|
Post by gary on Jun 21, 2007 14:16:54 GMT -5
We read Henry Ellerson, chauffeur for the Morrows, drove Betty Gow to the Hopewell estate that fateful day and arrived there near 1 pm. Some accounts have Ellerson having tea and shortly leaving and some say near 3pm leaving the estate. Whats interesting is he could be the most direct witness to view the setting prior to the kidnapping. He reports casual chat with Betty and nothing else unusual until he leaves
Behn mentions Ellerson as the apparent source to Hoffman the theory Elizabeth did it. If so why would he feel this way? If he drove Betty to Hopewell I assume he never saw the child there at his brief stop there. For if he saw the child when would Elizabeth have done this? Reading in Gardner's book he encounters a green ford coup somewhat blocking the drive as he leaves. Did he see a car that was involved in the kidnapping?
Milton mentions Ellerson was known to frequent a speakeasy known as the Sha-Toe. This became his alibi that night but subject of rumor flashing a sizable bankroll days prior or after the kidnapping. Even more mysteriously around the time the child's body is discovered Ellerson drives his car into a bizarre accident causing the car to slide over an embankment. The car caught fire and burned. Was this to destroy evidence? In this same book it is noted the investigation looked at ties with Baker and Ellerson. Certainly a candidate of an inside source if there was one because of all these events.
Wondering if anybody would have other information or opinion regarding Ellerson? Did he see the child before he left? Was he the source that pointed suspicion to Elizabeth? Is he a suspect of a part in the crime?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 22, 2007 22:00:24 GMT -5
So far I haven't been able to find any reference to Ellerson seeing CJr. during his visit. No one seems to be asking him if he did either.
Behn says that Harry Green did not say exactly who it was who gave the affidavit. It seems likely that if such an affidavit existed that it would have been Ellerson instead of Burke or even McDonald, but hey, either of those may have had a motive to betray and/or invent something. I say "likely" because there is evidence of Ellerson cooperating on friendly terms with Governor Hoffman. One problem is the date Green tags this affidavit with. I think if it is Ellerson then 1935 is very unlikely. I think an affidavit coming from him would probably be in 1939.
In a previous post on this subject I mentioned that I couldn't figure out why such an affidavit did not exist in his collection but after researching as much as I have concerning the Parker angle it actually does now make sense.
Hoffman gave Green anything he wanted in order to assist in the Parker's defense. It seems very possible this affidavit, as well as some other info, may have been retained by Green even after the Parker's conviction on June 23, 1937 in Federal Court. There was still the other case in Kings County to defend, and the Appeal wasn't decided until April 11, 1939. Then there was the Parole matter and eventual Pardon after that for Ellis Parker Jr. Of course by that time Hoffman isn't Governor anymore - although he did keep some kidnapping related material after he left the position it got to be less and less...and there is references to material that isn't in the collection...just not this affidavit.
The Governor trusted Harry Green and for very good reason.
I know that they really tried to bring as much evidence concerning the Lindbergh Case as possible into the trial but that Judge Clarke prevented it at every turn despite allowing the Prosecution to bring in Rancocas Creek, and the rest of that nonsense in the Pratt book that wasn't even true.... Anyway, I'll continue to dig through Green's material to see if I find an indication as well as reference to something else he may have had as well. What we are getting from Behn is what Green "remembered" so at that late date he may not have mentioned some stuff we'd be interested in.
Regardless, Ellerson does seem to be on "good terms" with the Governor in '39 and appears to be offering him some inside information on what he knew and/or viewed as suspicious. For this reason I find Ellerson as a "suspect" for any type of involvement as unlikely. It was a dangerous move to betray the house of Morrow AND to insert oneself into the case with someone as Powerful as Hoffman who was trying to prove others were involved would be kind of nuts crazy.
The car he saw on March 1st is suspicious and I have always felt it probable this person was involved. As with the other car that Lupica saw, this Driver seems to be waiting/looking for someone without any real fear of being seen.
As for the Ellerson/Baker connection... I don't believe they were ever able to prove anything here. I know Joe has looked into this in the past so maybe he can add a little insight here.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,616
Member is Online
|
Post by Joe on Jun 23, 2007 7:08:04 GMT -5
I'm not sure where it was first developed that Ellerson worked for Armour and Co. It's well documented in a number of books, including Milton's Loss of Eden and it's source may have been the FBI Summary Report which states that Ellerson was employed there in 1923. During an investigation interview in which he provides a history of his employment, Ellerson does not refer to any period of employment with Armour and Company. I've previously questioned whether he chose to omit this detail in light of any possible suspected affiliation with Baker.
There are also references to Duane (Baker) Bacon having worked there, again including the FBI Summary Report which states he was employed as a chauffeur at their 52 West 14th St., New York City location in 1924. On the surface, all of this does present an interesting possible connection to the kidnapping, relative to the 537 West 149th St. address and "J.J. Faulkner."
Over the past few years on a number of Internet discussion boards, the connection between Baker and Ellerson has taken on a life of it's own, to the point they were both regular drinking buddies at the Sha-Toe speakeasy. I may be wrong on this but I tend to think there's a bit of creative writing going on here.
If Ellerson and/or Baker actually worked at Armour and Company, it's certainly not supported by this investigation report. From a Bureau of Investigation report dated July 20, 1934 by H.C. Leslie:
With the view of determining whether Henry Ellerson and Duane Bacon were employed by Armour and Co., meat packers, New York, at any time, inquiries were made at the Armour and Company general offices at 120 Broadway, New York where the employment records were checked from 1920 to the present date. It was ascertained that the names of the above individuals do not appear in the above records. The manager of the Personnel Department suggested that a further effort to determine whether the above were employed by Armour and Company be made through inquiry at the Personnel Department, Armour and Co., Chicago, Ill.
Interviewed Mr. Hogan, manager of Armour and Company, Sales Department, 14th Street and 11th Avenue, New York, concerning Ellerson and Bacon and he advised that he had never known either of these individuals as having been employed by Armour and Company in any capacity.
Mr. Hogan made inquiries among a number of employees who have been employed by Armour and Company ranging from ten to fifteen years and none of those interviewed had ever heard of Ellerson or Bacon as having been employed by Armour and Company.
Undeveloped Lead
CHICAGO OFFICE is respectfully requested to make inquiries at the general offices, Armour and Co., Chicago, Ill. to determine whether or not Charles Ellerson and Duane Bacon were ever employed by this concern, allegedly they had been employed in the years 1923-24.
There may be another report out there which covers follow up with the Armour and Company Chicago Office but I'm not aware of it. I suppose the possibility does exist that Bacon's preferred last name "Baker" might have been overlooked when Armour employees were questioned, I'm not sure. Does anyone else have any further information about either Ellerson or Bacon having worked at Armour and Company?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 23, 2007 13:44:45 GMT -5
I see Ellerson in a slightly different light as representative of the servants at Next Day Hill. All of them, the whole bunch, seem bound and determine to have an airtight alibi for March 1st 1932? Is this predetermined ahead of time, for some heretofore unexplained reason, or after the fact? They all seem to pair up with alibis and only poor Violet cant come up with an excuse for her time out/ - Red, Condon and Al Reich have a green Ford coupe? What was Ellersons description of the driver and/or passengers in a narrow driveway at 3pm in good light? We dont know? Noone asked? It was daylight? Did Hoffman cover for the driver too?
- Apparently, Ellerson only needed to account for his time AFTER he returned to Next Day Hill? And was never called as a witness in the Trial? Or interviewed about his trip to Hopewell?
- Wasnt Ellerson also another roomate of Red Johnson at the rooming house? didnt someone from Skillman report seeing one of Red Johnson's roomates nearbye that Tuesday afternoon?
- Violet Sharpe goes out on a driving date with 3 strangers and we are led to believe this is the only evening she went out in all of 1932? The 2 Ernies are not located until after her untimely death? She faces neither of them in Life?
- Why does Ellerson get the guilts years later when it can do so little to repair the obfuscations of the past? Why didnt he come forward sooner? His description of a car in the driveway is a dead end?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 26, 2007 20:59:44 GMT -5
This is a good point. No one ever follows this up (on paper). We don't know for sure whether or not something verbal occurred but it seems important enough that this should have been mentioned again - but it isn't.
As far as the Ellerson/Baker "follow-up" report I haven't been able to locate one. The FBI Summary Report makes it sound like its solid but Turrou's is written almost 6 months later and sounds rather indefinite.
I keep telling y'all to be careful about that Summary Report.
A couple of things in that Summary Report which is true is Ellerson did spend time in Fort Lee at a Speakeasy whose Proprietor was a promoter for the State Boxing Commission.
When I think boxing I think Condon. Did he know Condon? Condon's Son-In-Law worked in Fort Lee and the Summary Report notes this also wondering aloud if Ellerson knew Hacker.
Ellerson's former employer was a retired Stock Broker who was in Leona. When I think "Stock Broker" I think Hauptmann. Additionally, Hacker lived in Leona.
Frank Pettit, PI and former Investigator for the Defense (Reilly), believed Ellerson was involved. There's also some indication that a Member of the Staff at Englewood also believed he was somehow involved.
The BIG problem is this: These types of things (connections) seem to occur at every turn concerning just about everyone. Too many loose ends were never sewn up by the Police and we are left "holding a bag" of unknowns. All of this stuff should have been solidly investigated to their logical conclusions.
Here is where the worst evidence of the in-fighting & jealousy between Police Agencies rears its ugly head.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 27, 2007 9:57:27 GMT -5
Just wondering. If you believe that the "kidnapping" was well planned in advance it would follow that Highfields was the intended target and not a last minute substitution. So what does Ellerson have to bring to the table?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 27, 2007 17:14:32 GMT -5
Michael--my instincts have always considered that son-in-law Hacker was connected somehow? Why--because Condon got all upset with the charges against Red Johson and Gow (Jafsies House of Facts) as if RED was his son-in-law? Doesnt add up? Gardner thought that one avenue of connection to Hacker with the Sha-toe Inn/Palisades crowd did not pan out in spite of Ralph going to HS with maybe Liepold married to Jane Faulkner. Another interesting connection could be Krippendorf (think Harry Potter): - Krippendorf, Willie—(see Jones) J210-211; FBI 358; FBI 365; TW112 and Leo Roden who went to HS with Ralph.
35 yrs olde/ 155 lbs/ looks CJ/ leaves for Munich April 1932? Buddy of Ralph Hacker?
- Ellerson had boxing connections with Bugsy Kruger on the NJ Boxing Commision per FBI files--think Al Reich and Owney Madden?
- Ellerson had Taxi connections with A & M Taxi in Englewood--think Thomas Brennan/Ernie Brinkert?
- Maybe Ralph picked up the ladder from Abe Samuelsohn for JFC?
- Ellerson was "passing out $20s" at the Sha-toe Inn on March 1st.
.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 27, 2007 19:27:54 GMT -5
Another important fact that I forgot to mention above was that Lindbergh controlled the investigation. He is the one who got the FBI in hot water after they began "sniffing" around the Morrow Employees. He had forbidden it, refused to lie-detect them, and, according to Lt. Keaton - was the reason for the case being bungled in the first place. Schwarzkopf followed Lindbergh's instructions like a little puppy dog.
Divide and conquer?
Even in '38 Ellerson was singing praises about Lindbergh for keeping the Police in check as it concerned the Employees. It was noted in a Memo to Hoffman that Ellerson was very loyal to Lindbergh as a result.
I assume this question was meant for Gary but I'd have to say its a good question - especially to someone who hasn't suspected him and is unprepared for it. For me, I think if you (anyone) suspects and "inside" connection then no one is above suspicion until properly eliminated. I don't think Ellerson ever was although he isn't high on my list of candidates. I've always believed the target date was meant for the weekend coming but for some reason they struck out on Tuesday nite. This could be because they were alerted by the "inside connection." So I suppose, if Ellerson was that connection, he could have been the one to tip them off.
I think Rick is alluding to the possibility that Ellerson's Green Ford Coupe may have been utilized so he claimed to have seen this car as an alibi that he could not be in two places at the same time AND to pre-empt the Police suspicion concerning the fact he owned one.
Now don't forget, (I think it was Sue who first brought this to our attention), Rev. Vincent G. Burns's church was in Fort Lee. The confession he was given, if he was given one, basically made him lose his mind. Regardless the area seems to come up alot - but then again......
Anyway, the NJSP told the FBI that Hacker was "above suspicion" and blamed Lt. Finn for the mix-up concerning Rudolph Hacker and Ralph Hacker. However - the NJSP told the FBI a lot of things....some were true - and some were not.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jun 27, 2007 20:20:07 GMT -5
Rick~ Do U suppose CJ "supposedly" clearing Betty and by extention, Red, is Condon just catering to what he knew CAL wanted?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 27, 2007 20:49:16 GMT -5
Hi Mairi/ of course I dont know? But William Norris quessed that Condon was a known quantity to the Morrow family interests prior to the LKH? Maybe thru Dwight Jr. or the other bastard son if there was one? William the Pharmacist? But it is also possible that Condon was a known quantity to Lindbergh as well? Why else would he be shopping in Abe Samuelsohn's shoppe, his olde buddy, just one week ahead of the kidnap and then forget his name? Of course JFC would do exactly what he was told by CAL and more. You dont really think JFC held back the $20K all by his lonesome driving over to St. Raymonds with CAL do you? Not too likely/
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Jun 28, 2007 5:29:04 GMT -5
Fingering Ellerson:
Henry Charles Ellerson was a gardener before he became a chauffeur, according to Joyce Milton, page 258.
Vincent Godfrey Burns says the man that came to his church on Easter Sunday 1932 was a Morrow gardener.
Arthur Jones says in HIS letter that one of the gang was a Charles somebody or other.
Also, Joyce Milton says, again on page 258, that according to FBI records, a well-respected Morrow employee came foward to say Ellerson was involved in the crime. He or she was someone employed with the Morrows for 25 years. Figuring this out may not be difficult. Does anyone know if the FBI records says who this is?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jun 28, 2007 14:39:26 GMT -5
It seems to me that there may have been something wrong with the child's health more than just moderate Rickets and hair nodes. If this was the case, I wonder if this would cast a different slant on why CAL threw up the shield around all the employees. They might let something slip(?) Gow and Anne, baby was "perfectly normal" Planned for a long time, "for a year already" with Highfields as the target? What's the arithmetic on that? Did Highfields have the foundation dug that long before? Sounds something of a ruse to me . That and "we warn you" having same equipment as police communications.
|
|
|
Post by rita on Jun 29, 2007 18:47:18 GMT -5
Wasn't there a radio operator on both the Curtis and Condon Boats? I think real evidence in this case was either destroyed or ignored, but there is a mountain of it including that of Violets feeding info to the tabloids. On the surface or just glancing at this case New Jersey's Courts hit a new justice low by elevating fiction into courtroom debate. You cannot ascertain words from over a 100 feet distance let alone voice characteristics needed to identify a voice, and two years later is reaching fairy tale level.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jul 1, 2007 2:11:46 GMT -5
Thank you for the the response people have given here. I see Michael's point that if Ellerson was involved why would he point fingers? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to fade in the sunset ?
The first time I read his car was destroyed in a fire it presented a red flag of question. Then again destroying forensic evidence back then seems an unlikely quest.
The question, " What does Ellerson bring to the table?" is basically my question and asked by Kevin once again. I believe even the strongest believers in Hauptmann as the coordinator of the crime have not snubbed there could have been a source within to contribute . I think a stop and look at Ellerson is a must regardless if we only get so far. Personally I question if truly Ellerson was the source of Green's story. Green's papers were destroyed in a wet basement only furthers the question of an accurate account.
Sue brings up Vincent Burns. Her input is interesting. I've read discussion before on this forum about him. I didn't catch before the grounds gardener was this person that came to Burns. I think I will look back on this some more.
|
|
|
Post by rita on Jul 1, 2007 17:59:39 GMT -5
There are too many divergent issues in this to be ignored as the Hunterdown Court did. I think as Sue refers to the Morrow Gardner, that so meting important to the case happened there. There were many statements pointing to something at least as a starting point at Morrow House. We know that Dwight Sr. warned not to leave Elizabeth alone with Charley, but why? What happened at Morrow House seems to be a starting point to what followed with Charleys disappearance. Beside the police questioning, what motivated Violet to commit suicide, or was it not a suicide as sleeping would have been more of a choice.
I seem to recall from some articles on the Morrow Lindbergh House employees both came forward with information that was ignored by Schwartzkopf's loyalists. I forgot the name of the detective that searched Lindbergh's furnace, but there had to be more that just suspicion to do that.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Aug 20, 2007 7:08:18 GMT -5
Seems like he would be a good candidate to know what happened, whether or not he was an actual participant. Behn's theory, if I remember right, was that he drove Elizabeth to Hopewell on Saturday. Then he is back again on Tuesday driving Betty. It's too bad both trips weren't looked into further. Then again, that's where we are with most leads in the case.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Aug 20, 2007 11:22:03 GMT -5
Hi Rita/ maybe this is a better thread to consider Violet Sharpe for now since it encompasses the "servants"? Its very interesting that only Red Johnson and Violet Sharpe earn trips to Hopewell among the servants as far as we can tell. Both of them just happened to have their initial interviews with the Newark NJ PD--Red up in Hartford by Det Schiable, Sgt McGrath and O'Neil. Apparently, Violet was interviewd by Schiable, McGrath and Strong at Next Day on March 10th? (The Lindbergh Case by Jim Fisher on page 47 and 48 says Hopewell?) Both Red and Violet claim at first that they were " at the movies" on Tuesday nite March 1st? But this odd claim does not fly and they both have to alter their alibis. Red gets a trip to Hopewell on or about 19 March and then is sent to Ellis Island with a $50,000 bail? Violets trip to Hopewell, if correct, is postponed until April 13th so that her room can be searched. Violet is protected by Mrs Morrow in the same manner as CAL protects Red, Ollie and Betty? I think we should note that all these servants of interest seem to have some unexplained cash on hand? Red, broke on his keister, buys his green Chrysler coupe just 2 weeks before the snatch, Violet has $1600 in savings and Charlie Ellerson is handing out $20 bills at the Sha-toe on the very nite of the snatch? Hmmm--very interesting. Later on the quilts get to Ellerson and he talks to Gov. Hoffman. - Why was Reds bail so astronomical if he was proven innocent?
- Why did Condon make such a big point to defend Red?
- Why did Violet get 30 days vacation between interviews? So her sister Edna would to have time leave for England on April 6th?
- Was it Condon's light green Ford coupe Ellerson saw in the driveway as per the Jones' letter?
|
|
|
Post by rita on Aug 20, 2007 22:16:03 GMT -5
There were claims that Ellerso had given Gov.Hoffman an affadavit that he saw Charley lying on the drive bleeding with Elizabeth raving uncontrolably. Considering that Dwight Sr. warned not to let Elizabeth alone with Charley, and Elerson diving Elizabeth to Hopewell on saturday we certainly have something to consider as a possible cause of Charley's dissapearance.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Aug 21, 2007 7:14:52 GMT -5
There were claims that Ellerso had given Gov.Hoffman an affadavit that he saw Charley lying on the drive bleeding with Elizabeth raving uncontrolably. Considering that Dwight Sr. warned not to let Elizabeth alone with Charley, and Elerson diving Elizabeth to Hopewell on saturday we certainly have something to consider as a possible cause of Charley's dissapearance. I've given Behn's theory on this a lot of consideration. A Saturday death in some ways makes more sense than a Tuesday night snatch. For me, it takes Gow off the hook as an accomplice/associate - which I've always felt she was too close to Charlie to be involved. Also it explains some of the ways in which the media was handled by CAL. Whether it occurred that Saturday or that Tuesday - Ellerson would have been a key person to talk to. And like so many other instances in the case, that didn't happen.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 21, 2007 18:54:24 GMT -5
In terms of the Employees we can thank CAL for the lack of proper investigations. Ellerson himself held him in high regard for just this reason, that is, protecting the Employees. Having said that - thanks to Governor Hoffman we actually do have a little more to look at concerning Ellerson. Additionally, its obvious certain things were obtain from these people that was never put down in writing in Statement form... For example: Banks/Sharp. There's information discussed as a matter of fact that no one appears to have disclosed in the source material.
Problem for me is that a Saturday death makes everyone an accessory who says they saw Charles Jr. alive after that. Additionally, would each and everyone of them keep their mouths shut forever? Maybe someone else was there and they kept that quiet but the child dying on Saturday?
I do believe Green had an affidavit... But we don't know for sure who it came from and for me - I need to see things myself before drawing any conclusions. Furthermore, we are relying on Green's memory about what was in it.
As for Gow - I don't believe she should ever have been "off the hook" under any circumstances....In fact, no one in that house should be.
|
|
|
Post by rita on Aug 22, 2007 23:21:01 GMT -5
Their silence would be made easier by employees made to believe they were helping Elizabeth to not endure blame for Charley in her fragile mental and physical condition, but the after the two year period they couldn't change testimony, becoming complicit in Charley's death. Remember Bette Gow would have now been guilty of of a possible more serious charge, and any lack of silence by any employee may have brought Lindbergh's personel police department to bear against them as Hauptmann accomplices. All employees could have been deathly afraid to change their story especially after Whatley and Violets deaths.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 24, 2008 16:48:43 GMT -5
Some interesting points found within an undated Memo found within the Governor's files: 1. E., while operating automobile, stopped car at request of butler before baby was discovered, which stop, it was subsequently revealed, was within fifty feet of where baby was found. This stop was the only one made on that particular trip. Butler requested stop to perform act of nature. The place where the baby was found is the only spot from which you can see L. home.
5. E. claims that he does not believe the job could have been accomplished by use of ladder due to weakness thereof and ladder built in sections did not fit each other. he stated that it was possible for the baby to be carried down stairs, out the front door, without being seen by anyone sitting in the dining room or living room. E. also stated that after discovery of kidnapping the ladders were found quite a distance from the rear of the house. He could not understand how the kidnapper could carry the baby and also the ladders for such a distance under such circumstances. "E" = Ellerson "L" = Lindbergh Point #1 is self explanatory. I think it bolsters one's opinion that perhaps Whateley was the "insider." Point #5 is interesting. I believe it echoes either the common belief held at the time that the ladder wasn't sturdy enough OR that it was only used in (2) sections as opposed to Kevin's theory that all (3) were actually used. It supports a position that perhaps the stairs were used as an exit. We have often heard the "stairs" theory and this gives it "hope" because it shows it was possible. Next, his observation concerning the carrying of the two joined sections, the third section, the chisel, and the baby at the same time is a very good point. Footprints only led away from the house so it seems all of these items were indeed carried away to the spot they were found in one trip.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 24, 2008 21:22:01 GMT -5
The opinion of those who express doubt regarding the ladder would be far more credible if they had actually tried to climb it.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jun 26, 2008 9:50:43 GMT -5
Some interesting points found within an undated Memo found within the Governor's files: 1. E., while operating automobile, stopped car at request of butler before baby was discovered, which stop, it was subsequently revealed, was within fifty feet of where baby was found. This stop was the only one made on that particular trip. Butler requested stop to perform act of nature. The place where the baby was found is the only spot from which you can see L. home.
5. E. claims that he does not believe the job could have been accomplished by use of ladder due to weakness thereof and ladder built in sections did not fit each other. he stated that it was possible for the baby to be carried down stairs, out the front door, without being seen by anyone sitting in the dining room or living room. E. also stated that after discovery of kidnapping the ladders were found quite a distance from the rear of the house. He could not understand how the kidnapper could carry the baby and also the ladders for such a distance under such circumstances. "E" = Ellerson "L" = Lindbergh Point #1 is self explanatory. I think it bolsters one's opinion that perhaps Whateley was the "insider." Point #5 is interesting. I believe it echoes either the common belief held at the time that the ladder wasn't sturdy enough OR that it was only used in (2) sections as opposed to Kevin's theory that all (3) were actually used. It supports a position that perhaps the stairs were used as an exit. We have often heard the "stairs" theory and this gives it "hope" because it shows it was possible. Next, his observation concerning the carrying of the two joined sections, the third section, the chisel, and the baby at the same time is a very good point. Footprints only led away from the house so it seems all of these items were indeed carried away to the spot they were found in one trip. Personally, I always thought that the ladder was delivered to Highfields down the driveway to the first cut off where it was later found? But, what about the reports of Ollie Whateley headed downtowne (in a car?) to " get a flashlight"? What stores were open after 10pm on a Tuesday nite? Shopko/ Wallmart? Didnt Whateley run smack into the Chief of Police of Hopewell, who at first drew his pistol thinking OW was the snatcher? Is this odd story one reason WHY CAL didnt want the servants interviewed? II. If Ellerson felt the guilts about the LKC, then maybe it had to do with his car that caught on fire around the time of the baby's discovery on Mt. Rose Hill? What more do we know about this car, either his or Morrow's, being destroyed around Palisades NJ? Isnt this too near Fort Lee? Who reported it?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 29, 2008 15:39:53 GMT -5
Suicide, while the most studied of mental disorders has never been adequately resolved, and the most reasoning for that is because"suicidal" is immediately transferred to another category, such as "depression" or "terminally ill" or "guilt." The psychiatric community does not want to recognize that suicide is in itsel a disorder and so lumps that disorder into other abnormalities. What is known though, is that suicide does fall into several categories, but I hope you get the meaning, that a suicidal nature has to exist also. For example of the millions of people facing certain death in the last fifty years from terminal cancer only about two percent have even considered suicide, much less accomplished it. Life has a built in will to live, and that is evident in plants and trees and even in inanimate things like rocks (sub-atomic studies have proven this - see me for sources if interested). I have always believed that the cyanide Violet kept was her own personal posession, and I've never seen evidence to detract from that. That would fit correctly with the belief that one of suicidal nature (see above - according to psychiatrists that is not yet a proven inclination) tends to hoard methods of self-execution. There are many known examples (though again the medical community refuses to accept them) but one of the best is that the guy who hung himself in the bar on Halloween had two plastic bags in his pocket - another method but the same result. One of the reasons that will put a suicidal over the edge is lack of attention. From Violet's history as we know it, she seemed to be a very attention seeker. If she was ostracized by the other members of the Morrow staff (and perhaps most importantly Septimus) because of her answers to the investigators, that would be enough to have her bite the bullet and pull the plug. Just as street thought about the situation, I'd guess she believed the poison wouldn't really kill her or she wouldn't have walked downstairs to be found - she'd have died in a closet. If you're really intent on killing yourself, whether in 1932 or 2008, it's not too hard to find a tall building or a gun.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 29, 2008 15:41:54 GMT -5
Oops - that was meant to be posted on Violet - another reason for suicide, you're just stupid!
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 29, 2008 15:49:54 GMT -5
Retraction - "I'm just stupid." So here I go ...up to the roof...whew, lotta steps, hey here's a fire hose. I could put that into floor fourteen and turn it on and scoot. Better not but, "which way do you turn these red handles?" Sirens commotion...
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 30, 2008 6:04:06 GMT -5
Sharp's "suicide" has always been one of those things that if it makes sense explains a lot but if it doesn't then it just raises more issues then we need.
Jack you make a great point....why did she run down stairs saying what she said? Foster made a report that someone on the Englewood Staff believed she had been murdered.
Couldn't that be an option under the circumstances?
And if it is, does it have to have anything to do with the kidnapping?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 1, 2008 16:37:28 GMT -5
Was Violet murdered? That comment made me think a lot because, though it's come up some in the past, I never considered it seriously. It seems like if she would have been murdered there would have been a struggle, but if it was staff that killed her they would have had plenty of time to straighten the room, and probably her room wasn't held as a crime scene. If it was suicide, you'd think, as an attention seeker, she'd have left more word of it than just the one letter. Her attitude certainly changed after they found the baby's body, and even before that she showed signs of severe stress by her illness. On serious thinking I guess I'd go along with murder. LKC was a hot issue all around the world and you can imagine what it must have been to the Morrow household. If the staff thought (and possibly knew things we don't) she had a lot to do with it, which perhaps she did - easily murder, and if it was murder that explains her walking downstairs to either get help, or show she was fatally sick. That doesn't explain why she would have kept cyanide (seems to me it had been purchased ten years prior in NY) and kept it - but you may know about the silver polish more than me, Michael. And in response to your "more issues that we need," Sharp's suicide explains nothing, but, as you say, Sharp's murder explains a lot! It's also super-directional.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 1, 2008 23:18:51 GMT -5
I think its something to consider. I don't think someone forced her to drink this, rather, if she was poisoned - I would think someone mixed the crystals in her drink without her knowledge. I don't know if this is even possible, although slipping someone "something" in a drink happens all the time - and happened back then too. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Finn_(drugs)Odds are she killed herself, but her actions both before and afterwards, in my opinion, don't seem to suggest she really wanted to die - for any reason.
|
|