|
Post by Michael on Sept 10, 2008 15:41:08 GMT -5
Kevin, the FBI utilized the Mafia during WWII. There have always been informants used as well who were almost always as bad as those they were employed to help catch. Dudley Field Malone, a famous and highley respected Attorney, worked side by side with Owney Madden during this case.
Then there are the spies such as Nosovitsky and Law Men such as Means who seized any moment to serve just about anybody. I still don't know everyone that Noso worked for and I have been studying him for 3 years. Means died and never told where McLean's money was. He could have helped himself if only he talked - sound familiar? And when he was talking he was such a liar no one could believe a word he said.
Next consider the connections between Newspaper Men and the Underworld. It was Waxey Gordon who told George Clarke that a "madman" who lived near Lindy had killed the baby. This was before May 12th.
To suggest that Lindbergh, or anyone in the Morrow Family had no one within their network who could arrange and still insulate themselves from any connection I think is over-looking if not over-reaching the possibility.
No one talked. That includes Hauptmann and we know he was involved in at least some way in at least some part. This proves people could keep their mouths shut and why some conspiracies aren't proven beyond circumstantial evidence.
In this case if someone actually talked I truly believe they or a loved one would suffer the consequences of death. Frankly, I believe someone involved was killed.
Joe, although the Dailey Mirror did publish some of this it was CAL himself who caused his pregnant wife to go straight to the hospital. It was witnessed by many people. There were hospital staff who attended her. So while her family was rife with medical problems, sometimes exterior factors cause defects within an unborn child.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Sept 10, 2008 19:27:44 GMT -5
Michael, I'm sure there have been instances where a group of criminals kept their mouths shut. But sooner or later someone always gives something up. However, I'm not really as interested in that as I am in the entire process of a non-criminal like Lindbergh contacting someone with a proposal to have his own child murdered. Just how exactly does this work? Then how does one end up with Mr Hauptmann? Now how does this arrangement work? How many would be between these two? What would be their take? What code binds them? How do they communicate? It's these practical issues that make or break theories.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,635
|
Post by Joe on Sept 10, 2008 23:09:51 GMT -5
Yes, I'd love to see this procedure on paper. If Lindbergh had actually gone through such a convoluted process to ensure the purity of his bloodline, I'm sure he would have had no difficulties hiring someone to take care of the greedy and otherwise bullet-proof Mr. Hauptmann. A "mishap" during a ceiling flying episode or "accidental" boink on the head from a spinning propeller would have had the same effect on CALjr without the extended manhunt, trial circus sideshow and mega-publicity that Lindbergh loathed. When Lindbergh called the police in, he chose "YES" on his personal problem-solving flowchart that allowed no possibility but to follow through in a process he would otherwise have avoided at all costs.
|
|
|
Post by gary on Sept 11, 2008 0:18:04 GMT -5
Good points kevin. Thanks!
If for a moment .....you could believe there definitely was inside help...What would be his motive? What gain would there be? If there was an insider how would he enter the circle and the life of Hauptmann. I know what some may say: you are giving reasons why there was no inside help. But I don't believe that. I think too many things show there had to be. If you believe there was inside help you have to believe the plot might be more comlex than the crime.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Sept 11, 2008 7:16:07 GMT -5
Hey Gary, I guess when it comes to this case I have learned to never believe anything unless I can see it for myself! So, while the case for the "insider" is often well made, I'm not believing anything one way or another. There are some brilliant people who have (and do) espouse the theory of a conspiracy. I'm neither brilliant or conspiracy minded, I'm basically a mechanic. And as such I need to know how things work in a practical manner. And that's why I ask these questions over and over. Someone says conspiracy, I say fine. Just show me how it works. Someone says insider, fine. Just let me know how that works out. I'm told Hauptmann was a successful stock trader, I say ok, what was his trading strategy?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Sept 11, 2008 11:40:20 GMT -5
From things I've read, just some thoughts on Betty Gow.
She came to this country and took several jobs and rather promptly quit them
Lands a job with the prominent and famous Morrow/Lindberghs Good perks--bed/board/salary/luxury surroundings, locationally fertile for some social opportunities.
Now, uh oh! Looming ahead is relocating to full residence out in the boonies. Another baby soon to take care of . A sort of further zilch-mark on any social life. (And I'd guess her ambitions didn't include that of spinster-nanny, forever).
Dwight Morrow had already floated safety concerns about CAL letting the guard go. Can't recall if the word "kidnap" was used, but the implication was there. If any such thing occurred would that put paid to remaining out in the middle of nowhere(?) At some point Betty Gow was given some extended time off? Where did she go? What did she do(?)
Was this removal of the baby to have had a quick turnaround(?) The child to have been quickly found, unharmed(?)
But then something dreadful and unplanned occurred. The child's death.
Haven't been able to find just when Gow went back to Scotland. In doing so wouldn't job opportunities have taken a significant dive(?) Was it just a short while she remained with the Lindberghs afterwards?
Guess I'm not fully persuaded that there's always a paper trail to things. I can imagine, though, that a big lot of geographic distance could send a "no threat, here" reassurance.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Sept 11, 2008 16:03:20 GMT -5
Ok, but who contacted Mr Hauptmann and how? How many steps are there from the Lindbergh residence to E222 st? How many people are taking them? How much communication would have to occur throughout the entire process? How would that be done?
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Sept 11, 2008 17:22:39 GMT -5
* Don't know * Don't know * Don't know * Don't know * Don't know
Am still cogitating, Kevkon! ;D You could help me.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Sept 11, 2008 18:52:54 GMT -5
Good word!
I don't expect specific answers to these questions, Mairi. I guess what I was getting at was more of a general idea (or guess) as to what steps would be involved if, say Gow or CAL were to instigate this crime. I try to think of being in that position, how does one proceed without giving the show away?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 15, 2009 8:49:50 GMT -5
[Source: NARA, College Park, MD]
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 14, 2010 8:45:16 GMT -5
There doesn't have to be a conspiracy, but it works out nicer that way.
For example, it would be nice to know which window was left unlocked. Anne said that the French window was usually left open and Betty didn't discount that, but said for some reason the SE window was left open 3/1. Was she covering for Ollie who came in and switched windows and wiped nursery down after handing out the kid? Did Ollie know that the child (Charlie) was really Betty Gow's son, so he had an incredible hold on her? Are there any pictures of Anne actually visably PG w/jr? Are there pics of Betty at that time?
The voyeur flashing Lindbergh family closed only the child's shutters - a dead giveaway as to where Jr. was. Is CAL that stupid, especially after being directly warned (as Mairi said) by Dwight Sr?
Conspiracy or not, for Noso-Fisch-Hauptmann it would have been a terribly easy take of 50K! And it seems more of a motive for Noso.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 14, 2010 10:35:57 GMT -5
I can't say that I understand this, though I believe you are correct. I do feel that some people just are pre-disposed toward the more complex. I am not and often that can be a point of friction. We all see things differently. I will admit that one major problem I find with most conspiracy theories is that they are heavy on creativity but very light on specifics. My take on that is simple, if you propose something complex, be prepared to do the increased amount of work to support that complexity.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 14, 2010 17:46:27 GMT -5
Great comment.
Nobody's ever going to look into Noso or Condon or even Hauptmann enough. Research really works on tidbits. For example, did Richard and Anna really remember what they did on the eve of 3/1? Did the Lindberghs and servants even? Does Anna give a S if she got a ride home or had to walk - two years earlier? So research is not even speculative - usually it's BS. See my earlier post on Vincent Bugliosi.
So researchers are chasing old letters and files that have to be lies because people would never put the bad S in print! So researchers go on to their next mission singing "Happy Holidays . . ." and saying "now wasn't that sooo conclusive?"
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Mar 14, 2010 17:51:08 GMT -5
Kevkon is trying to say, are WE creating the crime? Wonderment.
|
|