kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 8, 2006 9:56:00 GMT -5
Is there a compilation of exactly what bones were missing from the corpse and the surrounding area?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 8, 2006 20:54:45 GMT -5
Yes and No.
There isn't one report which breaks it down, however, if we take the autopsy, Squibb Report, Dr. Bass's, and Dr. Krogman's reports then cross-reference them we should have a fairly good idea.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 8, 2006 21:11:31 GMT -5
I was just interested to know how many bones from the right hand were found and where.
|
|
|
Post by Rab on Mar 9, 2006 2:58:16 GMT -5
4 bones from the right hand were found. 1 in the bag and 3 in the soil in the vicinity of the body. This is another aspect which makes me think this wasn't due to animal activity. The bone in the bag was a right fifth metacarpal. The other bones were three proximal phalanges (index, middle and ring fingers). All of this detail is in the Bass report, a copy of which is available on Ronelle's website: www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/bassreport.pdfFor a good illustration of finger bones: www.pncl.co.uk/~belcher/handbone.htmRab
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 9, 2006 8:01:31 GMT -5
Thanks Rab for that info. So what are the theories on how the bones are missing and why are they found devoid of most tissue as opposed to the corpse?
|
|
|
Post by Rab on Mar 12, 2006 8:43:42 GMT -5
Kevin, the lack of tissue on the bones is an interesting question. Bass also noted a lack of animal teeth marks which suggests the tissue wasn't eaten.
My general view is that the bag was used to transport the body which was already in a state of decomposition. That may mean that some bones were elsewhere, at whatever place the body was kept before being brought to Mt Rose. The metacarpal remained in the bag when the body was dumped out as did a large amount of hair. The scattering of some bones around the body were the result of animal activity and the lack of tissue the result of decomposition / insect activity. The missing bones were either left at the original site, dumped elsewhere or the result of animal activity at Mt Rose and so were spread more remotely. Of course, this is merely my opinion.
Rab
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 12, 2006 13:26:30 GMT -5
It must have been a pretty gruesome task and not one for the faint of heart. I would think some sort of sealed container would be needed for transport, you certainly wouldn't want that odor in your car. That is unless you had a means to transport the corpse on the outside of your vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by rita on Mar 16, 2006 20:27:49 GMT -5
I can just see that crib on top of the car, but in reality if no one is kidnapped there is no body, although for the final scene there must be a body and any body will do. Why did the DNA Evidence disapear if it was CAL Jr.'s Body?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 18, 2006 11:51:48 GMT -5
But we still have the reports to rely on. I think the Lindbergh family either removed these items due to the German sibling claim or the claims of the child's illness.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2006 7:56:19 GMT -5
I happened to watch an episode of North Mission Road on Court TV the other night and it caused me to think of the bone issue here. The story involved an LA screenwriter who went missing while driving from Barstow. Eventually police recovered his vehicle with him inside from the LA aqueduct. When the coroner examined the body both hands were found to be missing, which naturally led to speculation of foul play. A forensic archaeologist was called in and preformed a water sieve on the contents of the recovered vehicle. This process produced the missing hand bones from the back seat area. Microscopic examination of the bones ruled out any possibility of them having been cut off. To explain the mystery a forensic anthropologist was called in and explained that as the body decomposed the hands fell downward and the water current and catfish did the rest. The whole episode made me think what might have been learned from a more exacting survey of the Mt Rose site. I have seen the photos of the police sifting dirt there and I would not be surprised if much was lost. Also the bag and it's contents may have been explained. Who knows, there may still be evidence buried at that site.
|
|
|
Post by rick 62 member on Mar 30, 2006 8:16:34 GMT -5
1. Its truly astonishing that the Lindbergh family retained legal custody of all of Charlies forensic evidence and potential DNA. What a weird president that sets for The Innocence Project? Joe Blow gets convicted of murdering and raping Jane Doe, but later, the family retrieves all the evidence. How does Joe prove his innocence. He doesnt/ his goose is cooked. Power, Priviledge and Absolute Control. 2. Kevin could be right. Having visited "Charlies grave site" twice this month I was astonished as its wild and pristine appearance. More bones could be nearby. Too bad we cant find them electronically. The lack of any marker or stone in remembrance is counterintuitive. 3. I was also intriqued by the Olde dirt Hopewell-Mt Rose road still obvious. It parallels the paved Road. On it was Shippells shack less than 1/4 mile from the grave site in 1932. This site too is on private land and I think this too could be revisited using a metal detector if the current owner gave permission. Koehler, Bornmann and Gaetano found it intriquing as well in 1933.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2006 10:08:58 GMT -5
Rick, I am not sure who owns that property but if permission could be obtained I think it is entirely possible to conduct a proper archaeological excavation and survey. Many universities will use these types of local excavations for training and might be eager to undertake this task. Princeton, Drew and Rutgers are possible candidates.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Mar 30, 2006 12:28:25 GMT -5
kevin/ what did you have in mind for an outcome? Bones for DNA testing? Can this be possible?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2006 13:06:24 GMT -5
Rick, don't know about DNA. I was thinking more along the lines of bone and clothing locations and how it could help us understand any body movement at the site.
|
|
|
Post by carol on Mar 30, 2006 17:38:31 GMT -5
I think this is an excellent idea. But how much evidence would be left after 74 years?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2006 17:47:05 GMT -5
Who knows Carol? But there may be a chance that there is still evidence present. I am just not that impressed with the original dirt sifting operation and the recording of where the fragments where found. I know it is a long shot but a proper archaeological excavation could reveal some information regarding the body placement and possible movement. There could even be evidence relating to the cause of death, such as a bullet. Archaeologists have found the answers to mysteries far older than the Lindbergh case.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 4, 2006 7:30:22 GMT -5
Interesting idea Kevin.
Even a basic metal detector may find something, however, I wonder by doing this we may actually do more harm then good. Perhaps a real forensic team could make this investigation in the future and our efforts may actually hinder those efforts.
I know, I know, I am looking at two future events which may never happen but I thought I'd bring it up. These thoughts came to me the day I was digging up soil samples for Liz's research.
Anyway, I am not sure people know this but the Police went back to the site when they were finished and "obliterated it" (whatever that means) in order to deter people from going there.
There was even talk early on of erecting a monument there but it was decided this would "embarrass" the Lindbergh family and the idea was quickly squashed.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 4, 2006 7:44:18 GMT -5
I am not suggesting an amateur attempt here. This would be conducted by professional archaeologists from a recognized university. The students are strictly supervised. Since the site has already been disturbed it is essentially compromised and finds would have to take this into account. Archaeologists are accustomed to working sites which have various conditions present and know how to recognize this. If such an excavation could be performed we might gain by both what is and what isn't found. The discovery of the missing bones, for example, would indicate all decomposition likely occurred at this site. On the other hand , the lack of any discovery would strongly indicate the opposite. Who knows what other artifacts may be undiscovered?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 4, 2006 7:57:47 GMT -5
I wonder what it would take in order to make it happen? Supposing the child was shot.....I think the idea that a bullet may be found would probably be very slim.... The weapon would have to be fired at that location but since the bullet wasn't found inside of the skull then we have the problem of possible ricochet and/or trajectory.
I have also considered, and this is something I haven't posted in the past, that a shot may have been fired post-mordem, in order to give the impression it was the cause of death.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Apr 4, 2006 8:11:49 GMT -5
I think step one would be to locate the property owner and see if permission would be obtainable. If that can be done the next step would be to contact all regional universities with archaeological graduate programs and contact the respective department head. In archaeological terms this is not a very long term project and might be just right for field experience. Michael, I was assigned to an archaeological dig in the middle east and I can tell you that these people can find anything that is buried. I was amazed at how meticulous their work is and how nothing escapes discovery and recording. They were discovering the Bronze Age equivalent of bullets, small rounded rocks that I would have completely overlooked.
|
|
|
Post by Anne on May 19, 2006 14:56:36 GMT -5
Rick: exactly where was the body found? Was it on what is now called Princeton-Hopewell Road? Or Aunt Molly Road? Distance from Route 518?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 22, 2006 16:00:30 GMT -5
There is an interesting account in William Brittingham's Hopewell's Crime of the Century by a local woman , Dorothy Hill Christopher who says, "Years later, we would drive down that Hopewell-Mt Rose Road and there would always be curiosity seekers looking for the baby's grave. A path was worn into the woods, but no where near the right spot." (pg 84) Her father was a local farmer ( Calvin Hill) who was present at the grave site on May 12 1932 and was photographed there by a NY Times reporter. Is it possible the the actual grave site has been mistakenly identified?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 23, 2006 19:41:27 GMT -5
Not many people have this book Kevin....
I like stuff like this. Letters recounting the stories are very interesting and no doubt this is a very true situation. I am not sure about others, but I can say with the utmost conviction that I know the right spot. I have been to the site with my Grandfather, Father, Mark Falzini, Gary, Steve, Sue, MikeC, and a host of other LKC Researchers. Trooper Carmony's map AND Cpl. Leon's map both show I was in the right place.
It's like life. You've got to know where you are going so if you follow someone around who doesn't then you wind up in the wrong spot or worse - you get lost. ;D
|
|
|
Post by steve for mike on May 23, 2006 19:46:13 GMT -5
i went there before the wine and words talk in hopewell
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on May 23, 2006 19:53:41 GMT -5
It is a very under rated book and has some interesting accounts by locals in it. I like the stories about the gambling and drinking done by the reporters covering the crime.
|
|