|
V3
Jul 7, 2020 22:53:57 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by lilibean on Jul 7, 2020 22:53:57 GMT -5
When I mean notes,I meant notes that refer to the planning of the kidnapping.Directions, schedules of Lindbergh's, observation of movement by the family. Also were there articles of the house being built, info on the baby? Most times during a search they find this type of evidence.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 8, 2020 14:02:56 GMT -5
Michael likes this
Post by hurtelable on Jul 8, 2020 14:02:56 GMT -5
When I mean notes,I meant notes that refer to the planning of the kidnapping.Directions, schedules of Lindbergh's, observation of movement by the family. Also were there articles of the house being built, info on the baby? Most times during a search they find this type of evidence. No, to the best of my knowledge, there were NO notes belonging to Hauptmann found which pertained to to any of the subjects you mentioned. There was, however, at least one map of the state of New Jersey which included the part of the state in which Highfields was located. Yes, there were several newspaper and magazine articles published about Lindbergh's new home as it was being constructed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
V3
Jul 8, 2020 15:12:14 GMT -5
Michael likes this
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2020 15:12:14 GMT -5
When I mean notes,I meant notes that refer to the planning of the kidnapping.Directions, schedules of Lindbergh's, observation of movement by the family. Also were there articles of the house being built, info on the baby? Most times during a search they find this type of evidence. One thing I can share with you that was found in one of Hauptmann's notebooks that were taken from his house by LE is a sketch. This sketch was thought to be of a ladder. This sketch shows two rails with a mortised rung. There was also the word "Boad" found in Hauptmann's 1931 California trip notebook. Both these pieces were thought to implicate Hauptmann as the perpetrator of the Lindbergh kidnapping. I feel it necessary to mention that Hauptmann denied making that ladder sketch in his notebook. It was noted by at least one of the handwriting experts for the state that others may have made notations in some of his notebooks. Here is a link to the picture of the ladder sketch from Hauptmann's notebook. imgur.com/TvFSOY8
|
|
|
V3
Jul 8, 2020 19:57:17 GMT -5
Michael likes this
Post by trojanusc on Jul 8, 2020 19:57:17 GMT -5
When I mean notes,I meant notes that refer to the planning of the kidnapping.Directions, schedules of Lindbergh's, observation of movement by the family. Also were there articles of the house being built, info on the baby? Most times during a search they find this type of evidence. Nothing Lindbergh or the kidnapping. The above posts do a good job at at distilling what little there was which could be construed as being related, even though there are numerous other explanations beyond just the kidnapping. Also, as mentioned, others used the books so whatever sketches or handwriting may not have been Hauptmann's.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2020 10:16:56 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Jul 9, 2020 10:16:56 GMT -5
No, to the best of my knowledge, there were NO notes belonging to Hauptmann found which pertained to to any of the subjects you mentioned. There was, however, at least one map of the state of New Jersey which included the part of the state in which Highfields was located. Not the kidnapping but "perhaps" the extortion.... There's the writing inside the closet that I addressed in V2 in Chapter 9. Clearly from the evidence I cite Hauptmann did not write the phone number. However, its hard to ignore that he did write the address where it was found. One thing I can share with you that was found in one of Hauptmann's notebooks that were taken from his house by LE is a sketch. This sketch was thought to be of a ladder. This sketch shows two rails with a mortised rung. There was also the word "Boad" found in Hauptmann's 1931 California trip notebook. Both these pieces were thought to implicate Hauptmann as the perpetrator of the Lindbergh kidnapping. I feel it necessary to mention that Hauptmann denied making that ladder sketch in his notebook. It was noted by at least one of the handwriting experts for the state that others may have made notations in some of his notebooks. Here is a link to the picture of the ladder sketch from Hauptmann's notebook. imgur.com/TvFSOY8Here are some of the other pictures in that notebook: imgur.com/6315mncimgur.com/5ylX1QsNothing Lindbergh or the kidnapping. The above posts do a good job at at distilling what little there was which could be construed as being related, even though there are numerous other explanations beyond just the kidnapping. Also, as mentioned, others used the books so whatever sketches or handwriting may not have been Hauptmann's. I cover this in V3 pages 463-6. Also, in Dr. Gardner's book " The Case That Never Dies" in the illustrations between pages 210-211 which questions whether or not that "d" in Boad contained in this notebook was even a "d" and may have been a "t."
|
|
|
V3
May 19, 2021 8:49:29 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by Michael on May 19, 2021 8:49:29 GMT -5
Think this article adds a little flavor to what's written in Chapter 6: imgur.com/mWHzTGs
|
|
|
V3
May 20, 2021 15:05:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Michael likes this
Post by IloveDFW on May 20, 2021 15:05:03 GMT -5
Think this article adds a little flavor to what's written in Chapter 6: imgur.com/mWHzTGsGood article, Michael! Almost as bad as having your defense attorney having the ladder on his stationary!🤯
|
|
|
V3
May 31, 2021 16:33:53 GMT -5
Post by wolfman666 on May 31, 2021 16:33:53 GMT -5
i saw that in a few crimes that made the headlines back then. jackasses selling made up items pertaining to the crime
|
|
|
V3
Jun 4, 2021 7:02:05 GMT -5
Post by wolfman666 on Jun 4, 2021 7:02:05 GMT -5
the eva coo case upstate new york a mallot was used in the crime they sold little mallots outside the courtroom
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 8:50:44 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 9, 2021 8:50:44 GMT -5
While reading one of Michael's books (could be the volume in this thread), I found a picture of Charles Maran with Joseph Cerardi, his stepfather, and thought that Charles bears some resemblance to Isidor Fisch. The hairline, the mouth, and height and weight of the two seem to resemble one another. Does anyone know if Charles Maran wore glasses? Perhaps he was the person who met with Breckinridge shortly after the kidnapping. Breckinridge at first thought it was Isidor who visited him but later was not so sure, but he did remember the glasses.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 9:41:07 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 9, 2021 9:41:07 GMT -5
I just checked. The photo referred to in the previous post is indeed included in Michael's third volume following Chapter 3 entitled Schippell's Shack. Sorry I would not find a page number. Isidor Fisch had an appearance that appeared to be unique, but the photo of Charles Maran does show some resemblance brtwee the two men, both in face and build. The eyes are different, but the mouth and jaw and hairline are similar.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 14:46:10 GMT -5
Post by Guest on Jul 9, 2021 14:46:10 GMT -5
I just checked. The photo referred to in the previous post is indeed included in Michael's third volume following Chapter 3 entitled Schippell's Shack. Sorry I would not find a page number. Isidor Fisch had an appearance that appeared to be unique, but the photo of Charles Maran does show some resemblance brtwee the two men, both in face and build. The eyes are different, but the mouth and jaw and hairline are similar. Isidor was skinny and he didn't smoke. Maran, who's on the right in the photo you mention, is holding a cigarette and is much heavier than Isidor.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 20:23:53 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 9, 2021 20:23:53 GMT -5
In the photo Charles Maran is the slender dark-haired young man on the left. The man on the right holding a cigarette is his stepfather Joseph Cerardi, a former middleweight boxer. Maran appears to be slender, as was Fisch.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 21:07:46 GMT -5
Post by Guest on Jul 9, 2021 21:07:46 GMT -5
In the photo Charles Maran is the slender dark-haired young man on the left. The man on the right holding a cigarette is his stepfather Joseph Cerardi, a former middleweight boxer. Maran appears to be slender, as was Fisch. No, it's the other way around. Maran the cigarette-smoking process server is on the right. Cerardi the boxer is on the left. If only Isidor could have defended himself against the many outrageous accusations against him. Unfortunately, dead people never have that chance. RIP Isidor!
|
|
|
V3
Jul 9, 2021 22:30:06 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Jul 9, 2021 22:30:06 GMT -5
Cerardi is the older of the two and on the right.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 5:07:48 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 10, 2021 5:07:48 GMT -5
Thank you for verifying, Michael. The observation was not intended to implicate Isidor Fisch in any way but simply to comment on the resemblance. Isidor seemed to have a unique appearance, but Charles Maran, the son of George Maran and Sophie Rosenthal, does bear some resemblance to Isidor. He was younger than Joseph Cerardi, his stepfather, by several years and approximates the age of Isidor. A number of witnesses stated that they saw Isidor riding around in a car near Hopewell with two other persons just prior to the kidnapping of the Lindbergh child. It's possible that the individual they actually saw was Charles Maran, and his companions were Cerardi and Charles Schippell. I do not recall the type of car if any was mentioned. Sorry that I could not copy the photo of Maran and Cerardi. It must be under copyright.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 11:01:38 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 10, 2021 11:01:38 GMT -5
In the photo Charles Maran is the slender dark-haired young man on the left. The man on the right holding a cigarette is his stepfather Joseph Cerardi, a former middleweight boxer. Maran appears to be slender, as was Fisch. No, it's the other way around. Maran the cigarette-smoking process server is on the right. Cerardi the boxer is on the left. If only Isidor could have defended himself against the many outrageous accusations against him. Unfortunately, dead people never have that chance. RIP Isidor! I believe Fisch gets a bad rap at times, but even though he was a kind and good natured soul, he clearly deserves the title of conman for the friends and acquaintances he isolated, manipulated and bilked of money. I also find it almost inconceivable that within the business partnering and friendly relationship he had with Hauptmann for a year-and-a-half, Fisch didn't "rub up against (the latter's ill-gained) money," know exactly what it's source was and willingly assist within the ransom payment laundering.
|
|
|
Post by lurp173 on Jul 10, 2021 11:31:13 GMT -5
I'm attempting to attach a side by side photo of Fisch and Maran. I've always thought that Fisch had such a unique appearance that anyone who had any kind of close encounter with him would have certainly been able to make a positive I.D. When one has Fisch's unusual appearance, a life of crime is not a smart thing to engage in. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 12:12:17 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Jul 10, 2021 12:12:17 GMT -5
Well, I was just shown two pictures of Cerardi and he is clearly the man on the left. The photo in the book was the only one of the men that I had ever seen and went by the description of it in the files. In my mind the cops were interviewing these men so I expected they knew who was who in the picture. Or maybe it was inverted during development or something? IDK.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 12:23:04 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 10, 2021 12:23:04 GMT -5
Thanks for posting the photos of Fisch and Maran. I had also thought that the face of Fisch was unique until seeing the photo of Charles Maran in Michael's book and was struck with the similarities which suggest that witnesses might confuse the two. Elis Sanborn, a resident of Maine, stated in 1933 that Fisch had approached him with the prospect of harboring a child kidnapped from a nearby summer camp. Initially Sanborn thought that Fisch had made the proposal, but it's possible that he spoke with Charles Maran who had rented a place in Liberty, Maine, briefly a summer at an earlier time. Later Sanborn said that he was not sure the individual was Fisch. His then wife, Erna Cahn Sanborn, would probably have been aware of the true identity, however.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 13:00:24 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 10, 2021 13:00:24 GMT -5
I'm attempting to attach a side by side photo of Fisch and Maran. I've always thought that Fisch had such a unique appearance that anyone who had any kind of close encounter with him would have certainly been able to make a positive I.D. When one has Fisch's unusual appearance, a life of crime is not a smart thing to engage in. View AttachmentFisch was thought by some of his friends and acquaintances to resemble Eddie Cantor, (below) the actor, comedian and recording artist. Coincidentally, Cantor's first name by birth was Isidore. (surname Itzkowitz)
|
|
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 13:57:56 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 10, 2021 13:57:56 GMT -5
If the photo appearing in volume 3 was in fact mislabelled, then Joseph Cerardi is the person who resembles Isidor Fisch. The man on the right is not necessarily Charles Maran, though. Cerardi would be the individual thought by witnesses to be Fisch which does not exclude Maran from suspicion, however.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 10, 2021 19:52:41 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 10, 2021 19:52:41 GMT -5
I found several photos of Joseph Cerardi in newspapers dated January 1934. In one of them (The Edmonton Journal dated Jan. 10, 1934 on page 6 ) Cerardi is photographed while wearing glasses--recalling the incident in which it was said that Breckinridge claimed to have met with "Isidor Fisch" but the man was wearing glasses. Fisch did not wear glasses.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 10, 2021 20:08:48 GMT -5
I look at this whole crime occurring in phases.
1. Planning
2. “Kidnapping”
3. Extortion
4. Actual Ransom Payment
5. Laundering
6. Arrest
7. Trial
8. Execution
9. Aftermath/Fallout
Each has certain players involved and there’s wrongdoing going on by just about everyone on all sides to varying degrees.
As it pertains to the kidnapping, I don’t believe there’s too many out there now who believe this was a one-man job. Same for the extortion when we have both CJ, a Lookout, and of course Condon.
When it comes to Fisch, there’s no direct proof he had anything to do with the kidnapping. Since I think it’s clear that multiple people were involved with laundering that ransom, then it seems hard for me to believe his hands were clean concerning this angle. What was his role? A dupe? I think not. He was too streetwise and savvy. So even if one believes he didn’t know ransom was involved he absolutely knew something shady was going on. In fact, that was his specialty. Just look at the fake bills he had Helfert create. Then we have all of the stories…. I don’t know about anyone else but Bruckman especially strikes me as believable. And here is where a separate debate can occur because it may have involved a different scam that had nothing to do with this case. Anyway for some, a connection in one place means a connection to all. While that’s possible, it doesn’t make it true when we look at all the possibilities that exist.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 11, 2021 8:45:42 GMT -5
Post by hurtelable on Jul 11, 2021 8:45:42 GMT -5
Michael, sorry I can't recall the name Helfert in the case. Can you please post a brief summary of who Helfert was and his possible involvement?
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
V3
Jul 11, 2021 19:00:36 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 11, 2021 19:00:36 GMT -5
I look at this whole crime occurring in phases. 1. Planning 2. “Kidnapping” 3. Extortion 4. Actual Ransom Payment 5. Laundering 6. Arrest 7. Trial 8. Execution 9. Aftermath/Fallout Each has certain players involved and there’s wrongdoing going on by just about everyone on all sides to varying degrees. As it pertains to the kidnapping, I don’t believe there’s too many out there now who believe this was a one-man job. Same for the extortion when we have both CJ, a Lookout, and of course Condon. When it comes to Fisch, there’s no direct proof he had anything to do with the kidnapping. Since I think it’s clear that multiple people were involved with laundering that ransom, then it seems hard for me to believe his hands were clean concerning this angle. What was his role? A dupe? I think not. He was too streetwise and savvy. So even if one believes he didn’t know ransom was involved he absolutely knew something shady was going on. In fact, that was his specialty. Just look at the fake bills he had Helfert create. Then we have all of the stories…. I don’t know about anyone else but Bruckman especially strikes me as believable. And here is where a separate debate can occur because it may have involved a different scam that had nothing to do with this case. Anyway for some, a connection in one place means a connection to all. While that’s possible, it doesn’t make it true when we look at all the possibilities that exist. Michael, I agree with your overall impressions of Fisch in relation to a willing hand within the money laundering, but can you please elaborate on your connection to Bruckman, as well as a different scam, in relation to this position?
|
|
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 5:58:09 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 12, 2021 5:58:09 GMT -5
Michael mentions the laundering of the ransom money suggesting that Fisch may have been involved at this point. It's quite possible that Fisch and Hauptmann, as business partners, were approached immediately after the police were contacted and the news broke out in the newspapers. The additional $20,000 may have been added at that time in order to help cover the cost of laundering, or at least a part of it. At the time of Hauptmann's trial, his wife Anna reportedly told one of her caretakers that her husband "was only supposed to get the money" and then would not say anything more. She must have had some knowledge of the laundering situation. The ransom money was paid only after a lengthy wait of several weeks, and Hauptmann was caught in a situation where he could not pay his utilities at the end of the month, so he must have invested what he had in the purchase of the ransom and had to wait to pay his bills until the money was handed over to the kidnappers. The laundering must have taken place immediately following that transaction. Hauptmann would work no longer, and his wife quit her job a few weeks later. The ransom money began to turn up immediately in two areas: one in the North Bronx where Hauptmann lived, and the second in the South Bronx in the neighborhood where Fisch was then living (source Kim Rossmo).
|
|
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 7:42:50 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 12, 2021 7:42:50 GMT -5
I reviewed the comments posted on the thread "Strange Vehicle Sightings Around Hopewell" and found them to be helpful and interesting. Of particular interest is the post regarding Alfred Hammond's statement. Hammond, a railroad watchman at Stillman's Crossing in West Trenton, reported that before the Lindbergh kidnapping occurred he saw a car with three men in it heading in the direction of Hopewell. His report was made immediately following the kidnapping. The man in the rear seat, Hammond stated, appeared to be Italian and approximately 25-28 years of age. Later he identified Isidor Fisch from photos as the man he saw in the rear seat. His testimony was not used as the prosecutors were intent on proving the case against Hauptmann, and Hammond's testimony did not help their case. The man whom Hammond saw may not have been Isidor Fisch. Fisch fitted the age but was not of Italian descent. The man may have been Joseph Cerardi who was an immigrant from Italy and who resembled Fisch as the photos shown earlier demonstrate. In 1932, Cerardi would have been about 32 years old, though-not 28.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 11:22:23 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Jul 12, 2021 11:22:23 GMT -5
Michael, sorry I can't recall the name Helfert in the case. Can you please post a brief summary of who Helfert was and his possible involvement? Sorry about that. Here is a portion of a report that explains what I'm talking about: imgur.com/0fEX4IKHauptmann acted stupid about it and played the victim. I happen to believe he knew about it. Michael, I agree with your overall impressions of Fisch in relation to a willing hand within the money laundering, but can you please elaborate on your connection to Bruckman, as well as a different scam, in relation to this position? Just that I believe Bruckman's story. To your next point, I'd say there's nothing specific Joe. Just repeated my oft made claim about how everyone seemed to jump to the conclusion that no matter what was seen/heard that it HAD to be about THIS crime. You know, its as if no other crimes were going on anywhere. For example, if I said that Fisch paid his rent in November 1933 with a $10 gold note, who among us wouldn't immediately believe it was ransom? It's irresistible. And yet, Fisch DID pay with a $10 gold note to Mrs. Kohl who still had the bill. But when the NJSP checked it against the ransom list it did not match. Think that one over for a minute. I reviewed the comments posted on the thread "Strange Vehicle Sightings Around Hopewell" and found them to be helpful and interesting. Of particular interest is the post regarding Alfred Hammond's statement. Hammond, a railroad watchman at Stillman's Crossing in West Trenton, reported that before the Lindbergh kidnapping occurred he saw a car with three men in it heading in the direction of Hopewell. His report was made immediately following the kidnapping. The man in the rear seat, Hammond stated, appeared to be Italian and approximately 25-28 years of age. Later he identified Isidor Fisch from photos as the man he saw in the rear seat. His testimony was not used as the prosecutors were intent on proving the case against Hauptmann, and Hammond's testimony did not help their case. Hammond's account is interesting. Enough so that author Jim Fisher tried to explain it away. One point he made was to insinuate Hammond made this request because he was seeking money... leaving in one's head that he may have been lying for financial gain. Then he later claimed that " the files of the New Jersey State Police show no contact with Hammond after May 1933." While I don't have a problem with picking a side and arguing for or against it, I do have a problem with these tactics. The first is misleading. Why? Because most people sought out compensation and some were given money and some were not. The question now becomes whether or not being denied compensation shut this account down. Which leads me to my second problem.... He's wrong that the NJSP files show no further contact because they met with him again in 1934 (See V1, Footnote #3.)
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 16:55:24 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 12, 2021 16:55:24 GMT -5
Michael, I agree with your overall impressions of Fisch in relation to a willing hand within the money laundering, but can you please elaborate on your connection to Bruckman, as well as a different scam, in relation to this position? Just that I believe Bruckman's story. To your next point, I'd say there's nothing specific Joe. Just repeated my oft made claim about how everyone seemed to jump to the conclusion that no matter what was seen/heard that it HAD to be about THIS crime. You know, its as if no other crimes were going on anywhere. For example, if I said that Fisch paid his rent in November 1933 with a $10 gold note, who among us wouldn't immediately believe it was ransom? It's irresistible. And yet, Fisch DID pay with a $10 gold note to Mrs. Kohl who still had the bill. But when the NJSP checked it against the ransom list it did not match. Think that one over for a minute. To clarify what I was looking for, what was Bruckman's story? I'm sure I must have read it in your book, but don't recall the details.
|
|