Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
Post by Joe on Aug 29, 2018 9:35:34 GMT -5
Regarding the foot imprint at Hopewell, do you know what the burlap type material was covering? If it was a foot, as opposed to a shoe, how then do you make an accurate determinatiom of that person's shoe size? From what I know about the print made in the ground of the fresh grave at St. Raymond's, was it not estimated at 8-1/2, while Hauptmann wore a size 9? Everything I have on the footprints is in both books. If you are talking about the imprint 18" from the footprint at the base of that ladder I do not believe that was a footprint at all which I attempted to address in V1. Any way you look at it, Hauptmann's foot was bigger than the prints they found. Remember, they wanted to match it up. If there was any way for his print to fit in any of those prints don't you think they would have done it? Think about it. They went to his shoe-maker, they seized every pair of his shoes the man owned, and they made comparisons. Best of all they had access to his foot (bare or shoed) while he was sitting in a jail cell and under their complete control. So here's what we're left with if we want to believe it was Hauptmann: 1. Hauptmann's foot shrunk.
2. Police matched it up with the evidence but chose not to use it.
3. That somehow, with evidence in hand, they didn't consider a bare foot. None of these options seem reasonable to me. That certainly doesn't mean he's "innocent" just that whoever made those prints wasn't him. If investigators had a clean SHOEPRINT which they knew unequivocally originated from one of the kidnappers from BOTH Highfields and St. Raymond's, then they'd really have something to compare with Hauptmann's shoes, wouldn't they? I don't believe they had that in either case unless you've got something other than your personal conclusions which appear to be based upon the limitations of the actual evidence they had to work with. I think the prosecution would have wanted to be pretty damn careful about introducing anything that was inconclusive. And it's not like they didn't have a pretty lethal battery of verifiable, circumstantial physical evidence against Hauptmann already.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 29, 2018 12:22:10 GMT -5
If investigators had a clean SHOEPRINT which they knew unequivocally originated from one of the kidnappers from BOTH Highfields and St. Raymond's, then they'd really have something to compare with Hauptmann's shoes, wouldn't they? I don't believe they had that in either case unless you've got something other than your personal conclusions which appear to be based upon the limitations of the actual evidence they had to work with. I think the prosecution would have wanted to be pretty damn careful about introducing anything that was inconclusive. And it's not like they didn't have a pretty lethal battery of verifiable, circumstantial physical evidence against Hauptmann already. They had casts, measurements, and pictures. They considered these items evidence. Once Hauptmann was arrested they compared his size to them all. None matched. They seized every shoe he owned trying to find a match. After his arrest they were very interested in looking for a particular boxing shoe (eventually finding it). They went to his shoemaker and while there told him Hauptmann did not match. What in the hell were they looking for if you are now claiming they never would have been able to match this evidence to anyone? It's either evidence or it wasn't. There was some question about the cast made at St. Raymonds. But as I've proven they had the actual measurements of that print so the whether the cast was or was not good did not matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2019 13:29:19 GMT -5
So, Michael, In TDC Volume II, Chapter 10 about Isidor Fisch, on page 571 you talk about Fisch being in White Sulphur Springs, New York in September of 1933 and the possible link to ransom bills that came from the upper New York area. There was a story that appeared in newspaper coming from the Philadelphia area (January 17, 1935) concerning a woman who AG David Wilentz requested to see who was claiming that in the autumn of 1933 Hauptmann and Fisch were at her Catskill, New York lodge. I am posting the article here. I was wondering if this woman's claims were investigated at all and whether there was anything to them. For Wilentz, a story like this would not have been something he would have wanted surfacing at the Trial!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 9, 2019 10:51:37 GMT -5
This doesn't ring a bell Amy. To my knowledge Fisch never took a hunting trip with Hauptmann. We know Mueller & Hauptmann took one to Maine and the woman there was pretty angry because they cleaned their guns with her curtains.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 9:23:22 GMT -5
In TDC, Volume II, Chapter 5, The Skeletons In The Closet, from pages 368-372, Michael talks/writes about the search for the "Boad Nelly". I am bringing this up on the Fisch Thread because I think the connection Michael makes of a boat named Nellie actually existing and then tracing it back to Stonington, Conn. should not be overlooked. Fisch had a connection to this area and could have been familiar with the boat name Nelly. Michael mentions in this chapter an April 9, 1932 report by Boston Treasury Agent Kelleher (see footnote 1086) about checking on boats named Nellie in the Massachuetts area. I am going to post Schwarzkopf's copy of the memorandum for pages 1 and 2 of this report here: imgur.com/LLEzkd6 Page 1 imgur.com/p8LJkXN Page 2 In this earlier report, besides the 45 foot long Nellie boat, Kelleher mentions a 31 foot long Nellie boat that belongs to Ellen R. Gremour of Providence, R.I. This report also mentions a rum runner named Frank Butler who supposedly had a 28 foot sloop named Nellie. Michael, I was wondering if there was follow up done on the Nellie boat of Ellen R. Gremour. Kelleher had thought it important to check out rum runner, Frank Butler also. Do you know if any checking was done on these two people? It seems to me that whoever was involved with the writing of the "Boad Nelly" note was well acquainted with New England and the existence of boats named Nellie.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Apr 25, 2020 10:41:27 GMT -5
Amy,
Boston Globe writer Dorothy Wayman, in Bite the Bullet, published in 1948, claims to have have known the person Condon and Lindbergh were looking for on Cuttyhunk.
I posted a good chuck of chapter 5 of her book on Ronelle's board, maybe about 4 years ago.
I wonder if these posts still appear on the Internet, or are they gone for good?
Wayman does not give the name of the man, but who did she have in mind? (See page 63 in Wayman's book)
Did she take the secret to her grave?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 14:20:45 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing this Sue. I wish I had seen that post you made. I will have to do some checking around about Dorothy Wayman and see what I can find. I would definitely like to know who she thought this man might be!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 25, 2020 19:16:01 GMT -5
Michael, I was wondering if there was follow up done on the Nellie boat of Ellen R. Gremour. Kelleher had thought it important to check out rum runner, Frank Butler also. Do you know if any checking was done on these two people? It seems to me that whoever was involved with the writing of the "Boad Nelly" note was well acquainted with New England and the existence of boats named Nellie. Glad to see this Amy. Over the years we've been spoon fed a lot of nonsense by people who know much less than us. So its important to dot our "i"s and cross our "t"s the best we can because its quite clear no one else ever did. Unfortunately, and this is the reason why so many before us skipped over this material, its a difficult job - so its easier to simply believe poor research. When it comes to this era things were much more difficult to track down. Names, as I've mentioned so many times, were always a problem. Next, people worked, didn't work, and changed jobs so much that it could be useless information. They also moved a lot. But you know all of that. Well, I found when it came to boats they often changed hands quite often as well. Now in this case, Agent Kelleher investigated Butler (or at least started to):
Attachment Deleted This and a smaller version were the only items I've found related to him. As far as Gremour, I haven't found anything at all to show they bothered to look into her. What I did find was an attachment to Special Agent Seykora's July 1934 report: ibb.co/rptmcpzThis means she obviously still had the boat in July 1934. Unfortunately, I never found anything to indicate she was ever interviewed either. I could have missed it but I don't think so. But it could have happened and just that the record isn't at the NJSP Archives. That's possible since its clear to me that some Treasury Reports are missing. Now here's what's strange.... Corporal Leon put this list together the very next month: imgur.com/h8kGgAFSee Gremour's name on there? I don't. Sometimes I get dyslexic if I look at something like this for too long so double check me. So it appears to me that she sold the boat. If so it could have gone anywhere in the country. My experience is usually on the east coast but could have gone all the way to Florida as far as I know (or to Florida and resold). Also notice reference to Special Agent Leslie's investigation. I don't have a copy. So I either missed it or it was so unimportant (to me) that I didn't bother to copy it. If you're still interested, once the Archives open back up, I'd recommend going straight to the index cards and search for her name and any possible spelling variations of it. It should only appear in these two places so if there's anymore that would be new information to consult. Lt. Hick's did a little investigation for Hoffman but that was kind of half-assed so I am quite sure there's nothing in that collection which concerned Gremour. And I'd also recommend you do the same for Butler too.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Apr 26, 2020 10:33:57 GMT -5
Kind of amazed that there were so many boats named "Nellie" registered at that Connecticut location alone in Cpl. Leon's report. I suppose "Nellie" was kind of a popular name for boats.
But if you were LE working on the Lindbergh case, I would venture a guess that you would look at Massachusetts registrations for boats named "Nellie" with greater priority in comparison to Connecticut registrations. That's because of the geographical locations mentioned in the "Boad Nelly" note. And that raises the question: Were boat owners required to register their boats in Massachusetts? How about other Atlantic coast states?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Apr 26, 2020 12:27:55 GMT -5
Amy,
The collier, William C. Atwater, ran aground on April 2, 1932 -- on the same day and in the same waters of the anticipated Martha's Vineyard rendezvous.
Could this mishap have had ANY bearing on the outcome of the ransom negotiations?
Dorothy Wayman felt that the kidnapper may have been scared off when rescue boats began speeding to Sow and Pigs Reef where the Atwater was in distress.
(The story of the grounding of the William C. Atwater was reported the following day in The New York Times.)
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Apr 26, 2020 19:36:55 GMT -5
Michael, the reason you don’t see Ellen Gremour’s name on the Corporal Leon’s list is that she lived in Rhode Island. The boat was built in Mystic CT but her address was E. Greenwich RI. All the names on the list were boats which were registered to people with Connecticut addresses including someone who lived around the corner from my grandparents ( Brewster St. in Bridgeport!). Amy, what is Fisch’s connection to the Stonington CT area?
|
|
|
Post by Mbg on Apr 26, 2020 20:15:07 GMT -5
Kind of amazed that there were so many boats named "Nellie" registered at that Connecticut location alone in Cpl. Leon's report. I suppose "Nellie" was kind of a popular name for boats. But if you were LE working on the Lindbergh case, I would venture a guess that you would look at Massachusetts registrations for boats named "Nellie" with greater priority in comparison to Connecticut registrations. That's because of the geographical locations mentioned in the "Boad Nelly" note. And that raises the question: Were boat owners required to register their boats in Massachusetts? How about other Atlantic coast states? One has to wonder why the investigators focused on so many Nellie boats when the boat in the note was called Nelly. It was assumed that CJ was German. One of the most popular names for female dogs in Germany -- to this day -- is Nelly. Once Hauptmann was arrested, did they ever ask him, his sister, his only surviving brother or his mother if the family ever had a dog by that name? In his auto-bio, Hauptmann tells us that he and Anna had two dogs, at different times, both, unfortunately, dying in their care not long after joining the household. He doesn't mention their names. Was one of them a Nelly? Did previous landlords remember that they owned dogs? Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by Mbg on Apr 26, 2020 21:32:33 GMT -5
hurtelable, Not sure why my post appeared under your name. Guess I'm too stupid to post properly on this site. Meant no harm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2020 21:55:15 GMT -5
Now in this case, Agent Kelleher investigated Butler (or at least started to): Thanks, Michael for finding the information on Frank Butler. Since nothing was found that would connect Butler to the kidnapping, I can understand this investigation being dropped. Thanks for the Nellie boat lists. Nellie certainly was a popular name for a boat! The boat that is of real interest that you mention in Volume II on page 369 is the Nellie that was in Cuttyhunk on April 2. This boat was registered from Point Judith, Long Island so it does not appear on the Connecticut list you shared. The owner, Alfred E. Jones did live in Connecticut. Was Alfred Jones investigated? You mention that this Nellie boat was from Stonington, Connecticut. Do you mean this is where it was built? I do believe that the name Nelly was used in the Boad Nelly note for a reason. Just like the Faulkner name on the ransom money bank deposit slip, I do not think the use of Nelly is random either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2020 22:01:24 GMT -5
Amy, The collier, William C. Atwater, ran aground on April 2, 1932 -- on the same day and in the same waters of the anticipated Martha's Vineyard rendezvous. Could this mishap have had ANY bearing on the outcome of the ransom negotiations? Dorothy Wayman felt that the kidnapper may have been scared off when rescue boats began speeding to Sow and Pigs Reef where the Atwater was in distress. (The story of the grounding of the William C. Atwater was reported the following day in The New York Times.) It is an interesting idea, Sue. If a boat had been there with Charlie on it, the coast guard cutter that was sent to assist the Atwater would have been alarming for sure. Here is the New York Times article you mention in your post: imgur.com/dPUZQRe
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2020 22:22:10 GMT -5
Amy, what is Fisch’s connection to the Stonington CT area? Fisch's connection was through his good friend and fellow business investor Erich Schaefer. Erich and Fisch became friends in 1925 while Erich lived in New York. Erich was giving piano lessons to Gerta Kirsten (Henkel) and her sister, Erica. Erich and his parents resided at 19 Northwest Street, Stonington, Conn. Fisch was in contact with Erich even after he (Fisch) had gone back to Germany in 1933. Fisch had borrowed money to invest from Erich's father.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 27, 2020 10:43:22 GMT -5
Michael, the reason you don’t see Ellen Gremour’s name on the Corporal Leon’s list is that she lived in Rhode Island. The boat was built in Mystic CT but her address was E. Greenwich RI. All the names on the list were boats which were registered to people with Connecticut addresses including someone who lived around the corner from my grandparents ( Brewster St. in Bridgeport!). Amy, what is Fisch’s connection to the Stonington CT area? Thank you for pointing this out. Obviously you are correct and it was a stupid mistake that I should have never made. There's still the issue of someone living in one state and registering their boat in another. I don't know how that worked but it happened. Now, with what you've pointed out, I am wondering why the police only checked CT. Or perhaps they checked the other states and those reports aren't available. I think the key to answer this question would be Special Agent Leslie's report. This has all one big domino effect and by the end of it one could be an expert in boats during the 1930s but no closer to learning anything about this case. This is nothing new and there's only one way to find out unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 27, 2020 10:48:49 GMT -5
hurtelable, Not sure why my post appeared under your name. Guess I'm too stupid to post properly on this site. Meant no harm. I fixed it. No harm done ... I make this mistake myself at times. One has to wonder why the investigators focused on so many Nellie boats when the boat in the note was called Nelly. It was assumed that CJ was German. One of the most popular names for female dogs in Germany -- to this day -- is Nelly. Once Hauptmann was arrested, did they ever ask him, his sister, his only surviving brother or his mother if the family ever had a dog by that name? In his auto-bio, Hauptmann tells us that he and Anna had two dogs, at different times, both, unfortunately, dying in their care not long after joining the household. He doesn't mention their names. Was one of them a Nelly? Did previous landlords remember that they owned dogs? Just wondering. I think they were trying to look at anything that sounded like "Nelly." As you know the police weren't very good spellers either. About the dogs this is a great question. I don't believe it ever came up during the investigations - or at least I don't remember it and I think I would have. I do seem to remember something about the pets being mentioned in Anna's autobiography so I'll check that later and get back to you.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 27, 2020 11:28:43 GMT -5
Thanks, Michael for finding the information on Frank Butler. Since nothing was found that would connect Butler to the kidnapping, I can understand this investigation being dropped. Well, if there's more to be found about this guy I'd like to see it myself. He seems suspicious and deserved to be located and at the very least interviewed. In the other report I mentioned Agent Kelleher wrote that it was possible Butler's boat was " undocumented" in which case the name could have changed " at the will of the owner." That's another wrinkle to consider concerning any boat. Thanks for the Nellie boat lists. Nellie certainly was a popular name for a boat! The boat that is of real interest that you mention in Volume II on page 369 is the Nellie that was in Cuttyhunk on April 2. This boat was registered from Point Judith, Long Island so it does not appear on the Connecticut list you shared. The owner, Alfred E. Jones did live in Connecticut. Was Alfred Jones investigated? You mention that this Nellie boat was from Stonington, Connecticut. Do you mean this is where it was built? I do believe that the name Nelly was used in the Boad Nelly note for a reason. Just like the Faulkner name on the ransom money bank deposit slip, I do not think the use of Nelly is random either. I quoted Agent Kelleher's report on page 369 and everything I wrote on pages 370-1 can be traced back to the footnoted documentation. While these sources all seem to indicate it was " from Stonington," we know that Jones lived in Mystic, CT (later addresses include Port Judith, RI, then after that Newport, RI, and finally Groton, CT). At the time the Nellie was searched, Leon Wilkinson (also of Mystic) was Master " due to temporary absence of Mr. Jones." According to the information obtained by Meade and Mustoe in 1936, the boat was built in Delanco, N.J. in 1927. It's homeport in 1936 was now Newport, RI. I suspect when everyone was talking about the Nellie being "from" Stonington they were referring to its port or where it was being tied up at the time. In fact, during Lewis's investigation, he interviewed a fisherman in Stonington who recalled a boat named "Nellie" " that was tied up at Groton, or New London and that the owner was named Jones." And this was in 1936 too. Lewis visited Conn State Police Sgt. Whitmarsh in Groton who informed him that it was the " nearest state police state to Stonington." I never found any interview with Jones to consult. Clearly the child was never on board of this vessel. My main point was that a boat by that name was in the place the note said it was at the time it was supposed to be there. This fact, along with everything else included in this section of V2, is important because it shows specific knowledge about many things most people would not know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2020 15:24:39 GMT -5
Clearly the child was never on board of this vessel. My main point was that a boat by that name was in the place the note said it was at the time it was supposed to be there. This fact, along with everything else included in this section of V2, is important because it shows specific knowledge about many things most people would not know. Agreed, Charlie was not on this boat. This is no evidence that he was ever on any boat from the time he went missing. Speaking for myself, I see a lot of symbolism in the Boad Nelly note. Other than what the creator of that note might know about the Lindberghs and Morrows, what purpose does this note really serve? It is not about returning Charlie to his family, thats for sure! Since this thread is about Isidor Fisch, I wanted to post a picture I came across that was posted on Imgur a few years ago. I did not post this picture. I do not know who did. Thought people might be interested in seeing it. I wonder who the girl is? imgur.com/kS5iKDG
|
|
|
Post by Mbg on Apr 27, 2020 15:43:35 GMT -5
If I'm not mistaken, the girl is Violet Schuessler. The Schuesslers and the Hauptmanns lived in the Rauch home and were good friends.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2020 21:03:21 GMT -5
If I'm not mistaken, the girl is Violet Schuessler. The Schuesslers and the Hauptmanns lived in the Rauch home and were good friends. Thank you for this! The Schuesslers lived downstairs in the Rauch home. I believe Victor's wife's name was Louisa and the young daughter was Violet. I would have never guessed that is who is in that picture with Fisch. The Schuesslers did go sometimes to Hunters Island with Hauptmann. So I am assuming this picture is from one of those trips in the summer of 1933.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Apr 27, 2020 21:17:06 GMT -5
Amy,
Does the picture of the people in the canoe, in the picture section opposite page 320 in Anthony Scaduto's Scapegoat, help?
If that is Fisch in the picture that you put up, well, he's in the same clothes as the picture I am referring to! Maybe Fisch was too poor to have another outfit to change into?
Is the girl in your picture the same girl as one of them in the canoe in Scaduto's book?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Apr 27, 2020 22:11:50 GMT -5
Amy,
Thanks for posting the New York Times article about the grounding of the William C. Atwater.
Another interesting adventure of Dorothy Wayman, as it pertains to the Lindbergh case, is a mysterious, late-night meeting she had with an underworld character who was the "king of the Cape rum ring."
He offered a $100,000 reward for return of the baby. The Rum King asked Wayman to publish the offer in her paper. Wayman said she did. I guess that should be easy to confirm by looking at issues of The Boston Globe for March, April, and May of 1932.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2020 18:36:31 GMT -5
Amy, Does the picture of the people in the canoe, in the picture section opposite page 320 in Anthony Scaduto's Scapegoat, help? If that is Fisch in the picture that you put up, well, he's in the same clothes as the picture I am referring to! Maybe Fisch was too poor to have another outfit to change into? Is the girl in your picture the same girl as one of them in the canoe in Scaduto's book? I looked at the picture in the Scaduto book. I think the Scaduto picture and the imgur picture I posted are probably from the same day since Fisch is dressed exactly the same way. The woman and little girl in the Scaduto picture are identified as Mrs. Schussler and her daughter Violet. As far as whether the woman in both pictures are the same woman, I am not sure. Mrs. Schussler in the canoe picture does not appear to be the same woman as the one Fisch is carrying on his shoulders. I really cannot say definitely one way or the other because the imgur picture I posted is not mine so I don't know if there is a caption on the back which might properly identify who that woman is.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on Apr 28, 2020 19:08:36 GMT -5
If I'm not mistaken, the girl is Violet Schuessler. The Schuesslers and the Hauptmanns lived in the Rauch home and were good friends. Thank you for this! The Schuesslers lived downstairs in the Rauch home. I believe Victor's wife's name was Louisa and the young daughter was Violet. I would have never guessed that is who is in that picture with Fisch. The Schuesslers did go sometimes to Hunters Island with Hauptmann. So I am assuming this picture is from one of those trips in the summer of 1933. The woman on the shoulders of Isidor Fisch resembles Marguerite Junge who lived in Englewood Cliffs and was employed by the Morrows to do sewing. She lived in an apartment also rented by Red Johnson and--at one time--by Henry Ellerson. Marguerite and her husband Johannes gave Red Johnson an alibi for his whereabouts on the night of the kidnapping
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on May 2, 2020 17:36:58 GMT -5
The woman on the shoulders of Isidore Fisch appears to be Marguerite Junge. Attached please find a photo of Marguerite Junge found in the files of the NJSP. There is no indication of Marguerite's age when the photo was taken. The photo of Isidor and Marguerite may be in reverse.
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
Post by metje on May 2, 2020 18:35:19 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2020 9:21:07 GMT -5
The woman on the shoulders of Isidore Fisch appears to be Marguerite Junge. Attached please find a photo of Marguerite Junge found in the files of the NJSP. There is no indication of Marguerite's age when the photo was taken. The photo of Isidor and Marguerite may be in reverse. Thanks for posting the picture you identify as Marguerite Junge. I have not seen all of the pictures at the archives yet so I can't identify that picture as such. It looks like it could be Marguerite, just a bit older. At this point, I am not in agreement that Marguerite Junge is the woman in the photo with Fisch. I don't think that woman looks like the woman in the picture you posted. What is your source for Fisch knowing Marguerite Junge?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 3, 2020 10:03:40 GMT -5
It looks like it could be Marguerite, just a bit older. That's Mrs. Jung. By the way, there's some really good pictures in that collection so I recommend taking a look at it. At this point, I am not in agreement that Marguerite Junge is the woman in the photo with Fisch. I don't think that woman looks like the woman in the picture you posted. What is your source for Fisch knowing Marguerite Junge? That's not her in my opinion. Of course I could be wrong but I have to agree with Amy. I don't recall ever seeing a picture of Mrs. Schussler, but if Mbg is leaning that way then it's probably a safe bet.
|
|