SMF - Just Installed!
Username  
Password
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: New Book on the Lindbergh Kidnapping  (Read 1309 times)
Philip G
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 54


View Profile
« on: June 24, 2012, 08:22:39 AM »


I just heard about this new book on the Lindbergh case, 'Cemetery John'.  This was written by Robert Zorn.  Zorn asserts the other accomplice was John Knoll, a family acquaintance of his father (Eugene Zorn). Unbelievable!! The book has pretty good reviews on Amazon and is available at a few Bergen County (NJ) libraries.

Anyone read this one yet?       
Logged

Forgive and be Forgiven.

Sara Watkins
emma1231
Newbie
*
Posts: 29


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2012, 06:50:09 AM »

I just got my copy of the Zorn book in the mail on Monday and started reading it a few mins. ago.  Seems a little awkwardly written, and i hope I can enjoy it while studying it in my precious free time.   There has always been, among students of the case, a slight doubt that Cemetey John was Hauptmann, because whlle he looked like the police sketch drawn with the help of Dr. John F. COndon, the go-between who met him in or opp. two cemeteries, COndon (known as "Jafsie") would not say that John  and Hauptmann were one and the same until just before he took the witness stand at the trial of the century. He steadfastly refused to ID him until then, and was no doubt pressured to do so after Lindy testified that he had the same voice as the man whom he heard holler out to Jafsie in one of the cemeteries, "Hey doktor!   [i'm ] over here!" (hiding behind a tombstone waiting for him to bring the ransom money). (Even Lindy's ID is suspect for some logistic reasons I won't go into here.)     Jafsie said that the man in the cemeteries (thereafter called "Cemetery John") had a cough and a boney growth on the joint of his thumb (which he felt when he shook hands with him).  Cemetery John may have been someone else.   Hauptmann may have simply been  an accomplice.  SO why didnt he name them/him to help his cause?   WHy didnt he even name them when he was on Death Row?   Prob. bec. he was sure the "gang" or accomplices had threatened to kill his wife and little boy if he did.  Hauptmann no doubt was in on the crime; the evidence of that  is strong.  This is why the case is still fascinating.  Even Condon is full of mystery.   The Zorn book supposedly has the answers.      I know of two students of the Lincoln case who ae, like me, students of the Lindbergh case -- Mike Kaufman and John Howard.   John is already reading the book. Heaven knows when I'll be finished with the book.
Logged
Gene C
Full Member
***
Posts: 200


Fido


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2012, 08:05:04 AM »

I have only read a little about the case.  Do many people believe the child died as a result of a head injury caused by being dropped as the kidnappers came down the ladder from the second floor window?
Logged

The more you know, the more you think the less you know, because you know that you don't know.  The less you know the more you think the more you know, because you don't know that you don't know. 
 (Not bad for an old dog)
Dawn E Foster
Newbie
*
Posts: 31


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2012, 04:29:19 PM »

I always read everything I could ever find about it at either of our local libraries (which, sadly, was never very much).  Lizzie Borden and Jack the Ripper too.
Logged
BoothBuff
Guest
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2012, 04:39:07 PM »

     That's what's speculated, Gene. The ladder had a broken rung that caused speculation that as the kidnapper fell, the baby's head may have hit another rung. Being from N.J. I've looked into that case, but it's too weird for me. The twists and turns are endless.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2012, 04:49:18 PM by BoothBuff » Logged
BoothBuff
Guest
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2012, 08:23:32 PM »

     I actually have to go to N.J. State Police Headquarters next week. If anyone wants me to stop in the museum and see if they have a pamphlet regarding the kidnapping, I would be happy to do so and mail it to you. Keep in mind, it will be slanted towards the State's case. Drop me an e-mail or a PM if you would like me to check. 
Logged
BoothBuff
Guest
« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2012, 11:11:58 AM »

     An article about the Zorn book.               

                                                    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/161573595.html                                                                 
Logged
emma1231
Newbie
*
Posts: 29


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2012, 09:40:55 PM »

FInished reading the Zorn book. DOn't waste your time or money. This reminds me of Otto Eisenschiml's "Why Was Lincoln Murdered?" ALtho Zorn says he just went where the evidence took him, he makes statements that are conjecture and presents flimsy evidence as tho it was important.  He leads the reader instead of remaining objective. Right off the bat he gives himself away as a lousey researcher by failing to understand that none of Hauptmann's family or friends ever called him or referred to him as "Bruno," as he relates.  The book's flimsy evidence is stretched too much.   The footnotes make it appear that this was well researched.    But the quality of the mateial is what counts, not the quantity of footnotes. Pleze don't ask for more details. Just ignore this book and you'll do yourself a big favor!  And stick with the Lincoln case.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: