|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 5, 2014 19:53:35 GMT -5
never heard of him, ive been at the location of the balt in Princeton with sue campbell
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2014 22:27:46 GMT -5
Thanks Michael for checking on William Dennis. Like Steve, I never heard of him either but thought I would check with you just to make sure there was nothing interesting about him.
Steve, You have certainly been to so many places that were important to this case. I believe The Balt was where Dr. Condon stopped the night he was going to see Lindbergh and show him the letter he received in the mail from the kidnappers. I think Condon called for directions to the house.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Nov 6, 2014 6:37:14 GMT -5
The Balt was on Nassau St. between Witherspoon St. and what was later to become Palmer Square, and directly across from the main entrance to Princeton University. My husband's family's grocery store was around the corner on Witherspoon St..
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 6, 2014 7:59:17 GMT -5
amy alot of people involved in this case went to the balt. I think it was open 24 hours. einstein use to eat lunch there also
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2014 22:59:43 GMT -5
Stella and Steve, Have either of you ever been to the Union Hotel in Flemington? I read this story about it and there are claims that the Hotel is haunted! Here is a link to the story. There is a video also included with this story. weirdnj.com/stories/ghosts-union-hotel/
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Nov 7, 2014 0:23:38 GMT -5
Yes, I had drinks there in my 20's, so that was a long time ago! A lot of businesses have closed on Main St. in Flemington in recent years, I hope the new owners can turn it around.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 7, 2014 7:37:54 GMT -5
the last owner of the union hotel gave me a tour upstairs in the place
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Nov 7, 2014 7:54:58 GMT -5
Steve, did you see the ghost? Did the owner have some good stories about the trial?
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 7, 2014 12:42:21 GMT -5
no ghost, he ran the restraunt when it was open. that's where I ate dinner with noel behn, Robert bryan, and jim fisher after the Lindbergh symposium that was at the courthouse in 1
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Nov 7, 2014 12:42:58 GMT -5
im sorry it was in 1996
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 25, 2014 20:43:10 GMT -5
Thanks Michael for checking on William Dennis. I stumbled onto something tonight and wanted to post it before I set it aside and either forgot or misplace it. Check out the very last AP report citing U.S. Dist. Attorney H. N. Connaughton claiming Dennis most likely had an ulterior motive: Attachment Deleted
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2014 21:37:53 GMT -5
Thanks for posting this! The flat tire incident sounds familiar. I remember reading something about a car with a flat tire seen that night in the Hopewell area. I don't remember William Dennis as the person in the story. Oh gosh, now I will have to go and find where I read this before!! An ulterior motive to get back to New York? Maybe he was in a hurry to catch a flight back to Chicago? I wish Connaughton would have elaborated on the motive that caused William Dennis claim to be discounted.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 26, 2014 14:28:30 GMT -5
Thanks for posting this! The flat tire incident sounds familiar. I remember reading something about a car with a flat tire seen that night in the Hopewell area. I don't remember William Dennis as the person in the story. Oh gosh, now I will have to go and find where I read this before!! An ulterior motive to get back to New York? Maybe he was in a hurry to catch a flight back to Chicago? I wish Connaughton would have elaborated on the motive that caused William Dennis claim to be discounted. According to Connaughton, Dennis's son had been killed in a Car Accident and his grieving Wife took off to New York. Dennis chased after her but was unable to locate her and was seeking Police help. Once he returned to Chicago it was then he started making these claims. Below are some photos and his original statement: Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Nov 26, 2014 16:20:28 GMT -5
To Amy, Michael, and All:
Of course, the key question surrounding any witness like Mr. Dennis who claimed he saw Hauptmann around Hopewell on the day or night of the purported kidnapping is WHY DIDN"T HE REPORT WHAT HE SAW SOON AFTER HE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE INCIDENT AT THE LINDBERGH HOME?
I think this puts Dennis in a class with other individuals who only reported their sightings 2 1/2 years later, after Hauptmann's arrest, and tried to pin the kidnapping on the suspect already in custody. The most common motive of these individuals was probably to get their name in the newspapers - what we now refer to as their "15 minutes of fame" - and have themselves thought of as "heroes."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2014 14:53:56 GMT -5
Thanks, Michael for the additional clips about William Dennis. I seriously doubt he saw Hauptmann that night plus his story seems to have changed from a hurry up need to get somewhere to a leisurely ride with his wife. I think Hurtelable's post above makes good points about all these sightings and why some of these people didn't come forward after the kidnapping. Two and a half years later is a little late to be taken seriously.
Along these same lines, I have another Who Was for you:
Who was Arthur Mills, Baltimore Bertillion expert(?), who claimed that a bootlegger told him the Lindbergh baby was dead and would be found near the Lindbergh home? According to Mills, this bootlegger shared this information with him shortly(just days) before the body was found in the Mount Rose woods.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 28, 2014 16:47:13 GMT -5
Who was Arthur Mills, Baltimore Bertillion expert(?), who claimed that a bootlegger told him the Lindbergh baby was dead and would be found near the Lindbergh home? According to Mills, this bootlegger shared this information with him shortly(just days) before the body was found in the Mount Rose woods. I recall this guy sending a Western Union to Schwarzkopf after the discovery of the child. I believe he was told by a NJ Rum Runner, or so he said, a week before that he'd be found dead. Mills was a former Maryland or Delaware State Police Officer who was then working in Corrections. And it looks like you taught me something new too... I had, for some reason, remembered him being a handwriting expert but after looking up "Bertillion" (I had no idea what it was) it looks like that isn't correct. A "Bertillion Expert" is someone who could identify someone - sometimes referred to as an "Identification Expert": en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphonse_BertillonI'll see if I can't find that Western Union and post it. I think this "Rum-Runner" is named in it. It's going to be a tough one because I cannot remember the last time I saw it but you never know.... While it's completely without proof at the moment, I had a flash back in thinking this was something bogus designed to protect Curtis. I could be wrong but I wanted to put that out there while I was thinking about it.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 28, 2014 19:37:07 GMT -5
So far I've been able to find this document below. It appears that my hunch is supported to some degree, enough so that I trust my memory about it at this point. If you'd like me to search further just let me know. Attachment Deleted
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 18:26:24 GMT -5
Michael,
Thanks for searching for info on Arthur Mills. There are so many names that come up when reading about this case. I have another one to ask you about.
Who was Harry Whitney? I have read his name attached to Anna Hauptmann in 1934 as her "Business Manager". I checked Lloyd's book and he mentions him very briefly on page 217 as someone who was a visitor to the prison cell (of Hauptmann?). Lloyd says Whitney's actual status in the case was never completely determined.
Would you have any additional information about him? How could Anna afford a business manager? Did Fawcett arrange this for Anna?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 2, 2014 19:45:56 GMT -5
Who was Harry Whitney? I have read his name attached to Anna Hauptmann in 1934 as her "Business Manager". I checked Lloyd's book and he mentions him very briefly on page 217 as someone who was a visitor to the prison cell (of Hauptmann?). Lloyd says Whitney's actual status in the case was never completely determined. Most people don't know that Mrs. Hauptmann had conferred with an Attorney with whom she was about to hire but hesitated when Foley, of all people, bad-mouthed this Lawyer to Anna. Still up in the air on this situation, upon exiting the Bronx Courthouse, she found Whitney outside waiting for her. According to her he was married to her cousin's daughter and had been to her wedding. He recommended Fawcett and Miesels so she hired them (instead of the other guy) as a result. Whitney stayed on claiming to be the " Lead Detective" for the Defense. This claim would be refutted by Fawcett who deemed him her " buisness manager," however, there is evidence Whitney was conducting investigations with the full knowledge and at the instigation of Fawcett. The Police wrote in their Reports that he was Mrs. Hauptmann's " confidential advisor" and would tap his telephone lines so they could get whatever information they could about the Defense from his calls. He would later be charged with running a Private Investigation business without a license but this was dismissed when Anna testified that she never paid him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 15:00:45 GMT -5
Who was Harry Whitney? I have read his name attached to Anna Hauptmann in 1934 as her "Business Manager". I checked Lloyd's book and he mentions him very briefly on page 217 as someone who was a visitor to the prison cell (of Hauptmann?). Lloyd says Whitney's actual status in the case was never completely determined. Most people don't know that Mrs. Hauptmann had conferred with an Attorney with whom she was about to hire but hesitated when Foley, of all people, bad-mouthed this Lawyer to Anna. Still up in the air on this situation, upon exiting the Bronx Courthouse, she found Whitney outside waiting for her. According to her he was married to her cousin's daughter and had been to her wedding. He recommended Fawcett and Miesels so she hired them (instead of the other guy) as a result. Whitney stayed on claiming to be the " Lead Detective" for the Defense. This claim would be refutted by Fawcett who deemed him her " buisness manager," however, there is evidence Whitney was conducting investigations with the full knowledge and at the instigation of Fawcett. The Police wrote in their Reports that he was Mrs. Hauptmann's " confidential advisor" and would tap his telephone lines so they could get whatever information they could about the Defense from his calls. He would later be charged with running a Private Investigation business without a license but this was dismissed when Anna testified that she never paid him. Thanks for the information about Whitney. So Whitney had a family connection with Anna and he recommended Fawcett as an attorney. Interesting. I did not know that Anna had someone in mind before Fawcett. Do you know who he was? I can't believe that Foley actually influenced Anna that way. Why did she listen to Foley? He was going to prosecute her husband. He was not out to help her or Hauptmann. Anna being foreign and naive about the American justice system left her very vulnerable to manipulation by others. I am glad that she ended up with Fawcett. He did do what he could. He really didn't have a lot of time or money to prepare a court case. Everything was so rushed to get Hauptmann extradited to New Jersey. I have read that it was a Hearst reporter that talked Anna into going with Ed Reilly as Hauptmann's attorney. Is this really true? Was Anna that disappointed with Fawcett's representation of Richard that she thought she was doing the right thing by changing lawyers?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 4, 2014 17:06:58 GMT -5
I did not know that Anna had someone in mind before Fawcett. Do you know who he was? I can't believe that Foley actually influenced Anna that way. Why did she listen to Foley? He was going to prosecute her husband. He was not out to help her or Hauptmann. I've got his name but very little information about him. I am conflicted about Foley's reason for doing this. On one hand it seems possible he was afraid of this Attorney, but I cannot rule out that his actions were sincere because there were a ton of "shady" characters back then that did not exclude Lawyers from their ranks. I have read that it was a Hearst reporter that talked Anna into going with Ed Reilly as Hauptmann's attorney. Is this really true? Was Anna that disappointed with Fawcett's representation of Richard that she thought she was doing the right thing by changing lawyers? Absolutely 100% true. Hoffman wrote about it in his Liberty series, and it was even included in her Wrongful Death suite against New Jersey in the 80's. I believe the Reporter was John "Jack" Clements.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Dec 20, 2014 9:50:53 GMT -5
Who Was..... Marie Cappele? Okay. So you're at the Archives looking up a name you've come across. Who is she and what information, if any, did she possess? You stumble onto the Report below and quickly find out the Report holds more value concerning something other then Mrs. Cappele. This happens more often then not, and is an example concerning why it's so hard to file reports in places where they can be easily found. While it's not a "blockbuster" of a find, or anything even approaching it, it does show that Hauptmann was still doing at least "something" other then his Trading on Wall Street. With this in mind then the thought becomes "are there more examples of this?" and the search for those examples should continue. The point being that if someone asserts he "quit working" and never picked up a tool again - they'd be wrong. Furthermore, it also shows Hauptmann making a purchase without attempting to unload ransom he's supposedly desperate to launder. What value does this hold? Well, there's only one way to find out and believing those who never did the research is the wrong place to look.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2015 9:48:32 GMT -5
Michael,
What can you tell me about Dan B. Cowie? He was an attorney with a Wichita, Kansas law firm and he wrote a letter to Gov. Hoffmann. Cowie says that he met with Colonel Lindbergh and went over information he had about the crime. They also discussed Lindbergh's distrust of Dr. Condon. Part of this letter is in Wayne Jones book on pages 1111 and 1112. Have you seen this letter? What could a law firm in Kansas know about a crime in Hopewell N.J.?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 25, 2015 10:43:10 GMT -5
What can you tell me about Dan B. Cowie? He was an attorney with a Wichita, Kansas law firm and he wrote a letter to Gov. Hoffmann. Cowie says that he met with Colonel Lindbergh and went over information he had about the crime. They also discussed Lindbergh's distrust of Dr. Condon. Part of this letter is in Wayne Jones book on pages 1111 and 1112. Have you seen this letter? What could a law firm in Kansas know about a crime in Hopewell N.J.? I've got it and, in fact, I've made several copies so that I could place it as many files as it pertains. While I don't have it in front of me at the moment, I recall what's written in Jone's book seems accurate, and it's also mentioned in Lloyd's book on page 460 at footnote #6. Cowie had been an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Topeka Kansas when he rec'd information from an Inmate named Harry Mack AKA Robert Baird concerning the Lindbergh Case. As a result of this information he had a discussion with Lindbergh - it also drew in the FBI and ultimately Agent Larimer who worked out of Oklahoma City and had been asked for by Mack himself. At some point Cowie left the U.S. Attorney's Office and became a Partner in a Private law firm. On Jan 12, 1936 he sent a Western Union to the Governor advising him that important details were omitted from the testimony in Flemington. The very next day, Gov. Hoffman called Cowie which prompted the writing of the letter referred to in your post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2015 14:59:32 GMT -5
OK, Michael. You have me very curious about this letter! The portion Jones quotes in his book does not mention Harry Mack AKA Robert Baird. Can you give some details about this man? What was Cowie putting forth about him that led to the involvement of the other law enforcement agencies?
In the portion of the letter Jones does have in his book, Cowie says the Lindbergh told him "that there was no other deduction to be made; that it could not have been done by one man and one man alone, and that he would even go so far as to say that until this crime was solved, he and every member of his family and household, was a legitimate suspect."[/b]
I have trouble believing that Lindbergh would say such a thing (the words in bold) to anyone! When did the meeting take place between Lindbergh and Cowie? Did they meet at the Hopewell house or somewhere else? Were there any witnesses to this meeting and what was said?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 25, 2015 17:16:36 GMT -5
OK, Michael. You have me very curious about this letter! The portion Jones quotes in his book does not mention Harry Mack AKA Robert Baird. Can you give some details about this man? What was Cowie putting forth about him that led to the involvement of the other law enforcement agencies? The letter itself doesn't mention why the interview took place so it's possible Jones didn't add the history surrounding it because he probably had no idea. Mack was an informant for the FBI, and assisted Agent Larimer with information concerning the 1931 Leavenworth Escape based upon what Fontaine told him in Jail. There is an "angle" concerning this crime that ties into this event, and Mack also claimed to have knowledge of it through this same source. Since he had been very reliable with his information in the past they felt this was something that should draw attention based upon this fact. In the portion of the letter Jones does have in his book, Cowie says the Lindbergh told him "that there was no other deduction to be made; that it could not have been done by one man and one man alone, and that he would even go so far as to say that until this crime was solved, he and every member of his family and household, was a legitimate suspect."Yes. It's not bolded in the letter but that's correctly worded. I have trouble believing that Lindbergh would say such a thing (the words in bold) to anyone! When did the meeting take place between Lindbergh and Cowie? Did they meet at the Hopewell house or somewhere else? Were there any witnesses to this meeting and what was said? Don't have any trouble believing it. There are other sources for information like this and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Cowie is a very reliable source. The problem is most Authorities didn't want to say anything to make Lindbergh look badly so they would omit or disregard this type of information. Dare I say that if Mr. Cowie had still been in Government service this letter would not have been written? I believe the meeting with Lindbergh was on December 18, 1932. It may have been on the 19th or 20th because the dates concerning what meeting and when seem a little confusing in the various sources that I have. There was a Washington Meeting, a New York Meeting - and a meeting with Lindbergh & Schwarzkopf. U.S. Attorney Medalie was with Cowie during the meeting with Lindbergh and Schwarzkopf and I believe AUSA Brewster as well as Frank Wilson were there too (Hoover merely says "a representative of the Special Intelligence Unit") This meeting lasted 4-1/2 hours according the SAC Vetterli. I am pretty sure the meeting was in NJ, although it's possible it was in NY (I can't find the source which says where it was at although I know I have it).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 0:50:11 GMT -5
That was quite a meeting you describe. Because it was done with so many important people present it just adds to the credibility of Mr. Cowie and what he says Lindbergh said at the meeting.
Jones used this letter to highlight how Lindbergh's position was that more than one person was involved with this crime but then changed. He would go on to implicate through his testimony that only one person was involved, Hauptmann. No mention of the man he saw at St. Raymonds cemetery who was thought to be a lookout for CJ.
The other thing I wanted to mention about this letter is what Cowie says Lindbergh said about the night of the ransom payment. He says Lindbergh talked about driving Condon to St. Raymond's the night of April 2, 1932. Lindbergh also stated that Colonel Irey and Colonel Breckinridge followed them in another car. I do not recall reading anything like this anywhere! Can you comment on this?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jan 26, 2015 9:02:50 GMT -5
The other thing I wanted to mention about this letter is what Cowie says Lindbergh said about the night of the ransom payment. He says Lindbergh talked about driving Condon to St. Raymond's the night of April 2, 1932. Lindbergh also stated that Colonel Irey and Colonel Breckinridge followed them in another car. I do not recall reading anything like this anywhere! Can you comment on this? I have an FBI Report which I got at the Archives that was among those which Lloyd donated once he was finished with his book. I have the impression that it's mentioned in TCTND but I cannot find it. SAC Connelley writes in a Report to Hoover: From the statement of Colonel Schwarzkopf, May 17th, Colonel Lindbergh and Condon proceeded alone to 3225 Tremont Avenue as directed. However, from reliable source it was definitely known that four persons left the Condon home at about 10:00PM with a package on Saturday night, April 2, 1932 for the purpose above indicated, the other two parties being, it is understood, Wilson and Irey or Wilson and Madden of the Intelligence Unit. I also have another source which compliments both the information in Cowie's Letter and Conelley's Report above, and it exemplifies why it's taken me all of the 15 years I've been researching to put things together. If you stop - you miss something. If you dismiss without searching further - you miss something. Now while Irey says he was in NY he never mentions anything about this. Breckenridge says Reich was "left at the house" but never says anything about this. Condon says the only people at the house during this time was Breck, Lindy, himself, and Reich. So it demonstrates why it's so hard to "trust your source" when no source is ever truly trustworthy. So who is the "reliable source?" I am positive it isn't Cowie. That's because Cowie refused to share his information and what was said in his meeting with Hoover. He said he knew of the "friction" between the FBI and the NJSP and since NJ was in charge his information was to be kept confidential. In short, he left that meeting on the side of the NJSP because of whatever Lindbergh and Schwarzkopf had told them about it. My guess is that while it could have been Medalie, it a safe bet that the information came from Lanphier who was basically, for all intent and purposes, Connelley's informant concerning the behind the scenes information.
|
|
|
Post by romeo12 on Jan 26, 2015 11:12:01 GMT -5
not to change the subject but I found the fbi report of everybody who worked on the Lindbergh house and contractors, its a long list. I forgot who asked me for it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 15:48:14 GMT -5
I will check out TCTND for it.
Your FBI report says the departurn time was 10 p.m. I thought that Lindbergh and Condon left between 8/8:30 p.m. to go to St. Raymonds. Could the 10 p.m. departure actually be after the ransom payment was made and Lindbergh, Condon and the government agents were leaving to go to the Morrow apartment in NYC? I believe that Irey was at the Morrow apartment when Lindbergh and Condon arrived there.
What I did read so far in Gardner book is that Lanphier requested that FBI agents be positioned near Condon's home the day of April 2nd. I will keep reading. Thanks for your help Michael.
|
|