|
Post by Michael on Jan 15, 2008 19:03:28 GMT -5
No one has done more research on the ransom angle of this case then Rab: lindberghkidnap.proboards56.com/index.cgi?board=rab&action=display&thread=1141552543For me there is a clear indicator that person(s) other then Hauptmann are passing/spending ransom money. Here is one story that has always caught my attention: Woman With Money Flees The reported identification of a bill in Greenwich fell into a different category. The incident occurred in a pastry shop on West Putnam Road in Greenwich, where a customer offered a $20 bill in payment for some pastry she had bought. A Mrs. De Cornille, said to be the proprietor of the shop, took the note and compared the serial number with a list of the ransom bills published in a newspaper which she had pasted to the counter.
"Why that's one of the Lindbergh bills," she exclaimed excitedly.
Before Mrs. De Cornille could gather her wits the woman snatched back the bill and darted from the store. She jumped into a green sedan with a chauffeur at the wheel and sped away toward New Haven. The police teletype flashed the alarm from New York to Boston but the woman was not apprehended.
The official police report of the incident as it was sent out over the teletype follows:
"Greenwich (Conn.) Police Department reports a woman of following description went into bakeshop in city of Greenwich, made a purchase and presented $20 bill in payment. Storekeeper looked at bill and remarked it was one of the Lindbergh bills.
"Woman grabbed bill out of storekeeper's hand and ran out of store and jumped into green sedan. License number unknown. it was waiting outside with a chauffeur at the door.
"Woman is white. Age 42. Five feet six inches. Good looking. Dark complexion. Wore string of green silver beads around neck. Gray felt hat, gray tweed coat. Brown dress.
"Stop for questioning." [/blockquote] [New York Times 4-12-32]
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jan 16, 2008 17:14:40 GMT -5
Hi Michael....two questions: 1. It is so strange that this chic mystery woman has a liveried chauffeur and a green sedan or towne carheading North towards New Haven, Connecticut 30 miles from NYC to buy a strawberry pie on the Boston Post Road? Do any of the women in the Morrow Family, or Breckenridge family or..Lamont family or Gugenheim family match this woman's description? "Well dressed and 42?" "string necklace and fancy clothes.?" Or...what about the woman at the Pennington Pharmacy that buys the ether? Or Estelle Nossow? 2. I seem to recall that the NYC cops traced down one well-to-do woman in a highrise in Manhattan within a few days as this person?" But this quickly turned out to be another "dead-end"? >April 13, 1932: LONDON REPORTS RANSOM MONEY/ San Antonio Light and Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune/(AP) "In London today, the Daily Mall said Scotland Yard swung into action after leanring some of the LKC banknotes had been changed there. Detectives here are puzzled over how they could have got there? the money was paid out about 7pm April 2. The liner Scythia called from New York about 11am that day, touching at Boston from which it departed April 3rd for England. Investigators thought the money may have been hurried to Boston from New York in time to catch the Liner?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jan 16, 2008 19:28:50 GMT -5
When did edna/Emily Sharpe go back to England?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 17, 2008 6:31:19 GMT -5
Rick - I don't think anyone in any of those families, as proven by other facts that have been uncovered, would have been looked at very carefully by the Authorities. We also have to realize that the bill in question was not recovered so Mrs. De Cornille may have been mistaken and/or making it up. If she were mistaken then its possible the woman didn't want to lose her money or simply didn't want to deal with the situation. It's hard to say... But even if it was a ransom bill we also have to consider this woman may have gotten it through the bank or some other exchange just as many other bill passers were discovered to have done. And so while her actions were suspicious, its just one of those things we have to file into our memories perhaps linking up to something else we find once we come across it - or perhaps not.
Mairi - I still don't have my files yet. The answer, I am quite sure, are in the Scotland Yard folders. Unless someone else answers your question, I'll look as soon as I get situation then post the answer.
|
|
|
Post by Giszmo on Jan 17, 2008 8:19:13 GMT -5
Early April 1932. On or around the 6th, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 17, 2008 18:20:41 GMT -5
Thanks Gismo! I wanted to post another article I found concerning the same incident. It shows why one needs all sources for information before coming to a rock solid conclusion..... (btw - I still have yet to review my files on this incident) Woman's Try Vain to Use Traced Bill in Greenwich. ------------------ DASHED AWAY ON DETECTION A middle-aged woman fled from a bakery here tonight after a $20 note which she had offered was identified positively by the proprietress as one of the Lindbergh ransom notes. Police said the note bore the number KB 03387539 A.
The woman, who had come to the store i a green sedan driven by a chauffeur, grabbed the note and ran when the proprietress, described by police as a Mrs. Decorville exclaimed:
"Why that's one of the Lindbergh bills."
The bill number was originally announced at police headquarters as KB 03387529 A, a number which did not appear on the official list of ransom notes. Officials announced later, however, that a recheck had shown the next to the last digit was a "3" instead of a "2". [Washington Post 4-12-32]
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Jan 17, 2008 18:57:25 GMT -5
Roughly how much of the ransom money ended up unaccounted for?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 18, 2008 19:15:34 GMT -5
One of the figures I see mentioned in the reports after Hauptmann's execution is $19,800.00 However, there is also an issue of $445.00 being mentioned by Hoover in respect to monies having been turned over the Treasury Dept. by the Federal Reserve. It would take some research on my part to determine whether or not this $445.00 was part of the $19,800.00. It seems odd that its mentioned separately.
There's also the issue of various bills turning up after these memos, however, I think to answer your question as its asked there was approximately $30,000 unaccounted for.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 18, 2008 20:16:30 GMT -5
Just thought I would add this. For what it's worth, I occasionally check for Lindy gold notes that are offered for sale or auction. To do this I use a copy of the original list and a copy of the NY Times list. I have to say that it is a tedious task and one where it is all to easy to misread or juxtapose a number. I think if anyone cares to try this ( or already have done so) it will be readily understandable as to how those bills escaped discovery. It's also why I am a bit skeptical about reported Lindy note sightings, such as the one in Ct. where a note was not actually recovered and verified.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Jan 18, 2008 20:26:36 GMT -5
If roughly 30K was unaccounted for, that could point to Hauptmann having accomplices. Or that aupmann never had all of the ransom money to begin with. I tend to think it points to accomplices, though. In either event, it would interesting to find out where the rest of the money went.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 19, 2008 9:05:50 GMT -5
I don't see how any assessment of the disbursement of the money can be made by the bills which were not detected and recovered. That amount could have been spent by one or one hundred people in the 2 1/2 years since it was paid out. Accounting of Hauptmann's spending over that period is another matter altogether, however.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 19, 2008 9:42:48 GMT -5
It definitely is. The Authorities realized this and came up with something of a "cheat-sheet" which assisted in identifying bills to be checked against the master list: members.aol.com/mmel71/images/key.gifI think a motivator was the reward issued for the discovery of a ransom bill AND the fact people were specifically employed at the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury whose only job was to check for ransom money. That's not to say money didn't slip through the cracks because it did. Rab always said he felt the $5s were all spent first so he believed they were all in circulation but harder to find because they weren't gold.... All Gold Notes were standing out after Roosevelts Executive Order on Gold Hoarding and its exactly why Lyle wrote Hauptmann's plate on the one he passed at the gas station. I personally think there was at least two different spending patterns - if not more. Additionally, I see problems with Hauptmann having enough time to speculate stock all day if he's laundering all of this ransom in drips and drabs like he was caught doing. Furthermore, if you have a system that does work - why deviate from that system which would obviously lead to your doorstep exactly the way it did when Hauptmann was caught? For me, from beginning to end, there is more then (1) person involved in this crime.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 19, 2008 12:14:59 GMT -5
Even the "cheat sheet" is difficult to use at the point of exchange. If the laundering takes place at busy retail establishments it's a cinch that the notes will probably pass. It's not unlike that credit card ad that shows everything coming to a stop when paying by check. I don't disagree about multiple participants, though I don't see it as a given. I do wonder about alternate means of "cleaning" the money which would be used for larger bulk sums. I have often wondered about a foreign exchange method, I just don't know enough about the practicality of this. I do know that even with a multitude of regulations in place, drug smugglers ( and others) still manage to find ways to disburse their illegal profit. Another point of interest to me is that Hauptmann was spending these bills for some time. I wonder at times if some of those closest to him didn't harbor suspicions that they kept quiet about.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jan 21, 2008 18:05:33 GMT -5
Kevin....two questions BRH was asked repeatedly during interrogations at the Greenwich Village NYC Police Station: - What did you do with the rest of the ransom money?
- "Vhere is the baby?" "Ve'll knock your brains out" (eg BRH to Gov. Hoffman page 861 Murder of Justice--Wayne Jones)
- We can only quess why the cops thought both were yet unaccounted for?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 22, 2008 8:37:31 GMT -5
Rick, how likely do you think it is that those closest to BRH really had no idea that something was up? OK a guy is hanging doors one day and then going to an office the next. Nothing suspicious about that, right? You are just getting by one day and then the next you are flush with money, gold notes that is. And miraculously this all occurs at the same time of the LKC which is plastered all over every paper. Maybe it's just me, but I think some of those around Hauptmann knew or at least had a strong suspicion that he was involved in this crime. I also think that for a variety of reasons they chose to protect him with their silence. And yes, I do include Anna ( diary or not). Time to get down to reality here and stop playing charades.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jan 22, 2008 12:36:09 GMT -5
Kevin, I totally agree with you. Isn't it all just a wee bit fishy that Fisch comes over from Leipzig and already knows Uhlig and the Henkels. Then on top of that, Hans Kloppenberg goes on a California vacation with BRH in summer of 1931? But none of the others meet BRH and Anna until "after the kidnap"? DYBT? And they rely on Gerta Henkel to determine this date? None of them have any kids? Why not? Even the bootlegging of Gerta's dad is suspicious after Uhlig and Fisch become "furcutters" ? Where are they all getting the money for cars and vacations "before the kidnap"? Noone ever seems to extend the timeline of their associations back to 1930-31? Who are they all working for? Think more international? Money doesnt grow on trees? Then BRH says when he first meets Fisch on Hunter Island that the latter is accompanied by a tall Scandanavian/Austrian named Fritz? But this is never Uhlig or Kloppenberg? Who is it? Why do they all fly under the radar until BRHs demise and then why cant the NJSP, NYSP or BOI connect any of them to the crime? [Or dont want to?] From available photos, Hunter Island, including Doc Condon, looks more like Club Med than a depression? Show me the money? Show me someone with a real job? Whos the Mastermind? Not the guy spending Golde Certs for gas at Walter Lyles station 3 doors down from Fisch's olde apartment?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 22, 2008 20:10:12 GMT -5
Well Rick, I don't know if I meant to go as far as you have in considering Hauptmann's wife and friends as actual accomplices. I just think that some of them must have had suspicions which, for one reason or another, they chose to be quiet about. I don't see how they couldn't have, actually. As for a "mastermind", I don't know that I believe there is one. I certainly can't see anyone with a masterful mind dealing with these Bronx knuckleheads.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Jan 23, 2008 7:49:33 GMT -5
Kevin--your point is well taken. The olde saw in the LKH is that everyone "knew more than they were saying or willing to reveal"? For instance, they all must have known more about "Moneybags" Fisch than they were willing to say? [Gerta and Uhlig for two] Gerta and Carl did give up Fisch as a frequent attender at the B and C Temple of Divine Light, but thats as far as it went? Maybe the cops (or deputized mobsters?)were just too dumb to aske the right questions? After all, there were exactly zero arrestees for 30 months? Everyone was deemed Innocent/ the doctrine of original innocence--especially the servants with an inside job? Oddly, the final solution of the LKC hinged solely on the Fed recalling the Gold Certs by FDR? What precisely was the motivating impetus for calling in the Gold Certs in May 1933?
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 14, 2008 7:09:29 GMT -5
Well Rick, I don't know if I meant to go as far as you have in considering Hauptmann's wife and friends as actual accomplices. I just think that some of them must have had suspicions which, for one reason or another, they chose to be quiet about. I don't see how they couldn't have, actually. As for a "mastermind", I don't know that I believe there is one. I certainly can't see anyone with a masterful mind dealing with these Bronx knuckleheads. The more I read, the more I am coming to the conclusion that there was no true mastermind in this case. Not to say it was a one man job, but that I don't think there was a puppetmaster. I got to thinking of the Brinks robbery recently, and how one of the biggest heists in history was pulled off by a bunch of ham and eggers. I think the same is probably true in this case. BTW, I don't consider the Birratella's 'masterminds'. Not sure what they may or may not have known about the crime, although I think it was something. But I wouldn't put them in the 'puppetmaster' category either.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 14, 2008 16:20:10 GMT -5
Besides the amateurish actions in this crime the most compelling reason for me to be skeptical regarding a criminal mastermind or organized gang involvement is simply that no one that intelligent and savvy would allow these players to walk around long. You just don't take that kind of risk if you don't have to. It's the same reason that a Hauptmann frame-up doesn't wash. Besides the incredible difficulty of accumulating and producing such evidence, you just wouldn't let this guy wander around until he encounters a cautious gas attendant. Too much time for all that valuable planted evidence to dissipate, Hauptmann to disappear, and worst of all , all that time the hunt is still on.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 14, 2008 16:24:46 GMT -5
Hello RMC...well if Nozovitsky is involved, in any ways, he was an International Spy, worked for Scotland Yard, a double agent--BOI, knew Hoover, Communist and Master Forger? No ham and egger there? Maybe we could create a gang of specialists: - 3-part Ladder Specialist--2nd storey man?
- Occult symbol specialist--and cleaner?
- Document forger and handwriting specialist?
- Extortion and money laundering specialist?
- Italian lookout and muscle specialist?
- Wheel man and taxi driver?
- Gypsy and violin afficinado?
- Scissor grinder and salesman?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 14, 2008 16:27:29 GMT -5
Create is the precise word!
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 14, 2008 19:02:59 GMT -5
Hello RMC...well if Nozovitsky is involved, in any ways, he was an International Spy, worked for Scotland Yard, a double agent--BOI, knew Hoover, Communist and Master Forger? No ham and egger there? Maybe we could create a gang of specialists: - 3-part Ladder Specialist--2nd storey man?
- Occult symbol specialist--and cleaner?
- Document forger and handwriting specialist?
- Extortion and money laundering specialist?
- Italian lookout and muscle specialist?
- Wheel man and taxi driver
Just my opinion, but I believe if Noso were involved, it was running an extortion that was separate from the kidnapping/killing. Obviously he was a high level criminal, but I still don't see him as a mastermind or puppetmaster in this case, pulling the strings for all these people. My take is if he were involved, he was on his own.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 14, 2008 20:07:52 GMT -5
For my money, too many things were simply too exact and at the right time for there not to have been a coordinated effort. It seems to me that someone put this thing together. After the crime itself, the other "phase" may or may not have involved this person. I personally don't believe the ransom was meant to be collected and it was this deviation that sealed Hauptmann's fate.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 14, 2008 20:36:01 GMT -5
Sure, but what makes you feel that this took more than a few players? Looking at it another way, there were also quite a few incidents in which chance, not design were the rule.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 15, 2008 5:35:06 GMT -5
For my money, too many things were simply too exact and at the right time for there not to have been a coordinated effort. It seems to me that someone put this thing together. After the crime itself, the other "phase" may or may not have involved this person. I personally don't believe the ransom was meant to be collected and it was this deviation that sealed Hauptmann's fate. Michael...I assume you agree with Ellis Parker that the two "phases" of the Crime are i) Phase I: the kidnap and/or disappearance of Charlie Jr and ii) Phase II: the Extortion in the Bronx? I think you have also stated that Phase II was "prepaid" and that is the reason they were not supposed to collect the $50,000 from Jafsie? Does that imply that Phase I and Phase II are independent or connected? Why would a "phoney, cooked-up extortion" (eg they never proved they even had Charlie) be required to support a real kidnap? To cover or disguise the true motive or the true kidnappers?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 15, 2008 6:49:12 GMT -5
Kind of. It seems to me Parker believed those extorting had nothing to do with the kidnapping and there I believe he's wrong to a certain degree. I believe some "originals" didn't pursue that end and those that did may have solicited additional help to fill the void.
And I have a feeling "John" was killed just like Condon said.
I also believe "The Leader" of the Extortion took away the "symbol maker" so as to prevent future extortion attempts by those who may have possessed it - as Condon retold what John supposedly told him after handing him the "Boad Nelly" note. Obviously, one of those involved was in possession of it before (or during) the actual crime.
There are several nexuses between both the kidnapping and extortion. Some are more solid then others but even if there's just one of those that are solid are enough it seems to me that it strengthens the case for the weaker ones.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 15, 2008 7:23:27 GMT -5
I wonder if Parker didn't base his idea on the division of kidnapping and extortion for the same reason I feel the crime was not planned as it occurred. It doesn't seem linear because it is evolving as it moves forward.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 15, 2008 10:47:07 GMT -5
I wonder if Parker didn't base his idea on the division of kidnapping and extortion for the same reason I feel the crime was not planned as it occurred. It doesn't seem linear because it is evolving as it moves forward. Kevin.....my memory isn't as good as I wish it was, but I thought Ellis Parker based his disconnect theory on the differences between the nursery note script (and hacked symbol), and the obvious changes visible in ransom notes (and symbol) 2 and 3 as can be reviewed on page 161 Anthony Scaduto in Scapegoat? I think Behn and Pelletreau also thought that there were two different ransom note authors--one for the Nursery Note and the rest by Nosovitsky? Michael alludes to the connection between the torn paper and the 3-holds in his note above...so a link and non-link simultaneously.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 15, 2008 11:17:10 GMT -5
You may be right, Rick. But I think all of us, admit it or not, have an underlying sense about this crime which gives us cause to look at and pursue the case from different perspectives. On the evidence level, Parker may have seized the issue of the notes, on a another level there might have been a feeling, call it a sixth sense if you will, that gave him cause to look in this direction. I see the same thing in a different manner. To me the crime is not unified simply because it is being adjusted in play. I largely discount the notion of many players simply because of the multitude of trails so many would leave are not present. Neither is a string of dead bodies which would be the far more likely case if a true criminal mastermind was behind all of this. There is a unified thread throughout this crime and the ensuing ransom negotiations, it's just not as linear as one would expect to see in a highly thought out and planned endeavor. Like the ladder, the crime works but not without some major deficiencies and oversights. Is this not consistent with the actions of Mr Hauptmann?
|
|