so, could it be that person who makes the mistake - and not the Carpenter - who then uses those measurements?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 12, 2011 8:58:01 GMT -5
Getting back to my original question: Is it possible, for any reason, that a Carpenter asks for measurements from someone else? If so, could it be that person who makes the mistake - and not the Carpenter - who then uses those measurements? Sure, though most would try to verify the info if for no other reason that it's hard to get paid for your work if the customer is not pleased with the product.
|
|