|
Post by Michael on Oct 23, 2008 17:23:03 GMT -5
Small had a unique angle on the handwriting that I never saw anyone address before or after he presented it. I wanted to start a thread so that I could post on him in the near future. [AP Photo - 1/36]
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 23, 2008 18:18:33 GMT -5
I find that you have circularized facsimiles of the last two notes received from the kidnappers, and these without comment. From what I can gather from these facsimiles , they in no way reflect the normal writing ability of the man. This tends to leave the investigator floundering about in a sea of uncertainty. (Bert C. Farrar, EQD, Department of Treasury, 5-26-32) With this in mind, and what was supposed to be proven by the State's Experts, here is a quick letter from Small to Gov. Hoffman ( 1-12-38): Dear Governor,
Your sincere motives in handling the Hauptmann case, will now thru published articles show the real life picture of the most misunderstood case and bring regrets to many persons who so thoughtlessly criticized.
The unselfishness and heartaches endured by Chief Parker in his declining years must suffer because of a grossly unjust clique, and I hope your articles will be the means of bringing peace to a great man and his fine son.
Altho I am still utilizing every spare moment, I have been unable to uncover anything tangible. To the present day I have as yet not found a person writing the Palmer or Zaner Method of penmanship (Hauptmann's) who is capable of writing in the system used in the ransom notes. This fact certainly proves that it would have been a physical impossibility for Hauptmann to have written the ransom notes.
With every hope for your success and may we soon learn that this nation is too big to allow the Parkers to be so unjustly punished.
I am only too glad to do anything humanly possible to help.
Sincerely S. Small
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 25, 2008 9:27:24 GMT -5
I am going to post part of another letter by Small and finish posting the other part later. Hoping to generate some sort of discussion here.... From Small to Gov. Hoffman, 1-22-38: It gives me the greatest pleasure to write the following, which I hope will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bruno Hauptmann could not have written the ransom notes had he tried.
Mr. E.A. Lupfer, head of the Zanerian College, Editor of the Educator, the outstanding periodical published exclusively about penmanship and whose text books on penmanship are used thruout the schools f the United States, is the greatest recognized authority and professional penman living, agrees with my entire theory 100%, that the prosecution experts overlooked the fact that the notes were written in the vertical system and Hauptmann's is in the Zaner-Palmer style. The books in the school library proved this.
Mr. Lupfer was so impressed with my proofs that he agreed to edit the story and place the entire school records which date back a great many years, at my disposal without a penny cost. The only provision made was not to use his name as the magazine carries quite a lot of advertising. I am enclosing a copy.
Just to use one example Mr. Lupfer gave. "For many years he was closely associated with Mr. Zaner (the founder of the college) and at no time, no matter how hard he tried could he imitate Mr. Zaner's signature, simply because part of it was in the vertical system ------ and Mr. Lupfer is the greatest penman living, devoting his entire time, at least thirty years, to the teaching of penmanship and whose writings in the text books are used in half the schools in the United States.
I am fully aware of the seriousness and the complications involved and bearing this in mind, I can honestly say that you will never regret making the most of this indisputable scientific fact that Hauptmann was incapable of writing the ransom notes.
In explaining my theory I use a copy of the Declaration of Independence to show the Spencerian system, Two ransom notes to illustrate the Vertical system and a letter written to you by Hauptmann, for the Zaner-Palmer style. To prove the difference one only need get corresponding specimens and place over the originals. To fully explain without illustration would require a very lengthy letter. For example -- A letter was written by Mr. Stoneham (owner of N.Y. Giants) when he was 12 years old to his teacher and when placed over Hauptmann's letter ties up perfectly. This also holds true of metal letters I had made showing how one letter forms many more if written in the same system. [/i]
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Oct 27, 2008 5:59:28 GMT -5
In chapter 1- "Little Clews" by Kingston a very true fact is shown which I am quoting;
"Strange, isn't it, how a little clew which has escaped everyones notice, becomes as large as a mountain as soon as some keen eye had revealed its hiding place. When an expert reveals a tiny clew, the public is apt to be a little inclined to think how simple the puzzle was and to forget that it had remained a puzzle until the expert solved it and showed them "how the thing was done."
This time I have the backing of the greatest authority that the prosecution experts overlooked the fact that the notes were written in the vertical style and Hauptmann wrote the Zaner-Palmer style, but instead spent their time on spelling and trying to make letters look alike, just like Reilly forgot to have an interpreter for Hauptmann.
Of course it is needless to remind you again that there isn't anything I wouldn't do for you and believe me if there is only something I can do to help Chief Parker I would even double my efforts if that were only possible. The data Attorney Green sent you I will need for copies and this will take a little time - so don't you think I better get busy? or can you use the article in a later edition? Mr. Lupfer said the story would hold up under all circumstances.
Sincerely
Sam Small
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 12, 2008 16:34:10 GMT -5
PENMANS HALL OF FAME [a href=" "] [/a]
|
|
|
Post by hunley2 on Jan 11, 2011 18:22:17 GMT -5
Michael, I think this is a wonderful angle to introduce. It makes sense, but it also makes me sad and angry that Hauptmann was put to death by jury because of people that schemed for the verdict given. I feel the suppression of evidence and tricking expert witnesses proves our justice system unworthy to victims like Hauptmann. Oh, I know he was guilty concerning the money...but I do not believe he kidnapped or killed the baby...which was what lead him to the electric chair...
I wanted to add some handwriting samples but cannot figure out how to attach??? Please advise.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 11, 2011 19:47:23 GMT -5
hunley, he was involved, the big question is did he have help? there isnt no credible evidence
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 12, 2011 10:03:13 GMT -5
When you hit the "reply botton" the message block that you write your post in has several things above it. The first is an "upload an image" which has a "browse" button. This will upload then give you a link to include within the message for ALL to have access to. Above that are the "icons" (smiles) and above that are the "tags" (bold, intalic, underlines, etc). Above that is an attachment with a "browse" button. This will place your upload directly within the post, however, only Members will have access to it. And above that is the subject.
Do you not consider Lindbergh's Grand Jury Testimony concerning the "Lookout" creditable? This is just one piece of evidence everyone likes to overlook. Either Lindbergh's eyewitness account of this man was real or it wasn't. You can't have it both ways.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 12, 2011 18:24:04 GMT -5
i understand what lindbergh said, but did it go anywhere? nobody came forward. i think he thought it was a lookout, but who knows for sure? even with this i see no hard evidence he had help
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 12, 2011 18:49:06 GMT -5
Lindbergh was sure. And then there's the "other" eyewitness accounts about others involved. But of course if Condon isn't creditable, or Lindbergh, or Reich, or Breck, or the J.J. Faulkner slip, etc. etc. etc.
If he's the "mastermind" somebody helped. And if he's not - somebody helped. There's no way around it. You want the smoking gun for an Accomplice but didn't want it for the Hauptmann. The only reason there was ever a thought that Hauptmann did it alone was for the purposes of the conviction.
That's it. No one ever truly believed it.
|
|
|
Post by johndoe on Apr 2, 2012 2:17:47 GMT -5
Interesting that this thread got few replys to the main point except a "he did it" comment.
Looking at the notes myself even I can see that there are differences even in letters that are supposed to be similar.
The bottom of "V"s for instance, rounded continuous motion verses spiked pointed reversed direction.
|
|
|
Post by johndoe on Apr 2, 2012 14:18:53 GMT -5
This interesting thread has seemed to have bypassed a few people.
|
|
|
Post by johndoe on Apr 4, 2012 3:18:29 GMT -5
Nobody interested in this interesting thread?
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Apr 4, 2012 6:23:25 GMT -5
It’s interesting, johndoe, and Small’s comments are impressive. It’s just that for someone like myself, who lacks knowledge about systems of penmanship, there is nothing meaningful I can add.
|
|