The Lizzie Borden Society archive

Forum URL:

1. "Lindbergh kidnapping site"
Posted by Harry on Mar-28th-02 at 7:37 PM

For those interested in the Lindbergh kidnapping there is a website with tons of documents, images and links. Although the author(s) state the kidnapping was a hoax it does not detract from the mountains of data on the site. Worth a look if you are at all interested in the case.

http://www.lindberghkidnappinghoax.com/

And you thought only we Bordenites had a fixation on a crime!

(Message last edited Mar-28th-02  7:53 PM.)

Harry, I know you are into the Lindbergh case, right? Well, what do you think of the charlie did it theory? Just wondering. I realize this has nothing to do with Lizzie, but LIndy does "sound" similar so I am going to ask it anyway.

If Fleet and Harrington thought Lizzie was a cool customer they would have been amazed at Lindbergh. How many fathers or mothers would not have instantly opened the envelope with the ransom note in it?

I would look at Charlie in a more suspicious manner if I could only see a  motive.

I've always leaned toward an inside-job theory. This crime did not happen at 3 in the morning when all would have been in their jammies sleeping. It occurred about 9pm when all the occupants were still up. There were lights on in the house. I've never heard of a case where the kidnapper broke into a house under such circumstances.

If the kidnapper knew where the baby's room was then he most have also known that Betty Gow's room was just a few feet away and that the Lindbergh's bedroom had an entry into the baby's room. How would he know where any of these people would be?

I kinda like Noel Behn's theory that the baby was carried down the steps and not by the ladder. There is a staircase right in the hallway between Betty's room and the nursery. I don't think too much of his theory about it being the older Morrow daughter though.

Betty Gow would be a more likely candidate to me although the police didn't seem to think so.

If the baby wasn't accidently dropped from the ladder during a horrible practical joke, then how/why do you think he was killed?

There is the "curious incident of the dog in the night": "it did nothing"; "that is the curious incident"!

Didn't the dog go crazy with barking two nights earlier? Noel Behn uses this to question the "official theory". The important fact for me is that Bruno's Time Sheet was marked up to hide the fact that he worked to 5PM that day! It would've been a long, long trip to NJ in those days (before super hiways!). I don't doubt that he got the ransom money, of course.

Please don't get me started on this. The Borden Mystery (and the unsolved murder of JFK) is enough at this time. But I wish you well.

I have been attending the Lindbergh site for about a year, trudging through the books on the subject and arriving at the conclusion that it would have been impossible for Bruno to have executed this crime.  It appears to me that he was one of a small group of opportunists looking for a quick buck independent of the actual perpetrator, who was most likely a family member or employee, such as Gow.  The killing was probably accidental. 

It has been an eye-opening experience for me, having been reared by a family who had absolutely no doubt that Bruno was the kidnapper.  It is a fascinating case if you can leave your preconceptions at the door and an excellent argument against capital punishment.

If you are thin-skinned, however, beware.  There are a couple of extraordinarily rude people who post there daily.

I am humbled...I've merely dabbled in the crime, reading maybe 2 or 3 books and visting that site just lately.
My father LOVED Lindy!
Then he found out about his political leanings.
He did not live long enough to be disgusted by the newer revelations about his hero.

So, I want to know why the child was killed.  Was it murder or an accident?

I'm sure the death was accidental (I hope nobody would kill a young child, even if he believed in "eugenics". I personally know a few people whose education and experience puts their parents in the shade; opportunity, not innate talent.) Also, a poor diet can have life-long effect; hence WIC (food stamps for pregnant & children).

The question is still: who really did it?

I'm sure the death was accidental (I hope nobody would kill a young child, even if he believed in "eugenics". I personally know a few people whose education and experience puts their parents in the shade; opportunity, not innate talent.) Also, a poor diet can have life-long effect; hence WIC (food stamps for pregnant & children).

The question is still: who really did it?

How can you be *SURE* ?

I'm "sure" because I think only a madman or madwoman would kill a yound child deliberately. Don't you agree?

On another thread you said to Carol that what she pondered couldn't happen in those times in that place.  That a madman who "snapped" could not plan after that. (paraphrased--not an exact quote).  Well, if cool-thinking people staged a kid-napping and it somehow went terribly awry, and they decided that a crying baby that was too noticeable should be done away with, for expediency's sake, then deliberate murder CAN happen under these circumstances.  Also, if Lindy himself were involved, from what I've heard and read in the last few years he may not have cared too much about the fate of that child. 
Same as how much Lizzie seemed to care about the death of Abby....
Not all killers are *madmen*
Not all *madmen* are killers

I don't understand how you can be so *sure* about anything

I can be "sure" the same way I function in real life: things work in a familiar way. If the afternoon sun is to my back, I'm sure I'm heading easterly. It depends how the word "sure" is defined.

You probably already know this:

The earth spins really fast on an Axis, plus it Orbits.  The term "East" is an arbitrary word that merely denotes the relationship of the sun to the horizon.  It's Almost A Mystery, how we can walk through a parking lot and Not Get Dizzy.

There is a school of Map-Makers who believe that all the globes and maps are wrong, in that the upper hemisphere should be denoted as the Lower, and the Lower hemisphere should "dominate".  This would essentially "turn the world upside-down."  But since the planet spins & orbits and there IS no Up or Down or Left Or Right in SPACE, they could very well be right.

So what do we find "familiar" in that?

Also, at night, when we go outside and LOOK UP, we see stars that are never in the same place they were before.  Not "familiar".

We are, gazing UPward, LOOKING AT THE PAST.  Not too familiar an idea if one really contemplates it.
The star you see may no longer EXIST--it's fire extinguished 2 million years ago--the light just now reaching your eyeball.
That doesn't seem familiar..it seems like A Mystery To Me.

My brain, even, is not familiar.  It is not the same today as it was yesterday, and this is my "Oracle" of Perception.  It is losing cells, gaining synapses, re-wiring constantly.  And even what I "think I Know" changes all the time, as new research finds new answers to old questions, and my brain has to *adjust* to this new information all the time....ever Expanding, like the Universe. 

With So Much Change, even at cellular level, nothing seems "Sure" or "familiar" to me.  Everything is a Beautiful Mystery...and I hope to always be learning MORE.

(Message last edited Apr-16th-02  6:32 PM.)

I only read Noel Behn's (?) book "Airman & Carpenter", he attempts a solution to the case. We'll never know w/o a videotape of the crime. Even that can be faked nowadays (see J Leno show).

What is the "best evidence"?

Those contrary map makers seem to be perverse. Going north for cold, south for heat says the traditional orientation is right. Those with another orientation are fooling themselves again.
(Nothing personal intended for anybody.)