|
Post by sue75 on Apr 7, 2009 13:35:24 GMT -5
www.tvarchive.ca/database/17076/front_page_challenge/episode_guide/See: Green, Harry - 1978 Hauptmann Guilty in Kidnap Killing of Lindbergh Baby Harry was on the show "Front Page Challenge," a show very much like "What's My Line?" Lawyer Harry was alive in the 1980s to provide information for writer Noel Behn's book on the Lindbergh kidnapping. Green said the household servants signed statements saying that Elisabeth killed the baby.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 7, 2009 19:26:30 GMT -5
Funny you should post this exactly when I was updating my Green file. Jim Fisher wrote about Harry Green in Ghosts of Hopewell. In order to trash Noel Behn and his book Lindbergh, the Crime he had to bad-mouth and downplay Green's creditability: The source of Behn's preposterous theory is a ninety-three-year old man named Harry Green who had a brush with the case through Governor Harold G. Hoffman. (p.57) To say that Jones, Bleefeld, and Green were on the fringes of the Lindbergh case would be to exaggerate the degree of their involvement. (p.95) Fisher's ignorance really shines through here, and if he bothered to spend a little more time at the NJSP Archives he'd know that what Governor Hoffman knew then Harry Green knew it too. And to say that Governor Hoffman was on the "fringe" of this case or had a "brush" with this case is completely absurd. Fisher simply didn't do what he is making fun of the other Authors for not doing - proper and thorough research.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 8, 2009 6:05:12 GMT -5
Harry Green also defended the Parkers. What people don't realize is the wealth of information about this case that came out in that one. So while Fisher "guesses" that A&M didn't know about Hynd's earlier articles, I don't have to guess to see what Fisher himself doesn't know. It's proven in just about every other sentence in his pathetic "book" (as opposed to the Novel he wrote first). Here's what I know about the Behn Theory: In all of my research I have never found any affidavit like the one Green says exists. If he says it (or they) did then they absolutely did. My guess is that Ellerson is the source. Now scattered throughout the Hoffman Collection and elsewhere - there are Memos labeled " Please Destroy." Now I could be wrong but I believe some which were labeled in this way actually were - probably more so then the ones which were not. Next, there are obvious signs of missing documentation everywhere. Sometimes its can be found in places it shouldn't be, likely not to be, or moved for a legitimate reason. The bottom line is this Case is not an easy research. It takes a lengthy amount of time to sometimes track down (1) piece of information only to find out its worthless. But for me, its worth finding so that it can then be chalked up as worthless. As evidenced in his "books," guys like Fisher simply state things as if they actually know what they are talking about - and it drives me NUTZ! Green was a man of integrity. He was a very good Lawyer who defended principals above the almighty dollar. Most of the money which was used to Defend the Parkers came out of his very own pocket. If you don't like what he had to say then disprove it without making false claims, insinuations, or baseless character assassinations. Isn't that the suppos-ed point of Fisher's book? Preposterous indeed. (And how can one attack this guy but ignore Koehler's false testimoney? - Make something up in one place and ignore it in others. Selective Observation is an understatement here.) It's sometimes really hard to read through Ghosts because there are just so many mistakes its hard to count. And so many absurd labels and adjectives which do not apply. Take the footnotes on ( p.172): The moment he was released, Wendel took back his "confession." Really? Wendell was released to Parker. He did not take back his confession at the "moment." In fact, some time went by before the repudiation occurred. And it did occur while under Parker's protection at New Lisbon Colony. How do we know? Because Parker turned that, as well as his other confession, over to Mercer County after he dropped Wendel off. It was one of the points the Defense scored on at trial. Sorry folks, it just irks me when someone bashes others only to do exactly what they accuse these others of themselves. There's a word for that.... what is it again?
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 8, 2009 18:39:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 8, 2009 18:51:36 GMT -5
I don't know that name. I have a sneaky suspicion that it might be George Clarke, although there are so many names connected to this case its hard to know or remember all of them and it what capacity. To. Col. Lindbergh.
In as much as all afternoon newspapers using serial number story. Urge you immediately issue new signed appeal to kidnappers to disregard Treasurer Woods action and again pledging immunity. We will be happy to print such an appeal.
Signed George Clarke City Editor of the New York Daily Mirror. [Western Union To Hopewell - 4/9/32]
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 10, 2009 6:11:29 GMT -5
I finally found the document I had promised the board last year:
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 30, 2009 12:33:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Apr 30, 2009 12:43:11 GMT -5
Lawyer Harry Green is also mentioned in this July 3, 1983 New York Times article called "McCarthy's 'Purge' at Fort is Recalled." Unfortunately, this is not the full length article. Here's the part about Harry: "Mr Katchen had high praise for Harry Green, a Newark lawyer at the time, who specialized in the laws of libel and who joined him in defending the accused Army employees. Mr. Green, now 92, practices in California." www.nytimes.com/1983/07/03/nyregion/mccarthy-s-purge-at-fort-is-recalled.html
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Nov 25, 2009 12:49:29 GMT -5
|
|