|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 18:22:38 GMT -5
Post by lurp173 on Jul 12, 2021 18:22:38 GMT -5
Joe,
I assumed that Michael was referring to Oscar John Bruckman who Reilly used as a defense witness in Flemington. Bruckman stated that as a cab driver he drove Fisch around when he (Fisch) was allegedly engaged in his pie making business. On one occasion, he (Bruckman) observed Fisch produce a large roll of cash as he paid Bruckman five dollars for a cab ride. Bruckman could not testify that any of the notes he observed in this cash roll were in fact gold notes. In my opinion this was just another failed attempt by Reilly to implicate Fisch with the kidnapping and ransom money. If I recall correctly, Wilentz didn't even bother to cross examine Bruckman. I think that this was a smart move by Wilentz. Just let the jury assume that the money Bruckman observed in Fisch's possession could have come from any legal/illegal source and had nothing to do with the Lindbergh ransom money.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 18:46:34 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 12, 2021 18:46:34 GMT -5
Joe, I assumed that Michael was referring to Oscar John Bruckman who Reilly used as a defense witness in Flemington. Bruckman stated that as a cab driver he drove Fisch around when he (Fisch) was allegedly engaged in his pie making business. On one occasion, he (Bruckman) observed Fisch produce a large roll of cash as he paid Bruckman five dollars for a cab ride. Bruckman could not testify that any of the notes he observed in this cash roll were in fact gold notes. In my opinion this was just another failed attempt by Reilly to implicate Fisch with the kidnapping and ransom money. If I recall correctly, Wilentz didn't even bother to cross examine Bruckman. I think that this was a smart move by Wilentz. Just let the jury assume that the money Bruckman observed in Fisch's possession could have come from any legal/illegal source and had nothing to do with the Lindbergh ransom money. Yes, you're right and thanks Lurp, for clarifying. I had a feeling Michael wasn't referring to Inspector Henry Bruckman, and here's where I get another opportunity to complain again about the lack of an Index, or at least subtitled Table of Contents for ready referrals where names and instances tend to get thrown out there willy-nilly on this board. Fisch obviously was able to raise money whether it be legally or illegally. As the evidence shows, he didn't seem to care too much about how it came to him, as long as it would allow him to move on to his next scheme. And of course just because Fisch had money at any given time, gold or greenbacks, doesn't mean it came from the Lindbergh ransom payment. He was certainly no One Trick Pony.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 12, 2021 20:37:36 GMT -5
Joe likes this
Post by Michael on Jul 12, 2021 20:37:36 GMT -5
I wrote about this in V2, pages 598-602. I personally like the whole chapter but I picked out Bruckman because I totally believe him. The only issue is the year it occurred but not, in my opinion, what he said happened. This also to includes his assertion that Reilly was trying to get him to embellish or use “his imagination.” He tried that same tactic with Anna. When you have people refusing to cave to pressure (Lupica also is a good example) I think it helps to show they truly believed what they were willing to testify to.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 13, 2021 15:08:39 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 13, 2021 15:08:39 GMT -5
I am having some technical problems trying to show the photo that illustrates the points on this post but was able to enter it on the Imgur and so will include the reference to it and hope the readers of the board can access it. If Joseph Cerardi is the man on the left, then obviously he was on good terms with the man on the right, but this person is not his stepson Charles Maran. First, Charles was about eight years younger than his stepfather. In 1934 Cerardi would have been about 34 years old, so Charles would be no older than 26. The man on the right is obviously older than 26 years. Second, the man on the right appears to be of Italian descent. Charles Maran's mother had a German maiden name (Rosenthal) and came from a family who emigrated to the US from Romania. Charles' father, George Maran, must have had a similar background. The man in the picture seems to be well dressed with some sort of jewelry around the neck or tie, unlike the appearance of Cerardi whose trousers need a good washing. So this person, who seems to be on good terms with Cerardi, could have been his relative or in-law, perhaps a husband of a sister of Cerardi. Or he may have been a friend of Cerardi when he had been involved in his boxing career, which would have occurred when he was about 24 years of age. Cerardi, according to the account in Vol. 3, was regarded by his neighbors as demented or on drugs. He may have been dissembling, of course, but that takes a level of consistency, and apparently he did not get along with many persons, nor did he care to. The friend appearing in the photo is an exception to this statement. My earlier observation concerned only that Cerardi resembled Isidor Fisch and may have been incorrectly identified because of this likeness. The man who appears alongside Cerardi in this photo (friend and fellow Italian) may be another important piece in this kidnapping puzzle. He is not Peter Beritella as he does not fit Joseph Dunninger's description of Peter--"a wiry little Italian with bushy hair and a hard eye." The possibility, however, of Cerardi's continued connection with the boxing world is an interesting consideration. He did admit knowing Birrettella according to one source, but he also would know something of John Condon before his involvement with the case. Reference to the photo appears as follows: IMG_20210329_123614.jpg
|
|
|
V3
Jul 14, 2021 10:44:37 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 14, 2021 10:44:37 GMT -5
After some searching I suggest that the man on the right in the photo posing with Joseph Cerardi could be Paul Kelly, the head of the Five Points Gang in New York. Paul Kelly was born Paolo Antonio Vaccarelli in New York in 1876 to parents who had emigrated from Italy. Paul (or Paolo) was first a bantamweight boxer. He then created the Five Point Gang that had its headquarters in the Little Naples Clubhouse in NYC. He recruited young men to join his gang and became known for his labor racketeering. He was elected vice-president of the Longshoreman's Union in spite of his illegal activities and was actually appointing to a commission (either by or with permission of the NY mayor) to resolve a strike of the ILA in 1919. (High ranking government official?) Paul Kelly died of natural causes in 1936, probably about two or three years after this photo was taken, so he would have been about 58 years old which seems about right, given his appearance in the photo. He was described as "having gentle manners). Paul (Paolo) Kelly seems to be a good prospect. Sorry I still cannot copy the photo as it is too large for the space, but it does appear on the Ingur, number given in the last post.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 14, 2021 11:01:38 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 14, 2021 11:01:38 GMT -5
Joseph Cerardi once was quoted as saying he was expecting a check from "Naples" (Vol.3). He may have been referring to the Naples Club on Great Jones St. in New York City, the headquarters of Paul Kelly, not the city of Naples in Italy.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 15, 2021 18:15:50 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 15, 2021 18:15:50 GMT -5
Below is photo of some members of The Five Points Gang created by Paul Kelly.The individual we identified as Joseph Cerardi appears in this photo. You can find his image in the photo copied by Joe in a previous post next to a photo of Isidor Fisch. Cerardi appears as a member of Kelly's Five Points Gang. He is in the front row, fourth from the left.The date of this photo is not indicated.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 15, 2021 18:34:11 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 15, 2021 18:34:11 GMT -5
With some technical assistance hope to send here a copy of the photo that appears in vol.3 The man on the left we have identified as Joseph Cerardi. I suggest that the man on the right is Paul Kelly, labor racketeer and organizer of the Five Points Gang. He immigrated from Italy and was a former boxer--characteristics that fit the profile I described earlier.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
V3
Jul 15, 2021 19:09:08 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by Joe on Jul 15, 2021 19:09:08 GMT -5
With some technical assistance hope to send here a copy of the photo that appears in vol.3 The man on the left we have identified as Joseph Cerardi. I suggest that the man on the right is Paul Kelly, labor racketeer and organizer of the Five Points Gang. He immigrated from Italy and was a former boxer--characteristics that fit the profile I described earlier. View AttachmentAll great information and certainly no lack of research involved here. Not to be disrespectful in any way, but what does any of the above really have to do with the LKC, and how do any of these unfortunate individuals relate in any way to the only one who inarguably, has been proven to have been involved up to his eyeballs for close to ninety years now, Bruno Richard Hauptmann?
|
|
|
V3
Jul 15, 2021 22:02:32 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 15, 2021 22:02:32 GMT -5
Good question. My interest in the Lindbergh kidnapping case began only a few years ago when it seemed clear that there are many pieces missing from the puzzle and I began trying to connect the dots attempting to get at the facts as much as possible with no particular theory in mind. In this situation, it seemed to be possible that Isidor Fisch was not the individual seen by witnesses near Hopewell but another person who resembled him in some way. As you have observed, Fisch seemed to be unique, but it did occur to me that Joseph Cerardi appears to resemble him in some respects, so it may well have been Cerardi that the witnesses observed. Second, in his remarks about the kidnapping case, Condon mentions Italians as those he encountered several times, but the only Italians relating to the case were the spiritists Peter and Mary--who would not divulge the origin of their statements but attributed them only to "the spirits." Condon did state that someone said "Shut up" in Italian to the kidnapper or representative who was speaking to him on the phone, so who could this person be? Not likely Peter Birrittella. So I was looking for an Italian person who might be connected to the action. This was a missing piece. The older man in the photo in vol.3 appeared to be Italian, as was Joseph Cerardi, and the relationship seemed close, surprisingly so since Cerardi was not exactly what one would call sociable or friendly and not really capable of carrying out an elaborate kidnapping plot. He may have been working for someone else who was far more capable than he was and on close terms with him. Cerardi had been a boxer, a lightweight in all probability given his size, and he may have suffered from concussions resulting from his bouts. That would not prevent him from what I would call "fishing expeditions" that is, acting as a scout by moving around and noting possibilities for making money--illegally of course and reporting these opportunities to his "boss." The connection between Cerardi and Paul Kelly (his Irish alias) was a matter of connecting the dots, a relationship that was too important to ignore, and one I thought should be shared with the board members.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 17, 2021 15:43:09 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 17, 2021 15:43:09 GMT -5
Referring here to the earlier post of Joseph Cerardi and his older Italian associate.The two of them are meeting under a gazebo which has not had any gardening attention for some time. Shrubs and grass growth dominate the scenery In a work called "Ridgefield Park: 1685-1985 (a history of the town of Ridgefield Park) I found a photo of a gazebo that strongly resembles the one in the Cerardi/Older Man Italian man picture. The photo in the Ridgefield his tory collection shows the gazebo about 15 to 18 years later than first photo. The gazebo appearing below is near the Ridgefield Park Railroad Station. The photo was taken from the overpass (Route 46) which was build in the early 1950's in order to alleviate the traffic conditions and backups in the center of town on Main Street. This gazebo would be convenient for anyone traveling from New York and also for Cerardi who lived north on Teaneck Road. It was at this house, once the estate of Edwin Barnes, that Cerardi's wife Sophie was discovered in a wretched condition, this happening in 1934. In the earlier photo a small structure is displayed, and given the height and construction of the structure, it is probably a small shed or pit toilet (outhouse). In the picture following this post, the building is built of wood and housed the town's first Rescue Squad headquarters. It is close to the railroad and not to any private building, so one can assume that the property belongs to the town. The gazebo, still enclosed and hosting shrubs and accompanying shed or toilet facilities, was probably used as a rest area for railroad and town workers. It was not only convenient but private as well for an important conversation. ;There would have to be a third person, someone who snapped the photo--which could be evidence that the conversation took place and that some news was transmitted or an agreement was reached. The older Italian-looking man has a paper, not a handkerchief, tucked into his pants pocket. The showing may well have been deliberate. The paper has typewriting appearing on it, but I could not magnify it any farther to read the contents.Perhaps someone on the board with better equipment might be able to decipher the message and post the contents. The photo appears in Michael's "Dark Corners" vol. 3 after chapter 3 dealing with Schippell and his Shack. Attachments:
|
|
|
V3
Jul 17, 2021 19:56:23 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 17, 2021 19:56:23 GMT -5
The picture of the gazebo just posted can be found on page 49 of the Ridgefield Park historical book. It is located in an area called "Brewer Park" which is sometimes referred to as "Sand Banks."
|
|
|
V3
Jul 29, 2021 9:49:06 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 29, 2021 9:49:06 GMT -5
The full photo of Joseph Cerardi and the older Italian man can be found in Michael's "Dark Corners" vol. 3 following the chapter on Schippell and his shack. Dangling from the Italian's left-hand pocket is a paper with some typewritten message which I cannot make out. The coat is open, as often occurs with gangsters, and there appears to be a gun dangling from the right-hand pocket. The meeting takes place in an untended area, as the overgrowth of shrubs indicate. The siding on the shack is old and not professionally applied. The photo was mislabelled by the NJSP. Are we sure that the dark-haired man on the left is Joseph Cerardi? The photo confirms a meeting and most likely an agreement made with a high-ranking member of a gang in a remote area.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 29, 2021 16:38:29 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 29, 2021 16:38:29 GMT -5
I have to admit that the dark haired man on the right of the photo does resemble Joseph Cerardi as he appears in newspaper photos. He does appear to be somewhat older though than in the likenesses in the newspapers dated 1934. The gun that I mentioned on the right of the older Italian man can be seen if the photo is magnified; that is, the gun barrel can then be viewed. I am not expert in the weapons department, but someone else may be able to identify it.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 29, 2021 16:40:20 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 29, 2021 16:40:20 GMT -5
Sorry, Joseph Cerardi is the dark haired man on the left of the photo. The older Italian person is the one on the right.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 29, 2021 21:59:07 GMT -5
Post by Guest on Jul 29, 2021 21:59:07 GMT -5
Sorry, Joseph Cerardi is the dark haired man on the left of the photo. The older Italian person is the one on the right. Regardless of who the guy on the right is, perhaps it should be mentioned here that Charles Maran had been rooming with Schippell's mother-in-law in Manhattan at some point and that this is how the cast of characters ended up summering in Mount Rose in '31. It wasn't to kidnap Charlie.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 30, 2021 2:08:33 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 30, 2021 2:08:33 GMT -5
Interesting point since Ms.Kliemann, Charles Schippell's mother-in-law, also owned the farm on which the Schippell family lived. The argument does not follow logically, however, as this would not necessarily indicate that Joe Cerardi had no involvement in the Lindbergh kidnapping (non sequitur). Cerardi actually rented Schippell's shack following the kidnapping, by the way.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
V3
Jul 30, 2021 8:42:59 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 30, 2021 8:42:59 GMT -5
Interesting point since Ms.Kliemann, Charles Schippell's mother-in-law, also owned the farm on which the Schippell family lived. The argument does not follow logically, however, as this would not necessarily indicate that Joe Cerardi had no involvement in the Lindbergh kidnapping (non sequitur). Cerardi actually rented Schippell's shack following the kidnapping, by the way. As much as many of the residents of Hopewell were infatuated by the presence of the Lindberghs in their area, there were many who as a result, felt genuinely threatened by the increased publicity their area received and by the sudden influx of outsiders. Many of these residents, especially ones that may have been involved in shady but relatively routine dealings totally unrelated to the Lindbergh Kidnapping, just wanted to be left alone. I believe this is the primary motivation for any suspicions of wrongdoing that befell these folk in general. Is there some kind of factual connection between the numerous people from the area who get drawn into a wide web of suspicion here with Richard Hauptmann, the guy we know for a fact was involved, that was not fully explored through the efforts of law enforcement?
|
|
|
V3
Jul 30, 2021 10:22:35 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 30, 2021 10:22:35 GMT -5
Joe, you make an excellent point and a suggestion that should be investigated. I will work on this for a while and see if anything turns up. Perhaps other members on the board may have some leads.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
V3
Jul 31, 2021 8:38:28 GMT -5
Post by Joe on Jul 31, 2021 8:38:28 GMT -5
Joe, you make an excellent point and a suggestion that should be investigated. I will work on this for a while and see if anything turns up. Perhaps other members on the board may have some leads. Granted, more possibilities might well have unfolded had law enforcement not felt so motivated to label Hauptmann a lone wolf, but I see these possibilities arising primarily through Hauptmann's immediate social circle. His systemic influence within all phases of the kidnapping, extortion, decision-making and personal living expenditures met through the ransom money amount, is clear.
|
|
|
V3
Jul 31, 2021 10:14:25 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Jul 31, 2021 10:14:25 GMT -5
Joe, your comments are well taken and so should be well considered. Your earlier remarks regarding members of the Hopewell community in their attitude toward the new Lindbergh neighbors also seem to have some potential. As a child growing up in a farming community, I can understand the individual resentment that their quiet life was interrupted by the publicity surrounding the transplanting of Charles Lindbergh and family into their neighborhood. Whether this resentment could erupt into a kidnapping of their child is admittedly possible, though hardly likely since this is an extreme act motivated by a psychopathic individual seeking isolation, not the ransom. That being said, however, we can take a look at several residents in the Hopewell area to learn of their reactions to the move of Charles Lindbergh to their community.
Ben Lupica, a 17 year old student who lived in Hopewell not far from the Lindbergh residence, testified as a witness for the defense at the Hauptmann trial. He saw a blue Dodge sedan about 5 p.m. on March 1 carrying a ladder in sections. I will not recount all the details as these have been covered before on the board but will comment that the sedan followed him, the driver moving erratically probably in an attempt to gain his attention; the driver may have mistaken him as his confederate with whom he was supposed to meet with that evening. Lupica stated that the Dodge bore New Jersey license plates and remembered enough of the letters to indicate that the plate would belong to a car registered in Mercer County NJ. If the car belonged to Hauptmann, he would have had to acquire a NJ plate, not impossible certainly, but requiring some effort on his part to obtain the plate and most likely with assistance from another person who may well have lived in the area. By the way, I did not see any reference in Lupica's testimony regarding a trunk attached to the sedan. If it had been there, he would have seen it and made some remark in his description of the car. The photos taken of Hauptmann's car following his arrest clearly show the trunk still attached to the rear of the sedan.
Most importantly, though, to the topic of the current thread, when Lupica was told of the kidnapping of the Lindbergh child, he said "What! Are they up here?" This comment indicates that not everyone in the Hopewell area was aware that the Lindbergh family lived among them. Nor did Lupica show any resentment toward the family when he learned of it. If there had been strong resentment in the Lupica family, Ben would have known about it.
Next I will take a look at Charles Schippell and his attitude toward the Lindberghs, hoping this approach will be of interest to the members of the board.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 1, 2021 8:27:11 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 1, 2021 8:27:11 GMT -5
Charles Schippell, called a resident in Hopewell, disliked Lindbergh intensely although he did not give any particular reason for his attitude toward his neighbor. The subject has been addressed at some length on the board, so I will not repeat details already given but will add some observations regarding the subject. A postcard picture appeared on the board some time ago of Schippell in a sailor suit, date given as Feb. 8, 1920. The picture is addressed to "My Dear Sweetheart Lottie." Charlotte was the name of Schippell's wife and evidently was nicknamed "Lottie." The two were also parents of a girl who was named Charlotte after her mother. So this picture is Schippell, and he does resemble Hauptmann as some have claimed. The writing is in a pointed hand and does not resemble, in my opinion, the writing found on the table in South Plainfield NJ. (I make no claims to being a graphologist.) One source does state that Schippell was ambidextrous, however, so he may have been able to feign his handwriting successfully as the circumstances would require. He lived with his family in New York and rented out his farm in Hopewell through a realtor. His NY address is given by Michael in Dark Corners vol. 3 as 236 E.88th St. The farm in Hopewell was actually owned by his mother-in-law who employed a realtor to acquire renters. A number of Schippell's belongings, tools and abandoned car were found at the Hopewell site by investigators into the Lindbergh kidnapping, and Schippell was considered to be a likely suspect in the crime by some of them, especially given his antagonism to Lindbergh. He probably suffered from a post traumatic syndrome acquired through his experiences in WWI. His observations do not always seem to be consistent. My interest concerns the burlap bag which was found near and once contained the body of the Lindbergh child. Farmers purchased meal--or what they called "feed"--for their cattle, chickens, and livestock from retail stores or mills especially during winter when the animals could not eat grass. The feed was often used in small quantities to supplement other food such as hay or corn fodder. (I was an old farm kid and remember this well, having had to travel to town to purchase feed for my father's livestock.) Up until the end of World War II, the feed was contained in burlap bags, loosely woven and constructed of what appeared to be small rope strands. The meal was coarsely ground and left a lot of dust in the material, so much so that one would not place a living child, or animal for that matter, into such a bag because the dust would get into the lungs and cause serious breathing problems before much time elapsed. So if the Lindbergh child was placed into a burlap bag, he would have already died, or the person putting him into the bag was ignorant of the consequences if he had been still breathing. Burlap bags were not readily available. Hauptmann's life would not involve burlap bags. He would have had to acquire some knowledge of them and gone out of his way to to obtain an empty bag if he was the person involved with the killing. There are, however, a couple of possibilities. First, the footprints of two persons led from the Lindbergh house to a chicken coop nearby. The kidnappers may have thought to check on the child after the ladder broke and finding the child dead or dying, found the burlap bag in the chicken coop and decided to use it. Second, empty burlap bags could be found on the Schippell farm, and that suggests some involvement on the part of the residents there or of someone who had previously lived on the farm, whether Schippell or Joseph Cerardi.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
V3
Aug 1, 2021 10:50:21 GMT -5
IloveDFW likes this
Post by Joe on Aug 1, 2021 10:50:21 GMT -5
Joe, your comments are well taken and so should be well considered. Your earlier remarks regarding members of the Hopewell community in their attitude toward the new Lindbergh neighbors also seem to have some potential. As a child growing up in a farming community, I can understand the individual resentment that their quiet life was interrupted by the publicity surrounding the transplanting of Charles Lindbergh and family into their neighborhood. Whether this resentment could erupt into a kidnapping of their child is admittedly possible, though hardly likely since this is an extreme act motivated by a psychopathic individual seeking isolation, not the ransom. That being said, however, we can take a look at several residents in the Hopewell area to learn of their reactions to the move of Charles Lindbergh to their community. Ben Lupica, a 17 year old student who lived in Hopewell not far from the Lindbergh residence, testified as a witness for the defense at the Hauptmann trial. He saw a blue Dodge sedan about 5 p.m. on March 1 carrying a ladder in sections. I will not recount all the details as these have been covered before on the board but will comment that the sedan followed him, the driver moving erratically probably in an attempt to gain his attention; the driver may have mistaken him as his confederate with whom he was supposed to meet with that evening. Lupica stated that the Dodge bore New Jersey license plates and remembered enough of the letters to indicate that the plate would belong to a car registered in Mercer County NJ. If the car belonged to Hauptmann, he would have had to acquire a NJ plate, not impossible certainly, but requiring some effort on his part to obtain the plate and most likely with assistance from another person who may well have lived in the area. By the way, I did not see any reference in Lupica's testimony regarding a trunk attached to the sedan. If it had been there, he would have seen it and made some remark in his description of the car. The photos taken of Hauptmann's car following his arrest clearly show the trunk still attached to the rear of the sedan. Most importantly, though, to the topic of the current thread, when Lupica was told of the kidnapping of the Lindbergh child, he said "What! Are they up here?" This comment indicates that not everyone in the Hopewell area was aware that the Lindbergh family lived among them. Nor did Lupica show any resentment toward the family when he learned of it. If there had been strong resentment in the Lupica family, Ben would have known about it. Next I will take a look at Charles Schippell and his attitude toward the Lindberghs, hoping this approach will be of interest to the members of the board. Aaron, here are my thoughts on the well-founded points you’ve made. The Lindberghs’ weekend visits to their new house in Hopewell was still a relatively new phenomenon on March 1, 1932, but enough locals were well aware of the construction that had been going on from mid-1931 and whose house it was. I’m a bit surprised Ben Lupica would have been unaware as to who the new inhabitants of this great white house on Sorrel Hill were. And both Charles and Anne Lindbergh, while perhaps being somewhat taciturn, made no attempt to hide their identities as they regularly drove to Hopewell for supplies from late October 1931. Word travels very quickly around parts like these, at least for those who don’t totally shut themselves off from civilization. As for the movements of the Dodge Sedan as it approached Lupica. Yes, I consider the possibility the Dodge driver believed Lupica’s vehicle was one he intended to meet up with. But if that’s the case, why would he pull to the left, thus distancing himself from his anticipated contact? You’d think he would just proceed in the right lane so could pull up alongside to greet and talk to this individual. What I tend to believe happened here is that the Dodge driver was surprised by Lupica’s approaching vehicle and made an attempt to distance himself entirely from it. To his left was a farmer’s field and I believe that in the fading light, he decided to turn left into what he believed was a roadway, but in fact was nothing more than a tractor trail leading into the field. Having then realized that this was not a thoroughfare, the driver then recovered in a sense to make his actions appear more normal. By the time Lupica passed him on the left hand side, the driver’s unusual actions here had probably only created more interest and even suspicion in Lupica’s mind, than if he had driven past him in a normal fashion on the right side. I believe this is what piqued Lupica’s curiosity, which in turn allowed him to then observe the level of detail he then testified to. The New Jersey plate (Mercer County with an “L”) Lupica claimed he observed, is an interesting scenario. While stealing a local license plate might pose an immediate risk, I think that in this case with a crime of unprecedented proportions in the making, the driver, whom I believe was not from the area, would have realized it would be much wiser to relieve some unfortunate local of his or her plate, possibly from a vehicle that appeared to receive less than normal everyday use. An out-of-state plate would at the least, have drawn much more attention and retained detail about the vehicle in the mind of a local resident. Believing that the driver of the vehicle was Richard Hauptmann who of course lived in New York, I do state this with some bias but I also believe for many reasons, this conclusion is well founded. From my recollection, Lupica observed either a spare wheel and tire, or a tire alone secured to the back of the Dodge. In those days with the tendency of tires to blow out quite often, perhaps an extra one would have been a better idea than the custom built trunk, which in itself would have only represented another point of observation by a witness. Hauptmann had a factory-installed spare wheel and tire installed in the left front fender of his Dodge, but it seems unlikely Lupica would have noticed it as he passed on the opposite side. Hauptmann’s rear trunk was fully detachable and so I don't think its removal before the trip to Hopewell would have posed an issue.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 1, 2021 11:10:58 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 1, 2021 11:10:58 GMT -5
Re: the photo of Joseph Cerardi and the older Italian man: a friend of mine identified the gun shown hanging from the right side of the Italian man. He says that it is a clip gun that would been new in the 1930s but sought after because it can shoot 16 times. He also said that it would have been expensive.
The entire photo can be found in Michael's Dark Corners vol.3 at the end of the third chapter "Schippell's Shack"
|
|
|
V3
Aug 1, 2021 11:29:43 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 1, 2021 11:29:43 GMT -5
My friend said just now that the gun is not "dangling from the pocket," but that the man is wearing a gun strap.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 9, 2021 12:20:48 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 9, 2021 12:20:48 GMT -5
Robert Riehl was the guard at Woodlawn Cemetery who saw two men engaged in conversation the evening Cemetery John and John Condon conducted their first conversation. Riehl described two men he witnessed that evening at Woodlawn Cemetery in a statement made on July 19, 1932, to a member of the NJSP and to Det. James Fitzgerald of the Jersey City Police. In the statement Riehl describes the older man as being of 50-55 years of age, height 5'6" or 5'7" tall, and about 170 pounds. He was "clean shaven, with a round face and wearing a dark suit with a dark overcoat, collar and tie, a black soft hat turned up" and speaking like an American (no foreign accent). Riehl denies specifically that the man he saw was John Condon. In "Dark Corners" vol. 2 Michael also describes this meeting. The man was clean shaven, no mustache, and Riehl definitely states that the man was not Condon. Questioned about the light in the cemetery, Riehl said that it was "pretty fair." Dr. Condon may well have been present at Woodlawn that evening, but Riehl saw a different person, one Condon did not mention in any of his statements. Riehl's description does not fit Condon, but it does fit the appearance of the Italian man who appears in the photo with Joseph Cerardi posted above on July 15.
|
|
|
V3
Aug 9, 2021 12:22:20 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 9, 2021 12:22:20 GMT -5
The statement of Robert Riehl can be found in its entirety on-line (Robert Riehl/Lindbergh kidnapping case).
|
|
|
V3
Aug 9, 2021 12:33:56 GMT -5
Post by aaron on Aug 9, 2021 12:33:56 GMT -5
I am not trying to deny that John Condon was indeed present and conversed with Cemetery John at Woodlawn Cemetery. It does appear, however, that for some reason he did not want to admit to the presence of the man Riehl described (a third person).
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
V3
Aug 10, 2021 8:22:21 GMT -5
Post by metje on Aug 10, 2021 8:22:21 GMT -5
Possibly Joseph Cerardi was involved in the Woodlawn scene. Lindbergh studied moving images of Cerardi and Charles Maran and stated that the running of Cerardi resembled the movement of one of the men he observed at St. Raymond's Cemetery, more so than any other sample he had been shown. Cerardi may have been present at "John's Birthday Party" on March 12, 1931. He bears some resemblance to the dark-haired man standing next to John Mohrdieck in the last row on Mohrdieck's left side. Fisch is standing to the right of Mordieck. There seems to be some controversy regarding the identity of this person, but in this photo he does bear some resemblance to Joseph Ceradi. Attachments:
|
|
metje
Detective
Posts: 174
|
V3
Aug 10, 2021 10:38:39 GMT -5
Post by metje on Aug 10, 2021 10:38:39 GMT -5
Continuing on and quoted from Michael's "Dark Corners" vol. 3: Upon viewing the photos of Joe Cerardi's walking and running, Lindbergh said that "The photos were the closest that he had seen sin the night of April 2, 1932." This would have been the date of the occasion Lindbergh accompanied John Condon to St. Raymond's Cemetery, suggesting that Cerardi was present and perhaps functioning as a lookout. Also Michael notes here that "Joe the Wop" ( believed to be Joe Cerardi) lived then on "3000 or 3001 East Tremont Avenue." This address is within the Westchester Square area. Condon reported that when on the phone with the kidnapper, he asked where the call was coming from, and the caller responded "Westchester Square." Michael reports the response as "Westchester Square" and not just "Westchester." Whereupon another man in the background shouted "Shut Up" in Italian to the caller. I suggest that all this detail is relevant to the kidnapping.
|
|