Did Lindbergh’s arrival alter the kidnapping?

[kjones]

Amy I really like your idea about stowing the ladder at the gatehouse. The noise Anne heard may have been the kidnappers being dropped off to retrieve the ladder. Didn't Lindbergh make the drive down the driveway looking for the baby even before the police arrived. As you said Amy once the police arrived evidence may have been destroyed. I too cannot imagine carrying a ladder/and or baby across the field to Featherbed Lane on such a dark/windy cold night. Does anyone know where the thumbguard was found in relation to the gatehouse?

[lightningjew]

I think stowing the ladder at the gatehouse is an interesting idea, but I don't think a car arriving there to pick it up would've been audible in the main house--too far away. I do wonder, though, about that tire sound Anne Lindbergh said she heard prior to Lindbergh getting home: Could it have been the kidnappers dropping off the ladder? Picking it up? Though it seems unlikely, could it have been completely unrelated to the crime (someone having lost their way)? Or could she have been mistaken about hearing that sound altogether? And I too have a hard time imagining carrying the baby across a half mile of open country to Featherbed, which is why using those access roads as an escape route is starting to make more and more sense to me (along with the footprints leading away from the house in that direction, as well as the ladder being found between the house and the mouth of the access road).

[kevkon]

May 7, 2012 20:15:17 GMT -5 wolf2 said:

kevkon, who in there right mind would anybody get involved in a big lie of writing ransom notes and have the negotiations in a cemetery where you can easily get caught. i dont see any real proof that people helped him. the footprints could have would have and should have. it dosnt mean he had help

So you think Hauptmann wasn't in his "right mind"?
What makes you think Hauptmann was not the help?

[Michael]

At first, I thought the abandoned house was much closer to the Lindberghs' house, because there were supposed to be footprints leading to the chicken coop near the abandoned house. Did investigators really follow footprints all the way down to where it says “gatehouse”? Or have I gotten my chicken coops mixed up?(BR)

I have always believed the "abandoned house" mentioned was the house the Contractors had used which later became the Gatehouse for the NJSP. I've seen it referred to in the reports as an "abandoned house" once or twice. When Kevin pointed out the chicken coups I must admit that I still cannot find them in the photo - so I am assuming that's where they are based upon his post. Maybe I am wrong so I will defer to Kevin concerning this in order to clear it up.

[wolf2]

mike, when you read the newspaper writer lorena hickoks unpublished chapter of a book that never came out, she says she went to a couple of abandon houses, iwill have to read it again. sue campbell dug that one up

[kevkon]

I had a picture of the house and coops, now I can't find it. I know there is a seller on EBay that had one listed awhile ago.

[lightningjew]

Just to be clear, we're not talking about the gatehouse right by the mouth of the drive, but an abandoned house with chicken coops around it, on Hopewell-Amwell Rd., near the point where the access roads connected to that main road? Also, Michael, I had a somewhat random question: Do you know when the Lindberghs moved out of Highfields and for how long it sat empty?

[kevkon]

The gatehouse and the abandoned house are one and the same.

Michael, do you think this clip is showing the actual footprints?
www.efootage.com/stock-footage/493/Lindbergh_Baby_Kidnapping/

Here's the "gatehouse". The coops are behind and to the left. These were taken around 1940 when the ownership was transferred.


Here's another taken at the time of the kidnapping;

[Deleted]

Kevkon the pictures are great. You must have quite a collection on hand! The link to the clip you provided has very interesting too. If they are kidnapper footprints, they look like they would have been good evidence. I don't recall them every being used in court against Hauptmann. Guess his feet weren't the right size!

[Michael]

Michael, do you think this clip is showing the actual footprints? (Kevin)

I'm confident they were prints Reporters filmed on March 1st but I don't know if they're from the construction road, the yard, or somewhere else. That's one of the big problems we face here, and the Governor faced too back in during his re-investigation which continued even after he was no longer Governor believe it or not.

Also, Michael, I had a somewhat random question: Do you know when the Lindberghs moved out of Highfields and for how long it sat empty? (LJ)

They left Hopewell on May 21, 1932. This wasn't permanent. They returned for the Curtis Trial at the end of June but had every intention of continuing to live there and for High Fields to remain their home.

On July 6, 1932 its back to Englewood so that Anne will be nearer to Dr. Hawk when the time comes to deliver the new baby. According to Anne's Diary (Hour of Gold Hour of Lead p296) She and Elizabeth are planning the "new wing" on August 12, 1932 which signifies their plan to stay permanently. And on the 17th entry it says Lindbergh is discussing plans for High Fields to become a "Children's Home."

This transition takes a long time to complete.

On July 5, 1933 the deed transfers from Anne Morrow Lindbergh to "High Fields" (an association not for pecuniary profit) of which Lindbergh is President. It wasn't until May 16, 1941 that the State accepted this "gift." Strangely enough, in December of '42 the New York Times reported the State's intention to make the home a treatment center for women with VD. Apparently this never came to pass, but in early 1950 the State announced plans for it to become a "Boy's Home."

During this lengthy time the house always had a "CareTaker" so it was never truly vacant. In fact there is an interesting story about the CareTaker and some men the Governor sent over to take measurements from the ground to the Kidnap Window (April 1936) but I am starting to take this to another level so I will end my response here.

[kevkon]

If the shot of the prints is in the same location as the detectives looking at the ground, I'd say this is about 150 ft SE of the house given the Cedar trees.
They certainly do look like prints made with stocking feet and I'm surprised at how good they are. Amazing that the news corp records this and the NJSP doesn't. Well, maybe not.

[kjones]

kevkon, thank you for the pictures they are amazing. Do you know where the thumbguard was found on the driveway? If one was heading toward the house was it before or after the turn onto the access road?

[lightningjew]

Out of curiosity, what's the "interesting story" about the caretaker?

[Michael]

Out of curiosity, what's the "interesting story" about the caretaker? (LJ)

I've spent the better part of the morning searching for the Reports I know exist but I haven't found them. Part of the problem is "pulling" files then "pulling" reports for the project I am working on - things get messy and disorganized real fast unfortunately. In any event, don't laugh, but I can be somewhat of an Idiot Savant when it comes to certain random facts, like that the CareTaker's name in question was Joseph Lyons (I said don't laugh) during the incident which occurred sometime in April '36. Unfortunately, I can forget things that I should remember too so bear that in mind as well - its why I always would like to consult the documentation first.

According to Hoffman's Liberty Article (this is from his unedited manuscript):

Typical of the misrepresentation of press and radio is this little incident: I wanted one morning to verify some information given me and this required the taking of a measurement of the Lindbergh estate. One of my friends, Frank Holmes, a Trenton business man, volunteered to measure this distance. In the early afternoon, with three other young friends, he drove to Hopewell, went to the door of the Lindbergh home, identified the party, and asked for permission to take the measurement. When my name was mentioned, the caretaker excitedly ordered the young men off the grounds. The party left; the caretaker hurried to the phone to tell Prosecutor Anthony Hauck of Hunterdon County about the visit. The afternoon papers and the evening radio commentators advised the public that "Four Hoffman Thugs Attack Aged Caretaker at Lindbergh Home."

From memory, Hoffman had cleared access to Highfields a long time since and so instructed these men what to do. These men told Hoffman that they approached the house, knocked on the door then asked Lyons for permission to make the measurements. Lyons seemed perfectly fine at first until hearing they were sent by Hoffman. At that point he went crazy ordering them off the property. These men claimed they got into the car and while attempting to leave Lyons was now trying to stop them so they drove around and departed. According to Lyons he was assaulted ( I cannot remember how). The NJSP investigated the incident, and I recall Lyons saying there were 5 men involved, that when he ordered them off, 3 of these men began to argue with him.

During the investigation they were showing Lyons pictures. They were trying to get him to identify one of the PIs Fawcett had employed (Walsh) but instead he identified Chief Walters (Ex-Chief of Trenton PD) as one of those men giving him a hard time.

[Deleted]

Michael, interesting post about the caretaker. Was Joseph Lyons employed by Lindbergh? I think you said in another post that the house wasn't turned over to the state until 1941?

I am reading Gardner's book "The Case That Never Dies". In the chapter titled Betty Gow's Journey it talks about the footprints Trooper DeGaetano, Trooper Bornmann and Lindbergh followed down the access road to the abandoned house with the chicken coops at the entry to the Lindbergh estate (Kevkon's photo). They said these prints were made by someone wearing rubber boots or overshoes. Dog prints were also encountered along certain sections of this route. The prints crossed the road and then ended there near impressions that appear to be made by an automobile. These overshoe prints do not go to Featherbed Lane.

A couple pages over Gardner tells of another search of the Lindbergh grounds made by a man named Oscar Bush, a local resident who is known in the area for his tracking skills. He was taken to look at the prints mentioned above but then the text says that Bush found another set of tracks made by two people starting at the point where the ladder was left continuing through the nearby open field to Featherbed Lane. The tracks end there and evidence of a vehicle(s) on Featherbed Lane is found.

If I am interrupting this correctly, there are two different footprint trails leading away from the kidnap area going two different directions and both ending up with evidence of being taken from the scene in cars. Please correct me if I am getting this mixed up.

If, however, this evidence points to two pickup points, how are we to determine which car took Charlie away from the scene??

Sorry this post is so long. Gardner's book is very good but discloses so much information that I think it shall take me 6 weeks at least to get through it.

[lightningjew]

This had always been my impression too, that there were two sets of footprints--one leading to the gatehouse/chicken coops on Hopewell-Amwell, the other leading in another direction to Featherbed. Looked at in connection with the eyewitness testimony of various sightings of cars over the course of that afternoon, the evidence would seem to indicate a minimum two kidnappers, each with their own car. But what I can't figure out is the lack of footprints to the house. Maybe there was a trail that just got overlooked or obliterated when the crime scene wasn't secured...?

[kjones]

Is the only piece of evidence that puts the baby in anyone location the thumbguard? It is found on the driveway. I know some believe it was placed there at a latter date, I too find it hard to believe that it had been overlooked but maybe it was. Let's leave that discussion for another time. I'm stilll asking if anyone knows where the thumbguard was found in relation to the access road?

[lightningjew]

I believe it was found in the middle of the drive, near the entrance, closer to the road than the house. And it wasn't just some little thing that could've gotten dirty and overlooked entirely, mistaken for a stone or something. It was a large metal contraption that fit over the whole hand, fastened in place with shoelaces, so it seems odd that no one discovered this earlier had it been there all along. At the same time, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me to plant it either. I mean, if it was put there later as some sort of signal or prompt to pay the ransom, why not just mail it (as was done with the sleeping suit)? After all, police were using the whole property as a command center; the area was crawling with cops for weeks after the kidnapping, so I don't know why anyone would risk sneaking back there to plant it.

[mairi]

May be a reach-maybe not.
Someone way back suggested the possibility that a dog picked up the thumbguard (from elsewhere)and happened to drop it on the driveway.

Anne did not see the thumbguard applied that night. Did Gow not put it on - but knew she should have and to cover up for it later dropped it there(?)

Such good photos, Kevkon.

Along the driveway are we considering Ollie's footprints?

[kevkon]

The thumb guard actually kinda reminds me of a champagne cage;
www.magazineart.org/main.php/v//healthandmedicine/medicalequipment/Baby+Alice+Thumb+Guard+-1931A.jpg.html

I don't think there is anyway to tell how it ended up where it did, but I do believe it indicates that the access road to the front drive was the actual escape route. I don't know what faith I put in Oscar Bush. Not because I don't think him capable, it's just that a lot had gone on prior to his arrival and for what ever reason I have never seen anything substantial from him.

[kjones]

The footprint in this video is unusual. It appears to have been photographed in the day, so who knows by that time if it really belonged to the kidnappers. I too have mixed feeling about Oscar Bush. According to Gardner, Bush didn't get to the scene until 0400. I would guess by then that there were a whole lot of footprints to follow. .,http://lindberghandamerica.com/2012/03/02/lindbergh-baby-kidnapping-newsreel-march-3-1932/

[kjones]

Oops, lets try again.
lindberghandamerica.com/2012/03/02/lindbergh-baby-kidnapping-newsreel-march-3-1932/

[lightningjew]

Looking at the ladder rails at about 1:26-1:28 in that newsreel, it seems as if they don't fit into the shutter louvers. At least, the rails of the top section don't look like they do (not wide enough). We've discussed this elsewhere, so was it the next section down that fit into the louvers?

[kevkon]

Great video! Talk about getting cold feet.
There is no way someone is walking all the way to Featherbed (1/2 mi.) in stocking soon to be bare feet over rocky fields. I don't know if Bush was just misunderstood, I heard he was not liked. I'm sure Michael can expound.
LJ, I think it's just the viewing angle, the top section does fit between the shutter stiles. Each shutter is about 16" wide, the top ladder section is 11" wide. The stiles are about 2" ea.

[Deleted]

Great video clip kjones. The foot impression looks clearly like a stocking foot without a shoe on. I, too, cannot see how someone could walk all the way to Featherbed Lane without anything but socks on!

I don't know anything about Oscar Bush so I hope that Michael can enlighten us about him. However, the footprints leading to Featherbed Lane are the ones that have been used to show the escape route from the Lindbergh house. How do we keep the accepted version of the crime "intact" without the use of this print evidence then? The prints leading to the abandoned house along the access road are the ones that were discovered first yet these were apparently disregarded for some reason and the Featherbed Lane ones the accepted exit route. How was this decided and by whom? I think the access road makes much more sense as the road used by the kidnapper(s) especially if you are inclined to the single kidnapper theory. Featherbed Lane shows two sets of prints leading to it. The thumbguard found near the Lindbergh drive entrance also puts Charlie at that scene if the thumbguard wasn't planted later.

Kevkon, only two sections of the ladder were actually used for the kidnapping. What do you suppose the purpose was of the investigators using all three sections then?

[kevkon]

Without a doubt, I would go with the initial print finds of DeGaetano if only because the pollution hadn't yet started. I do believe that there is some confusion regarding the Featherbed tracks and I believe this was the starting point.

Kevkon, only two sections of the ladder were actually used for the kidnapping. What do you suppose the purpose was of the investigators using all three sections then? Amy

Probably because they quickly realized that the manouvers required to get in and out with the child are just not possible from a ladder that falls 30" below and 15" to the right of the window and without assistance.

[lightningjew]

I thought it could be the viewing angle, but I wasn't sure. But if only two sections of the ladder were used, then I wonder what would be the point of building that third, top section that fit into the louvers? I mean, if the rails of that section did fit in the louvers, then the kidnappers would've had to have gone to the house previously in order to take measurements. They would've realized at that point that only two sections of a ladder would need to be built. Or were the shutters of a standard size that anyone could've known without having actually been to the house before? As to that stocking footprint: As out of context as it is (they don't show a trail of similar prints or their direction or anything), I guess that print would nevertheless constitute evidence, but it seems to me that a stocking footprint with that kind of definition would be much more identifiable and incriminating than a shoe print (a pair of shoes can always be discarded later), so what would be the logic of the kidnapper(s) removing their shoes to walk in the mud? Anyway, I thought socks were worn over shoes and that those were the prints left behind, not stocking footprints that indicated shoes were removed...

[Michael]

I believe someone asked for a Chrono of movement and I promised to post if I found one. I can't recall if I ever did and since I found one I am going to post it:

Attachments:

[Michael]

Michael, interesting post about the caretaker. Was Joseph Lyons employed by Lindbergh? I think you said in another post that the house wasn't turned over to the state until 1941? (Amy)

Directly or indirectly he was.

If I am interrupting this correctly, there are two different footprint trails leading away from the kidnap area going two different directions and both ending up with evidence of being taken from the scene in cars. Please correct me if I am getting this mixed up. (Amy)

You're not getting mixed up and thankfully Lloyd, once again, sets the record straight concerning what the actual historical record was. Many Authors ignore so many things and I think its because they just weren't willing to do the proper research in order to get where Lloyd has.

So now exists our dilemma - on top of the original one.

This had always been my impression too, that there were two sets of footprints--one leading to the gatehouse/chicken coops on Hopewell-Amwell, the other leading in another direction to Featherbed. (LJ)

Part of our problem is figuring out whether or not there was a double set in one place but not in the other. The NJSP "trail" to the chicken coups seems to have been (2) sets, yet an argument could be made there was only (1). Bush is credited with seeing (2) sets leading off to Featherbed Lane, yet, I have found sources that say too his claims to have only seen one set.

(If you go to the "Members Section" I have some sources linked up that mention Bush. Namely Brant & Renaud's book, and the FBI Summary Report. Last I checked the links have not broken so snatch up what you can while you can.....)

lindberghkidnap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=source

But what I can't figure out is the lack of footprints to the house. Maybe there was a trail that just got overlooked or obliterated when the crime scene wasn't secured...? (LJ)

They approached from a place where they couldn't be detected - that is the only explanation I can give. I do not believe the evidence was obliterated because the immediate area was searched before something like that could have happened in my opinion. After wards, Troopers were posted to keep the Reporters away from stomping the grounds. After certain footprints were deemed important, they were either casted or "boxes" were placed over them to protect them. At that time Reporters seemed to be allowed in assisting the Police in searching for clues. That's my position, and of course we've heard other stories, but I believe that came after what I've outlined above.

I'm stilll asking if anyone knows where the thumbguard was found in relation to the access road? (KJ)

It's a good question KJ and one that needs to be answered because that clue is a piece of the puzzle to this whole footprint evidence.

Betty Gow gives (2) answers: After the child was found murdered she said it was on the driveway 50 ft from the Gatehouse. During the trial preparation statement she said it was on the driveway about 300 ft from the entrance.

The driveway was one place everyone searched, to include the scores of Reporters who were on scene, and all of recollections from those who were there all seemed to have voiced their belief that if could not have been there at the time. I am not saying it wasn't but there seems to have been hundreds of eyes looking for something, anything - just like this - well before Betty accidentally stumbled upon it 4 weeks later.

According to Gardner, Bush didn't get to the scene until 0400. I would guess by then that there were a whole lot of footprints to follow. (KJ)

Lloyd is right about the timing of Bush's arrival. But its important to note that Bush was a trapper and had some skill in this line. He's looking at grass etc. - certain things a normal person wouldn't know about. It was said he was 1/2 Indian which, back then, counted for something in relation to this ability.

(FYI - if "Bush" was a variation of "Busch" it could be possible because of the area's history where many of the Hessians who were defeated at Trenton married the Native Americans and took up residences in Zion and the surrounding areas. I haven't the time to look into this so simply consider it a possibility - for what its worth.)

I don't know what faith I put in Oscar Bush. Not because I don't think him capable, it's just that a lot had gone on prior to his arrival and for what ever reason I have never seen anything substantial from him. (Kevin)

The major problem with Bush is that no official report concerning his findings exists at the NJSP Archives. What does exist are investigations concerning his possible connection to the crime. So many people were bad mouthing the Bush family, and specifically Oscar himself, they had to look into the possibility. He was cleared.

Most of what we know concerning Bush's findings are in the newspapers and books on the case. (Brant & Renaud's book is one of them).

Attachments:

[wolf2]

my fbi reports has things on bush also