Post by Rab on Mar 5, 2006 8:32:18 GMT -5
[Extract from a post on LindyKidnap September 25 2003.]
Let me outline the various pieces of accomplice evidence as I see them and see if we can begin to gauge criminal intent.
1. The kidnapping. Evidence of Oscar Bush of perhaps two sets of foot prints and two sets of tyre marks. Evidence of Lupica of one person and one car. That the ladder was left is more suggestive of one person. So the evidence for an accomplice is mixed, let's call it medium. But any accomplice would surely have criminal intent, let's call that high.
2. The Birritellas. Someone sent them. But that someone could have been the kidnapper(s), the underworld or even a newspaper. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Low.
3. The "Westchester" telephone call to Condon. Someone was heard talking in the background and the caller appeared to be conversing with someone else as an aside. Condon was convinced there was another person there. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
4. The "other" telephone calls to Condon. This is rarely discussed. Condon made a statement to Keaton on May 13 1932 (contemporaneous with the events) wherein he was asked "How many telephone calls did you receive?" He replied, "Two, both of them stating that I would receive a written communication and in both places there were a number of people talking, they were directing John in the same room." Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
5. The peddler. Someone came to Condon's house when Breckinridge was there and Breckinridge observed that the person didn't call at any other houses on the street and was suspicious that the person may have been sent to "case" the house. Could have been an emissary or could equally be paranoia on behalf on Breckinridge. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Low.
6. The "Tuckahoe Lady". I think we are entitled to ask if this person even existed, such are Condon's contradictions on the matter. May have had some inside knowledge but equally may have been either some crazy woman or a figment of Condon's imagination. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Medium.
7. The "lookouts" at Woodlawn. Condon and Reich both observed a number of people but there is nothing about them specifically to raise suspicion beyond their presence at that location. Accomplice: Low. Intent: High.
8. The "lookouts" at St Raymond's. A number of people were observed, most dismissed by Condon and Lindbergh as passers-by. There was a man and a young girl who seemed to be standing around and were approached by Condon. And, of course, there was the walking, running, returning, nose blowing, handkerchief dropping man who appeared over a period of time and who convinced Lindbergh by his actions that he was involved. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
9. The March 7 letter. Hauptmann was working that day for National, most likely in the Bronx. The letter was mailed between approximately 9am and 1pm. There is no evidence to suggest that Hauptmann didn't work a full day and some to suggest he did (an analogous amount of pay with what he was willing to accept to work full time at the Majestic and the fact that he had to bid cheap to get work with National). Of course, anything is possible. Accomplice: Medium. Intent: Medium.
10. The Turchiarelli bill. A gold ransom bill was passed in the same manner as Hauptmann, in the same neighbourhood, in the same type of establishment. But after Hauptmann's arrest. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
Let me outline the various pieces of accomplice evidence as I see them and see if we can begin to gauge criminal intent.
1. The kidnapping. Evidence of Oscar Bush of perhaps two sets of foot prints and two sets of tyre marks. Evidence of Lupica of one person and one car. That the ladder was left is more suggestive of one person. So the evidence for an accomplice is mixed, let's call it medium. But any accomplice would surely have criminal intent, let's call that high.
2. The Birritellas. Someone sent them. But that someone could have been the kidnapper(s), the underworld or even a newspaper. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Low.
3. The "Westchester" telephone call to Condon. Someone was heard talking in the background and the caller appeared to be conversing with someone else as an aside. Condon was convinced there was another person there. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
4. The "other" telephone calls to Condon. This is rarely discussed. Condon made a statement to Keaton on May 13 1932 (contemporaneous with the events) wherein he was asked "How many telephone calls did you receive?" He replied, "Two, both of them stating that I would receive a written communication and in both places there were a number of people talking, they were directing John in the same room." Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
5. The peddler. Someone came to Condon's house when Breckinridge was there and Breckinridge observed that the person didn't call at any other houses on the street and was suspicious that the person may have been sent to "case" the house. Could have been an emissary or could equally be paranoia on behalf on Breckinridge. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Low.
6. The "Tuckahoe Lady". I think we are entitled to ask if this person even existed, such are Condon's contradictions on the matter. May have had some inside knowledge but equally may have been either some crazy woman or a figment of Condon's imagination. Accomplice: Low. Intent: Medium.
7. The "lookouts" at Woodlawn. Condon and Reich both observed a number of people but there is nothing about them specifically to raise suspicion beyond their presence at that location. Accomplice: Low. Intent: High.
8. The "lookouts" at St Raymond's. A number of people were observed, most dismissed by Condon and Lindbergh as passers-by. There was a man and a young girl who seemed to be standing around and were approached by Condon. And, of course, there was the walking, running, returning, nose blowing, handkerchief dropping man who appeared over a period of time and who convinced Lindbergh by his actions that he was involved. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.
9. The March 7 letter. Hauptmann was working that day for National, most likely in the Bronx. The letter was mailed between approximately 9am and 1pm. There is no evidence to suggest that Hauptmann didn't work a full day and some to suggest he did (an analogous amount of pay with what he was willing to accept to work full time at the Majestic and the fact that he had to bid cheap to get work with National). Of course, anything is possible. Accomplice: Medium. Intent: Medium.
10. The Turchiarelli bill. A gold ransom bill was passed in the same manner as Hauptmann, in the same neighbourhood, in the same type of establishment. But after Hauptmann's arrest. Accomplice: High. Intent: High.