|
Post by Michael on May 20, 2013 13:44:52 GMT -5
In Betty's 3-10-32 Statement she says: This was in May 1930. I procured a position with a family named Ross, who lived in the Parkstone Apartments in Detroit. I didn't like this position and only stayed a couple of days and in a few days I obtained another position with a family named Moser who lived at Grosse Point, Detroit. I stayed with them exactly two weeks. I didn't like that position and left and obtained a position in the Whittier Hotel in Detroit where I stayed for three months. I don't recall what the Moser's said about this in any book so I decided to post the Report:
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on May 20, 2013 17:46:47 GMT -5
lol..Interesting post Michael....Just like everyone else..it seems that Betty shaded the truth about her past employment, her friends and the people she said she knew and worked with. I have never seen a person who took care of a children dress as nice as she did!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2013 22:46:04 GMT -5
So, Michael, how many brothers did Betty Gow have living in America? In the report you posted, she mentions she will be returning to Camden N.J. to visit her brother.
In her statement, she says her brother William lived in Bogota N.J. Further into that statement she mentions having a brother in Tenafly N.J. Apparently this brother died in a work related accident?
In October of 1931 after Charlie was returned to Englewood, was Betty given some time off? Is this when she went to visit her friend Willam Coutts in Detroit? He apparently turned out to be a real let down to Betty. Were the authorites ever able to track down this man?
Didn't Scotti Gow have no connection to Betty? Is Betty's last name actually Goway and not Gow?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 21, 2013 8:14:53 GMT -5
That's a very interesting observation Aimee. Yes, it sure is! No. This lead was a dead end. From everything I have there was no connection. (I will go through some of my material soon to ensure I give you the right answers to your other questions). Something else I wanted to quickly point out comes from The Case That Never Dies. It's no secret that I am both a friend, and a HUGE fan of Lloyd. Concerning Betty Gow background: What about Betty Gow? "Did you make any effort to learn her background?"
"I don't know. That may have been done. I personally only talked to her. Mrs. Lindbergh may have looked into her background."
Not personally he replied. "I placed my confidence in the police."
"Did you not make any effort as a father to find out the background of the people that were int he house the night your child was snatched away?"
Prosecutors again objected, but this time Trenchard let the questioning go on.
"I placed my entire confidence in the police and followed their suggestion from that time on. I tried to cooperate in every way that I could."
Reilly was finally onto something here, but he muffed it. By asking about background checks, he had got Lindbergh to assert that he followed police suggestions and cooperated in every way he could. That was not true. Lindbergh had controlled every move until the discovery of the body. [Gardner - p277] For me, just this one point is worth the price of his book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2013 9:19:10 GMT -5
)
Ditto on Lloyd's book. It is always my first place to go to for information. I haven't had the book a year yet and it looks like its many years old because it is used so much!
I find it disturbing how families like the Morrows and Lindberghs would employ people without detailed background checks. Do you think that because Betty came through a recommendation by a friend of Elisabeth's everyone felt that was good enough so they hired her?
Reading Lindbergh's testimony about Betty's background check and his ignorance about whether a check was ever made shows a real lack of concern on his part and also the poor level of communication between Charles and Anne about Betty.
Betty gets no free ride with me. She remains high on my suspect list, especially when she has someone like Cemetary John standing up for her innocence!!
In Lloyd's book he mentions that William Coutts was a former boyfriend of Betty's (page 12). She went to see him in October of 1931 to decide if she would want to marry him. I am surprised that she was considering this because according to her statement she says she met Henry "Red" Johnson in August 1931 and was dating him. Weren't Betty and Johnson supposed to be in love? Why then go to Detroit to see an old boyfriend if she had someone new? Something is wrong with this picture!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 21, 2013 15:35:59 GMT -5
Just one - William.
Returned from their Estate in Maine.
No. She lived with her brother then went to Detroit with the Jacksons I believe in April 1930. I think she left Detroit in September 1930, and after she returned to New Jersey never went back.
Sgt. Gutch of the Detroit Police Department tracked down Couttes and interviewed him. Just as Betty said, he worked for the Ford Motor Company. He said he met Betty in Glasgow when, as a Nurse, she was attending to his dying Mother. He claimed once Betty arrived in Detroit he was paying attention to her but that she discouraged him. He believed it was because he did not measure up to her social standards. Sgt. Gutch found him to be "very reputable and beyond suspicion."
According to the Glasgow Police her full name was: Bessie Mowat Gow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2013 23:15:49 GMT -5
Yes. Betty and Charlie returned to Next Day Hill after Dwight Morrow's funeral in October of 1931. I believe she arrived back at Next Day Hill October 15 or 16. Charles and Anne returned from their Orient flight to Englewood around October 19. The reason I asked about Betty receiving time off subsequent to the Lindberghs returning to Englewood is because Susan Hertog in her book "Anne Morrow Lindbergh" mentions that Anne allows Betty to take a three month holiday at this particular time (page 152.). Since there is not a footnote for this statement, I was wondering if you had come across this in any of your research.
Thanks Michael for answering all my questions!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 23, 2013 16:27:24 GMT -5
Thanks for asking questions! These discussions are worth their weight in gold, and without questions usually there isn't much discussion.
I've always believed this was in reference to the fact Betty had been with the child exclusively for that extended period of time and once Anne got back CJr. did know who she was. So the idea was to maximize contact with the child on her end and minimize it on Betty's. It probably explains why Miss Root was there over the weekend preceding the supposed "snatch" and Betty was in Englewood. So this "holiday" Hertog mentions is more or less, in my opinion, a poor choice of words to describe it.
If something thinks I am wrong I welcome any type of rebuttal. I just having seen anything to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 4, 2013 20:39:56 GMT -5
Reilly gave Betty a really hard time at Trial:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2014 14:49:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 25, 2014 10:25:59 GMT -5
Michael, The link below is to a picture of Fisch and Uhlig. This photo appeared in the newspapers after Hauptmann's arrest. The caption on the back of the picture says the photo was taken in 1929. Besides Uhlig and Fisch, the older woman in the picture is identified as Mrs. Kirsten (Gerta's mother). The younger woman is not identified. Would you know who she is? Could she be Gerta's younger sister? That's definitely not Betty Gow. Usually when pictures like this spring up those in them are asked to identify unknown individuals. So I will check to see what Uhlig has to say about it.
|
|