|
Post by mufti on Jan 28, 2018 17:32:30 GMT -5
To amy35 and All:
Wow, this is a theory I had never heard of before, which doesn't mean that one should accept or reject it at first glance. But in order for the ransom package to have contained $30,000 of unrecorded serial number bills, it would seem as if someone in a high position at J. P. Morgan, by replacing the recorded serial number bills with the unrecorded ones, would have known that he'd be playing a trick on the Treasury Dept. agents. Normally, that would not be a wise game to play. So what may have been the motivation for the switcheroo? Did Lindbergh order the J.P. Morgan people to do it, perhaps trying to protect (partially) the ransom receiver(s) from legal repercussions? Were the T-men themselves corrupt enough to let such a switch happen? What would the J.P. Morgan people have to gain from it?
I think that Lindbergh would have known who to go to at J.P. Morgan for assistance. Lindbergh and the Morrow family were well known to those at the top at J.P. Morgan Co. This bank was involved from the beginning with assembling the ransom money. The Treasury Dept would have never known about a switch. Some of the recorded serial number bills stayed in place. When they started to show up slowly in bank deposits, that was proof the ransom was paid with recorded bills. End of story for the Treasury Dept. Lindbergh's motivation for the switch is rooted in the public pledge he made to the kidnappers which he released to the newspapers on March 3. In that pledge he promised them confidentiality and would not try in injure in any way those connected with the return of the child. Lindbergh felt he was honoring that pledge by giving them money that could not be traced. In return he expected them to return his son alive and well. Like I said in my earlier post, I believe Lindbergh went to someone he was close to at J.P. Morgan for help and a plan was worked out. The Treasury agents knew nothing about what took place on March 23rd in the privacy of a J.P. Morgan office. Gain? The J. P. Morgan people were helping one of their own, Lindbergh. This is just a theory I have been working on. Thanks for asking those questions. And why do this exactly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2018 23:24:10 GMT -5
On March 4, 1932, the newspaper carried a letter from Charles and Anne Lindbergh to the kidnappers of their child. They conveyed their desire to make contact and in this letter they promised to keep everything confidential and not seek to injure in any way those connected with the return of the child. In order to keep the above promise, Lindbergh was dead set against using traceable money to pay the ransom as were Breckinridge, and J.P. Morgan friends Frank Bartow and Henry Davison. Apparently Lindbergh believed if he did what the kidnappers wanted he would get his son back. So in order to seek not to injure in any way these kidnappers, Lindbergh needed to find a way to pay the ransom the way he wanted. Quietly a plan was made to help Lindbergh keep his promise and hopefully get his son returned. Here is the letter that was run in the papers on March 4, 1932.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 29, 2018 9:46:59 GMT -5
hi amy you have to read the chapter from the book tax dodgers on the Lindbergh case, it tells you what happened with Lindbergh refusing then caving in
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2018 10:32:09 GMT -5
hi amy you have to read the chapter from the book tax dodgers on the Lindbergh case, it tells you what happened with Lindbergh refusing then caving in I have read it Steve. Lindbergh "caved in" after a plan was developed quietly, unknown to Irey, that some of the recorded serial number bills would be switched out. Please read the court testimony by J. P. Morgan officials on the handling of the ransom money after serial numbers were recorded and that money was packaged to go to the Corn Exchange Bank in the Bronx. It becomes clear what happened. Lindbergh made a promise to the kidnappers. He wanted his son back. Lindbergh did what he could to keep that promise. Some recorded serial number bills would be left in the ransom bundles. This way Lindbergh was complying with Irey while at the same time giving as much unrecorded money as he could to the kidnappers which was what the ransom notes demanded.
|
|
|
Post by mufti on Jan 30, 2018 14:33:26 GMT -5
Tried to read taxdodgers but it seemed to have zero point to it that touched on this. Can you summarize? On March 4, 1932, the newspaper carried a letter from Charles and Anne Lindbergh to the kidnappers of their child. They conveyed their desire to make contact and in this letter they promised to keep everything confidential and not seek to injure in any way those connected with the return of the child. In order to keep the above promise, Lindbergh was dead set against using traceable money to pay the ransom as were Breckinridge, and J.P. Morgan friends Frank Bartow and Henry Davison. Apparently Lindbergh believed if he did what the kidnappers wanted he would get his son back. So in order to seek not to injure in any way these kidnappers, Lindbergh needed to find a way to pay the ransom the way he wanted. Quietly a plan was made to help Lindbergh keep his promise and hopefully get his son returned. Here is the letter that was run in the papers on March 4, 1932. So haptmann or someone else spent all the clean bills but kept a bunch of bad ones around to incriminate him? Sounds very unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by wolfman666 on Jan 31, 2018 10:12:19 GMT -5
what do you mean zero point
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Jan 31, 2018 17:33:30 GMT -5
To All:
Would anyone know offhand the total value of the bills in the final ransom package given to CJ whose serial numbers were NOT recorded by the Treasury officials?
|
|
|
Post by john on Feb 5, 2018 4:31:44 GMT -5
I was just in Provincetown at the end of April and it was freezing and windy. keeping a baby on a boat up there in March and April seems really precarious and too exposed to the elements. It's cold, the seas are too rough and it's much windier out on the Cape. Yes, and also: Cape Cod in 1932 wasn't the famous vacation place it is today. There was some tourism and plenty of summer rentals, but its visitors came largely from New England, and there were far fewer vacation homes then than there are today. It would have been difficult for an average person, whether a semi-employed tradesman like Hauptmann or a schoolteacher, a policeman, a small businessman, those at most levels of the middle to lower middle or high end working class, to have afforded to spend much time on Cape Code back in the early Depression era. I just can't see Hauptmann or the kinds of people he was friends with, hung out with, being able to afford to spend much time on the Cape. It was a long drive from New York City, and one that few people could have afforded back then. Then, as with rural New Jersey, there's the business of navigating through then largely rural and small town southern New England, much of which also consisted of unpaved roads. Nowadays a drive from New York to the Cape, even all the way to Provincetown is, comparatively speaking, an easy ride. There are highways everywhere and road signs that give directions. Back at the time of the Lindbergh kidnapping it would have been, for the average person, somewhat daunting to drive all the way from the Bronx to Cape Code, especially in winter, but even in early spring. Then there was the business of keeping a place warm so that the baby would be healthy.
|
|