i am re-reading the Behn book, and have a couple of issues that stick out:
after JFC handed over the ransom money, he and CAL stop by a rental house of Condon's to chat about opening the note saying where the baby would be found. seems odd to me that they did not go straight back to Condon's own house, why the detour? were not Breck and some others waiting for them? what did they need to discuss or do there that could not be done in front of the others? just seems weird.
also, it's been noted that ransom hand-offs in cemeteries was a common practice of the mob and other gangsters. would BRH know that, or is it just so obvious a great place to everyone? to me, i can see some advantages but some disadvantages too; like the fact that the first cemetery had a security guard. seems like if you knew a place real well you would know that, i can't see someone risking that kind of encounter in a place they did not know well.
Hi, xjd. Good question on the note. In Gardner’s book (p. 83) he says they stopped the car near this house and opened the note, without specifying if they went into the house or just opened the note in the car.
In any case, I am going to guess that it wasn’t a real detour, but a place on the way, or pretty much on the way, back to Condon’s home.
As to why they stopped THERE—I’m going to guess that they anticipated that after they opened the note, they might need or want to access a phone immediately. You know, if the note said, “he’s held at 455 Beacon Street in Boston,” they might want to be able to call authorities without delay.
Last Edit: Aug 2, 2013 20:42:25 GMT -5 by bookrefuge
Condon tells the same story in his Liberty Magazine Series. I've checked other sources and found this is Condon's May 13th 1932 Statement:
We rode back to my home and enroute to my home stopped and noted the contents of the letter which directed use to go to Bay Head, Horses Neck Beach and Elizbeth Islands where when we motored to Bridgeport where Colonel Lindbergh secured a plane and we flew from Gay Head around the various islands in search.....
Michael: the whole business of not only how the ransom went down but where the negotiations took place, strikes me as suspicious and shows poor judgment for even an amateur criminal, drawing attention to not only the Bronx,--as in "hey, I'm your neighbor, I'll meet you down the street (sic)" but to cemeteries, morbid places, suggestive of death, and downright spooky after dark, especially in the dead of winter. All this was set in motion by a piece placed in a local, not citywide paper, thus drawing even more attention to, if one buys that Hauptmann was involved at this point, where if not the perp then the extortionist, resided.Even amateur sleuths like Condon and Lindbergh ought to have smelled a rat, as in "something's wrong with this picture".
Isn't there something strange and almost surreal in all this? Yet these two men followed the notes they received to the letter. The raising and then, at the end, the lowering of the ransom fee makes the dealings with Cemetery John feel downright awkward, clumsy, as if he was making things up as he went along. Even back then, eighty years ago, long before criminal profiling, there must have been law enforcement professionals who could have advised Lindergh (especially) that things weren't right, that that a substitute sleeping suit could easily be obtained (especially if the kidnappers had help or had somehow got information from a member of the Lindbergh household staff). CJ was by Condon's accounts frightened, not bold, stating that he was a minor player at best, thus making him an unlikely player in the crime, likely allied with extortionists, who ought to have been arrested the night of the money drop.
Bottom line: Lindbergh himself was controlling the investigation, thus law enforcement professionals were essentially "prohibited" from intervening. Lindy got his way. I find this ironic to think about: the alleged lone wolf perp Hauptmann dealing with the lone wolf controller of the investigation, like peas in a pod. It's as if the case ultimately made against Hauptmann in the Flemington courtroom was a kind of reverse mirror shadow play of how Lindbergh himself handled the case. When I view the LKC in this light the Ahlgren & Monier "Lindy did it" thesis becomes all the more intriguing, for while Lindbergh himself may not have done the deed, his character, the way the case turned out, right down to the day of Hauptmann's execution, lends a kind of poetic, suggestive air to the LKC that has inspired the imaginations of many highly intelligent, thoughtful people over the years, which has produced an ever expanding body of literature about the case, making the comparisons to Jack the Ripper seem only fitting, as the crime is retreating from living memory, has become larger than life, as it appears to be entering the realm of folklore, of legend, it has perhaps become too much for one man,--any man?--to handle. It just is.
The scenario can be maddening John. I tried to better understand Condon's assertion about it being an "Italian Custom" by asking someone who would know about such things. They told me that if you wanted to meet someone to discuss business in a neutral place, that a Cemetery or a Train Platform were the two places back then where it would happen. So I've often wondered whether or not this was done as a ruse to suggest underworld people at work. I also know Condon was like a Parrot sometimes repeating things in order to sound legit. It could also have been something like "imitation is the best form of flattery" - that is - they really didn't know what to do so they decided to use a tactic employed by those who actually did.
Yes, Michael. Why Condon was tasken so seriously is a mystery to me. I suppose that Lindbergh was grasping at straws, and when the old man got a response from his Bronx Home News piece he went for it hook, line and sinker. Yet even so early Lindbergh had been deluged with letters, phone calls and visits from all kinds of wacko types of the sort that come out of the (proverbial) woodwork when there'a crime the magnitude of the LKC. Still, they ought to have been more circumspect when dealing with not only Condon but CJ. They could have picked the latter up more than once, and they let him go. If one reads the accounts of the cemetery negotiations carefully there's an undercurrent to (assuming that he was telling the truth) Condon's accounts of CJ's language and, especially, behavior, that suggested the child was already dead. CJ was too frightened. There was a sleepingsuit but no photograph. They should have insisted on one so as to assure that a.)CJ was legit in his being in league with the kidnappers, and b.) to ensure that little Charlie was alive and well.
I find the whole negotiation procress to be unlike any I have ever read about. The length of time, the amount of notes and two face to face meetings seems more like a business negotiation than a kidnapping.
I think Condon realized early on that Charlie was deceased but could not back away. He had taken this on and would have to see it to its conclusion. My personal theory at this time is that Lindbergh was buying silence not his son's life. In order to give the negotiations legitimacy so money could be paid over, the sleeping suit was provided to the extortion group to "prove" they had Charlie and were entitled to receive the $50,000. I don't believe they ever had Charlie to begin with. They had knowledge about the kidnapping but did not have the body....money for silence. I think this is what they were negotiating over.
Post by lightningjew on Aug 4, 2013 18:56:50 GMT -5
John, In response to what you point out about Lindbergh being deluged with letters and offers of help and, of all of them, picking only Condon's: Lindbergh also followed Curtis' lead, even though, from the outset, there was never any particular reason why he should've been taken seriously. But at any rate, in contrast to Curtis, Condon was the only person to receive a communique with the same interlocking circle symbol seen in the nursery ransom note. When Lindbergh realized this, I think he also realized Condon was to be taken seriously and was legit. Now, when I say legit, I don't necessarily mean honest or totally on the up-and-up. I mean legit only insofar as I think Condon was genuinely in touch with the right people. What's weird to me is how quickly this was accomplished. How could Condon have established contact with the right people so fast, by advertising in a relatively small paper like The Bronx Home News? To me this suggests planning and prearrangement. First, I think the people who took CAL Jr. were probably Bronx-based. As such, they would've known of the Bronx fixture Condon--and known him to be the garrulous, self-aggrandizing old attention whore that he was; someone who'd be eager to involve himself in a major world event. So I think that within a few days of the kidnapping, the perps approached Condon with the idea of using him as a buffer between them and Lindbergh, appealing to Condon's vanity and mawkish sentimentality: "We're the ones who kidnapped the Lindbergh Baby and are deeply ashamed, in way over our heads. Everyone knows you, the great Dr. Condon, as an upstanding, trustworthy pillar of the community--someone who devotes his life to helping others. Will you help us?" Always eager for the spotlight, I think Condon agreed, with the condition that he would place CAL Jr. in Anne Lindbergh's arms when the time came. Further, as much as he would've relished it, it was still dangerous getting involved in a thing like this, so I think Condon also wanted $20K for his services. I think the plan was for the kidnappers to then write another ransom note to Lindbergh, disguising Condon's fee as jacked-up ransom. Once this note had been received in Hopewell, Condon put his open letter in the Home News and got an immediate, prearranged response from the kidnappers, with the same interlocking circle symbol in the nursery ransom note. Condon then contacted Lindbergh, saying he was in touch with the men who took his son--and he had a letter with the special, unique ransom symbol to prove it. Later, after talking with one of the kidnappers (Cemetery John), Condon realized CAL Jr. was dead--either deducing this on his own or getting the very frightened, jittery CJ to admit as much. At this point, what with a dead child now in the mix, Condon realized he could not accept any money. He had to wash his hands of the whole thing as much as possible by forfeiting his fee--removing the extra $20K from the ransom packet, under the guise of altruistically saving Lindbergh money by having talked the kidnappers into lowering the ransom to its original amount. In short, it looks to me like the kidnappers were in contact with Condon earlier than he claimed, that the initial communication he received from them and the cemetery meetings were all prearranged, throwaway, going-through-the-motions type deals--things that, since they're moot points and really don't matter anyway, one tries to keep simple by carrying them out in a convenient personal comfort zone (using your local paper whose columns are always open to you, arranging meetings within a few miles of your house, etc.). It's also occurred to me, as mentioned on this board, that there was no cemetery meeting at all, at least not at St. Raymond's. After all, we only have Condon's word that he talked with anybody. So really, for all we know, he could've gone off into the darkness and... who can say? Hidden the ransom box somewhere on the cemetery grounds for later disbursement? I seem to remember that there were buildings there where money could've been safely kept--a barn or something at Woodlawn or St. Raymond's, so... maybe. I mean, to sum up, it could've been that Condon was approached by the kidnappers, who needed a buffer and intermediary between them and Lindbergh. Condon agreed to participate for $20K and the privilege of returning the baby to its mother. He contacted Lindbergh, proved himself legit by being in possession of a letter with the same symbol in the nursery note, and met one of the kidnappers (CJ) at Woodlawn Cemetery a few days later to discuss the next move. It was here that Condon could've learned that CAL Jr. was dead and, with a dead child in the mix, things were now far too dangerous. Condon wanted out, but he was already involved and couldn't extricate himself. He had to arrange another meeting to give himself the opportunity to somehow do so. So in the meantime, while still at Woodlawn, he had CJ walk off, write the "Boad Nelly" receipt and return (he would subsequently claim this occurred later, at St. Raymond's). Condon kept this note for the next, St. Raymond's "meeting"--the one that needed to happen so Condon could do something to withdraw as much as possible. But this meeting never really took place. I mean, Condon certainly went to St. Raymond's and walked off into the cemetery. He'd brought the Boad Nelly note with him and hid the ransom money he'd been given somewhere on the cemetery grounds for later disbursement to the kidnappers. He also removed his $20K cut and, in so doing, washed his hands as much possible. He returned to the car with the money, telling Lindbergh he'd met CJ again and managed to save him $20K--providing a note CJ had apparently just given him, with CAL Jr.'s location. I don't know; maybe. In a nutshell, I think Condon felt the need to perpetuate the idea that CAL Jr. was still alive up till the point the ransom was paid, in order to perpetuate the idea that he, Condon, was legit, completely on the up-and-up, and that, when the baby turned up dead, he had been just as duped as everyone else. But anyway, as to nobody but Condon being present for the St. Raymond's meeting: It occurs to me that someone called out "Hey Doctor!" to Condon at St. Raymond's, so it would seem somebody was there to meet him. Then again, this also is something we only have Condon's word for. Lindbergh's too, but, if I'm remembering correctly, he didn't seem too definite about seeing or hearing the "Hey Doctor" individual, at least not at first. I'd be curious to know exactly when Lindbergh, who was well up the street from Condon at the time, corroborated Condon's "Hey Doctor" encounter. At any rate, this is all, admittedly, pure speculation on my part.
My personal theory at this time is that Lindbergh was buying silence not his son's life. (Amy)
Amy, just a question about this. If Lindbergh was trying to buy silence, why is it that Hauptmann (who had the ransom cash and almost certainly built the ladder) maintained silence about Lindbergh from his arrest to the electric chair? If Lindbergh was concerned about silence, who wouldn’t he have just said, “Hauptmann was not the man whose voice I heard in the cemetery?”
Last Edit: Aug 5, 2013 8:26:13 GMT -5 by bookrefuge
First, let me start out by saying that I am working on a theory about this crime but it does remain fluid because I am still learning things about this whole kidnapping/extortion. I realize that I do think outside the box but I do include evidence and events that are real when formulating a theory.
In addressing BR's question, let me say that, to begin with, Lindbergh expressed doubt about being able to identify a voice he heard briefly two and a half years earlier. Lindbergh was given the opportunity to hear Hauptmann speak, yet like Condon, Lindbergh did not initially identify Hauptmann either! Strange isn't it? Both Lindbergh and Condon were facing the same dilemma. They were being confronted with the necessity to make an identification they probably thought they would never need to make. Yet they both would end up being the ones to say that "Hauptmann is the man".
Given that it was two and a half years later, I don't think Lindbergh was concerned about Hauptmann pointing a finger at him. Hauptmann was maintaining his innocence of the whole crime and that was not going to change. Hauptmann had withstood all kinds of treatment and admitted nothing. He was standing by his Fisch story even though no one was believing any of it. So I ask, why would LE believe any other scenarios Hauptmann were to offer up in his defense? Why would anyone ever believe anything he might confess about Lindbergh, Condon or anyone else? He was already looked upon as a babykiller responsible for the death of the most famous baby in the world.
Do you really think that blaming Lindbergh for Charlie's kidnapping would have saved him from the chair? Do you think that he would have been believed? Really? I don't think he thought it would gain him anything. His best and only hope was to maintain his innocent plea and remain silent.
But anyway, as to nobody but Condon being present for the St. Raymond's meeting: It occurs to me that someone called out "Hey Doctor!" to Condon at St. Raymond's, so it would seem somebody was there to meet him. Then again, this also is something we only have Condon's word for. Lindbergh's too, but, if I'm remembering correctly, he didn't seem too definite about seeing or hearing the "Hey Doctor" individual, at least not at first. I'd be curious to know exactly when Lindbergh, who was well up the street from Condon at the time, corroborated Condon's "Hey Doctor" encounter. At any rate, this is all, admittedly, pure speculation on my part.
I agree with many of your observations LJ. This last part is interesting. Do you believe Condon was the source of the "voice" himself? In an attempt to answer your last question.... I would have to consult many sources in order to find the true 1st time reference. But I do know, right off the top of my head without any question, that Lindbergh told both Walsh & Keaten that he heard a voice call out "Ay Doctor" from the Cemetery shortly after the discovery of CJr's corpse. He was also a Witness to the "Lookout" as well as the Man with the young girl which he also told them about.
Post by lightningjew on Aug 6, 2013 17:36:26 GMT -5
I think a lot of what I suggested may have something to it, especially the general idea that Condon's Home News ad, the kidnappers' response, and the cemetery meetings were all just putting on a show, going through the motions. I definitely think there was some previous contact between Condon and those who took CAL Jr., during which those things were prearranged. For me, the speed at which things happened gives that away: On March 7 Condon writes his letter, which appears on March 8 in his local paper. Within a day--ONE DAY, allowing for mail delivery time and everything--the kidnappers see Condon's advertisement, getting a response to him by March 9, and three days later they're meeting at Woodlawn Cemetery. Yeah, I'm sorry, but this is all happening way too fast for tracks not to have been laid in advance, so to speak. It's interesting too how the second ransom note to Lindbergh was written/posted on March 4 (received on the 6th), talking about how another person has to be brought in, and THEN, on the 7th-8th, Condon offers his services, volunteering to be brought in. It might be said that this sequence was intentionally and very carefully planned that way, to make it look like those two events were completely disassociated and unrelated. I don't know, I can see where that much is totally circumstantial, but I think the sequence of events could at least bear that interpretation (among others). But all this being said, I think it might be a little bit of a stretch right now to suggest there was no one to meet Condon at St. Raymond's. That was just a thought on my part, and might be going a little far. It's an intriguing possibility, but what keeps me from leaning fully in that direction is the "Hey Doctor" guy: If there was someone at the cemetery to shout that, then there had to be someone there to meet Condon for some purpose (even if not the official, stated one). But it never occurred to me that Condon himself might've shouted "Hey Doctor," for Lindbergh's benefit. Could be. Is that what you think? I mean, how would it have worked exactly? Condon and Lindbergh arrive at St. Raymond's, Condon walks off, goes back to Lindbergh and the car, and then off into the cemetery for the meeting...? I'd just like to get an idea to see if it's possible Condon was the source of "Hey Doctor." Also, another possibility I've considered is that Condon entirely made up hearing "Hey Doctor," lying to make it seem someone was there, and Lindbergh corroborated that lie for reasons of his own. At that point, Condon's thinking could've been: "I'm lying through my teeth here, so how can he corroborate this and why is he doing that?" But obviously Condon wouldn't have wanted to ask those questions aloud, so he never did.
But it never occurred to me that Condon himself might've shouted "Hey Doctor," for Lindbergh's benefit. Could be. Is that what you think? I mean, how would it have worked exactly? Condon and Lindbergh arrive at St. Raymond's, Condon walks off, goes back to Lindbergh and the car, and then off into the cemetery for the meeting...? I mean, I'd just like to get an idea to see if it's possible Condon was the source of "Hey Doctor." Also, another possibility I've considered is that Condon entirely made up hearing "Hey Doctor," lying to make it seem someone was there, and Lindbergh corroborated that lie for reasons of his own. At that point, Condon's thinking could've been: "I'm lying through my teeth here, so how can he corroborate this and why is he doing that?" But obviously Condon wouldn't have wanted to ask those questions aloud, so he never did.
No, I didn't think that but it brought back a memory concerning a film I saw at the Archives where Condon has this "acting" voice in front of the camera which was quite different then his own. I wouldn't doubt he would think to do something like this but as the version of events unfolds in the Reports it seems both Condon and Lindbergh hear the voice come from within the Cemetery and Condon reacts to it. It had to be loud though since Lindbergh claims to have heard it clearly. Still though, since we agree on many possibilities (and even if we didn't) I'd like to hear your ideas about such things.
First, let me start out by saying that I am working on a theory about this crime but it does remain fluid because I am still learning things about this whole kidnapping/extortion. I realize that I do think outside the box but I do include evidence and events that are real when formulating a theory.
I really don't think it is outside the box given all the facts and circumstances. Lindbergh would have been the primary suspect if this had happened today - and he should have been then too. Heck, he said that HIMSELF! As far as buying silence this could certainly be an option. I look at this by asking myself IF Lindbergh were involved what would be the most important thing to him? My answer is to end this. What needs to occur for this happen? The body turning up benefits Lindbergh - no one else at all. In fact, Criminals would benefit by holding onto the body then continuing to, ad infinitum, extort money. They had him over a barrel until that body showed up. I know that I've offered many differing views but this is the one I would go with in this regard. I think in ending it silence is implied for the very reasons you mention along with the fact no one was "allowed" to openly suspect him or any Family Member. That circle of protection, indirectly, extended to Staff as well because he would scare off Investigators who followed that lead. He would also, at times, suggest it was possible they could be involved. Who is legitimately trying to get their son back alive by protecting people "above suspicion" only to say confidentially they weren't? It's one red flag among many.
As far as buying silence this could certainly be an option. I look at this by asking myself IF Lindbergh were involved what would be the most important thing to him? My answer is to end this.(Michael)
The reason I say he was buying silence when paying the $50,000, that was, I believe, never to have been collected to begin with, is because the Bronx group didn't have the baby to give back, but they did know that Charlie was dead. They decided to use this knowledge to collect the $50,000 from Lindbergh. Whether Lindbergh thought they had Charlie's body or not, he would have to pay out the money. The sleeping suit made this possible. He apparently wasn't going to give them money based on the symbol signature alone. I guess the money bought him the silence because, if Hauptmann was involved with the kidnapping he remained silent, implicating absolutely no one else. Of course, there is always the possibility he was totally innocent and had no knowledge whatsoever to offer.
I totally agree that if Lindbergh were involved he would have wanted an end to it. Charlie's corpse being found did just that. It ended further extortion attempts. It would also allow Anne to begin the mourning process.
So, who decided to help Lindbergh get this much needed ending? We know it wasn't the Bronx gang. All they gave to Condon was a note saying where they would find Charlie. They had no corpse to place on Mt. Rose. Any ideas??
Post by lightningjew on Aug 8, 2013 16:54:51 GMT -5
Like you, I don't think the $50K was initially meant to be paid. I think it ultimately was to buy closure to the case. I think Lindbergh already knew CAL Jr. was dead and the kidnappers decided to hold the body hostage. I think the reason that the kidnappers having the body would've counted for anything is because, I believe, there was something physically wrong with baby, which would be apparent in an examination of the body. As Lloyd Gardner points out, the ransom notes could be interpreted as dropping hints of some special knowledge about the baby's health. So I think the kidnappers decided to blackmail Lindbergh over this and go for an extra $50K--the ransom mentioned in the first note--after they'd already been paid upfront. I think they brought in Condon for this purpose, to get that extra money. At any rate, once they had been paid the $50K, the rest of the original plan was carried out: The body was exhumed from where it was being kept and dumped on a roadside at a frequented rest-stop area near Hopewell, for closure to the case and once the body was too decomposed for any physical anomalies to be apparent. So basically, I think of the ransom negotiations as a month-long detour of sorts (the whole thing being prolonged a further month by animals dragging the body into the woods after it had been dumped on the Mt. Rose road).
So I think the kidnappers decided to blackmail Lindbergh over this and go for an extra $50K--the ransom mentioned in the first note--after they'd already been paid upfront.(LJ)
So you think the extra money was extorted because of the baby's physical issues which the public was unaware of? It is an interesting angle. I am not aware of any threats by the kidnappers to make public anything about the child's condition if the $50,000 isn't paid to them. Can you explain this a little better. It is different from what I thought was behind the extortion which is greed by a lesser paid accomplice(s).
At any rate, once they had been paid the $50K, the rest of the original plan was carried out: The body was exhumed from where it was being kept and dumped on a roadside at a frequented rest-stop area near Hopewell, for closure to the case and once the body was too decomposed for any physical anomalies to be apparent. (LJ)
So you feel that it was always in the plan to return Charlie's body to Lindbergh after it had decomposed, regardless of the extra $50,000 deviation? It was always part of the plan to provide closure? I had never considered that possibility. Hmmmmmm.
Post by lightningjew on Aug 8, 2013 22:40:47 GMT -5
My thinking on your first question stems from the fact that it was stated in one of the ransom notes (paraphrased): "We would've kidnapped him sooner, about a year ago, but we were worried that the baby wasn't strong enough." Initially, I thought this could just mean that a baby of CAL Jr.'s age a year prior to 3/1/32 is, generally speaking, too frail and delicate to survive an abduction and captivity, etc. But the more I thought about it, this seems unlikely, since, all things being equal, babies aren't that fragile. So then it occurred to me that all things might not be equal here--that, as Lloyd Gardner has suggested, that particular ransom note line could've been some sort of veiled reference to physical problems CAL Jr. may've been suffering from--as if the kidnappers were saying, "We know. You know that we know, and unless we get that extra $50K, everyone else will know too." And as to your second question--yeah, you pretty much summed it up. For me, the ransom negotiations were a detour and deviation to a point which was meant to be arrived at all along: The body turning up for the dual purpose of bringing closure to the whole thing and beginning (and ultimately ending) the mourning process, for both the Lindbergh family and the rest of the world. Now, with a body, there's also a murder investigation. And especially with the American Prince of Wales as the victim, that investigation would never cease, the whole country crying for the perps' blood until they were caught--so why would anyone get involved in such a thing and risk going to the chair? My answer to that would be that the LKC seems to have been a dead story within a year or so, even without anyone in custody. Further, I think the perps/kidnappers were covered from the standpoint of getting caught and didn't have to worry about it. After all, LE was not allowed to do its job properly and was being controlled and steered throughout.
My answer to that would be that the LKC seems to have been a dead story within a year or so, even without anyone in custody(LJ)
This is true. The country moved on to other things that were happening. This is why I feel that the LKC was meant to be a cold case. And I really feel it would have been if there was no unplanned extortion for the $50,000 dollars that was never meant to be collected. There would have been no New York/Bronx connection at all. There would have been no money trail. Nothing. Everything would have centered around the nursery and Hopewell area. That crime scene did not yield much in the way of clues to build an investigation around. Even with the finding of Charlie's corpse, it would not have lead them anywhere. This case would have most likely remained unsolved.
I think the perps/kidnappers were covered from the standpoint of getting caught and didn't have to worry about it. After all, LE was not allowed to do its job properly and was being controlled and steered throughout. (LJ)
This is my belief too. If you believe this was an arranged kidnapping (inside job) then the participants knew they would be protected from apprehension......which should lead one to look at who is doing the protecting. I realize the accepted view is that Lindbergh was stifling the efforts of LE because he was trying to ensure the safe return of his son. However, if this is true, then WHY did he call the police in to begin with if he felt that their assistance was going to interfere with getting Charlie back? He could have waited for the second contact from the kidnappers and then paid the ransom to get Charlie back. If this kidnapping were truly a kidnapping why didn't he exercise this option instead of making a three-ring circus, world-wide event out of it which could not have been in Charlie's favor as far as keeping him alive? Lindbergh is not a stupid man whatsoever. Why would he take that risk if his son is alive and he wanted to get him back that way?
Something just doesn't ring true about this whole kidnapping.
Post by lightningjew on Aug 9, 2013 14:55:53 GMT -5
Exactly. Why did he call the cops if A) he was just going to take charge of the investigation himself anyway (which he did, from the first night), and B) when calling the cops was tantamount to calling the press, creating a three-ring circus and all the confusion, chaos, and false leads that went with it. As you say, Lindbergh was no dummy, so why was this done?
I was doing some internet reading about the LKC and I read something surprising:
When the first mailed note came to Highfields it was mailed from Brooklyn. Commissioner Ed Mulrooney of the New York City Police Department wanted to surveil the postal boxes in the Brooklyn area to help track down who might be tied to the case and possibly locate CAL Jr. if he was being held in the Brooklyn area. Lindbergh strongly disapproved of the plan and actually threatened to ruin Mulrooney's career if this plan went forward.
Exactly. Why did he call the cops if A) he was just going to take charge of the investigation himself anyway (which he did, from the first night), and B) when calling the cops was tantamount to calling the press, creating a three-ring circus and all the confusion, chaos, and false leads that went with it. As you say, Lindbergh was no dummy, so why was this done? (LJ)
I've been looking for a Report to post to exemplify my point but can't locate it at the moment....however, someone gave Lindbergh information and he specfically told them not to tell the police but to give it only to him. I remember seeing that wondering how many other people he told that to which will we never know about because they did exactly as they were told to do.
When the first mailed note came to Highfields it was mailed from Brooklyn. Commissioner Ed Mulrooney of the New York City Police Department wanted to surveil the postal boxes in the Brooklyn area to help track down who might be tied to the case and possibly locate CAL Jr. if he was being held in the Brooklyn area. Lindbergh strongly disapproved of the plan and actually threatened to ruin Mulrooney's career if this plan went forward. Is there any truth to this?(Amy)
I've seen versions of this in a couple of places. The first time was in A&M's book. I remember wanting to verify it and wound up reading it elsewhere - probably from Alan Hynd or Liberty Magazine. I believe it's true.
Last Edit: Aug 10, 2013 12:56:35 GMT -5 by Michael
From Everybody wanted in the act by Alan Hynd (p105):
If it hadn't been for Lindbergh, the New York cops would probably have wrapped up the case after two ransom letters showed up from mailboxes in one particular section of Brooklyn. Police Commisssioner Ed Mulrooney, a realistic cop, was visited by the bright thought that whoever had mailed the two ransom letters might just drop a third from the same locality.
Mulrooney wanted to stick a two-man twenty-four-hour cover on every one of the scores of mailboxes in the section. Every time anybody mailed a letter at any of the boxes, a dick was to retrieve it by means of a special device that would hold it just inside the slot. If any letter was addressed either to Lindbergh or to an eccentric old man named John F. Condon, who had by that time become the intermediary in the case, the person who had just mailed the letter could be tailed before he got out of sight. Lindbergh vetoed Mulrooney on the ground that shadowing the letter writer might jeopardize the life of his son. Mulrooney argued that the letter writer need never know he was under surveillance and that by shadowing him, or his associates, it was entirely possible that the child could be recovered by a police coup.
Lindbergh still said no. He added that if Mulrooney went ahead anyway, he, Lindbergh, would use his influence to see that Mulrooney was broken. Lindbergh, at that time, might really have been able to make such a threat stick. At any rate, Mulrooney laid off. Next day a third ransom note was dropped in one of the very boxes that the cops would have been watching.
Fascinating stuff, Michael, and thanks for posting. I saw the Nova documentary on Zorn's theory the other night and it got me thinking all over again just how much Lindbergh himself made it difficult to impossible for law enforcement professionals to do their job. Even in the (by today's standards) criminal justice Stone Age of 1932 there were plenty of good, solid people who could have cracked the LKC if only they'd been allowed to do so. It was Lindbergh himself who prevented this, as your quote from Hynd's book reminds me once again. The question remains: why, why and why? on ad infinitum, ad nauseam. The more I think on it the standard answer (control freak) just isn't good enough. The man was literally (no need for quotes here) obstructing justice, plain and simple.
As I've said before it was an unwritten rule then, just as it is now - not to judge or question Lindbergh's behavior. If someone does they are quickly labeled with a negative adjective, Lindbergh is given some sort of pass by excusing his actions - or both. Once someone actually takes a step back and views this from a neutral perspective it's quite hard to ignore. With this in mind, as the research continues, there are other noticeable examples that most (having chosen to ignore this subject) shrug off or never bother to make a note of. It gets to the point where there actually is a mountain - instead of merely the mole hill we've been led to believe existed.
Something is going on. It's all right there for anyone to see. The more you look - the more you find.
Now, its very important for me to point out that nothing in this case is ever "black or white" so alternative explanations must be explored as well. But the usual ones such as "concern for the child's safety" or your example as "control freak" do not explain blatant contradictions and/or irrational decisions that neither excuses cover.
Michael: I wrote a lengthy three paragraph reply early today and it didn't post. I lost it. At the moment I don't have the time to reconstruct it but I was trying to tie the strains between Lindbergh's behavior (for want of a better word) and Condon's involvememt im the case, together, in response to you and to Lightningjew. You guys made me wonder if maybe Lindbergh orchestrated the faux kidnapping for fun (and/or profit), recruited a few Germans along the way. Condon somehow caught wind of all this, decided to jump in, too.
Post by lightningjew on Aug 14, 2013 13:03:45 GMT -5
Interesting, John. It sounds something like Algren and Monier's theory. I think a lot of what they say makes sense; the only thing that's a little weak for me is the motive they offer (practical joke gone wrong).
Post by lightningjew on Aug 14, 2013 17:12:57 GMT -5
The Algren and Monier theory is basically that the joke went wrong, that CAL Jr. was accidentally killed by Lindbergh during this practical joke and, afterwards, Lindbergh had to cover it up and make it seem like a kidnapping--writing the nursery ransom note, calling the cops, etc. Like I said, a lot of what they say makes sense, it's only the accidental practical joke motive that doesn't seem right to me.
Michael: Talked to him a couple of months ago.
Feb 11, 2020 18:22:20 GMT -5
jack7: Heey Michael - seen Dave around?
Feb 21, 2020 11:55:55 GMT -5
Michael: Talked to him a couple of months ago.
Feb 22, 2020 10:30:59 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour à tous les membres,et merci d'avoir crée ce forum. Je me présente à vous, mon prénom est mon pseudo. Je suis de France. Pendant mon sommeil,John Edgar Hoover m'a montré son vécu mais également une infinie partie d'indices concernant le nom du forum
Mar 3, 2020 12:02:53 GMT -5
Michael: Bienvenue Laurence. Allez-y et postez ce qu'il vous a dit - ça a l'air intéressant ...
Mar 3, 2020 12:26:06 GMT -5
stella7: Sorry for the short notice but there’s a documentary on Anne Morrow Lindbergh on at 8:30 tonight. Channel 23 New Jersey Public Television
Mar 11, 2020 19:24:43 GMT -5
wolfman666: the half hour one made in 2017? it was very good
Mar 14, 2020 9:23:46 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour Mickael,ainsi que tous les autres membres de ce forum..
Mar 20, 2020 7:48:19 GMT -5
Laurence24: Et merci de m'avoir acceptée chaleureusement dans votre forum..
Mar 20, 2020 7:50:48 GMT -5
Michael: Je vais consulter le site. N'hésitez pas à publier ou à créer un fil de discussion sur le babillard à ce sujet. Vous pouvez également y poster un lien car je crains que beaucoup ne lisent pas cette shoutbox.
Mar 20, 2020 9:56:06 GMT -5
Laurence24: Moi qui comprend pas l'anglais, j'ai été surprise de sa première visite dans mon rêve, quand j'ai cherchée par mots clés, et que j'ai découvert qui il était ou ou il avait vécu, je me suis dis, wouah !! dans l'au delà, ils peuvent faire beaucoup de choses
Mar 20, 2020 10:41:07 GMT -5
Laurence24: Bonjour et merci à vous Michaël,je viens de suivre votre conseil..
Apr 29, 2020 7:52:33 GMT -5