Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2014 20:21:32 GMT -5
I hear you LJ and I would love to find something that solid. The Myoclonic type of seizure which is the mildest one and short in duration. It would usually occur in the morning when waking up. No one outside the immediate family circle would have had the opportunity to witness this. This is not a fall down, thrashing around with teeth clenched type of seizure. It is mainly twitching which was brief in nature.
Charlie's world was limited in scope. Englewood, Hopewell, North Haven Maine and doctor visits sums it up. Control and privacy ruled. The only solid proof would probably be found at Johns Hopkins patient archives. I doubt we could just walk in and get permission to see their patient records. And people who did know would have taken that knowledge to the grave and that includes the servants. Such comprises the loyalty to the Morrows and the power of Lindbergh's name.
The changed diet is all that can be offered but I think it is a strong indicator of something serious. The kidnappers realized it too once it was published in the papers and they played it like a trump card in those ransom notes. Perhaps those ransom notes are the most solid proof we will ever have.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Jan 22, 2014 20:29:58 GMT -5
Amy, could you post the two different diets here for us to compare. Sorry, if you already did somewhere else.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Jan 22, 2014 20:35:52 GMT -5
Michael, why was a second Berryman sketch drawn, and do you have dates for the different sketches?
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jan 22, 2014 20:50:28 GMT -5
Amy, you're quite right about the limited scope of CAL Jr.'s world and interactions. Just something solid, somewhere, to indicate what may've been the problem. One of the Morrow servants writing something down and putting it in a safe deposit box, I dunno. After all, within 10-15 years of the kidnapping, Lindbergh was gone, living abroad, and the bloom had long since gone off his name. Were people still so scared of him, did he still wield the kind of power to keep everyone completely quiet, even in totally private, confidential, do-not-open-till-my-death circumstances? Not that I'm disagreeing with you; just playing devil's advocate. I do believe there was something physically wrong with CAL Jr., but there's a difference between belief/gut-feeling and certainty. I mean, maybe there is indeed some Mersman-esque discovery still out there still waiting to be found with regards to this. Who knows...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2014 22:29:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kjones on Jan 22, 2014 23:05:30 GMT -5
I have included two videos showing children with absence seizures. I hope this is okay to do, I never really know the rules about the internet. Some of you may have already seen these but I believe these two are typical of children with this type of seizure disorder. Working in the hospital I will tell you that I have called other nurses, residents and attendings to a bedside to witness activity in a child. Everyone has an opinion and often they are not same. Fortunately, we have come along way in diagnosing and treating these children. www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzIs8YeafZM&feature=relatedwww.youtube.com/watch?v=PcmHtuQ4ZtI&feature=relatedIf Charlie was having seizures, I wonder if his actually starting preschool was what might have lead to him being seen by a specialist. Charlie would now be with trained teachers and aides who might have had noticed his pattern of seizure activity. In Hour of Gold, Anne writes to Mrs Lindbergh about Charlie and his first few days of preschool. She mentions the teachers had an all day meeting and came up with a plan to have him play separately from the others under constant supervision. If Elizabeth or others in her family suspected something was wrong, those at the school might have confirmed their fears. Elizabeth may have had conversations with Anne, Charles or both about these concerns. The rumor is that Charlie was seen in December by a specialist at JH. In another letter to Mrs L in December she writes "the only thing the doctor says that's wrong with him is that he needs a haircut". I don't know why but that line has always bothered me, it just doesn't seem like it belongs in the letter. Almost like saying I know you too are worried but everything is okay. The videos of Charlie taken during the summer of 1931 show a very healthy, inquisitive and I might say beautiful little boy. But I think we can all agree that appearances are deceiving, one only has to look as far as Charlies dad.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jan 22, 2014 23:27:32 GMT -5
This is fascinating stuff. I had no idea that a seizure could look so innocuous. And I agree wholeheartedly that appearances, especially where Charles Lindbergh was concerned, can be very deceiving. Speaking of which, do you happen to know if any physical changes occur over time in children with these kinds of conditions? I ask because I'm trying to incorporate the absence of more recent photos of CAL Jr. into this whole thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2014 9:40:47 GMT -5
kjones,
Thanks for your excellent post. I think the absence seizures are probably right on the money with Charlie. Something started this ball rolling and it very well could have been when he started attending the Little School. Once he was around other children, this temporary disconnect with his surroundings would have stood out and been quietly questioned amongst the staff. This is part of Anne's diary entry dated November 16, 1931. I agree with your evaluation of this entry.
I really feel that they went to Johns Hopkins to have Charlie evaluated also. His treatment plan was probably being recorded as part of the research being done there. After the loss of Charlie, Anne searched for the value Charlie's short life brought to the people around him and also while being treated at JH, his contribution in a larger way to the world around him. His short life had significance. She wanted that remembered.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 23, 2014 10:23:11 GMT -5
So, we have two against one that Burke introduced them. From where I am sitting I don't see any reason that both Betty and Red would lie about something like this. More than likely he did introduce them. Frankly, the jury is out for me. I am still reeling from the fact I've read this information numerous times and missed what he told Police about this. Either that or it didn't process. It's possible since I believed I knew the answer to this already I cruised over this part thinking I knew what he would say about it. And so here starts the process of the various combinations concerning the "ifs" depending upon who is telling the truth. How long was Burke employed by the Morrows? 13 years. Michael, why was a second Berryman sketch drawn, and do you have dates for the different sketches? I wish I could give you a perfect answer here but I have none. I tried to pursue this at one time but let it go because it was causing me too much time without any results. The answer could lie in one of many places, but it is not at the NJSP Archives. I found the "original" sketches there, and when I did I was a little shocked concerning how "different" (IMO), they looked compared to what is now the accepted version of the sketch. For me, the "original" looks more general then the other one we always see. For that reason I've used the word "mutated" and perhaps that's not something I should have done without proof. And so I will give you what I do know then allow you to draw your own conclusions.... Some sources claim it was drawn by Cliff Berryman but these are incorrect (innocently I might add). It was his son James who made the infamous sketch. Asst. Director Lester said that "three months" before Hauptmann's arrest, J. Edgar Hoover sent Berryman to sit down with Condon and produce this sketch. He claimed it took more then 2 days when finally Condon said: " That's the man to whom I paid the ransom money." The Agents were all given a copy of this sketch and showed it during interviews. A copy of this sketch was leaked to the press, and it matches the one I've deemed "original." (I have a NYT article to support this but I believe it would be a copyright violation if I scanned it). Here is a link to one Ronelle has uploaded onto her site: www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/berryman.jpgHere is a link to Jim Fisher's upload: jimfisher.edinboro.edu/lindbergh/photos/grave_j.jpgThe caveat is that while working with Condon Berryman drew "hundreds" of sketches. It might be the one we often see was among them. I don't know. But it isn't the one at the NJSP Archives accepted as the "original" and wasn't the one leaked to the papers to show Hauptmann's resemblance to "John." If Charlie was having seizures, I wonder if his actually starting preschool was what might have lead to him being seen by a specialist. Charlie would now be with trained teachers and aides who might have had noticed his pattern of seizure activity. I can never get past the denial of those who shrug off Anne's situation while flying across the continent when 7 months pregnant. Lindbergh flew so fast the gauges broke. They were both oxygen deprived, and Anne would admit she was also breathing in fumes. The "story" is she dealt with it like a Trooper, and the Baby was born completely healthy in every way. If anyone questions this version then they are branded a "Conspiracy Theorist Nut."
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jan 23, 2014 16:16:37 GMT -5
For me, that flight while Anne was pregnant is the key to the whole thing, where it all began. What's so conspiratorial or "out there" about it? We know she participated in the flight, we know she was so sick from it that she had to be carried off the plane, and we know (now) that this is all really bad for a fetus, usually resulting in severe developmental issues. I did have a problem with the home movies of CAL Jr., showing what seemed to be a perfectly normal toddler, but those videos kjones posted have caused me to rethink that: These videos are very reminiscent of the Lindbergh home movies in some respects; I mean, without sound, you wouldn't know, just from a visual standpoint, whether or not there was anything going on with those other kids either. The absence of photos of CAL Jr. though, post-Spring of '31: If he was indeed suffering from a condition like the one kjones showed us, would there be some physical manifestation of it? Or could there have been another condition that needed to be hidden? We all know about CAL Jr.'s unusually large head, and I seem to remember Anne writing something about a dream she had, where she was freaking out about not being able to brush the baby's hair right... I mean, maybe the hair needed to be arranged just so, to cover enlarged or swollen areas of the head? Brings one back to that enlarged skull and the open fontanel mentioned in the doctor's report, like maybe there was something wrong with the head that was starting to show, hence no photos after a certain point (Spring, '31). And this is setting aside the fact that the skull bones were so soft after death that a stick could poke through. In any case, if Betty Morrow or anybody else with regular access to the baby never said or mentioned anything about any physical problems with CAL Jr., it doesn't mean they didn't exist. Their silence on the matter would've been quite natural: Not only would Lindbergh have been furious had these revelations gotten out, but the media attention generated by this wouldn't have been wanted by anyone, in any case. So going off of this--I mean, not that she would've done it as part of any potential kidnapping plot--but even so, Betty Morrow could've taken it upon herself to ask the very sympathetic sounding Dr. Van Ingen ("Call my private line anytime with any further questions.") to supply as normal a physical report on CAL Jr. as ethically possible, just so the family could have something documented, something official on paper to point to, should the rumors about the baby's physical state get out of hand. Again, Betty Morrow wouldn't, in my view, have done this with any kind of knowledge that, say, the kidnapping was actually a ruse propagated by someone who didn't want a defective child. Rather, I think she would've realized something was "in the air" about CAL Jr.'s general health and could've had Van Ingen supply a report that the baby was perfectly fine (more or less), simply because, as far as she was concerned, what possible need was there for the press and public to know otherwise? General protection of her family. Maybe. And as to CAL Jr. being diagnosed at Johns Hopkins: I don't know that Lindbergh would've wanted to involve such a large, well-known and public institution. He was, however, working with Dr. Carrel around this time, so, instead of Johns Hopkins, could Carrel have privately and informally diagnosed some problems with CAL Jr., thereby circumventing (and explaining the current lack of) any kind of medical paper trail? This seems more likely, more in keeping with Lindbergh's secretive, trust-virtually-no-one nature.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Bristow on Jan 24, 2014 12:27:03 GMT -5
If Carrel and Lindbergh were working on a artificial heart pump there would be the acceptance of human physical inabilities. Yet trending is that Lindbergh would have little acceptance of the probable signs of poor health from Charlie. I don't buy that Lindbergh would kill his child. Almost borderline ridiculous.
I am not saying Lindbergh isn't a strange but to believe strongly in eugenics and move to a murderer of someone as a son is a stretch. If I believed Lindbergh was behind the kidnapping or fake kidnapping it would be more plausible to me it was for some kind of testing and evaluation that could be dangerous and opposed by that day society and even Anne. That he would have no choice but to steal his own son. I am not saying I believe that but I would believe that before accepting Lindbergh planned a hoax for the specific reason of murder.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 24, 2014 17:53:35 GMT -5
I don't buy that Lindbergh would kill his child. Almost borderline ridiculous. Let me ask you this... We've been talking about the trans-continental flight when Anne was 7 months pregnant, deprived of the proper amount of oxygen, and suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning (not to mention the amount of g-force it takes to break gauges). Let's say there is a version of this story where Anne is begging Lindbergh to land the plane because she is so ill, and Lindbergh refuses, risking his Wife's health, life, and his unborn child's life all because he doesn't want people to think either he or Anne is "weak." Would that change your mind any?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Bristow on Jan 25, 2014 0:34:13 GMT -5
Michael I don't think so. I can believe his dislike for weakness and can believe he would force her to toughen it out. This would be an example of stupidity. Now if you told me he continued the flight on the sole purpose to harm Anne that would represent the level of accusation made to purposely kill his child. The example you bring out more exemplifies his willingness to take unforgivable risks which I contend is more possible and proven in Lindbergh's history.
It is a shocking fact that he missed the banquet on the very night of the kidnapping. Lindbergh's actions that night and during the investigation all are suspicious. I believe all this but to step to murder is another matter. I would like to hear more about cummings, the nurse maid before Betty, and perhaps there is something missing that could make me go where you are. There is no one that studies the case and experience as you. So when you speak I listen. I have never counted Lindbergh out of the crime but if so for different reasons. I don't believe in the lone wolf. I didn't go to the dark side.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 25, 2014 8:47:43 GMT -5
Michael I don't think so. I can believe his dislike for weakness and can believe he would force her to toughen it out. This would be an example of stupidity. Now if you told me he continued the flight on the sole purpose to harm Anne that would represent the level of accusation made to purposely kill his child. The example you bring out more exemplifies his willingness to take unforgivable risks which I contend is more possible and proven in Lindbergh's history. While we disagree in theory I can see where you are coming from. One act does not equal the other and they are different. I think what I am attempting to do is show that based on a perceived weakness Lindbergh is willing to take monumental risk in order to erase it. While this does not mean he's a murderer, I would submit that if someone were to be - for the reasons we've discussed, this would establish a possible candidate for such. To sacrifice something important (such as your pregnant wife's health) rather then to do what "normal" people would do in order to exemplify a superior position. It shows he was willing to take it to the next level....from his own life when he flew the Atlantic to now his Wife and unborn child. And so I am certainly not saying he woke up one day then decided to murder his son. What we have here, in my opinion, are beliefs, then actions, then a progression of things all of which point in the direction of the extreme. It is a shocking fact that he missed the banquet on the very night of the kidnapping. Lindbergh's actions that night and during the investigation all are suspicious. I believe all this but to step to murder is another matter. I would like to hear more about cummings, the nurse maid before Betty, and perhaps there is something missing that could make me go where you are. There is no one that studies the case and experience as you. So when you speak I listen. I have never counted Lindbergh out of the crime but if so for different reasons. I don't believe in the lone wolf. I didn't go to the dark side. We agree more then you know. I think our only difference is that I cannot exclude this theory from consideration.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2014 10:29:44 GMT -5
I have been doing some reading about the 1930 Easter Day flight made when Anne was 7 months pregnant. Anne understood the flight was about setting a speed record for a coast to coast flight. They would make one stop to refuel in Kansas. It could be that the rest of the journey was spent flying at altitudes up to $15,000 feet. They are in an open cockpit plane while doing this. The plane could travel faster at this high altitude and a new record would be set by doing it this way. Lindbergh with all his knowledge of flight never gave any consideration to Anne or their unborn child. It was about showing that high altitude flying would be a faster way to fly long distances. Its this risk taking and willingness to push the envelope further all the time that is so dangerous. According to Dorothy Herrmann's book on Anne Lindbergh, page 65, Anne said with hindsight 40 years later flying during an advanced stage of pregnancy was possibly not the wisest thing to do. I think even if Anne would have had concern about making that flight she would not have mentioned it beforehand. Lindbergh expected her to be tough and she would not let him down or mess up the record he wanted to set. It was always CAL first in everything. He was Anne's center.
Michael, in Dorothy Herrmann's book on page 65 she also says, according to Leonard Mosely, a Lindbergh biographer, he claims that Anne admitted that rumors she had a nervous breakdown after this 1930 flight were actually true. I have read a newspaper account that she was still flying as late as 5 days before Charlie was born. Since this is a newspaper claim, I was wondering if there is any truth to the nervous breakdown or her flying so close to her due date. The newspaper was praising Anne for being such a strong woman and dedicated to faithfully flying with her husband almost up to the day Charlie was born.
I think that something needs to be said about the fact that CAL did nothing to provide protection for his wife and son when they started living in Princeton and then in Hopewell. Joyce Milton in her book, Loss of Eden, talks about a person looking in the windows at the farmhouse at Princeton. Anne is concerned about them being basically unprotected at that farmhouse. Then when they started staying weekends at Highfields instead of keeping the guard that was hired to protect the property from theft of materials while the house was being constructed, Charles then dismisses him in November of 1931. What does this say about CAL and what he thinks is more valuable, building materials or his family? I believe CAL was even warned by Dwight Morrow Sr. to have a guard for protection. All unheeded by CAL. Why??
I have ordered Lindbergh's book "Autobiography of Values". I am hoping this will give me a clearer picture of how this man's mind worked.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 27, 2014 8:41:06 GMT -5
Michael, in Dorothy Herrmann's book on page 65 she also says, according to Leonard Mosely, a Lindbergh biographer, he claims that Anne admitted that rumors she had a nervous breakdown after this 1930 flight were actually true. I have read a newspaper account that she was still flying as late as 5 days before Charlie was born. Since this is a newspaper claim, I was wondering if there is any truth to the nervous breakdown or her flying so close to her due date. The newspaper was praising Anne for being such a strong woman and dedicated to faithfully flying with her husband almost up to the day Charlie was born. Mosley's book points to HGHL. In my copy of that, on p8, there is a reference. No where does it say "nervous breakdown," and I am beginning to think this was just a general term used to describe an unknown malady. We do know she was suffering physically from that flight for the reasons we've mentioned. But as to her mental state I don't have anything I can point to. There is also the possibility the Mosley reference could stem from something other then what's in his book. The flight "5 days before" Charlie was born isn't something that rings a bell and something I cannot find. Is there any more to this story that might give me a jumping off point? I am glad you are looking at all of the sources concerning this flight because I think its pretty important and a window into many things. Hertog's version of the newspaper men getting in a circle and clapping doesn't jibe with my research. I would love to know her source for this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 12:32:34 GMT -5
I am posting the link to the newspaper article that mentions two flights that Anne supposedly took with Lindbergh in June. Personally, I can hardly imagine Anne being able to get into a plane cockpit at this time. Having been so sick after the April 30th flight should have been determent enough. Add to that the physical difficulty she would have encountered at this late time of her pregnancy just getting in and out of the plane safely would have been an enormous challenge. Then again, if Charles wanted her along, she would have went. news.google.com/newspapers?id=ZxVWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=h-IDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4194%2C5844280I am going to continue to search around on this topic. Anne's HGHL diary goes on a long silent hiatus. No entries starting from April 11 until May 12th. I have noticed this same type of gap whenever there is a crisis type situation going on. It doesn't mean she wasn't writing. I think many things landed on the editing room floor for privacy reasons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 14:11:49 GMT -5
I have been looking at the possibility of Elisabeth being depressed before Charlie's birth. I have read the above claim made by Dorothy Herrmann. I also went and looked for any possible entries made by Anne about Elisabeth at this time. In a letter Anne wrote to her sister Constance dated May 15th, Anne does mention that "Elisabeth, although improving, and she looks awfully pretty and well, discouraged about having to keep quiet for so long." I suppose the need for Elisabeth to keep quiet could refer to either her nerves or her heart condition. I did find this newspaper article about a medical response to Next Day Hill in the beginning of June 1930. The article says it was Elisabeth. See what you think. news.google.com/newspapers?id=jA8yAAAAIBAJ&sjid=AuQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5539%2C5365634If it is Elisabeth, she recovered well enough to travel several weeks later. Anne says in her diary post of June 23 and 24, 1930 that Elisabeth and Con will be leaving on Monday (June 30, 1930) to go to Maine. This could be part of what Herrmann refers to in her book. Dwight Jr. precedes Elisabeth and Con. He left for Maine the morning that Anne wrote this entry. Anne also mentions that her Dad (Dwight Sr.) would be leaving in a day or two to go to Mexico. I guess the only Morrow family member who sticks around to be with Anne is her mom.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 27, 2014 14:14:43 GMT -5
I am posting the link to the newspaper article that mentions two flights that Anne supposedly took with Lindbergh in June. Personally, I can hardly imagine Anne being able to get into a plane cockpit at this time. Having been so sick after the April 30th flight should have been determent enough. Add to that the physical difficulty she would have encountered at this late time of her pregnancy just getting in and out of the plane safely would have been an enormous challenge. Then again, if Charles wanted her along, she would have went. I am still not finding anything. That certainly doesn't mean it didn't happen, and I don't put it past Lindbergh to force her to go back up. I did find a Sgt. Grafenecker Report. He was assigned to make an investigation as to " Lindbergh Home AND Movements Prior to March 1st, 1932." Grafenecker went to the NY Times office looking up the articles in references to his movements. There's an entry for April 23 or 24, 1930 which only says: In Lakehurst, N. J., then to Washington, D. C. then to Miami Fla. Nothing else before mention of Charles Jr. Also, there are a couple of stories listed where someone writes " no" next to them. Obviously this means that story wasn't true. One being a December 10, 1930 entry that lists: " Col. Lindbergh personally hired 25 men to clear landing field at Princeton, N. J." Another on January 22, 1931: " In New York City, at motorboat show."
|
|
|
Post by chrisyb65 on Jan 27, 2014 14:35:02 GMT -5
If the transcontinental flight was really about speed, wouldn't it have been smarter to carry an extra 100 or so pounds of fuel rather than an extra 100 or so pounds of human life? This might have prevented the need for a stop in Kansas making the flight time even shorter.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 27, 2014 20:02:10 GMT -5
I have been looking at the possibility of Elisabeth being depressed before Charlie's birth. I have read the above claim made by Dorothy Herrmann. I also went and looked for any possible entries made by Anne about Elisabeth at this time. In a letter Anne wrote to her sister Constance dated May 15th, Anne does mention that "Elisabeth, although improving, and she looks awfully pretty and well, discouraged about having to keep quiet for so long." I suppose the need for Elisabeth to keep quiet could refer to either her nerves or her heart condition. I did find this newspaper article about a medical response to Next Day Hill in the beginning of June 1930. The article says it was Elisabeth. See what you think. There's so much going on at this time, and I would think in the absence of anything else this would be the default answer - especially due to the fact they're revealing what had been a secret. Unless it's the lessor of two (or three) evils. For me, in her fragile state she still chooses to leave Englewood - maybe not feeling better, but in an effort to escape Next Day Hill so she can. It's speculation of course but why leave the comfort of your own home with the best Doctors available nearby? If the transcontinental flight was really about speed, wouldn't it have been smarter to carry an extra 100 or so pounds of fuel rather than an extra 100 or so pounds of human life? This might have prevented the need for a stop in Kansas making the flight time even shorter. There is an answer for this, and I know I've read it but at this very moment I can't think of the specifics. I do know it wasn't just about speed but also altitude. And Anne wasn't just along for the ride. She was both navigator and co-pilot (although I don't know to what degree once she became sickened by the situation).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2014 21:33:36 GMT -5
Hertog gives no footnote for the last serveral statements where she claims the reporters applauded. She even adds that Anne smiled and waved at those reporters. All I can say is she must of taken some creative liberties with those remarks. She does have a footnote for the paragraph preceding her added remarks. She sights a New York Times article dated 4/21/30.
I have not found any other source describing this landing the way she does. None so far. They all say that Anne was carried from the plane ashen-faced with tears in her eyes and was placed into a waiting limo. No smiles, no waves. Lindbergh made a short statement and asked the reporters to leave. The few that were slower to depart saw Anne being physically removed and carried. I am not aware of any newspaper articles printing that Anne needed to be removed and carried from the plane.
The high-altitude flying was dangerous. Air pressure suits would not exist until 1934. The gas fumes being breathed in for 14 hours affects oxygen levels in the blood. Both Charles and Anne were wearing heated flying suits for the entire length of the trip which took 14 hours and 45 minutes. Not sure if this would be risky for an unborn child for 14 hours.
Its amazing that Charlie survived that flight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 12:05:41 GMT -5
Michael,since we have been discussing servants on this page I am going to post these comments and questions here. Perhaps there are answers you can share with me.
On March 1 when Betty learned she would be going to Hopewell she called Red Johnson to tell him she would not be able to see him that night. Betty was unable to reach Johnson at the boarding house. Betty says in her statement of March 10, 1932 that she left a message with Mrs. Sherman(boarding house)to have Johnson call her at Englewood. Betty also says that Mrs. Sherman was expecting Johnson any minute. Now, since Betty wasn't going to leave for at least an hour to go to Hopewell she must have expected Johnson to get back to her before she left.
So my questions are:
Concerning Mrs. Sherman - 1) When she was interviewed by LE (I am assuming she was), did she confirm receiving a call from Betty Gow and what time she received that call? 2) Does Mrs. Sherman say if Betty only reguested a call back to the Morrow house by Johnson or if Betty mentioned to her that she would be leaving Englewood and going to Hopewell? 3) Did Mrs. Sherman confirm giving Johnson the message to call Betty when he finally returned to the boarding house? Does she say what time Johnson returned to the boarding house on Tuesday, March 1?
Concerning Henry (Red) Johnson - 1) When interviewed by LE does Johnson confirm getting the message about Betty's call from Mrs. Sherman? If so, what time does he say he was given this message? 2) Did Johnson ever call the Morrow house on March 1? 3) If so did he speak to anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 9, 2014 10:24:36 GMT -5
So my questions are: Concerning Mrs. Sherman - 1) When she was interviewed by LE (I am assuming she was), did she confirm receiving a call from Betty Gow and what time she received that call? I know that she was because I had just recently read this in a Report. I haven't been able to find that Report yet because its not where I would have expected it to be, or I am overlooking it somehow (which does happen unfortunately). From memory she did confirm this. I did find her Statement to the Police which is dated April 15th but it asks nothing about this. And so this tells me the Report which I seek predates this Statement: Attachment DeletedAttachment DeletedI think its best to locate this Report before answering your other questions. I am sure I know the answers but I'd rather be able to say I am reading it straight from the record. Concerning Henry (Red) Johnsen - 1) When interviewed by LE does Johnsen confirm getting the message about Betty's call from Mrs. Sherman? If so, what time does he say he was given this message? In Red's March 8th Statement he says he was dropped off at 4PM by Captain Christiansen, and upon arriving Mrs. Sherman told him that his lady friend called in the forenoon for him to call Betty Gow at the Morrow home when he arrived home. According to what Mrs. Jung told Agent Seykora: Betty Gow came downstairs at 1 o'clock and said 'Marquerite, you know I have a date tonight with Henry and I have to go to Hopewell right away because the baby is worse. I did not reach Henry at the boarding house but I left a message that he should call up here, and I went downstairs and told Violet that when the call came in she should switch it upstairs to you.' At 5:30PM I went downstairs to Violet Sharpe and asked her if Henry called for Betty. She said that he did call but she forgot to switch the call upstairs but told him that Betty went to Hopewell. At 8PM I went to my husband's room at 96 Engle Street. Henry Johnson was sitting in my husband's room with my husband. I was surprised to see him there because he did not usually come there. He said 'Marguerite I don't want to disturb you long but I am going to Hartford tomorrow morning and I want to know why Betty could not keep the date with me tonight.' 2) Did Johnsen ever call the Morrow house on March 1? I'd have to say no because I haven't read anywhere (that I recall) which says he had. His Statement, for example, says he learned of it from the Newspaper, showed that to Sherman without any mention of a phone call to Next Day Hill.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2014 11:06:26 GMT -5
No problem! When you locate it and can post from it works for me.
I suspect that like Violet and Edna, Johnson is doing some lying about March 1 also.
Since Betty says that Henry has not called yet and she had to leave she lets Marguerite Junge known that she told Violet to switch Johnson's call to her when he calls. According to Junge, Violet says Johnson did call and she told him that Betty went to Hopewell. So is Violet lying here or is Johnson not saying he called Englewood that day? Could the phone call attributed to "Ernie" really have been Johnson calling Next Day Hill? When Violet told him Betty went to Hopewell to assist Anne with Charlie, might Johnson have asked Violet if she wanted to go out for the evening and she accepted. The reason I say this is because Violet says that she told "Ernie" to pick her up for their date at the same location where they met on February 28, 1932. She did not want to be seen at the Morrow home being picked up by Ernie. Why? As it happens, Ernie, who is supposed to be a stranger, actually comes to the Next Day Hill pantry door to pick up Violet. Huh?? How the heck does he know how to do this? Didn't Englewood have a watchman on duty that night? Wouldn't Ernie, who has never been at Next Day Hill before have needed to ask how to get to the pantry door? That is a large estate. I doubt there were signs saying "Pantry door turn here" on the property. It stands to reason that whoever called for Violet that night knew where to go to pick her up. Johnson would have known this because of his relationship with Betty Gow.
Have you ever come across any statements that Violet was seeing Red Johnson? I can really understand Violet wanting to keep something like this from coming out. To have this become known to Betty Gow and Mrs. Morrow may very well have resulted in her being dismissed from her job not to mention how this would have impacted her relationship with the other staff at Next Day Hill.
I can also see Johnson not wanting this to come out either. I am sure he wanted to go on seeing Betty Gow. Both Violet and Johnson had to lie about what they were doing the night of March 1. I think they both first said they had gone to a movie that night. Then they both changed their stories. The Junges ended up covering for Johnson but Violet had no one to back up her explanation for the evening of March 1 until after her death.
I think what was going on at Next Day Hill the day and evening of March 1 is just as important as what was going on at Highfields on March 1. Being able to have a clear picture of who was where when and who talked to who when between these two homes could prove helpful in understanding this crime.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 11, 2014 17:55:09 GMT -5
I suspect that like Violet and Edna, Johnson is doing some lying about March 1 also. Since Betty says that Henry has not called yet and she had to leave she lets Marquerite Junge known that she told Violet to switch Johnson's call to her when he calls. According to Junge, Violet says Johnson did call and she told him that Betty went to Hopewell. So is Violet lying here or is Johnson not saying he called Englewood that day? Could the phone call attributed to "Ernie" really have been Johnson calling Next Day Hill? I think I got your question confused. I thought you were asking if Red had called Englewood after learning about the crime. I am certain he did call after getting the message from Ms. Sherman, but let me recheck his statement so I can quote it for you.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 11, 2014 21:59:49 GMT -5
Sorry for the misunderstanding Amy.... I called the Morrow home from the corner drug store in Englewood and the lady who answered the phone told me that Betty Gow had left for Hopewell, N. J. and did not know when she would return to Engelwood. I then went to my home. (Finn Henrik Johnson, Statement, 3-8-32)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2014 17:53:02 GMT -5
No problem Michael!
So he did call on March 1 and Violet took that call. Hmmmmmm.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 8, 2019 9:29:43 GMT -5
But Betty and Ellerson arrived at Highfields at 1:00 - how could she have come downstairs at the Morrow residence at 1:00? Highfields was at least an hour away - correct? And it had been rainy, so the dirt roads were a mess which would have slowed everyone down a little more. It all depends on the source. Each one has the time a little different. On page 117 in V1 she claims in her statement of March 10, 1932, that she didn't arrive until 2PM. I think I list another source in V1 which gives yet another different time. Its part of the reason I try to mention all of the differences because what seems to happen over time is that "we" agree on a specific time without realizing there's other first hand accounts out there that differ from it.
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Feb 14, 2019 13:13:09 GMT -5
Last month I went to UCLA and viewed the Hoage collection.
It's minuscule by comparison to the NJSP archives but the 4-5 hours I was there weren't nearly enough.
They don't let you photocopy like NJSP; you have to make arrangements for them to do it for you.
Some documents are certainly duplicative of what's at NJSP. Anyway, I have some notes on this topic...
March 3 1932 statement by Betty Gow.
To James Morell Frank Brex at Hopewell.
"I left Englewood at half past ten with the Morrow chauffeur in a small Chevrolet roadster car. We didn't make any stops, went straight here and arrived here by two oclock"
Later on statement PG.14 she states "we stopped in a drug store." "I bought something for the baby's cold that Mrs. Lindbergh told me to get"
I was surprised that she contradicts herself in the same statement about whether a stop was made! Also that the car used was apparently Ellerson's personal car and not one of the Morrow family cars as I had assumed since it was a member of staff driving...
|
|