Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2017 0:08:29 GMT -5
Michael, On page 214 of Chapter 14, The Next Phase you mention that Johnson identified the wood dowels of the kidnap ladder and a 3' long piece of wood of identical size and quality as the wood used in the dowels of the kidnap ladder which was found in Lindbergh's library as being maple. Johnson's examination of the dowels and the rest of the ladder was a visual one only. So I did a little reading about maple and birch and came across the following from American Woodworker, October 2001, Issue#89Birch or Hard Maple? "Yellow birch and hard maple look so much alike its often tough to tell them apart. Plain sawn boards have similar figure patterns. They both have pale sapwood and distinctly darker heartwood. Manufacturers have used them interchangeably for decades." In defense of Johnson, it is possible he could have thought the dowels were maple even though they were actually birch. He only made a visual examination. Koehler was sent a small sample of the dowel wood to examine which he did with a microscope and he was able to identify the dowel wood as paper birch. Sadly, we will never know about that 3 foot long piece found in Lindbergh's library since that piece of wood was never addressed beyond Johnson's report. Johnson had a lot of good common sense observations in his March 10 report that are worthy of consideration. Also that he thought the ladder was made by two people, not one, because of the handedness point he made in the report is compelling. I remember reading on this board somewhere that the bottom section of the ladder might have been made separate from the two smaller sections. Perhaps there is a real basis for two people constructing the ladder. Did Johnson ever find any wood that matched any of the ladder wood when he went to the State Village for Epileptics in Skillman NJ to inspect the wood they were using there? What about the large pile of discarded wood that was on Lindbergh's property? Was that wood ever checked?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Feb 4, 2017 0:14:16 GMT -5
That dowel was identified as a roll-up for one of Lindbergh's large maps.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 4, 2017 8:51:58 GMT -5
Did Johnson ever find any wood that matched any of the ladder wood when he went to the State Village for Epileptics in Skillman NJ to inspect the wood they were using there? What about the large pile of discarded wood that was on Lindbergh's property? Was that wood ever checked? Great research (as always) Amy. The idea that Johnson didn't know what he was doing by pointing to this birch/maple mistake is only a method used by those who do not like his observations. As I implied on pages 220-1, there's no doubt in my mind that Johnson repudiated his report because he did not want to lose his Job. He clearly believed all that he wrote as we see evidenced by his actions and words after Hoffman got involved. To answer your question(s): 1. Yes. Johnson searched the lumber at Skillman on at least two occasions. He found lumber "similar" but nothing to connect it to the ladder. 2. Yes. Koehler made a search of that wood pile in the spring of 1933 but found nothing to connect with the ladder.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2017 12:30:59 GMT -5
Michael,
I agree with you that Johnson was forced to publicly reject his own report. Schwarzkopf had been confronted by the defense in court with Johnson's report. Fisher posed questions about the left handedness, the ladder dowels and the wood found in Lindbergh's library that matched. Almost every question Fisher asked Schwarzkopf was objected to and every one was sustained by Trenchard. It was really nasty. I believe that Johnson had a government job at this time (not the same one as 1932) in New Jersey so I am sure his job was threatened. He had a wife and young children he needed to support so he had to fall on the sword for the prosecution. The longer you look into this case, the more of this you see.
Staying with Squire Johnson but moving in another direction, in Dark Corners, Chapter 14, The Next Phase, page 217, you wrote the following:
"On March 11th, Johnson learned that the 'Humes living at Kingston were personal friends of Betty Gow,' and that 'Commissioner Peterson and Chief Davis of Raritan Township, the Prosecutor of Middlesex Country and Lieutenant D. Walsh of the County staff' had gone to their home and discovered some crate lumber." (Footnote 656)
The above comes out of a report dated March 12, 1932.
Moving to Chapter 9, The Whateleys, page 79, you write that the Whateleys were friends with the Humes of Kingston. These two couples became friends when Mrs. Hume took care of Elsie Whateley when she was recuperating from surgery. You then explain that the Whateleys entertained the Humes at both the Lawerenceville rental house and at Highfields. (Footnotes 204 & 205)
The above comes from a report dated April 8, 1932.
The Whateleys were at the Lawrenceville rental starting in October 1930. Betty Gow becomes Charlie's nurse in February 1931 at the Lawrenceville house. Betty would leave the Lawrenceville rental in April when CAL and Anne and Charlie moved back to Englewood so they could begin preparations for their Orient flight.
So my questions are:
1) When did Elsie Whateley have her surgery which became the starting point for the friendship between the Humes and the Whateleys?
2) Why are the Humes described as close friends of Betty Gow in that March 12th report?
3) The dislike of Betty Gow by Ollie Whateley you mention on page 81 of Chapter 9, did it stem from the time Betty was in residence at the Lawrenceville rental? Did this dislike continue into 1932 even though Betty Gow was no longer living with the Whateleys but was living in Englewood?
|
|
|
Post by garyb215 on Feb 5, 2017 17:26:04 GMT -5
Else and Olly end their statements to the police with a vote of confidence for Betty. Maybe it was because one of their own was darted with suspicion along with Red. Amy I like your question # two. How would Gow be considered friends with the Humes. Thats a really good question.
I am only talking hypothetical here. If Lindbergh was planning a hoax and yet somehow the baby got in the wrong hands of Hauptmann. What if someone knew Lindbergh was making moves this night and an equally evil mind had plans to make things happen in their direction. Say Gow handed the baby to Hauptmann out the window not completely filled in with specific instructions gave the baby to the wrong person. It would be in this wild scenario a reason why Whately would blame Betty on his deathbed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 15:28:38 GMT -5
Else and Olly end their statements to the police with a vote of confidence for Betty. Maybe it was because one of their own was darted with suspicion along with Red. Say Gow handed the baby to Hauptmann out the window not completely filled in with specific instructions gave the baby to the wrong person. It would be in this wild scenario a reason why Whately would blame Betty on his deathbed. Gary, Elsie and Ollie do say in their statements that they observed that Betty Gow was upset about what happened that night. Do you think at this point they both believe that Betty is not involved in what happened? If Betty Gow is who Whateley named in his deathbed confession, how did he learn that it was Betty Gow who handed Charlie out the window?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 6, 2017 18:10:07 GMT -5
So my questions are: 1) When did Elsie Whateley have her surgery which became the starting point for the friendship between the Humes and the Whateleys? I've got (2) sources in front of me and one says the summer of 1931. The other is Mrs. Hume who said April 1931. I think there are more but I trust the Hume since she was a party to it. 2) Why are the Humes described as close friends of Betty Gow in that March 12th report? This claim comes from Johnson. I don't have anything beyond that to show where he's getting it from. I always believed it was possible that Betty was present during the visits by the Humes as a possible explanation. Another being Hume was Scotch like Betty. Lastly that he worked at Princeton University where Betty was known to hang out on her days off until that incident I wrote about in the book. However, Mrs. Hume claimed they did not know her and they never met her. Since I never found anything else then I cannot say for sure. The dislike of Betty Gow by Ollie Whateley you mention on page 81 of Chapter 9, did it stem from the time Betty was in residence at the Lawrenceville rental? Did this dislike continue into 1932 even though Betty Gow was no longer living with the Whateleys but was living in Englewood? I don't have anything to date when it started but, since he's revealing it after the crime, then I think it's safe to say he still felt that way. It's pretty interesting to me that Whateley also told Reporters that it was, in essence, an inside job almost immediately after the crime.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Feb 6, 2017 20:46:02 GMT -5
Yes, the more you know about the goings-on at the Hauptmann trial, the more you can see that Hauptmann was railroaded into that murder conviction. You had Wilentz advancing a bogus theory about entering the nursery window from a ladder, taking the baby from a crib, then climbing back down with the baby. That just doesn't wash with the evidence. No credible evidence of Hauptmann anywhere near the Lindbergh property at the time he was alleged to be perpetrating this crime, unless you fall for the testimony of a legally blind elderly man or of a known liar. Then you have Koehler testifying that one rail of the ladder wood had to have come from Hauptmann's garage. As we see on this thread, some the ladder wood could possibly have come from Lindbergh's library or from Hume's property as well.
Aside from the phony theory, Wilentz and pals also saw to it that defense witnesses were threatened, and even before the trial, had police vet potential jurors so that the jurors would be swayed toward the prosecution even before they were selected. Sad to say, the jury pool available in Hunterdon County was generally poorly educated and prone to follow the prosecution's arguments above the defense's.
Then, too, you had the politically correct and biased Judge Trenchard, as Amy illustrated above, who would not allow the defense attorneys to pursue issues which might have inculpated CAL Sr. or his employees. Surely his biases would be reflected in the thought processes of these jurors who would instinctively look up to a judge as an iconic figure.
So, given the entire atmosphere surrounding the trial, it would have required an extraordinary amount of bravery, beyond that which could reasonably be expected from these people, for anyone on the jury to refuse to go along along with his colleagues and cause the jury to be hung. If I was on the jury and were brave enough, I would have voted NOT GUILTY and recommended that the defendant be remanded back to New York (from whence he was extradited) to face extortion charges.
|
|
|
Post by garyb215 on Feb 6, 2017 22:35:33 GMT -5
Thank you Amy for being nice enough to respond to my comment. Again this is just a what if. If one can believe Cal was able to control Betty why not both Betty and Olly? I don't want to disrupt the chain of thought and topic here so I'll go back in my hole in the woodwork.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 23:29:43 GMT -5
So, given the entire atmosphere surrounding the trial, it would have required an extraordinary amount of bravery, beyond that which could reasonably be expected from these people, for anyone on the jury to refuse to go along along with his colleagues and cause the jury to be hung. When the jury began voting, they all voted guilty. What they split on was the death sentence. Five jurors voted for mercy. Those five would turn over to the death sentence during the course of the deliberating. I know that Michael discovered that one juror had been bribed. I wonder if one of them had hinted at causing a hung jury and that could be why there was a bribe. (Sigh), we will have to wait for one of Michael's future volumes to find out what the circumstances are concerning that bribe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2017 23:37:12 GMT -5
Thank you Amy for being nice enough to respond to my comment. Again this is just a what if. If one can believe Cal was able to control Betty why not both Betty and Olly? Gary, Do you think Whateley might have named both Betty Gow and Lindbergh in his deathbed confession? The fact that the people who were present and heard what Whateley said never revealed it to anyone. Do you think they would have kept silent if Whateley had named just Betty Gow?
|
|
|
Post by garyb215 on Feb 7, 2017 4:17:30 GMT -5
The deathbed confession was something new to me until I read Michael's book. What did Betty do to make him say this? I think if Whately knew something he probably knew it all. Its funny Lindbergh visited him just before the clergy. Lindbergh's visit probably burdened him to say what he said. It would be interesting to know their parting words to each other. It could give us a clue. Yeah if Lindbergh was mentioned it would have been even more imperative to keep his last words in that room.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2019 20:57:22 GMT -5
Michael talks about Squire Johnson in The Dark Corners, Volume 1, Chapter 14 starting on page 213. I want to post an interesting report written and submitted by Squire Johnson and George Daws to Gov. Harold Hoffman in January of 1936. This report is about Charles Schippell. Schippell had lived in a shack located off Mount Rose Road close to where the body of Charlie was found. These gentlemen lay out for Gov. Hoffman why they believe Schippell was a strong suspect as the kidnapper of the Lindbergh baby. In this report you will see the name "Carodi". The correct spelling for this name is Cerardi. Enrico Cerardi had rented Schippell's shack during the summer of 1931. imgur.com/zrhEJMJ Page One imgur.com/ebIFwi9 Page Two imgur.com/jrBp0ns Page Three imgur.com/uhGom1r Page Four imgur.com/mir4Mu6 Page Five imgur.com/yr6RY1I Page Six imgur.com/0TsPkBD Page Seven imgur.com/4eTgJlr Page Eight Here is photo of Charles Schippell taken in 1920. Does he make you think of Richard Hauptmann? Some people thought there was a resemblance. imgur.com/Z6t8TMN
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2019 9:16:03 GMT -5
Hi Amy - remember the alleged rumor that Betty had "mistreated" Charlie - I think Ollie told that to the Humes? That may be one of the reasons Ollie disliked Betty so much. Michael discusses this "dislike" of Betty Gow in Chapter 9 of The Dark Corners, Volume One. He mentions the police report of May 15, 1932, which I will share here. As Michael writes, this dislike of Betty Gow by Ollie reveals itself more than once in that chapter. So there must be something to it, I suppose. I have always wondered (and as Michael mentions in this chapter) if that "dislike" stemmed from Whateley's position that the kidnapping was an inside job and Whateley believed Betty Gow was the inside accomplice in this kidnapping. I think it should be noted that Betty Gow and Red Johnson visited with the Whateleys on the weekend of February 13/14, 1932. Supposedly a strictly social call. But was it really just that? Less than a month later Charlie would go missing. I wonder what Whateley thought of Henry "Red" Johnson? imgur.com/g7klsJ2
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Oct 8, 2019 9:24:19 GMT -5
Too bad that picture of Schippell is 12 years before the LKC... a person's appearance can really change in a dozen or so years.
Based on this report , the case for putting Schippell at the scene of the crime appears a lot stronger than BRH:
Page 2 - Schippell's chisel set is missing the same 3/4" Bucks Brothers chisel as found at the scene. Variety of available wood in his workshop. Green sedan hidden on premises.
Page 3 - Burlap bags in his vehicle similar to that found at the body dump site. Left-handed ladder construction and placement at Hopewell (was BRH left handed?)
Page 4 - Schippell's self-proclaimed "monkey climbing abilities." (Was Schippell ever considered as CJ based on accent and climbing antics at Woodlawn?)
Page 5 - Schippell not "moronic" and alibi disproved for March 1st
Page 6 - Rodwellers confirm Schippell lived at his shack proximate to the kidnapping time frame. Introduces Cerardi as possible accomplice? Are the footprints at Hopewell that of Schippell, Cerardi and his mistress?
Page 7 - Rodweller observes paper with symbols similar to kidnapping notes at Schippells shack. Schippell's ability to write in multiple style variations. Told others about CALjr body burial moves.
I'm really looking forward to V3 and the sections on the ladder and Cerardi...
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Oct 8, 2019 16:02:06 GMT -5
On page 2 of the report, Schippell is in possession of a hidden dark green Paige sedan. The Graham Brothers bought the Paige company in 1927. The corporate name soon changed to Graham-Paige Motors Corporation. In 1928 the cars became known as Graham-Paiges. His bore a 1930 license plate so it's unclear what model year the car actually was. Here is a 1930 Graham Paige: Here is BRH's Dodge: To my modern eyes, the headlights, radiator and bumper are very similar; of course there may have been many similarly styled sedans in that era. But as previously posted a dark colored car was observed in the vicinity of Highfields on the night of the kidnapping. Could a dark green Paige be confused with a dark blue/green Dodge of a similar vintage, especially at dusk/night? We know Lupica was adamant about the grille/radiator ornament being a Dodge but could he have been mistaken and confused it with a less popular/common make?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2019 19:17:36 GMT -5
Nice research, scathma! I had no idea those cars were so similar! I have always been interested in Schippell. There was belief that a local was involved with this crime. I think Schippell makes a good suspect for this crime. Like you, I can hardly wait to read Michael's The Dark Corners Volume 3 and everything he has to share on the wood, Cerardi and so much more!!!
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Oct 9, 2019 9:54:17 GMT -5
Amy - I enjoyed reading that thought-provoking Johnson/Daws report you posted.
Perhaps you can clarify or give an opinion on a statement on page 5 regarding Schippel's military service. The report indicates his claims of being a naval veteran with WWI service were false; however, he is receiving what I interpreted to be a military pension. Was he receiving the pension under false pretenses or is only the claim of WWI service the extent of the falsehood?
If he was a naval veteran, then the "Boad Nelly" and Horseneck Beach/Gay Head near Elizabeth Island references might be areas he was familiar with based on his history in that service or as an experienced sailor?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2019 15:05:24 GMT -5
Perhaps you can clarify or give an opinion on a statement on page 5 regarding Schippel's military service. The report indicates his claims of being a naval veteran with WWI service were false; however, he is receiving what I interpreted to be a military pension. Was he receiving the pension under false pretenses or is only the claim of WWI service the extent of the falsehood? I read that statement on page 5 with interest also. I will post Charles Schippell's May 17, 1932 statement for you. According to what he says he was in the Naval Reserve. That photo I posted shows Schippell in his naval uniform. Schippell talks about the ship he was on and also about being injured. So it is possible he was receiving a form of disability due to that injury. I will do more checking on this at the archives to see if there is any confirmation report by the NJSP concerning Schippell's military service. I find your link of Schippell's naval service and the Boad Nelly note interesting! Here is that statement. I hope you will share your thoughts on it after you have time to review it. imgur.com/Ku8VHPm Page One imgur.com/hVDaC9t Page Two imgur.com/2meBPxi Page Three
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2019 20:05:34 GMT -5
however, he is receiving what I interpreted to be a military pension. Was he receiving the pension under false pretenses or is only the claim of WWI service the extent of the falsehood? Hi Scathma, I went on to Ancestry and I can confirm that Charles Schippell was a U.S. Veteran. Schippell died November 16, 1948 and is buried in Long Island National Cemetery, Farmingdale, New York.
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Oct 11, 2019 9:42:07 GMT -5
Amy - thank you for posting Schippell's 05/32 statement and the Ancestry research
They interviewed him at 3am?
He describes himself as a chauffeur, mechanic and butcher. That last occupation is interesting. Would he know any meat preservation techniques that might explain the condition of the body purported to be CAL jr? Some described the appearance of the skin on the corpse as similar to embalming. The accepted explanation for the absence of certain organs and limbs was attributed to animal predation. What is a butcher but a surgeon on a less precise level? Assuming the corpse is real and Schippell is responsible for the abduction, could he have removed those missing parts for a reason known only to him?
His alibi for 2/29 is he went to the movie theater... this from a guy living on $17 a month? I suppose it was a common occurrence even in the Depression.
His alibi for the next day 3/1 is he was home bedridden with illness... not the most iron-clad alibi offered in the case is it?
He doesn't get around to going to the VA hospital for a week. Maybe just a regularly scheduled visit for his routine "treatments" and not related to the purported illness that is the basis for his alibi for 3/1?
Schippell being born in the States to a German parent fits the notion that the ransom notes were written by someone trying to appear German rather than an actual German like BRH.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Oct 12, 2019 10:05:51 GMT -5
I think joe perrone is buried there also
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 19:40:55 GMT -5
He describes himself as a chauffeur, mechanic and butcher. I have seen Schippell listed as a chauffeur and a mechanic in his ancestry listings. The butcher one I am not sure about. Perhaps he is using his navy position as a second level cook when he offered this?? I do not think of this as a strong alibi either. There was no doctor visit to validate it. Apparently this went unchallenged. He supposedly was at his mother-in-law's house in the Bronx the night of 3/1. I have not been able to locate a report that Schippell's wife and/or mother-in-law were interviewed to verify this! Schippell's father, Rudolph, came to America in 1883 and became a naturalized citizen in 1897. I have encountered that thought before that the ransom notes were written so as to appear they were written by someone who was a German. It is something that I have considered myself. In his statement, Scippell claimed the ammonia fumes he was exposed to on the ship affected his lungs. I wonder if he coughed a lot?? Schippell does say on page two of his statement that the Veterans Bureau won't tell him what is wrong with him. Does he really have any condition at all or is it all just in his mind? Charles Schippell died in 1948 at the age of 60. I have not been able to find the cause of death. Sorry! Charles Schippell did remain a person of interest in this case, especially for Lieutenant Leo Rodweiller of the Princeton Police. I am going to post a report concerning Schippell dated April 7, 1934 where it mentions Schippell is still under investigation by the NJSP. imgur.com/n3BIS2k
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 20:21:55 GMT -5
The NJSP did bring a picture they found in Schippell's shack to Dr. Condon to see if he recognized this man but Condon was not able to identify him. Unfortunately the picture brought to Condon to look at was not Charles Schippell. It was actually Schippell's brother, Rudolph who lived in Australia. Charles mentions this brother on page three of his statement. imgur.com/ogB5w7BHere is the picture of Rudolph Schippell that Condon was shown. imgur.com/v7WpTzy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2019 20:28:00 GMT -5
I think joe perrone is buried there also I did not know that, Steve. Thanks for sharing this!
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Oct 13, 2019 12:46:05 GMT -5
If anyone can obtain any known Schippel handwriting specimens and compare them to the ransom notes, that could be a revealing study.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Oct 13, 2019 13:24:24 GMT -5
From this perspective, absolutely no facial resemblance to Hauptmann.
Thanks, amy35, for your posts of the Squire Johnson summary sent to Gov. Hoffman. I do think that Schippell is a fairly "hot suspect." What resonates in particular are the items found in Schippell's shack (allegedly) cantianing the overlapping circles symbol used on the ransom notes. You have to wonder why that and other factors didn't prompt an earlier arrest of Schippell in the case.
What stands out in the Schippell statement to NYPD is that in May 1932, he seemed to have a quick reply to all questions about his whereabouts and doings on specific dates in February and March. He must have rehearsed these answers and prepared well for his interview. But if he was totally innocent of the Lindbergh kidnapping, why would the preparation be necessary? The ordinary person who was totally uninvolved could generally legitimately say that he couldn't remember what he was doing on a specific date two months or more earlier. And, of course, his NYPD May statement is inconsistent with the Squire Johnson report, especially with the time denied being spent in and around the New Jersey shack.
|
|
ziki
Trooper
Posts: 44
|
Post by ziki on Oct 14, 2019 0:22:13 GMT -5
What stands out in the Schippell statement to NYPD is that in May 1932, he seemed to have a quick reply to all questions about his whereabouts and doings on specific dates in February and March. He must have rehearsed these answers and prepared well for his interview. But if he was totally innocent of the Lindbergh kidnapping, why would the preparation be necessary? The ordinary person who was totally uninvolved could generally legitimately say that he couldn't remember what he was doing on a specific date two months or more earlier. And, of course, his NYPD May statement is inconsistent with the Squire Johnson report, especially with the time denied being spent in and around the New Jersey shack. Maybe Schippel just needed to be prepared for this queations because he found Charlie’s Jr. body on his property and took it to the place where it was found? (The idea of Schippel transferring the Body is expressed in some older posts on this forum.)
|
|