|
Post by kate1 on May 5, 2017 13:45:08 GMT -5
On a rotting corpse? He didn't go into dentistry but I believe his grandfather Land had an influence on his interest in science. His inspection was so quick and deliberate I think he was looking for something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 14:16:53 GMT -5
The way he handled the examination of the teeth seems to suggest that he was looking for a certain oral condition that would confirm to him if, indeed, the corpse was really his son. The following article appeared in the Chicago Tribune on May 14, 1932. Although Michael has established that Prosecutor Marshall was not at the morgue when Lindbergh examined the body, I still think what Marshall claims Schwarzkopf said about Lindbergh examining the teeth is relevant to what we are discussing.
|
|
|
Post by scathma on May 5, 2017 14:54:16 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 15:08:33 GMT -5
Thanks scathma for linking the newspaper page. It is much more readable!
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on May 5, 2017 20:30:02 GMT -5
I tend to agree. I don't think that Lindbergh was clairvoyant enough to think of modern day DNA testing (DNA wasn't even discovered until the early 1950s), but as it turned out, the cremation would eliminate the possibility of doing such testing on the remains to determine if the corpse was that of Charlie or another child. What might have scared CAL Sr. the most was the possibility that the body wasn't Charlie's. If that were shown to be true, the case would have followed a totally different direction.
|
|
|
Post by kate1 on May 8, 2017 11:18:10 GMT -5
I think the Lindbergh children removed the bone fragments because of DNA. After the shock of his European children, I'd be doubting anything he told me
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Jun 22, 2017 17:49:27 GMT -5
Today would have been my Parent's 65th Wedding Anniversary!
|
|
|
Post by kate1 on Jun 22, 2017 18:02:39 GMT -5
I imagine their children are just beautiful!
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Oct 7, 2017 20:33:23 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I posted. I offically asked the NJ State Attorney's Office to resubmit Charlie Jr's DNA. Basically they told me that I need probable cause to reopen the case. Does anyone have any suggestions ..as it relates to my case.. that I can use..? Oh boy.. I need a good one. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by TrojanuscGuest on Oct 7, 2017 22:49:15 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I posted. I offically asked the NJ State Attorney's Office to resubmit Charlie Jr's DNA. Basically they told me that I need probable cause to reopen the case. Does anyone have any suggestions ..as it relates to my case.. that I can use..? Oh boy.. I need a good one. Thanks. He'd never do it but would be fascinating if Manfred Hauptmann tried to have the envelope DNA, along with the DNA on the handkerchief tested.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Dec 2, 2017 0:31:28 GMT -5
Hello Everyone! Just a thought... I know that there were Thumb Gaurds ...but Did Charlie Jr. actually suck his thumb? No photos.. right? Also..why would anyone think that Dwight Morrow Jr. Would have anything to do with "planting" the thumbguards on the grounds after the kidnapping? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Dec 4, 2017 21:04:27 GMT -5
To ilovedfw:
I'm guessing that one of the books you read was Noel Behn's Lindbergh: The Crime, which implicates Elisabeth Morrow as the killer of little Charlie. I happen to have read Behn's book at lest twice, and find his solution plausible, although certain aspects of the case aren't included.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Dec 8, 2017 21:31:53 GMT -5
Hello ILOVEFW: It's a complicated issue, as you can see -or as you have read. AFTER 28 THOUSAND VIEWS ON MY THREAD...I have not asked for anything, except for help. I have not dismissed, made fun of implied as if a Board Member was ever "smoking". The members on this Discussion Board all have their own ideas of what really happened in this case. My father's life was shielded with lies and deception. Whatever your opinion may be - you didn't live with that - I DID.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 23, 2018 2:19:11 GMT -5
Read through most of this but there are many puzzling things about this theory that don't make sense to me.
1. WHY? It looks like your dad is a normal and handsome guy who had all his faculties and managed to raise a family. So why on earth would Lindbergh want to be rid of his namesake?
2. Why would CAL set up Hauptmann? This completely sabotaged everything he was attempting to do politically speaking. Politics ie promoting FDR and intervention are the only reasonable motivation for the crime aside from the official story that has any weight to it, especially if you are looking for one that would warrant such a very questionable investigation by an appointee of a democratic governor.
3. If it's an inside job (and this seems likely given all the coincidences and oddities) then again why send secret messages in the newspapers? This is really nonsensical when you could just telephone or pass a note, you already had to know the kidnapper beforehand to set this all up.
Given that he had a string of children out of wedlock, maybe there is a much simpler explanation that has nothing to do with the kidnapped child.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jan 23, 2018 4:22:09 GMT -5
Some very good points Mufti and in part, exactly what we've been discussing.
Why dust your kid when, especially with the Lindbergh/Morrow money you could hide him away forever?
And, as you pointed out, why kill your son?
That Lindbergh took that course used to be an unlikely method, but lately on here anyway it has gained popularity. I personally wonder why?
Your thoughts will be appreciated Mufti.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 23, 2018 6:47:44 GMT -5
I think the media today likes to dig up every historical figure it can who has the 'wrong' opinions and give them a probably pointless hatchet job, even in cases like this that have dropped from the public radar for some time now. I have seen some articles implying such things about Lindbergh recently whereas in the past I can't even remember talk like that at all.
I can see some sort of coverup for an accident but this is much too elaborate of a charade to fake a kidnapping like this, and would probably be more dangerous than a simple lie.
For me personally I can see only two main possibilities.
1. Hauptmann is involved but only in some ancillary way, and the only motive was pure money. Whoever did the kidnapping it must have involved a fair number of people, and probably some kind of inside info was involved as well. Lots of people apparently passed these bills but only he got caught doing it, and he only had a small amount. Lindbergh is a bad target in many ways because of his immense popularity, but it could have been somehow an opportunist affair ie one of the perpetrators happened to have some connection to someone on his staff and took advantage of that. Yet it could be that this is the case, things went bad, and Hauptmann ended up holding the bag. Why the investigation was handled like it was if that's the case, I can't imagine, but police work was seemingly a lot less professional back then.
2. This is really all about America First and interventionism. Morrow died mysteriously and Huey Long was outright plugged in broad daylight, events which dramatically aided the rise of FDR and the New Deal and most especially of interventionism. There couldn't be a much worse punishment for a political opponent than what happened to CAL, or better way to tie up his time, and it would not bring about the kind of political outrage that simply plugging him full of holes would have. And of course best yet Hauptmann provided a way for the press to bash on Germany by proxy all it liked and whip people up for the idea of a war in Europe.
FDR was pretty corrupt even for a time of open corruption in many areas but it seems like an unnecessary move to me. Huey Long running as a third party candidate would have split the dem vote and probably killed any chances for FDR but Lindbergh could not run for president and the public not desiring a war has never seemed to stop them from getting one anyways. I guess it could also be some american jews who were worried about Hitler in europe so much that they felt the need to sabotage CAL, but at the time it was not clear there would be war in europe at all let alone the war crimes and atrocities and millions of deaths that ultimately resulted.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Jan 23, 2018 8:34:13 GMT -5
Read through most of this but there are many puzzling things about this theory that don't make sense to me. 1. WHY? It looks like your dad is a normal and handsome guy who had all his faculties and managed to raise a family. So why on earth would Lindbergh want to be rid of his namesake? 2. Why would CAL set up Hauptmann? This completely sabotaged everything he was attempting to do politically speaking. Politics ie promoting FDR and intervention are the only reasonable motivation for the crime aside from the official story that has any weight to it, especially if you are looking for one that would warrant such a very questionable investigation by an appointee of a democratic governor. 3. If it's an inside job (and this seems likely given all the coincidences and oddities) then again why send secret messages in the newspapers? This is really nonsensical when you could just telephone or pass a note, you already had to know the kidnapper beforehand to set this all up. Given that he had a string of children out of wedlock, maybe there is a much simpler explanation that has nothing to do with the kidnapped child. 1. Lindbergh, more than anything, believed he was of superior stock and had developed a serious interest in eugenics. His child being ill, as most experts believe he was, based on the medical documentation available, would not have been acceptable to him. He was described as having a "rickety" condition and, at autopsy, his skull "came apart like an orange," which is not normal whatsoever. In his mind, a "kidnapped" child draws public sympathy and saves him the embarrassment of the public believing he has a crippled offspring. Times were very different then. 2. He did not "set up" Hauptmann. Most people believe that CAL, through some sort of third party, hired a group of kidnappers to stage this kidnapping and remove the child from the premises. Hauptmann may or may not have actually been in New Jersey that night, but was likely somewhat involved in this group, at least tangentially, in terms of building the ladder, etc. Nobody was supposed to get caught. Hauptmann did and took the fall. There is no real evidence that he was in New Jersey the night of the kidnapping but because the prosecutor had to prove that he acted alone to get the death penalty, every shred of evidence showing that multiple people were involved was immediately discarded. 3. This really depends on who you ask. Many, both now and then, believe the kidnappers were paid a lump sum, perhaps before the kidnapping, and that the ransom was never meant to be paid. This wound up being just an extortion plot against Lindbergh. That's why the body was discovered where and when it was - to stop any further attempts at extortion. Having said that, this "gang" of kidnappers likely hired John Condon for $20,000 to act as a go-between - it's the only thing that makes sense when they say they had to take on "another guy." Condon, not knowing the baby was dead yet, was happy to gain the publicity and look like the saint when he returned the child to the Lindbergh family. However, to make things look legitimate, Condon had to come into this plot in a way that would not raise suspicion and had to make it appear that he did not previously know the kidnappers. Newspapers were a somewhat common way to do this in 1932. Ask yourself how Condon, writing in a relatively obscure Bronx-only paper, could catch the attention (and trust) of kidnappers who had just kidnapped the most famous child in America. It's boggling to think they would just approve of his involvement within a matter of hours unless there had been previous communication.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 23, 2018 11:02:16 GMT -5
Could you possibly be more specific on these points? How is CAL "promoting FDR and intervention" in any explanation of the real or false "kidnapping"? I don't see the connection there. And what would "warrant such a very questionable investigation by an appointee of a democratic governor"? Are you referring to Schwarzkopf as the "appointee"?
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Jan 30, 2018 9:11:37 GMT -5
Read through most of this but there are many puzzling things about this theory that don't make sense to me. Dear Mufti and all: I believe that Anne lost their baby in the high altitude flight. This would have been (and was - to her father) very shameful. Then there was the birth announcement time delay.. that's where and when my Great Aunt and Dwight Jr. and their baby (my dad) came into play (replacing the baby lost from that flight). The kidnapping took place....I do have ideas on who the corpse was and but not who did it. The entire kidnapping - with the twist of the staged setup feature at the end turned out well for all...since my dad had deformed toes and Anne was pregnant with their REAL CHILD- JON...and everyone lived happily ever after. It was the VanIngen letters to Elizabeth Morrow that made me understand that all of this was tied together.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 30, 2018 14:41:22 GMT -5
Ok, but it still does not really make much sense to me. When Anne was pregnant she flew less than halfway through the pregnancy. If she lost the baby it should be early on, not at birth. Even if she does lose it at birth, why get a double to play little Lindy? There is no shame in losing a baby and back then it was relatively common. The problem here is there is just no motive to do this. I don't say a baby switch is impossible and never happened in history but there has to be some very unusual but compelling reason to explain something like this.
Then like you say there is then an 'extra' baby corpse in the mix. Whatever crazy plot someone might cook up, introducing a dead baby to the mix is not going to do them any favors.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 1, 2018 8:53:24 GMT -5
[ Dear Mufti and all: I believe that Anne lost their baby in the high altitude flight. This would have been (and was - to her father) very shameful. Then there was the birth announcement time delay.. that's where and when my Great Aunt and Dwight Jr. and their baby (my dad) came into play (replacing the baby lost from that flight). The kidnapping took place....I do have ideas on who the corpse was and but not who did it. The entire kidnapping - with the twist of the staged setup feature at the end turned out well for all...since my dad had deformed toes and Anne was pregnant with their REAL CHILD- JON...and everyone lived happily ever after. It was the VanIngen letters to Elizabeth Morrow that made me understand that all of this was tied together. I rec'd an email from a Guest to our Board who was trying to post this but was encountering an issue: Hi Aimee,
If, as you say, Dwight Morrow Jr. and his wife (Margot Loines, I assume) were your dad's parents, wouldn't that make them your grandparents instead of his wife your great aunt? I'm confused.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Feb 19, 2018 13:36:28 GMT -5
Hi Aimee,
If, as you say, Dwight Morrow Jr. and his wife (Margot Loines, I assume) were your dad's parents, wouldn't that make them your grandparents instead of his wife your great aunt? I'm confused.
No... I believe it was Dwight Jr. and my Great Aunt who actually had Charlie Jr., and then handed him off to Charles and Anne, after she lost the baby in the high altitude flight. Back in those days, it was very shameful to a family if a baby was lost.. especially due to intense air pressure in the womb, caused by Anne's thirst for flight. Dwight Jr. married Margot Loines in 1937.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Feb 19, 2018 13:38:25 GMT -5
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Feb 19, 2018 13:39:26 GMT -5
Attachment DeletedHappy Heavenly Birthday..to my Dad. I never would have guessed that February 18th was such a planted date..but I guess you always knew.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on May 28, 2018 21:39:34 GMT -5
Can someone please wave a magic wand over all of this information.. and then contact me? I'm not getting any younger...lol. I need somone who can fight the system...someone who understands the storyline, the states, the crime, the players, the families, the Politians, the Police Department..their detectives, lawyers and judges. Someone who can file a petition to the court, run DNA and court order the truth to be told. Any Takers?
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Jul 10, 2018 13:14:36 GMT -5
I have tried to relate my information to the kidnapping information....My dad's beginning life was truly a mystery, one in which I will solve one day. I will see it in a photo..or see it in a name, a photo of an auto or even a note that I had written down from so long ago. My thread has over 30,618 views, that is a good feeling, knowing that they had all come from other people, and not just from myself! Surely someone knows something and would like to come forward?
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 12, 2018 0:47:46 GMT -5
Well, if Anne lost the baby on the flight as you claim there would have been some bad pictures of her coming off of it which there wren't. It didn't happen, worse than speculation.
|
|
jack7
Major
Der Führer
Posts: 1,920
|
Post by jack7 on Jul 12, 2018 0:50:12 GMT -5
What's unusual about this is your squalking for twenty five pages on here about which amounts to basically nothing.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Aug 6, 2018 13:12:53 GMT -5
You would be squawking too...if you thought your dad was the actual Lindbergh baby.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2019 13:51:16 GMT -5
I like this clip of Charlie also! Thanks for posting it.
|
|