|
Post by rick3 on Feb 1, 2010 10:31:56 GMT -5
this is one of the more fascinating questions posed by Major Pease in his book: The Hole in the Hauptmann Case? [page 13] - "Whose blood stained one of every three bills (1/3) of the ransom money found in BRHs garage? Did BRH only bury the blood stained bills"... with the Lilliput German pistol?
- This blood was confirmed by Edward Dean Sullivan (Snatch Rackets )...some thought it was Jafises? "it is entirely possible that other violent incidents followed the abduction and murder of the baby" Who Helped Hauptmann? [Inside Detective may 1935]
- "Is there any record of a body of a man or woman found near St. Raymonds after the ransom payment?" This question implies that CJ might have been killed for the money--maybe for giving back the $20,000 extra?
- Jafsie even charged that BRH or others murdered Isador Fisch? It was front page headline news....so even this is possible as well if Fisch ever held the ransom? He too did not make it to Sept 1934 arrest?
- Yet, this continues to remain an buried aspect of the LKC? Why? Isnt blood evidence the key to solving most homidicides?
[could it be CJrs blood under the circumstances?]
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Feb 1, 2010 11:37:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 1, 2010 14:03:23 GMT -5
how could it be condons blood?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 1, 2010 18:41:18 GMT -5
Excellent post Sue! I forgot it was Jones in 1956 in his letter to Gov. Brendon Byrne! Just remembering this obscure blood money for 20 years should add to Jones' credibilty and prod us to read the rest of the Jones letter more carefully.....especially since he got it first hand from BRH? Who else? I wonder if anyone thought to check this with Jafsie's version to confirm it was in fact his blood? Funny how all this got overlooked by all major authors? It could be a game breaker...Jim Fisher alone mentions Jones in the The Ghosts of Hopewell/ Also see: witty04.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=discussion6&action=display&thread=126[Steve--Pease and Sullivan are not prisoners--they are authors]
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 1, 2010 20:39:47 GMT -5
because the authors cant believe a prisoner and his crazy word
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Feb 2, 2010 5:28:32 GMT -5
that guy jones was a prisoner
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 2, 2010 7:53:09 GMT -5
I'm amazed that anyone can doubt Hauptmann's ability to mastermind this crime after reading the Jones letter. I mean, how many people can teach both arithmetic and grammar to a student from a separate jail cell and do it covertly? Looks like he did a pretty good job as well!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 2, 2010 8:45:17 GMT -5
I think with ANY source you have to weigh carefully many things in order to trust it. And even then, do you trust it completely, partially, or not at all.
Jones is interesting I have to admit.
What I think has to be done is figure out what sources he had available to him before he wrote that letter then cross reference them. Even though he obviously gets things wrong he's saying some things that could be coming from a unique source.
Next, he is a criminal. No matter how you look at it that hurts. But that doesn't mean he's Gaston Means either. Does he have anything to gain? He was with Hauptmann and on death row - so in that regard, he's in a really good spot for information to be passed to him.
But here's a spin I don't think many people consider.....
Jones could be telling the absolute truth about what Hauptmann told him. However, it could all be a story. Hauptmann could be lying about everything. Then over the years Jones confuses or gets some things about it wrong.
I know I have been criticized for having no original ideas or constantly counter-punching those that do. This seems to be a legitimate criticism. It might just be who I am. But I do think I can upset just about anything laid before me. With a little time and research I can call anything into question. If those questions can then be properly answered, then for me, I have a solution.
Now as to Hauptmann's ability to teach reading and math... It does sound a little far fetched. But I've seen people come in with 6th grade educations leave, not only with a HS diploma, but with a degree and speaking several foreign languages - fluently. They invent ways to communicate and pass things to each other that are ingenious. So I don't consider it impossible that (at least) a version of this was going on - regardless of anything else he says.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 2, 2010 22:27:38 GMT -5
Do you think Hauptmann would invent this story for a stranger and not his wife and close friends? I do think it's possible that certain parts of the Jones letter did come from Hauptmann. In particular the allegory of 3 and 0. That seems to me to be something consistent with Hauptmann and possibly important at that. The bulk of the tale seems to have more to do with the post execution period, though.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 3, 2010 10:57:15 GMT -5
I think with ANY source you have to weigh carefully many things in order to trust it. And even then, do you trust it completely, partially, or not at all. Jones is interesting I have to admit. I know I have been criticized for having no original ideas or constantly counter-punching those that do. This seems to be a legitimate criticism. It might just be who I am. But I do think I can upset just about anything laid before me. With a little time and research I can call anything into question. If those questions can then be properly answered, then for me, I have a solution. As far as the blood money its not about either Jones or BRH! It is about Pease and Sullivan knowing about it and writing about it in 1935-36...long before Jones surfaces as BRHs BFF? 1. Was there blood on the ransom money...Yes or No? Who knew about it? 2. Whose blood was it? Who was questioned or tested using the A-B-O system of Landstiener? Such a Big Deal was made about NO BLOOD in nursery, or sleeping suite or burlap bag! Its as if CJr didnt even have blood? Oops--my bad? (please forgive me and bless the pygmys in Africa) 3. Did the NJSP etc even try to solve this mystery? Who cares? It might have come up in the Trial? Was IT suppressed? 4. This looks like a case of Jones giving credibilty to Pease and Sullivan's questions?--just 20 years later? It may or may not be the key to the case? Wheres the blood money now? Can it still be tested? for DNA? And dont forget that the Family removed all evidence of CJr's DNA from the NJSP Museum in 2001-2003 after Anne Morrow Lindbergh died: www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/brace.html#Forensic%20Items%20Removed%20From%20the%20West%20Trenton%20Archive%20-5. A more interesting question would be how did Jones get off death row? Quid Pro Quo? (for his 20 years of silence?) 32/93
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 5, 2010 19:36:09 GMT -5
Here's the thing.... He doesn't want his Wife to ever know he has ANY involvement whatsoever. He tells this story (or a version of it) to Jones - a Death Row Inmate.
You have my attention. Could you go into this a little more?
Yes, on some of it. Both the NYPD Lab, and the FBI Lab found it on some of the bills they tested.
Well, since we're talking 1932 there was no DNA testing. Fingerprints were an after-thought coming from the FBI who, after having it sent to their lab to be tested got blind-sided by the jealous NJSP for doing so.
The origin of the blood was suggested (by whom I cannot remember) that it could have been Fisch's from his cough. But we also have to remember this money wasn't "brand new" and had been in circulation before it was assembled for this ransom. How much is worth considering a "pattern" which could be from one or more of the Kidnappers? I think a review of the reports on this matter would be necessary before I start throwing anything out there.....
No. They didn't claim to have any interest in it until the FBI tried to solve this matter by testing it. After that they started "protesting" that the FBI had stolen their evidence and usurping their authority. Hoover was confused by this action knowing they had chosen to do nothing with it, and having no standing orders or hold on it during this time saw nothing underhanded in retrieving it for this investigative purpose. Schwarzkopf simply saw the FBI doing something the NJSP hadn't thought of then considered it may lead to the solution of the Case.
Silly isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 7, 2010 5:43:47 GMT -5
In forensic law, blood has always been considered class evidence, but the potential exists for individualized blood typing, and even today, forensic serologists can provide testimony with some strong probability estimates linking a single individual, and that individual only, to a bloodstain. Consider that identical twins may have the same DNA profile but completely different antibody profiles, and you begin to see how promising the field of forensic serology really is.
BLOOD TYPING The typing of blood, with what is now called the A-B-O system, was discovered in 1901. A few years later, starting around 1937, a series of antigen-antibody reactions were discovered in blood, the most common ones being ABH, MN, Rh, and Gm (over 100 antigens exist). Most people are only familiar with the Rh factor, which is technically the D antigen. There are more than 256 antigens, and 23 blood group systems based on association with these antigens. 1901--Dr. Paul Uhlenhuth developed a method of testing blood stains, to determine if they were human. Fingerprinting was introduced to Scotland Yard in 1902. Safe blood transfusions have saved many lives during the 20th century. This would not have been possible without the discovery of the human blood groups made by Nobel Laureate Karl Landsteiner in 1901. 1922--Detection of Human Blood Stains by E.A Victors U of Calif...if a suspect in a crime maintain that a certain blood sample came from a nose-bleed (or TB?) then the findings of a blood group different from the suspect would discredit this assersion". 1923-- Vittorio Siracusa, working at the Institute of Legal Medicine of the R. University of Messina, Italy, developed the absorbtion-elution test for ABO blood typing of stains. Along with his mentor, Lattes also performed significant work on the absorbtion-inhibition technique… 1932--The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime laboratory was created. 1934--ransom money found in BRH's garage. Fisch coughing on all the money is gross--but the pattern would sure be different than Jafsie cutting his finger? How can we explain no blood on the burlap bag--once the hair falls out one might think the blood would fall out too? Or at least some bodily fluids? Doesnt add up?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 7, 2010 9:35:12 GMT -5
What would you expect? If there's no external bleeding would there be blood evidence if decomposing occurred in that bag? If it were used to transport a decomposing corpse?
There's evidence of an internal bleeding caused by trauma which resulted in damage to the skull.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Feb 7, 2010 10:18:23 GMT -5
-- I know I have been criticized for having no original ideas or constantly counter-punching those that do. This seems to be a legitimate criticism. It might just be who I am. But I do think I can upset just about anything laid before me. With a little time and research I can call anything into question. If those questions can then be properly answered, then for me, I have a solution. What would you expect? If there's no external bleeding would there be blood evidence if decomposing occurred in that bag? If it were used to transport a decomposing corpse? There's evidence of an internal bleeding caused by trauma which resulted in damage to the skull. There were at least two obvious drain holes in the babys head....one the size of a quarter visible in Lloyd's photo of the babys forehead--...and a stick-poke/gunshot behind the right ear....I predict one or both would be leaky...also in a severe compound tramatic fracture of the skull due to extermal violence, fluids would likely leak from the existing openings: ears, nose or eyes or mouth--unless the body was totally dried up before entering the burlap? Were there any fluids remaining at the autopsy...or was the whole skeleton like a freeze-dried mummy from square one? We should recall how soupy and disqusting the brain was and it ran out onto the floor --so there should have been other fluids and tissues containing blood cells to test for ABO blood grouping? Mercer County, unlike Flemington, should not be decades behind in forensic science, in spite of letting Coroner Swayze perform the autopsy? Did CAL by proxy, or any others present, prevent the retention of tissues and fluids for blood typing? Its like the perfect storm...no fingerprints, no footprints, no birthmarks and no forensic blood evidence? Its not difficult to understand why folks keep asking "Who Bungled the Lindbergh Case?"
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Feb 7, 2010 12:03:36 GMT -5
Hi Rick, What do you make of Dr Michael Baden's view that there was no skull fracture? Rather that it was unfused skull plates which fell apart during autopsy. I've wondered about it, but find myself left hanging. I have the feeling that it was one speedy autopsy (due to oder of decomp).
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Feb 7, 2010 12:56:32 GMT -5
Have dug around some trying to find Baker info. If anyone knows, without going to a bunch of trouble, would appreciate knowing what date (or approx) he disappeared. I recall reading he was never heard from again. And that his wife disappeared not too long after he did. There's another date in the case I'd like to compare his disappearance with. Thanx.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Feb 7, 2010 16:56:35 GMT -5
I know I'm glad the blood on the money wasn't id'd as Hauptmann's. I can only imagine how many more wacky theories would abound attempting to explain it away.
Michael, I'll explain the 3 & 0 at the Swan.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 8, 2010 8:21:39 GMT -5
Originally, Baker was believed to have "disappeared" on May 2, 1932. But as the investigation continued, the Police were able to follow his trail into 1933 eventually to the point where they located then interviewed him on Nov 20, 1933. Later, using Agent Leslie's investigation concerning a possible link between Ellerson & Baker, Agent Turrou spoke with Lt. Finn who stated in no uncertain terms that he had eliminated Baker from having any connection the this case. Although the investigation of Baker seems to end here, I am not so sure this position was held by all.
I know at one time Joe was doing a lot of research on Baker. It's possible he has something that I haven't seen on him.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Feb 8, 2010 11:18:02 GMT -5
Thanks Michael I appreciate the Bacon/Baker info. You added some which I hadn't read before.
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Feb 10, 2010 20:12:18 GMT -5
news.google.com/newspapers?id=fVovAAAAIBAJ&sjid=y9oFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3324,3556747&dq=lindbergh+kidnapping+blood-stains&hl=en Ottawa Citizen September 24, 1932 (Third Column down) "Attention was drawn to information that blood-stains had been found on some of the recovered ransom money. One theory advanced was that a quarrel over a division of the loot had resulted in serious injury to one of the kidnappers. Indicates Serious Fight While none of the marked notes were found in the Hauptmann garage, they had been included among certificates which had trickled into banks for months past. Stains were too numerous, officials concluded, to have resulted from a casual cut, and indicated a serious fight for possession."
|
|