jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 16, 2012 2:54:19 GMT -5
Anyone substantiate the "known" fact that Lindbergh could not have come up with $ 50K on 3/2/32.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jun 24, 2012 1:38:24 GMT -5
You see about that, Michael? I appreciate how nice you have been to me and my craziness, but we are certainly at crossed swords regarding this issue. Lindbergh could have come up with $50K in ten minutes promoting toothpaste or bicicyle tires. I guess I'm beginning to wonder why anyone would reject that fact.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 24, 2012 5:46:35 GMT -5
I agree with you Jack that he could have come up with it. I sometimes over-think things like this. In my mind, I was considering whether or not he had this amount "at hand".
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Jul 29, 2012 19:06:35 GMT -5
If push came to shove, I am sure he could have. He was married to JP Morgan money, after all.
I have always thought the delays had to do with the media coverage, and the kidnappers' caution once the news of the kidnaping became public. Do you think raising the money was the real delay in the ransom exchange? Other than Condon mentioning the difficulty of raising the money to the kidnappers, I don't remember reading about the difficulty in getting the money before. Was that talk just Condon being a loose cannon, or was there any evidence that he was instructed to mention this to the kidnappers to stall for time?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 13:39:50 GMT -5
I have never read that Condon was instructed to discuss with the kidnappers any type of financial difficulty on Lindbergh's behalf. If there is any such discussion in a report somewhere, perhaps Michael is aware of it. Condon's behavior during the whole negotiation process is both bizarre and suspicious.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 1, 2012 17:23:57 GMT -5
As I am sure everyone is aware by now - there are a million sources to sift through so (sometimes) citing one may not be the absolute truth of the matter.
According to SAC Keith's Report of April 9, 1932, Breckenridge told SAC Connelley that, in essence, they had been prepared at all times to to pay the ransom but wanted Kidnappers to first furnish positive proof the child was still alive.
Obviously, this information was given to Connelley prior to May 12th, and the FBI wasn't made aware of exactly what this "evidence" was (which eventually was offered as proof) until much later in the investigation.
I think Breckenridge is a good source representing the mindset at the time but if anyone wants me to keep digging let me know and I will.
|
|