jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 7, 2016 5:02:05 GMT -5
Looks fishy to me. There's an incorrect total amount. There's the word "deposit" used many times when there was no deposit made. There are girls searching for the correct "deposit ticket" that wasn't for a deposit. Sounds like CYA.
Was the detectives handwriting checked against "J.J. Faulkner"'s ? Especially Buster's?
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jul 7, 2016 16:20:23 GMT -5
Looks fishy to me. There's an incorrect total amount. There's the word "deposit" used many times when there was no deposit made. There are girls searching for the correct "deposit ticket" that wasn't for a deposit. Sounds like CYA. Was the detectives handwriting checked against "J.J. Faulkner"'s ? Especially Buster's? I would cut the detective some slack in his stretching the meaning of the word "deposit" in this report. Police in general were not great writers, then or now. Perhaps technically Keaten used the word "deposit" too broadly, but remember this was a unique historical situation that many of today's Americans probably can't conceive of. Everyone in the country was forced to hand in their physical gold or gold notes or certificates, excepting a relatively small amount, to a bank regulated by the federal government, or face criminal charges for "hoarding." ("Hoarding" was a term the Roosevelt administration used for Americans holding on to to their own private gold assets.) The result was that the Federal Reserve Banks became the depository for the bulk of the nation's gold and gold assets. The paper fiat currency received in exchange was NOT of equal value, because it was subject to loss of value because of inflation, as Roosevelt's economic planners had designed. So those who followed the new law could be loosely said to have deposited their gold assets to the federal government.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 7, 2016 17:03:07 GMT -5
There's an incorrect total amount. That's the correct amount. $2990 was found. Once it was determined the J.J. Faulkner deposit slip was the one used then they had to try to figure the extra $10 out. One suggestion was that Faulkner made a mistake and another was that the extra $10 came in from a different source. There's the word "deposit" used many times when there was no deposit made. There are girls searching for the correct "deposit ticket" that wasn't for a deposit. Sounds like CYA. Both Finn and Wilson refer to exchanges as deposits, and vice-versa as well.
|
|
|
Post by Despina KARLIAFTIS on Jul 13, 2016 2:29:41 GMT -5
Manny manny sorriew , please I am in Greece, Doyou know something for Constantinos Maratos? I don;t speak very well Eglish, and he
was a person, who we search for him, from 1916, beacause he xaw oyr relatine. Maybe you khow somthing for him? thank you very much.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 13, 2016 5:05:26 GMT -5
Despina,
Τι έχει βρεθεί έχει αναρτηθεί σε αυτό το νήμα:
lindberghkidnap.proboards.com/thread/1000/greek-connection
Σε αυτό θα βρείτε τα έγγραφα γι 'αυτόν. Θα πρέπει να ενταχθούν στο Διοικητικό Συμβούλιο προκειμένου να τους δει. Εν τω μεταξύ, αν δεν σας πειράζει να μοιράζονται ό, τι γνωρίζεις εδώ μπορώ να σας πω είμαστε όλοι ενδιαφέρονται για το τι μπορεί να έχετε.
Ευχαριστώ.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 15, 2016 10:23:43 GMT -5
Despina:
Nothing new for Constantinos. Is Pat Matter OK?
Jack
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 25, 2018 15:50:44 GMT -5
You just don't let your "fall guy" walk around for 2 1/2 years. The whole point is to take the heat away, to misdirect LE. That's not what happened. Hauptmann is a nobody and he is not vested, the obvious choice would be to eliminate him ( with incriminating evidence) early on, case closed. That's how it always is done. The point of a fall guy is he does not know anything. Hauptmann probably had nothing specific he could tell aside from Fisch.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 25, 2018 19:54:41 GMT -5
That's your rationale?? That's what exonerates a major case suspect? The supposedly honest woman who spent the proceeds from a kidnapping without ever questioning the source? Who says she knew anything about it? They had given 4k to her uncle to keep, but Fisch leaving some money behind before he dies is just impossible apparently. Why waste your life on something when the official explanation exonerates you and conveniently rejects the idea of all accomplices? It makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 25, 2018 20:00:30 GMT -5
As I read this thread, I can see why it is important to look at the life style of BRH prior to the kidnapping. Considering the time period of just 1930 to early 1932, Richard and Anna seem to be enjoying a more stable financial environment than so very many people at that particular period. With massive unemployment, financial devastation and suicides resulting from the stock market conditions, the Hauptmanns are able to save a very large amount of money, quit their jobs and leave $4000.00 dollars behind, buy a car, travel across the USA and then return home and still be monetarily sound is unbelievable considering the state our country was in at the time. I guess they never had to stand in a bread line or visit a soup kitchen for a much needed meal. They were either the most frugal couple around or there was an influx of money coming from somewhere enabling them to live more comfortably than most in their income bracket. Is it possible that Hauptmann had received an advance payment for his participation in the future kidnapping of Charlie? Since the kidnapping had been planned for a year or so before it occurred, perhaps this is where some of their monies were coming from. Hauptmann must have lost money in the stock market just like everyone else. I don't see how those investments could account for all the money needed to do what they did. Quitting their jobs when people were losing them on a daily basis seems crazy to me. Weren't they concerned about how they would manage when they returned without having employment for the future? Highly skilled craftsmen never go hungry and they do even better in a bad economy. For my family, the depression is a time that we did much better than ever before.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 25, 2018 20:51:02 GMT -5
Why should anyone believe it? Is there supporting evidence? Fisch went to the same church as Violet Sharpe (who killed herself and said many suspicious things), and Fisch was the one Hauptman blames, who lived with him. Some amazing coincidences.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 25, 2018 21:01:17 GMT -5
This has always been an issue with me: where the body was found. If the baby died on the night of the kidnapping, was buried in the woods not too far from the Lindbergh estate shortly thereafter, and Cemetery John was Hauptmann and did the whole thing by himself, he was indeed taking an enormous risk, not knowing whether in fact he, Cemetery John, was being set up by the police, with Condon as an intermediary. For all Hauptmann/CJ knew, the whole ransom business was a con game to smoke him out with reward money. But if Hauptmann was the lone kidnapper he'd have all the inside dope himself, would know the risk of negotiating with the old man in the cemetery. The area around the Hopewell estate had been gone over with a proverbial fine tooth comb by all kinds of people, including boy scouts; and yet they found nothing. I'm guessing the body was placed there later (as to why, I haven't a clue). To return to Hauptmann, though, the Hauptmann Wilentz prosecuted, the insanely jealous loser who wanted to hurt national hero Lindbergh, THIS Hauptmann would also know where (literally) all the bodies were buried. It would be too risky to negotiate with anyone by that point. He couldn't be sure that the body had been found, the news kept secret by the authorities. After all, he could say the baby is well, even make threats that he (and his accomplices) would harm the baby if their terms were not met would mean nothing if it was already known that the child was dead. I doubt they would conceal finding the body, and even if they did then if Condon were an inside man this would not matter. And that is the only reason I can think of for wanting an intermediary chosen by themselves. However I think that the body was placed there afterwards. I really doubt he was killed on purpose, but they at least wanted them to know the child's fate and once they had the money no reason not to.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 26, 2018 3:41:27 GMT -5
The prison uniform example is kind of silly. If nothing else, it shows him to be a somewhat honest guy who is looking into his future. Yes, he stole food and a little money but that was to survive. It was very, very common in post-war Germany and people were doing things they never would normally do. Nevertheless, if one is to believe Hauptmann was a lone wolf, either he was a master criminal who managed to plan and execute one of the most incredible cases in the 20th century (one that even the most expert gangs would have trouble pulling off) or he's a bumbling criminal with incredible luck. It can't really be both. Considering there's no way luck could allow him to execute this crime, it must be the latter. Given this, nobody of Hauptmann's supposed calibre would bring back the most famous corpse in the world at that point to - essentially - the scene of the crime. It's far more likely that somebody wanted that body to be found. Why? There's only one reason I can think of: So there could be no further attempts at extortion. There is no cost to dumping the body off in the middle of the night on a back road while no one is looking, especially if it is not hauptmann who has it in the first place but someone nearby. And there are other motives to doing so aside from the obvious of having a last shred of decency the sooner they stop looking for the child the less likely they are to eventually get caught. Lindbergh could stop flying around looking any time he wanted with no questions asked, if he did not find this mythical boat immediately then there is virtually zero chance it ever existed in the first place. Even if he wanted to kill his own child (!!!) for some crazy reason he had no need to make an elaborate show to the public. If anything the whole affair cost him a lot of time he could have used on political aspirations if he had any.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 26, 2018 4:31:26 GMT -5
Quite a thread! So much information. Sorry for so many replies at once but very provacative stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 26, 2018 9:02:47 GMT -5
Highly skilled craftsmen never go hungry and they do even better in a bad economy. For my family, the depression is a time that we did much better than ever before. I cannot agree with this. Perhaps your family was lucky enough for this to have happened but it just wasn't the case overall. If you go to the NJSP Archives, and simply pick up a handful of investigations where they go out into Hopewell to interview people, you will immediately know how wrong you are on this point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 22:19:25 GMT -5
Michael, I came across this article recently. I have never read about this anywhere before. This is from the Syracuse Journal (NY). September 28, 1934. Did Arthur Johnson mention this in any of the reports he did on Hauptmann?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 26, 2018 7:39:26 GMT -5
I came across this article recently. I have never read about this anywhere before. This is from the Syracuse Journal (NY). September 28, 1934. Did Arthur Johnson mention this in any of the reports he did on Hauptmann? We know that Johnson isn't this source. But what I have is this... there was a man named "Franz Rose" who police say tried to sell the "Magneto" that Hauptmann had stolen. This is from the official records: As Rose, according to reports from Kamenz, served time in the same cell with Hauptmann until 6/14/23, it is surmised that Rose obtained the magneto from Hauptmann and knows something about the Breaking and Entering. And here: Rose served a jail sentence in the County Court in Kamenz in the cell with the accused Hauptmann. Rose finished his sentence on 6/19 and after his release his first steps were to go to Hauptmann's mother. Rose told her "let me have a suit, hat and money quick for your son, he is out." Hauptmann escaped on the afternoon of 6/20. It is certain that Hauptmann and Rose talked about the magneto and the 4 missing belts and also planned the escape. Therefore, Rose is suspected of assisting in the escape and an article in the Saxony Criminal paper to arrest him would be very helpful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2019 9:22:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on May 20, 2019 8:40:40 GMT -5
I read a lot on mrs mclean she came into the case twice, both times she was disappointed. as far as people missing things, Hauptman is still guilty with all this so called new stuff, I don't see no smoking gun just bad detective work and the same nonsense
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2019 9:05:16 GMT -5
I read a lot on mrs mclean she came into the case twice, both times she was disappointed. Mrs. McLean disagreed with the execution of Hauptmann and that it should not have happened. The prosecution never proved Hauptmann killed Charlie. They couldn't even prove Hauptmann was in Hopewell the night of March 1, 1932. Whited lied about seeing him in the woods and Hochmuth had no credible description of who he saw, if he ever saw anyone at all that day. Hochmuth was pressured into his identification of BRH. Whited was paid for his!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 20, 2019 10:26:15 GMT -5
I read a lot on mrs mclean she came into the case twice, both times she was disappointed. as far as people missing things, Hauptman is still guilty with all this so called new stuff, I don't see no smoking gun just bad detective work and the same nonsense So hold on.... The sources are real but the detective work is bad. It is new stuff Steve. You hadn't heard about it - so that makes it new. You don't "like" it so that makes it "bad" or "nonsense." See how that works? Well its all down at the Archives for anyone questioning it to see for themselves. But its easier just to shoot from the hip and take pot shots about documentation nobody bothers to review. Silly, but I completely understand. But hey I didn't write the reports, memos, letters, manuscripts, or transcribe the Grand Jury testimony nobody knew existed. Listen, I don't like some of it either and if I were to make things up, like some people do/did on the other site, I'd type up something much different than what I discovered. Or I could imagine something then present it as a matter of fact ... kinda like they do as well. If the documentation UPSETS something in another book then it is what it is. Research is the key to everything. Anyway, you are REALLY going to hate V3. I am going to ruin everything (SIGH). New stuff is an understatement!
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 21, 2019 8:37:46 GMT -5
Hard to understand how an honest jury could possibly buy the testimony of Whited or Hochmuth. Whited was known as a compulsive liar and Hochmuth was an elderly man who was legally blind. Without their testimony, there was nobody to place Hauptmann in or around Hopewell on the night of the purported kidnapping. And without Hauptmann at Hopewell at that time, it's impossible to prove that he murdered Charlie, Jr. So Hauptmann should have been cleared of the murder charge in New Jersey and extradited back to New York to face an extortion charge.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 21, 2019 12:56:06 GMT -5
Hard to understand how an honest jury could possibly buy the testimony of Whited or Hochmuth. Whited was known as a compulsive liar and Hochmuth was an elderly man who was legally blind. Without their testimony, there was nobody to place Hauptmann in or around Hopewell on the night of the purported kidnapping. And without Hauptmann at Hopewell at that time, it's impossible to prove that he murdered Charlie, Jr. So Hauptmann should have been cleared of the murder charge in New Jersey and extradited back to New York to face an extortion charge. I am working on the Trial/Jury chapter now. I think you'll see the answer to your question there once I am finished. You'll also be interested to know that almost the entire Jury believed Hauptmann did not work alone.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on May 23, 2019 10:00:02 GMT -5
new stuff I accept but if it doesn't add up and does not prove anything why should I can gitty over it? ive been at this since 1992, some stuff on this board is the same stuff that people brought up years ago.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on May 23, 2019 10:03:29 GMT -5
amy if houmuth was so blind at the time, wilentz wouldn't have been stupid enough to put him on the stand. I saw a old documentary and they interviewed the njsp policeman who drove him to the police station he said houkmuth said my god that's the man I saw. so you can go all around but people said they saw him
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 23, 2019 15:43:19 GMT -5
amy if houmuth was so blind at the time, wilentz wouldn't have been stupid enough to put him on the stand. I saw a old documentary and they interviewed the njsp policeman who drove him to the police station he said houkmuth said my god that's the man I saw. so you can go all around but people said they saw him Aside from the issue of visual acuity with Hochmuth, there was also the possibility of what we now call Alzheimer's disease. After all, Hochmuth was well into his eighties, being a veteran of the Franco-Prussian War, which occurred in 1870-71. The "ordinary" juror at the time would be far less familiar with senile dementia than the "ordinary" juror of today, simply because life expectancy then on average was a couple of decades less than it is now. And BTW, wasn't Hochmuth enticed to testify by a monetary reward? Did he ultimately receive a little chunk of change from the governor's office?
|
|
|
Post by scathma on May 23, 2019 15:54:39 GMT -5
Ahlgren wrote in Crime of the Century that Hochmuth received a $250 share of the reward money.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 24, 2019 7:31:52 GMT -5
Ahlgren wrote in Crime of the Century that Hochmuth received a $250 share of the reward money. I'm not sure what their source for this figure would be. I have a letter from the Governor which directs the payments of that reward dated 1/10/38. This states Hochmuth was to receive $1,000. It should be noted that this is just the amount of reward money. The witnesses were paid for their time in court and in some cases there were other stipends/benefits given to them from some other funding source. Whited, for example, was getting his rent paid by the state for a certain amount of time. So its important to consider ALL sources when looking at this angle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 8:35:20 GMT -5
I have a letter from the Governor which directs the payments of that reward dated 1/10/38. This states Hochmuth was to receive $1,000. It should be noted that this is just the amount of reward money. The witnesses were paid for their time in court and in some cases there were other stipends/benefits given to them from some other funding source. Whited, for example, was getting his rent paid by the state for a certain amount of time. So its important to consider ALL sources when looking at this angle. Researching at the archives has really been an eye-opening experience. One of the things I came across on one of my trips was "REPORT OF EXPENDITURES FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S FUND DURING THE LINDBERGH INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL. It is dated July 10, 1936 and lists payouts made from this particular fund from Sept. 25, 1934 through February 7, 1935. Among the names on this list you will find both police officials, investigators, and witnesses. The amounts vary, the largest being $100.00 and the smallest, $2.00. How frequently a name appears also varies. One of the names appearing several times each month is that of Joseph Perrone! His amounts range from $4.00 to as much as $50.00. Hochmuth appears twice during this span of time; once in December for $5.00 and once in January for $5.00. Millard Whited appears twice on the list in the amounts of $50.00 and $25.00. This is just one list I came across. I am sure there are other expense lists I have yet to discover!
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 24, 2019 16:23:47 GMT -5
The whole thing smacks of bribery. Bear in mind that this was "THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S FUND." In other words, Wilentz had complete control over it. I call it bribery because Wilentz was the big winner in the Hauptmann prosecution. His reputation from winning the case soared to the point that for many decades thereafter, he was the head honcho of what became New Jersey's most prestigious law firm. I'm not 100% sure but I believe the Wilentz firm is still prominent today in New Jersey and is still in the family.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2019 19:11:33 GMT -5
The whole thing smacks of bribery. Bear in mind that this was "THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S FUND." In other words, Wilentz had complete control over it. I call it bribery because Wilentz was the big winner in the Hauptmann prosecution. His reputation from winning the case soared to the point that for many decades thereafter, he was the head honcho of what became New Jersey's most prestigious law firm. I'm not 100% sure but I believe the Wilentz firm is still prominent today in New Jersey and is still in the family. There are people on this expense list that would not need to be bribed, so I am not sure that term applies overall. I am of the opinion that Millard Whited's clothing for court appearances was probably covered by this account. I am going to link the list here. Everyone can decide for themselves how they view Wilentz's fund. Page One: imgur.com/Tx0bZ7TPage Two: imgur.com/f3PJ9O3Page Three: imgur.com/dPMG8Hs
|
|