Post by bookrefuge on Dec 16, 2011 0:35:24 GMT -5
I am not a great fan of Wayne Jones’s Murder of Justice. He thrusts his opinions emphatically at his readers, which makes me want to resist even when I agree. However, he does incorporate some interesting material.
There is one passage I find potentially very important. It is the statement given by William H. Wright beginning on page 1043 of the book. I am somewhat surprised that it has never been posted on the Internet. Jones met Wright when the former gave a talk on the Lindbergh case at the Union League in Philadelphia in 1980. Wright, then in his seventies, told Jones he had been stationed in Colombia as a member of the U.S. Army Air Corps Intelligence Service during the 1930s and 40s. Wright had first-hand information related to the LKC gathered while in that service.
Let me say up front that I know there were countless bogus “Lindbergh baby sightings” after the kidnapping. But I believe Wright’s statement deserves to be read, even though it does not readily fit my own theories about the LKC, because I believe it has earmarks suggesting that it is both honest and authoritative. I am going to post his rather long statement. (I have copied it—any typos are my fault.) I will then comment on it, and I invite others to do the same.
The following statement was dated by Jones as given on December 5, 1984:
OK. A very significant statement if true. What I find most compelling about it is that Wright says he believed Fisch was implicated in the LKC long before Hauptmann was caught passing ransom notes.
I think the first thing to address is: Do we believe the foregoing statement is essentially true? And then, if it is, what does it mean for the LKC?
I suppose the statement could be challenged in a number of ways. How do we know Wright really made it? And if he did make it, how do we know he wasn’t a liar, a publicity-seeking lunatic, or a disinformation specialist? I prefer to presume innocence until guilt is proven, but since the LKC itself is so controversial, let’s examine these possibilities.
I don’t think Wayne Jones invented the Wright statement. He is opinionated, but I didn’t see anything in his 1168-page volume to suggest he dishonestly fabricated evidence. Also, if you’re familiar with Jones’s prose style, he couldn’t have possibly written this statement—Wright is a better writer than Jones!
Do we know William H. Wright actually worked in the United States Army Air Corps Intelligence Service? I suppose Wright could have invented that—the way some people pretend they attended Harvard. On the other hand, going to Harvard is something that carries a sort of “universal prestige.” I don’t know that would apply so much to Army Air Corps Intelligence, and to make up such a claim would risk being shown up as a fake by people who really worked in that service.
On the other hand, I haven’t heard of any ex-members of that service corroborating Wright either. But then again, I know a few ex –“spooks” by proxy, and it’s not unusual for former intelligence service officers to stay mum about their work, even after retirement.
The document does show familiarity with South America. While I cannot find confirmation of many of the individuals Wright names (not surprising after 70-80 years), most of what he says about Scadta Airlines and Peter Von Bauer can be easily confirmed in Wikipedia.
Wright’s description of the character and scheming of Isidor Fisch seems very consistent with what we know from other sources.
Just as Wright says, there was a Hotel Lindbergh in Popayan. Here is a 1957 photo of it: popayancity.com/historia/hotel-lindbergh-1957-273.html I have not seen independent confirmation of what Wright says about how the hotel got its name.
Also, regarding the story Wright gave of the woman in Buga, Colombia, Jones found confirmation of the report on the front page of the March 30, 1932 New York Times, which he reproduced among his book’s images. Here is the Times story:
OK, one could say that Wright reconstructed his own account from sources like this. But this is where we start to endlessly speculate, and I’d want some evidence before I called him a liar.
As far as being a lunatic goes—Wright’s report is logically written and, while it may conflict with some of what we believe about the kidnapping, it is pretty much internally consistent. I mean, it’s not like Wright is tripping over himself with self-contradictions.
As far as his giving out the statement to supply “disinformation”--he made it 52 years after the kidnapping, which is a little late to be working on the LKC as a disinformation specialist.
As drd99 correctly pointed out regarding the Mancke depositions, Wright’s statement has never been subjected to cross-examination. Nonetheless, this doesn’t mean the statement is false.
There are some things in it that seem to contradict what we know about the LKC. What really jumps out at me: Wright describes Fisch as being down in South America quite a bit—yet I don’t see other authors mentioning Fisch going abroad. In fact, it has been stated in several LKC sources that Fisch applied for a passport on May 12, 1932—the day the baby’s body was found. Of course, this doesn’t mean Fisch couldn’t have been out of the country without a passport. If he was committing the crime of transporting the Lindbergh baby, he would have almost certainly traveled “on the sly.” And if he really had friends in high places, maybe this was even arranged officially. Still, you pretty much need a passport when overseas—I suppose he could have had a false one? But then why does he still apply for one? But, but, but.
Also, I wonder if there may be some confusion between “passport” and “visa.” If Fisch was a German national working in the United States, he may have retained his German passport, residing here as what we would today call a “permanent resident.” Unless he became an American citizen, he probably would have kept his German passport, giving him the capacity to travel internationally—however, he would still need a “visa” from the country of his destination. In much the same way, Edna Sharp applied for a visa to return to Britain on the day of the kidnapping; she already had a passport. Michael, do you know if these terms might have been inadvertently confused by LKC investigators? Wright does say that Fisch “made frequent trips to Germany,” and if that was true, Fisch should have already had both a passport and a German visa—unless one of these had expired and required renewal.
We know that Fisch was dealing in furs, but I haven’t heard too much about how he procured them. Wright’s account of his South American dealings seems like a possible explanation. Martin Stover was a real person; he had family in the U.S., Jones has a picture of him in his book, and Jones spoke to people who knew Stover was dealing in South American furs. I will also say that if Fisch and Stover were intimately familiar with South American trade routes, this would have helped make them ideal people to carry the child into this area. Illegal activities (drug smuggling, for example), are often done under the cover of business travel.
Another potential problem with the Wright statement: If Fisch is traveling with the baby in South America in March 1932, that pretty much takes him out of most of the Condon ransom negotiations—yet Fisch supposedly wound up with much of the ransom money. Wright’s dates are mostly inexact, and Fisch could have connected to the ransom after it was paid—but it does raise a question in my mind. Michael, do you know if we have documentary proof that Fisch was in the United States during March 1932?
It also seems odd that if Wright (and, as he says, his intelligence colleagues) knew of Fisch’s involvement, they apparently didn’t communicate this to authorities during the Flemington trial. I suppose “sworn to secrecy” rules might have prevailed, but I can’t see such protocols preventing an interagency memo, like something being sent to the FBI.
It may also seem contradictory that Wright mentions Nazis (Weissman, Benkart) working with Jews (Fisch and “an Argentinean Jew”). However, in 1932 the Nazis were not yet officially in power, racial segregation was not yet enforced, and furthermore we are talking about South America.
OK, I recognize the above difficulties. I think they are not insurmountable, but I also acknowledge Wright’s statement may not be correct. However, I’d now like to take on this question: If Wright’s account is true, what does it mean for the LKC? From this point forward, I am going to hypothetically assume the statement is true.
One thing it would mean is that the corpse found near Hopewell could not have been that of Lindbergh’s son. I realize there has been great debate on this. Personally, after reading both sides, I have been leaning towards it being CAL Jr.—the overlapping toes, the clothing, the reportedly curly blond hair, correct number of teeth. I assumed that the rapid decay occurred due to being mostly kept indoors somewhere. But if CAL Jr. was in South America in the time frame given by Wright, there is no way that CAL Jr.--even if he died in South America and was somehow returned in a sealed coffin (a challenge in itself)--could undergo that amount of decay.
Another thing that comes to mind is that the Wright statement doesn’t look very good for Lindbergh. I am personally not a “Lindy did it” person. And while Wright’s version excludes the Ahlgren-Monier thesis that Lindbergh killed his son in a prank gone wrong, it could support a “eugenicist” theory. In other words, that Lindbergh did not want a son that has been alleged to be physically imperfect, but neither did he have the heart to kill him, so he had him taken out of the country to be cared for. As much as I dislike this theory, I’ll run with that ball for a moment:
--Lindbergh had taken goodwill flights to Central and South America, so was familiar with those air routes.
--According to Jones, Lindbergh mentions Peter Von Bauer and Scadta Airlines in his 1970 memoir Wartime Journals. (However, since Von Bauer and Scadta were famous within the airline industry, Lindbergh’s knowing of them is hardly surprising.)
--It is perhaps a little more disturbing that Pan-American took over Scadta. Lindbergh worked as a consultant for Pan-American. This at least circumstantially links Lindbergh to the airline implicated by Wright. One would think that Lindbergh could have at least eventually learned of Scadta’s involvement—even Wright says he and his colleagues scoured Scadta’s records and found some LKC evidence, after the war started.
--Lindbergh has been accused of pro-German sympathies, and the figures Wright discusses in South America are mostly Germans.
--If one wanted to run with this ball, I suppose it could be suggested that Lindbergh, just prior to the alleged kidnapping, himself flew his son to some Latin American relay point. Michael, do we know enough about Lindbergh’s movements shortly before the kidnapping to rule this out?
Now let’s look at things that don’t click in the above thesis.
--The thesis implies that Isidor Fisch was chosen to be the “guardian” of the baby. I cannot imagine the Lindberghs wanting a man like Fisch looking after CAL Jr.—kind of like hiring Lucrezia Borgia as your babysitter.
--One must also believe that the Lindberghs went through enormous charades—getting household servants to lie for them; continuously fooling the police; paying a ransom they knew wasn’t necessary; apparently even arranging for a corpse to be deposited to end the matter. For my money, seems much too complicated.
I suppose one could claim the ransom drop was a clandestine means of providing Fisch with “child care” money, but it would be quite risky for Lindbergh to arrange that, given the possibility of undetected police or FBI surveillance. Furthermore, we know that the ransom money wound up mostly getting spent in New York, not Latin America.
--Wright says US embassies did not investigate because they were “called off from above.” I can’t see the U.S. federal government cooperating to this degree with a bizarre personal eugenics deception by Lindbergh. My own feeling is that something more significant had to be happening to get the embassies to lay off.
--If what Wright says about the priest and investigator being assassinated is true, I personally cannot imagine the Lindberghs taking the deception to that level of violence. Perhaps some will consider me too charitable to Lindbergh, but again, I believe something greater would have been going on.
Another possible interpretation that the Wright statement lends itself to is that the baby was kidnapped by the Nazis to force Lindbergh into supporting them. Items that might bolster this hypothesis could include: the Mersman table confession which attributed the kidnapping—either truthfully or as a hoax--to the NSDAP (Nazi party); the large number of Germans connected to the LKC, including at least two Nazis cited by Wright; and Lindbergh’s alleged sympathies for the Third Reich.
Contradicting this thesis: the Nazis were not even officially in power yet, and had they been caught kidnapping CAL Jr., it would have been politically devastating for them; had Lindbergh been threatened by the incipient Nazi Party, he could probably have turned the threats over to the Feds for investigation; and Lindbergh did not join the America First Committee until nine years later—quite a long time to be holding a threat over someone’s head.
Since Wright implicates both Jews and Nazis, the German politics involved are a little gray. (If you want to see just how gray German politics could get, try reading Untouchable by Pierre de Villemarest or Hitler’s Traitor by Louis Kilzer. Both authors compiled evidence that Hitler’s secretary, Martin Bormann, was conveying Germany’s precise war plans to the Communist spy ring broadcasting out of Switzerland known as the “Red Orchestra.” The information was so regular and precise that Stalin even knew the exact times Hitler entered and exited his war room. Apparently it was largely for this reason that the war in the East suddenly turned against the Germans—Stalin was playing with a marked deck. As for Bormann, instead of being tried at Nuremburg, he was spirited out of Europe after a faked “death” and allowed to live out his years in…. South America, where he died in 1959.) The foregoing may annoy World War II buffs on this board, so let me just add that I’m not at all claiming it’s the “last word” on Bormann or the Eastern front—other authors have certainly offered other very compelling interpretations.
Well, back to the LKC (sorry for the diversion). Another possible theory is that powerful political forces in the U.S.—those “people in high places” Wright said Fisch knew—were the ones blackmailing Lindbergh. For an elaboration of those forces and their adversarial relationship to Lindbergh, see the thread on this board I began called “A Theory in Development.” In connection with that thread, which focuses on James P. Warburg, let me just mention that the oldest book I can find written by Warburg is Hides and Skins in the Manufacture of Leather (1921), which is even readable online at www.archive.org/details/hidesskinsmanufa00warb I mention this only because it means that Warburg had some acquaintance with the skins industry—which is what Fisch and Stover were involved with. However, Warburg’s book is dealing principally with the tanning of cow hides—Fisch and Stover were essentially furriers. Warburg could qualify as a someone in “high places” whom Fisch could get money from—but so could countless thousands of other people, and if Fisch bragged about knowing people in high places, this might have just been one of his many tall tales.
Whoever was responsible, it is probably worth pointing out that 1932 was at least a momentous time politically, with both the Nazis and the New Dealers on the threshold of power. It is probably worth considering that Lindbergh, through his entry into high society, might have discovered something explosively incriminating, and like “The Man Who Knew Too Much” (see the thread “Hollywood Musings” on this board), his child was taken to keep his mouth shut. However, if someone wanted to silence Lindbergh, I don’t see why they couldn’t have simply arranged an “accident” for Lindy during one of his nighttime drives to the Sourland mountains. (It seems like every theory has a “however.”)
I suppose yet another possibility (still assuming Wright is essentially correct) is that Stover and Fisch were not traveling with Cal Jr., but with a “ringer.” But just why they would do that is probably something best left to a Hollywood screenwriter. Maybe to trick a wealthy person into paying them for the ringer, like some people will try to foist off a copy of a famous painting? Given the growing evidence that Fisch was quite the con artist, I suppose such an endeavor might not have been beyond his imagination.
A couple of other odds and ends I noticed about the Wright statement. Wright said he thought Stover was probably German, but according to Wayne Jones (who knew contacts Stover had in the U.S.), Stover was actually Scandinavian. This is a bit interesting, inasmuch as Dr. Condon seemed to primarily think “Cemetery John” might be either Scandinavian or German. However, Stover was a small man—smaller than CJ-- and the picture of him in Jones’s book does not look much like Cemetery John, and the Bronx-Colombia timelines don’t match up.
Speaking of Dr. Condon, it is somewhat interesting that when he went abroad in December 1935—some think to elude Governor Hoffman’s inquiry—he chose to go to Panama. According to Wright, Martin Stover flew into South America with the baby from Panama.
I also did a “double take” when Wright first mentioned the name Ernie Benkert. This name is of course very similar to Ernie Brinkert, who Violet Sharp falsely named as the man she dated on the night of the kidnapping. But Brinkert was evidently an American small-timer; Benkert is described by Wright as a wealthy engineer in South America. Just similar but not identical names—another one of those many meaningless coincidences that crop up in the LKC.
Thoughts, anyone?
There is one passage I find potentially very important. It is the statement given by William H. Wright beginning on page 1043 of the book. I am somewhat surprised that it has never been posted on the Internet. Jones met Wright when the former gave a talk on the Lindbergh case at the Union League in Philadelphia in 1980. Wright, then in his seventies, told Jones he had been stationed in Colombia as a member of the U.S. Army Air Corps Intelligence Service during the 1930s and 40s. Wright had first-hand information related to the LKC gathered while in that service.
Let me say up front that I know there were countless bogus “Lindbergh baby sightings” after the kidnapping. But I believe Wright’s statement deserves to be read, even though it does not readily fit my own theories about the LKC, because I believe it has earmarks suggesting that it is both honest and authoritative. I am going to post his rather long statement. (I have copied it—any typos are my fault.) I will then comment on it, and I invite others to do the same.
The following statement was dated by Jones as given on December 5, 1984:
I, William H. Wright of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, do hereby swear that the following statement is true and correct in every detail:
During the years of the 1930s and 1940s I was stationed in Colombia, South America as a member of the United States Army Air Corps Intelligence Service. While there I became acquainted with many people. Among them was a rather small, slightly built man, named Isidor Fisch. Mr. Fisch was well known in Colombia as a handler of illicit skins and furs. He would sell them to dealers down in Argentina, who in turn, would ship them to Bogota, Colombia, from where they would be sent north into the United States and Europe. Fisch had connections with the Indians who lived in southern parts of Colombia, and he seemed to have access, knowledge and contacts with those involved in the transfers or movements of furs from Popayan down the entire west coast. He spent much of his time in and out of the United States, making frequent trips to Germany. During the time he spent in South America he was always known as a man who carried lots of money.
Many Germans lived in Colombia during those years and certain numbers of them were associated with Fisch and two of his closest friends, Martin Stover and a man by the name of Weismann, a powerful Nazi who had great wealth and seemed capable of financing almost anything, including many of those in which Isidor Fisch was involved.
It was shortly after the kidnapping of Colonel Lindbergh’s baby in 1932 that word spread throughout the areas in and around Popayan and Cali that a baby believed to be the kidnapped child had been brought there. The newspapers got hold of the story and played it up to such an extent that, according to its prominence, you would have thought the actual kidnapping had occurred down there.
During this period of time rumors persisted about the child and it was soon learned by the local authorities there that a Missionary priest had brought in a private investigator from up in the states to ferret out the truth of this story. The detective journeyed to Colombia where he met his friend, the priest, and the two men quickly began a concentrated effort to inform the authorities in New Jersey of the validity of the rumor since they, the two investigators now firmly believed that Lindbergh’s baby had been brought down there. But it all went to no avail. The authorities up north turned a deaf ear to their pleas.
I know for a fact that the United States Embassys [sic] in Colombia and Peru never bothered to investigate. We learned from authoritative sources that they were, as they stated, “called off from above.” As a matter of fact they continued to refuse the help of other investigators who, as late as 1934-1936, attempted to follow up the story of the appearance of the Lindbergh baby in South America. Absolutely no pressure was applied by the American Embassy. In spite of the many newspapers carrying their headlines and stories about Isidor Fisch, the embassy consuls clamped up tight, refusing to make any comment. The Embassy absolutely made no move to investigate. The same thing occurred in Ecuador. This simply amazed us since our own investigation of the story proved to us there was much credence to it.
At any rate, a shocking surprise came when both the priest and detective were killed. It was an overwhelming belief among us that they had been assassinated because their deaths would put an end to their investigation of the mysterious baby. The two men had been intent on solving the South American mystery of having the child identified by the northern authorities and making an arrest of the actual kidnappers, Fisch, Stover, and the unidentified woman. You must understand that by this time the investigation had proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, at least to the priest and investigator, that it was definitely the Lindbergh baby who had been brought from the states into Popayan.
The priest was stabbed and shot while he was walking on the street in front of the Hotel el Pazo in Popayan. He died on the floor of the dining room where he had been dragged indoors. For years his blood was not washed away and many persons claim traces of it can still be viewed there today. Although I believe the private investigator was also killed there, I must admit I am not too certain of that, since it may have been that he was slain in either Ecuador or Peru. But, regardless of where he was killed, we know he was definitely on his way to meet the priest in Popayan since he had some valuable information that was vital to the success of their investigation.
I think it is worth mentioning that the name of the Hotel el Pazo was later changed to the Lindbergh Hotel, not as an honor to Lindbergh the famous aviator, but because of the death of the Colombian priest who had been slain there because of his certainty that the Lindbergh baby was in Popayan. The hotel management explained the reason for their decision to change the name was prompted by an effort to attract the interest of the many tourists passing through the area.
One of the informants from whom we learned many facts was a man by the name of Ernie Benkert, another Nazi, who had the habit of drinking too much, and when under the influence of alcohol, would tell those of us in the intelligence service much of what he knew of the activities that were taking place in Colombia. He told me that whenever Fisch would show up with so much money he would inquire of him where he had obtained it all. He claimed Fisch blatantly declared he had received it from friends of his in high places up in the United States. He told us one thing further that proved to be self-incriminating, that being that Fisch claimed some of the money was given to him to take care of a very famous baby that had to be kept out of the United States. This claim of his ran rampant and, of course, left little doubt with almost everyone that the baby he referred to was the child of Colonel Lindbergh.
A friend of mine, a Colombian, a man I imagine is dead today, also knew Ernie Benkert quite well, and he insisted that he knew for a fact that the information the private detective had obtained would have convinced the authorities beyond any doubt that the Lindbergh baby had been brought to South America. He said he also knew it was for this reason the two men were murdered.
Peter Von Bauer, an Austrian German, was a pilot for the Scadta Airplane Lines in those days. The line was German oriented and was located in Colombia. It was regarded as the first commercial airline in the New World. Its headquarters was in Medellin, with its jump-off place at Popayan to points along the west coast of South America, below the Republic of Colombia, into Ecuador and Chile.
Quite naturally, we of the intelligence service, were very anxious to investigate the authenticity of these rumors that were being so widely circulated as factual. We certainly did this, and this is what we discovered.
It was true that a baby had been brought into South America by the man we knew to be Martin Stover. I believe he was a German, but of that I am not certain. He had been accompanied by a woman who was either a Latin American or mixed Indian. In early March of 1932 they had been flown in from Panama, landing at Medellin where they made a short stop-over. They then continued their flight on to Cali where they made contact with Isidor Fisch who had arrived earlier and was waiting for them. Stover and the woman then took the child by train to Popayan where they stayed at the Hotel el Pazo. It was here they were joined by Weismann.
Some time later Fisch met them at the el Pazo, once again loaded with money and bragging that it came into his possession from friends of his in high places in the United States. It was not only known, but was a well established fact, that these persons were all at the hotel when the assassinations took place.
Peter Von Bauer, a Scadta pilot, who lived at the Hotel Europa in Medellin, spoke quite openly as he bragged to us that it had been he who flew Martin Stover, the baby, a woman, and Weismann into Cali where a man he knew to be Isidor Fisch met them. Somehow he seemed to know that the money Fisch received on a regular basis was picked up by him in one of the older banks in Bogota. Quite often he would talk about Fisch and his unscrupulous business tactics. All of the men in our group agreed that Isidor Fisch was certainly a man of mystery.
In early 1941, when the Scadta airplane lines were closed down prior to the war, we searched through the records of the defunct airline, and there, sure enough, just as Von Bauer had claimed, were the names of Stover and a child on the passenger list. We never did learn the woman’s name and could not identify her from among the other passengers. If Weismann made the trip with them, as Von Bauer claimed, there was no record of his name on the list. Further airline records were non-existent since only small planes made the trip south of Cali. However, it should be noted that their journey into Popayan was made by train over a rather good railway system. Incidentally, the Scadta airline was taken over by Pan-American Air Lines until it finally became known as Avianca.
As early as 1931 Martin Stover had been bringing furs into Colombia. He was a fur buyer. As far as I know, Stover did not smuggle furs into the country, but on the other hand, he made a practice of not paying full duty on them. He supplied live furry animals and exported them from Putumayo in southern Colombia after bringing them to the trading post and furriers located along the Putumayo River. Quite often I would see him with Fisch after he had brought his animals up to the post after an exciting trip through the Andes Mountains. He had any number of contacts and was usually loaded with furs. He spoke with an Argentinean accent and was very well known by the fur dealers in South America, especially in those places where he and Fisch holed in quite often, usually in Santiago, Chile, the La Paz in Bolivia, a place run by an Argentinean Jew, and the Cali Real in Bogota. It was here that I had many conversations with Fisch.
Stover, who was known as a German National, was a traveler, not staying in one place for any great length of time. He resided at the Hotel Botami when he was in Bogota. He spent a great deal of time at the Hotel Europa in Medellin, and when he went to Lima, Peru he lived in the Hotel Royale. His permanent home, if you can call it such, was at Chuchumanga in Ecuador. It was a ranch-like place that served as a meeting place for Germans whom we believed were deepy politically involved in Argentina. From his residence it was quite easy to get to Quito, Ecuador and not at all difficult to get out of Quito into the many key points where clandestine meetings were held by them on many occasions. Chuchumanga was in an isolated section of the country where at one time much agricultural work was conducted, chiefly by the German people, with the help of Austrians, Hungarians, and Czechoslovakians. I am not at all certain if Martin Stover ever held a full residence visa. He probably held a semi-permanent one due to his owning property.
The fact nevertheless remains that the chief topic of conversation during these days was the kidnapping. No one had to be convinced in and around Cali and Popayan that the mysterious baby was not the Lindbergh baby. Everyone was certain that he was the stolen baby and that Martin Stover had brought him down from the states. Talk among the guests at the Hotel Alfredez Royale ran rampant on this subject, but despite this, the local authorities could do nothing about it because of the lack of cooperation up north. It did seem strange, however, that following the assassinations of the priest and private investigator, and the news of their deaths spread into Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Chile, the anxiety of the German community relaxed considerably.
Ernie Benkert was involved with several German groups in Colombia that were located along the west coast of South America. He was an engineer by profession and was also known to be quite wealthy. He was in Colombia at the time of the kidnapping and was a close friend of both Fisch and Weismann. Another friend of theirs was Ernest DuPerlee, a close associate of Benkert. Peter Von Bauer, a financier who backed the Scadta Airplane Lines, had finances that were known to come strictly from an industrial movement in Germany. Another friend of mine, Hector Vargas, an elderly Colombian, was a chauffeur for the owners of the Scadta Airlines, and was also well aware of these sinister activities which centered on the Lindbergh kidnapping of 1932.
The woman involved with the removal of the baby can best be described as being rather short and strictly Colombian. She served as a nursemaid for the child. Both Stover and Fisch were men of small stature. Incidentally, I was well acquainted with a family living in Buga, Colombia, during those years, and some time during the middle of March, 1932, one of its members, Senora Soledad Fernandez dePenesa, was approached by two strangers who asked her to take care of a small child for which she in turn would receive a payment in pesos, not in United States currency. I learned that she did take care of the youngster for a short time and that it was later taken to Popayan and points south. Buga is a small city of about 30,000 people located inland from Buenaventura almost midway between Pereira and Cali. I am not absolutely certain that it was here that the baby saw a picture of Lindbergh and called him “daddy” or not, but I do know the incident took place somewhere in Colombia and that it was because of this that the story spread like wild-fire throughout the area and caused the investigation to spring into action.
Summing everything up concisely, it is a definite fact that Martin Stover and a woman, never identified, brought a baby down to South America from the United States. Isidor Fisch and Martin Stover were closely connected and involved in many unscrupulous deeds. When the child was brought to Popayan and believed to be Lindbergh’s baby, and consequent attempts were made to reach the authorities in New Jersey with the news, nothing developed because the police authorities there appeared as though they were not at all interested in ferreting out the truth of the South American report. They apparently wrote it off as being nothing more than a wild rumor or that someone’s imagination had run wild.
As for the possible question as to where the baby was finally taken, I can only report that when things in Popayan became too hot for those who were holding the child, Fisch and Stover at once took the baby into Buga from where they traveled by bus or car down into Ecuador. The baby was never seen down there again, however both Fisch and Stover reappeared and continued on with their other activities.
Regarding my personal feelings about the “so called” solution of the case, I have one major thought about the matter, based largely on my knowledge of the things that took place in South America and my ultimate investigation of them. From the time I first learned from the newspapers in their reports of the Hauptmann trial that the defendant claimed he obtained the money in his possession from a friend of his named Isidor Fisch, I was more than satisfied that the baby we had seen down in Popayan had definitely been the stolen Lindbergh baby. You see, I had already been convinced of the involvement of Fisch in the crime years before Hauptmann named him as his alibi, one the police laughed at. Knowing Fisch as I did, I was certain he was guilty because I knew him as a man who could, without his conscience bothering him, involve an innocent person in the crime and then go on to lie his way out of his own involvement in it. Fisch was known to all of us as one mean man, if I can call him that, who had the ability to con people into almost anything.
As for my personal feelings about the guilt of Bruno Richard Hauptmann, I am certain that his explanation about Isidor Fisch should have been followed up with a thorough and intense investigation being conducted on the reported events, proven to be true, down in Colombia, South America. I firmly believe that Hauptmann was innocent, entirely innocent, of any part of this terrible crime that shocked the world.
During the years of the 1930s and 1940s I was stationed in Colombia, South America as a member of the United States Army Air Corps Intelligence Service. While there I became acquainted with many people. Among them was a rather small, slightly built man, named Isidor Fisch. Mr. Fisch was well known in Colombia as a handler of illicit skins and furs. He would sell them to dealers down in Argentina, who in turn, would ship them to Bogota, Colombia, from where they would be sent north into the United States and Europe. Fisch had connections with the Indians who lived in southern parts of Colombia, and he seemed to have access, knowledge and contacts with those involved in the transfers or movements of furs from Popayan down the entire west coast. He spent much of his time in and out of the United States, making frequent trips to Germany. During the time he spent in South America he was always known as a man who carried lots of money.
Many Germans lived in Colombia during those years and certain numbers of them were associated with Fisch and two of his closest friends, Martin Stover and a man by the name of Weismann, a powerful Nazi who had great wealth and seemed capable of financing almost anything, including many of those in which Isidor Fisch was involved.
It was shortly after the kidnapping of Colonel Lindbergh’s baby in 1932 that word spread throughout the areas in and around Popayan and Cali that a baby believed to be the kidnapped child had been brought there. The newspapers got hold of the story and played it up to such an extent that, according to its prominence, you would have thought the actual kidnapping had occurred down there.
During this period of time rumors persisted about the child and it was soon learned by the local authorities there that a Missionary priest had brought in a private investigator from up in the states to ferret out the truth of this story. The detective journeyed to Colombia where he met his friend, the priest, and the two men quickly began a concentrated effort to inform the authorities in New Jersey of the validity of the rumor since they, the two investigators now firmly believed that Lindbergh’s baby had been brought down there. But it all went to no avail. The authorities up north turned a deaf ear to their pleas.
I know for a fact that the United States Embassys [sic] in Colombia and Peru never bothered to investigate. We learned from authoritative sources that they were, as they stated, “called off from above.” As a matter of fact they continued to refuse the help of other investigators who, as late as 1934-1936, attempted to follow up the story of the appearance of the Lindbergh baby in South America. Absolutely no pressure was applied by the American Embassy. In spite of the many newspapers carrying their headlines and stories about Isidor Fisch, the embassy consuls clamped up tight, refusing to make any comment. The Embassy absolutely made no move to investigate. The same thing occurred in Ecuador. This simply amazed us since our own investigation of the story proved to us there was much credence to it.
At any rate, a shocking surprise came when both the priest and detective were killed. It was an overwhelming belief among us that they had been assassinated because their deaths would put an end to their investigation of the mysterious baby. The two men had been intent on solving the South American mystery of having the child identified by the northern authorities and making an arrest of the actual kidnappers, Fisch, Stover, and the unidentified woman. You must understand that by this time the investigation had proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, at least to the priest and investigator, that it was definitely the Lindbergh baby who had been brought from the states into Popayan.
The priest was stabbed and shot while he was walking on the street in front of the Hotel el Pazo in Popayan. He died on the floor of the dining room where he had been dragged indoors. For years his blood was not washed away and many persons claim traces of it can still be viewed there today. Although I believe the private investigator was also killed there, I must admit I am not too certain of that, since it may have been that he was slain in either Ecuador or Peru. But, regardless of where he was killed, we know he was definitely on his way to meet the priest in Popayan since he had some valuable information that was vital to the success of their investigation.
I think it is worth mentioning that the name of the Hotel el Pazo was later changed to the Lindbergh Hotel, not as an honor to Lindbergh the famous aviator, but because of the death of the Colombian priest who had been slain there because of his certainty that the Lindbergh baby was in Popayan. The hotel management explained the reason for their decision to change the name was prompted by an effort to attract the interest of the many tourists passing through the area.
One of the informants from whom we learned many facts was a man by the name of Ernie Benkert, another Nazi, who had the habit of drinking too much, and when under the influence of alcohol, would tell those of us in the intelligence service much of what he knew of the activities that were taking place in Colombia. He told me that whenever Fisch would show up with so much money he would inquire of him where he had obtained it all. He claimed Fisch blatantly declared he had received it from friends of his in high places up in the United States. He told us one thing further that proved to be self-incriminating, that being that Fisch claimed some of the money was given to him to take care of a very famous baby that had to be kept out of the United States. This claim of his ran rampant and, of course, left little doubt with almost everyone that the baby he referred to was the child of Colonel Lindbergh.
A friend of mine, a Colombian, a man I imagine is dead today, also knew Ernie Benkert quite well, and he insisted that he knew for a fact that the information the private detective had obtained would have convinced the authorities beyond any doubt that the Lindbergh baby had been brought to South America. He said he also knew it was for this reason the two men were murdered.
Peter Von Bauer, an Austrian German, was a pilot for the Scadta Airplane Lines in those days. The line was German oriented and was located in Colombia. It was regarded as the first commercial airline in the New World. Its headquarters was in Medellin, with its jump-off place at Popayan to points along the west coast of South America, below the Republic of Colombia, into Ecuador and Chile.
Quite naturally, we of the intelligence service, were very anxious to investigate the authenticity of these rumors that were being so widely circulated as factual. We certainly did this, and this is what we discovered.
It was true that a baby had been brought into South America by the man we knew to be Martin Stover. I believe he was a German, but of that I am not certain. He had been accompanied by a woman who was either a Latin American or mixed Indian. In early March of 1932 they had been flown in from Panama, landing at Medellin where they made a short stop-over. They then continued their flight on to Cali where they made contact with Isidor Fisch who had arrived earlier and was waiting for them. Stover and the woman then took the child by train to Popayan where they stayed at the Hotel el Pazo. It was here they were joined by Weismann.
Some time later Fisch met them at the el Pazo, once again loaded with money and bragging that it came into his possession from friends of his in high places in the United States. It was not only known, but was a well established fact, that these persons were all at the hotel when the assassinations took place.
Peter Von Bauer, a Scadta pilot, who lived at the Hotel Europa in Medellin, spoke quite openly as he bragged to us that it had been he who flew Martin Stover, the baby, a woman, and Weismann into Cali where a man he knew to be Isidor Fisch met them. Somehow he seemed to know that the money Fisch received on a regular basis was picked up by him in one of the older banks in Bogota. Quite often he would talk about Fisch and his unscrupulous business tactics. All of the men in our group agreed that Isidor Fisch was certainly a man of mystery.
In early 1941, when the Scadta airplane lines were closed down prior to the war, we searched through the records of the defunct airline, and there, sure enough, just as Von Bauer had claimed, were the names of Stover and a child on the passenger list. We never did learn the woman’s name and could not identify her from among the other passengers. If Weismann made the trip with them, as Von Bauer claimed, there was no record of his name on the list. Further airline records were non-existent since only small planes made the trip south of Cali. However, it should be noted that their journey into Popayan was made by train over a rather good railway system. Incidentally, the Scadta airline was taken over by Pan-American Air Lines until it finally became known as Avianca.
As early as 1931 Martin Stover had been bringing furs into Colombia. He was a fur buyer. As far as I know, Stover did not smuggle furs into the country, but on the other hand, he made a practice of not paying full duty on them. He supplied live furry animals and exported them from Putumayo in southern Colombia after bringing them to the trading post and furriers located along the Putumayo River. Quite often I would see him with Fisch after he had brought his animals up to the post after an exciting trip through the Andes Mountains. He had any number of contacts and was usually loaded with furs. He spoke with an Argentinean accent and was very well known by the fur dealers in South America, especially in those places where he and Fisch holed in quite often, usually in Santiago, Chile, the La Paz in Bolivia, a place run by an Argentinean Jew, and the Cali Real in Bogota. It was here that I had many conversations with Fisch.
Stover, who was known as a German National, was a traveler, not staying in one place for any great length of time. He resided at the Hotel Botami when he was in Bogota. He spent a great deal of time at the Hotel Europa in Medellin, and when he went to Lima, Peru he lived in the Hotel Royale. His permanent home, if you can call it such, was at Chuchumanga in Ecuador. It was a ranch-like place that served as a meeting place for Germans whom we believed were deepy politically involved in Argentina. From his residence it was quite easy to get to Quito, Ecuador and not at all difficult to get out of Quito into the many key points where clandestine meetings were held by them on many occasions. Chuchumanga was in an isolated section of the country where at one time much agricultural work was conducted, chiefly by the German people, with the help of Austrians, Hungarians, and Czechoslovakians. I am not at all certain if Martin Stover ever held a full residence visa. He probably held a semi-permanent one due to his owning property.
The fact nevertheless remains that the chief topic of conversation during these days was the kidnapping. No one had to be convinced in and around Cali and Popayan that the mysterious baby was not the Lindbergh baby. Everyone was certain that he was the stolen baby and that Martin Stover had brought him down from the states. Talk among the guests at the Hotel Alfredez Royale ran rampant on this subject, but despite this, the local authorities could do nothing about it because of the lack of cooperation up north. It did seem strange, however, that following the assassinations of the priest and private investigator, and the news of their deaths spread into Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Chile, the anxiety of the German community relaxed considerably.
Ernie Benkert was involved with several German groups in Colombia that were located along the west coast of South America. He was an engineer by profession and was also known to be quite wealthy. He was in Colombia at the time of the kidnapping and was a close friend of both Fisch and Weismann. Another friend of theirs was Ernest DuPerlee, a close associate of Benkert. Peter Von Bauer, a financier who backed the Scadta Airplane Lines, had finances that were known to come strictly from an industrial movement in Germany. Another friend of mine, Hector Vargas, an elderly Colombian, was a chauffeur for the owners of the Scadta Airlines, and was also well aware of these sinister activities which centered on the Lindbergh kidnapping of 1932.
The woman involved with the removal of the baby can best be described as being rather short and strictly Colombian. She served as a nursemaid for the child. Both Stover and Fisch were men of small stature. Incidentally, I was well acquainted with a family living in Buga, Colombia, during those years, and some time during the middle of March, 1932, one of its members, Senora Soledad Fernandez dePenesa, was approached by two strangers who asked her to take care of a small child for which she in turn would receive a payment in pesos, not in United States currency. I learned that she did take care of the youngster for a short time and that it was later taken to Popayan and points south. Buga is a small city of about 30,000 people located inland from Buenaventura almost midway between Pereira and Cali. I am not absolutely certain that it was here that the baby saw a picture of Lindbergh and called him “daddy” or not, but I do know the incident took place somewhere in Colombia and that it was because of this that the story spread like wild-fire throughout the area and caused the investigation to spring into action.
Summing everything up concisely, it is a definite fact that Martin Stover and a woman, never identified, brought a baby down to South America from the United States. Isidor Fisch and Martin Stover were closely connected and involved in many unscrupulous deeds. When the child was brought to Popayan and believed to be Lindbergh’s baby, and consequent attempts were made to reach the authorities in New Jersey with the news, nothing developed because the police authorities there appeared as though they were not at all interested in ferreting out the truth of the South American report. They apparently wrote it off as being nothing more than a wild rumor or that someone’s imagination had run wild.
As for the possible question as to where the baby was finally taken, I can only report that when things in Popayan became too hot for those who were holding the child, Fisch and Stover at once took the baby into Buga from where they traveled by bus or car down into Ecuador. The baby was never seen down there again, however both Fisch and Stover reappeared and continued on with their other activities.
Regarding my personal feelings about the “so called” solution of the case, I have one major thought about the matter, based largely on my knowledge of the things that took place in South America and my ultimate investigation of them. From the time I first learned from the newspapers in their reports of the Hauptmann trial that the defendant claimed he obtained the money in his possession from a friend of his named Isidor Fisch, I was more than satisfied that the baby we had seen down in Popayan had definitely been the stolen Lindbergh baby. You see, I had already been convinced of the involvement of Fisch in the crime years before Hauptmann named him as his alibi, one the police laughed at. Knowing Fisch as I did, I was certain he was guilty because I knew him as a man who could, without his conscience bothering him, involve an innocent person in the crime and then go on to lie his way out of his own involvement in it. Fisch was known to all of us as one mean man, if I can call him that, who had the ability to con people into almost anything.
As for my personal feelings about the guilt of Bruno Richard Hauptmann, I am certain that his explanation about Isidor Fisch should have been followed up with a thorough and intense investigation being conducted on the reported events, proven to be true, down in Colombia, South America. I firmly believe that Hauptmann was innocent, entirely innocent, of any part of this terrible crime that shocked the world.
OK. A very significant statement if true. What I find most compelling about it is that Wright says he believed Fisch was implicated in the LKC long before Hauptmann was caught passing ransom notes.
I think the first thing to address is: Do we believe the foregoing statement is essentially true? And then, if it is, what does it mean for the LKC?
I suppose the statement could be challenged in a number of ways. How do we know Wright really made it? And if he did make it, how do we know he wasn’t a liar, a publicity-seeking lunatic, or a disinformation specialist? I prefer to presume innocence until guilt is proven, but since the LKC itself is so controversial, let’s examine these possibilities.
I don’t think Wayne Jones invented the Wright statement. He is opinionated, but I didn’t see anything in his 1168-page volume to suggest he dishonestly fabricated evidence. Also, if you’re familiar with Jones’s prose style, he couldn’t have possibly written this statement—Wright is a better writer than Jones!
Do we know William H. Wright actually worked in the United States Army Air Corps Intelligence Service? I suppose Wright could have invented that—the way some people pretend they attended Harvard. On the other hand, going to Harvard is something that carries a sort of “universal prestige.” I don’t know that would apply so much to Army Air Corps Intelligence, and to make up such a claim would risk being shown up as a fake by people who really worked in that service.
On the other hand, I haven’t heard of any ex-members of that service corroborating Wright either. But then again, I know a few ex –“spooks” by proxy, and it’s not unusual for former intelligence service officers to stay mum about their work, even after retirement.
The document does show familiarity with South America. While I cannot find confirmation of many of the individuals Wright names (not surprising after 70-80 years), most of what he says about Scadta Airlines and Peter Von Bauer can be easily confirmed in Wikipedia.
Wright’s description of the character and scheming of Isidor Fisch seems very consistent with what we know from other sources.
Just as Wright says, there was a Hotel Lindbergh in Popayan. Here is a 1957 photo of it: popayancity.com/historia/hotel-lindbergh-1957-273.html I have not seen independent confirmation of what Wright says about how the hotel got its name.
Also, regarding the story Wright gave of the woman in Buga, Colombia, Jones found confirmation of the report on the front page of the March 30, 1932 New York Times, which he reproduced among his book’s images. Here is the Times story:
SOURCE OF RUMOR TRACED
$5,000 Was Offered to Colombian Woman to Care for a Baby
CALI, Colombia, March 29 (AP).—Major Samper, District Chief of the National Police, revealed today the sources of a rumor last week that led authorities to suspect that the kidnapped Lindbergh baby might be near the Colombian city of Buenaventura.
He discovered that an unidentified baby had been offered to a woman at Buga, midway between Buenaventura and Cali, for keeping on March 17.
Buga is an old Colonial city of 30,000 inhabitants. Two strangers, one a Colombian, the other a foreigner, arrived at the home of Senora Soledad Fernandez de Panesa, a respectable middle-aged woman of moderate circumstances, and offered her $5,000 to care for a boy about 19 months old.
Senora Fernandez said she would have to ask her husband and the strangers left. The senora told her friends and gossip spread ten days before it reached the authorities.
$5,000 Was Offered to Colombian Woman to Care for a Baby
CALI, Colombia, March 29 (AP).—Major Samper, District Chief of the National Police, revealed today the sources of a rumor last week that led authorities to suspect that the kidnapped Lindbergh baby might be near the Colombian city of Buenaventura.
He discovered that an unidentified baby had been offered to a woman at Buga, midway between Buenaventura and Cali, for keeping on March 17.
Buga is an old Colonial city of 30,000 inhabitants. Two strangers, one a Colombian, the other a foreigner, arrived at the home of Senora Soledad Fernandez de Panesa, a respectable middle-aged woman of moderate circumstances, and offered her $5,000 to care for a boy about 19 months old.
Senora Fernandez said she would have to ask her husband and the strangers left. The senora told her friends and gossip spread ten days before it reached the authorities.
OK, one could say that Wright reconstructed his own account from sources like this. But this is where we start to endlessly speculate, and I’d want some evidence before I called him a liar.
As far as being a lunatic goes—Wright’s report is logically written and, while it may conflict with some of what we believe about the kidnapping, it is pretty much internally consistent. I mean, it’s not like Wright is tripping over himself with self-contradictions.
As far as his giving out the statement to supply “disinformation”--he made it 52 years after the kidnapping, which is a little late to be working on the LKC as a disinformation specialist.
As drd99 correctly pointed out regarding the Mancke depositions, Wright’s statement has never been subjected to cross-examination. Nonetheless, this doesn’t mean the statement is false.
There are some things in it that seem to contradict what we know about the LKC. What really jumps out at me: Wright describes Fisch as being down in South America quite a bit—yet I don’t see other authors mentioning Fisch going abroad. In fact, it has been stated in several LKC sources that Fisch applied for a passport on May 12, 1932—the day the baby’s body was found. Of course, this doesn’t mean Fisch couldn’t have been out of the country without a passport. If he was committing the crime of transporting the Lindbergh baby, he would have almost certainly traveled “on the sly.” And if he really had friends in high places, maybe this was even arranged officially. Still, you pretty much need a passport when overseas—I suppose he could have had a false one? But then why does he still apply for one? But, but, but.
Also, I wonder if there may be some confusion between “passport” and “visa.” If Fisch was a German national working in the United States, he may have retained his German passport, residing here as what we would today call a “permanent resident.” Unless he became an American citizen, he probably would have kept his German passport, giving him the capacity to travel internationally—however, he would still need a “visa” from the country of his destination. In much the same way, Edna Sharp applied for a visa to return to Britain on the day of the kidnapping; she already had a passport. Michael, do you know if these terms might have been inadvertently confused by LKC investigators? Wright does say that Fisch “made frequent trips to Germany,” and if that was true, Fisch should have already had both a passport and a German visa—unless one of these had expired and required renewal.
We know that Fisch was dealing in furs, but I haven’t heard too much about how he procured them. Wright’s account of his South American dealings seems like a possible explanation. Martin Stover was a real person; he had family in the U.S., Jones has a picture of him in his book, and Jones spoke to people who knew Stover was dealing in South American furs. I will also say that if Fisch and Stover were intimately familiar with South American trade routes, this would have helped make them ideal people to carry the child into this area. Illegal activities (drug smuggling, for example), are often done under the cover of business travel.
Another potential problem with the Wright statement: If Fisch is traveling with the baby in South America in March 1932, that pretty much takes him out of most of the Condon ransom negotiations—yet Fisch supposedly wound up with much of the ransom money. Wright’s dates are mostly inexact, and Fisch could have connected to the ransom after it was paid—but it does raise a question in my mind. Michael, do you know if we have documentary proof that Fisch was in the United States during March 1932?
It also seems odd that if Wright (and, as he says, his intelligence colleagues) knew of Fisch’s involvement, they apparently didn’t communicate this to authorities during the Flemington trial. I suppose “sworn to secrecy” rules might have prevailed, but I can’t see such protocols preventing an interagency memo, like something being sent to the FBI.
It may also seem contradictory that Wright mentions Nazis (Weissman, Benkart) working with Jews (Fisch and “an Argentinean Jew”). However, in 1932 the Nazis were not yet officially in power, racial segregation was not yet enforced, and furthermore we are talking about South America.
OK, I recognize the above difficulties. I think they are not insurmountable, but I also acknowledge Wright’s statement may not be correct. However, I’d now like to take on this question: If Wright’s account is true, what does it mean for the LKC? From this point forward, I am going to hypothetically assume the statement is true.
One thing it would mean is that the corpse found near Hopewell could not have been that of Lindbergh’s son. I realize there has been great debate on this. Personally, after reading both sides, I have been leaning towards it being CAL Jr.—the overlapping toes, the clothing, the reportedly curly blond hair, correct number of teeth. I assumed that the rapid decay occurred due to being mostly kept indoors somewhere. But if CAL Jr. was in South America in the time frame given by Wright, there is no way that CAL Jr.--even if he died in South America and was somehow returned in a sealed coffin (a challenge in itself)--could undergo that amount of decay.
Another thing that comes to mind is that the Wright statement doesn’t look very good for Lindbergh. I am personally not a “Lindy did it” person. And while Wright’s version excludes the Ahlgren-Monier thesis that Lindbergh killed his son in a prank gone wrong, it could support a “eugenicist” theory. In other words, that Lindbergh did not want a son that has been alleged to be physically imperfect, but neither did he have the heart to kill him, so he had him taken out of the country to be cared for. As much as I dislike this theory, I’ll run with that ball for a moment:
--Lindbergh had taken goodwill flights to Central and South America, so was familiar with those air routes.
--According to Jones, Lindbergh mentions Peter Von Bauer and Scadta Airlines in his 1970 memoir Wartime Journals. (However, since Von Bauer and Scadta were famous within the airline industry, Lindbergh’s knowing of them is hardly surprising.)
--It is perhaps a little more disturbing that Pan-American took over Scadta. Lindbergh worked as a consultant for Pan-American. This at least circumstantially links Lindbergh to the airline implicated by Wright. One would think that Lindbergh could have at least eventually learned of Scadta’s involvement—even Wright says he and his colleagues scoured Scadta’s records and found some LKC evidence, after the war started.
--Lindbergh has been accused of pro-German sympathies, and the figures Wright discusses in South America are mostly Germans.
--If one wanted to run with this ball, I suppose it could be suggested that Lindbergh, just prior to the alleged kidnapping, himself flew his son to some Latin American relay point. Michael, do we know enough about Lindbergh’s movements shortly before the kidnapping to rule this out?
Now let’s look at things that don’t click in the above thesis.
--The thesis implies that Isidor Fisch was chosen to be the “guardian” of the baby. I cannot imagine the Lindberghs wanting a man like Fisch looking after CAL Jr.—kind of like hiring Lucrezia Borgia as your babysitter.
--One must also believe that the Lindberghs went through enormous charades—getting household servants to lie for them; continuously fooling the police; paying a ransom they knew wasn’t necessary; apparently even arranging for a corpse to be deposited to end the matter. For my money, seems much too complicated.
I suppose one could claim the ransom drop was a clandestine means of providing Fisch with “child care” money, but it would be quite risky for Lindbergh to arrange that, given the possibility of undetected police or FBI surveillance. Furthermore, we know that the ransom money wound up mostly getting spent in New York, not Latin America.
--Wright says US embassies did not investigate because they were “called off from above.” I can’t see the U.S. federal government cooperating to this degree with a bizarre personal eugenics deception by Lindbergh. My own feeling is that something more significant had to be happening to get the embassies to lay off.
--If what Wright says about the priest and investigator being assassinated is true, I personally cannot imagine the Lindberghs taking the deception to that level of violence. Perhaps some will consider me too charitable to Lindbergh, but again, I believe something greater would have been going on.
Another possible interpretation that the Wright statement lends itself to is that the baby was kidnapped by the Nazis to force Lindbergh into supporting them. Items that might bolster this hypothesis could include: the Mersman table confession which attributed the kidnapping—either truthfully or as a hoax--to the NSDAP (Nazi party); the large number of Germans connected to the LKC, including at least two Nazis cited by Wright; and Lindbergh’s alleged sympathies for the Third Reich.
Contradicting this thesis: the Nazis were not even officially in power yet, and had they been caught kidnapping CAL Jr., it would have been politically devastating for them; had Lindbergh been threatened by the incipient Nazi Party, he could probably have turned the threats over to the Feds for investigation; and Lindbergh did not join the America First Committee until nine years later—quite a long time to be holding a threat over someone’s head.
Since Wright implicates both Jews and Nazis, the German politics involved are a little gray. (If you want to see just how gray German politics could get, try reading Untouchable by Pierre de Villemarest or Hitler’s Traitor by Louis Kilzer. Both authors compiled evidence that Hitler’s secretary, Martin Bormann, was conveying Germany’s precise war plans to the Communist spy ring broadcasting out of Switzerland known as the “Red Orchestra.” The information was so regular and precise that Stalin even knew the exact times Hitler entered and exited his war room. Apparently it was largely for this reason that the war in the East suddenly turned against the Germans—Stalin was playing with a marked deck. As for Bormann, instead of being tried at Nuremburg, he was spirited out of Europe after a faked “death” and allowed to live out his years in…. South America, where he died in 1959.) The foregoing may annoy World War II buffs on this board, so let me just add that I’m not at all claiming it’s the “last word” on Bormann or the Eastern front—other authors have certainly offered other very compelling interpretations.
Well, back to the LKC (sorry for the diversion). Another possible theory is that powerful political forces in the U.S.—those “people in high places” Wright said Fisch knew—were the ones blackmailing Lindbergh. For an elaboration of those forces and their adversarial relationship to Lindbergh, see the thread on this board I began called “A Theory in Development.” In connection with that thread, which focuses on James P. Warburg, let me just mention that the oldest book I can find written by Warburg is Hides and Skins in the Manufacture of Leather (1921), which is even readable online at www.archive.org/details/hidesskinsmanufa00warb I mention this only because it means that Warburg had some acquaintance with the skins industry—which is what Fisch and Stover were involved with. However, Warburg’s book is dealing principally with the tanning of cow hides—Fisch and Stover were essentially furriers. Warburg could qualify as a someone in “high places” whom Fisch could get money from—but so could countless thousands of other people, and if Fisch bragged about knowing people in high places, this might have just been one of his many tall tales.
Whoever was responsible, it is probably worth pointing out that 1932 was at least a momentous time politically, with both the Nazis and the New Dealers on the threshold of power. It is probably worth considering that Lindbergh, through his entry into high society, might have discovered something explosively incriminating, and like “The Man Who Knew Too Much” (see the thread “Hollywood Musings” on this board), his child was taken to keep his mouth shut. However, if someone wanted to silence Lindbergh, I don’t see why they couldn’t have simply arranged an “accident” for Lindy during one of his nighttime drives to the Sourland mountains. (It seems like every theory has a “however.”)
I suppose yet another possibility (still assuming Wright is essentially correct) is that Stover and Fisch were not traveling with Cal Jr., but with a “ringer.” But just why they would do that is probably something best left to a Hollywood screenwriter. Maybe to trick a wealthy person into paying them for the ringer, like some people will try to foist off a copy of a famous painting? Given the growing evidence that Fisch was quite the con artist, I suppose such an endeavor might not have been beyond his imagination.
A couple of other odds and ends I noticed about the Wright statement. Wright said he thought Stover was probably German, but according to Wayne Jones (who knew contacts Stover had in the U.S.), Stover was actually Scandinavian. This is a bit interesting, inasmuch as Dr. Condon seemed to primarily think “Cemetery John” might be either Scandinavian or German. However, Stover was a small man—smaller than CJ-- and the picture of him in Jones’s book does not look much like Cemetery John, and the Bronx-Colombia timelines don’t match up.
Speaking of Dr. Condon, it is somewhat interesting that when he went abroad in December 1935—some think to elude Governor Hoffman’s inquiry—he chose to go to Panama. According to Wright, Martin Stover flew into South America with the baby from Panama.
I also did a “double take” when Wright first mentioned the name Ernie Benkert. This name is of course very similar to Ernie Brinkert, who Violet Sharp falsely named as the man she dated on the night of the kidnapping. But Brinkert was evidently an American small-timer; Benkert is described by Wright as a wealthy engineer in South America. Just similar but not identical names—another one of those many meaningless coincidences that crop up in the LKC.
Thoughts, anyone?