|
Post by stella7 on Mar 22, 2023 8:30:23 GMT -5
What is the last known photo of Charlie and what is his age in the photo?
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 23, 2023 10:25:22 GMT -5
What is the last known photo of Charlie and what is his age in the photo? Hi Stella! Pretty sure it's the one Wayne posted of Charlie running and crying and it would have been taken in October 1931. A search should find it.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Mar 23, 2023 16:39:46 GMT -5
Thanks Mary, that's what I thought but I just can't find it. So this photo is taken about four months before the kidnapping when Charlie is about 16 months old. He is smiling and running and looks very much like a normal toddler boy, I'm really having a hard time surmising that his diagnosis is anything more than a mild rickety condition based on this last photo.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 23, 2023 19:01:59 GMT -5
I can't honestly answer the question. It's always been understood that the last known pictures came when Lindbergh was asked for his most recent which he produced. So everyone naturally assumed that's what he did. He then handed out pictures to the Press except to those reporters/papers he did not like ( V1, Page 184). Those were the same pictures that made it into the Wanted Poster. ibb.co/qk2mzKgThe issue for me is that I've seen plenty of other pictures over the years but I'd be lying if I said I know when they were taken. There's one of Anne and the baby in the pool. That has to be the summer, so I've assumed its from that batch. There's another with him sitting with Mrs. Morrow at a table. So again, I have no idea but if one believes Lindbergh handed out the most recent there's your answer. As far as trying to diagnose something from one of these pictures, I think its helpful but not foolproof. This kid had everything he needed to include the best Pediatrician on the planet. Of course, we also have other sources to include pictures of the corpse, the autopsy, letters, reports, and other testimony. Looking at pictures of the corpse: The toes were still deformed. The skull looks oversized. The "autopsy:" The skull still had an unclosed fontanel. The body was missing every organ except the heart and liver. Oversized head, underdeveloped body. Inspector Walsh testimony: A stick pierced the "hard part" of the skull which most experts claim shouldn't happen. NJSP: Unusual hair may have indicated a "disease" of some sort. And so, we might say " well he looks fine in this picture" but, well, you know.
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 23, 2023 19:46:00 GMT -5
Thanks Mary, that's what I thought but I just can't find it. So this photo is taken about four months before the kidnapping when Charlie is about 16 months old. He is smiling and running and looks very much like a normal toddler boy, I'm really having a hard time surmising that his diagnosis is anything more than a mild rickety condition based on this last photo. I'll try and find it for you tomorrow.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Mar 25, 2023 8:17:25 GMT -5
Thanks Mary, that's what I thought but I just can't find it. So this photo is taken about four months before the kidnapping when Charlie is about 16 months old. He is smiling and running and looks very much like a normal toddler boy, I'm really having a hard time surmising that his diagnosis is anything more than a mild rickety condition based on this last photo. Norma, here is the photo you're referring to, and which appears in the introduction of Jim Fisher's book, 'The Lindbergh Case.' From the list of photographs of Charlie that Charles and Anne Lindbergh carefully documented, I believe his age here would have been between 15 and 16 months.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 25, 2023 14:14:29 GMT -5
Norma, here is the photo you're referring to, and which appears in the introduction of Jim Fisher's book, 'The Lindbergh Case.' From the list of photographs of Charlie that Charles and Anne Lindbergh carefully documented, I believe his age here would have been between 15 and 16 months. View AttachmentWhere did you get this picture Joe? I only ask to make sure its not a copyright violation to post it here. Otherwise, thank you for the photo and clearing up that Lindbergh lied to the Press and allowed the Wanted Posters made up with old pictures and not his most recent (as he led everyone to believe). How do you know exactly when this was taken?
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 25, 2023 15:58:11 GMT -5
Thanks Mary, that's what I thought but I just can't find it. So this photo is taken about four months before the kidnapping when Charlie is about 16 months old. He is smiling and running and looks very much like a normal toddler boy, I'm really having a hard time surmising that his diagnosis is anything more than a mild rickety condition based on this last photo. Norma, here is the photo you're referring to, and which appears in the introduction of Jim Fisher's book, 'The Lindbergh Case.' From the list of photographs of Charlie that Charles and Anne Lindbergh carefully documented, I believe his age here would have been between 15 and 16 months. View AttachmentThanks Joe!!🤘
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 25, 2023 16:01:30 GMT -5
Norma, here is the photo you're referring to, and which appears in the introduction of Jim Fisher's book, 'The Lindbergh Case.' From the list of photographs of Charlie that Charles and Anne Lindbergh carefully documented, I believe his age here would have been between 15 and 16 months. View AttachmentWhere did you get this picture Joe? I only ask to make sure its not a copyright violation to post it here. Otherwise, thank you for the photo and clearing up that Lindbergh lied to the Press and allowed the Wanted Posters made up with old pictures and not his most recent (as he led everyone to believe). How do you know exactly when this was taken? Michael...Wayne posted it a few years ago.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Mar 25, 2023 18:22:05 GMT -5
Norma, here is the photo you're referring to, and which appears in the introduction of Jim Fisher's book, 'The Lindbergh Case.' From the list of photographs of Charlie that Charles and Anne Lindbergh carefully documented, I believe his age here would have been between 15 and 16 months. View AttachmentWhere did you get this picture Joe? I only ask to make sure its not a copyright violation to post it here. Otherwise, thank you for the photo and clearing up that Lindbergh lied to the Press and allowed the Wanted Posters made up with old pictures and not his most recent (as he led everyone to believe). How do you know exactly when this was taken? This photo, the same one I previously posted about 6 months ago, which you didn't comment on then and as I said above, appears in Jim Fisher's The Lindbergh Case. if you feel it represents a copyright issue then by all means remove it. I can't think why it would be, as my intention here is information sharing only. As to when the photo was taken, I don't know for certain and never said I did, so no need to try and buttonhole me here for exactitude that doesn't exist. Maybe just a sign of your favorite Jersey City cop there.. lol. As I previously said, it's my belief the photo was taken at the age of 15 - 16 months. I only say this because of my own parental experience relative to Charlie's physical appearance, his apparent ease within the act of running and the chronology within the list of Charlie's photographs, which would indicate to me that this photo was probably taken at Deacon's Point, North Haven, Maine during September or October of 1931. Regarding your thanks and implied zinger that Lindbergh lied to the press, I'm not clear as to what your point is here. This photograph, if it had been available at the time of the kidnapping, would have presented a far more accurate likeness of Charlie, assuming he was located alive and well. I don't know myself, but I'm curious as to why you believe Charles Lindbergh would then have wanted the entire world to know his son looked more like a 12-month old when he was in fact 20 months old at the time of his kidnapping.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 25, 2023 20:48:33 GMT -5
This photo, the same one I previously posted about 6 months ago, which you didn't comment on then and as I said above, appears in Jim Fisher's The Lindbergh Case. if you feel it represents a copyright issue then by all means remove it. I can't think why it would be, as my intention here is information sharing only. As to when the photo was taken, I don't know for certain and never said I did, so no need to try and buttonhole me here for exactitude that doesn't exist. Maybe just a sign of your favorite Jersey City cop there.. lol. As I previously said, it's my belief the photo was taken at the age of 15 - 16 months. I only say this because of my own parental experience relative to Charlie's physical appearance, his apparent ease within the act of running and the chronology within the list of Charlie's photographs, which would indicate to me that this photo was probably taken at Deacon's Point, North Haven, Maine during September or October of 1931. No need to get emotional Joe. I just needed to make sure this picture didn't come directly from Fisher's book. Mary cleared it up, but of course, you had to make hay and act like I wounded you somehow. But if you really feel that way, and this isn't an act, then I apologize because that wasn't my intention. On the date of the picture, I am just trying to figure it out because its important. If you do not know, then you do not know. I'd also like to know where and I'd rather not guess at these things. As far as running with "ease" I think that's a huge assumption. Clearly he's moving. Running perhaps. With ease, well that can't be determined from this photo unless you're a psychic or something. And we all know how the psychics fared in this case don't we? Maybe he took a header and face planted immediately after this photo was snapped? We don't know do we? Anyway there are photos that CAN determine certain things. Take the photo of the corpse for example. We know from that one, the child's toes were severely deformed. Shouldn't that be something to consider or would you rather just ignore it? Regarding your thanks and implied zinger that Lindbergh lied to the press, I'm not clear as to what your point is here. This photograph, if it had been available at the time of the kidnapping, would have presented a far more accurate likeness of Charlie, assuming he was located alive and well. I don't know myself, but I'm curious as to why you believe Charles Lindbergh would then have wanted the entire world to know his son looked more like a 12-month old when he was in fact 20 months old at the time of his kidnapping. Zinger? Joe, its why the widely held belief has always been that the last known photos of the child were of his 1st Birthday. Why are you trying to kill the messenger? As to "why" Lindbergh wanted the world to know his son looked more like a 12-month old, that's what I'd like to know. This idea he didn't have the most recent available is silly. If you are right about the date of the photo below, there were more, they were somewhere, and certainly could have been retrieved. While I'm sure you are right now busy thinking up some ridiculous excuse, I think any parent would want their most recent pictures of their son out there and available to anyone who was willing to keep an eye out for him. That doesn't appear to be the case here. First by denying the photos that he did give out to people/organizations he did not like, and next by handing out old photos.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Mar 25, 2023 21:39:57 GMT -5
Information about that picture of the baby is on the other side of the TITLE PAGE of Jim Fisher's 1987 book.
See the OTHER SIDE of the page that includes author Jim Fisher's name and the publisher, Rutgers University Press.
Reads:
FRONTISPIECE: The baby a few months before the kidnapping. Courtesy New Jersey State Police.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Mar 26, 2023 8:41:41 GMT -5
Information about that picture of the baby is on the other side of the TITLE PAGE of Jim Fisher's 1987 book. See the OTHER SIDE of the page that includes author Jim Fisher's name and the publisher, Rutgers University Press. Reads: FRONTISPIECE: The baby a few months before the kidnapping. Courtesy New Jersey State Police. On May 15, 1932, Anne Lindbergh wrote in her diary: "I look over the pictures. There are none like him, none recent enough. It is very cruel.” Why didn't anybody in the extended household care to keep a photographic record of Charlie for his own enjoyment later in life? Not Anne, not Mrs. Morrow, not Betty, not Elsie or Olly (there are plenty of snapshots of them out there of their time at Highfields), not Elisabeth, not Constance? Or had CAL given a universal order months earlier not to take any more photos of the child? It sure looks like it.
|
|
|
Post by xjd on Mar 26, 2023 16:55:49 GMT -5
"cruel" is an interesting word choice here. wonder what exactly was cruel; CAL not allowing photos? a child with developmental delays? just the whole damn thing, kidnapping and all? i have always been puzzled by the lack of photos of Charlie.
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Mar 26, 2023 18:59:30 GMT -5
Hi, Guest.
I posted the information from Jim Fisher's book because I thought maybe it was overlooked since the reference was not near the picture of the (adorable) Lindbergh baby who seems to have started running for the first time in his life!
Could Fisher be right? Maybe that picture is in the New Jersey State Police Museum?
Has anyone tried looking for the photo there?
Evangeline Lindbergh, Dorothy McCardle, and Dwight Morrow Sr.'s sister took a trip to Istanbul -- as best I can remember from that letter.
I think Alice Morrow took her own photos of the baby.
|
|
|
Post by bernardt on Mar 27, 2023 0:50:12 GMT -5
The photo of the child is great! Thanks for posting it. it was obviously taken in summer, perhaps late summer as there is grass on the ground and plants, apparently some with flowers in the background. It was probably taken in the summer or late summer of 1931, whether in Maine or New Jersey. The child is not dressed for cold or even cool weather. Since he was born in June, it's likely that the photo was taken several months before the kidnapping. He may have been about sixteen months or so old at that time.
|
|
|
Post by bernardt on Mar 27, 2023 0:56:34 GMT -5
Actually, sixteen months would place the photo in October, which is a bit late. More likely August or possibly September. The foliage and grass are still in good blooming shape.
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on Mar 27, 2023 7:56:28 GMT -5
Charlie would have celebrated his first birthday on June 22, 1931. His parents left for their trip to the orient on July 27 that year and did not return until the middle of October following the death of Dwight Morrow, Anne's father.
During the time they were on their flight, Betty Gow took care of Charlie in the Morrow summer residence in Maine. The photo could have been taken in Maine, but if so, Charlie's mother Anne could not have taken it since she was away. Obviously the photo was taken in summer, so if Anne took the picture it would have been between June 22 and July 27 of 1931. Many other photos of Charlie were taken during this time. This one was certainly not taken just before the kidnapping, given the visible grass and plants. It would have had to be taken before the frost in the fall of 1931.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Mar 27, 2023 14:03:29 GMT -5
I would agree that Sept is the more likely month, given that he is wearing shorts and there's lots of greenery around. So, he's probably around 15 months. old in that picture.
While cruel seems an odd choice of word for Anne to use in her diary, perhaps it perfectly describes her perspective of the situation with Charlie gone and she doesn't even have an up-to-date picture to remind herself of his last moments and she's realizing she'll never have that chance to capture those moments again. Think of how cruel this kidnapping was to a mother.
This is a seriously adorable picture of Charlie.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 27, 2023 20:43:41 GMT -5
I posted the information from Jim Fisher's book because I thought maybe it was overlooked since the reference was not near the picture of the (adorable) Lindbergh baby who seems to have started running for the first time in his life! Could Fisher be right? Maybe that picture is in the New Jersey State Police Museum? Has anyone tried looking for the photo there? Evangeline Lindbergh, Dorothy McCardle, and Dwight Morrow Sr.'s sister took a trip to Istanbul -- as best I can remember from that letter. I think Alice Morrow took her own photos of the baby. Hi Sue. Yes, I searched for all photos of the child when I was down there. In fact, I went through all the picture files specifically and also went through all of the other files where sometimes random photos were tucked away. The photo of Mrs. Rauch in V3, for example, was mixed in with the Robert Hicks material which was/is stored in the closet. While I've found others that I mentioned earlier, I never found this specific one. So if Fisher found it there, then I'd wager its not there now. As far as the date goes, Fisher seems to be doing exactly what Joe did - guess. Either that or he relied on Plebani and if anyone read my last chapter in V4, then you can see there can be problems with that method. I am still not sure he's actually running. He could be. He's definitely taking a step. But it's like my last post, we could assume anything from it. Like, he looks like he's crying. So I could assume he's in pain. See what I'm saying? It's like that game we played in 2nd grade when my teacher showed us a picture and we went around the room with each student adding what we thought was going on. In the end we had a story. Of course I asked if that's what really happened but the teacher's response was she didn't know either. I never saw the point behind that exercise but she said it was to make us "think" whatever the hell that meant I don't know. Anyway, Joe said Wayne posted this photo some years ago, and I'm going to search for it. My guess is he found it someplace other than NJSP, and if so, there's probably an exact date posted as well.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 27, 2023 20:58:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 28, 2023 9:38:45 GMT -5
I posted the information from Jim Fisher's book because I thought maybe it was overlooked since the reference was not near the picture of the (adorable) Lindbergh baby who seems to have started running for the first time in his life! Could Fisher be right? Maybe that picture is in the New Jersey State Police Museum? Has anyone tried looking for the photo there? Evangeline Lindbergh, Dorothy McCardle, and Dwight Morrow Sr.'s sister took a trip to Istanbul -- as best I can remember from that letter. I think Alice Morrow took her own photos of the baby. Hi Sue. Yes, I searched for all photos of the child when I was down there. In fact, I went through all the picture files specifically and also went through all of the other files where sometimes random photos were tucked away. The photo of Mrs. Rauch in V3, for example, was mixed in with the Robert Hicks material which was/is stored in the closet. While I've found others that I mentioned earlier, I never found this specific one. So if Fisher found it there, then I'd wager its not there now. As far as the date goes, Fisher seems to be doing exactly what Joe did - guess. Either that or he relied on Plebani and if anyone read my last chapter in V4, then you can see there can be problems with that method. I am still not sure he's actually running. He could be. He's definitely taking a step. But it's like my last post, we could assume anything from it. Like, he looks like he's crying. So I could assume he's in pain. See what I'm saying? It's like that game we played in 2nd grade when my teacher showed us a picture and we went around the room with each student adding what we thought was going on. In the end we had a story. Of course I asked if that's what really happened but the teacher's response was she didn't know either. I never saw the point behind that exercise but she said it was to make us "think" whatever the hell that meant I don't know. Anyway, Joe said Wayne posted this photo some years ago, and I'm going to search for it. My guess is he found it someplace other than NJSP, and if so, there's probably an exact date posted as well. Wayne got it from the Yale archives.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Mar 28, 2023 18:51:46 GMT -5
Hi Sue. Yes, I searched for all photos of the child when I was down there. In fact, I went through all the picture files specifically and also went through all of the other files where sometimes random photos were tucked away. The photo of Mrs. Rauch in V3, for example, was mixed in with the Robert Hicks material which was/is stored in the closet. While I've found others that I mentioned earlier, I never found this specific one. So if Fisher found it there, then I'd wager its not there now. As far as the date goes, Fisher seems to be doing exactly what Joe did - guess. Either that or he relied on Plebani and if anyone read my last chapter in V4, then you can see there can be problems with that method. I am still not sure he's actually running. He could be. He's definitely taking a step. But it's like my last post, we could assume anything from it. Like, he looks like he's crying. So I could assume he's in pain. See what I'm saying? It's like that game we played in 2nd grade when my teacher showed us a picture and we went around the room with each student adding what we thought was going on. In the end we had a story. Of course I asked if that's what really happened but the teacher's response was she didn't know either. I never saw the point behind that exercise but she said it was to make us "think" whatever the hell that meant I don't know. Anyway, Joe said Wayne posted this photo some years ago, and I'm going to search for it. My guess is he found it someplace other than NJSP, and if so, there's probably an exact date posted as well. Wayne got it from the Yale archives. It seems unlikely that Charlie would have worn the same outfit, shoes and socks that he wore in his first-birthday pictures months later in the photo showing him "running." Is it possible that the "running" photo was taken on his 1st birthday as well? Betty didn't take any photos of Charlie at North Haven, only the reporters did. Five weeks after Charlie's body was found, Anne Lindbergh wrote in her published diary: "My theory: … that my fundamental job is creating clearer, stronger, better children –." Was Charlie not good, strong or clear enough? (What did "clearer" mean to her?) Two days later, on what would have been Charlie's second birthday, she wrote, "Aunt Alice's film [of Charlie] disappointing: not the boy I knew, except in flashes, shaking his head and talking, saying one word over and over." Head shaking and repeating a word or words over and over are today considered textbook symptoms of autism. Ann realized that something was wrong with her child. Instead of mourning her loss and expressing anger toward her child's murderer(s), she seems to blame Charlie's worrisome behavior and her own perceived inadequacies for the kidnapping. Why else would she have written those words?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Mar 28, 2023 21:02:52 GMT -5
Hi Guest,
Can you say for a certainty that the picture of the baby in Jim Fisher's book was taken on the day of his first birthday?
I can see some differences in the two outfits.
I don't buy the autism argument. Albert Einstein didn't say a word til he was 3 or 4 years old. Maybe Einstein's parents were also worried about him, and full of self-recriminations?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Mar 28, 2023 21:22:31 GMT -5
Hi Michael.
I guess like ilovedfw states, that the picture is from the Yale collection. Maybe it's in a folder, and eventually will be found?
Every time I look at that photo in the Fisher book, I get the impression that the baby is running. His left hand is blurry maybe from swinging his arm fast while he is running?
Maybe a post from the past will provide more information about that photo. I will look, too.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Mar 29, 2023 11:34:58 GMT -5
Wayne got it from the Yale archives. It seems unlikely that Charlie would have worn the same outfit, shoes and socks that he wore in his first-birthday pictures months later in the photo showing him "running." Is it possible that the "running" photo was taken on his 1st birthday as well? Betty didn't take any photos of Charlie at North Haven, only the reporters did. Five weeks after Charlie's body was found, Anne Lindbergh wrote in her published diary: "My theory: … that my fundamental job is creating clearer, stronger, better children –." Was Charlie not good, strong or clear enough? (What did "clearer" mean to her?) Two days later, on what would have been Charlie's second birthday, she wrote, "Aunt Alice's film [of Charlie] disappointing: not the boy I knew, except in flashes, shaking his head and talking, saying one word over and over." Head shaking and repeating a word or words over and over are today considered textbook symptoms of autism. Ann realized that something was wrong with her child. Instead of mourning her loss and expressing anger toward her child's murderer(s), she seems to blame Charlie's worrisome behavior and her own perceived inadequacies for the kidnapping. Why else would she have written those words? Could this have been an example of Charlie acting spoiled and being difficult on that particular day, during this film clip and for someone he was not comfortable around, as he probably was with Dr. Van Ingen during his final physical? Some conclude from the latter account that Charlie had difficulty standing up, despite the many independent documented accounts of him running, playing and jabbering around like a typical toddler. Is the Alice Morrow film clip then representative of Charlie’s true overall condition or a specific social situation snapshot within his development process? I believe it’s also important to consider who the messenger is here. Anne wore her feelings on her sleeve and didn’t hesitate to exalt the triumphs of herself and others around her, or conversely, both major and even seemingly petty dissatisfactions in her life. Nowadays, she might be diagnosed as suffering from bi-polar disorder, or at minimum, a chronic form of mild depression. What is Anne really unhappy about here?
|
|
|
Post by xjd on Mar 29, 2023 13:55:25 GMT -5
Five weeks after Charlie's body was found, Anne Lindbergh wrote in her published diary: "My theory: … that my fundamental job is creating clearer, stronger, better children –." Was Charlie not good, strong or clear enough? (What did "clearer" mean to her?) Two days later, on what would have been Charlie's second birthday, she wrote, "Aunt Alice's film [of Charlie] disappointing: not the boy I knew, except in flashes, shaking his head and talking, saying one word over and over." Head shaking and repeating a word or words over and over are today considered textbook symptoms of autism. Ann realized that something was wrong with her child. Instead of mourning her loss and expressing anger toward her child's murderer(s), she seems to blame Charlie's worrisome behavior and her own perceived inadequacies for the kidnapping. Why else would she have written those words? [/quote]
i can only imagine that an intense trauma like losing a child would make someone question everything about themselves. but those are strange words, especially considering those are her published diaries (so some stuff must have been edited out). which means she wanted us readers to know those were her thoughts. to me, this smacks of trying to live up to some standard of ideal human-ness which we usually associate with CALs thinking (gotta be stronger, tougher etc.) i seem to always think because she was a writer she had to be more sensitive and feeling than what we know of CAL. maybe she wasn't all that touchy feely, maybe they were both in agreement about creating super people.
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Mar 29, 2023 14:32:27 GMT -5
Hi Guest, Can you say for a certainty that the picture of the baby in Jim Fisher's book was taken on the day of his first birthday? I can see some differences in the two outfits. I don't buy the autism argument. Albert Einstein didn't say a word til he was 3 or 4 years old. Maybe Einstein's parents were also worried about him, and full of self-recriminations? His hair is also much different. Kinkier, longer, and dark instead of blonde and short curls.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Mar 29, 2023 14:44:36 GMT -5
Hi Guest, Can you say for a certainty that the picture of the baby in Jim Fisher's book was taken on the day of his first birthday? I can see some differences in the two outfits. I don't buy the autism argument. Albert Einstein didn't say a word til he was 3 or 4 years old. Maybe Einstein's parents were also worried about him, and full of self-recriminations? His hair is also much different. Kinkier, longer, and dark instead of blonde and short curls. Sue and IloveDFW: It was merely a guess on my part, and, as I now know, an incorrect one. Some children walk by their first birthday, Charlie did not. He learned to walk at North Haven later in the summer of 1931. The photo in question must have been taken there, unless October that year was unusually warm in New Jersey.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne on Mar 29, 2023 16:16:15 GMT -5
Okay, here are the facts... There were 8 photographs taken of Charlie in October 1931. The back of these photos are labeled "October 1931 New Haven". These were the very last photos taken of Charlie. Apparently photos were taken of Charlie in February 1932 in Englewood but unfortunately these were "all blanks". I cannot post the 8 October 1931 photos here because I signed a confidentiality clause with Yale University, but Charlie is walking in 4 of the photos and he looks completely normal and happy and smiling a huge smile in all. The photo in Fisher's book is one of these 8. How Fisher got this photo, I have no idea. According to Mark Falzini, it is not at the NJSP. I've tried to contact Fisher and ask him where he got it, but no luck. If someone here knows Fisher, please ask him and get back to us. FYI, on March 3, 1932 the NYT printed on its front cover a photo of Charlie saying that this was the most recent photo of Charlie, "... Made about two weeks ago." The only person who would have given the NYT this photo and date taken would have to have been CAL himself. This photo was 8 months old. Not 2 weeks old. It was taken on Charlie's 1 year birthday. Probably taken by CAL himself. Also the two photos of Charlie on the Missing Poster were taken in August 1930. They were 6 months old.
Why didn't CAL give the NYT and the NJSP the most recent October photos? Here's a listing of the photos from Yale which I can post --
|
|