|
Post by rick3 on Feb 17, 2008 10:22:22 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? Kevin....I like the feeling part, but the facts are less clear. - Alot is made about Rosner taking the Nursery note to NYC. But if the holes match perfectly(?) and the paper is torn in half(?)then we are still just changing writers? Not "gangs".
- I suppose there could be two Merman's? tables in play? After all, they would all have the same hole pattern? But what were the holes for anyways? Were they used other times for some other reason and not just thought up for the LKC? One table is so far out that two would almost be "the same" as one?
- So, the very instant you disconnect the kidnap from the Extortion in the Bronx....you get some definite connections? With or without BRH.
- I suppose we should axe MM what other reasons Ellis Parker had for suspecting a disconnect--like the timing or distance from NYC? Didn't it take ages for Parker to get ahold and see the ransom notes anyways. Maybe EP advanced his theory before he even saw them, eg independent of the handwriting on the Notes which looks so different? Maybe from talking to Benjamin Lupica? Or something else? Olde Ellis proceeded in strange ways (eg Paul Wendel),that were ususally over everyone elses head and light years beyond in analysis. Thats why he was the most famous Detective in the World.***
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 17, 2008 10:40:32 GMT -5
This "disconnect" between the "kidnapping" and extortion is not my idea. Personally, I see no proof of such anywhere. My only point is that I don't believe that the crime was completely planned and that it did not involve a large "gang". One of the major reasons it was so hard for investigators ( including Parker) to solve is exactly the reason stated above. Large criminal actions have a logic which can be discerned. Small actions are more likely the result of the peculiar personality of the participants. These actions can be baffling to anyone attempting to understand them. The smaller size endeavor also has the advantage of quickly adapting as the situation changes without a cumbersome chain of command.
|
|
|
Post by Ye Olde Fox PI on Feb 20, 2008 14:17:33 GMT -5
You may be right, Rick. 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. Kevin...I've been working on your string of dead bodies.....Dwight Morrow Sr> Charlie Jr> William J. Burns> Violet Sharpe>> John Fogarty>> Ollie Whateley> Henry Carl Liepold>>J.J. Faulkner>>Max Hassel and Max Greenberg>> Isador Fisch>>Septimus Banks(?)>>Miss Louise Breckenridge>>Elizabeth Morrow Morgan>>BRH. (ref. page 7 Hole in Hauptmann Case--Major Frank Pease)
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 20, 2008 16:26:35 GMT -5
And how many of these people were murdered? It just doesn't wash. No criminal "mastermind" capable of concocting this crime would allow so many potential threats to walk around, especially Hauptmann and Condon.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 20, 2008 19:13:29 GMT -5
That's hard to say isn't it? I mean who knew what exactly? What more could someone tell that wouldn't injure someone close to them? Moreover, Condon appears to be helping Hauptmann until he is backed into a corner. Hauptmann is keeping quiet and going to the electric chair. Dead men tell no tales and Hauptmann wasn't talking - much. He turned on Condon after Condon turned on him. Anybody believe Condon was in on this thing from the beginning? Me neither. But he did know more then he was telling - that much I'd stake my life on. It would depend when. Parker's position changed over time as he was able to learn more. Wendel was his source in the very beginning for a lot of information. Then Parker used his skills to speak with Benny Lupica and David Moore. Later, once he was able to see the corpse, his conclusion was that it wasn't the child. Wendel was telling him it wasn't and he noted that if it were then the baby was "sub-normal" something he didn't believe (at the time) the Lindbergh child was. Later, as we all know, Parker interviewed Hauptmann. Parker's impression of Hauptmann was [ April '35]: I can see a great possibility where this fellow can be a victim, even in the extortion. I don't think he had a damn thing to do with the kidnapping, or had any knowledge of it; however, I am going to suspend judgment until I get further into it. As his investigation progressed [ December '35]: To me, I believe they got cold feet and didn't intend to go on with the ransom, but when it was not discovered the kidnapper hooked up with these other birds (I don't mean Hauptmann), to get the money.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 20, 2008 20:14:27 GMT -5
And how many of these people were murdered? It just doesn't wash. No criminal "mastermind" capable of concocting this crime would allow so many potential threats to walk around, especially Hauptmann and Condon. Kevin....Jafsie Condon had a body quard and BRH was, well, flying under the radar? Maybe you dont want to kill the Patsy? (just a thought?) Who knows? Samuelsohn got death threats and Duane Baker/Bacon went into hiding on Long Island? Jafsie said "his life wouldnt be worth 5 cents"? I forgot to mention Robert L. Conroy who died in August 1932. Conroy and Rosemary Samborn ( murder/suicide) the counterfeiters found in NYC apartment. About 1/2 of the others were murdered? Certainly Charlie Jr and Breckenridges daughter and 2 Maxes. The framework is plagarized from Pease. i still havent figured out why Pease listed Septimus Banks? Odd? ( dont kill the messenger)
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 20, 2008 22:19:48 GMT -5
Remember that I am referring to the concept of a large scale operation with a criminal "mastermind". In that scenario I think it fair to say that either someone would have talked, a trail would have been uncovered, or the participants would have been eliminated. Anything else is the stuff of fiction.
Hauptmann a "patsy"? What type of patsy is allowed to walk around for 2 1/2 yrs until he stumbles upon an attentive gas attendant? In the meantime all that valuable planted evidence deteriorates or is potentially lost. And all during that time the heat is still on in a big way, so what's the point of a "patsy" anyway?
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 21, 2008 6:39:09 GMT -5
This has turned into an interesting conversation. I like the concept of keeping certain duties 'compartmentalized', so one person is not necessarily aware of another in this case. But what is the hangup for me on that, is the simple fact that Hauptmann had so much money on him. Either you have to believe that money in his garage was not just his, but his and Fisch's (and possibly others as well), or that he was the mastermind controlling all these people.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 21, 2008 11:21:51 GMT -5
Forgive me for changing the topic but I would like to raise a subject not oft mentioned: THE BLOOD ON THE RANSOM MONEY. For all the chatter given to red, blond and brunette hairs, metal particles and lipstick and cosmetic powder on the 8-folded notes....seldom is the blood discussed? Blood is only even mentioned 3 times to my knowledge: 1. Inside Detective featuring the article, "Who Helped Hauptmann?" by Edward Dean Sullivan. (May 1935) 2. Arthur W. Jones letter to Gov. Brendon Byrne--Jones makes a point of claiming that BRH told him the blood was Jafsie Condons? "Condon cut his finger on one of the money strings trying to give BRH $40,000 of the money".....page 3. “Who Said the Lindbergh Case was Solved?” manuscript of Arthur J. W. Jones, Inmate #17966, New Jersey State Prison Farm, September 1956. 3. Major Frank Pease in The Hole in the Hauptmann Case..pg 12-13: - "Whose blood stained "one out of every three bills" of the Lindbergh ransom money unearthed from Hauptmann's garage."
- "Did Hauptmann bury only the blood stained bills? If so, Why?"
- So now we have 1/3 the $50,000 hidden/buried in the garage with a Liliput German pistol and there is blood on the bills?
- Which lab reported the blood? Where are the bills today?
- Why was this evidence given such short shrift in The Trial?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 21, 2008 17:29:27 GMT -5
I believe the amount in the garage was Fisch's. It probably started out as a batch of $15,000. I am also a firm believer in whoever was involved in this was paid up front for their troubles and the ransom probably wasn't meant to be collected. And so the idea (for me) to try and fit $50,000 into all and every expense will never work because there are more monies involved then just the ransom.
Both NY and FBI...
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 21, 2008 18:12:07 GMT -5
Michael - I think for that theory to work, you would have to be right in there were other monies involved. Because, even though 50K is a lot of money, when it gets split as much as it would have in this scenario, the risk/reward factor comes into play.
So, how much stock do you put in the 'Faulkner- Nosovitsky letter' that showed up while Hauptmann was on death row? If that handwriting is a good match for the ranson notes that arrive after the nursery note, that would be very interesting.
And I answered weapons charge on the poll question.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 21, 2008 18:18:12 GMT -5
I believe the amount in the garage was Fisch's. It probably started out as a batch of $15,000. I am also a firm believer in whoever was involved in this was paid up front for their troubles and the ransom probably wasn't meant to be collected. And so the idea (for me) to try and fit $50,000 into all and every expense will never work because there are more monies involved then just the ransom. Both NY and FBI... Michael--are either of the lab reports available for posting? How did the NYSP and FBI think the blood got on the ransom notes? If it were Condons he could have freely admitted that--no harm no foul. Whos blood do you think it might be?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 21, 2008 20:24:10 GMT -5
I see your point and my position comes from a reverse argument that is known throughout our community.
If Hauptmann is spending money he doesn't have on the books after the ransom is paid then where did it comes from? Moreover, Hauptmann was spending money he didn't have on the books prior to the ransom as well so where'd this money come from? Not only that, he makes an illogical decision as it relates to money, that is, he quits his job, buys a new car, then takes off for a trip to California to see his sister and explore the country.
It reminds me of someone with terminal cancer taking a trip around the world before they die.
But upon his return he gets his property out of storage then rents a more expensive place. Make sense for a guy who has hit rock bottom financially? No job? In dire straights? Desperate? Losing in the market?
I have the FBI in totality. As I recall it simply listed each bill with whatever traces were on them. There's no connection to anyone and doesn't appear any attempt to do so. I do believe this move ticked off the NJSP prompting Schwarzkopf to, once again, get mad at Hoover.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 21, 2008 21:09:46 GMT -5
Was BRH enjoying a down payment for a job not yet done or was he perhaps enjoying the fruit of another unknown completed one? If you believe him capable of criminal acts in 32 then why believe he was hibernating prior? In either scenario he has to have criminal connections. I think this last point is most important. No matter what degree of involvement you believe BRH was guilty of in this crime there has to be some degree of exposure to the criminal world. Innocent law abiding carpenters would not be exposed to the criminal elements who undertake such crimes. Nor would they be considered for any such role. So the 50k question is where did he gain this exposure? What was the nature of it and to what degree? What was this guy up to prior to the LKC? Personally, I think Hauptmann's friends and associates were covering him. I think they knew or suspected that he wasn't playing according to the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2008 8:29:05 GMT -5
Either way, he has money that isn't reflected in the official record. That's my point when it comes to post April 2nd.
I think for one to be involved in this event then its a logical conclusion that he has been involved in prior criminal activity. From my research, I believe Hauptmann was always looking for "easy money" - again, this throws the curve when it comes to accounting for the ransom in its totality. Additionally, I will never come to terms with the suggestion Hauptmann was spending this ransom right up until he gets caught. There were differing methods employed and, I am quite sure, they didn't involve Hauptmann spending it out of his car.
Laundering hot money definitely wasn't his expertise.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 23, 2008 8:48:07 GMT -5
What exactly was Herr Hauptmann's expertise?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2008 16:22:38 GMT -5
I suppose one could argue he knew more then most about wood working, the stock market, or both. Maybe not an Expert, but knowledgeable nevertheless.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 23, 2008 20:09:00 GMT -5
Pretty sad if those are his areas of expertise. From what I can see he's lacking in both. What would Hauptmann bring to the table for a kidnap gang?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2008 20:45:05 GMT -5
I would think he would have been recruited based upon trust. It's what keeps everyone out of trouble if someone gets caught.
Fisch was the same way.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 23, 2008 22:39:43 GMT -5
What is your opinion of the authenticity of the JJ Faulkner letter that showed up while Hauptmann was on death row? Also, on your theory that up front money was involved, do you have any targets on who would be willing to put up such an amount, and what would be their motive?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 24, 2008 17:52:08 GMT -5
I believe you are referring to the January 1st letter to Governor Hoffman. I don't have an opinion, per se, because it appears to be designed to either save Hauptmann or assist the Governor. Could it have been someone involved doing this? Maybe. The Experts were somewhat split.... There were the two "super-powers" of Handwriting identification: Osborn Sr. and Stein, who did an evaluation for the NJSP. They both said the signature was a forgery. They both say the signature on the letter is unlike the writing in the body of the letter as one of their primary reasons for believing this. However, another rather famous handwriting Expert by the name of Hartkorn concluded both signatures were written by the same hand. Hartkorn doesn't appear to be using the writing in the letter just the two signatures in order to draw his conclusion. Someone wrote the Governor explaining that when the author wrote the lines: Sir: As the zero hour in the HauptmannThe next line: case draws near, I feel impelled tois indented which was rarely done in "social" writing but done is business typewriting. Furthermore, this person believed certain phrases were indicative with the legal profession and was probably a Lawyer: "to dispel the pre-conceived idea of the guilt *** sustain and affirm you."
"who exercised undue and unconstitutional control over twelve simple-minded good people"
The letter concludes....."If this doesn't show a legal trend, at least it indicates education and business practice."
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 24, 2008 19:59:04 GMT -5
Here is what bothers me about the idea of Hauptmann ( and Fisch) as hired hands in this crime. You say he was trustworthy, yet he gave up Fisch. I know Fisch is dead at this point, but still such a disclosure could lead investigators closer to the truth and identity of others. So how trustworthy was BRH? More importantly, how would Hauptmann have such a "street" reputation unless he had history. Here is the dilemma from my point of view; if Hauptmann was selected to fulfill a role in this crime then it stands to reason that he had a history or reputation for some type of criminal activity. Why was this not known, or at least suspected by the police?
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Feb 25, 2008 5:24:32 GMT -5
Michael - thanks for your input on the letter. My slant is that it is valid.
Kevin - it would be interesting to know more about Hauptmann's life of crime in Germany. Crime was sky high in post WWI Germany, but I also would like to know what else he was involved in there. As it would shed some light on how he may have operated here. It would also be interesting to know how many (if any) of his friends in the Bronx were friends of his in the old country as well.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 25, 2008 8:03:22 GMT -5
I agree completely, RMC. In fact I am often surprised, given the scrutiny performed on even peripheral characters in this case, that so much regarding Hauptmann is unknown. I do believe that the truth of what occurred in the LKC can be found in Hauptmann's activities in the years prior to the crime. I do find it difficult to believe that he was a known commodity among the criminal community. I think in that case he probably would be known by the NYPD as well. Of course it is possible that he was and that the NYPD overlooked him and then in typical bureaucratic face saving they covered that up. That's about the extent of my conspiracy tolerance.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2008 18:36:36 GMT -5
There many possibilities as I see it. Hauptmann could have been recruited by someone who was a trader. He could have been brought in by someone else who was known who did know him. This is one way modern day informants infiltrate various criminal activities. Additionally, there were German Immigrant "hang-outs" in which potential criminal acts were hatched on a daily basis. And of course we have the Speak-Easies, and/or other like situations. Fisch was a notorious hustler yet he didn't seem to be on any Law Enforcement radar for being a criminal....that is unless you believe Wendel had represented him in Court. In fact, he seemed to have many people fooled as to what he was worth depending on what he needed at the time.
Under normal circumstances but Fisch was damned near invisible. His own family didn't know much about him, or the true representation of exactly who he was. Remember Hauptmann and Uhlig went looking for the furs and attempted to gain access to his bank security box. In my opinion this was a legitimate search on Hauptmann's part. And so even HE didn't know everything about his Partner. But, in giving him up, he was probably of the opinion that dead men tell no tales - I am certain he probably knew it would lead only to a grave stone in Germany. Hauptmann wouldn't have given up that information if it would lead to anyone else. Of that I am quite sure....but that in no way eliminates Fisch from the mix.
Fisch was a Master at what he did somehow and Hauptmann found out first-hand when he was on the recieving end of it. Before that he probably laugh at everyone else who had been.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 25, 2008 20:06:57 GMT -5
But why would Hauptmann be brought in if he has no major reputation in the crime field? What is he needed for? As for Fisch, how could Hauptmann be sure that giving him up would be safe? If Hauptmann is part of a gang, wouldn't the mere fact of giving anyone up, dead or alive, significant or insignificant, prove that Hauptmann could not be trusted to keep quiet? I don't know, but this seems problematic to me.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 26, 2008 10:12:01 GMT -5
But why would Hauptmann be brought in if he has no major reputation in the crime field? What is he needed for? Kevin...this is just a guess on my part, but maybe the others had dark hair, olive skins and East Serbian or Italian origins? Maybe they were shopping for a carpenter with blue eyes, brown hair and fairer, more Teutonic features? You could consider it an Aryan affirmative action hiring policy?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 26, 2008 16:55:47 GMT -5
Why would they be looking for a carpenter? Are they going to renovate or kidnap? Does BRH have other special skills?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 26, 2008 17:05:49 GMT -5
BRH is also very clever with money--and love of money. This is evidenced by his stock funds and money market accounts. One author opined that Fisch and BRH were "shovers of queer". [eg money launderers and passers of counterfeit bills]
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 26, 2008 17:33:50 GMT -5
And how did that go? If your laundering money you work on a percentage. So the 50k is really quite less. Was Hauptmann able to make this profitable? Is his reputation such that someone would seek him out to get rid of the recorded bills? My point is simply that one can talk about gangs but where is the linkage to Hauptmann and why would there be one? What "mastermind" would rely on this guy let alone trust him? My money is on BRH and one or two others, that's it. Anymore and there will be trails and links.
|
|