|
Post by rick on Feb 4, 2006 23:16:08 GMT -5
Never heard of this before--relatively new field brought about by computers. Dr. Carole E. Chaski analyzed/compared two sets of writings statistically for syntax and word usaged to determine authorship of a suicide letter. Turned out the murderer wrote the suicide letter for the deceased. Heres a brand new area of inquiry for analysis of the ransom notes and related writings. Hope someone will take a look.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 5, 2006 9:36:02 GMT -5
This is one area of Expertise I am extremely interested in. I first stumbled across this Science after reading a couple of anonymous letter trials in which Linguistic Experts were used to testify. I contacted Dr. Edward Finegan, who told me that while he was interested in the case, he hadn't evaluated the notes. www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/linguistics/content/people_e_finegan.phpAnother Expert that I have been reading a lot about is Dr. Roger W. Shuy. rogershuy.com/ The article he wrote for the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin which really impressed the hell out of me. www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2002/april2002/april02leb.htm If we could ever get Experts like these two gentlemen to look over these notes I think any conclusions they draw would certainly clear up this evidence especially if they say Hauptmann wrote them. Of course I always have to throw in the fact Hauptmann's "requests," which were made under dubious circumstances, should never be used in any Professional evaluation but I don't think they would use them in their evaluation in the first place. It might be something to ask someone in their field about in order to know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by pzb63 on Feb 7, 2006 17:46:35 GMT -5
Sort of on the same lines, I have wondered about the conversations with CJ and Condon. How likely is it that Hauptmann would use terms such as "would I burn" and "smack me out"? Having heard Hauptmann audio and seen his translated letters etc, I can't reconcile the use of these terms with his speaking manner? Or is this how the general population spoke in the 20's and 30's? Only in the movies I'd say. Any thoughts on this?
|
|
|
Post by dryan on Feb 7, 2006 18:52:31 GMT -5
Hauptmann was a movie-goer. And in the ransom notes CJ warns that he has the same tools in terms of car radios as the police have, as if he learned all about that from the movies.
|
|
|
Post by laura51830 on Feb 7, 2006 19:03:07 GMT -5
A lot of people were movie-goers. It doesn't mean it was Hauptmann and could have been anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 7, 2006 20:49:42 GMT -5
I think the ransom notes themselves are a contradiction. It's as if someone smart is trying to sound dumb.
Then if you take what CJ is quoted as saying it certainly doesn't appear he is the ransom note writer - at least to me. But what he says is coming from Condon and Agent Sisk reported that everyone believed he was "dressing up" his conversations with CJ.
I would have never guessed Hauptmann would use the term: "now I am in the bag" which is obvious Police lingo yet Inspector Clegg reports this to Hoover. However, I've search for the actual source because I know Clegg wasn't there but all I can find is that Clegg says "someone" (who was there) said Hauptmann said it.
|
|
|
Post by dryan on Feb 9, 2006 11:26:39 GMT -5
Turrou used the "I'm in the bag," too, didn't he at some point? He also is the one who called out Anna to witness the "discovery" of the money in the garage -- when it had actually been found before.
|
|
|
Post by rita on Feb 13, 2006 23:59:23 GMT -5
I' sure CAL's compatriots followed CJ from day one, and since they needed a patsy I suspect they would have placed some of the 30k gold certificate they didn't give CJ at his regular haunts. The bootleg era this part of history applies to is full of accounts where police badgered someone like the gas station attendant to writ down Hauptman's license on the gold certificate.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 14, 2006 6:19:23 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you here Rita. If something like this occurred then CJ would have been captured very shortly thereafter.
|
|