|
Post by acondon on Oct 7, 2006 9:25:38 GMT -5
I cannot add much except for the St. Raymond vacinity around that time. There was a restaurnat on the cornor, I think. I remember when we went to visit my Grandfather's grave we would stop at the restaurant and eat. I would also play on the stepsoutside; There was kind of a concrete (can't say poarch) but concrete veranda only no tables. I was on the north west corner and the bus stop was there as well. When I went wa a bit later then 32 but the building was not new and this was the 40s. I am sure that it dated back to the early 30s and probably I would say late 20s.
I am not sure if that was also the corner of Mayflower Avenue. I think so. I would have to look at a street map. It has been some time since I was there.
Maybe someone else will remember the restaurant. It was a family type place, not fast food. Rather large. Patricia Doyle
|
|
|
Post by acondon on Oct 7, 2006 9:40:12 GMT -5
OH, I made an error, I meant the north east corner. Yes, I belive that it was right on the corner of Mayflower Ave. and Tremont Ave. Yes, N. E. sounds right. diagonally would have been a corner house with property and then directly across the street would have been the Cemetery on the S. E. sde of that intersection. Whitmore Ave. was not really a continuation of Mayflower. Again, it has been many many decades, I guess a quarter century since I have been there.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Nov 16, 2006 16:49:37 GMT -5
Does anyone know if any policeman, detective, FBI--any lawman, even if on their own--continued to search for co-conspirators after BRH was executed?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 16, 2006 19:56:08 GMT -5
Absolutely.
Practically everyone associated with Hoffman's "re-investigation" continued their investigations of the case despite his execution. The NJSP, under Kimberling, continued investigating whatever came up... Since the laws were that a Governor could not serve a consecutive term, once Hoffman's term was up in '38 the fervor died down and completely lost its steam after Kimberling was out in late '41.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Nov 16, 2006 21:47:52 GMT -5
That is interesting Michael! All the way til late 41! I think I've seen Kimberling name somehow. I guess they may have contributed some of their thinking to some of the writers who came along? It seems to me there would have been so few who worked with the case who believed the Lone Wolf spin. I don't think Wilentz could have thought so, either. It surprises me Trenchard gets such a soft landing in the case. Thanx for the information.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Mar 15, 2008 6:59:39 GMT -5
There were several interviews with this Special Officer the first being on 4-14-32. I am going to give you the "nut-shell" version of all of them. That on "payday" which was either March 31st or April 1st, 1932 whichever did not fall on Sunday because he was never paid on Sunday - Uebel saw a Maroon Car. Condon had been in the car and got out and walked over to a green touring car which had just pulled up there. Just the day before Uebel had seen this green touring car parked there waiting for about 2 to 3 hours for someone. A couple of the men had gotten out and walked around as if looking for something. Condon walked over to the car and when he left - the car started and drove away. Condon and his companion then walked around St. Raymond's in the area very near where the money had been passed. Once back at the car, Condon's companion got in but Condon walked back to the green touring car which had returned. Condon reached into his pocket and took out a white envelop and handed it to someone in the car. Uebel claims that on Monday, April 11th, in one version it was the "Maroon" car but another says it was the green "touring" car - pulled up on Wittemore Ave. He observed a dark complexion man walk to a box-wood bush in the rear of 3254 E. Tremont Ave. which is about 75 feet west of Whittemore Ave., reach into the bush, take out a box and place it under his coat get back into the car and drove away. On April 18th Uebel wrote down the license plate of a maroon car he saw at the cemetery and believing it was the same car of the previous mentioned storie(s) wrote down the license plate. This plate was traced back to Gregory Coleman - Asst. Editor of the Bronx Home News. No one questions Uebel's integrity. He certainly wasn't looking for publicity. I have communicated with his Grand-Daughter and she and her family had absolutely no idea he had any connection to this case. Did everyone forget Bernard F. Uebel? He saw Condon at St. Raymonds the nite before the ransom was paid?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 15, 2008 12:04:11 GMT -5
Uebel may have gotten his dates mixed up....that is a possibility.
However, all Law Enforcement who investigated his claims were impressed that he was an honest man plus his seeing Condon did coincide with another known event - just taking place on a different date. And so, for me, I believe everything the man said should be taken into consideration even if you want to minus out the actual day of the eyewitness account.
Uebel is a creditable source in my book.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Mar 15, 2008 14:35:13 GMT -5
Thanks Michael--special policeman Bernard F. Uebel sure has a unigue perspective: - Did BFU claim to see the actual ransom payment in progress on Saturday April 2nd and/or the man with the little girl? If not who did provide this report?
- Why would the Editor of the Bronx Home News be snooping around St. Raymonds? Did Gregory Coleman play any role in the negotiations for Charlie Jr.?
- Why would this team need to return to St. Raymonds at the one week and two weeks afterwards?
- Could you post or type some of Bernards interviews? Who did he report all this to?
- Who kept all this quiet until Hoffman found it? NYCPD? Why? What big secret is hidden here?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 16, 2008 16:28:23 GMT -5
Uebel was first interviewed by Avon out of Inspector Bruckman's office. He would later be re-interviewed by Hoffman's people which included Former/Future Trooper Lewis.
Uebel never claimed to have seen the ransom payoff. He was working during the day and reported what he saw then.
Coleman was privy to some information I would think shouldn't have been shared with him - obviously coming from Condon. He was writing something which has been quoted in Lloyd's book.
|
|