|
Post by john on Jan 8, 2013 4:03:22 GMT -5
Kloppenburg's too easy, as I see it; and too obvious. Besides, early on the police had investigated him thoroughly and found nothing.
I doubt that Hauptmann had an accomplice, at least as we'd define the word accomplice.
It seems more likely to me that he was engaged in some shady deals, and not just with Isador Fisch; most likely stolen merchandise of various kinds, money laundering, petty theft (someone else's, with Hauptmann as a go-between).
Hauptmann seemed to go out of his way to not engage directly in crime when he lived in the States, and I believe he did "go straight", by his lights; however what's straight to Hauptmann some of us might find a bit crooked, thus he walked on the dark side of the street some of the time,--hence his occasional "windfalls", his ability to keep his head above water in the depth of the great Depression--but my guess is that he regarded what we would call accomplices as something closer to business associates. That sounds more respectable, and it would have enabled Hauptmann to retain some measure of self-esteem.
Best guess on my part as to Hauptmann's "accomplice" in the LKC: if not Fisch, someone like him; a passing acquaintance, a friend of a friend, a referral, someone who needed a man of Hauptmann's specialized talents for a very special job, a job which Hauptmann himself, having been engaged in such dealings in the past, knew little about as to the larger picture. He did what was asked of him and no more. The ransom money came perhaps later. He knew what it was, was perhaps a bit more nervous than usual about handling such a large amount, but I doubt he was a stranger to hot money.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jan 8, 2013 6:30:29 GMT -5
I was trying to think if Hauptmann ever did something without an accomplice.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 9, 2013 4:44:17 GMT -5
Actually, I can't offhand think of anything Hauptmann did alone, Kevkon (leaving aside odd jobs and the like).
This would have been a good point for the defense to have brought up at Hauptmann's trial.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 9, 2013 7:22:18 GMT -5
since theres no real proof that he had help, i think he did it alone
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 9, 2013 21:28:37 GMT -5
While I agree with you that Kloppenburg is not a good candidate as a Confederate - I don't think the Police did an adequate job of fully investigating him. Once they had Hauptmann, what they did was to solidify their position against him. Their investigation was more to find out if Kloppenburg presented any problems for them, and if so, how to neutralize whatever they were. Of course I am not suggesting that if they came across something to implicate him they would ignore it, however, they were looking more toward what obstacles could exist and being able to bridge them if the need arose in Court. Kloppenburg did present a problem in their eyes so Wilentz remedied it with threats towards him. It seems to me after this arrest, they relied solely on Hauptmann to bring in others. Once it became clear he would not have anything to do with it on that end, their job moved toward only ensuring he was convicted. Not to put you on the spot, but what do you rely on to come to this conclusion? Specifically that he "went out of his way not to engage directly in crime....". I ask because it seems like you may have a specific example or two in mind and if so I am curious. Do you think he considered Fisch a "business associate", a "friend", or both? Steve, what about the eyewitness accounts of Reich, Condon, and Lindbergh having all seen an Accomplice to Cemetery John? I have more evidence, but isn't this enough? BTW: I've posted a new Poll question. I don't know why, but they never seem to be a big hit. Anyway, please take a minute to choose an answer. Even if you don't know - take a wild guess....
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 10, 2013 2:57:37 GMT -5
No, I don't feel on the spot, Michael . Sometimes me have to interrogate one another to get at what's actually being said: my intention was to point out that to the best of our knowledge, prior to the LKC business, Hauptmann was "clean" in the U.S. This isn't to say that he wasn't engaged in shady business deals but if there had been so much as a "whiff of evidence" to have been used against Hauptmann at his trial, obtained during the investigation, the prosecutors would have used it, even if it was just a rumor of Hauptmann having received stolen goods, acted as a go-between, had some dealing with known criminals. Even if the law had no concrete evidence against Hauptmann himself that much would be a matter of public record, yet so far as I know (I have no inside knowledge) there was "nothing out there", nothing in America, so suggest that he was engaged in criminal activities other than, obviously, his involvement in the LKC due to his being in possession of the ransom money. As to Hauptmann's relationship with Isador Fisch, they were truly an odd couple. I think of Fisch as more of a business associate than friend but I also sense that prior to his final departure for Germany Hauptmann had come to see Fisch as a friend, that he was still wary of the guy but that he had also developed a measure of fondness for Fisch who, apparently, had a kind of Charlie Chaplin air of the lovable tramp about him (whether this was an act is another matter). I think that Hauptmann's rage after feeling cheated by Fisch later on was genuine and deeply personal. In regard to the (inevitable) question of what if any role Hauptmann and Fisch (as a team) played in the LKC, I have no strong opinions on the matter due mostly to lack of concrete evidence (i.e. Fisch may or may not have been CJ, may or may not have been the lookout a Woodlawn, may or may not have been engaged in a money laundering scheme with Hauptmann, etc.). For me it's still maybe so and maybe no. Best hunch (at this moment): Hauptmann was closer to a criminal as a type, had experience in crime; he had been a thief, gone to prison. Yet he was obviously no master criminal, and he was wise to have moved on to other things. Fisch strikes me as a swindler and an operator, withal not a criminal type, as Hauptmann was, and that of the two he was sharper, had a shrewder mind than Hauptmann. Fisch's (apparent) poverty notwithstanding, given the right opportunity, and some good luck, he had the makings of a criminal mastermind, of a least the one shot kind. If he was a player in the LKC, the end result would likely have been, had things worked out and Fisch succeeded, regained his health, got his share, that Fisch would have gone legit. But this is all speculation on my part.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 10, 2013 7:15:27 GMT -5
i dont think its enough, dont forget the police tried hard to connect ficsh or somebody at the time. i never seen real evidence that he had help
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 10, 2013 18:16:52 GMT -5
Steve, are you trying to say because they never found out who it was they didn't exist?
As far as Fisch goes, they were trying to show he was penniless, when their own Reports show otherwise. Next, they tried to show that Hauptmann was lying about the partnership that existed between them. Not only did those same Reports prove otherwise - the State's own Witness did too. So what you had presented within the State's case on the stand doesn't necessarily represent the truth.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 10, 2013 22:41:31 GMT -5
to me mike, iot dosnt matter if was penniless or not. the police could never connect him to the crime
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 11, 2013 17:47:51 GMT -5
What if, in the short period of time their investigations into Fisch (designed only to see if they could overcome this "problem"), it could be shown they weren't sure whether or not he was involved? BTW: Somebody - Anybody - please take the new Poll! I am anxious to see what everyone guesses but no one is taking the darn thing.... (I've got a feeling you know the answer Steve).
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 11, 2013 20:37:04 GMT -5
i know people think he was involved, but i dont think he was, but i know it went this way and that way but i never saw good evidence
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 12, 2013 1:08:17 GMT -5
If it hadn't been for Hauptmann we'd never have heard anything about Isador Fisch. That much is true.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jan 12, 2013 9:11:55 GMT -5
thats true, but why didnt he mention fisch before they found the money? he lied to the the police so many times with corny excuses
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 12, 2013 14:35:49 GMT -5
I certainly agree that Hauptmann conducted himself badly from the moment the police stopped him in his car. It's like he couldn't comprehend the consequences of his actions and, especially, once apprehended, his words. This is, to my way of thinking, one of the strangest aspects of the case (leaving aside whether one believes in Hauptmann's innocence): how he behaved and what he said once he was in police custody.
|
|