|
Post by xjd on Jul 31, 2012 13:23:38 GMT -5
(please excuse if this has been addressed somewhere before) was wondering about Condon's life after the trial was over, there doesn't seem to be much info on that. i have read he traveled to Peru or some such.
how did he afford that? other than his own book, have there been any books/articles related solely to Jafsie? we have only Condon's word that there was a CJ, CAL only heard someone wave & shout, and the reports of "look outs" walking by are kinda dubious.
yes, Condon seemed like a patriotic pompous old ass, but sometimes i think his personality is almost over done, if you know what i mean.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jul 31, 2012 21:04:08 GMT -5
He went to Panama. And so did Andy Dutch. There was a Liberty Series but I think its basically what's in his book. I remember it being very similar so that was my first impression conclusion.
Was there a "CJ?"
Well there was "someone." The Cemetery Guard, Robert Riehl was an eyewitness to someone talking to someone else. Condon claimed he was one of those men, and the other was CJ.
Condon was a grand stander. He was known because he forced himself on people. Locally, he was referred to as "Windy Jack" and wasn't thought of as portrayed by most of the books.
I can't think of anyone more I wouldn't want acting as a neutral go-between if I were the Kidnappers. But if this guy was on "our" side then he'd give them fits trying to figure out what the hell was going on.
And he did.
|
|
|
Post by jdanniel on Aug 3, 2012 16:11:44 GMT -5
After the execution, Condon did a one-man show in various theaters.
It was ostensibly a vaudeville act. But he never, at any point, submitted his name for any portion of reward money.
Presumably the fame, notoriety, and attention was reward enough.
That, plus the possibility that his alleged past indiscretions would be exposed. Law enforcement (the FBI, if not the state police) must have had something on him. Being exposed as a child molester--even an "exonerated" one--would have been bad enough. But being viewed as a hypocrite would have probably been poison to Jafsie.
Jd
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2015 21:56:57 GMT -5
I have been reading Gov. Hoffman's series of articles he did for Liberty Magazine. They are really well written and have lots of factual information in them about the case that wasn't available to the public at the time his articles were published in 1938. The one I read today talked about Doctor Condon and "John" (CJ). I thought I would post here some things that Condon said about CJ that Gov. Hoffman mentions in one of his articles. Condon told conflicting things about "John" and, like the title of this thread asks, his variations on things about CJ make you wonder if CJ was real or a creation of Doctor Condon's.
Some Of The Many Things Doctor Condon Said About "John"
AGE - 30 to 35 years
WEIGHT - Condon gave estimates from 150 lbs to 165 lbs in 1932. Compare that to Hauptmann's weight of 175 lbs in 1932 according to his application for an automobile driver's license.
EYES - To Inspector Walsh and Detective Avon, Condon said the eyes were blue-gray. To Officers Keaton and Moffat, Condon said the eyes were almond shaped and quite a distance from the nose, never opened wide . . . rather semi closed . . . not big eyes. To the Bronx Grand Jury, Condon said the eyes were separated a little from the nose such as a Chinese or Japanese. In Condon's Liberty article in 1936, Condon said the eyes were deep set.
HAIR - Condon continually said that John wore a hat which he kept pulled down over his face. In spite of this, Condon would say that John had a "high" or "prominent" forehead, and that John's hair was "dirty blond" or "medium light." I wonder how Condon could have seen John's forehead or the color of his hair, considering he and John were in a park after 10 p.m. at night and it was dark! And John had a hat on also.
EARS - It was not until July 1834 that Condon would reveal to Agent Sandberg of the Dept. of Justice that John's ears are unusually large; protruding somewhat.
COMPLEXION - Condon would describe John's complexion differently at times: 1 - Medium 2 - Rather light 3 - Sallow
HEIGHT - This would vary with Condon, giving John a range from 5ft 8inches to 5ft 10inches.
GLOVES - Condon would claim that John wore gloves. He would also claim that John did not wear gloves.
EYEBROWS - Condon told Agent Sandberg that John's brows were medium heavy and in a straight line across his forehead almost joining each other.
NATIONALITY - According to what Condon would say sometimes John was Scandinavian or sometimes German. When Condon was asked on June 2, 1932 "What makes you think John is a Scandinavian?" Condon replied, "He told me--and his accent."
JOHN'S LEFT HAND - On July 25th, 1934, Doctor Condon furnished the Department of Justice with a pencil sketch of the kidnapper's left hand showing a fleshy development at the base of the thumb. On this sketch, as reported by Agent Sisk, "Doctor Condon had placed an arrow pointing at the fingertips and made the following notation ... apparently concerning the fingertips ... 'just as disease, such as pulmonary inroad would cause.'" It should be mentioned that Hauptmann had a normal mechanic's hand.
JOHN'S COUGH - In Condon's June 2, 1932 statement given to Inspector Walsh, Condon says, "The skin was smooth and it gave me the impression that disease had started its inroads into his body. He had a hacking cough."
To Detective Avon Condon said that "John coughed continually." There would be numerous other times Condon would tell people that John coughed continually.
At the Trial in Flemington, Condon would testify that "John only coughed once."
JOHN"S MARITAL STATUS - Condon told Inspector Walsh that John told him he was not married. Condon told Lieutenant Finn that John told him he was married.
So what are we to believe about "John" since Condon was saying different things to different people. These are only some of the things that Gov. Hoffman would share about Condon in his Liberty articles. I will close this post with the words of Gov. Hoffman from his Liberty article of March 26, 1938:
"If Doctor Condon did not do or did not say the things I have mentioned and will mention, then the reports of the Flemington Trial, and the Bronx Grand Jury, the statements of Colonel Lindbergh, the records of the Department of Justice, the New Jersey State Police and the New York City Police are in error. I am quoting from these records, and I challenge anyone to disprove my statements."
|
|
|
Post by Ron on Nov 3, 2015 0:30:41 GMT -5
Gov Hoffman's file contains a report from one of his detectives that does nothing but compare Condon's statements on various issues over the 3-yr span from his original debrief in April 1932 thru to "Jafsie Tells All". It's amazing. The kidnappers could not have picked a better go-between. To deduce anything from Condon one must a psychologist and logician. IMO habitually exaggerates, embellishes and even fabricates to fill an inconsistency. But he only does any of these to protect or elevate C.A. Lindbergh and himself, in THAT order. For example, do you really believe that it was Condon and not Lindbergh that called the shot to leave the extra $20,000 out of the payment?
|
|
|
Post by Ron on Nov 3, 2015 0:36:53 GMT -5
It would be neat to have pictures of all the suspects that Condon identified as looking like CJ. I remember one named Simek. I think Hoffman made that point but it guess he couldn't publish faces of people alive then. Some pics might have survived or be found in outside archives.
|
|
|
Post by Ron on Nov 3, 2015 0:41:19 GMT -5
As you likely know, Condon refused to identify Hauptmann until they told him Lindbergh did.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Nov 3, 2015 10:00:14 GMT -5
To All:
Although Condon's descriptions of CJ vary somewhat, it is obvious that there were meetings of Condon with another individual or individuals in two cemeteries, and that ransom loot was handed out during the second encounter at St. Raymond's. Yes, there is a small possibility that these two men at the cemeteries were not the same, but it seems as if the handwriting on the notes directing Condon was by the same individual, thus suggesting that he did meet the same CJ twice.
CJ was most likely Jacob J. Nosovitsky. According to the caption under the photo of Noso appearing in Noel Behn's book, "Lindbergh: The Crime" (the same photo also can be seen on the Net; it is the only one of Noso I've seen, other than police mug shots), he "fit most of the physical descriptions Condon gave regarding 'Cemetery John.'" In particular the well-dressed Nosovitsky seen in this photo definitely has very large ears, and it appears as if he might have a lesion on his left thumb, in which he is holding some unknown spherical object on what seems to be a rooftop. Nosovitsky normally spoke English with a strong guttural accent (Eastern European), but from his extensive European travels, had the capability of faking other accents, such as German or Scandinavian, as well.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Nov 3, 2015 10:16:35 GMT -5
It wouldn't surprise me if Condon did remove the $20K from the ransom packet on his own initiative, since I think he was chosen by the kidnappers as a go-between, with the $20K meant as the fee for his participation--for, ostensibly, helping return CAL Jr. to his parents. Second note: "And ransom was made aus for 50000$ but now we have to take another person to it and probably have to keep the baby for a longer time as we expected. So the amound will be 70000..." I think Condon was the "another person" mentioned in that note and, again, the extra $20K was meant for him. But once he found out CAL Jr. was dead, he obviously couldn't accept any money from the kidnappers and had to wash his hands of the whole thing as much as possible. So when it came time to hand the ransom over, Condon removed the $20K, claiming he talked the kidnappers out of it. This also served the purpose of insulating the kidnappers, as the $20K contained the largest and therefore more traceable bills. Also, on paying the ransom and returning to Manhattan, Lindbergh was apparently pretty upset with Condon for not just handing the full amount over, but, that being said, I can see where that could've been an act and that it may've been Lindbergh's idea to remove the $20K, since I think he had his own reasons for not wanting the kidnappers caught.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2015 11:18:24 GMT -5
Gov Hoffman's file contains a report from one of his detectives that does nothing but compare Condon's statements on various issues over the 3-yr span from his original debrief in April 1932 thru to "Jafsie Tells All". It's amazing. The kidnappers could not have picked a better go-between. To deduce anything from Condon one must a psychologist and logician. IMO habitually exaggerates, embellishes and even fabricates to fill an inconsistency. But he only does any of these to protect or elevate C.A. Lindbergh and himself, in THAT order. For example, do you really believe that it was Condon and not Lindbergh that called the shot to leave the extra $20,000 out of the payment? I have been thinking about who called the shot on withholding that extra $20,000 ever since it came up on another thread recently. I think a case can be made that it was Lindbergh's call. Lindbergh had wanted to pay the ransom with untraceable money to begin with. He had promised the kidnappers that he and Anne would not do anything to help with their apprehension if they returned Charlie to them. Condon made the same promise in his Bronx Home News letter of March 8, 1932. I think it is very probable that Lindbergh and Condon talked when they arrived at St. Raymond's cemetery and it was decided that Condon would go to meet CJ first without the money (which he did) and explain the need to withhold the $20,000 because that packet contained $50 dollar bills that would be easier to trace when used. Condon would appear to CJ as protecting him and the others from capture and showing that Lindbergh was keeping his promise to the kidnappers not to help in their capture. CJ agreed to take only the $50,000 in the box (I suppose if we can't get $70K then we take $50K). There would need to be a cover story for why the $20,000 was withheld that could be told to Irey of the Treasury Dept. Irey was counting heavily on being able to trace those $50 dollar gold certificates and apprehend the kidnappers more easily when they would start to spend them. Condon was very obliging (of Lindbergh) and created the whole exchange story about Lindbergh not having as much money because, after all, there was a depression going on and Lindbergh was affected by it too. Condon would shoulder the responsibility of this decision for Lindbergh by claiming it was his call. This is the kind of story only Condon could make fly and it worked with officials. I can see the possibility in this scenario.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2015 11:32:26 GMT -5
To All: CJ was most likely Jacob J. Nosovitsky. According to the caption under the photo of Noso appearing in Noel Behn's book, "Lindbergh: The Crime" (the same photo also can be seen on the Net; it is the only one of Noso I've seen, other than police mug shots), he "fit most of the physical descriptions Condon gave regarding 'Cemetery John. Condon's conflicting statements about CJ 's (John) appearance made it all but impossible for the police officials to use it to apprehend anyone. It could have fit so very many people that it was useless as a tool for the police. Condon could very well have been using attributes of various people he knew and used them to create his description of John. I believe he was purposely being misleading in order to protect the perps from being apprehended.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2015 11:43:11 GMT -5
Also, on paying the ransom and returning to Manhattan, Lindbergh was apparently pretty upset with Condon for not just handing the full amount over, but, that being said, I can see where that would've been an act and that it may've been Lindbergh's idea to remove the $20K, since I think he had his own reasons for not wanting the kidnappers caught. LJ. Where did you read that Lindbergh was upset with Condon for not handing over the $20,000? I know that when Lindbergh and Condon went to Manhattan and met with Irey, that Lindbergh backed up Condon's story. No doubt it provided Lindbergh with a very awkward (and embarrassing) moment in Irey's presence because he knew how important those $50 dollar gold notes were but yet he allowed Condon to withhold them. I would be very interested in reading that Lindbergh was upset with Condon's actions concerning the withhold. I must have somehow missed reading that somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Nov 3, 2015 13:13:27 GMT -5
It's covered around pgs. 83-84 of Gardner's book: Condon and Lindbergh return to Manhattan after the ransom drop, and Condon's all proud of himself: "Just saved Lindy $20K! Good day's work I call it!" Lindbergh, however, doesn't seem too pleased: "You shouldn't have argued with him [CJ]," he says. "Argued, nothing!" says Condon, "I reasoned with him..." I'm paraphrasing, but that's the basic rundown of the exchange. Meanwhile, Irey of the FBI is furious: "We could've shot the well-meaning meddler," he says. Also, in the endnotes (on pg. 428) of Gardner's book, there is a citation (#73) for all this, describing Condon's apparent relief at having the burden of the $20K off his shoulders. Now, why would the $20K have been a burden to him? Because, I believe, on finding out CAL Jr. had actually been dead all along, Condon's $20K fee for participation had become blood money, which, as such, was now a burden Condon obviously couldn't accept and no longer wanted. He was in too deep to be able to wash his hands of the whole thing altogether--just end all involvement in the case and go home--but returning his fee to CJ on the pretense of saving Lindy $20K offered Condon at least that much of an out, hence his apparent relief after the ransom drop.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2015 14:28:50 GMT -5
It's covered around pgs. 83-84 of Gardner's book: They return to Manhattan after the ransom drop, and Condon's all proud of himself: "Just saved Lindy $20K!" Lindbergh, however, doesn't seem too pleased: "You shouldn't have argued with him," he says. "Argued, nothing!" says Condon, "I reasoned with him..." I'm paraphrasing, but that's the basic rundown of the exchange. Meanwhile, the NYPD is furious: "I could've shot the well-meaning meddler," one of them says. Thanks LJ for directing me to where this exchange takes place. I have read it several times and I will admit I am having trouble seeing Lindbergh as being displeased or upset with Condon. Gardner says that Lindbergh commented to Condon, "You should not have argued with him." Not much of a protest against Condon's withholding of that money. What that comment does do, however, is give the appearance that it was Condon's decision, which leaves Lindbergh off the hook for making that call to withhold the $20,000. If one is inclined to believe that Lindbergh was involved with what happened to Charlie, then it is in Lindbergh's best interest that the easily traceable $50 dollar gold certificates not get into circulation. Therefore they are withheld for that reason. I think something else can be taken from this whole ransom exchange. I think it points to who really was in control of this payoff and it is not the kidnappers. They had to settle for $50,000 not the $70,000 they asked for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2015 14:46:04 GMT -5
Also, in the endnotes (on pg. 428) of Gardner's book, there is a citation (#73) for all this, describing Condon's apparent relief at having the burden of the $20K off his shoulders. Now, why would the $20K have been a burden to him? Because, I believe, on finding out CAL Jr. had actually been dead all along, Condon's $20K fee for participation had become blood money, which, as such, was now a burden Condon obviously couldn't accept and no longer wanted. He was in too deep to be able to wash his hands of the whole thing altogether--just end all involvement in the case and go home--but returning his fee to CJ on the pretense of saving Lindy $20K offered Condon at least that much of an out, hence his apparent relief after the ransom drop. I see this as one possibility for Condon's relief about the $20,000. But that relief Turrou says he noted about Condon and the $20,000 could also be because Condon's story of outsmarting John and saving Lindbergh $20,000 dollars was accepted by the officials. He was much relieved when he was able to pull it off and save Lindbergh and himself.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Nov 3, 2015 15:15:44 GMT -5
I can very much see this too. In any case, whichever one of them had the original idea to withhold the $20K, I still think it was in both Condon and Lindbergh's interest to withhold it--to remove the more traceable bills and reduce the chances of the kidnappers ever being caught.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Nov 3, 2015 15:53:37 GMT -5
To All: CJ was most likely Jacob J. Nosovitsky. According to the caption under the photo of Noso appearing in Noel Behn's book, "Lindbergh: The Crime" (the same photo also can be seen on the Net; it is the only one of Noso I've seen, other than police mug shots), he "fit most of the physical descriptions Condon gave regarding 'Cemetery John. Condon's conflicting statements about CJ 's (John) appearance made it all but impossible for the police officials to use it to apprehend anyone. It could have fit so very many people that it was useless as a tool for the police. Condon could very well have been using attributes of various people he knew and used them to create his description of John. I believe he was purposely being misleading in order to protect the perps from being apprehended. Perhaps some of Condon's inconsistency in his descriptions of Cemetery John had some connection to memory problems over time in a man of Condon's age? I'm not saying that he wasn't on an ego trip in getting involved in the Lindbergh case on his own volition and against his family's advice, but then again he was an educated and very bright man (at least in the past) who was well regarded by many in the Bronx prior to the purported kidnapping. Furthermore, up to the age of 72, he had never had any criminal record. There certainly was much less awareness of what today is called Alzheimer's disease back in that era, which doesn't rule out the possibility that Condon may have been in the early stages of it. It should be noted again that the two rarest physical descriptors that Condon gave of CJ, the very large ears and the lesion on the thumb, fit Nosovitsky. I'm not aware of any other suspects who had both of those characteristics.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Nov 5, 2015 20:21:46 GMT -5
It would be neat to have pictures of all the suspects that Condon identified as looking like CJ. I remember one named Simek. I think Hoffman made that point but it guess he couldn't publish faces of people alive then. Some pics might have survived or be found in outside archives. Vaclav Simek was arrested in Detroit for extortion in 1924. He was attempting to get 1 Million dollars from Edsel Ford or threatened he would kidnap and blind his son. He was arrested at the church where the money was supposed to be delivered. He was later convicted. Condon first said something like 'boys your getting hot' then later it was proven that Simek had an alibi.
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 31, 2019 3:54:08 GMT -5
It makes good sense that Condon would not want the kidnappers apprehended for both personal and altruistic reasons. Also, if something went wrong, especially with the baby, it would make Condon look bad if the perps were dragged in and they told a story very different from the one Condon told. This likely also explains why, for all his "CJ sightings" that the Cemetery Man was never found.
John
|
|