Post by Rita Witt on Oct 11, 2010 14:04:33 GMT -5
I noticed the use of "boad" mistake police and Wilentz used repeatedly earning them a three star dunce cap from the world of education. During my time in the University I studied German and used the digital programing style that has English speakers practice common words from English into German pronunciation using their dialect structure, and the word "boat" would be pronounced "boot" with a "D" ending sound.
From Theon Wright's Book, In Search of the Lindbergh Baby pg. 159 "Theo Bernsen, a European writer covering the Hauptmann Case, told Anthony Scaduto he had discussed the matter of Hauptmann's writing with an expert on translating English and German writing attached to the German Embassy in London. He showed his enlarged photographs, presumably the kidnap notes, and was told these were not written by a German who had been taught English, but by a man who thinks in English and is trying to write Germanic."
"The grammatical errors show it clearly, the attempt to make a Germanic construction by a man who thinks in English. He particularly stressed the word "boad" which Osborn and others claimed was German. In German it is written with a "t"--boot--and is not possible a German just learning English would make that mistake."
Unlike most everyone else I don't believe there was a kidnap, and even the FBI-BOI kept there distance, going over even the ladder construction they didn't believe was either used or capable of the act. Governor Hoffmann didn't believe the story either, and had even an affidavit from Ellerson claiming that Elizabeth had been responsible whether an accident or intentional.
We know from their stories that at least Anne and Bette were in the nursery at 7:30 that evening, but from a claimed kidnap in around 9pm being discovered at 10pm no fingerprints can be found, which in my book, and in BOI's book is what distanced them self from that story. If you studied law enforcement such evidence doesn't hold true for the investigator, and am mystified why it was believed by Bornman and Wilentz?
There is also a feeble claim of mud marks in the room, but what did the imaginary kidnapper do carry in a handfull of mud to leave as confirmation he had been there, if these where the kidnappers footprints whey didn't he clean them up like he cleaned all the fingerprints from the nursery?
What if I told you the Mersman sales man looked more like CJ than Hauptmann, and he was questioned by the BOI-FBI on kidnap-bank robbery suspicion. I don't believe the case records show all the investigations, or that a lot of records were simply held in reserve pending a conviction to end the case.
I think the government didn't believe the case as told either, and were investigating leads with a grain of salt added. This contributed to everyone having some hesitation on investigating further, believing any minute the true story would be divulged by family or employee. The only incidence of employee divulging a different story came from Ellerson to Governor Hoffmann, telling that he thought Elizabeth had killed Carley claiming he seen Charley dead in the drive with Elizabeth incoherent.
there are also so many disappearing features in this case that add even to the already suspicious lack of interest by investigators to examine the basic story. Missing fingerprints, Schipple's hidden green sedan, Pig Lady story, and to top it off Anne's reference to an accident and family hiding DNA evidence , can we believe any of the story, or were neighbors trying to help Lindbergh in some kind of difficulty?
All this and much more, the one month introduction to CJ extortion make the whole kidnap story seem a feeble attempt at a cover for something other than kidnap happening?
It is interesting to examine the many leads in the case the police ignored. Police never go after things the prosecution avoids, and many people fall for the belief that court cases represent fact, when in reality prosecution decieves the defense, and defense decieves the prosecution. If you attend court cases you hear rewording of sentences when the judge or the opposing lawyer catches the trick questions and
Reference to Hilda Schaffer
books.google.com/books?id=axBAqJwrx2IC&pg=PA456&lpg=PA456&dq=Hilda+Schaffer+Handwriting+Expert&source=bl&ots=NGcE6-ffhV&sig=e5hLEL7Tok7qiuNV-sLJZIxlKz8&hl=en&ei=o3eyTKa4F5OknQeL2KmQBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
John M. Trendley Handwriting Impersonation Expert Pours over every note in ransom notesthat Osborn ignored, in fact Osborn only identified similarity in (is) as the only word similar to Hauptmann in the nursery note.
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/trentest.htm
Hilda Schaffer claims overwriting in the nusry not, and I do also. The overwriting is apparent by just looking at the note being easily seen. The overwriting is very easily seen with ifra red filtering which brings out the blue/black ink.
www.network54.com/Forum/503282/thread/1155183848/last-1155183848/Nursery+Note+Secret+Writing-
From Theon Wright's Book, In Search of the Lindbergh Baby pg. 159 "Theo Bernsen, a European writer covering the Hauptmann Case, told Anthony Scaduto he had discussed the matter of Hauptmann's writing with an expert on translating English and German writing attached to the German Embassy in London. He showed his enlarged photographs, presumably the kidnap notes, and was told these were not written by a German who had been taught English, but by a man who thinks in English and is trying to write Germanic."
"The grammatical errors show it clearly, the attempt to make a Germanic construction by a man who thinks in English. He particularly stressed the word "boad" which Osborn and others claimed was German. In German it is written with a "t"--boot--and is not possible a German just learning English would make that mistake."
Unlike most everyone else I don't believe there was a kidnap, and even the FBI-BOI kept there distance, going over even the ladder construction they didn't believe was either used or capable of the act. Governor Hoffmann didn't believe the story either, and had even an affidavit from Ellerson claiming that Elizabeth had been responsible whether an accident or intentional.
We know from their stories that at least Anne and Bette were in the nursery at 7:30 that evening, but from a claimed kidnap in around 9pm being discovered at 10pm no fingerprints can be found, which in my book, and in BOI's book is what distanced them self from that story. If you studied law enforcement such evidence doesn't hold true for the investigator, and am mystified why it was believed by Bornman and Wilentz?
There is also a feeble claim of mud marks in the room, but what did the imaginary kidnapper do carry in a handfull of mud to leave as confirmation he had been there, if these where the kidnappers footprints whey didn't he clean them up like he cleaned all the fingerprints from the nursery?
What if I told you the Mersman sales man looked more like CJ than Hauptmann, and he was questioned by the BOI-FBI on kidnap-bank robbery suspicion. I don't believe the case records show all the investigations, or that a lot of records were simply held in reserve pending a conviction to end the case.
I think the government didn't believe the case as told either, and were investigating leads with a grain of salt added. This contributed to everyone having some hesitation on investigating further, believing any minute the true story would be divulged by family or employee. The only incidence of employee divulging a different story came from Ellerson to Governor Hoffmann, telling that he thought Elizabeth had killed Carley claiming he seen Charley dead in the drive with Elizabeth incoherent.
there are also so many disappearing features in this case that add even to the already suspicious lack of interest by investigators to examine the basic story. Missing fingerprints, Schipple's hidden green sedan, Pig Lady story, and to top it off Anne's reference to an accident and family hiding DNA evidence , can we believe any of the story, or were neighbors trying to help Lindbergh in some kind of difficulty?
All this and much more, the one month introduction to CJ extortion make the whole kidnap story seem a feeble attempt at a cover for something other than kidnap happening?
It is interesting to examine the many leads in the case the police ignored. Police never go after things the prosecution avoids, and many people fall for the belief that court cases represent fact, when in reality prosecution decieves the defense, and defense decieves the prosecution. If you attend court cases you hear rewording of sentences when the judge or the opposing lawyer catches the trick questions and
Reference to Hilda Schaffer
books.google.com/books?id=axBAqJwrx2IC&pg=PA456&lpg=PA456&dq=Hilda+Schaffer+Handwriting+Expert&source=bl&ots=NGcE6-ffhV&sig=e5hLEL7Tok7qiuNV-sLJZIxlKz8&hl=en&ei=o3eyTKa4F5OknQeL2KmQBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
John M. Trendley Handwriting Impersonation Expert Pours over every note in ransom notesthat Osborn ignored, in fact Osborn only identified similarity in (is) as the only word similar to Hauptmann in the nursery note.
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Hauptmann/trentest.htm
Hilda Schaffer claims overwriting in the nusry not, and I do also. The overwriting is apparent by just looking at the note being easily seen. The overwriting is very easily seen with ifra red filtering which brings out the blue/black ink.
www.network54.com/Forum/503282/thread/1155183848/last-1155183848/Nursery+Note+Secret+Writing-