I more interested in the European dispersion and exchange of gold notes. Also, no way any of these people were not aware of the Lindy notes and they are looking at every bill they get. A little like a German mafia.
There's a neat little quote made by Hauptmann cited in Lloyd's book (p.255) about Fisch. Here is the appropriate page of the report:
Is it reasonable to assume Hauptmann is telling Wollenberg this as a possible alibi if and when he is caught by the Police? If not, why then would he "talk up" someone other then himself concerning money? Wouldn't he want to keep this private? Or could this be sincere? If he were such an ego-maniac as many would believe, why then make anyone other then himself look well to do?
It could be an alibi in the making, but I've always interpreted this incident in part as Hauptmann standing up to Wollenbergh for acting like a drunken jerk. Fisch was his well known close friend and business partner for a year and a half and although he does make an effort to defend him, Hauptman's riposte focuses almost entirely on Fisch's financial worth. In my opinion, it's just as much a subtle indictment of Hauptmann's obesession with money, despite the fact he was probably as much in the bag as Otto was by that hour.
I believe that refusal on Wilentz's part had a lot to do with what ultimately became a monumental clash of egos and wills between him and the accused. Soon after Hauptmann's arrest, Wilentz became convinced it was largely him at work, regardless of any others' lesser involvement; I cannot imagine him believing Fisch, his close friend and business partner during the interim timeframe, played no role at least within the laundering of the ransom money, but of course there was never a concerted effort to prove this one way or another. He does allude to the the possibility during his summation but refuses to cut Hauptmann any slack and deflects this by reminding the jury that Reilly's wholesale denigration of the dead is an easy task. For his role in this battle, Hauptmann is by far the more discredited one though in my opinion, due to his refusal to come clean the way he should have when he had the chance.
Hi, Re Wollenberg Didn't remember seeing this before. Without over-thinking, I don't see it as a pre-alibi . Strikes me as the outcome of another Fisch ruse of his partner in furs and stocks. Fisch seems to have fooled so many.
Wilenz: He manipulated the entire trial. He wanted to be the one to fry Hauptmann, in my view. The tiny whiff of any other(s) involved strikes me as Wilenz covering for himself in case others were later caught.
First off, how certain is this recounting of a conversation between Hauptmann and Wollenberg? Second, isn't perfectly logical and understandable for someone in the position of a 50k illegally gained windfall to make every effort to explain said enrichment? Would you not expect Hauptmann to construct fictitious business deals and partners? Does it not provide a very obvious utility to him?
As for Wilentz, why is it a surprise to anyone that he would do whatever it took to secure a conviction? That's what ambitious prosecutors do. That's what ambitious defense attorneys do as well. Look at the enormous pressure Wilentz faced in this, his first major case. The most obvious tact for a prosecutor to take when dealing with such a situation is to put all of your resources into securing a single conviction. Focus the jury on the one that didn't get away. Wilentz may not have played fair, but Hauptmann certainly wasn't either.
Second, isn't perfectly logical and understandable for someone in the position of a 50k illegally gained windfall to make every effort to explain said enrichment? (Kevin)
But in every instance (when asked), he says he is making money himself in the stock market. Next, he tells a certain few about his partnership with Fisch. That Fisch is rich, in essence, due to furs and he is going 50/50 with the stocks. He tries to entice people to entrust their own money with him to buy them stock so they can turn a profit. When this happens, in every case I have found, he makes them money...a couple of bucks return on a small amount down. Fisch does this too, according to the ledger, but in larger amounts.
Would you not expect Hauptmann to construct fictitious business deals and partners? (Kevin)
Are you of the opinion that a partnership did not exist?
Now as for Wilentz....
I am personally certain he believed others were involved but since Hauptmann wasn't talking, in order to secure a conviction based upon the State's theory of the crime, it was indeed necessary for him to be a "Lone-Wolf" without anything else "out there" to distract the Jury. And so he presented evidence and arguments contrary to what he knew was the real situation.
The Daily Washington Merry-Go-Round, Pearson & Allen, (6-9-34):
Their apprehension is only a matter of time -- provided they aren't killed, or commit suicide... According to one report in inner Department of Justice quarters at least one of the guilty has already been done away with by fearful accomplices.
(American University Library).[/blockquote]
Next, Bill Conklin makes an interesting observation concerning why Wilentz is mentioning the "rest" of the ransom when it was already testified to, by his own Witnesses, that Hauptmann had spent it all.
Are you of the opinion that a partnership did not exist? Michael
Partnership? Seems to me to be a pretty lopsided one if it existed. Are you of the opinion that Fisch and Hauptmann were on par financially? You can put anything in a ledger, it's just writing. Where is the evidence of Fisch's wealth? Did he have $100 to spend on binoculars?
Fisch had money. And there are other sources to check to see whether or not this partnership existed. Not to mention testimony by State Witnesses. But let's just look at the logs.... Agent Geneau used them, and said they matched up with his banks accounts by only a few dollars off.
How much is an impossible question to answer. There's alot we do know considering what others gave to him and what he gave to other people. His buisnesses and partnerships of the past and what his friends had to say....what his employees had to say as well.
To some he was penniless, but to others he had much. If there's anything specific I'll have to hit the files in order to come up with the right answers for you. Let me know and I will as soon as I am able.
It depends on what one would consider qualifies these things... Additionally, again - to some Fisch was dirt poor, to others well-to-do, and yet to others quite rich.
To some he was quite trustworthy and honest. To others.... a hustler, and con-man.
He gave Mrs. Schaeffer a very expensive fur coat. He borrowed money in upwards of $8000. He owned the Knickerbocker Pie Company were records would revel him taking money out for "personal" reasons regularly.
Others had him sleeping on park benches.
This is the beauty of this Case, and in the case of the Jewish Fur Currier, another mystery to solve - just like everything else.
But what was Hauptmann's purpose with Fisch? If it were just as a cover, then we'd have to start answering some serious questions which seem to show otherwise.
Fisch appears to have had a streak of Hetty Green, "The Witch of Wall Street" in his makeup. I think what's most important here is his close business and personal relationship to Hauptmann from the time of their actual meeting until he departed for Germany in December of 1933 and Hauptmann's insistence that they "shared" equally the results of their business dealings, whether they involved gains or losses.
But did they share equally? Once again what was Fisch's standard of living? What accumulated wealth did he amass? Where did it go? It seems to me that Fisch is not a partner of Hauptmann, that is unless someone can provide proof of equal distribution ( I don't mean ledgers!). Until I can see some physical evidence that Fisch was flying as high as Hauptmann, I have to conclude that whatever their relationship, it wasn't a true partnership. In that case Fisch seems to be more of an accessory to Hauptmann.
Fisch never seems to demonstrate the need to fly high with whatever enrichment he possessed, with perhaps the one exception when in effect and under the influence, he propositioned Katie Fredericksen. He seems to have been a straight-up miser. It's been reported he had a gambling problem and in my opinion, because of his highly secretive nature and declining health, he was probably abusing alcohol and narcotics.
When Hauptmann met Fisch is another mystery. There was a "meeting" which everyone seemed to believe it was the first time they met. That was on 8-10-32. However, as Siglinde pointed out to me, Hauptmann had visited and opened his Steiner account on 8-8-32 and told Mulligan that he was a fur trapper and dealer. In Hauptmann's letter to Pinkus he says he met him in "1932."
"When he was shown the serial numbers and the figures 1928 he said that represented some money, probably a $500 bill, which had been given to him by Fisch; that someone said to him, "You have already said you didn't know Fisch until 1932", and he made the following comment: "Well, I'm now in the bag." I stated this should not be given publicity, and Mr. Clegg states they claim it will receive none." (Hoover to Tamm 9-25-34)
Also, in his 9-20-34 interview it says on page 47:
[Q]: This man Fisch, Isidore Fish, how long do you know Isidore Fisch?
He has told me about several business enterprises in which you were also active, and still are. He advised me that you and my brother used to speculate with stocks and Silver Fox Furs. (Pinkas Fisch to Hauptmann Letter 4-15-34)
Fisch had also sent a letter to his sister, Henna, which told her about his partnership between himself and Hauptmann.
Fisch makes several purchases/sales that are real (for example):
8/10/33 Fishbein & Klar (Norwalk, Ct.) sold for $10,400 8/14/33 Deifik & Preufer buy for $207.00 8/18/33 Schiller Trading Company buy for $163.20 8/18/33 $100 to Steinweg deposit 8/31/33 Ward-Gruver Co. buys 100 shares (stock) of Truscan Steel $932.50
And from Fisch's best friend Henry Uhlig:
Isidor wanted to do business with the man Hauptmann, and as this man had some money Isidor told him how easily he could make a lot of money in the fur trade. He let himself be persuaded and commenced to do business with Isidor. However, Isidor had borrowed money from everybody. He was always boasting that he $29,000 from Hauptmann. Since I wrote the letter to Erich, many people have turned up from whom he borrowed money. He incited his acquaintances against each other, so that they did not speak to each other about their private affairs and consequently it was possible from him to borrow money from each of them. Now of course they would all like to tear the fellow to pieces, if they only had him there. (Uhlig to Borman Letter, 10-11-34).
Something from Fisch's former employee at the pie company:
He said "You know my racket, you know that I sell stocks. I sold some stocks and I got some hot money like I got out of the Pie Company, and I can't pass it in New York." He said "I'll buy a small car and you drive me out of town, and I think I can get rid of the money, and you can make more money then you can driving a hack." After we talked for a while he said "How much do I owe you?" and I told him thirty-five cents, and he reached in his pocket, and as though he was taking a bill from a roll, he pulled out a five dollar bill and said to me "just keep the change." (Bruckman Statement 1-8-36).
He even went to "dancing school":
Here is the first page of Hauptmann's letter to Pinkus :
Hauptmann claimed that in August his deposits into the Steiner was coming from Fisch. I believe these amounts total about $1600.00. Agent Frank admitted this could have been possible.
By the way....
A new search engine at the bottom of our site. It's called Footnote and I am very impressed with it. Anyone who thinks they are too far from an Archival Site to do research can't say that now. On top of that it's interactive and allows you to annotate, connect, add a story, etc. to any document. Additionally, you can upload documents which can be shared. I've uploaded a few myself already.
Sounds like a lot of funny business going on. Fisch certainly had a busy month in August! Hauptmann's letter to Pinkus sounds like he's working an angle. Two guys who should have been just getting by seem to have magically pulled a rabbit out of a hat. Too bad Hauptmann was executed. Had he lived he might have written a book on successful stock strategies in a recession. There's lots of investors today that could benefit from such knowledge!
Anyone know what Fishbein & Klar (Norwalk, Ct.) was all about?
Michael: Talked to him a couple of months ago.
Feb 11, 2020 18:22:20 GMT -5
jack7: Heey Michael - seen Dave around?
Feb 21, 2020 11:55:55 GMT -5
Michael: Talked to him a couple of months ago.
Feb 22, 2020 10:30:59 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour à tous les membres,et merci d'avoir crée ce forum. Je me présente à vous, mon prénom est mon pseudo. Je suis de France. Pendant mon sommeil,John Edgar Hoover m'a montré son vécu mais également une infinie partie d'indices concernant le nom du forum
Mar 3, 2020 12:02:53 GMT -5
Michael: Bienvenue Laurence. Allez-y et postez ce qu'il vous a dit - ça a l'air intéressant ...
Mar 3, 2020 12:26:06 GMT -5
stella7: Sorry for the short notice but there’s a documentary on Anne Morrow Lindbergh on at 8:30 tonight. Channel 23 New Jersey Public Television
Mar 11, 2020 19:24:43 GMT -5
wolfman666: the half hour one made in 2017? it was very good
Mar 14, 2020 9:23:46 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour Mickael,ainsi que tous les autres membres de ce forum..
Mar 20, 2020 7:48:19 GMT -5
Laurence24: Et merci de m'avoir acceptée chaleureusement dans votre forum..
Mar 20, 2020 7:50:48 GMT -5
Michael: Je vais consulter le site. N'hésitez pas à publier ou à créer un fil de discussion sur le babillard à ce sujet. Vous pouvez également y poster un lien car je crains que beaucoup ne lisent pas cette shoutbox.
Mar 20, 2020 9:56:06 GMT -5
Laurence24: Moi qui comprend pas l'anglais, j'ai été surprise de sa première visite dans mon rêve, quand j'ai cherchée par mots clés, et que j'ai découvert qui il était ou ou il avait vécu, je me suis dis, wouah !! dans l'au delà, ils peuvent faire beaucoup de choses
Mar 20, 2020 10:41:07 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour et merci à vous Michaël,je viens de suivre votre conseil..
Apr 29, 2020 7:52:33 GMT -5