|
Post by pgray on Mar 10, 2008 19:43:17 GMT -5
We do not require a photo of the ladder here,
it is the 4 holes which were found in the side of the ladder, which had nothing to do with it's construction.
When they were placed on the flooring of BRH's attic, the holes matched up with the holes in the support beams.
Something like that could be almost impossible to be a coincidence.
Now how do you get around something like that?
Please tell me as I would like to know.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 10, 2008 20:09:48 GMT -5
If the holes in the ceiling joists have been documented prior to the introduction of rail #16 into the attic , you can't get around it. On the other hand, if someone was able to bring that ladder rail into the attic prior, it would be easy enough to drive nails through the holes and into the joists. That is providing the joist spacing is in alignment with the holes. It's matching the grain of the wood that is practically impossible to do.
|
|
|
Post by pgray on Mar 11, 2008 11:02:28 GMT -5
Though there is no evidence of the sort you mention, that , I am aware of, it still fits in because of the spacing of those beams. That the defense could have objected is of course academic. That the entire ladder should not have been admitted as evidence is also academic.
Just say, it was not planted, evidence, how do you get around something like that? It is very damning.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 11, 2008 17:10:19 GMT -5
You can't get "around it", nor the nails and the hand plane marks. I guess that's why people looking to exonerate Hauptmann choose to ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 11, 2008 18:26:09 GMT -5
There are several ways to "cast doubt" on this....
The 1st problem is to find documentation to show that Rail 16 had (4) holes in it when the ladder was discovered at Highfield's and before being altered. The Betts report proves there was by June. The picture in Kelvin's report could support this, I suppose, but I wouldn't think it would hold up in Court today as proof of (4) holes.
Next, could someone have brought Rail 16 into that attic and do as Kevin suggests. Absolutely. However, that doesn't mean they did. There is a lot of nonsense going on in the reports but again, its jumping to conclusions to say "this" represents "that."
Scaduto wrote about the holes being full of "springy" wood fiber. Scaduto argued that because they were "springy" they were fresh, therefore freshly made. But a counter argument could be made based upon Prof. Hazeltine's observations that nails were being hammered in and withdrawn after the fact AND Investigators during Hoffman's re-investigation were using probes to gauge how deep the holes were....which weren't deep enough due to the fibers.
Kevin's observations he posted here in the past have satisfied me this evidence actually came from the basement after having been removed by the original electricians working on the house. This explains everything.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 12, 2008 7:13:19 GMT -5
I thought I had heard it all when it comes to the wood evidence and how it has been subject to so much confusion and misunderstanding. Now I see that our recent "babbling" ( far better than ranting and raving) has led one extremely misguided individual to get it all wrong with something as simple as the nail holes in the attic joists. For the record, the nail holes were not filled artificially. How could any rational and sane person even come up with this? It really is very simple. When you withdraw and insert cut nails the wood fibers in the hole get severed and collected at the bottom. Take any nail, even a wire nail, drive it home, withdraw it, and you will not get it back all the way without force. That's partly the wood fibers resisting the nail and partly the accumulation of fibers in front of the nail. Is this really complicated? Does every single aspect of this case have to be spun into a web for some alternative theory? Can't people put this creativity to better use? Sorry, better make that 2 misguided individuals and I wouldn't be surprised if it's a dozen by days end. Just wanna give credit where credit is due. Only in this case could you find the people capable of making a mountain out of a nail hole.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Mar 16, 2008 8:35:20 GMT -5
This is along the lines of where Scaduto is heading as part of his "planting" explanation. I've previously pointed out on Allen's board the main problem with this theory is that there would have had to have been existing holes already in the joists where the previous length of 1 X 6 had been nailed before it was removed, before Rail was surreptitiously hammered in place.
Kevin, this was a great observation on your part. I recall you originally posting this but can't remember how you determined this from the comparison of the depositing of airborne dust / soot. I believe Rail 16 has been permanently discoloured due to its silver nitrate staining. Was the comparison a relatively straightforward one and do you have any pictures you can post?
Amen. Not to mention the fact that each of the cut nails pushed through the holes in Rail 16 matched up perfectly with the positioning in the joists, the angle of penetration as well as the rotation / orientation of each nail. It amazes me too how far over some heads some of the most elementary evidence in this case seems to fly.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 16, 2008 8:52:34 GMT -5
Joe, I was attempting to give a possible scenario for replacing the board. The nail holes, in my opinion, would be the easiest part of a "fabrication". I really don't think people are fully aware of just how difficult this whole procedure would be. A really simple example that anyone can do is this. Go to a local building supply center and ask for a small piece of yellow pine, any length or size will do. Go back to your car and study the grain at one end very carefully. Now go back in and sort through the stock until you find a match. Go back to your car and compare. I think once you see how different the two pieces are you will get an appreciation for the difficulty of this. That doesn't even include the actual size, t&g profile, color, age, and nail holes. If people would just attempt to try out their theories before proclaiming them to the world, we might not waste so much time spinning our wheels.
No I don't have any pictures yet. I am putting together a list of things I want to do at the NJSP Museum including this and proof that rail 16 was not a replacement. The staining of the ladder is uniform so different contrasts are still present. S-226 clearly shows the joist lines where as rail 16 does not.
|
|
|
Post by ktolks on Feb 18, 2013 21:42:40 GMT -5
I think the most productive avenue of deduction to follow is to ACKNOWLEDGE the continuity of Rail 16 (shown in numerous newspaper photos) and its four nail holes -- and to accept the inevitable conclusion that this key component of the ladder DID indeed originate from Hauptmann's attic. But remember that Rail 16 contained no fingerprints of Hauptmann, and could very well have been removed from the attic by someone other than he.
We are led to ask, why would an experienced union carpenter in need of a seven-foot piece of lumber think to obtain it from his attic? To do that would have required emptying out the contents of the pantry closet, climbing up, cutting the needed wood from the flooring, and then restoring and reordering the closet. It's a lot of trouble to go to, especially when the alternative is to take ten minutes to walk or drive to a lumberyard and purchase the lumber for a few cents.
The possibility has to be considered that Hauptmann was targeted for framing by people canny enough to think of the Rail 16 strategem and capable of gaining clandestine access to the attic -- perhaps with the assistance of landlord Max Rauch. Remember that Rauch was given the receipt for the materials used to build Hauptmann's garage, and therefore knew full well that Hauptmann purchased lumber at the National Lumber & Millwork Co. on White Plains Avenue. That would have allowed him to feed the information to Arthur Koehler so that the latter could simulate the tracing of the Southern Pine members to that location.
I am suggesting nothing less than that the framing of the ladder evidence in advance of the kidnapping -- by the REAL kidnappers -- is a genuine possibility. Rauch had access to Hauptmann's apartment and knowledge of his wood purchases -- and could have been the critical link in implementing the framing of Hauptmann.
|
|