|
Letters
Feb 16, 2013 17:46:25 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 16, 2013 17:46:25 GMT -5
Great post Rab.
This thread is about to take on a life of its own so hold on! I am going to place this in the Archive section. (Fix, adjust, or change whatever you like once its there.)
I certainly agree the Kidnappers were planning on getting paid on March 12th. It's my opinion that due to the length in time which CJ and Condon were on that bench there was probably a lot they didn't know. So its less likely they were tipped off ahead of time - but that's still a possibility although an improbable one.
Okay. To some, I am about to get Radical up in here.
I believe there are so many sources for something like this so it would take a very long time to pinpoint whether or not this was Lindbergh's idea. I believe it was Spitale who first opposed the Ransom Payment without the child. This Crook, Criminal, Gangster - call him what you will - told them point blank they'd be taken for the money if they did. Furthermore, it was the general consensus of everyone involved this would be true. So when Wilson says that "Lindbergh was unwilling to meet the demands of Kidnappers for the payment of $70,000, unless the child was surrendered at the same time the payment was made..." is true because the guy was running the investigation. If he didn't agree then it wouldn't have happened.
So my point could be a moot one.
However, once Rab's positon is made (and I respect his observation concerning it - I just have a different one) then I believe more circumstances must be considered:
I cannot agree his actions here dispels involvement. We don't know, for example, what he did or didn't know at that time (or any other time for that matter). Additionally, coming up with this idea (if he did), or agreeing with those involved doesn't mean he's not to be considered a suspect in any way. Certainly he isn't holding the child and we know that to be true. So others are.
I look at Lindbergh's reactions to everything. Some places he's reasonable and others downright irrational. He must be graded on all accounts as well as on equal ground.
The only place I have ever seen Lindbergh "blink" was on the serial numbers being recorded. Since he begged the Treasury Agents into the case, I can't see how he would then force them to withdraw. Here he had no choice. So concerning the Ransom delivery he absolutely did. Let me explain....
The sleeping suit was mailed and rec'd (see Rab's timeline above). Despite what is considered historically correct, this was not accepted as absolute proof of anything. Then the strangest thing happens. According to Wilson's Report, Lindbergh changes his mind based upon "consultation with friends and associates" with Anne's health and the child's safety in mind.
Next, Irey plans on recording the serial numbers. Lindbergh says "no." Wilson insists there should not be a "blind" exchange, which is what Lindbergh was supposedly against in the first place - and Lindbergh says "no." When asked why Lindbergh says he wants to "keep his word" to the Kidnappers. That has nothing to do with the safety of his child.
So we have a complete turnaround based upon a Sleeping Suit Lindbergh himself says may not be authentic?
This forces the Treasury Department to give Lindbergh an ultimatum. Here Lindbergh "blinks." The serials are then recorded much to the displeasure of Lindbergh. However, Lindbergh would continue to say he plans to get his son upon the delivery of the ransom. Why? The Ransom Note that came with the Sleeping Suit seems clear, and Jafsie's response seems to indicate they are okay with what they are saying.
Lindbergh inserts himself into the plan for the ransom drop. His reasoning for this is because if Condon gets "bumped" for trying to help him then he deserves to get "bumped" too. (!!!) Lindbergh bans the Police from the drop. This, Lindbergh says, is because he wants his son - not the man collecting the ransom. So here again, he is supposedly believing he'll be getting his son back during the exchange. And again - why?
They go to St. Raymond's. Condon supposedly asks for the COD which the Kidnappers had clearly indicated they would not do. He explains to Lindbergh what's going on and LINDBERGH agrees to the conditions. In Flemington, it was stated that Condon wanted the COD but was over-ruled by Lindbergh.
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 16, 2013 18:26:17 GMT -5
Post by Rab on Feb 16, 2013 18:26:17 GMT -5
Michael, your points about Irey and Turrou are well made but I'm not sure they change the thrust of my argument. In fact I'm not clear if you're actually disagreeing with me or not. I think the central thing is that if one accepts that Lindbergh was controlling the process (as he clearly was up until the child's body was found) then one has to accept that he was controlling it in all aspects. And the most important aspect was whether or not to pay the ransom without receiving the child in return. I agree also that the sleeping suit wasn't seen as definitive proof of anything but the reality is that all the cards were with the kidnapper. It was plain from the ransom notes that they were willing to wait. So if you are in Lindbergh's position, where your instinct is clearly COD, but your child is still missing and your pregnant wife suffering and the people you are negotiating with are immovable, where else do you go? He had no choice.
On the question of the serial numbers, again this to me is evidence of Lindbergh's determination to get his child back safely. He didn't want to take any chance. Catching the kidnapper was secondary. I don't know how any parent in the same position would act differently. Together with the quest for COD it is to me clear proof that Lindbergh was dealing with a situation in which he dearly wanted only one outcome: the safe return of his child. More exotic theories have no basis in the actual analysis of his actions.
Rab
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 16, 2013 21:09:24 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 16, 2013 21:09:24 GMT -5
I understand the differing positions that exist and why they do. I think my post was meant more to extend why I believe Lindbergh should not be dismissed as a Suspect. It's really not designed to change anyone's mind that already has come to the conclusion that he is not.
I don't consider it exotic or anything similar to consider the Parents then eliminate them. That was never done here. For me, I've done a lot of debating from many points of view but could never get past the fact Lindy was warned by his Father-In-Law, Dwight Morrow Sr., that his son would be kidnapped if he didn't hire some Security. Lindbergh offered up the reason he wouldn't because he didn't want people to think he was "afraid."
In my mind that's just not rational.
But for arguments sake, this could mean a variety of things: He's crazy, he doesn't care, he has something in the works, or that he cares about the Public's perception of him over everything else. Maybe there's more, and I always allow room for what I haven't considered yet.
Regardless, it doesn't mean he's involved, but it certainly gives rise to suspicion in my opinion. So as I post here you will see more and more and more examples that add to that pile. They'll be the little ones - just kind of like "extra credit."
I wanted to add Rab, that Breckenridge testified in the Bronx Grand Jury (May '32) that Lindbergh only paid that Ransom over without getting his son back because the serials were recorded knowing that it would lead to capture of the Criminals! Obviously that's not true, so in my mind, he's doing this because he's trying to project what people would expect of him - especially only days after his child was found murdered.
Lindbergh himself testified in the Bronx Grand Jury (Sept. '34) that he never had any reason to doubt Condon. Elsewhere in other places how such high regard he had for Condon's honesty. However, he told Agent Larimer he went with Condon on the Ransom drop because he, in essence, did not trust him. (So much for the "bumped" reason here.) He told many others the same things. So he trusted him and didn't trust him depending on who he told or where it was being told.
I think we can expect the Criminals to lie. But I have a hard time with other people lying that shouldn't be.
For what its worth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Feb 17, 2013 14:56:49 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2013 14:56:49 GMT -5
Did Linbergh see this man and little girl or just Condon? Was the Lady from Tuckahoe even real? Was Condon just making these people up? Not sure about these people. Could they have been newspaper people trying to gain access into Condon's house to get a story? Not sure I would link them to the kidnappers. I think this could point to an accomplice. It is a large sum of gold notes. If this isn't an accomplice then I guess it would have to be someone who bought the gold notes as hot money and decided to turn them in then, which turned out to be a smart time to do it. Oh boy! What does one believe when it comes to Condon's statements? If the statement about the symbol maker happened to be true, I don't think it matters. The night the ransom was paid in St. Raymonds, the first note that was delivered to Condon's house by the unseen "taxi driver" had the secret symbol on it. This proved it was authentic and set in motion the payoff. The symbol maker would no longer be needed anyway. Why did he even bother to make this statement? When was this statement actually made? To me it sounds like Condon wanted to back pedal away from ever having to identify CJ. I am sure no one believed this anyway. I do agree with this. I had posted this same idea in the past. It appeared to me that a tug-of-war was going on during the whole negotiation process. Finally, when the 9th ransom note was received threatening to increase the ransom by 30,000 dollars plus stating that the kidnappers would continue these negotiations for yet another month plus Charlie's thumbguard being found on Lindbergh's private driveway, Lindbergh knew he had to comply. I am glad that Michael put your Ransom note post in the archives. It is good reference material. I do too. Things like why didn't he open the nursery note when he found it? His son is stolen out of his bed yet Lindbergh is more concerned about fingerprints. He could have put on gloves. He knew it was a ransom note. He should have opened it. The Boad Nelly note that would tell him, finally, where to find his son who has been missing for 31 days was not going to be opened right away either. Condon is the one who nudged Lindbergh to open it. Things like this make me wonder what Lindbergh really knew about what happened to his son. The urgency to act to get his boy back as quickly as possible just doesn't seem to be there.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Feb 17, 2013 17:24:11 GMT -5
2-17-13 In memory of my father. Dear Lindbergh Kidnapping Discussion Board: I need your help. Since this is a very personal matter..I will release information slowly. slowly. Well..here it goes...My family has always thought that my dad was the Lindbergh Baby. They tried to report it to the FBI throughout their lives. After my dad's passing, I have uncovered information that has led me to believe that the rumors I had heard all my life could be true. I believe that the babies were switch at Meridian Sanaitorium, a hospital for children with TB, located in Connecticut. Children checked in..but never checked out. My grandfather was a bootlegger in the Northeast, from Pa to Cn. They had a house filled with bathtubs full of liquor located in the deep woods of New Jersey. My grandfather was also a pilot, a member of an aviation club. For those of you who have been following this case, then you will know that February 18th is an important date on the letter from Dr. Van Ingen to Elizabeth Morrow...Charlie Jr.'s grandmother. That was my dad's birthdate. Also, one of my dad's birth certificates (He had 5 of them) was signed by Registrar Julian A. Morrow. I look forward to your comments and ideas...and can't wait for some resolution as to my father's identity for sake of the next generation of my family. Well..here we go...Thank you.
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 17, 2013 22:56:13 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 17, 2013 22:56:13 GMT -5
Lindbergh did claim to have seen them too.
Hard to know for sure. Condon said she was, then said she wasn't, then said she was again.
I am not sure either Amy. Although, Breckenridge believed they were "linked up" with them - perhaps paid to get in and get out then report back what they saw. I know there was a lengthy investigation that looked promising at one point concerning the Needle Salesman but I believe it hit a wall.
Here's the thing, and I won't go into this too much because its worthy of its own thread, Hauptmann did not pen out that Deposit Slip. But he's supposed to be the guy who wrote all of the Ransom Notes. I've seen it suggested that he "tricked" someone into writing the Deposit Slip for him.
Why would he do that? Because of the Ransom Note Writing Wanted Posters? Well that doesn't explain all of his other Deposit Slips penned out in his handwriting. So this proves he's not worried about the handwriting. I have the Report and I believe its in Lloyd's book too - that the Teller, Estey, had the impression it was a Female who made that deposit.
The one thing that does bother me about that Deposit is the amount Hauptmann places into his account later looks comparable.
He attributes this to CJ at St. Raymond's. I can look it up if need be. The only thing I find interesting about it would be the Mersman Table. So if it was a Table or something similar it makes sense that it could be "taken away." But since it comes from Condon its hard to know if it was even said at all. I could be wrong but it gives CJ an excuse for why the "Boad Nelly" note doesn't have it.
I agree.
Hi Aimee.
I am sure everyone here will be willing to help. Meridian Sanatorium doesn't ring a bell for me although others here may know something about it. I don't think Julian A. Morrow is anyone of importance - but who knows? I have a stockpile of information concerning people writing in concerning children they believed were the actual Lindbergh child. I will keep them on the ready and watch your posts closely.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Letters
Feb 18, 2013 8:02:20 GMT -5
Post by Aimee on Feb 18, 2013 8:02:20 GMT -5
My grandfather was arrested on kidnapping charges in the Northeast. Sitting in the backseat, was my father, a curly blonde toddler and my aunt, a dark haired little girl. My "Uncle" Max Boyer...an attorney or Judge for the New Jersey Police Department got his charges dropped and instantly stopped my grandfather from being a suspect. Comments anyone???
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 18, 2013 10:11:37 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 18, 2013 10:11:37 GMT -5
Aimee,
Here is a document out of Rockland Maine concerning this topic. Obviously it's not about your Grandfather but I wanted to post it to exemplify the things that I have. I will go through my stuff to see if I might have something that seems to fit into your situation.
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 18, 2013 10:31:38 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 18, 2013 10:31:38 GMT -5
Here's one connected to Coopersburg, PA:
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 19, 2013 16:10:40 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 19, 2013 16:10:40 GMT -5
Aimee,
Not to minimize your efforts, but I have been going through my files on the Claimants and there are many of them. Some aren't mentioned by name, rather, by the person who wrote or called in about them. Some simply reference an area like: "the one from DuDois, Pa" or the "Seattle child", etc.
I also have found a name I never remembered seeing before - a man by the name of Unger. Here its in my own files and I don't recall ever seeing that letter before in my life.
Even so, if I don't have something then its quite possible there is something at the NJSP Archives I just didn't take note of or copy. In addition to posting here I recommend that you contact Mark there to see if he can't find something to help. That way you are hitting it from all angles.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Letters
Feb 20, 2013 9:25:50 GMT -5
Post by Aimee on Feb 20, 2013 9:25:50 GMT -5
I am interested in knowing more about the post card that was sent...it begins with "BABY BEING TAKEN GOOD CARE OF". Why has this been overlooked..or has it?
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 20, 2013 20:28:27 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 20, 2013 20:28:27 GMT -5
I don't think the Authorities ever took it seriously. The Press got their hands on it and presented it to the public as if it was legit.
I believe the only handwriting expert to take a look at it was Farrer. I seem to remember that he said it was written by a left-handed American.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Letters
Feb 20, 2013 20:58:49 GMT -5
Post by Aimee on Feb 20, 2013 20:58:49 GMT -5
Generally, newspaper photographers altered photos of the Lindbergh Baby for printing appearances. The used black grease pencils to highlight his eyebrows, hairline and shadows within the photo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Feb 22, 2013 23:16:00 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2013 23:16:00 GMT -5
Possibly a female? Hmmm. Since Hans is assisting Hauptmann could it have been Maria that made that deposit for Hauptmann? Did the police ever question her? Did they check her handwriting against the Faulkner deposit slip by any chance?
Apparently Hauptmann was lending Hans money. In the report you posted it mentions that Hans owes Hauptmann $175.00. That is alot of money for back then. Was Mueller unemployed at this time?
Yes. I saw a deposit made into one of Hauptmann's stock accounts that was close to that amount two days after the Faulkner deposit was made. They are probably linked.
Did Hans Mueller ever testify at Hauptmann's trial? Did the gun come up at the trial?
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 23, 2013 11:11:57 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 23, 2013 11:11:57 GMT -5
I've noticed that too. Seems to be the airbrush technique of the day. Lots of Reports on this but the only one where he says this is in an FBI Report. Lloyd gave me a copy or I wouldn't have it myself. So its my feeling he got this impression after thinking about it over a period of time. I've not made that conclusion yet, but I believe no one is above suspicion. Asst. District Attorney Breslin did on 10-11-34. Not to my knowledge. They absolutely did against Hauptmann's but unfortunately those exemplars are not at the NJSP Archives. I've searched even the boxes in the closet for them. I could be wrong, but I believe this references a loan made to Hans by Hauptmann in 1931 for $180.00. Mueller's notebook shows that he still owed Hauptmann $100.00 in 1932 but there are no other notations about it after that. It could be buried in a Report somewhere so I don't want to say there isn't information in my files somewhere about that. Mueller also took a loan from Adolf Schoeffel (see notebook scan below). It appears Mueller was employed. I seem to remember that he was unemployed once Hauptmann returned from his trip. However, unless he found another one for a short time, he says he lost his job on 2/18/32 and didn't find another one until mid-March. I wanted to quickly revisit this for a moment. It's a perfect example of "thinking outside of the box" and its this type of research that inspires me. Mark once again did a great job with his newest Blog Posting. The timing is interesting. What made Jafsie (or Lindbergh) "give in," if that's what they were doing, at this particular time. I don't know. I just don't. Attachments:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Feb 24, 2013 14:26:28 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2013 14:26:28 GMT -5
Who is this Michael? When I look the name Schoeffel up I only come up with Major Charles Schoeffel of the NJSP.
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 24, 2013 16:15:27 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 24, 2013 16:15:27 GMT -5
Sorry Amy. I just read through that post and I don't seem to make myself clear about anything I thought I had.
My intent was to say I haven't gotten to the point where I am committed to Mueller being involved. I do consider him a likely suspect when considering Hauptmann's involvement. I extend that suspicion, although not to that level, over to Maria. Like I said before, everyone should be looked at.
Thanks for calling me on this. Sometimes my brain works but my fingers don't. Adolf and Earnest Schoeffler were Anna's brothers. When Adolf was interviewed by Police he claimed that he had gotten into an argument with Hauptmann over a card game in January 1930 then completely stopped speaking to him ever since.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Feb 24, 2013 18:54:19 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2013 18:54:19 GMT -5
I do too. Looking at that notebook page where it shows that it took Hans over two years to pay the loan back to Adolf, I tend to think that if Hans rendered any assistance at all to Hauptman it was probably after the crime (except for the Liliput). I wonder if Hans had a gambling problem and needed to borrow money to pay his debts?
)
Now it makes sense! Hopefully Hans limited his borrowing to family members. Thanks for clarifying this for me.
|
|
|
Letters
Feb 25, 2013 9:39:03 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2013 9:39:03 GMT -5
I'm not sure. I also am reluctant to say if everything was recorded or not. Rab may not agree with me here, but that goes for Hauptmann too.
I know that Hans was supposed to have been in dire straights financially prior to the kidnapping. And so it seems - Hauptmann was supposed to be as well.
But you have both men acting completely different by and through their actions.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Letters
Feb 25, 2013 21:19:23 GMT -5
Post by Aimee on Feb 25, 2013 21:19:23 GMT -5
Does anyone recall reading a long message about "Follow the Money" The person wrote a very long 1-2 page summary about money and war. His theories on JP Morgan and the bottom sentence referring to Sharpe and Fishe??? I am trying to locate this on the Discussion Board.... Did anyone else see this recently?? Thank you....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Mar 7, 2013 11:32:41 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2013 11:32:41 GMT -5
So Hans was in America illegally. He is married to Maria who is here legally. Hauptmann is in America illegally and is married to Anna who is here legally. Cozy little group.
Since Hauptmann was in America illegally he could not have used that issue to obtain Hans' help with the kidnapping. He could have used a monetary benefit to solicit Hans' help. Have you seen Hans Mueller's financial records? Did he show any sudden enrichment of maybe $1000.00? Or could Hauptmann have pressed Hans for help based on giving Hans help with his gambling debts if he assisted Hauptmann in some way?
|
|
|
Letters
Mar 7, 2013 17:31:36 GMT -5
Post by Rab on Mar 7, 2013 17:31:36 GMT -5
I don't believe Hans' financial records are available at the archives or elsewhere but others may know better. What we certainly do know is that he existed in a constant state of near-penury and borrowed money from Hauptmann and others. I'm not personally aware of any evidence of enrichment but difficult to say without the records.
Rab
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Letters
Mar 7, 2013 17:35:05 GMT -5
Post by jack7 on Mar 7, 2013 17:35:05 GMT -5
Hey I got kicked out of Pogo for being too stupid - so value my opinion - ur all crazy!
|
|
|
Letters
Mar 10, 2013 14:07:40 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Mar 10, 2013 14:07:40 GMT -5
I have what I believe is available. They sent out requests to the various banks for information in his accounts. One problem was there were many people, as odd as it seems - named Hans Mueller. They found a few which I believe were his... They also found that he had some Money Order slips for smaller amounts like $5 and $10. I have a Report concerning his notebooks which I found helpful. However, while going over the notebook (I have that too) side by side I noticed they either missed or skipped over some stuff. One interesting find the Police did make are listed in this Report. First the Brunswick-Radiola Super Heterodyne: And the Waterman's 14K gold pointed fountain pen found hidden in the back: I find it interesting that they blame Hauptmann for both. Were they lying (or was Hans lying) or did Hauptmann really hide this expensive pen there without telling them?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Letters
Mar 10, 2013 14:21:49 GMT -5
Post by jack7 on Mar 10, 2013 14:21:49 GMT -5
Everything was super hetrodyne. I have a Panasonic which is super super hetrodyne so that means nothing. The radio you listen to now is super hetrodyne. Richard was involved, but we don't know how. To me he looks like a sleeper agent. He walked in with no papers - was probably tough, experienced with death - just what they wanted. And when a job came along he got it done and never talked, even to his wife.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Letters
Mar 11, 2013 12:16:21 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2013 12:16:21 GMT -5
I think that the Muellers are lying about when Hauptmann gave them the radio. I think Hauptmann gave it to them in 1932 after he bought the new Stromberg and not in 1934 like they claim.
Wow! What a find that pen was! I tend to think that they did not know it was there. If Hans saw it by chance when he was converting the radio portion of the Brunswick to a sewing space, wouldn't he have removed it and questioned Hauptmann about it? I wonder how Hauptmann came into possession of such an expensive pen? And that letter M on it. I doubt that it stood for Mueller. Maybe the M was for medium point.
What did the police do with this pen? Did they try to link it to the ransom notes?
If Mueller had helped Hauptmann with the kidnapping/extortion in any way, I would think the last person he would want to point a finger at is Hauptmann. Hans must have been very sure that BRH would not talk if he were apprehended. Also, there was no way he could say someone else gave him the radio. Hmmmmm. Maybe he did know that pen was there.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Letters
Mar 11, 2013 17:21:12 GMT -5
Post by jack7 on Mar 11, 2013 17:21:12 GMT -5
You guys are jousting at windmills, and perhaps Michael, you have been for a very long time.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Letters
Mar 11, 2013 23:09:50 GMT -5
Post by jack7 on Mar 11, 2013 23:09:50 GMT -5
I try and get under his wires once in a while - BUT WE ALL LIKE MICAHAEL!
|
|
|
Letters
Mar 12, 2013 20:05:14 GMT -5
Post by Michael on Mar 12, 2013 20:05:14 GMT -5
Thanks Jack... (I think) ;D
For anyone interested in Mueller - here is a page from an FBI Report on him. Those check marks aren't from me and I assume were made by an Investigator.
A couple of interesting things here. One "weird" thing is the line second to the bottom. I saw that originally in the notebook myself and can't figure that one out. Why would someone write this, and what could it mean?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Letters
Mar 13, 2013 3:13:02 GMT -5
Post by jack7 on Mar 13, 2013 3:13:02 GMT -5
You have been pumping this thing for over ten years Michael, and I have done about the same - when is it time to give up? I look at different angles and still see no solutions. I posted some stuff on a personal note with Aimee which said CAL was actually crazy and that's the only thing that I can figure can be an answer. He was crazy and was upscounded by the Nazis. Other than that nothing makes sense.
|
|