Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2012 17:25:24 GMT -5
BR, I think Fisch would not be a good candidate for the inside guy either. I thought about his health condition. What if he needed to cough!! I am inclined to Hauptmann being a part of the extortion but not the kidnapping. I think Fisch is probably CJ since Condon describes him having a serious cough that did not sound like a typical cold. Also the lump at the base of the thumb is very telling also.
I agree with you LJ. Condon embelished and sometimes invented so much that it is difficult to know what to believe and what to discard. I really don't think he ever intended to identify CJ. Or maybe he thought he would never have to. It was over two years later before they arrested Hauptmann.
CJ did have knowledge of the nursery crib. He recognized the pins or so Condon says he did. How do we know that CJ even said this? Condon had been in that nursery before he ever met with CJ. He knew the pins held the baby in the crib. What Condon didn't know is that the ransom note was left on the window sill. He has CJ say it was left in the crib. If CJ had been in that nursery he would have remembered where he put that ransom note. Condon could have been making up alot of that conversation but not all of it.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 1, 2012 18:34:52 GMT -5
Michael, I second kjones’ wish to hear more about your thoughts on Schippell possibly being set up as a fall guy. The people he rented his shack out to—Gerardi and Maran (FBI spellings here)—had lived near the Lindberghs in Hopewell, Englewood, AND North Haven, Maine—and while I can buy 2 locations, 3 really reduces the chances of coincidence. When you add to the mix of facts that the baby’s body was found a few hundred feet from Schippell’s shack, with its burlap bags and Bucks Brothers chisels, you just have to wonder if somebody was trying to set up Schippell to take the fall as a patsy. Of course, Gerardi and Maran would inevitably draw attention to themselves that way. By the way, you wouldn't have pictures of Gerardi and Maran, would you?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 1, 2012 18:40:42 GMT -5
Cerrardi is one of those "tangents" I was talking about. Others would be that Schippell was a "Local," said to have hated Lindbergh, had the means to carry out this crime, and the child was found near his place. He would claim that someone had buried something, then dug it up on his property. He showed this spot to both J. J. McNally, and Ray Sanderson (both PIs). He believed that's where the child had been at one time. He claimed some of his tools were missing to include his chisels. Fenton is another name I am interested in and he is connected to Schippell. The fact Waxey Gordon told Clarke that a "Local Mad-Man" committed the crime and killed the child is very interesting. Here we have a NY Gangster telling the Press this and not the Press injecting/forcing their theories to him to see what he thought which was the case everywhere else. This lump, while a "Catch-22" for Condon is also one for us as well. It places all Researchers in the unenviable position of either believing Condon or disbelieving him. Once committed, its hard to justify the opposite in a later place. Personally, I believe Condon made this up for the purposes of being able to claim someone wasn't John - even if he was. Compare Schippells picture to Hauptmann's then explain how Condon said Schippell did not look like John, yet, he claimed Steiner did! One of the problems is the Berryman Sketch mutates. What do I mean? Well, here is the original, which by the way, even Jim Fisher got right: Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 1, 2012 18:48:10 GMT -5
I'll check. Even if I don't I believe the Archives would. Also, I believe Siglinde once told me that Cerardi was a Boxer. I'll have to check this too because I might be confusing him with someone else.
|
|
|
Post by wolf2 on Jun 1, 2012 19:52:07 GMT -5
dosnt it look like hauptmann? fisher got alot of things right like debating his book with other authors.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 1, 2012 20:12:15 GMT -5
I agree, Michael—very interesting. Waxey doesn’t exactly seem to have been the honest, helpful, public-spirited type. And how could he possibly know the kid was killed by a “Local Mad-Man”? His NYC crime connections wouldn’t have known THAT. Makes me wonder if Waxey was feeding the press a “red herring,” something to get people looking at a guy like Schippell. Would you happen to know on what date Waxey told this to Clarke?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2012 20:14:27 GMT -5
Michael, I have not seen a photo of Otto Steiner so I really can't comment on that point. But I will say this, Schippell and Hauptmann resemble each other but I don't think either of them resemble the Cemetary John sketch at all. The jaw is too long, the nose is too thin and the lips are too thin also.
I am still of the opinion that Dr. Condon had no intention of ever identifying Cemetary John. He only identified Hauptmann because he was forced to by authorities. I am still trying to figure out Condon. The first book I ever read was Waller's Kidnap. He was a troubling figure for me then and still is. You need to strip down everything he says to try to get the morsel of truth that is buried in his rhetoric.
I read somewhere that Schippell was in the bronx the night of the kidnapping. Do you know if this is so?
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 1, 2012 20:44:09 GMT -5
Sorry, I’m still thinking on that Schippell-as-patsy angle. He owned a green Paige sedan, and when Henry Ellerson left Highfields that afternoon, he said that a green Ford coupe was blocking the driveway, such that it was difficult to get around and he honked at it. I realize there is a distinction between these two cars in appearance, but nonetheless, it makes me wonder if that car Ellerson encountered could have been an attempt to establish another red herring. The real kidnappers were clandestine—but the car that Ellerson encountered almost seems to have been “in your face.” Putting a car where Ellerson would have a hard time getting around it—it’s almost like they wanted to give him something he would remember. I realize it could have been a coincidence, that sightseers did come by to gawk at Highfields. Still, it was 3PM, not long before the snatch was put in motion.
|
|
|
Post by kjones on Jun 1, 2012 20:54:55 GMT -5
Sometime back Dena posted some interesting info on the Cerardi thread. According to the information she had, he was at one time a boxer. Off topic here, Michael have you ever seen a picture of or have a physical discription of Robert Conroy?
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jun 1, 2012 23:34:40 GMT -5
Sorry, but could someone fill me in on who Waxey Gordon is, and also, as to this Schippell guy: He believed the baby was buried on his property at one point? Is there any more detail on this? And a chisel was missing from a set he owned too. Was it ever determined if this missing chisel was the same size and make as the one found at Highfields? If so, it certainly does look like someone was trying to frame him. Either way, given all this, I'm surprised his name didn't come up more. I mean, circumstancially at least, Schippell seems to have had almost as much on him to indicate involvement as Hauptmann did. And Michael, that original sketch of CJ does not resemble Hauptmann (or even Fisch) to me. There was another one I was thinking of that showed the subject at a couple different angles and which looks a little more like Hauptmann, but, then again, if these sketches are based on Condon's descriptions, I don't know that I'd put any stock in them, one way or the other. God, what a jackass that guy was...
|
|
|
Post by kjones on Jun 2, 2012 4:09:56 GMT -5
On a lighter note, I have always wanted three of what I call "history mysteries" to be solved before I move on to greener pastures. Who was Deep Throat? What happened to Amelia Earhart? and well I think you all know the third one. Wow, incredible news about Amelia Earhart. It sounds like we now know what happened to her and Fred. Of course, Deep Throat was revealed years ago. So thats two down, and one to go.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 2, 2012 8:15:52 GMT -5
LJ, Wikipedia actually has a pretty good bio of Waxey Gordon. Seems he was called “Waxey” because he could steal a wallet from your pocket so easily, it was like it was covered with wax. Nice characters we run into on this board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2012 8:21:10 GMT -5
I have wondered why that green car was sitting at the entrance to the Lindbergh driveway too. If this car had kidnappers in it why would they take such a chance of being seen in the middle of the afternoon. Do you think they were going to check out the driveway like a dry run because they were going to use it that night to drop off the perps and ladder?
If Schippell was not at his home, perhaps the kidnappers used his place as the stopping point after taking Charlie and buried him on that property. If Charlie died as a result of the snatch or was already dead when taken from the nursery, they would have wanted to dispose of the body quickly. Why not use Schippell's place if they knew he was not at home.
Would anyone know what mile radius the authorities used to search for Charlie? Did they extend it as far as Charlie Schippell property?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 2, 2012 9:04:56 GMT -5
Schippell is wearing the uniform of an Australian soldier, notice the slouch hat and insignia.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 2, 2012 10:00:23 GMT -5
Amy, I confused Steiner for Simek. This happens to me a lot since they both identified many people. Perrone identified Steiner and Condon Simek. Here is a mugshot of Steiner: Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 2, 2012 10:58:00 GMT -5
This is from his unpublished manuscript: I went to his house, 920 West End Avenue, managed to get by all the bodyguards and was ushered into his apartment.
Whereupon we went into his library. I said, "Waxey, I'm confused. I thought we were doing some guys a favor but nothing happened. I'm going to tell you the whole story and you tell me what's going on." I did.
Then Waxey told me, "George, you don't have to worry about that baby. That baby is dead. He was kidnapped by a local maniac who wanted revenge on the Lindberghs. The gangs had nothing to do with it. (This was weeks before the body was found in the immediate vicinity of the Lindbergh estate, such finding apparently substantiating completely Waxey's estimate of the case.) I believe so. Something about medical trip which seemed to call off looking into him (officially). I just can't remember whether I have or not. If a picture exists at the Archives then I have - but its so hard to remember unless I made a copy for my files. Conroy's case I didn't unfortunately. Mark Falzini's new book is going to have countless new photos for us to pour over. I am anxiously awaiting it. You are talking about the one everyone sees now. It's like the other one didn't exist - but it does. That too has a side view as well. I can't say where the "new" one came from but I can say what the original one looked like. Gordon is also mentioned in the FBI Summary. Just look him up in the index. According to Schwarzkopf: among persons investigated were: all persons living within a radius of five miles of the Lindbergh home,...... (April 7, 1932) I don't know what to make of this. In 1932 he was 45. Prior to the War he lived in NJ for 7 years. When he was interviewed he said he had been gassed while in foreign service during the War. He says he enlisted in the naval reserve then in 1918 he was a 2nd class cook on the S. S. Leviathen. Squire Johnson would claim in his 1936 Report to Gov. Hoffman that Schippell was lying about his service. I have seen a picture of Schippell in a Naval Uniform in which he looks about 30ish which would be about right. In the photo above he looks extremely young I would guess early 20s maybe even younger.
|
|
mairi
Lieutenant
Posts: 548
|
Post by mairi on Jun 2, 2012 11:00:58 GMT -5
Shippell has always been interesting to me, too. If, indeed the child was first buried there, it would seem to point again to a local who knew the family would be away. It was also described (somewhere) that around the hole the trees were "marked". Can't think of why about the trees but then what do I know? Interesting that he said the baby was dead - but then again it seems there were others who suspected the same.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 2, 2012 15:30:18 GMT -5
Well, it's definitely an Aussie uniform he's wearing and I very much doubt he would have been gassed serving aboard a ship so unless he's completely making up all of this, I'd say he seved with the Aussies during the war and then enlisited in the Navy.
|
|
|
Post by pzb63 on Jun 2, 2012 23:39:33 GMT -5
I've done a quick search and here are several Schippell's in the Australian Army records. From what I can see three are possibile matches, two being are American citizens. There is no Charles but several Rudolphs. I'm (hopefully) uploading an image of an enlistment form for the most likely candidate of these three- Michael if this is worth pursuing I can try to find out more. Cheers
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 3, 2012 8:26:24 GMT -5
Here; recordsearch.naa.gov.au/NameSearch/Interface/ItemsListing.aspxNote; I did not limit the search for Americans, just the name Schippell. This is very odd and I wonder if Schippell is his real name. Why would someone travel all the way to Australia to enlist in the AIF, fight and survive some of the toughest battles of WWI and end up in a shack in the Sourland Mountains of NJ? OK, here is part of the answer; Descendants of Karl Friedrich Schippel Generation No. 4
6. CHARLES4 SCHIPPELL (RUDOLPH FRIEDRICH WILHELM3, CARL FRIEDRICH WILHELM AUGUST2 SCHIPPEL, KARL FRIEDRICH1) was born 18 Apr 1888 in St. Paul, Minnesota, and died 1948 in Bronx, NY. He married CHARLOTTE W. KLIEMANN 07 Mar 1920 in New York.
More About CHARLES SCHIPPELL: Military service: U.S. Navy Child of CHARLES SCHIPPELL and CHARLOTTE KLIEMANN is: 14. i. CHARLOTTE5 SCHIPPELL, b. 1921, NYC.
7. CAROLINE "LILY"4 SCHIPPELL (RUDOLPH FRIEDRICH WILHELM3, CARL FRIEDRICH WILHELM AUGUST2 SCHIPPEL, KARL FRIEDRICH1) was born 1889 in New York City?, and died 1978 in Windham, NY. She married PATRICK MADIGAN in NewYork. He died in New York. Child of CAROLINE SCHIPPELL and PATRICK MADIGAN is: 15. i. PAT5 MADIGAN, b. 1927, New York; d. 1992, Florida.
8. AUGUST4 SCHIPPELL (RUDOLPH FRIEDRICH WILHELM3, CARL FRIEDRICH WILHELM AUGUST2 SCHIPPEL, KARL FRIEDRICH1) was born 1890 in NYC, and died Abt. 1954 in VA Hospital, St. Petersburg, Florida.
More About AUGUST SCHIPPELL: Military service: U.S. Army, served in France where he was gassed during WW1 Child of AUGUST SCHIPPELL is: i. BARBARA5 SCHIPPELL, b. Abt. 1925, Windham, NY; m. MR. HOWARD. Notice that August is also listed in the Australian index as the brother of Rudolph Fred William Schippell of NYC. So is Charles actually Rudolph ?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 3, 2012 8:50:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 3, 2012 8:58:17 GMT -5
Great work to both Pam & Kevin!
It looks like when the Police took the items and pictures from Schippell's home in Mount Rose the picture was actually of his Brother, who he looks like, and misidentified as his picture.
Mystery Solved (at least as far as I am concerned).
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 3, 2012 10:47:01 GMT -5
One thing I have noticed in all this searching, there are a lot of Germans living in the Sourland/Hopewell area who also live in or have strong connections to the Bronx and employed in construction . You know there is such a thing as geographic profiling and although not 100% it is fairly accurate in determining a criminal's strike zone. I know most people seem to be concerned about the need to have someone on the inside at Highfields. I really don't for a number of reasons, but I do believe that someone involved in this crime had a comfort zone in the area of the home. Maybe you have to know the area to understand this fully. All I know is that there was an awful lot of familiarity with all of the back roads and trails and that's not something you get by driving down there once or twice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2012 9:33:35 GMT -5
Michael, thanks for the picture of Steiner. Need I say that there is no resemblance to either the sketch of CJ or to Hauptmann. Did Perrone really get that good of a look at the man who gave him the letter to deliver? What made the police think that the letter man was CJ?
Would you know if any of the people that Dr. Condon and Perrone selected from pictures looked anything like each other? If not it would indicate that they did not see the same person that night wouldn"t it?
Kevkon's observation of the strong connections between Hopewell area and the Bronx is a good one. Having a local person(s) assist in this crime makes alot of sense to me. They would have been needed to help plan the roads to use since many were not clearly marked. Otherwise someone would have needed to live in the area for awhile to gain that knowledge.
I am concerned though about how many people can be added to this mix before it becomes too many. I would think that the more people you have involved the harder it is not to end up being found out.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Aug 17, 2014 6:00:42 GMT -5
The video earlier in the thread was unique as it seemed to be the first time many saw the actual footprints seen by those on the scene. Here, in this clip, you'll see a much closer (and HD) version of that same print at 1:33: www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZIcAdZWIO4
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Aug 17, 2014 8:26:38 GMT -5
The video earlier in the thread was unique as it seemed to be the first time many saw the actual footprints seen by those on the scene. Here, in this clip, you'll see a much closer (and HD) version of that same print at 1:33: www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZIcAdZWIO4It's a great clip and thanks for posting. However we have to be careful of this because, when it comes to the footprint evidence, timing was everything. Some Reporters got there too late to get shots of the real prints and created their own for pictures and/or footage. So it's hard to know if this one shot is legit or not. Certainly the ransom note they show was bogus, although it's possible they weren't aware it was at the time - but I can say they weren't sure either.
|
|
Charles's silent granddaughter
Guest
|
Post by Charles's silent granddaughter on Apr 27, 2020 15:55:07 GMT -5
My Grandmother Elsie was of German descent and was a cleaning lady for "rich people", as she called it. She was always secretive to us about details of who she cleaned homes for, but I know she always told us the truth. My Grandmother has a photograph of "Lindbergh" in his plane on long island. It's a picture close up..like the photographer was standing just a few feet from his plane..and another photo of children, and a young Grandma, sitting on his plane. (I think my great Grandmother took that photograph). I know the general public wasn't permitted to get too close to "grandpa" or his plane. I wholeheartedly believe my mother Carol is Charles Lindbergh's daughter..they even look alike. I'd love to prove that through a DNA analysis once and for all. My mother is going to be 83 this year..I hope a direct decendent of Charles Lindbergh will come forward and provide a DNA sample to either prove or disprove my theory, as my mom is up in years and wants to know if her Father is indeed Charles Lindbergh. Throughout my mother's life, she never knew the truth about who her father was..although Grandma's three other children knew who their father's were. A secret my Grandmother took to her grave. Why the secrecy? Who was so important that she felt the need to protect even years after his death..and her own death? It must of been someone very important..someone in high standing with the public, and possibly she had knowledge of what really happened to baby Charles? Before my grandmother died, she kept yelling out "murderer!".. loudly. I feel she knew that the father of her baby was involved with the kidnapping and murder of his son Charles Lindbergh Jr. I have no proof to share with anyone, just the truth of what was told to me from my Aunts that were at Grandma's beside at that time. They couldn't make heads or tails of what grandma meant. I figured it out later as I put together the search for my mother's natural father..."Grandpa Charles "..as I refer to him. My mother was born in 1937..five years after baby charles was murdered. Grandma used to take trips up to Vermont sometimes..I wonder why? Yes. Charles visited there too sometimes...what a coincedence.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Apr 27, 2020 16:44:32 GMT -5
No need to worry. You are not Charles Lindbergh's granddaughter. The Lindberghs left the United States for England in December 1935 and did not return to the United States until December 1937.
|
|
Charles's silent granddaughter
Guest
|
Post by Charles's silent granddaughter on Apr 27, 2020 17:11:33 GMT -5
That's right they did, however, Charles made SEVERAL trips back to the United States without his family. In fact, Charles had THREE families..(with children) My grandmother must of been someone he dated during his trips back here to the United States. I'm convinced of that and will never waiver from my beliefs until a DNA test proves me wrong..and nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Apr 27, 2020 17:38:30 GMT -5
Unfortunately, I know you'll never waiver in your misguided belief. Lindbergh made no trips back to the U.S. between '35 and '37. Have you read Anne Lindbergh's published diaries? She covers the entire two years and would surely have mentioned her husband's absence during that time. And there would be ships' manifests confirming his travels. Why not accept the fact that your mother's father may have been just a good, ordinary guy, or even a scoundrel? He certainly wasn't CAL.
|
|