Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Dec 25, 2008 10:08:32 GMT -5
Kevin, considering that the first and second ransom notes were torn from the same original piece of writing paper, it seems reasonable that Hauptmann could have punched the double thickness to establish the three-holed pattern before tearing the folded larger sheet in half, thereby maintaining the accuracy for authenticity. Under minimalist circumstances, the ransom exchange could have been accomplished through a two-note process and I tend to believe this was his original intent. After the the whole thing exploded and drew in the police, press and underworld, I'm sure Hauptmann realized it would be impossible to negotiate the ransom exchange without a more protracted correspondence. In any case, he still had that second sheet which could now serve as the basis for an ongoing template, even if he hadn't utilized one from the beginning. I believe he made one up front though and that the irregular holes spacing is significant, otherwise I would have expected equal spacing. I've always been surprised at the seeming lack of attention paid to this feature of the pattern. The concept of using a template itself seems to be overstated as overly laborious at times but it's no more than a simple, five-minute exercise in cardboard or wood and in my opinion not a lot of work for someone planning a crime of this magnitude. It's when that Mersman table brace gets dragged into the equation, that the water suddenly goes murky and my eyes just kinda glaze over.. Quick and Easy Template on Paper
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 25, 2008 14:19:59 GMT -5
I personally think a good reference point is Mark's research on the signature which is located on his Blog here: I have been going back and forth from this discussion to his observations in order to see if the suggestions "work" (within the scope of personal acceptability) as well as Joe's research located on his Archive page here: Two great pieces of research we are lucky enough to have available to us.... But at what point do we accept the holes were done for this case if your hypothesis is correct? How many notes did (t)he(y) expect for whatever illegal action they were about to perpetrate? It's like that lack of "Lindbergh"s name. It continues this way at some point where we must assume the Writer knows who he is dealing with. It also shows respect does it not? "Dear Sir!" If its a psychological matter concerning superiority wouldn't it say something like "Hey Lindbergh" or anything similar showing contempt for him or the Morrow Family? I don't know the answer to this but I promise to post things as I come across them... The Writer seems absolutely confident that the consistency of the exact location of the holes prove the identity of the true parties. How does that happen when there isn't a model for the holes? The holes themselves are being "punched" with objects that sometimes stay in the same place and sometimes move - so the "punch" isn't the key - it's the spacing of the holes. So if you are using different things at times to punch the holes then its the template of the spacing which becomes so very important. And if its not such a big deal why the lack of the holes on the last note prompting John to (supposedly) tell Condon one of the group took the "symbol maker" away?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Dec 26, 2008 9:00:14 GMT -5
I'm not sure I understand the first part of that Michael. I'm suggesting they were not done for this crime but were incorporated. How many notes were anticipated? I guess you could solve the crime if you knew that! As I have asked, why are any required for a kidnap? How many notes does it take to make an exchange? Hauptmann didn't invent the crime of kidnapping and there certainly were plenty of examples on how to do the job. So why all the note writing? Look, I tend to look at all processes as a mechanic. If you want me to believe that the symbol was the result of a planned design and executed as a whole, then I will look for the evidence of that. Here's what I see; 3 holes approximately( but not exactly) 1" apart located on the lower right corner of a note paper that has been torn in half. The holes are irregular and inconsistency in shape. They are not precisely located in square with the note paper. The ink circles are always off and are obviously done freehand as are the 2 squiggles. Doesn't this bother anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 26, 2008 9:34:32 GMT -5
This is bothersome, and I do believe your original point is true. We can learn so much about this crime if we can decipher the notes and this symbol.
I have to go back to Mark's research. If Joe is correct in his position that them 3 holes could have an easily made template duplicated from the 1st then why this obvious "process" of making the holes in later notes?
Obviously the 1st Note predicts more notes and this first one was punched independently of each other and all other notes. Ok, that in my opinion supports Joe. It's on the 2nd half of the 1st Note that the 2nd Note is written and the holes on it are punched independently of all other notes. Again, this supports Joe. But it when these notes seemed to be "group" for punching that I see his efforts being "chipped" away. Then we see the absence of the symbol on note #5, and likewise on the last Note which shows the flaw in Joe's assertion (in my opinion).
Ever the diplomat, Mark tries to be as neutral as one can get but just can't ignore what's going on. For me it shows evidence of a "template" and that it is in a place that doesn't make it easy for them to utilize. I wholeheartedly subscribe to what Mark merely suggests.
Next, we do see evidence of preparation but also evidence of unplanned events.
When I examine Kevin's suggestions I do see something to it. I just don't know if it means that they went to the house intending to do something different. Obviously it would mean they did do their homework by expecting the Lindbergh's to be at Next Day Hill. But why would a note even be needed for such a crime? Why the paper torn in two - what's the 2nd half for? Why the colored ink in the car? What preparations were made for the dog? You see, for me, the questions then grow exponentially when there are already too many to begin with if simply accepting it happened with the intent history records. I am open minded due to those items Kevin & Rab have raised but need even more answers to even more questions that I wouldn't have otherwise.
It's for the same reason they have raised this issue that I have in the back of my mind that a 2nd note was more of an "afterthought." That the original was never meant to be followed up but a ruse to indicate it was supposed to be. And yes, this complicates matters the same way I indicate above concerning Kevin's suggestion. But I have been working on that....
This group, in my opinion, is operating with someone on the inside who originally provided them with intelligence. Later, they react to information which they should not possess but do, which again is an indication that someone is feeding them information. For example, if the Birritella's weren't involved, someone with direct knowledge of those events related them to the group of kidnappers.
For me, you can't look at the sequence of events and ignore the actions of these "Kidnappers." Those Notes looked at in conjunction with the events and evidence should solve the case completely. One can't be ignored while the other(s) embraced. Sometimes people do things that they themselves don't understand, or rationalize them in a way that make no sense to anyone but themselves, and so, we can't dismiss a motive because it doesn't make sense when considering what our own personal actions - in the exact same situation - would be.
I see I am rambling again so I'll stop now....
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Dec 26, 2008 16:53:31 GMT -5
I'd say this and hopefully Joe, who has done a lot with these holes could correct me if I am wrong. I'm not so that I have complete faith in the ability to say for certain which notes were punched together and how many were punched at a time. Here's why; when you make holes in paper with some type of solid punch ( as opposed to a proper punch which is hollow and sharp at the circumference, the paper "shards" pile up in front of the punch. That in turn can make an entirely new and irregular punch pattern. So if one tries to punch through a bunch of sheets the hole formed varies. At least that is what I experienced when attempting it. The end result is several sheets having a similar hole while those below or on top have a different one. Regarding the remote "template", I think this may be weighted by the Mersman business. I would suggest this; while at the Museum try to make these holes in alignment with the table part. I think once you do you will see immediately why it doesn't work. If, on the other hand, you are thinking of some other "template", I would again ask why or what for? If you make a template that in itself proves the need for multiple copies. So why not just punch them all at once and forgo the "template"? Why a template for the holes and not one for the inked circles which is much more difficult to create? Once again, who bothered to check the authenticity of the notes with the holes? It was the inked "singnature" that opened the door for Condon and directed the correspondence to Lindbergh. And those holes, or should I say a lack of, didn't stop Lindbergh and the police from looking at other claimants. What bothers me about the notion of any template made specifically to id the kidnapper is that it just seems inconsistent with the rest of the note construction. Does one see this type of concern elsewhere in the notes? It would be like Hauptmann using the proper screws in the ladder instead of the commons lying in the barrel. Here's the bottom line for me; if you believe the crime was premeditated and planned for some time then there's absolutely no reason for the template. You just punch a bunch of sheets at a time and the last one can always be used to make more. Another thing, why does someone with all the time beforehand tear a note paper in half and then have to fold it to be placed in the envelope? Wouldn't you cut the paper to fit the first time? Is this indicative of the high level of planning involved? Think about it. These are details that can be most revealing.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 27, 2008 9:32:51 GMT -5
After seeing the actual notes myself on several occasions, in my opinion the person "punching" the holes used different instruments to do the punching at different times. One such instrument looked like a "clover" and another is like a "half moon"...etc.. Their positions, turns, and omissions in the notes seems to indicate the "grouping" concerning when they were punched. For me it certainly shows a pattern of timing. And so, if one wants to insert the variable concerning the "chads" then its easily remedied by saying they were punched during the same session of "punching" and not necessarily on top of one another while being punched.
The 4, 6, and 7 notes especially are important. And if this holds true, Mark is correct to ask why 5 wasn't punched during this session. For me, its just not such an easy task to simply punch these notes with their properly spaced identifying holes.
Certainly I don't know how they were punched and that is something that still bothers me. I do think its obvious that a lot of thought went into this. Condon's suggestion that a "carpet stretcher" was used is an interesting thought. I do believe we can say an actual 3-hole punch wasn't used because of what I say above. The template theory was brought out for just these reasons by Dr. Souder back in '32, and the Police were looking for such a thing. Now it doesn't have to be the Mersman Table, or it could be the table was used merely for the spacing.... I don't see fault with anyone's theory here. But if you apply Mark's research, to the appearance of such an item that matches and couldn't have been known to anyone outside of the investigation then I think we must consider it. On top of that I think the motive of a hoax is to be believed, yet, this "Hoaxer" doesn't point out them three holes - and the Cops didn't pay attention to them at the time so the table wasn't believable to them because they were overlooking what the Writer failed to point out.
For me, there is something to this, it may not be a Black or White issue with it, but I do feel the table should not be dismissed as a possible lead.
But notes themselves don't seem to indicate that is what they did does it? They had a methodology concerning this process which we don't understand so we are utilizing what we would consider the practical, common-sense, or easiest path to explain it away. Why didn't they take the easy route is the question I would raise when examining your suggestion. Why did they do things this way instead of the "easy" way? I think one would have to explain why the uniquely shaped items piercing the paper do what's indicated above if one is to believe the last note is the model for then next one.
In my opinion no. This is another one of those things which should be properly examined. I've seen it suggested this was done to save the "cost" of buying more paper. Anyone believe that? Or, it could be used to show it was an afterthought. Or another method of identifying the Party. It worked for me, because I was always suspicious of the 2nd note being a copy of the 1st by someone who saw the actual symbol. I thought, like you, that a copy could easily be made from the previous one. It was the tears which led Osborn to take a closer look then identify it as the "other" half of the first note. Not to say a cut wouldn't have been noticed but it seems to me the tears draw more attention to it.
Again, I could be wrong about everything and I think discussing our individual theories and ideas can really help develop this angle towards a solution.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Dec 27, 2008 13:56:51 GMT -5
Yes, the holes appear different in shape. But so did mine when I punched a stack at one time with the head of a nail. As I said , that's because the solid punch is pushing shards of paper ahead of its path which then become the leading edge of the punch. I still can't see any good reason to utilize a "template", it's simply not necessary unless you only have one piece of note paper when you are making the symbol. If that's the case it hardly reflects a planned crime. I'd say the same is true of the mismatched note and envelope. If you are going to send letters and you are for some reason ripping paper, you simply rip it to fit the envelope. It was "planned for a year already", right? So what's with?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 28, 2008 13:26:01 GMT -5
I would think a certain shape might appear different under those circumstances but in this case they look the same. It could be my own personal bias but its how I am seeing it. I think in your case the same instrument could look different so its more like an opposite type situation.
I can also see your point about the template, however, something is going on that seems a bit more complicated than the easy solution. The points listed in posts above are still very unresolved for me. CJ's explanation to Condon about why the last note did not contain them 3 holes and everything else.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,640
|
Post by Joe on Jan 3, 2009 11:11:56 GMT -5
Right off the top it seems to me the writer wanted to set and maintain the extremely direct and business-like tone of the letter, saying only what it had to say until the implied followup communication. There is really nothing in the nursery note missive (aside from the kidnapping itself) that is derogatory or inflammatory towards Lindbergh. This change in tone and also the length of message appears in the second note and forward, after Lindbergh calls in the police, forcing a major shift in plan. As I've said before, I believe the nursery note demonstrates a real stiffness or awkwardness on the part of the writer towards addressing Lindbergh because of the respective social statures of the two individuals and he is more comfortable in allowing his very personally-inspired and elaborate ransom note symbol speak for his ultimate feelings of superiority/equality with Lindbergh.
The holes' positioning relative to the bottom right hand corner tells me an initial measurement was made on the folded sheet of paper and that these locations were possibly punched through both sides of the sheet. Given the sheer simplicity of making a very quick and extremely accurate template from a piece of cardboard or scrap of wood though, I tend to believe this was the approach taken in advance of the first note writing and that the writer didn't piggyback the holes' location from one series of notes to the next or take a ruler and pencil to the sheets.
Isn't there adequate evidence though that the dynamics of the intended exchange had shifted dramatically with the arrival of the second ransom note? Is Hauptmann not the type of personality who would have grasped this need for change and made the most of it when Plan A, (a discreet return of dead/alive child for ransom - maybe 3 notes maximum?) became history? It wasn't as if he now had the same freedom of access to Lindbergh's undivided attention given the sudden injection of police, press, gangsters, assorted intermediaries and the attention of half the civilized world. And there were numerous delays on both sides of the ensuing negotiations. Hauptmann does not strike me as the type who would have missed any opportunity to repeatedly underline his instructions and demands when it came to collecting his precious $50,000.
I'm not sure that this feature can be easily aligned towards the level of overall planning for the crime itself. My understanding of the Fifth Avenue Linen matching writing paper and envelopes is that the sheets are double-sized and can then be folded and placed in the envelope or halved if one sheet is all it takes, an economy measure. Regarding the tear instead of a scissor cut, perhaps this was another intended chain of ownership feature the writer wanted to impress upon Lindbergh, I don't really know.
Kevin, your findings verify all of my own nail punch experimentation in that there is less rhyme and reason that can be attached to the shape of the holes, (and therefore an indication of order and sequence) than one might expect. The head of a finishing nail, which I believe was used, has such an imprecise circumference compared to a standard paper punch. Not only is there the added effect of the cut out paper chads piling one on top of another as they are punched through, there is also the variable of the very makeup of the paper substrate itself (density, weave, linen content, moisture, etc.) at each precise punch location.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 4, 2009 10:41:45 GMT -5
Yeah Joe, that's why I am doubtful about claims of the exact sequence the notes were punched. There seems to me to be far to much of a random nature in the process.
As for the folding, perhaps you are right. It's very possible to make too much out of something. Yet, I wonder why a man such as Hauptmann planning a crime of such audacity and given the consideration of the magnitude of the ego involved would be so careless with such things. Is not this his crowning achievement? I try and put myself in his position and imagine myself preparing the note(s). Why, I still ask, is the need for the symbols and holes? Does he expect a prolonged negotiation? If he does, then why choose this target? Would the need for more than several communications mean that he anticipates holding the child for some time? Does he expect Lindbergh to notify the police and the public? If so, why the later admonishment for doing just that? What do you think the process of the symbol making entailed? Did he tear all of the paper, make the holes all at once and then add the symbols as he wrote the notes? Or did he prepare the notes with the holes and symbols at the same time? And why on earth does he put the all important Nursery note in an envelope with no address or instruction? In fact, why does he put it in an envelope? As I said earlier, kidnapping was a well known crime and it's process was public knowledge. Hauptmann would certainly have been well aware of it and his trip thru the heartland of kidnapping the previous summer would have no doubt exposed him to it's workings. Yet he chooses to violate or negate many of the very basic tenets. There was absolutely no need for the whole "singnature" routine. Communication could have been established promptly and more effectively without it. The exchange could have been made without all of the unnecessary communication and correspondence. It could also have been achieved without the introduction of any third party or the incredibly dangerous face to face meetings. So why is a man who is so astute as to recognize the need for a unique "singnature" and who can anticipate the possibility of a protracted exchange, so ignorant of the basic mo of the crime?
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Oct 18, 2014 16:48:29 GMT -5
To All:
I don't know if this particular issue has been brought up on these boards before, but after Hauptmann's arrest, it was brought up by a law enforcement agency that the elements of the "signature" on the ransom notes - Blue (circles), Red (circle), and Holes - could have been a cryptic representation of Hauptmann's initials: BRH. (This is also true if the words "Blue," "Red," and "Holes" are translated into German.)
As far as I know, this connection was never used against Hauptmann by law enforcement or prosecutors.
I'm interested in your thoughts as to whether Hauptmann consciously signed his initials with that "signature" or whether it was just a coincidence that the letters matched.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 18, 2014 16:58:48 GMT -5
"Holes" translated from English to German is "Löcher."
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Oct 19, 2014 10:08:53 GMT -5
I'm no expert in German, but another possible translation could be Hohle (umlaut over "o"). I'm sure I've seen reference to the theory developed by Scotland Yard (?) (which was consulted by the NJSP) that the signature could symbolize the initials "BRH".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2015 14:28:42 GMT -5
I recently found an article that claims that the ransom symbol signature could have been drawn from Vienna's Banditti (mafia??) and was used by them 100 years ago. The article states that Major Charles H. Schoeffel of the NJSP was sent to Europe to investigate this possible connection. I know that when Condon first described the symbol signature on the reason note the night he called Hopewell, he said the note had the sign of the mafia. I always took that to mean the Italian mafia. Has anyone heard of this before or know anything about a Vienna Mafia? bklyn.newspapers.com/image/59985892/?terms=Lindbergh%2Bbaby
|
|