|
Post by Michael on May 4, 2018 8:33:47 GMT -5
Mysteries at the Museum
Don Wildman goes on the scene to investigate
The Kidnapping of Lindy's Baby
Thurs May 31st, 9pm, on Travel Channel
(Preview Pending)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2018 22:15:40 GMT -5
Thanks for posting this!!!! I am so looking forward to seeing this presentation. Mysteries at the Museum is a good show. They do a nice job presenting the topics they cover so I am hopeful that they will do so with the Lindbergh case.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on May 5, 2018 13:21:42 GMT -5
Hi All, I agree with Amy, the Mysteries at the Museum series is terrific. But Michael is being very modest The Kidnapping of Lindy's Baby episode concludes with a round-robin, panel-discussion with Michael, Mark Falzini, Lloyd Gardner, Dolores Raisch, Margaret Sudhaka, and host Don Wildman. Kudos to all. Can't wait!
|
|
|
Post by rebekah on May 5, 2018 15:35:07 GMT -5
Isn't it great that we all seem to follow the same television? I love Mysteries at the Museum. Can't wait for this one! Whatever happened to the episode of A Crime to Remember, I wonder.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on May 7, 2018 10:04:39 GMT -5
that's a great show its where I learned about belle guness a women murderer in the turn of the century the crime author shecthter I don't think I spelled it right just wrote a new book on her I read it on a plane ride
|
|
matm
Recruit
Posts: 1
|
Post by matm on May 30, 2018 21:41:36 GMT -5
Hi all,
I'm the producer of the Mysteries at the Museum Lindbergh special. I wanted to share a big thanks to Michael and all of you here on these boards. I certainly don't have to tell any of you that this case is a heavy lift. When I started my research last fall I knew very little about the case. But thanks to this fascinating website, a handful of excellent books, numerous Lindbergh scholars who educated me over the phone and the incomparable Mark Falzini who always made time for me at the Archives, I feel I can at the very least keep up with all of you amateur sleuths.
I'm quite proud of the show that premieres tomorrow. The constraints of a one-hour television program (really 43 minutes after commercials) forced us to greatly simplify the case. I opted to do this mostly through subtraction. You will find no mention of Violet Sharp, Red Johnson, John Curtis, Mickey Rosner, Breckenridge, Osborne or even Al Capone. Whole pieces of evidence (the chisel) and stages of the investigation (J. J. Faulkner) had to go. This is the LKC stripped to its barest essentials.
What we hope it does do is provide an accessible entry point for thousands of people who have perhaps never heard of the case. Or maybe have never even heard of Charles Lindbergh (we spend some time explaining how he became famous). Then we present the essential facts at the very spot they happened: our host Don Wildman goes inside Highfields, stands outside Condon's house, in the dark on Whittemore Street, outside Hauptmann's house, inside the courthouse. He talks to people who know what they're talking about. And - in my personal favorite segment - he brings a replica ladder to Highfields and attempts the famous climb through the real nursery window.
And yes, as Wayne points out above, it all culminates in a roundtable discussion with Michael, Mark Falzini Lloyd Gardner, Dolores Raisch and Margaret Sudhaker.
Hope you can check it out: The Lindbergh Kidnapping: Mysteries at the Museum Thursday, May 31st at 9pm ET Travel Channel
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on May 31, 2018 11:06:52 GMT -5
Hi matm, I work til 10 tonight, will this episode be rebroadcast or can I watch online? I certainly don't want to miss this! Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 31, 2018 14:20:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on May 31, 2018 21:17:43 GMT -5
Matm,
GREAT WORK!
Honestly, with only 43 minutes to tell this story, you nailed it.
And great work Michael!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 1, 2018 7:19:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jun 1, 2018 8:36:27 GMT -5
terrible show rich sloan did a good job but to have a group of people and not have a rebuttal on gardners stupid unproven theory that Lindbergh had his son killed because of rickets is so absurd. and gov hoffmans grand nephew with a picture of rail 16 blurry to try to show there wasn't nailholes during march 1st is wrong. there were nail holes at that time. again no rebuttal.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 1, 2018 11:39:14 GMT -5
Steve-
Richard Sloan did a GREAT job and is always a "go to" concerning this case.
Now to your criticism... The only way you like the show is if it doesn't examine anything outside of the Lone-Wolf theory? One of the things that impressed me the most was their passion for the topic, and the final product certainly reflects it. You were on a replica at Highfields but did you crawl into the window? Why not? Because it was too dangerous, and it's much easier to draw a conclusion one "likes" without actually doing it. Here we have a crew that wanted to know. No ulterior motive other than to find out - so Don risked injury and did it. How they got so much information and great quality into such a short amount of time is beyond impressive, and I can't wait for the episode on Zodiac!
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jun 1, 2018 16:33:47 GMT -5
Regarding last night's show:
(1) The most spectacular part was the film's narrator supposedly showing how he could enter the nursery room window from a supposed "replica ladder" and then take a package supposedly simulating the baby out the window with him and then down the ladder. I have my doubts if that actually was a replica ladder that he used, but instead a much stronger version of the ladder found in the yard. And upon entering the window, was there a chest right below the sill with items on it, which he completely avoided in both going in and coming out? I wouldn't be surprised if this narrator had a background as a movie stunt man. Remember that the NJSP made several attempts at this feat in their investigations and were never able to do it.
(2) The first half or so of the film was quite straightforward for those of us who have some knowledge of the basic facts of the case. I suppose that because of time constraints, they completely neglected some of the important events, e.g., the first meeting between Condon and Cemetery John at Woodlawn Cemetery. Also nothing on Birratella and Cerrita, nor the controversy over the identity of the individual who delivered the note to Condon directing him to the vicinity of St. Raymond's for the ransom payment.
(3) Nothing about Isidore Fisch nor a possible accomplice of Cemetery John at the two cemetery encounters with Condon.
(4) Most of the last half of the film was dedicated to alternative theories, where the narrator met a small group of "experts' at the NJSP Museum. I picked up on Lloyd Gardner's name and his theory about Charlie's health and Lindberg's belief in eugenics. That's been discussed frequently on these boards. I also Knew of Mark Falzini. But who were the others in that small group, and what are their credentials with respect to the LKC?
(More possibly to follow. The show provoked a lot of thought but, due to its length limitations, left out a lot of issues.)
|
|
|
Post by rebekah on Jun 1, 2018 18:54:40 GMT -5
Regarding last night's show: (1) The most spectacular part was the film's narrator supposedly showing how he could enter the nursery room window from a supposed "replica ladder" and then take a package supposedly simulating the baby out the window with him and then down the ladder. I have my doubts if that actually was a replica ladder that he used, but instead a much stronger version of the ladder found in the yard. And upon entering the window, was there a chest right below the sill with items on it, which he completely avoided in both going in and coming out? I wouldn't be surprised if this narrator had a background as a movie stunt man. Remember that the NJSP made several attempts at this feat in their investigations and were never able to do it. (2) The first half or so of the film was quite straightforward for those of us who have some knowledge of the basic facts of the case. I suppose that because of time constraints, they completely neglected some of the important events, e.g., the first meeting between Condon and Cemetery John at Woodlawn Cemetery. Also nothing on Birratella and Cerrita, nor the controversy over the identity of the individual who delivered the note to Condon directing him to the vicinity of St. Raymond's for the ransom payment. (3) Nothing about Isidore Fisch nor a possible accomplice of Cemetery John at the two cemetery encounters with Condon. (4) Most of the last half of the film was dedicated to alternative theories, where the narrator met a small group of "experts' at the NJSP Museum. I picked up on Lloyd Gardner's name and his theory about Charlie's health and Lindberg's belief in eugenics. That's been discussed frequently on these boards. I also Knew of Mark Falzini. But who were the others in that small group, and what are their credentials with respect to the LKC? (More possibly to follow. The show provoked a lot of thought but, due to its length limitations, left out a lot of issues.) #4-- Well, one of them was Michael. Did you miss that? I didn't recognize the names of the ladies, but I'll bet we know their screen names.
|
|
|
Post by Miss dockendorf on Jun 1, 2018 18:58:26 GMT -5
I know this is probably a off point question but do you know if the nursery fireplace has been changed or are those various tiles with images of a sail boat and a child original to the nursery? Enjoyed see the inside of the house in "Spectacular Living Color" and the fireplace caught my eye. Thanks to anyone who knows the answer.
|
|
|
Post by rebekah on Jun 1, 2018 19:01:30 GMT -5
Hi, Michael. You looked great! They did a good job, and I have a question. Is it true that the base of the ladder was only 14 inches wide? If so, that only reinforces my belief that no one ever climbed through that window using it.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Jun 1, 2018 19:25:44 GMT -5
Regarding last night's show: (1) The most spectacular part was the film's narrator supposedly showing how he could enter the nursery room window from a supposed "replica ladder" and then take a package supposedly simulating the baby out the window with him and then down the ladder. I have my doubts if that actually was a replica ladder that he used, but instead a much stronger version of the ladder found in the yard. And upon entering the window, was there a chest right below the sill with items on it, which he completely avoided in both going in and coming out? I wouldn't be surprised if this narrator had a background as a movie stunt man. Remember that the NJSP made several attempts at this feat in their investigations and were never able to do it. He did it in broad daylight into a room he knew would be empty. We know from the footprint evidence the kidnappers never ventured the 20' or so feet from the window that it would take to see into the room to ensure CAL Sr. or other members of the household were not present. There did seem to be a chest with a little suitcase on it, but it seemed a bit lower to the ground than the actual one and the tinker toys were missing. Also missing was the literal obstacle course in the room (wind screen, small dining table + chair, etc). I'd also surmise that, while we didn't see it, the filmmakers had mattresses or padding set up at the base of the ladder should the host have fallen. Can't imagine insurance being okay with that kind of climb without it. If so, this would add to his confidence. As far as the "discussion" part of the show, Michael you were great! I only wish they'd added a minute or two to go over some of the other key points of contradictory evidence to the official theory (NYU dinner, Lindbergh's arrival time, his treatment of Charlie while alive, etc).
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 2, 2018 11:05:35 GMT -5
I know this is probably a off point question but do you know if the nursery fireplace has been changed or are those various tiles with images of a sail boat and a child original to the nursery? Enjoyed see the inside of the house in "Spectacular Living Color" and the fireplace caught my eye. Thanks to anyone who knows the answer. Here is one of the March 2nd photos of the nursery. i.imgur.com/iFQ4cWy.jpgHi, Michael. You looked great! They did a good job, and I have a question. Is it true that the base of the ladder was only 14 inches wide? If so, that only reinforces my belief that no one ever climbed through that window using it. Here are the ladder measurements:
|
|
|
Post by Miss dockendorf on Jun 2, 2018 11:56:37 GMT -5
Thanks for that picture and it's definitely the same. Amazing the interior is so similar and unchanged from the night of the kidnapping. For some reason that unnerves me. Thanks again for posting the picture.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jun 2, 2018 19:15:16 GMT -5
According to diagram posted by Michael, the steps of the ladder were 21" apart and the width was indeed only a tad more than 14". Just curious: What is Don Wildman's approximate height and weight? He seems like a pretty big guy in the film. You would think that an ideal guy to use a ladder of those dimensions would be tall and long-legged but slim, and I doubt that the narrator fits those specs. Who might use that ladder most conveniently? Maybe "Slim" Lindbergh himself?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2018 11:27:40 GMT -5
My question, also, has been : Why would you have an open window on a cold wet night in the nursery of a baby who was not even allowed to travel that day due to his cold that he was still suffering ? Also, I recently saw a documentary which stated that Charles Lindbergh's study was just below the nursery and that he was in the study the night the baby was kidnapped. If you look at the pictures of the ladder, you will note that the ladder is place just to the outside of the shutters of the study and the nursery, as if the kidnapper had prepared to not be seen climbing the ladder directly in front of the windows, yet, the placement of that ladder Must have made some noise, as well as making noise when the kidnapper brought down an extra 30 pounds, which was the weight of the baby. I believe the idea of opening the french window was to air out the room. I've read that is was typical to believe a "sick room" needed fresh air to kill germs. I am all ears though if anyone thinks this position is an incorrect one. The Library question is a very good one. We have all kinds of variables and/or scenarios to consider. When did the crime occur? For those who read my book know - I am certain it occurred right around 8PM. For those who believe Lindbergh's ear-witness account (one heard when no one else - even the dog - did not) then we're talking between 9:10-15PM. If the crime occurred after 9:30PM then Lindbergh was in his Library. The Police explained that while Lindbergh's desk was in front of the window directly under the "kidnap" window, it faced toward the wall, and if Lindbergh had been sitting at it he would have had his back to where it was positioned. A very interesting observation was made along these lines: "If the ladder had been placed to the left of the window and it had been there when Colonel Lindbergh entered his study he could have easily seen it through the window." We haven't debated this point for some time but this observation begs the question as to "why" the ladder was staged to the right. That means who ever climbed it would be using their LEFT hand to open the shutter, open the window, and use as the main "tool" to pull oneself through the window. It's where I would have staged it because I am LEFT handed. Hauptmann was right handed. So maybe it wasn't Hauptmann? But if was him did he do this knowing Lindbergh wouldn't be able to see him on the right but would on the left? Or was this just more dumb luck? For me it's just another point to add to the fact inside help was being utilized. As they mention there, no kidnapper would dare kidnap the most famous baby in the world at dinner time, when the whole family was awake and inside the house. We also have a pretty good knowledge of the footprint evidence. There was a narrow boardwalk which the kidnapper(s) stayed on during their approach, as no footprints were found leading to the house itself, only walking away. Given this, we know that the kidnappers stayed on this very narrow boardwalk when putting the ladder up, which would be near impossible for one person to do. More importantly, given the time of night, it is possible there could have been multiple people in the nursery yet we know the kidnappers didn't step off the boardwalk to go far enough back from the window to scope out who was in the room. They went up "blind," so to speak... in pitch darkness, with gusty winds and no knowledge of what or who may waiting for them in the room. Another thing, and this is in my book too, there was a Stein in the corner of that window ledge. Notice Don climbing in and out then imagine he doesn't knock it onto the floor. And if not knocked to the floor but not moving it all? Also consider there was a toy on top of that suitcase as well. That WAS moved but very little attention is ever paid to this fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2018 15:50:07 GMT -5
I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed this presentation of the Lindbergh kidnapping done by the Mysteries at the Museum show. I thought they did an awesome job of presenting the historical version while calling into question the possibility that there is more to this case than what history has told us.
I enjoyed seeing Richard Sloan with Don Wildman outside of Condon's house (undergoing renovations apparently) and Harry Kazman giving Don a tour of the Flemington Courthouse.
I was very intrigued when Don talked with Patrick Bamburak, the great grand nephew of Gov. Harold Hoffman. Patrick brought up the fact that in the March 2, 1932 Springfield picture showing rail 16, Patrick pointed out that there were no nail holes showing on that board in 1932. How could this board have been nailed down in Hauptmannn's attic if there are no nail holes in it in March of 1932?
I have watched the segment of Don making the window climb numerous times. Although he did get into the room, it was very difficult to do so and he needed to use the chest that was under the window. In order to exit the nursery with the "baby bag" he actually had moved the suitcase to the side, rested the baby bag on the chest when he climbed onto the chest so he could maneuver himself into a position to back out of the window after placing the ransom note. I think this is important. Isn't the historical narrative that the suitcase was never moved out of position? That the kidnaper entered and exited that room without disturbing anything, including the beer stein Michael mentioned earlier? As I watched this sequence, I tried to imagine Don entering and exiting without the use of that chest. He didn't, but yet we are supposed to believe the kidnaper did that night, long ago.
I really salute the Mysteries at the Museum show for including the round table segment hosting all those experts including Michael Melsky who hosts this wonderful board we all contribute to. You were great in this portion of the show, Michael. When Don asked if ransom money was the only motive for Charlie's kidnapping, you said "or make him go away", and for me, this was the most important point in this whole program. It is the foundation stone of this whole crime and I am so glad that you were able to say it on national TV.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jun 3, 2018 20:56:30 GMT -5
I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed this presentation of the Lindbergh kidnapping done by the Mysteries at the Museum show. I thought they did an awesome job of presenting the historical version while calling into question the possibility that there is more to this case than what history has told us. I enjoyed seeing Richard Sloan with Don Wildman outside of Condon's house (undergoing renovations apparently) and Harry Kazman giving Don a tour of the Flemington Courthouse. I was very intrigued when Don talked with Patrick Bamburak, the great grand nephew of Gov. Harold Hoffman. Patrick brought up the fact that in the March 2, 1932 Springfield picture showing rail 16, Patrick pointed out that there were no nail holes showing on that board in 1932. How could this board have been nailed down in Hauptmannn's attic if there are no nail holes in it in March of 1932? I have watched the segment of Don making the window climb numerous times. Although he did get into the room, it was very difficult to do so and he needed to use the chest that was under the window. In order to exit the nursery with the "baby bag" he actually had moved the suitcase to the side, rested the baby bag on the chest when he climbed onto the chest so he could maneuver himself into a position to back out of the window after placing the ransom note. I think this is important. Isn't the historical narrative that the suitcase was never moved out of position? That the kidnaper entered and exited that room without disturbing anything, including the beer stein Michael mentioned earlier? As I watched this sequence, I tried to imagine Don entering and exiting without the use of that chest. He didn't, but yet we are supposed to believe the kidnaper did that night, long ago. I really salute the Mysteries at the Museum show for including the round table segment hosting all those experts including Michael Melsky who hosts this wonderful board we all contribute to. You were great in this portion of the show, Michael. When Don asked if ransom money was the only motive for Charlie's kidnapping, you said "or make him go away", and for me, this was the most important point in this whole program. It is the foundation stone of this whole crime and I am so glad that you were able to say it on national TV. Yes, a lot of good stuff in that film. But a lot of areas important to the case missing, and you can understand that time limitations were the main factor in this. Wonder what may have been edited out because of time constraints.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Jun 4, 2018 2:03:09 GMT -5
Michael - curious what you can tell us from the discussion that wasn't aired? Did anything interesting happen? Did you find the host left in agreement, at least on the basics, with you and Lloyd?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 4, 2018 7:04:25 GMT -5
Michael - curious what you can tell us from the discussion that wasn't aired? Did anything interesting happen? Did you find the host left in agreement, at least on the basics, with you and Lloyd? I was only ever part of the "round table" discussion which is something very comfortable to me. We've had these types of meeting since almost the beginning. Going around the table with ideas and input is exactly how's its always been. Of course our conversation was longer than what aired but there's a lot from it I honestly can't exactly remember, but its not unlike the basic "hows," "whats," and "whys" we've all asked and explored. I don't like putting words in anyone's mouth but I'd say no one accepted this was done by a Lone-Wolf.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jun 4, 2018 11:03:41 GMT -5
I don't accept that Lindbergh did it either. gardner with this lame theory he claimed is comical
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 4, 2018 11:05:37 GMT -5
I don't accept that Lindbergh did it either. gardner with this lame theory he claimed is comical You're getting grumpy in your old age... Hey, get ready for V2 Steve. Your pal Condon will never be looked at the same way again.
|
|
|
Post by scathma on Jun 4, 2018 12:24:24 GMT -5
Unfortunately I haven't seen the show... I don't have access to cable TV and can't put a dish on my condo for satellite. I'll have to wait until it gets posted online somewhere Michael: have you noticed an increase in traffic to this site due to the MATM special? The guests visit counts seem higher to me and I've noticed some user names that seem new as well... If traffic is up, I suppose the same thing happened when PBS aired "Who Killed Lindbergh's Baby?" first aired on PBS?
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Jun 4, 2018 20:09:33 GMT -5
Unfortunately I haven't seen the show... I don't have access to cable TV and can't put a dish on my condo for satellite. I'll have to wait until it gets posted online somewhere Michael: have you noticed an increase in traffic to this site due to the MATM special? The guests visit counts seem higher to me and I've noticed some user names that seem new as well... If traffic is up, I suppose the same thing happened when PBS aired "Who Killed Lindbergh's Baby?" first aired on PBS? You can buy it on iTunes for $2.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 5, 2018 7:37:08 GMT -5
Michael: have you noticed an increase in traffic to this site due to the MATM special? The guests visit counts seem higher to me and I've noticed some user names that seem new as well... If traffic is up, I suppose the same thing happened when PBS aired "Who Killed Lindbergh's Baby?" first aired on PBS? Traffic usually fluctuates but the show definitely drew interest. For me that means quite a few people watched. MATM is a popular show to begin with, but encouraging part is that after seeing it they want to know more.
|
|