Lindbergh Kidnapping Case: the use of St. Raymond's Cemetery

[Mayerling]

How many people out there are interested in this infamous case? If you are perhaps you can answer a question I have been thinking about.

In all the various books dealing with the case, has anyone ever seen a reason that the St. Raymond's Cemetery in the Bronx was the choice for arranging the drop - off of the ransom and for first meeting Dr. Condon to arrange the details. I am not specifically interested in whether Hauptmann was behind it, or involved, or not involved. I'm just curious about if any student of the case figured out why St. Raymond's Cemetery was involved.

Jeff

[Ginger]

I certainly don't know, but I've always assumed that it's because a cemetery is usually empty after dark, so less chance of random passersby interrupting the meeting. Also, you have lots of hiding places, and if you have to flee, you're not constrained to move only in certain directions, as you would be in an alley or street.

[GUT]

No idea.

Other than the fact that a cemetery is a warren of places to hide.

[Ginger]

Also, as an afterthought, St. Raymond's is a huge cemetery. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for the police to cordon off the perimeter on short notice, and if they tried, they'd certainly be noticed.

[Graham]

As far as I can recall, Dr Condon was a wordy old busybody who pushed himself into the Lindbergh Case. He wrote an "open letter" to the kidnapper(s) in a Bronx newspaper, which was responded to by letter by *someone* who used the peculiar circles motif, same as the claimed kidnapper had used in a previous ransom-letter to Lindbergh. Via messages posted in the personal columns of whatever that Bronx newspaper was, Condon was asked by the claimed kidnapper to meet him in a cemetery with, of course, the ransom money. I always thought it was the Woodlawns Cemetery, but I think that Condon claimed to have met the "kidnapper" twice, each time in different cemeteries, so the other one could well have been St Raymond's. On one of the two occasions, Condon said he was driven to the meeting-place by Lindbergh himself - or so Condon claimed. I always thought that Condon was making most of it up, to be honest. Why he should want to do that, God alone knows. The man Condon met, or claimed to have met, became known as 'Cemetery John', because Condon himself said that he called the man 'John', whatever his real name was. If it was Hauptmann, then as far as I know it has never been proven.

The whole 'Condon Thing' is, to me, the oddest part of the entire Lindbergh Case. It just doesn't ring true. Weird.

Graham

[Mayerling]

Thanks for the responses so far - it's very gratifying, and I see how the cases still grips people some eighty three years later.

You all have good points (and I am bothered by Dr. Condon's self-advertising involvement too, by the way), but I stumbled on something I found curious the other day - but that may very well mean nothing.

Do any of you ever look at the "Find-A-Grave" web site? It is good if you want to find the final resting places of many people, particularly famous or infamous ones. Once I discovered that a cemetery that was two miles from my home is where the body of "Murder Inc." head, Louis Buckholter is buried. And it does include all of the known parties and suspects in the Ripper case (whose locations are known).

I was looking up St. Raymond's Cemetery (because you can check cemeteries) and checked out what famous people were there. And I found a name that was familiar: Vincent "Mad Dog" Coll. If see you plenty of old Warner Brothers and other Hollywood studio films about criminals, frequently you will see somebody going into a telephone booth in a pharmacy, and shortly some hoods come in and shoot the person with tommy guns through the telephone booth door. This interesting way of killing off somebody was created when Coll was killed in 1932 - he was on the phone threatening somebody.

Coll was a piece of garbage in human form. His murder was shortly after he was able to beat a homicide charge in killing a kid (killed in a cross-fire Coll started to get a rival gangster - Coll's victory in court was due to his superb counsel, Samuel Leibowitz, breaking some of the witnesses on the stand). Totally violent, he had tried to steal enterprises owned by another Bronx based criminal, Arthur "Dutch Schultz" Flegenheimer. Coll had visions of making himself boss of the Bronx and one of New York's biggest criminal bosses and Schultz was in the way. To be fair Schultz was also a piece of garbage, and would eventually come to a well deserved end in 1935.

One thing Coll needed for his campaign against Schultz was a huge war chest - and he got it from kidnapping and holding for ransom various hoods or businessmen in the rackets with Schultz or others. One of his biggest attempts at this was kidnapping "Big Frankie" LeMange, a partner of Owney Madden. This was not a riskless series of enterprises - many killings were involved including that of Coll's brother Peter.

After the trial, because (presumably) of his paying Leibowitz a well deserved fee, Coll's coffers for his campaign were a little empty. So he decided to resume the kidnapping plan. Apparently he called Madden again to threaten him with death if he did not fork over a ransom. Madden had learned from the last instance of what he had to do, and had a tracer wire on his phone this time. As a result, when Coll called Madden, the latter kept him on the phone as long as possible to 1) trace the call, and 2) get a hitman to that spot as soon as possible. It worked. [Madden, by the way, was one of the lucky gangsters - he died in bed of natural causes.]

Coll was killed in late February 1932. He was born in the Bronx, and his burial was next to his brother Peter's body, in St. Raymond's Cemetery. In March 1932 Charles Augustus Lindbergh Jr. was kidnapped and killed.

Now given the newspaper coverage of Coll's bloody antics in the early 1930s up to his demise and funeral, and it being centered in the Bronx, I thought about how "kidnapping" and ransoms played such a large part in what he was up to in those last years - and how it was so interesting that the cemetery that he was buried in happened to be St. Raymond's, where Dr. Condon met "Cemetery John". Whoever "Cemetery John was (Hauptmann, Fish, another party, or if he was a figment of Condon's imagination or worse), the Bronx based suspects would all have been following Coll's rise and fall and burial because of the Bronx connection, and the choice of St. Raymond's (where the notorious kidnapping killer Coll was buried) as a point in the Lindbergh case becomes curious to say the least.

Jeff

[GUT]

Find a grave can be great for family research too. Family connections and dates of death that you can't find elsewhere.

[Mayerling]

Find a grave can be great for family research too. Family connections and dates of death that you can't find elsewhere.

G'Day GUT,

Quite true. I use it to look up people I knew from fifty ago and since.

Jeff

[Ginger]

If see you plenty of old Warner Brothers and other Hollywood studio films about criminals, frequently you will see somebody going into a telephone booth in a pharmacy, and shortly some hoods come in and shoot the person with tommy guns through the telephone booth door. This interesting way of killing off somebody was created when Coll was killed in 1932 - he was on the phone threatening somebody.

I've seen that scene so many time, yes! I hadn't known that it was a reference to an actual crime, although I probably should have suspected as much. What I've always associated Mad Dog Coll with was recklessly opening fire when there were children playing between him and his intended victim.

It's interesting that he was buried in St. Raymond's. Checking the map, though, it looks like St. Raymond's and Woodlawn are the only two sizeable cemeteries in the Bronx, and Coll being Irish, the Catholic cemetery seems the more likely place for him to end up.

[Mayerling]

I've seen that scene so many time, yes! I hadn't known that it was a reference to an actual crime, although I probably should have suspected as much. What I've always associated Mad Dog Coll with was recklessly opening fire when there were children playing between him and his intended victim.

It's interesting that he was buried in St. Raymond's. Checking the map, though, it looks like St. Raymond's and Woodlawn are the only two sizeable cemeteries in the Bronx, and Coll being Irish, the Catholic cemetery seems the more likely place for him to end up.

Yes and No. If you are famous enough you can get buried in almost cemetery in the five boroughs. Ed Koch has a grave in the upper Manhattan cemetery connected to Trinity Church (he did not want to be buried outside his beloved Manhattan Island, and as a famous three term mayor there was no problem).

Bat Masterson is buried up in Woodlawn - he came east, settled in New York City and was sports reporter (also editor) on a New York daily paper. He died here in the 1920s. But more to the point, George M. Cohan, who was a Catholic, is buried in Woodlawn. So is Isidor Straus, of the elderly couple who died together on the Titanic. The Strauses were Jews. But he owned Macy's and had been a New York City Congressman in the 1880s, and was part of the tragic aura of the 1912 shipwreck. Sadly they never recovered Ida's body, but her death date is given too. The tombstone looks like a ship (not the Titanic).

[RivkahChaya]

People used to be much more reverent about cemeteries than they are now. Now, for example, the police would not hesitate to pursue someone on foot even if it meant running over a bunch of graves to do it, but the police would have had second thoughts about tramping over graves back in the 1930s, so if Condon did not come alone, but had police hiding in the bushes, who made a sudden appearance, they would probably have tried, back in the 1930s, to run around the cemetery. If they tried to catch "Cemetery John" coming out on the other side, the odds didn't favor them, because they wouldn't know exactly where he'd emerge, and street lighting wasn't as good then. The cemetery probably wasn't lit at night, the way they are now, to discourage homeless people from sleeping in them, and illegal activity in general from taking place.

Police weren't as experienced at this sort of thing then, and something a SWAT team might do now, like have the entire cemetery covertly surrounded before Condon said his first word, just wouldn't have happened.

The police would also be more likely to hesitate to fire a gun at a suspect fleeing through a cemetery, especially a cemetery attached to a church, back in the 1930s. Police wouldn't think twice about where they were now, but they'd be very aware then, and Lindbergh baby or not, firing in a church cemetery would likely result in lots of angry letters to the newspapers and the police commissioner.

All in all, it was a smart location. Cemetery John, whoever he was, probably had an exit route practiced, maybe having visited the cemetery in the daylight, and mapped it out.

I agree that there is a good possibility the whole thing was a hoax, except that Condon reported the man asked if he would fry if the baby was dead. I very much doubt Condon would invent a depressing footnote like that, since he wanted as much as anyone save for the Lindberghs themselves, a good outcome, so he could be a hero, and even suggesting that the baby wasn't alive could bring his part in the drama to an abrupt end.

Now, it's possible that an imposter who was vying for the ransom, and had no child to turn over, was concerned about being caught and executed for a crime he didn't commit, but it seems unlikely that he would bring up the subject as abruptly as he did. It sounds more like something that sprung from a guilty conscience.

And, of course, Hauptmann did live in the Bronx. I know that begs the question, for people who still want proof that Hauptmann was involved, but personally, I accept that even though he might not have worked alone, Hauptmann was definitely involved in the kidnapping, so the fact that the cemetery was in Hauptmann's general vicinity is a point in favor of Cemetery John having been one of the actual kidnappers.

The cemetery is about a 2.5 mile walk from where Hauptmann lived, I think (according to Wiki, he lived on 222 St.), but aside from the fact that people didn't think twice about walking much longer distances than we do now, Hauptmann must have had a car-- he was caught because he was paying for gas with some of the ransom money, and the license plate on the car was traced back to him.

[Mayerling]

People used to be much more reverent about cemeteries than they are now. Now, for example, the police would not hesitate to pursue someone on foot even if it meant running over a bunch of graves to do it, but the police would have had second thoughts about tramping over graves back in the 1930s, so if Condon did not come alone, but had police hiding in the bushes, who made a sudden appearance, they would probably have tried, back in the 1930s, to run around the cemetery. If they tried to catch "Cemetery John" coming out on the other side, the odds didn't favor them, because they wouldn't know exactly where he'd emerge, and street lighting wasn't as good then. The cemetery probably wasn't lit at night, the way they are now, to discourage homeless people from sleeping in them, and illegal activity in general from taking place.

Police weren't as experienced at this sort of thing then, and something a SWAT team might do now, like have the entire cemetery covertly surrounded before Condon said his first word, just wouldn't have happened.

The police would also be more likely to hesitate to fire a gun at a suspect fleeing through a cemetery, especially a cemetery attached to a church, back in the 1930s. Police wouldn't think twice about where they were now, but they'd be very aware then, and Lindbergh baby or not, firing in a church cemetery would likely result in lots of angry letters to the newspapers and the police commissioner.

All in all, it was a smart location. Cemetery John, whoever he was, probably had an exit route practiced, maybe having visited the cemetery in the daylight, and mapped it out.

I agree that there is a good possibility the whole thing was a hoax, except that Condon reported the man asked if he would fry if the baby was dead. I very much doubt Condon would invent a depressing footnote like that, since he wanted as much as anyone save for the Lindberghs themselves, a good outcome, so he could be a hero, and even suggesting that the baby wasn't alive could bring his part in the drama to an abrupt end.

Now, it's possible that an imposter who was vying for the ransom, and had no child to turn over, was concerned about being caught and executed for a crime he didn't commit, but it seems unlikely that he would bring up the subject as abruptly as he did. It sounds more like something that sprung from a guilty conscience.

And, of course, Hauptmann did live in the Bronx. I know that begs the question, for people who still want proof that Hauptmann was involved, but personally, I accept that even though he might not have worked alone, Hauptmann was definitely involved in the kidnapping, so the fact that the cemetery was in Hauptmann's general vicinity is a point in favor of Cemetery John having been one of the actual kidnappers.

The cemetery is about a 2.5 mile walk from where Hauptmann lived, I think (according to Wiki, he lived on 222 St.), but aside from the fact that people didn't think twice about walking much longer distances than we do now, Hauptmann must have had a car-- he was caught because he was paying for gas with some of the ransom money, and the license plate on the car was traced back to him.

Interesting points to consider about how reverently people felt about cemeteries back in 1932, Rivkah, particularly the police. Still, this was the time that people began calling them "the bone yards", which is hardly reverential.

The interesting thing about the car is that I believe it was a new one (the one that Hauptmann drove in 1934-35 when he made the purchase of gasoline with that out-dated "gold certificate" $20.00 bill*). It was supposed to be one of the items the police subsequently found (like stock market transactions he made) showing that Hauptmann, post - May 1932 was far more prosperous than prior to March 1932.

Jeff

*I don't know how many numismatics are out there who don't need this bit of "nickel knowledge" (trivia), but if you wonder what the bit about the "gold certificates" are read the following:

If you collect old U.S. paper money, certainly you have seen low amounts of really old currency with "silver certificate" printed on them. They are not on currency today. The reason was that prior to 1933 the U.S. printed two types of bills with gold or silver certificate on them. The purpose was that one could go into any U.S. bank, present one of these bills (even $1, $2, or $5) and demand (and get) the equivalent amount in silver or gold from the bank (because of the U.S. being under the Federal Reserve System). I am not certain if the bank would give small amounts of gold for the smaller bills, but certainly for the $10 and $20 amounts and up. Then came the Depression, the election of 1932, and the New Deal. In the "first 100 days" of the New Deal, FDR took us off the gold standard, and all U.S. gold coins were no longer minted. He also stopped the printing of gold certificates. However, the silver certificates were continued, and would be in use until the 1960s when they were finally eased out (though occasionally one shows up in one's paper currency change - if one does, put it aside - it's more valuable than the face value). Roosevelt's "first hundred days were from March to June 1933, a year after the kidnapping. When the ransom was paid the authorities made a list of the gold certificate bills and their serial numbers. As this was something the kidnappers were unaware about, they did not think of being careful using them. To be fair many of the bills were circulated in the New York - New Jersey area before the one traced to Hauptmann turned up.

[Graham]

What I've never understood about Condon ("Jafsie") is why on earth he was allowed by Lindbergh to get involved in the first place, unless it was because of sheer desperation and frustration that his son hadn't been found. It seems to me that he just muddied the already dirty waters and led Lindbergh up at least one blind alley.

Of course, there are those who claim that the whole thing was a hoax, that the child had never been kidnapped at all and had been accidentally killed by Lindbergh, who then 'used' Condon to help create the 'kidnap legend'. I don't personally go along with this, but ya never know!

I'm fairly well convinced that Hauptmann was involved somewhere along the line, but just to point up the often-claimed 'gangster connection', one time when Condon spoke to 'John' (or the man he thought was 'John' on the phone, he claimed he heard a loud Italian voice in the background.

Graham

[Mayerling]

What I've never understood about Condon ("Jafsie") is why on earth he was allowed by Lindbergh to get involved in the first place, unless it was because of sheer desperation and frustration that his son hadn't been found. It seems to me that he just muddied the already dirty waters and led Lindbergh up at least one blind alley.

Of course, there are those who claim that the whole thing was a hoax, that the child had never been kidnapped at all and had been accidentally killed by Lindbergh, who then 'used' Condon to help create the 'kidnap legend'. I don't personally go along with this, but ya never know!

I'm fairly well convinced that Hauptmann was involved somewhere along the line, but just to point up the often-claimed 'gangster connection', one time when Condon spoke to 'John' (or the man he thought was 'John' on the phone, he claimed he heard a loud Italian voice in the background.

Graham

Giving Lindbergh the benefit of the doubt, for the sake of his and Anna's sanity he had to act to see what he could do to find his son. Lindbergh also had been contacted by others (Gaston Means and that boat contractor) who claimed they could find the baby. Means was more indirect, and it was part of a scheme to steal money (meant for the kidnappers, supposedly) from the wealthy woman he used as a conduit to the Lindberghs, Evelyn Walsh McClean, and the contractor's motive never was really established (presumably notoriety). Condon was in the same group, except (being a school principal) he was somewhat more respectable.

In later years Condon was a firm supporter of Lindbergh's "America First" movement, so I think he probably never was planning to hurt the aviator's family.

Jeff

[Graham]

Yes Jeff, even Al Capone from his prison cell claimed he could find the baby. Me, I genuinely think that the baby was kidnapped to extort money, and that whoever arranged the kidnap included both Fisch and Hauptmann, at the very least. Whether the infant's corpse found in the woods near to the Lindbergh house really was that of the Lindbergh baby, I don't know, and I don't think anyone does or ever will. Possibly it was. On the night of the abduction Lindbergh himself said he heard a sound like the 'breaking of an orange box', or words to that effect, and that could well have been the breaking of the crude ladder leading to the death of the poor child as it fell from the arms of the abductor as he himself fell. Just don't know. The very fact that Hauptmann had gold certificates as paid over to 'Cemetery John' is I feel damning evidence against him. Unfortunately for posterity Hauptmann never said a single word following his conviction, even though he was given the chance right up to the moment they threw the switch on him. As for Condon, I personally believe he did more harm than good, but really not for me to say.

Graham