|
Post by lurp173 on Jun 20, 2017 20:31:19 GMT -5
Whateley was very specific in his accusation against Betty so we'll have to disagree that she'd do that without any instruction. I believe him. She had been terminated from an earlier position in Michigan for being "slip-shod" don't forget! That's in my book too (page 92). "History" brain-washed everyone to believe she was this great person and the facts have a terrible way of ruining that idea don't they? Anyway, if Elsie had wiped the nursery down for the reasons John outlined I don't see Lindbergh getting angry unless it was part of the plot he didn't want explained away. Know what I mean? Whatever happened here comes from the mind of someone doing what he/she thinks would be expected had the crime occurred. So wiping down the Nursery may have been part of that, and if Lindbergh was behind it all then he wouldn't want that narrative interfered with. But if not, I cannot see him upset by someone doing their job. Yes, and the first order CAL gave was not to touch the note because of possible fingerprints! Emphasizing the importance of fingerprints that weren't there. Just seemed staged and waiting to unfold the "narrative" I know Lindbergh has been credited with being concerned about not touching the note due to fingerprints, but the film footage of a reporter's interview with Hopewell Police Officer Charles Williamson that has been posted previously on this forum, clearly has Williamson saying from his own mouth "the Colonel said to me do you think we better open it now and I said no we better leave it and let the fingerprint men look it over in case there are any fingerprints on the note". Unless Williamson is misrepresenting a recent event or outright lying, it was his instructions to Lindbergh from the get go to leave the note alone at that point. The immediate actions of Lindbergh on finding out the child was missing (running outside with a firearm in an attempt to intercept any kidnappers) is exactly what I would have done. To hell with reading any note untill all attempts to reach the child were exhausted. Just my thoughts. I'm attaching a screen shot of that video which shows the website of that film if you haven't seen it. Sorry, Attachment Deleteddon't know how to link it directly.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jun 13, 2017 18:01:36 GMT -5
Joe stated: "Does this then not demonstrate that this specific print was made as a result of some considerable force or impact upon the ground on which the left foot came down".
I am attempting to attach a piece from Fisher's 1987 The Lindbergh Case. If this information presented by Fisher is correct and has not been subsequently discredited, it is interesting that at least some evidence existed that Hauptmann sustained an injury to his LEFT foot/leg during the time frame of the kidnapping.Attachment DeletedAttachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Feb 3, 2017 22:20:58 GMT -5
Once again Michael your extensive research and knowledge of all the players in this case allows you to put your hands on very relevant events. To say that I am impressed is a severe understatement. I think your research has clearly shown that virtually all (if not all) of the law enforcement officers involved in this case believed from the beginning that this crime was not perpetrated by one individual. I think Frank Wilson was an Agent with the IRS' s Intelligencd Unit (and later Secret Service). The IRS Intelligence Unit (later CID) has always had some of the best and brightest federal agents. I think Wilson did much of the dangerous undercover work that ultimately nailed Al Capone. I would be inclined to think that Wilson had a good "handle" on what had occurred in the Lindbergh case.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jan 30, 2017 20:46:41 GMT -5
Michael,
Thanks to you, Lightningjew, John and Amy35 for responding to my questions on Hauptmann's silence in this case. I knew that all of you with such knowledge about this case would have some excellent observations and thoughts about it. The fear for the safety of family members is certainly a factor. We would address this issue right up front with assurances that we could provide protection in regards to this concern. We did have resources for this and were always prepared to use them. Maybe we were just smooth talkers, but this never prevented a defendant from ultimately cooperating. It is interesting Michael that your experiences are different from mine, although I would imagine that inmates would put on a totally different image when behind bars than when they are first arrested and advised of what they are facing. I've seen some very tough guys who were the shooters out on the street, who literally became physically sick and vomited into a trash basket while in handcuffs in our office when confronted with the time they were facing. I totally agree with you that times were certainly different in law enforcement in the 1930's as opposed to my years in the 70's, 80's, 90's and into 2000. And this is what I may be missing in placing too much emphasis on Hauptmann not turning on his accomplices. I agree that the mandatory minimum sentencing did help flip defendants, but I keep coming back to the fact that from very early on, Hauptmann knew he was facing the toughest sentence this country has to offer-death.
Again, thanks to all for giving your thoughts on this matter. The knowledge that you all have on the facts/events of this case continues to amaze me. At some point, knowledge will normally "solve" any criminal case. My knowledge is still limited, but my experiences keep telling me that something very special/unique was going on in this case to cause Hauptmann to choose death over talking.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jan 29, 2017 20:47:08 GMT -5
Hey Lurp: Are you related to the writer Thomas Wolfe? He has peeked his way into the Case. (See Lindbergh Kidnapping Hoax Site) It would be soo strange if it turned out that one of the First officers at the crime scene and the writer of the ransom notes (I don't believe that but it is a long shot) were related! Jack, I can say with certainty that my Great Uncle Harry Wolfe was not related to the 20th Century novelist Thomas Wolfe. My Uncle Harry's family was from the Trenton, N.J. area prior to his move to Hopewell. I believeThomas Wolfe was a North Carolinian. I would also believe that my Uncle Harry and Thomas Wolfe did not quite travel in the same social circle!!!! It is always amazing to me how many names have been dragged into the Lindbergh case. I have been wanting to make an observation on this forum to see if the many informed and talented people on this forum have any thoughts on it. If this has been hashed-out previously, please just disregard. I have been reading the great historical threads on this forum but have not seen all of them. If this has been thoroughly dicussed in the past, just tell me and I will continue to look for it in the forum's archives. The one thing about this case that has always puzzled me is that Hauptmann never flipped on any coconspirators (with the small exception of Fisch and the box of ransom money). This flys totally in the face of my investigative experiencs. Defendants facing serious federal time, would scramble to be the first one to turn on their coconspirators and get the "best" deal from prosecutors. It was easy to get them to talk -It was just a matter of going out and corroborating their statements to use in court. It was a standing "joke" (law enforcement gallows humor) that if you were going to commit a crime with other individuals, you better make sure that all your accomlices were dead within a few months, because if caught they were going to roll on you. It was totally my experience that when the jail house door closed (and it appeared that it was going to remain shut) there were no stand-up guys. They all flipped. So, why did Hauptmann remain silent to the end. I realize that once he was apprehended, neither Wilentz nor the State of N.J. were looking for deals. They wanted a warm body for the electric chair and Hauptmann was it. However I have read that even though Governor Hoffman offered to commute his sentence to life, and several newspapers offered large sums of money to his wife and child, he confessed nothing and turned on no one. WHY? In my experience, there were only three reasons why a defendant did not give up coconspirators: 1. They were truly innocent of the crime and had no information to give. 2 . They were the sole perpetrator and had no one to roll on. 3. They were so low on the totum pole in the conspiracy that they did not know the identities of the accomplices. From my readings of this case thus far, it appears that Hauptmann does not fall into any of the above three categories. This complete silence on his part right to the end is a complete mystery to me at this time. I think it would be interesting to here any comments on this from the extremely knowledgeable members of this forum. It may be far too late in time at this point to ascertain why he didn't give everything up to save his skin (as virtually every petty crook does), but I believe that if his motive for this could be revealed, it would shed a great deal od sunshine on what really happen that night of March 1, 1932 outside of little old Hopewell..
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jan 28, 2017 21:05:15 GMT -5
Michael, I just wanted to respond to your questions concerning my recent post. From my experiences with a gravel driveway, I do believe that it is entirely possible that the thumb guard was "pushed" into the gravel by what I would believe was heavy vehicular traffic the night of the kidnapping prior to daylight. My experience has been that a new gravel driveway (5 years and under) has a very soft base that continues to absorb gravel and other objects with regular vehicle traffic on it. The amount of gravel it takes to maintain a decent gravel driveway during the first 5 years is amazing (and expensive! ). The gravel just keeps going into the ground until a solid base is established. It is also very forgiving on objects as they are "pushed" into the base, not crushed. One quick example that I think is very apropos. During the first year that my wife and I moved to our property (building a house and establishing the one half mile gravel driveway), she lost her watch and subsequent believed it may have ocurred during one of our many daily walks on the driveway. A number of days had past and we had driven on the driveway as well as having numerous delivery trucks on it. When she realized it may have been lost on the driveway, we visually searched for it for many subsequent days on many walks, with no luck. Within a month or two, I worked the driveway with rakes and a drag harrow to prepare it for more gravel. Within the next day or so (and before the new gravel arrived) we spotted the watch in the driveway during one of our walks. My wife was delighted and I was very surprised. With the exception of a slight crack in the face, it was in good condition and still running. With this experience, when I saw (I think it was Amy's post) that the Hopewell paper reported that the State Police worked on the Lindbergh driveway the day or so before Betty Gow found the thumb guard, I said "bingo". I am certainly not saying that this is what happened in regards to the thumb guard, but it clearly can not be ruled out.
I agree with you that any surveillance of the Lindbergh property at night (although extremely effective) would be very vulnable to locals being suspicious of strange vehicles. It was even that way when I was growing up in Hopewell in the 40's, 50's and early 60's. Hopewell itself was very small in population (maybe 1500 people) and the surrounding countryside was even less. Everybody knew everybody, and I'm sure it was even more so in the 30's. (My mother knew every vehicle that appeared on our lane in Hopewell, and if she didn't, she would soon find out!). In one of my prior post, I believe I mentioned I am a retired Special Agent with the federal government and had a little over 30 years investigating criminal cases. I have spent countless hours on surveillance, and when we did it in a rural environment we would simply have one agent drop off the rest of us for the night, and not have any vehicles in the area until before first light. I have always assumed criminals were aware of this simple technique to reduce vehicle presence, and utilized it. I totally agree with you concerning your observations that any surveillance of the Lindbergh estate would reveal how difficult it would be to conduct a surreptitious nighttime entry and exit for the purpose of a kidnapping. To think that total strangers (let alone one individual) on a stormy night could utilize a ladder, a chisel and a burlap bag to silently enter and exit the house to perpetrate this crime is just insane. It defies all logic and the facts that your extensive research Michael has revealed.
Once again my post is too long, but I wanted to respond to Michael's question. I throughly enjoyed your book Michael, and really liked the manner in which you laid it out--presenting your research but letting the reader sort things out. Looking forward to your next book. I have some thoughts on the case based on my background, but I won't bother you with them at this point.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jan 26, 2017 21:26:58 GMT -5
I haven't contributed much to this forum as my knowledge on the case is limited compared to many of the members of this site. I have been following it quite regularly and I am always impressed with the numerous well thought out theories on the kidnapping. I' m responding here because I may be able to add a little something to this topic. I am retired and live on a 300 acre farm in a very rural area of southside Virginia. Although it is 2017, we are somewhat in an area similar to the Lindbergh property in that our farm is surrounded by hundreds of acres of planted pines with no houses other than two on the road front. Our gravel driveway is one half mile in length. During thd past 12 years, my wife and I have dropped numerous objects on the driveway, only to find them sometimes months later in relatively good condition. One was actually a watch that "survived" rather well. The vehicle traffic will push these objects into the gravel base and between the gravel and soil base, the vehicles actually do very little damage. I maintain the gravel driveway regularly, and everytime I drag and repair it, any dropped items will surface. From my experiences, I can believe that the thumb guard was dropped on the Lindbergh driveway the night of the kidnapping, pushed into the gravel by the vehicle traffic, and brought back to the surface when the State Police worked on the driveway the day before Betty Gow dicovered it. If she truly found it (not planted it), and it was there the night of the kidnapping, it could certainly say something about how the child was taken from the property.
Two other quick comments. Living on our property, I can see how someone could have surveilled the Lindbergh residence at night for a very long time without being dicovered. Also, a gravel driveway is VERY noisy as to vehicular traffic. If I am outside or in the house with a window opened, I can hear a vehicle enter our driveway from the hard surface front road which is almost one half mile away. From my experiences, if a vehicle was on the Lindbergh driveway that night, it is very reasonable to believe that someone heard it. Sorry for the long post. Just thought that some of this might be helpful.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Aug 17, 2016 18:55:55 GMT -5
Just ordered it. Really looking forward to reading it.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Mar 17, 2016 14:28:22 GMT -5
Hurtelable,
You are indeed correct on the Lexington exchange in Manhattan. As the attachment shows, Lexington or LE, was an exchange in Manhattan, post December 1930 and prior to the current system. It was Lexington 2 which corresponds to dialing 532 and then the 4 digit number. Apparently the telephone companies thought that the public could not remember 7 digit numbers when they switched to the seven digit system. They thought the public would have an easier time remembering something like Lexington 2 for a given area and then only having to memorize 4 digits.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Mar 10, 2016 21:06:12 GMT -5
Georingoes, Attachment DeletedI read Michael's response to your question and his knowledge and access to information on this case is absolutely amazing. I believe he has more knowledge about this case than anyone past present or future.
I can only add the following concerning Hopewell at that time. I can remember my mother talking about how the police spoke to all the local men who had worked on the Lindbergh house during the construction (her father would have been one of those interviewed if he had lived). However, I have no information concerning the police interviews of the local telephone operators in Hopewell. Michael's document certainly shows the police were attempting to cover that angle.
When I was a child in the 1950's, the telephone operators were still working in the Hopewell Telephone Company billing in town. Even in the 1950's the telephone system in Hopewell was pretty basic. Our first telephone number was "6J" and like most Hopewell residents, we were on party lines. You had to listen for the proper ring sequence to know if the call was for your house. So you can see that even in the early 1950's (let alone the 1930's) the telephone system in Hopewell was not complex. Although the telephone operators could certainly listen in on any calls they handled, I would be very surprised if they would subsequently talk about those calls with others. My father mentioned many times how bad the Great Depression in the 1930's was, and in 1932 jobs were very hard to come by in Hopewell. I would suspect that the telephone operators in Hopewell at that time knew that they would certainly lose their jobs if they spoke about any conversations they overheard while working the lines.
I am attempting to attach a newspaper article dated March 8, 1932 from the Madera Tribune. One article on the page reports how Lindbergh was very upset that a New Jersey state trooper was stationed in the Hopewell Telephone Company office in town where he would monitor all calls going to the Lindbergh house after the kidnapping. Obviously it was a lot easier for law enforcement at that time to listen in on telephone calls. Interestingly, another article on this same page (entitle "New Angle to Lindburgh Case") reports the possibility that the child was taken from the house without the use of the ladder. I had no idea that this angle was even considered as a possibility as early as March 8th. I apologize if this article has already been posted elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Mar 2, 2016 22:56:49 GMT -5
Many thanks for welcoming me to your discussion board. I greatly appreciate that. I do not have the outstanding knowledge of this case that most of you have, so I would never attempt to interject any theories that I have on the kidnapping In my posting, I just wanted to relate some background information on my great uncle Harry Wolfe, and how the crime affected my parents generation who lived in Hopewell at that time
Unfortunately I do not have a great deal of additional information on my uncle Harry's thoughts about the case. I think this thread started out with the idea of time travel pertaining to the Lindbergh kidnapping. I would travel back to when I was eight or nine years old before uncle Harry's passing and attempt to use my three decades of interrogation experience to grill him on everything he saw, heard and felt that night of March 1st. This wouldn't solve the continuing mystery of this case, but it sure would answer some questions. I know what it is like to be the first at a crime scene, and in terms of the subsequent investigation it can be priceless.
Sweetwater asked if I knew whether my uncle Harry had ever expressed his opinion on when that child's remains were placed at the recovery site. Unfortunately, I never heard that aspect brought up by anyone who knew Uncle Harry. I will say that while growing up in Hopewell it was clear that everyone believed that the baby's remains were "dumped" at the recovery location as the kidnappers fled through town that night headed towards New York City by way of the Princeton area. Also, the idea that Charles Lindbergh was somehow involved in this crime was never entertained by anyone.
Amy 35 asked if I had any additional information as to why Uncle Harry had strong suspicions about Betty Gow and Violet Sharpe's involvement in the case. Again I do not. I only remember my mother saying that Uncle Harry did not like the reactions of the Lindbergh's nursemaid when he spoke with her that night, and he always thought that she was "hiding" something. As to Violet Sharpe, I do not know why Uncle Harry became suspicious of her, but I remember my mother commenting that when the Morrow's maid committed suicide during the investigation it only strengthened uncle Harry's suspicions of her.
My mother passed away in 2002, and uncle Harry's daughter in 2006. I now regret not having spoken with them more often about Uncle Harry's involvement and thought processes on this case. Most all the members of that generation are now deceased and so much information that was not reduced to writing is lost. Unfortunately on my visits home to Hopewell during my working career, the only investigations I had any interest in were the ones in the case load I was carrying as an agent at the time.
My mother did agree with you Jack 7. I remember at some point in time before her passing, I was home on a visit and talking to her about some of my current investigations which she always had an interest in. Somehow the Lindbergh kidnapping case came up and I told her that many new books had been written that contained many theories as to what exactly happened in the case. In her very direct way she told me "if they had just let your uncle Harry handle that investigation it would have been solved quickly and to everybody's satisfaction." Such was her complete faith and confidence in uncle Harry's abilities.
I'm not surprised that no reports or statements have surfaced in regards to my uncle Harry. The New Jersey State Police jumped on this case immediately, and I would think that if they didn't request a statement from him, none would have been provided. Policies on reports and statements by law enforcement officers vary greatly from agency to agency, and have constantly changed over time. In the federal system everything that occurs during an investigation was expected to be put in a report. I once had a supervisor who would say "if you don't reduce it to writing, it never happened." However, I have worked with Officers from some local and state agencies that were extremely laxed on report writing. In addition, some officers would learn quickly that if you make a written statement on some aspect of a case, a defense attorney at trial will use it against you if your testimony varies in any way from the statement. This always caused some officers to shy away from making written statements.
Once again I apologize for this long post. I will go back to just reading and enjoying the vast amount of information you all have on this case. I'll conclude with one last "words of wisdom" in regards to criminal investigations. When I started as an agent in 1973, I was assigned to an old-time agent who was about to retire after a very successful 30 year career. He very quickly told me "son, when you investigate these cases follow the facts only the facts. If you get bogged down in assumptions, you get off course and will not be successful." I always tried to follow that advice throughout my career, and I passed it along to younger agents along the way.
Jack 7, I have been impressed with your knowledge and investigative mindset in all of your postings on this forum site. I'm also impressed that you recognized my association with recon. The Recondo patch is in recognition of graduating from the U.S. Army's 5th Special Forces Recondo School which I attended in 1967 in the Republic of Vietnam. I served in Vietnam for 14 months as a young paratrooper in 1967-68 assigned to the 173rd Airborne Brigade's Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol unit (LRRP). At the time, people who knew about LRRP units call them Lurps. I do have quite a few recon stories from those days, and actually enough to write a book- if I can ever find the time.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Mar 1, 2016 20:52:38 GMT -5
I have been following this forum for over a year now and I have greatly enjoyed it. The volume of information from truly dedicated individuals on this forum is really amazing and impressive. As this thread has mentioned the Hopewell police officers involved in the Lindbergh kidnapping case , I felt this might be a good time for me to contribute a posting.
I was born and raised in the town of Hopewell as my mother's family goes back many generations in that part of New Jersey. I was born 15 years after the Lindbergh kidnapping so it was still relatively recent history during my childhood. Harry Wolfe, Chief of Police in Hopewell at the time of the kidnapping, was my great uncle. He was married to my grandmother's sister. Uncle Harry and my grandfather, Irvin Van Nest, married sisters in Hopewell in 1910. My grandfather was a carpenter by trade and he died of a heart attack in May of 1931 while working on the construction of the Lindbergh house. As far as I know, he was the only workman who died while working at the site.
I grew up surrounded by stories of the Lindbergh kidnapping. My elementary school in Hopewell is on Princeton Avenue, less then one half mile from where the Lindbergh baby's remains were found. During high school, I road the school bus past this site everyday to and from Princeton. Our house was less than a mile across the farm fields from the site. As a teenager, I bird hunted in those fields. My mother would tell us numerous stories about how the press inundated the small, sleepy town of Hopewell following the kidnapping, and how rumors about the kidnapping dominated the local gossip for many months. It appeared that the press desired to interview virtually every resident of Hopewell.
Although I was too young to question Uncle Harry about the kidnapping (I was only 10 or 11 years of age when he passed away), my mother remembered everything Uncle Harry had said about the case. Although Uncle Harry was not involved in the subsequent investigation of the kidnapping, as you all know he was the first law enforcement officer both at the house on the night of the kidnapping and at the scene of the discovery of the baby's remains. Apparently Uncle Harry went to his grave firmly believing the following:
1. The New Jersey State Police had the correct perpetrator of the kidnapping with the arrest of Haupmann, although Haupmann was accompanied by others that night. Haupmann was definitely not at the Lindbergh house on the night of March 1st by himself.
2. From the moment Uncle Harry entered the Lindbergh house that night of the kidnapping, he had a strong gut reaction that there was an "inside" aspect to this case. He apparently had strong suspicions in regards to Betty Gow and Violet Sharpe.
3. The remains found on Carter Road (Princeton Avenue) just outside of the town limits of Hooewell was definitely the remains of the Lindbergh child.
Uncle Harry was Chief of Police of Hopewell at that time because he was extremely well regarded by the residents of Hopewell. Although he had no prior law enforcement experience, he was a "jack of all trades" and could physically handle anyone causing trouble in the town. More importantly, Uncle Harry possessed a high degree of common sense and intellect. When Uncle Harry spoke, people listened. I would suspect that the above-listed beliefs that Uncle Harry took to his grave in regards to the Lindbergh kidnapping were spot on.
I am a retired federal agent having spent 29 years investigating federal crimes. I know from experience that most crimes, including conspiracies, are normally not complex, and with a little time and effort can be solved. This case however is in a special category. Due to the many mistakes made during the initial phases of the investigation, and the lack of modern investigative scientific techniques that were not available in 1932, the full story of this kidnapping may never be known. This being said, I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the many theories put forth by the members of this forum.
I apologize for this long posting, but I thought that the forum readers might find some of this interesting. The photo that I am attempting to attach shows a picture of my uncle Harry taken in 1910 at the "double wedding ceremony" with my grandparents and Uncle Harry and his wife. Uncle Harry is on the left.
Attachments:
|
|