|
Post by Wayne on Sept 20, 2018 12:56:28 GMT -5
Anyone want to tell me why this DID NOT happen?
The day after the kidnapping, Ben Lupica gives the NJSP a statement claiming that on the previous day, around dusk, he saw “…a dark body…Dodge Sedan” with “…ladders layed across the top of the seats of the car”.
This was the best clue that the NJSP would ever have.
And what does the NJSP do with this lead?
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
Michael, please check my math, but it wasn’t until 7 months later that the NJSP followed up with a second interview of Lupica in October 1932. 7 months! (I know that Ellis Parker followed up with 2 interviews in April, but that’s a different story).
Here’s what the NJSP knew as of March 2nd:
1) According to Lupica, a dark body Dodge Sedan with a collapsible ladder inside was seen close to Highfields.
2) From the Nursery Ransom Note, it was generally assumed the writer was of Germanic background.
3) From the construction of the ladder, there was a good chance the builder might have been a construction worker or carpenter.
Here’s what should have happened:
On March 3, the NJSP should have pro-actively searched EVERY Dodge dealership within a 50 mile radius of Highfields looking for a Germanic owner with some form of construction background who bought either a dark-colored 1929, 1930, or 1931 Dodge Sedan.
If nothing checked out, then they should have spread the search radius out to 100 miles, then 150 miles. By then, they would have checked out Dodge dealerships in NYC (there were less than 6 then… I’m waiting for Dodge to get back to me).
Checking the NYC dealerships would have eventually lead directly to BRH.
When you look at how much time, effort, and manpower the NJSP spent on suspects like Ortlieb and Liepold, there is no reason why the NJSP did not follow up on the one solid lead they had.
In a strange twist of fate, even if Lupica was wrong or mistaken in his statement, describing a Dodge Sedan would still have led to BRH. Weird!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 21, 2018 7:05:36 GMT -5
Michael, please check my math, but it wasn’t until 7 months later that the NJSP followed up with a second interview of Lupica in October 1932. 7 months! (I know that Ellis Parker followed up with 2 interviews in April, but that’s a different story). There are a couple of things I can add. On March 2nd the NJSP did send out a statewide lookout (what would be a "BOLO" today) via the teletype for " all Dodge 5 Passenger Sedans." It also asked that stations who received it to share it with those " adjoining towns that do not have teletypes." Troopers also seemed to be doing the same on this day. On March 3rd Lupica was picked up then driven to a Princeton Dodge dealer to look over cars. He identified the " a 1929 Dodge Standard Sedan Color Blue" as the car he had seen. After that I agree Wayne that they either lost interest in this angle or it seemed to fall through the cracks. Until Parker which you mentioned - and then in late October '32 it started to get attention again. Once again it seemed to die on the vine but was resurrected about a year later when Bornmann re-interviewed Lupica and later finally tested a '29 Dodge Six to see if the ladder would fit inside.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 21, 2018 9:11:05 GMT -5
Anyone want to tell me why this DID NOT happen? The day after the kidnapping, Ben Lupica gives the NJSP a statement claiming that on the previous day, around dusk, he saw “…a dark body…Dodge Sedan” with “…ladders layed across the top of the seats of the car”. This was the best clue that the NJSP would ever have. And what does the NJSP do with this lead? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
Wayne, I've been wondering the same thing now for 18 years, and I believe it speaks volumes about the level of general criminal investigative expertise of the NJSP in the day. As an aside, there are many NJSP reports and accounts I place very little faith in, although at times, the prevailing attitude here seems to be if that's all we got, then we gotta go with it. Getting back to Hauptmann's Dodge, can you just imagine how much closer LE would have been to nailing him if the NYPD had run with Leigh Matteson's suggestion of reviewing the annual New York license applications, starting in the Bronx, for ransom note writing features?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 22, 2018 7:46:58 GMT -5
Wayne, I've been wondering the same thing now for 18 years, and I believe it speaks volumes about the level of general criminal investigative expertise of the NJSP in the day. As an aside, there are many NJSP reports and accounts I place very little faith in, although at times, the prevailing attitude here seems to be if that's all we got, then we gotta go with it. Getting back to Hauptmann's Dodge, can you just imagine how much closer LE would have been to nailing him if the NYPD had run with Leigh Matteson's suggestion of reviewing the annual New York license applications, starting in the Bronx, for ransom note writing features? No ulterior motive in asking this question Joe ... but do you mean you believe there are other reports on Lupica that no longer exist as a way to explain they actually had pursued this further? From my experiences with the files at the NJSP there are definitely pieces missing here and there for sure as I've clearly mentioned over the years. One way to know is the content of reports we do have. Of course that's not 100% either, but that and sometimes testimony are indicators of it.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Sept 23, 2018 13:40:37 GMT -5
Anyone want to tell me why this DID NOT happen? The day after the kidnapping, Ben Lupica gives the NJSP a statement claiming that on the previous day, around dusk, he saw “…a dark body…Dodge Sedan” with “…ladders layed across the top of the seats of the car”. This was the best clue that the NJSP would ever have. And what does the NJSP do with this lead? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Michael, please check my math, but it wasn’t until 7 months later that the NJSP followed up with a second interview of Lupica in October 1932. 7 months! (I know that Ellis Parker followed up with 2 interviews in April, but that’s a different story). Here’s what the NJSP knew as of March 2nd: 1) According to Lupica, a dark body Dodge Sedan with a collapsible ladder inside was seen close to Highfields. 2) From the Nursery Ransom Note, it was generally assumed the writer was of Germanic background. 3) From the construction of the ladder, there was a good chance the builder might have been a construction worker or carpenter. Here’s what should have happened: On March 3, the NJSP should have pro-actively searched EVERY Dodge dealership within a 50 mile radius of Highfields looking for a Germanic owner with some form of construction background who bought either a dark-colored 1929, 1930, or 1931 Dodge Sedan. If nothing checked out, then they should have spread the search radius out to 100 miles, then 150 miles. By then, they would have checked out Dodge dealerships in NYC (there were less than 6 then… I’m waiting for Dodge to get back to me). Checking the NYC dealerships would have eventually lead directly to BRH. When you look at how much time, effort, and manpower the NJSP spent on suspects like Ortlieb and Liepold, there is no reason why the NJSP did not follow up on the one solid lead they had. In a strange twist of fate, even if Lupica was wrong or mistaken in his statement, describing a Dodge Sedan would still have led to BRH. Weird! This suggestion for checking out all Dodge dealerships within a certain radius of Highfields might (hypothetically) have been more complicated than assumed. Remember first that there were no computer data bases of any kind in those days, so any records of car sales at dealerships, even if they were preserved for three years or so, would be found on paper only. Would the dealerships keep those records for so long? Second, the car Lupica sighted had NEW JERSEY license plates, so they wouldn't match Hauptmann to it. Third, there were no guarantees that the car Lupica saw was purchased from a dealer; it could have been sold used. Or it could be that the driver wasn't the owner/purchaser. And of course, we have no idea if the ladder seen by Lupica was the same one left on Lindbergh premises after the purported kidnapping. (Lupica reported seeing two ladders or segments of ladders, while three segments were found on the property.) It's surely within the realm of possibility that the car with the ladder Lupica saw had no connection to the purported kidnapping
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 24, 2018 6:02:20 GMT -5
Wayne, I've been wondering the same thing now for 18 years, and I believe it speaks volumes about the level of general criminal investigative expertise of the NJSP in the day. As an aside, there are many NJSP reports and accounts I place very little faith in, although at times, the prevailing attitude here seems to be if that's all we got, then we gotta go with it. Getting back to Hauptmann's Dodge, can you just imagine how much closer LE would have been to nailing him if the NYPD had run with Leigh Matteson's suggestion of reviewing the annual New York license applications, starting in the Bronx, for ransom note writing features? No ulterior motive in asking this question Joe ... but do you mean you believe there are other reports on Lupica that no longer exist as a way to explain they actually had pursued this further? From my experiences with the files at the NJSP there are definitely pieces missing here and there for sure as I've clearly mentioned over the years. One way to know is the content of reports we do have. Of course that's not 100% either, but that and sometimes testimony are indicators of it.
While I'm sure many documents are missing, what I meant Michael, is that the NJSP did a relatively poor initial investigation of critical evidence, and a large amount of caution should be used in applying any of this information verbatim, especially that within the period of March 1 to April 2, 1932. I don't place a lot of faith in many of the reports that are used as source material, believing that much of the detail within critical events was misinterpreted back in the day by traffic cops playing investigator, as well as ego-driven detectives. A general cluster. The analogy I tend to think of is the modern day Christian New Testament, which today reads very little like it really should. That's because the actual word of enlightened ones was widely misinterpreted by ordinary people, whom we now refer to as saints, but who had relatively little spiritual comprehension and understanding in comparison. Getting back to the case, I know the NJSP also had to deal with Lindbergh having control of much of the initial investigation during the critical time period, but that also points out their own inadequacy (notably Schwarzkopf's orders) in establishing proper and necessary investigative controls from the beginning, and only adds to the inaccuracy of the actual reporting.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 24, 2018 6:17:52 GMT -5
Anyone want to tell me why this DID NOT happen? The day after the kidnapping, Ben Lupica gives the NJSP a statement claiming that on the previous day, around dusk, he saw “…a dark body…Dodge Sedan” with “…ladders layed across the top of the seats of the car”. This was the best clue that the NJSP would ever have. And what does the NJSP do with this lead? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Michael, please check my math, but it wasn’t until 7 months later that the NJSP followed up with a second interview of Lupica in October 1932. 7 months! (I know that Ellis Parker followed up with 2 interviews in April, but that’s a different story). Here’s what the NJSP knew as of March 2nd: 1) According to Lupica, a dark body Dodge Sedan with a collapsible ladder inside was seen close to Highfields. 2) From the Nursery Ransom Note, it was generally assumed the writer was of Germanic background. 3) From the construction of the ladder, there was a good chance the builder might have been a construction worker or carpenter. Here’s what should have happened: On March 3, the NJSP should have pro-actively searched EVERY Dodge dealership within a 50 mile radius of Highfields looking for a Germanic owner with some form of construction background who bought either a dark-colored 1929, 1930, or 1931 Dodge Sedan. If nothing checked out, then they should have spread the search radius out to 100 miles, then 150 miles. By then, they would have checked out Dodge dealerships in NYC (there were less than 6 then… I’m waiting for Dodge to get back to me). Checking the NYC dealerships would have eventually lead directly to BRH. When you look at how much time, effort, and manpower the NJSP spent on suspects like Ortlieb and Liepold, there is no reason why the NJSP did not follow up on the one solid lead they had. In a strange twist of fate, even if Lupica was wrong or mistaken in his statement, describing a Dodge Sedan would still have led to BRH. Weird! This suggestion for checking out all Dodge dealerships within a certain radius of Highfields might (hypothetically) have been more complicated than assumed. Remember first that there were no computer data bases of any kind in those days, so any records of car sales at dealerships, even if they were preserved for three years or so, would be found on paper only. Would the dealerships keep those records for so long? Second, the car Lupica sighted had NEW JERSEY license plates, so they wouldn't match Hauptmann to it. Third, there were no guarantees that the car Lupica saw was purchased from a dealer; it could have been sold used. Or it could be that the driver wasn't the owner/purchaser. And of course, we have no idea if the ladder seen by Lupica was the same one left on Lindbergh premises after the purported kidnapping. (Lupica reported seeing two ladders or segments of ladders, while three segments were found on the property.) It's surely within the realm of possibility that the car with the ladder Lupica saw had no connection to the purported kidnapping
Within two weeks of the actual kidnapping, LE had a German-speaking suspect who probably lived in the Bronx, and they had a good description of the car they believed he drove. With a little help from the newspapers appealing to dealerships and the average person people within the greater NYC area, and adding Matteson's recommendation, I think Hauptmann could have been a dead duck by the end of March 1932.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 24, 2018 7:10:17 GMT -5
While I'm sure many documents are missing, what I meant Michael, is that the NJSP did a relatively poor initial investigation of critical evidence, and a large amount of caution should be used in applying any of this information verbatim, especially that within the period of March 1 to April 2, 1932. I don't place a lot of faith in many of the reports that are used as source material, believing that much of the detail within critical events was misinterpreted back in the day by traffic cops playing investigator, as well as ego-driven detectives. A general cluster. The analogy I tend to think of is the modern day Christian New Testament, which today reads very little like it really should. That's because the actual word of enlightened ones was widely misinterpreted by ordinary people, whom we now refer to as saints, but who had relatively little spiritual comprehension and understanding in comparison. Getting back to the case, I know the NJSP also had to deal with Lindbergh having control of much of the initial investigation during the critical time period, but that also points out their own inadequacy (notably Schwarzkopf's orders) in establishing proper and necessary investigative controls from the beginning, and only adds to the inaccuracy of the actual reporting. Thanks for clearing that up. I'd only add that nothing ever followed an exact pattern. When I first started researching the case it was easy to say it was "bungled" but was it really? In some places I'd say it was, but in others I think we'd be hard pressed to label it that way. So I'd just caution everyone not to paint with a broad brush and look at everything no matter what. If in the end that label remains I can promise you will be so much more knowledgeable regardless - and it will be because you did.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Sept 24, 2018 8:21:20 GMT -5
What is your source for "LE had a German-speaking suspect who probably lived in the Bronx"? Do you know the name of this suspect?
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 24, 2018 9:07:07 GMT -5
What is your source for "LE had a German-speaking suspect who probably lived in the Bronx"? Do you know the name of this suspect? My apologies for not explaining myself more fully perhaps. LE knew there was an individual they believed was of German origin, whom they suspected might have been involved and possibly the kidnapper, based on the handwriting similarities between the nursery note and following ransom notes, and that this individual probably lived in the Bronx, based on the response to Condon's Bronx Home News letter and the first meeting at Woodlawn Cemetery. They also suspected he may have driven a 1929-30 Dodge Sedan, therefore wouldn't checking all Bronx registrations for potential candidates who drove a similar vehicle, have been a potentially fruitful avenue? If that sounds too involved, bear in mind that all single Blackburn, England males over the age of 16 who were in Blackburn during the time of a local murder, were directed to provide their fingerprints in an attempt to solve it. 40,000 sets of prints later, there were no matches. But of the ones who did not comply, the police had an easy time of narrowing down the list to find the murderer. Somehow, I don't think finding Hauptmann, considering the value of the clues police had in their hands, would have involved quite that much effort.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Sept 24, 2018 13:43:09 GMT -5
Exactly that method was proposed and Finn wanted to do it but he was overruled because of too much work looking in the card files. They would have had matches in letterx from Bronx and the hyphenated New-York which Richard did on his registration and on the ransom note. This idea was originally proposed by Sudley Shoenfeld (the alienist, that means psychiatrist) and was approved by Lindbergh. So much for you all saying the investigation was controlled by Lindbergh - that wasn't true. It was controlled by incompetent police
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Sept 24, 2018 13:46:58 GMT -5
Regarding that quote above. I don't think LE ever had a suspect in the Bronx. If they did they weren't aware of it.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Sept 24, 2018 19:49:17 GMT -5
Exactly that method was proposed and Finn wanted to do it but he was overruled because of too much work looking in the card files. They would have had matches in letterx from Bronx and the hyphenated New-York which Richard did on his registration and on the ransom note. This idea was originally proposed by Sudley Shoenfeld (the alienist, that means psychiatrist) and was approved by Lindbergh. So much for you all saying the investigation was controlled by Lindbergh - that wasn't true. It was controlled by incompetent police Hey Jack, I think you're on the right track. FYI, I think Ellis Parker was actually the first person who wanted to pursue checking out the Dodge Sedan angle a month after the kidnapping, but since he didn't have the manpower to do so, he passed the idea to Harold Hoffman who in 1932 was the NJ Commissioner of Motor Vehicles: Also, Jack could you please show me where you found that Schoenfeld also proposed this and that Lindbergh approved it? Thanks!
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Sept 24, 2018 21:24:51 GMT -5
I think that Shoenfeld stuff is in Fisher - at any rate Fisher is indexed as all non-fiction books should be, so you can find it easily. I'm sure some other police had the idea of checking registration applications for handwriting analysis. It was mostly, and almost done by Finn, and I'm sure he was kicking himself for many years for not pushing for it but in reality it just didn't happen so it doesn't matter who said what, etc. And in reality, it wouldn't have brought Charlie back so even that didn't matter anymore. Meant only that Hauptmann might have been caught a year or so earlier.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 25, 2018 7:55:51 GMT -5
I think that Shoenfeld stuff is in Fisher - at any rate Fisher is indexed as all non-fiction books should be, so you can find it easily. I'm sure some other police had the idea of checking registration applications for handwriting analysis. It was mostly, and almost done by Finn, and I'm sure he was kicking himself for many years for not pushing for it but in reality it just didn't happen so it doesn't matter who said what, etc. And in reality, it wouldn't have brought Charlie back so even that didn't matter anymore. Meant only that Hauptmann might have been caught a year or so earlier. I think all "non-fiction" books should only contain real quotes. I believe inventing dialogue leads people to quote it as if it actually occurred. Why? Because I've seen it done over the years. With so much real information why the need to do that I wonder? Next, I do not think my books work if they are index "surfed," therefore, I did not add something which would take away from what I was trying to accomplish. For example, one cannot fully understand Condon's actions if they are skipping over portions of what proves exactly why he said or did something specific. One cannot skip over certain sections and see the massive damage these lies did to the investigation either. They were written as they were supposed to be read. These are books of research and I recommend that everyone take notes. It's what I did with Wilson's summary, Waller, Whipple, Marcet H-Julius, and Virtray. If I hadn't I would have missed or forgotten things and those books weren't even written like I've written mine. You want an index by all means make one - its what advanced researchers (like us) do.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Sept 25, 2018 9:25:57 GMT -5
I think that Shoenfeld stuff is in Fisher - at any rate Fisher is indexed as all non-fiction books should be, so you can find it easily. I'm sure some other police had the idea of checking registration applications for handwriting analysis. It was mostly, and almost done by Finn, and I'm sure he was kicking himself for many years for not pushing for it but in reality it just didn't happen so it doesn't matter who said what, etc. And in reality, it wouldn't have brought Charlie back so even that didn't matter anymore. Meant only that Hauptmann might have been caught a year or so earlier. Hey Jack, I re-read all of the Shoenfeld and Finn sections in Fisher and, unless I missed it, neither make any reference to trying to track the Dodge Sedan down. Shoeneld concentrated primarily on a profile of the kidnapper, while Finn followed the ransom money. Which is my point. NOBODY except Ellis Parker seemed to think that searching for a Dodge Sedan was a viable idea. Again, this would have eventually led to BRH. There had to be a reason why this was not done. And it was not a lack of manpower in the NJSP. When you look at the enormous amount of reports and statements at the NJSP Museum, you'll see what I mean. Also, Jack I don't see any reference to Lindbergh supporting the idea of tracking the Dodge. Can you please confirm where you saw that? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 25, 2018 11:20:49 GMT -5
Also, Jack I don't see any reference to Lindbergh supporting the idea of tracking the Dodge. Can you please confirm where you saw that? Thanks. What I've found seems to imply they didn't know what kind of vehicle it was. Matteson wrote: " I figured it was a small car - a Ford, Chevrolet, Plymouth, Dodge or Whippet..."
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Sept 25, 2018 11:29:43 GMT -5
Oh I thought you initially meant the uise of auto registration cards vs. the ransom notes for handwriting analysis. You're right - 'm not aware of anyone going after the Dodge via the cards, but of course it would have worked if they'd have searched deeply enough into the drivers. Lindbergh's approval was linited to just using the cards, I believed at the time, but it showed cooperation with the police, and it sounded kind of unlike what I was hearing about him and police at the time. In short BRH could have definately been caught if the police had put enough effort into their initial clues regarding handwriting and auto registration.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Sept 25, 2018 11:32:10 GMT -5
Are you sure Parker even knew about Lupica's sighting of the Dodge with the ladder in it? He was out of the loop.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 25, 2018 13:55:25 GMT -5
Lupica was very clear about the car having been a Dodge and one that he concluded was a 1929 model year. He based this on his understanding that the radiator emblem had changed to a winged design in 1929, which is the same emblem that was on the vehicle he saw on March 1, 1932. Doing a little research into the different Dodge models of the time, I discovered this change was made for both the DA and DB models in 1929, so he may have concluded it was one of these models. Hauptmann however, drove a 1930 DD model which he purchased new in 1931. The DD Sedan wasn't introduced until 1930 but it also carried the same winged emblem and did so until 1932. Bottom line, Ben may not have realized it but it could well have been a 1929 to 1932 Dodge Sedan he saw. Without the above kinds of subtle but telltale nuances, it's very difficult to differentiate vehicle model years by body shape alone in that era. The attached represents a good capsule history of the production period of the same winged emblem. www.ebay.ca/itm/Dodge-Brothers-Wings-Radiator-Emblem-Medallion-1929-32-/202298014298?hash=item2f19e6ba5a
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 26, 2018 6:39:36 GMT -5
Hauptmann's 1930 Dodge DD sedan would have sounded something like this as he drove south on Hopewell-Wertsville Road in the late afternoon of March 1, 1932. www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD4yb32vXp4
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Sept 28, 2018 10:03:55 GMT -5
Hauptmann's 1930 Dodge DD sedan would have sounded something like this as he drove south on Hopewell-Wertsville Road in the late afternoon of March 1, 1932. www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD4yb32vXp4Yes, those cars back then were really loud. Notice that the car in the video is missing its front hood.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,656
|
Post by Joe on Sept 28, 2018 12:23:19 GMT -5
Hauptmann's 1930 Dodge DD sedan would have sounded something like this as he drove south on Hopewell-Wertsville Road in the late afternoon of March 1, 1932. www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD4yb32vXp4Yes, those cars back then were really loud. Notice that the car in the video is missing its front hood. Yes, I was reading a few of the comments for that video and it seems the owner is still looking for an original radiator but has had to go with a replacement from a Dodge minivan for now, so the hood might not have fit.. talk about anti-obsolescence though!
|
|