Post by Rita Witt on Mar 6, 2009 12:55:46 GMT -5
In the seventy five year plus time since the kidnap story no one has done anything to investigate the ladder claim other than the FBI when they backed out. We keep on hearing repeats of the ladder to nursery window story, but the cabinet makes this story impossible, and can easily be tested in your own home. On the new alluminum windows you can take the top window out easier, but on those old window you neede to slide the top window to the bottom. Just place a cabinet that is tall enough to parialy cover the window and what you find is a no brain solution that you can't get in or out of that window bcause you need to take out the top windows when there is a cabinet in front of the window?
There are hundreds of erros just like that one in the kidnap story, and it would take weeks for me to post them all. I constantly see the so called experts from other forums come here to make excuses for all the hundreds of suspicious case errors, but those excuses don't fit the story in general, and simply appear as excuses made by experts.
The case as explained by Wilentz in court is impossible, and if prosecutions main claim is a farce then the whole case must fall like in the OJ Case. You cannot convict someone for murder on speculation and untried evidence claims?
Here is an interesting site that shows many pictures of scenes from the case. Look for the investigators at the window site.
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/images.htm
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/lindberghhome.jpg
Notice where the investigator is standing on window sill the dark area on the bottom is the back of the cabinet in front of the window, and you would need to take out the top window in order to get in or out of the nursery window. Notice the ladder is leaning on the already open shutterbecause it is also impossible to open the shutters from a ladder outside the window
I think there are a few things every one missed? I have many years of photographic and movie television production experience that gives me the knowledge to discover details of phtography others not trained miss.
1. Look at the size of the person in the window compare to those on the ground, and I got around 4'8" to 5 foot, plus notice the slender arm and small feet a possible woman dressed in mans clothing.
2. The ladder was only two sections, but perhaps Bornmann built the third section.
3. The room is clearly brightly light, and with investigators the usual examination uses a bright spot light illumination for interior.
4. The cabinet is clearly defined in front of the investigators knees, and the opposite side wall an cieling can be seen so there is no darkened room excuse as Kevkon states.
5. Proof of standaard spotlight illumination can be seen as backlighting which can be seen around the midget arms and the molding neer the top of the window frame. Gang I have two years of college movie a television production and recognize back light, and know spot light is used in such work from my investigator training. You cannot foll me.
6. With spot light interior illumination to emphasize the room details the cabinet is clearly defined, including the reflection from the investigators belt buckle shinning on the window frame that can be seen between his legs.
In movie and television production we look for all those little incidental things most other people like you two guys miss. That is absolutly necessary in movies to catch items in scenes that might otherwise make a scene look comical when it is not supposed to. In this picture I have countered your uneducated claims which prove you have not entered into a real positive approach to investigating the picture and may in fact be just another verdict person single minded trick attack.
There are hundreds of erros just like that one in the kidnap story, and it would take weeks for me to post them all. I constantly see the so called experts from other forums come here to make excuses for all the hundreds of suspicious case errors, but those excuses don't fit the story in general, and simply appear as excuses made by experts.
The case as explained by Wilentz in court is impossible, and if prosecutions main claim is a farce then the whole case must fall like in the OJ Case. You cannot convict someone for murder on speculation and untried evidence claims?
Here is an interesting site that shows many pictures of scenes from the case. Look for the investigators at the window site.
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/images.htm
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/lindberghhome.jpg
Notice where the investigator is standing on window sill the dark area on the bottom is the back of the cabinet in front of the window, and you would need to take out the top window in order to get in or out of the nursery window. Notice the ladder is leaning on the already open shutterbecause it is also impossible to open the shutters from a ladder outside the window
I think there are a few things every one missed? I have many years of photographic and movie television production experience that gives me the knowledge to discover details of phtography others not trained miss.
1. Look at the size of the person in the window compare to those on the ground, and I got around 4'8" to 5 foot, plus notice the slender arm and small feet a possible woman dressed in mans clothing.
2. The ladder was only two sections, but perhaps Bornmann built the third section.
3. The room is clearly brightly light, and with investigators the usual examination uses a bright spot light illumination for interior.
4. The cabinet is clearly defined in front of the investigators knees, and the opposite side wall an cieling can be seen so there is no darkened room excuse as Kevkon states.
5. Proof of standaard spotlight illumination can be seen as backlighting which can be seen around the midget arms and the molding neer the top of the window frame. Gang I have two years of college movie a television production and recognize back light, and know spot light is used in such work from my investigator training. You cannot foll me.
6. With spot light interior illumination to emphasize the room details the cabinet is clearly defined, including the reflection from the investigators belt buckle shinning on the window frame that can be seen between his legs.
In movie and television production we look for all those little incidental things most other people like you two guys miss. That is absolutly necessary in movies to catch items in scenes that might otherwise make a scene look comical when it is not supposed to. In this picture I have countered your uneducated claims which prove you have not entered into a real positive approach to investigating the picture and may in fact be just another verdict person single minded trick attack.