|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 25, 2013 19:25:06 GMT -5
One of the difficult mysteries of the LKC has been the discovery of the thumb guard by Betty and Elsie on the Highfields driveway on April 1st, the day before the ransom drop. There seem to be two major theories about it. One is that the kidnapper(s) were giving Lindbergh a signal—most probably, an encouragement to go ahead and pay the ransom. The other is that the thumb guard was dropped on the night of the kidnapping and somehow escaped detection for a month. I realize there are other theories. April 1 WAS April Fool’s day, and it has been theorized that it was put there as a cruel joke on Lindbergh, and conversely (by Wayne Jones) that Lindbergh dropped it there himself as an April Fool’s gag, but I consider these ideas low in probability. Originally I leaned toward the “signal” theory, but I am now leaning toward the “dropped the night of the kidnapping.” As far as a signal goes. The kidnappers did have a standard means of communicating with Lindbergh—the notes with their “signature.” Furthermore, proof in the form of the sleeping suit had already been provided (and mailed, like the ransom notes). If they wanted to provide the thumb guard as added proof, they could have mailed it along with the sleeping suit. It also seems highly unlikely that the kidnapper(s) would have risked going onto the Highfields property just to give Lindbergh a signal. Highfields was still crawling with the NJSP, was it not? And at the cemetery, CJ ran like a jack-rabbit at the mere sight of a cemetery guard. So I don’t see him, at least, braving capture by the cops at Highfields in order to deliver a signal that seems to have been superfluous—Lindbergh would have paid the ransom anyway. But if the thumb guard was dropped on the night of the kidnapping, why was it not spotted sooner? Originally, I thought the thumb guard was a solid piece but actually it was made of relatively thin wire www.magazineart.org/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=21641&g2_serialNumber=3 It was for a tot’s thumb, so it was not a big piece, though it did have those “shoestring ties.” Had these strings been white, they would have been pretty visible, but from this picture, it looks like they were dark www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/thumbguard.jpgunless that darkness was from weathering over time. Betty and Elsie found it in the middle of the driveway. Now it was a gravel driveway. I assume that after the kidnapping, cars must have been going up and down this driveway dozens and dozens of times. Thinking out loud here, is it conceivable that the thumb guard was dropped on the driveway in the course of the kidnapper’s escape, and that in the subsequent roaring of vehicles up and down the driveway, tires kicked up enough muddy gravel that the thumb guard was effectively concealed during initial searches of the property? And that eventually, due to more gravel displacement by cars (or perhaps even eroding rains), it became visible again? I realize that a very thorough search of the Highfields property was made, but we are talking about a huge amount of land and a tiny object—the proverbial needle and haystack come to mind. Also, Betty Gow, who spotted the thumb guard, had an advantage over the cops who did the initial search—which is that she KNEW that thumb guard by sight, and knew its significance. A key to whether the guard was dropped on about April 1, or had always been there, would be the issue of weathering. I recall reading that the thumb guard’s manufacturer was consulted, and said that the guard was made of metals that would resist weathering. So I think a more pertinent question would be the condition of the “shoestring.” In the photograph www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/thumbguard.jpgit is dark, but I can’t tell if it was originally dark, or appeared darkened from soiling. Michael, you must have seen it in person. In your opinion, did the shoestring look weathered, or relatively pristine? Also, do we know how far the thumb guard was found from the trail of footprints that Lindbergh, DeGaetano and Bornmann followed from the ladder to the chicken coop and abandoned house on the night of the kidnapping? I will say that, if someone was running with the child, for one of the thumb guards to have come loose and fallen off would be no major surprise. By the way, I am not talking about the thumb guard in order to prove or disprove some theory. If the guard was dropped by an abductor, it could have been BRH, someone hired by Lindbergh, Dwight Morrow, or any of a number of suspects.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jun 26, 2013 7:43:42 GMT -5
For me, the timing and location of the thumbguard are the compelling factors here. I think it would've been madness for one of the kidnappers to sneak back onto the property, crawling with NJSP, just to leave Lindbergh a signal or message, especially given where it was found (near the gatehouse checkpoint). And then the much safer option of just mailing the thumbguard (as the kidnappers did with other items like the sleeping suit and ransom notes) presents itself, begging the obvious question of why wasn't this also done with the thumbguard, if it truly came from the kidnappers. And given that the thumbguard was found right out in the open--in the middle of the road, in good condition, and not banged up or looking as though it had been dragged around outside for a month--I also believe it never left with CAL Jr. on March 1, but stayed at Highfields and was dropped where it was found on the day it was discovered, which, incidentally, just happened to be the same day the ransom was paid. Since, again, an outsider sneaking back to drop the thumbguard would've been taking an insane if not impossible risk, this leaves an insider dropping the thumbguard in the lane, perhaps tossing it from a car on their way out: Like this insider knew the baby was dead, obviously couldn't admit this, but, in order to keep up the appearance that this was still a kidnapping for ransom, could no longer stall about paying that ransom, so had to create an apparent reason or threat to finally do that. So he or she took the thumbguard from the house and dropped it in the drive, as if it was a warning or threat from the kidnappers. Just my interpretation for now though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 10:46:51 GMT -5
I believe that the thumbguard was planted. If you see this crime as being committed by a single individual then the thumbguard could not have fallen onto the driveway because Charlie was in a burlap bag. The thumbguard could not have come off onto the driveway. You have the kidnapper hurrying away from the scene, possibly being pursued by a dog. He doesn't have time to take Charlie out of the bag to remove a sleeping suit and in the course of this drop the thumbguard.
The thumbguard was dropped there the day it was found.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jun 26, 2013 12:17:57 GMT -5
Also, the dog was chasing or tracking someone down the access roads, not the driveway, where the thumbguard was found (though it seemed the access road curved round and connected up with the drive near the entrance). So the thumbguard wouldn't have been dropped or lost on the driveway during the getaway, because, since the footprint trails were on the access roads, it doesn't appear that the driveway was the escape route in the first place. Either way, had the thumbguard been outside for a month, it would've had to be kicked and dragged around a lot--by cars, animals, what have you--to finally wind up where it was found and, as such, would've looked a lot more weathered than it did. So I agree; it was planted. Probably that morning.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 26, 2013 16:27:01 GMT -5
Michael, you must have seen it in person. In your opinion, did the shoestring look weathered, or relatively pristine? I looked at it some years ago. It had been flattened, presumably by a car (or cars) using the private lane. It wasn't "shiny" at all - quite dull actually. This could have been due to all of the time that had passed since 1932, or it may have looked that way back then. I don't know. I do know that Reilly claimed in Court it was "shiny." The string/ribbon was still knotted. Supposedly, it was tied around the wrists that way as a matter of securing it to him. It's been assumed by one theory that someone stripped him of the Sleeping Suit right there on the spot, and in doing so - the thumb-guard came off with it falling to the ground unnoticed. The other would have probably gotten hung up in the sleeve I would guess if this were true. The biggest problem everyone had was after the crime everyone was combing the area for "clews." And I do mean everyone. Reporters were desperate to find something like that where it had been found. Many would claim it hadn't been there because they had, and did NOT see it while they were searching and gazing at every inch of that lane. So if it hadn't been there then someone brought it back later. If it had, everyone (Police, Reporters, and Staff) completely missed it. Pick your poison.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 26, 2013 18:16:20 GMT -5
Another thought I’ve had on this. Since the thumb guard was found in the middle of the driveway, could it have been put there by the driver of an automobile? Because if a driver opened his door, it would open over the middle of the driveway, whether he was driving up the driveway or down (assuming that he keeps the car to the right).
But who? And why? BRH, or any other Bronx extortionist, would hardly be driving on Lindbergh’s driveway on April 1. And if it was a confidante of Lindbergh, why would he need to give him a signal with the thumb guard? Why not just disclose his message to Lindbergh in a private conversation, or with a wink or something?
One other thought comes to mind, however unlikely. Let’s say someone, an “insider,” is involved in the kidnapping and transported Charlie in his car. And around April 1st, he’s at Highfields, and he hears something rolling under the passenger seat. He feels around under the seat, and pulls out—the thumb guard! “Oh, no! If I get caught with this, I’m done for!” So he’s driving down the driveway—“Hm! Maybe I better ditch this thing before I reach those cops at the guard house.” He slows down the car and nobody’s looking. Drops the thumb guard out the window. “Heck, when they find it they’ll think it was dropped on the night of the crime.”
Not just a great theory either, I know. But it seems like all the theories for the thumb guard are unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jun 26, 2013 19:42:53 GMT -5
To an extent, I agree. That's why I suggested above that someone on the inside dropped the thumbguard out a car window as they were on the driveway, a safe distance from the gatehouse where the cops were stationed. No way that would be seen. To me, this makes a lot more sense than one of the kidnapper/extortionists sneaking back to the police barracks that was Highfields, when they could much more easily and safely have mailed the thumbguard, had they been in possession of it. After all, they mailed the sleeping suit and most of the ransom notes, so why not the thumbguard? This suggests to me that they never had it, and an accomplice on the inside dropped it in the driveway to make it look like it came from the kidnappers. Only thing, in order to accept this, you have to concede that there was an insider of some sort in the first place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 20:52:54 GMT -5
Michael,
I have a question for you. I know that you have been to Highfields. Is there a small creek or other water source along or near the Lindbergh private drive close to the entrance? In Hour of Gold, Hour of Lead Anne mentions in her diary entry for May 19 that the authorities felt that the kidnapper "stopped at the first place where there was water - where the thumbguard was found by the gate."
Just curious.
|
|
Aimee
Det. Sergeant (FC)
Posts: 387
|
Post by Aimee on Jun 26, 2013 21:10:34 GMT -5
I too believe that the thumbguard was planted. Perhaps put there as a signal or simply just to get rid of it. My question is.... Is there a difference between a left handed thumbguard or a right handed thumbguard? There is no way that a "lefty" (ie: my dad) would have kept that contraption on his left hand..no way.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 26, 2013 21:56:35 GMT -5
Amy, that is an interesting passage you quote from HGHL (I just looked it up), inasmuch as Anne talks about a police theory I hadn’t heard before—namely, that the kidnappers, suddenly realizing that Charlie was bleeding (from cracking his head from being dropped on the cement window ledge), stopped and took off the sleeping suit to see where the blood was coming from. Apparently the theory was that, when they yanked off the sleeping suit, the thumb guard came off, which sounds no less credible than other explanations that have been offered. I’m not suddenly saying that the theory is right, but it’s an interesting take to consider.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 22:31:20 GMT -5
BR, apparently there was water nearby that why I asked Michael about it. If its not a small creek or anything, maybe there were indentations in the area around the gate and when the sleeping suit was removed the thumbguard fell into the water and stayed there until the weather changed enough to dry up the excess water. It could have been late March by then and the thumbguard finally became exposed and ultimately found.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Jun 26, 2013 23:55:32 GMT -5
In Google aerial photos of the property today, there seems to a stream parallel to the drive. Not sure if it was there in 1932.
|
|
|
Post by xjd on Jun 27, 2013 7:45:44 GMT -5
i have always felt the most likely scenario was that the thumbguard was carried to where it was found probably by an animal after scavenging the body.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 27, 2013 19:48:19 GMT -5
But it seems like all the theories for the thumb guard are unlikely. That's so true. When faced with this type of situation, ask yourself which is the least unlikely. Michael, I have a question for you. I know that you have been to Highfields. Is there a small creek or other water source along or near the Lindbergh private drive close to the entrance? In Hour of Gold, Hour of Lead Anne mentions in her diary entry for May 19 that the authorities felt that the kidnapper "stopped at the first place where there was water - where the thumb guard was found by the gate." Just curious. I walked the length of Featherbed, end to end. Then I walked from Featherbed to Highfields. Then I walked the Private Lane from Highfields to Hopewell-Amwell Road (called Wertsville Road by the Police). I honestly do not remember seeing a stream. (There were Salamander breeding sanctuaries on Featherbed Lane tho!) I do have the East Amwell Deed dated January 1931. This shows a brook running north to south to an "Arch Bridge" which is on Hopewell-Amwell Road right near where Featherbed meets that Road. This brook would have to cross under where Lindbergh's Private Lane was eventually built. Exactly where is hard to say since this map pre-dates its construction. This may or may not be the same thing that LJ sees on Google. I too believe that the thumbguard was planted. Perhaps put there as a signal or simply just to get rid of it. My question is.... Is there a difference between a left handed thumbguard or a right handed thumbguard? There is no way that a "lefty" (ie: my dad) would have kept that contraption on his left hand..no way. I don't believe so. We'd have to try to find them on-line now in order to know for sure. i have always felt the most likely scenario was that the thumbguard was carried to where it was found probably by an animal after scavenging the body. I believe Liz said she believed this too. So you aren't alone in considering this as a possibility. Can you imagine a mother sending another woman (especially not a family member) to identify her child with your husband? I'm sure they wanted to protect her from the emotional stress, after all, she was very pregnant. Or maybe they didn't want her to blow the story by seeing the corpse. Either way... it's like having a leaf blow in the wind. Actually, Gow went before Lindbergh came back. It had already been announced that Anne was in a much "too fragile" state. So that "damage" concerning the abilities Lindbergh wanted portrayed had already been done as far as Anne was concerned.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on Jun 27, 2013 20:29:50 GMT -5
Just a couple of quick notes about the thumbguard. I found a pair of the Baby Alice thumb guards, the same brand put on CALjr, about 10 years on Ebay. A photo is attached. Some folks have commented on how cruel it would have been to subject a toddler to these. I can assure everyone they would have been totally benign to the child wearing them. They have almost a soft feel to them because of the thin wire and intricate braiding and absolutely no sharp edges. Being made of Monel metal (2/3 nickel and 1/3 copper) they are rust-resistant. Morton Maish, the founder of the company that made them, testified at the trial and Reilly got him to admit they had not been tested under the outdoor conditions the discovered thumb guard was apparently exposed to. He could have simply testified it was not possible for them to rust given the fact they contained no iron. Regarding the thumbguard having been found almost a month after the kidnapping, there seem to be few logical scenarios for its placement there. From my perspective, I've always been intrigued by the possibility it was picked up at some other location on the property by an animal or perhaps more likely a crow, a bird that is known to be attracted to shiny objects. I think that it being scavenged from the child over three miles away would have been a stretch. An interesting connection to crows in this case is the fact that on a warm March afternoon during the ransom negotiations, Mrs. Morrow walked into the baby's room to discover a large crow perched on the rail of the crib. The native American interpretation of this animal sign would be a message to the elder of the family to keep their faith in spirit no matter how the story unfolded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 22:30:09 GMT -5
Thanks Michael for your answer. That is quite a jaunt you made around the area! Since the brook would be crossing under the private drive I am not sure this is the water Anne is referring to in her diary entry. Looking at the pictures of the entrance to the private drive in Mark Falzini's lastest book, I don't see anything that looks like an open water source.
Perhaps from the rainy and snowy weather during that winter the private drive had some ruts in it and they had water in them. If the thumbguard had dropped onto the drive the night of the kidnapping it may have landed in one of the ruts with water in it. It would not have been noticable until the trapped water would have dried up. Joe mentions in his post that the thumbguards would not rust so lying in the water would not have damaged it. It would have gotten dirty and possibly flattened a bit by cars driving through the rut it was in. I still have doubts about it being there from day one though. Charlie was in a burlap bag. I find it hard to believe that the kidnapper would have stopped on the drive to take the time to remove Charlie from the bag. He would have wanted to flee the scene as quickly as possible.
Thanks Joe for posting that picture and information about the thumbguards. I no longer need to imagine what they might have looked like!
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 27, 2013 22:59:14 GMT -5
I like your thinking, Amy. I continue to think that something along these lines runs closer to what Michael calls the “least unlikely” explanation. Regarding the idea that the thumb guard shouldn’t have fallen to the ground due to Charlie being in a burlap bag--I know such a bag was found near the corpse, but how sure are we that he was being carried in a bag when he was abducted that night at Highfields?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2013 9:25:24 GMT -5
I questioned the use of a burlap bag in the removal of Charlie from the nursery about a year ago on another thread (Getaway thread I think it was). Charlie could have been placed into the burlap bag later when it was discovered he was dead and not drugged perhaps???
I think the use of a burlap bag becomes a necessary element if the kidnapper is a lone abductor and is leaving the nursery via the window and ladder. Exiting the nursery this way without the child being contained in some manor seems impossible even if Charlie is drugged or dead. It would be difficult to control the body while trying to get out of the window, leave a note on the windowsill, close that window and get your footing on a ladder that is not directly below the window you are exiting and is about 30 inches short of the window height.
Now if Charlie is not in a bag but is passed out or lowered to someone who is on the ladder this scenario might work better since the person on the inside could close the window, make sure the room is in the order it was found, leave the note on the windowsill, etc. However, we no longer have a lone wolf committing the crime.
Then there is always the least popular (unlikely??) position that the ladder is a prop to suggest a window entry when Charlie was actually carried out, like a sleeping baby, through a doorway and into the night.
Without the use of a burlap bag initially, the thumbguard ending up near the private lane entrance becomes more of a possibility I guess.
|
|
kdwv8
Trooper II
Posts: 95
|
Post by kdwv8 on Jun 28, 2013 11:44:56 GMT -5
There is a bridge just north of the entrance to Highfields. It's over what appears to be a dry creek bed. Is this the "Arch Bridge" or is it somewhere else?
|
|
dave
Detective
Posts: 130
|
Post by dave on Jun 28, 2013 11:55:47 GMT -5
Are those "thumb guards" on blue velvet? They look like Holy Relics.
How many sets of those guards do you think the family had? When the baby was taken for a walk in his stroller where do you think they went? Across the field where the runway was being built? Stumps, cut down trees, roots, mud, knee high field grass to Featherbed Lane maybe? No! They went down the driveway. Was't the best surface , but hay better than the muck and the mud. I had a lot of kids. Take them for a walk and stuff gets lost. Comes unglued, and untied. Don't over think this thing. On the night of March 1st and the morning of March 2nd people weren't looking for thumb guards.
Simple crime, simpler time!
|
|
dave
Detective
Posts: 130
|
Post by dave on Jun 28, 2013 12:56:06 GMT -5
The "Bag" I always found very interesting. I really believe it was used to get the body out the window and down the ladder. Across the field to Featherbed Lane and into the car and the race up the Mount Rose Highway to the gravesite. You could see the Lindbergh House from the garvesite in 1932.
1/ Hauptmann dumps the body on the ground. Strips the body of sleeping suite. Drops the body back in bag and does a quick not very good job of burying the kid. 2/ Condon wants proof that Hauptmann's got the kid. Has to go back to Hopewell and digs up the body. Dumps the body out of the bag, strips the suite, throws body in bag, or forgets the bag, and burys the body again. Forgetting bag means bag is left by grave.
Now anyway you look at this the body was not buryed very deep. Alas, "Pot Luck" for every living thing in the woods where the body is. The thumb guards, who knows, maybe used in a nest somewhere. If the body was buried in the bag, animals got it out. Check the reports for what body parts were missing. Hands? What was the status of the hands? You have hands, wrists, you have the "THUMB GUARDS!.
Now someone has to ask: "But Dave what about the Boy Scouts who walked that area? They didn't see a bag or the body ." Hey your right, so what? Maybe they missed it. Maybe the animals had not gotten to the body yet. Maybe, maybe the scouts and the cops never looked there! Why would they?
Don't over think this. All you will get is a headache !
Simple crime, simpler time.
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 28, 2013 16:38:30 GMT -5
Dave, when you have a chance, check the "Wright Deposition" thread. There is a question for you at the end of the thread.
|
|
kdwv8
Trooper II
Posts: 95
|
Post by kdwv8 on Jun 28, 2013 16:39:06 GMT -5
Your right about that, this stuff gives me lots of headaches!
|
|
dave
Detective
Posts: 130
|
Post by dave on Jun 28, 2013 16:58:50 GMT -5
To Bookrefuge,
I don't do well with "go to's." What's the question? I hate computers and go to here or go to there!
What's the question?
|
|
dave
Detective
Posts: 130
|
Post by dave on Jun 28, 2013 17:08:03 GMT -5
OK! I found it. How can you sit down and type that much. Just looking at the post turns my brain to over-load. I start seeing red lights flashing in the sides of my eyes. Do the question in a hundred words or less. Holy crap!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 28, 2013 18:40:25 GMT -5
There is a bridge just north of the entrance to Highfields. It's over what appears to be a dry creek bed. Is this the "Arch Bridge" or is it somewhere else? No, the "Arch Bridge" that I refer to is south. You would almost immediately be on it if you turned left from Featherbed heading north toward Lindbergh's Private Lane. Regarding the idea that the thumb guard shouldn’t have fallen to the ground due to Charlie being in a burlap bag--I know such a bag was found near the corpse, but how sure are we that he was being carried in a bag when he was abducted that night at Highfields? I believe he was in that bag immediately. For me, regardless of how many are involved, its much easier of a carry and/or hand-off this way. The bag was found near the burial site, its proved he had been in that bag at one time, and we must remember that Lupica saw burlap bags in the car he saw. If he didn't use it then, what's the purpose? Are those "thumb guards" on blue velvet? They look like Holy Relics. How many sets of those guards do you think the family had? When the baby was taken for a walk in his stroller where do you think they went? Across the field where the runway was being built? Stumps, cut down trees, roots, mud, knee high field grass to Featherbed Lane maybe? No! They went down the driveway. Was't the best surface , but hay better than the muck and the mud. I had a lot of kids. Take them for a walk and stuff gets lost. Comes unglued, and untied. Don't over think this thing. On the night of March 1st and the morning of March 2nd people weren't looking for thumb guards. Simple crime, simpler time! Great point about the walks and the possibility of things being lost. My problem is the string was still tied. Next, I'll have to (reluctantly) disagree with your assertion "people weren't looking for thumb guards." They were looking for anything and everything: Now in case the kidnapper did use road #1 the thumb guard would have been found the day after the kidnapping, because hundreds of people went over this road. I went over this road very carefully looking for foot prints and I noticed others doing likewise. Betty Gow's claim of finding the thumb guard is better evidence for the police then anything they have on Hauptmann on the direct kidnapping. (R. D. Von Nieda To Gov. Hoffman Letter 2/36) In case you aren't sure exactly who R. D. Von Nieda was.... At the time of the crime he had been working as a Reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer. He was sent to Hopewell on the night of the kidnapping and arrived there in the early morning hours. (The Road #1 to which he refers is Lindbergh's Private Lane.)
|
|
|
Post by bookrefuge on Jun 28, 2013 18:40:58 GMT -5
Hi, Dave. The question is short and is at the end of the thread. I agree that the deposition (top of the thread) is very long. You don't have to read the entire thread. Basically, since you say you knew Wayne Jones rather well, I wanted to know if you had met his friend William H. Wright and had any impression concerning his reliability. And I think this case gives us all flashing lights along with the headaches.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Jun 28, 2013 19:26:26 GMT -5
www.trendmls.com/MLS/Report/MemberListingReport.aspx?JTL=L600847929Amy, I drove by the entrance to Highfields today to see if there was any brook or creek nearby. This house was for sale across from the long driveway, used to be Worm Farm # 2, now called Stella's Worm Farm! Worm Farm # 1 is up the road a ways. Anyway, check out picture # 24 in this listing. There's the creek.
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Jun 28, 2013 19:28:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stella7 on Jun 28, 2013 20:05:17 GMT -5
|
|