kdwv8
Trooper II
Posts: 95
|
Post by kdwv8 on Apr 26, 2014 16:46:38 GMT -5
I wish I had seen this. What channel is this on? I might get lucky and find it "on-demand." It was on the Travel Channel. You can Google "Mysteries at the Museum:Don Wildman:Travel Channel" then go to "Episodes & Travel Guides" then use their search bar for "The American Sherlock Holmes" It is only about a 3 minute video, but it's interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 26, 2014 17:55:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 17:38:24 GMT -5
Michael,
In Brant and Renaud's book they talk about other attempted kidnappings in the neighboring area around Hopewell both before and after Charlie's kidnapping. They write about a man named Gustave Lockwood who was an inspector with the Motor Vehicle Bureau of New Jersey. When I read that Lockwood helped to expose a car theft ring that existed barely a mile from the Lindbergh home, I recalled reading in Master Detective that Ellis Parker was instrumental in uncovering this car theft ring with Lockwood. Since Parker and Lockwood were working together, I was wondering if these gentlemen (especially Ellis Parker)investigated the possibility of a kidnapping ring operating in the NJ area. In the B&R book they relate that Lockwood knew about an attempted kidnapping at the home of a wealthy family who lived close to the Lindberghs. In this case, the butler heard a noise and discovered a man in the nursery. The man was able to leap out the window and escape. This happened before Charlie was kidnapped. Lockwood then goes on to reveal yet another kidnap attempt on a wealthy family. This family lived between Hopewell and Princeton. Lockwood states that the family was downstairs eating dinner when they heard a noise upstairs. They ran upstairs and found a man struggling to hold onto their child. The kidnapper then dropped the child and fled the scene in a car. Lockwood said they were able to obtain a license number for this car.
There are several other attempted kidnappings against wealthy families during this same time period all in neighboring areas of the Lindbergh estate. Since Lockwood is talking about some of these cases, did he make Ellis Parker aware of all this? It sounds like there could have been a gang of kidnappers operating in central NJ. Could Paul Wendel have been aware of or had some connection to such a gang?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 28, 2014 6:54:49 GMT -5
There are several other attempted kidnappings against wealthy families during this same time period all in neighboring areas of the Lindbergh estate. Since Lockwood is talking about some of these cases, did he make Ellis Parker aware of all this? It sounds like there could have been a gang of kidnappers operating in central NJ. Could Paul Wendel have been aware of or had some connection to such a gang? Any Law Enforcement Officer, whoever they were or whatever Agency they represented, usually worked with Ellis Parker if that crime crossed into Burlington County at any stage. It was a big part of his success because he used his network of contacts to assist him when doing any investigation. Hoffman and Parker went way back, so it was not uncommon for his Agency to ask him for his help concerning any case where they might need him - even outside of Burlington County. Later, after Hoffman became Governor and started to re-investigate the Lindbergh Kidnapping, he had Lockwood "assigned" from the Dept. of Motor Vehicles to assist Parker on that end. I've seen several instances where Parker praised Lockwood, who by the way, also worked with Dr. Hudson's secretary Mary McGill, who had also been loaned over to the "cause" of re-investigating the unsolved matter. The one crime pointed out in B&R that isn't identified was the Claude Anderson attempted kidnapping. This was an inside job where the dog had been doped, and a former servant used a key he had retained to enter the house. This happened in Riverton, NJ on either March 11th or 12th, and the matter had been handed over to Parker, who I am fairly certain solved the crime. All of these cases were investigated to see if there was a tie-in to the Lindbergh matter. They were big on Malden at first but concluded he had nothing to do with it. The car ring Lockwood broke up appears to have only been that. They were very interested here too, because of the car from NY seen there on March 1st, and later when it was discovered one of the men involved had loose ties to Capone. However, they looked at this from top to bottom then seemed satisfied. But obviously it was worth looking into then and there's nothing to say it shouldn't be considered something worth looking into now. Here's one of the actual Reports made concerning this matter: Attachment Deleted
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 19:59:10 GMT -5
Thanks for posting the letter about the car theft ring. Sounds like they had quite a successful operation going for a long time!
I was surprised to read that there were other attempted kidnappings in this area of New Jersey. I have always thought the Lindbergh case was a lone case in this location.
I read in Master Detective that Parker did have Lockwood shadow Paul Wendel to see if he was in contact with any accomplices or might give away the location of Charlie. Harold Hoffman was the New Jersey DMV Commissioner in 1932 and asked Ellis to investigate the Lindbergh kidnapping through his department. Did Hoffman realize at this time that Ellis Parker strongly suspected Paul Wendel of the kidnapping?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 29, 2014 9:22:13 GMT -5
I read in Master Detective that Parker did have Lockwood shadow Paul Wendel to see if he was in contact with any accomplices or might give away the location of Charlie. Harold Hoffman was the New Jersey DMV Commissioner in 1932 and asked Ellis to investigate the Lindbergh kidnapping through his department. Did Hoffman realize at this time that Ellis Parker strongly suspected Paul Wendel of the kidnapping? Actually, Governor Moore is the one who asked Parker to investigate the Kidnapping, and it was because of this request that Parker got involved. As far as knowing whether Wendel was his main suspect (and when) is a matter of speculation. One would think he knew, but there is no specific evidence. Parker definitely told Hoffman he had "a suspect" after the corpse was found, but doesn't mention him by name. One would think he told him in person but there is so much in writing concerning a ton other sensitive and unflattering matters that I can't understand why these specifics wouldn't be written as well. And if Parker never told him a name then it seems to me Lockwood or "Mike" would have told him who it was if he asked. But again, while there are Reports from these men which included "all kinds of stuff" that they wouldn't want anyone to see, Wendel isn't mentioned by name before he's picked up.
|
|
|
Post by babyinthecrib on May 29, 2014 10:02:52 GMT -5
If you look back into the period concerning Hoffman, things dont seem to add up. First off he dies in a hotel room of a heart attack in New York, but just before this happens he writes a confession concerning the so called money he was embezzling from the state. (How did he know that he was going to die at that time from a heart attack)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2014 22:55:47 GMT -5
It makes sense to me too that Lockwood would have said something to Hoffman. Who is "Mike"?
Reisinger says in his book that by the time of Hauptmann's trial Ellis Parker's theory of the kidnapping was that Paul Wendel had done the kidnapping but had been cheated out of the ransom money when he asked Isidor Fisch, an old client, to launder it for him. Did Paul Wendel really know Isidor Fisch? Did he actually represent Isidor Fisch at a trial???
|
|
|
Post by Michael on May 31, 2014 9:28:36 GMT -5
It makes sense to me too that Lockwood would have said something to Hoffman. Who is "Mike"? You know, I have never been able to determine who "Mike" was. Could be someone who worked for the DMV, a PI, and I've also considered a Reporter whom they trusted. It's a mystery that I cannot solve - and believe me I've tried. Reisinger says in his book that by the time of Hauptmann's trial Ellis Parker's theory of the kidnapping was that Paul Wendel had done the kidnapping but had been cheated out of the ransom money when he asked Isidor Fisch, an old client, to launder it for him. I agree with how John portrays this in his book ( Master Detective p161). It's Parker's position up to this point but he does have a " wait and see" attitude. Even once the trial was over, Parker appears to be reserving judgement about Hauptmann's involvement. After his visit to see Hauptmann in April of '35 he wrote a letter to Hoffman which was placed in his "Confidential File." Here he writes: I don't think he had a damn thing to do with the kidnapping, or had any knowledge of it; however, I am going to suspend judgement until I get further into it. In early December of 1935 he writes another letter to Hoffman saying that once the "Kidnapper" realized the (dead) child hadn't been discovered, he "hooked up with these other birds" (Extortionists) to get the money. Did Paul Wendel really know Isidor Fisch? Did he actually represent Isidor Fisch at a trial??? There are two sources for this that I know of: 1. Murray Bleefeld told Scaduto this and that Parker claimed he had the documentation to prove it ( Scaduto p237). 2. Alan Hynd writes about this in several places without mentioning any source.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2014 10:10:23 GMT -5
In Master Detective (pgs 213 & 214 soft cover edition) Wilentz is concerned about Ellis Parker and if he might have found out anything that might jepordize the prosecution's case against Hauptmann. Reisinger also says that Wilentz hoped to be able to persuade Parker to help the prosecution. Wilentz clearly understood that Parker could be a threat if he had found something so Wilentz was seeking to neutralize this before the trial started.
Wilentz invites Parker to a meeting in December, 1934. At this meeting Parker is offered access to all the state's facilities to conduct whatever investigations he cared to make. Reisinger categorizes this offer as virtually meaningless because the trial is less than a month away from beginning. I am surprised by this. I am also surprised by Parker's reaction. He doesn't take advantage of this opportunity to see all the evidence that is going to be used. He could have had a look at the physical evidence, photographs, statements, etc. He finally would have been able to compare what Wendel was telling him about the kidnapping with what was found at the scene and what police investigations uncovered.
Why would Ellis not take advantage of this?
I pulled out my Scaduto book and read this claim made by Bleefield. He stated that Wendel was defending Fisch in a narcotics case. There is no timeline applied here. Since Fisch didn't come to America until 1925 this would have had to occur after that time. Wendel was reinstated to the Bar in 1925, so it would put such a defense in the realm of possibility but doesn't mean it actually happened.
If Wendel really did defend Fisch in court and shared this with Parker and Parker actually acquired documentation of this connection between Wendel and Fisch, why didn't Parker use this documentation to show a link between Wendel and Fisch? Why wasn't Wendel's claim that he gave the ransom money to Fisch to launder included in Wendel's confession? Would such a connection have carried enough weight with the court to provide a stay of execution so further investigation could have been done on this?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 1, 2014 15:55:53 GMT -5
In Master Detective (pgs 213 & 214 soft cover edition) Wilentz is concerned about Ellis Parker and if he might have found out anything that might jepordize the prosecution's case against Hauptmann. Reisinger also says that Wilentz hoped to be able to persuade Parker to help the prosecution. Wilentz clearly understood that Parker could be a threat if he had found something so Wilentz was seeking to neutralize this before the trial started. This was a tactic Wilentz consistently employed. He was attempting to "tie-up" anyone who may assist the Defense, or in the very least, glean what he could so that he would be able to prepare for it. Wilentz invites Parker to a meeting in December, 1934. At this meeting Parker is offered access to all the state's facilities to conduct whatever investigations he cared to make. Reisinger categorizes this offer as virtually meaningless because the trial is less than a month away from beginning. I am surprised by this. I am also surprised by Parker's reaction. He doesn't take advantage of this opportunity to see all the evidence that is going to be used. He could have had a look at the physical evidence, photographs, statements, etc. He finally would have been able to compare what Wendel was telling him about the kidnapping with what was found at the scene and what police investigations uncovered. Why would Ellis not take advantage of this? Parker knew what this offer was all about, had someone on the inside sharing what they had with him, and knew that everything would come out shortly during the trial. His position was to "wait and see" then proceed as the facts dictated. Something else to consider was that Fisher testified at his trial that he offered Parker money "on several occasions" to assist the Defense but that Parker refused - I am getting this from the source material but its also mentioned on page 260 of John's book. If Wendel really did defend Fisch in court and shared this with Parker and Parker actually acquired documentation of this connection between Wendel and Fisch, why didn't Parker use this documentation to show a link between Wendel and Fisch? Why wasn't Wendel's claim that he gave the ransom money to Fisch to launder included in Wendel's confession? Would such a connection have carried enough weight with the court to provide a stay of execution so further investigation could have been done on this? The confession was of Wendel's making. What was in it came from him so whatever isn't in it I cannot explain. But this fact not being in one of them tends to show me he wasn't coerced by Parker. The trial transcripts from Parker's hearing total 5876 exactly. Parker's testimony alone is well over 500 pages. While I have a good amount of these pages I don't have everything. And so it could actually have made its way into the trial. Whether or not it was allowed is another story. Part of the the Defense to this Conspiracy was "Good Faith." But much of the testimony along the lines of the Lindbergh Kidnapping was objected out by the Prosecution. For example, the Defense was attempting to bring out what Anna Bading observed about the body of the corpse as it lay in the morgue. Judge Clark would not allow it. ( TT 4327-32) From the testimony I have coming from Parker its a really hard read. He's all over the place, combative, unresponsive, evasive, and definitely confused. He's given an opportunity to map out his investigation on the stand and doesn't seem to remember - then much later he would blurt out some things that he should have brought up earlier... It's fragmented, and having all the material I've collected allows me to see what he's talking about because I know the bigger picture of it all. To everyone else who knows what they thought. Certainly even his own Defense at times didn't know, and Quinn was using it as something negative to impress upon the Jury. Knowing what I know about his health, especially at that time, its terrible to see.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 2, 2014 18:56:29 GMT -5
Here is an article written by Alan Hynd in True Detective Mysteries Magazine (January 1930) concerning one of Parker's most famous cases:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2014 19:49:58 GMT -5
You say Parker had someone on the inside who was sharing what they had with him so do you know who this person was? Were they a reliable source? Even with someone telling you things, it not like seeing it yourself. Parker was a true genius in his field. What might he have discovered and determined about the crime if he had looked at the notes and the ladder and read those reports!! He might have been able to really aid the defense during the trial.
Up to the point I have read so far, Parker seems basically convinced that Wendel is the kidnapper. I am not seeing any objectivity in his approach to the case. I see him change his position on things like the identity of the remains found on May 12th but he never waivers about the kidnapper being Wendel. So I am not understanding what "wait and see" means.
This is where I am at currently in the book. Reisinger does say that once Wendel is back in NJ and safely in New Lisbon State Hospital, Parker does some "fine tuning" on Wendel's confession. He asked Wendel to rewrite it and leave his family out of the confession. I can understand that request! A few other items were changed also according to Reisinger's book. I find myself wondering how Parker maintained his belief in Wendel as the kidnapper at this point. There were things that Wendel wrote that were not supported by real evidence in this case. Parker knew this. His back was also up against a wall to get this confession to Hoffman so the execution of Hauptmann could be delayed. I realize this affected his actions. Could his health also have begun entering into his decision making at this time?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 2, 2014 20:40:12 GMT -5
You say Parker had someone on the inside who was sharing what they had with him so do you know who this person was? Were they a reliable source? I do and it was extremely reliable. Even with someone telling you things, it not like seeing it yourself. Parker was a true genius in his field. What might he have discovered and determined about the crime if he had looked at the notes and the ladder and read those reports!! He might have been able to really aid the defense during the trial. Oh I agree, as Parker would later find out once he did have access granted to him by Hoffman. Sure he would have been able to assist, to the degree where he didn't betray his theory....which was why he did not want any involvement in that trial from either side of it. Up to the point I have read so far, Parker seems basically convinced that Wendel is the kidnapper. I am not seeing any objectivity in his approach to the case. I see him change his position on things like the identity of the remains found on May 12th but he never waivers about the kidnapper being Wendel. So I am not understanding what "wait and see" means. The best example I can give, concerning his mind-set, is the previous one I posted: After his visit to see Hauptmann in April of '35 he wrote a letter to Hoffman which was placed in his "Confidential File." Here he writes: I don't think he had a damn thing to do with the kidnapping, or had any knowledge of it; however, I am going to suspend judgement until I get further into it. Asserting someone does not have "a damn thing to do with" it then saying he will suspend judgement is strange but exemplifies his frame of mind here and in my opinion displays it prior to the trial - and elsewhere as well. Prior to the trial it was probably more of a strategy of sorts. Sometimes if you are unsure what to do the best decision is to do nothing at all and let things play out. Here is the trial coming regardless, and he's about to learn what the Prosecution has via the trial - without committing or tipping his hand to either side. But I do agree its hard to assess knowing his health is effecting his judgement more and more and it gets worse over time. This is where I am at currently in the book. Reisinger does say that once Wendel is back in NJ and safely in New Lisbon State Hospital, Parker does some "fine tuning" on Wendel's confession. He asked Wendel to rewrite it and leave his family out of the confession. I can understand that request! A few other items were changed also according to Reisinger's book. I find myself wondering how Parker maintained his belief in Wendel as the kidnapper at this point. There were things that Wendel wrote that were not supported by real evidence in this case. Parker knew this. His back was also up against a wall to get this confession to Hoffman so the execution of Hauptmann could be delayed. I realize this affected his actions. Could his health also have begun entering into his decision making at this time? I do believe he visited him asking to clear up some inconsistencies. But most of what's in there comes from Wendel. John was the very first to point out Wendel complains about personal slights in the first confessions - proving Wendel isn't being told by Bleefeld, or anyone else to write that since they had no idea about that stuff. Now consider that Wendel repudiates his confessions and that Parker takes that down too. Why would he is he's "masterminding" the confessions? He could have refused, or gotten rid of it. When asked why he still believed Wendel was the Kidnapper despite his repudiation, Parker said he never in his entire career took down a confession that wasn't later repudiated by the guilty party. His health was a factor, in my opinion, much earlier then we know. It just got worse and worse over time - and some days, or even hours - were better then others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2014 21:57:17 GMT -5
I totally understand your point. I don't think that Parker was masterminding Wendel's confession either. Wendel created it and wrote it himself. He put things in that confession that undermined its value. Plus with the repudiation attached with it, the court didn't really have much to consider. I am sure Wendel was counting on that result.
I think you are right about it factoring in much earlier than we will ever know. I hope to have a better understanding of what happened to Parker when I get to Reisinger's final chapter.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2014 19:47:38 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 12:01:34 GMT -5
The following is taken from Scaduto's book, Scapegoat, pages 242, 243, 244, 245. Muray Bleefield is telling this to Scaduto. Bleefield was with Wendel in the Brooklyn house where Wendel was kept. Bleefield says this is how Wendel admitted kidnapping Charles A. Lindbergh Jr.
1. Wendel said that he watched the Lindbergh house for months with binoculars as it was being built and also when the Lindberghs would come and go from the house with Charlie.
2. He says he made the ladder. He determined the height from a distance. He did not approach the house to take measurements.
3. He climbed up the ladder to get into the nursery.
4. He put stockings over his shoes.
5. He had a laundry bag around his neck to put the baby in.
6. He wore gloves.
7. He said a rung broke going up the ladder. He would not be able to exit the room by using the ladder.
8. He closed the nursery window after entering the room.
9. He left the ransom note on the radiator.
10. He says he used a screwdriver to pry open the nursery window not a chisel.
11. He applied paregoric to the baby's lips while the baby was sleeping.
12. He then placed the sleeping baby in the laundry bag.
13. Wendel said he wrote the nursery note at home.
14. He said that the symbol used on the note came from his lawbooks that have a key symbol on them.
15. He said he wrote the notes in such a way that it would appear that an illiterate German was writing them.
16. Wendel said that because the ladder had broke on the way up he had to carry the sleeping baby down the front stairs.
17. He said that the stockings over his shoes plus the carpeting on the front steps kept anyone from hearing him leave.
18. He said he left the front door open when he exited the house.
19. He said that with the laundry bag (containing baby) around his neck, he walked out of the house to go to his car.
20. He takes the ladders away from the house. Being unable to manipulate the ladders into the car with the baby around his neck in the laundry bag, he decided to leave the ladders behind.
21. Wendel said because he was wearing gloves his fingerprints were not on the ladder.
22. Wendel, with the baby in his car, leaves the scene and drives to his home in Trenton.
When you first read this, it sounds almost like a feasible way the kidnapping could have happened. I can see why Ellis Parker would believe that Wendel was the kidnapper if this is what Wendel was sharing with him before information was leaking out into the newspapers or by other sources. With Parker not having access to the evidence to compare what Wendel is saying with what was found by investigators, Wendel's version sounds convincing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 12:40:21 GMT -5
Oh boy, Michael, just when Gus is going to give his answer as to why Wendel was whacking his own legs with his shoes, we are left hanging!!! Ugh. I am going to take a guess and say that Wendel was doing it to cause bruises so it would look like he was being held against his will. Or maybe Wendel was going to try to tiptoe out of the room while his companions were sleeping? Can you give us Gus' answer?
Since you brought this up, I wanted to ask you about those bruises on Wendel's legs. When Wilentz saw Wendel for the first time in the Mercer County Jail, Wendel tells Wilentz that he was forced to confess and shows Wilentz his bruised legs as evidence of this. Was a physical examination made of Wendel very close to this time to ascertain if the bruising was new or old? Were any other marks or injuries apparent or found on Wendel's person?
In Master Detective (page 298, soft cover edition), Reisinger says that Wendel's legs were tied to a basement bench when he was first placed in the Brooklyn house of Harry Bleefield. If this is true, could Wendel have caused the leg bruising at this time if he was trying to free his legs? Reisinger says that Wendel's arms were restrained with leather straps. I do want to say, if any of this is true, Ellis Parker must not have known about it. I know this doesn't fit with the way Parker operated as an investigator.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 4, 2014 15:11:01 GMT -5
Oh boy, Michael, just when Gus is going to give his answer as to why Wendel was whacking his own legs with his shoes, we are left hanging!!! Ugh. I am going to take a guess and say that Wendel was doing it to cause bruises so it would look like he was being held against his will. Or maybe Wendel was going to try to tiptoe out of the room while his companions were sleeping? Can you give us Gus' answer? Attachment DeletedAnd if he's doing this here it seems reasonable he may have done it in Brooklyn as well. Since you brought this up, I wanted to ask you about those bruises on Wendel's legs. When Wilentz saw Wendel for the first time in the Mercer County Jail, Wendel tells Wilentz that he was forced to confess and shows Wilentz his bruised legs as evidence of this. Was a physical examination made of Wendel very close to this time to ascertain if the bruising was new or old? Were any other marks or injuries apparent or found on Wendel's person? There was no physical examination, at least, no reference to one that I presently remember. Wendel claimed there was still evidence of welts and bruises on his legs, and in other sources, his ankles. In Master Detective (page 298, soft cover edition), Reisinger says that Wendel's legs were tied to a basement bench when he was first placed in the Brooklyn house of Harry Bleefield. If this is true, could Wendel have caused the leg bruising at this time if he was trying to free his legs? Reisinger says that Wendel's arms were restrained with leather straps. I do want to say, if any of this is true, Ellis Parker must not have known about it. I know this doesn't fit with the way Parker operated as an investigator. I am sure he wasn't aware of a beating. He said when Wendel arrived at his home he was smiling and shook his hand. What he said he did see was a nick on his ear which he believed was associated with a razor from shaving. I wanted to clear up something I've said earlier in the thread concerning whether or not Hoffman knew Parker's suspect was Wendel. He absolutely did know because Parker had told him more then once that he was his suspect. What Hoffman did not know was there had been a confession and that he never wrote the "famous" letter Wendel said Parker showed him. Another interesting point was when Kirkham came to pick Wendel up he was surprised to see he wasn't in handcuffs. That Wendel told him he was given an option as to who he would be turned over to, and that Wendel selected Parker. He then went into a spiel about having underworld contacts, and as a result, could help Kirkham clear up some unsolved murders that occurred in Mercer County. Kirham claimed he did not ask to see Wilentz until after he was in his jail cell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2014 21:11:01 GMT -5
Exactly! Wendel chose to go to Parker because Parker was his friend and he felt he would be safe with him. Commonsense says that if he had been beaten he would have not only told Ellis about it but would have shown him his bruised legs if they were actually bruised at that time. Chances are they weren't and this was something he decided to do while at Four Mile Colony.
I thought that the blood was from a shaving nick too when I read about it. Since the blood spots on Wendel's suit were noticed by the cleaners when the suit was brought in to be cleaned, those spots could have already been on that suit when Wendel was first picked up in New York by Bleefield, Weiss and Schlossman.
Is this "famous" letter the one Reisinger quotes as saying, "....My advice to you is to lock up the entire family and put them in jail."? I find it hard to believe that Gov. Hoffman would have ever written such a letter. Is Wendel making all this kind of stuff up?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 5, 2014 5:38:29 GMT -5
Commonsense says that if he had been beaten he would have not only told Ellis about it but would have shown him his bruised legs if they were actually bruised at that time. Chances are they weren't and this was something he decided to do while at Four Mile Colony. Of course Wendel said he told Parker immediately which I do not believe based upon what everyone else was saying. He said he even asked Parker to see a Doctor but that Parker said "no." Yet, once at Four Mile Colony one of the first people he sees is a Doctor (albeit behavioral health one) and when asked if he told him or asked for help concerning injuries associated with his "torture" he said "no." Once Wendel actually DID tell them, they were all on the same page about the approximate timing of it. If the idea is to lie, then why say anything? When Bading said Parker learned of it he didn't believe it but still asked her to take it down. When one looks at the testimony of everything, the Bronx Grand Jury indicates that Wendel had been struck but not tortured, and that he was bragging about his actions concerning the kidnapping. Bleefield wasn't a model citizen either so its hard to know exactly what the truth was, but one thing for sure was that Wendel, for whatever reason, wanted those involved to think he had been involved. The entire situation was convoluted. Once the politics entered the situation, deals were made and testimony to the exact specifications requested were given. Unfortunately for them, Kings County couldn't get their hands on Parker then lied about the deals painting them into a corner. All in all, I don't believe Wendel was tortured but he may have been struck a couple of times. He may have also struck himself to make his minor injuries look worse, as we can see he was attempting to do at FMC. But I absolutely know he was struck in the groin when he boasted about dissolving the child's private parts with acid. Is this "famous" letter the one Reisinger quotes as saying, "....My advice to you is to lock up the entire family and put them in jail."? I find it hard to believe that Gov. Hoffman would have ever written such a letter. Is Wendel making all this kind of stuff up? Yes that's the one. This actually is consistent with Parker's techniques. He used mental "tricks" during interrogations and never physical violence. I always believed this letter existed only that it was Parker's invention. Once I read through some of his testimony I actually believe he's testifying to this as well. If you are interested I could try to find it then quote what he says to see what you think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 13:36:26 GMT -5
On what basis did the Bronx Grand Jury find that Wendel had been struck? If there was no physical examination done to find and note injuries or marks how was this verified? When Hauptmann was beaten by the authorites this was confirmed by a physical examination. Did Bleefield, Schlossman and Weiss admit to striking Wendel at anytime during his confinement? Even if Wendel struck himself while confined and then said someone else did it, wouldn't some type of proof be necessary to validate his claim that he was actually assaulted?
I would appreciate you finding this and quoting whatever you can. Only having the one line from Reisinger's book isn't much to make an evaluation with.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 7, 2014 7:26:25 GMT -5
I would appreciate you finding this and quoting whatever you can. Only having the one line from Reisinger's book isn't much to make an evaluation with. TT 5099 Cross: Q [Quinn]: Why did you tell him that Governor Hoffman had seen this statement, if that was a lie? A [Parker Sr.]: I told him a purpose to sidestep him.
Q: Why were you lying about Governor Hoffman? A: Well, I didn't consider it lying. This is consistent with Parker's techniques that made him so successful in solving crimes. Claiming someone saw something or knew something that generated a specific reaction to it then seeing what the suspect says or does as a result. These were his methods, not torturing someone. Torture and violence were common with many other Law Enforcement entities at the time but Parker was not only against those tactics he spoke out against them and wrote articles condemning them.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 7, 2014 8:30:04 GMT -5
On what basis did the Bronx Grand Jury find that Wendel had been struck? If there was no physical examination done to find and note injuries or marks how was this verified? When Hauptmann was beaten by the authorities this was confirmed by a physical examination. Did Bleefield, Schlossman and Weiss admit to striking Wendel at anytime during his confinement? Even if Wendel struck himself while confined and then said someone else did it, wouldn't some type of proof be necessary to validate his claim that he was actually assaulted? Your question caused me to revisit my research concerning this angle. It has been years since I read through it like I just did. This angle, the Parker case, is extremely deep, dark, and very ugly. And it requires a ton of time to sift through in order to get the best possible picture of what really did happened. Along these lines, there are people involved here that have a lot to do with it that I am positive no one has ever heard of. That is a sign. A sign that if one does not know who these people are then one absolutely cannot be in any position to explain the truth of what happened. Amy, it would literally take a book for me to properly explain this mess. I've told Andy on more then one occasion that he should publish his Pardon because it reads like a book. That would be the right starting point to begin to sort this out.... But let me try to answer your question the best I can - as quickly as I can: The Kings County Prosecutor's Office was the most corrupt in the entire country at this time. They were in the pocket of the Mob, and it had gotten so bad it was common knowledge. This matter was like Manna from Heaven dropping into Geoghan's lap and was the big case he could use to neutralize the misconduct coming from his Office. What better way then bringing down the Governor of New Jersey? Bleefeld's original Lawyer was hired by the Prosecutor's Office. Bleefeld was taken to Hackensack where Capt. Zimmerman commenced to beating the hell out of him. From there he went to Teaneck - and was beaten again. The purposes of these beatings were to fashion whatever confession they wanted out of him. It's no wonder he winds up saying certain things happened which would have been consistent with the conduct of everyone else excepting the Parker's. Weiss's Lawyer approached him saying he wouldn't have to pay him anything, in fact, he arranged to have his Wife paid $50 a week. While it wasn't true, he was told that Schlossman had already confessed and implicated himself, Weiss, and Bleefeld but not the Parker's and " whoever was behind them." He said that if he came back and implicated the Parker's and whoever was behind them he " won't do a day." When interviewed, each time Weiss said something they didn't like he was told he was lying and to come clean. Over and over this occurred with his Lawyer playing the duel role of "good cop / bad cop" explaining what he needed to do so that he could "help" him. Schlossman was offered immunity straight from Geoghan, and based upon this off the record promise he was advised to sign a waiver of immunity at the Grand Jury - as was Weiss. I have no knowledge concerning Bleefeld (at this moment) but that appears to have been the pattern. Bleefeld testified there that Parker Jr. told them to use a "spread-eagle" a tactic that they used to get confessions. Here he claimed he never laid a finger on Wendel but that Parker Jr., Weiss, and Schlossman pulled the straps. He further stated that Weiss slapped Wendel once, and hit him in the shin with a rubber hose. Weiss testified that Parker Jr. told them to use the "spread-eagle" and that himself, Parker Jr., and Bleefeld did this. Weiss testified that he slapped Wendel in the face after hearing him brag about emasculating the dead baby with acid. He claimed he snapped because he was a family man and had children. Schlossman testified he never saw any torture or physical violence and had no involvement in any such activity. He did testify that it was possible it occurred when he wasn't present (but he continued to insist he saw no evidence of it). All deals were "forgotten" about once Hoffman refused extradition. Weiss's Lawyer told him to re-fashion his statement to indicate Wendel was forced into New Jersey that way they could bring the Parker's up on Federal Charges. During the 1st Trial, the Defense was trying to show that Wendel and Parker had arranged this whole thing together and frankly, their Defense Attorney, operating with both hands behind his back, gave a good argument. While the Jury went out to deliberate a deal was struck with Bleefeld and he pled guilty. The Jury, however, deadlocked and a mistrial was declared. All testified throughout every trial that Wendel wrote willingly, and that no one told him what to write. The testimony also seems consistent that Wendel was offered to go to Schwarzkopf, or Wilentz, and that he said "no" and asked instead to go to Parker.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 7, 2014 13:12:10 GMT -5
Even if Wendel struck himself while confined and then said someone else did it, wouldn't some type of proof be necessary to validate his claim that he was actually assaulted? Just to add, while its still fresh in my memory from reading the transcripts, during the first trial Defense Attorney Turkus brought out a line of questioning asked of Wendel concerning a supposed robbery where he had been held up and had told Authorities he had been beaten. According to the Defense, here Wendel had also caused his own injuries.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2014 10:57:39 GMT -5
Agreed. Having read a number of his cases, this is part of how he would get a suspect to trip up and/or reveal details that only a perpetrator would know about a crime. There is not one case (that I know of) where he ever used physical intimidation to obtain a confession.
The use of this fake letter from the Governor was used by Parker to influence Wendel to alter his confession. Wendel was implicating his own wife and children in the kidnapping by saying they aided in taking care of Charlie Jr. in their home. Parker wanted this out of the confession but wasn't going to force him to take it out so he used this letter to accomplish this. Wendel would want to protect his family from going to jail so he changed the confession. That is my take on this.
I would certainly be interested in reading his grandfather's pardon. I have been searching online to see if it might be available but have not found it. There are articles about it but not the actual pardon. Any chance that he would ever allow someone else to share this? Is the Fullerton site still active? That is a wonderful tribute page to Ellis Parker. If a book isn't planned, perhaps this could be an alternative.
You are probably right. It is extremely complicated. So many people are involved. So many deals and promises made and then not kept. So many things being done to help careers or for political advantage. And then there is Paul Wendel who just seems to rise above it all. He comes out looking like a total victim even though he is guilty of lying ( or possibly more) about things too. I appreciate your lengthy answer. It has helped me to understand everything I have been reading.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 8, 2014 13:22:30 GMT -5
There's is so much that needs to be told about this and its hard to explain what a "liar" is telling the truth about - know what I mean? If you look at Bleefeld getting beaten up so that he would confess to beating up Wendel in order to get a confession - its kind of ironic isn't it? But the key here, as with everything else, is to look at everything in its timing and context then compare to see what's what.
It was said that Parker told them not to talk to Wendel and to "let him soak" because he would crack. That sounds legit so its hard to say it can't be true. It was also attributed to him to "watch him closely" after he confessed because he might "kill himself." Again, that sounds legit too. And during one of the trials this was the explanation for why Wendel was retrained. But then we have this scenario where Parker is telling these men about this "spread-eagle" technique he uses to get confessions. To me that's a red flag. We know this happens but it just wasn't done by the Parker's.
During the 2nd trial Bleefeld softens up on Schlossman claiming while he was involved with the "spread-eagle" he protested against harming Wendel. We also learned that Weiss defied his instructions, or so we were told, and became very "chummy" with Wendel - with Wendel revealing his brother Hugo was a University Professor and Weiss confessing his Brother was his student. But remember that Wendel claimed he didn't know who these guys were saying he believed they were hardened Mobsters... he's lying because he had already known how & where to find Weiss.
Furthermore, in my opinion, you can tell just what and where each of these men are "expected" to say certain things. Where they aren't more of the truth comes out. Like, for example, there was one instance where Bleefeld was lead in an attempt to say Wendel was tortured in order to confess to whatever Parker wanted, or if it wasn't what he liked, tortured to change it. Bleefeld corrected the Prosecution and said "no," that no one told Wendel what to write. For example, he claimed he brought a confession to Jr. where Wendel claimed he didn't have a gun. Bleefeld said Jr. told him he was lying because they knew he had a gun. Here again, this sounds like it could be true because Parker had investigated this already. They knew where his gun was, and had traced it back to the person he got it from. Just like Salamandra's car. They interviewed him and he told them he had loaned Wendel his car.
Anyway, from what I can tell from everything I have, it seems Bleefeld is claiming the "spread-eagle" was simply used to get Wendel to start talking but not to fashion what he said. He claimed the once Wendel started they couldn't get him to stop - talking for 4 hours about the crime. There was also a situation where someone was attempting to "sell" Wendel's confession which had many believing it was actually Wendel and Bleefeld in league and not Wendel & Parker as the Defense claimed in the 1st trial. Parker's Defense tried to introduce this during his Federal Trial but the witness ignored the subpoena and did not show.
Was Wendel tortured? Not in my opinion. This "spread-eagle" wouldn't be needed to get Wendel to talk, and I don't believe it was ever employed. Furthermore, instead of walking through Parker's door smiling and whistling I think he would have instead hit the floor in dire need of medical attention. Going back even further I would think he would have jumped at the chance to be turned over to Schwarzkopf or ANY name that was mentioned first. He was a Con-Artist and even padded his bills to King's County defrauding them of money each and every chance he got - then sued them to get even more.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 8, 2014 16:04:13 GMT -5
Remembering back to when Bleefeld had been brought in and knowing his Attorney had actually been on the King's County Proscutor's Office payroll, I've been searching to see if Bleefeld was made any deals as I suspected. At some point Bleefeld fired this Attorney then attempted to withdraw his guilty plea. Sometime before that this happened (from a letter I just stumbled upon): Attachment DeletedWhen looking further to see what this was all about, apparently Bleefeld told "SLK," who was a Lawyer, that he only pled guilty because he was concerned for his family and that promises were made to both him and his family. Bleefeld was telling him that he was certain Wendel was the Kidnapper, after having spent that time with him, and that he wanted him to help bring this out. From "SLK" quoted in a Memo written by Harry Green (2-8-38): "The time is coming to a head when he (Bleefeld) can cooperate with Ellis Parker and tell the world what he wants to tell the world, and strange will it be if I tell it." I also do not have the testimony of Weiss, or Bleefeld at the Parker's Federal Trial so I was digging around to see what they might have said. I first ran into this letter from Myron J. Greene to Harry Green dated 10-29: Weiss testified before the Federal Grand Jury under a waiver of immunity. On many occasions his testimony did not seem to satisfy the Grand Jury and they threatened him with prosecution for perjury. On some of these occasions, , Quinn called Mr. Turkus to advise with him. Of course, Weiss's testimony on a trial would have to follow the lines of his testimony before the Grand Jury. Mr. Turkus informed me, however, that there were many matters upon which Mr. Weiss did not testify or commit himself and on which he could be helpful to either the prosecution or defense. He told me that Weiss is a very clever person who could handle himself well. I then found this letter from Harry Green to the Chairman of the U.S. Parole Board where he claims " Weiss denied the tortures..." during the Federal Trial (p1): Attachment DeletedBy the way, while Green mentions Prosecutors McGuiness and Madden, he forgot to mention Baldwin as the other Prosecutor who was indicted, convicted, and disbarred.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2014 19:56:03 GMT -5
So all this torture business is what comes out of deals made by Bleefield with Geoghan. He will support any claims made by Wendel that he was tortured. In return Bleefield will get off with perhaps a suspended sentence or some such thing?
Who is Jack Arbitell? Murray says this is the man who he was in contact with and he apparently worked out a deal for Bleefield to give himself up in New York.
Weiss and Wendel became "chummy". Hmmmmmm. Reisinger mentions in his book on page 314 that police turned up a letter Weiss wrote on April 6 claiming that Wendel planned his own kidnapping to cover up that he(Wendel) was really the Lindbergh baby kidnapper. Would you know if such a letter existed?
Reisinger also mentions on this same page and in the same paragraph that Weiss tried to hang himself with his necktie in his cell in the Brooklyn City Prison but was seen by guards and they cut him down in time. Is this true?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2014 10:02:54 GMT -5
I am just beginning to read the chapters on the Federal trial of Ellis Parker and others in Master Detective. In the first few pages it brings up the following on page 332:
William Pelletreau a Jersey City detective who was working with Gov. Hoffman's reinvestigation of the Hauptmann case and who also worked with Ellis Parker too, brought an affidavit to Hunterdon County prosecutor Anthony Hauck. This affidavit was signed by a prisoner who was in the Bronx County jail. This prisoner was claiming he was asked to participate in the Lindbergh kidnapping in 1932 by an international spy who was the real culprit. Hauck promises Pelletreau he will investigate this claim further.
Did Hauck keep his promise?
Is this affidavit connected to Dinny Doyle who was incarcerated at that time? Dinny Doyle is connected to Condon. Is this when suspicion of Nosovitsky enters the picture in this kidnapping?
I am posting this here because I read it in Reisinger's book but I see that someone has made an interesting post on the Noso thread so you could answer this question on that thread instead if you want to.
|
|