|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 168
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 1:41 pm: | 
|
Hi Don,
Yes, no chance of that and happily so. According to him Camp Cooke is now Vandenberg Air Force Base.
Regards,
Stan |
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 128
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 3:07 pm: |
|
My father, a Marine pilot in WWII and Korea, was stationed at El Toro in 1947. He and his mates thought (I don't know why) the murderer was an American fighter pilot and former Japanese POW.
William T. Rasmussen has an intriguing website.
http://www.williamtrasmussen.com/
Take care,
Kevin |
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 606
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 4:25 pm: |
|
Stan,
I'm glad for both you and your dad there is no chance of that book.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 172
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
Hi William,
The Jack Wilson of Dahlia fame was born on August 5 of 1924. By most reasonable accounts, the first Torso murder took place around March of 1934 when he was still nine years old. That he could've been the killer seems almost impossible to me. If you're saying that it's another Jack Wilson, then the likelihood that two different people with the same name could both be suspects in the same murder is about as unlikely.
Regards,
Stan
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 173
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 10:41 am: |
|
P.S.
Another document gives Wilson's birth date as August of 1920. If this one is correct, that would still make him only 13 when the Cleveland murders commenced. He did live in the region, that fact was brought out in John Gilmore's book.
Stan |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 3:49 pm: |
|
Good point, Stan. It sure doesn't sound like the Cleveland informant is talking about a "man" who would have been, at most, 17 in 1937. This teenager has already had time to become not just a butcher but a "former butcher"? And I would think the suspect's extreme youth at the time of the Polillo murder (15 years old, assuming the 1920 DOB; just 11 years old assuming 1924) would be worth mentioning.
I haven't read Mr. Rasmussen's book, but I can't help noticing that his website relies on some (though not all) low-quality sources, such as "Severed", other pulpy true-crime books, and even a novel. I notice he embraces a number of things I regard as canards, such as idea that Elizabeth Short knew Georgette Bauerdorf from the Hollywood Canteen.
With all due respect to Mr. Rassmussen, you know what they say: garbage in, garbage out.
Speaking of unreliable sources, has anyone ever confirmed that John St. John considered Jack Wilson a real suspect in the Black Dahlia case? I know John Gilmore says he did, but John Gilmore says a lot of things. St. John sure doesn't sound overly impressed with Gilmore's findings in this in 1982 newspaper article posted on Larry Harnisch's website. Readers of "Severed" will notice some other startling differences between this story and the book.
It's probably worth noting that St. John died in 1995, and I have heard he was already in seriously declining health by the time "Severed" was first published (to little fanfare, it should be noted) in 1994. I am not aware of any comment he made about "Severed" after it was published. |
Mark McGlone
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 12:21 pm: |
|
Just finished reading Hodel's book.
I agree with everyone who says those pictures don't look like Elizabeth Short. I don't know how ANYONE could think they are. It's obvious at first glance. If you need to see specific differences, just compare the chins.
The book needed an editor. There's lots of irreleveant info: like the chapter on his own first wife, and the chapter on the Hinkies. The Man Ray info could have been left out entirely, including the whole Minotaur theory. All that Man Ray stuff hurts Hodel's credibility because, from what I know about Man Ray, Hodel is way off in describing him as some kind of woman-hating sadist.
Though I think we do have to look at Dr. Hodel as a suspect, Steve Hodel's insistenece that he has solved the case is truly annoying. Everytime I came to another sentence where he jumps to yet another conclusion (like connecting his father to the Jean French murder and then treating it as if its a foregone conclusion) I had to resist the temptation to throw the book across the room, particulary after the pompous announcement near the end of the book that the "I hear reclassify the murders of Elizabeth Short, Jeanne French, and Gladys Kern -- CLEARED OTHER, CASES SOLVED."
Despite these annoyances I still enjoyed the book. Especially the coverage of other crimes of the period, most of which I was not familiar with.
I don't think we've seen a definitive book on this case. I wish someone would write a book on the Dahlia case which is more along the lines of Philip Sugden's JTR book--a big skillful retelling of everything we know about the case, weeding out the myths and legends, WITHOUT bothering to present a brand new "shocking" suspect.
Regarding the Mary Pacios book, I have a feeling that it originally didn't have the whole Orson Welles angle, but that when she tried to get it published the publisher insisted on a suspect for marketing purposes so she added the wildest one she could think of. True crime books have become more "tabloidized" over the years. That's sad when you think that past luminaries of the genre include people like Edmund Pearson and William Roughead.
|
eliza cline
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 17, 2005 - 11:27 pm: |
|
My understanding is John St. John was not overly impressed with Gilmore's suspect, Jack Wilson, and put an interview with Wilson on the back burner, thinking nothing would pan out--unfortunately Wilson died before being interviewed. Wilson certainly had nothing to do with the Torso Murders, the age is wrong and he was in L.A., living with his mother, for most of his life.
However, I find a possible connection between the Dahlia murder and the Chicago "lipstick" murders intriguing. I too believe William Heirens to be innocent of the latter crimes. No blood, hair or fiber evidence was found to implicate him, as I understand it. The only evidence is his forced "confession." The kid was only 17, he was brutalized by the police and had all kinds of weird ideas put into his head by the psychologists of the time, who used outdated methods and theories that would not hold up today.
There are similarities between the Chicago and Dahlia murders--some of the Chicago victims resemble Beth Short. Bathtubs were used in these killings, as apparently in the Dahlia killing. The Chicago killer and Dahlia killer both had surgical skill. Beth Short has a connection withC Chicago--she visited the city often.
There is also a simlarity to the Jeanne French murder--French had writing on her body in lipstick, and the Chicago killer also used lipstick at one of the crime scenes.
This connection may be worth investigating.
|
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 183
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 - 9:14 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I've seen Jeanne Axford French described as a former bit actress. Does anyone know of any films she played in or is that assertion apocryphal as with ES?
Regards,
Stan |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 185
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 1:30 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I see that the release date for the higher budget BD film has been pushed back to 2006.
Stan |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 22, 2005 - 6:03 pm: |
|
Welcome to Mark and welcome back to Eliza!
Not much time to write at the moment, but I wanted to put in a short note here...
Given that we all seem to agree that no rational person would conclude, based on looking, that Hodel's photos are of Elizabeth Short, what do we make of Hodel's claim that these photos led him to the "shocking" discovery that his Dad was connected to the Black Dahlia case, something he says he had no inkling of until the moment he viewed those photos?
I'll give you my cynical answer: He'd known for years that Dad was a BD suspect (ironically, the updated paperback makes it abundantly clear that this fact was no secret) and planned to do this hatchet-job book whenever the old man croaked. Finding pictures that he could pitch as being E. Short was probably just a bonus. "What a story! Somebody outta make a movie out of it!" As Hodel has been saying at every opportunity since the book came out.
Well, that's my view, anyway. Any other thoughts?
P.S to Stan -- I think the stuff about Jeanne French being an actress is probably indeed apocryphal, but there is a tantalizingly incomplete entry for a "Jean French" in www.imdb.com right now. |
Mark McGlone
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 6:07 pm: |
|
imdb.com lists a "Jean French" as having a bit part in a 1945 movie titled "Keep Your Powder Dry" but I don't know if that's her or not. |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 187
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 7:58 pm: |
|
Hello all,
From what I understand, the bigger budget BD film is based on James Ellroy's novel. From what he's been saying lately, I'm afraid the movie might be tilted toward Hodel's story. I hope his book doesn't pollute the film the way Stephen Knight's did in a bunch of JTR movies.
Stan |
Mark McGlone
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, June 24, 2005 - 12:34 pm: |
|
I realize Ellroy's book is fiction, but is it worth reading?
Since I haven't read it, I don't know how they could change the movie version to fit in Hodel, but I can see how it would be attractive to a filmmaker. Dr. Hodel, as presented Steve Hodel's book, is an interesting guy. I think one of the reasons so many people have bought into Gilmore's suspect is because Jack Anderson Wilson seems like such an ordinary guy. He's a brutal creep, but an ordinary one--just the sort of person likely to commit a brutal murder. But Dr. Hodel is different. There's nothing ordinary about an intellectual, homicidal, sadistic, womanizing, wealthy, Hollywood doctor. If I were making a movie about the crime I'd be drawn to such a character too.
ERey I think you're right to be cynical.
I have to admit that when I finished Black Dahlia Avenger I was half convinced. After a little analysis, however, it became obvious that it's the order of Steve Hodel's discoveries that makes his book convincing. In the book he forms his theory (based on those photos) and then finds evidence that seems to confirm it. Evidence that confirms a pre-existing suspicion always feels much stronger. Had he just presented the evidence first it would be much less convincing. All he'd be able to say is that his father was once a suspect (along with a lot of other people). Big deal.
If those photos had looked more like Elizabeth Short he might have had me. I'd still quarrel with many of his other contentions, but I'd be able to understand how he could have formed an opinion that his father knew Elizabeth Short. But because they looking nothing like her, I have to agree that he has likely known all along that his father had been a suspect.
|
Eliza Cline
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 10:14 pm: |
|
Erey, you pose a good question about what really led Steve Hodel to believe his father was a credible Black Dahlia suspect. I can't agree with your idea that he knew for years that his father was suspected of the crime. No one knew--all the information about Hodel Sr. was locked away in the D.A.'s office, marked "confidential," since 1949.
I surmise that what really happened was that Hodel came across the "Avenger" letters and recognized that the writing was similar to his father's. He then went to a friend in the D.A.'s office (My guess would be Mr. Kay), who looked in the files and told Hodel that yes, his father was indeed a suspect. But maybe that wasn't dramatic enough for Hodel or his publisher, so he pushed the idea of the pictures as starting him on his investigation.
|
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 8:33 pm: |
|
Stan,
This note will take two days to show up but what the heck...
A few months ago, an article ran in the Wall Street Journal, of all places (the show biz section, but still...) wherein Hodel was complaining that the Ellroy/DePalma movie ought to be rewritten to reflect his "research". When asked to comment, Ellroy basically told Hodel to go [insert Ellroy-esque expletive here] himself. Not quite in so many word, but pretty close.
So I don't think you have to worry.
By the way, that WSJ article was a doozy. Totally treating Hodel's dubious case against daddy as fact. As may have said before, Steve Hodel must have one hell of a publicist.
If you want to see the WSJ article, drop me an email (click "ERey") and I'll dig it up and send it to you. Or else I'll post it here. |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 197
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 5:57 pm: |
|
Mark: I have Ellroy's book and it is good but, like you said, it is fiction so maybe you can just wait and see the movie.
ERey: Good to hear that about Ellroy. The reason I was worried was because, the last time I heard him speak of Hodel, he seemed to have softened his earlier position against the guy. Perhaps it was a TV edit job to give that impression.
Best regards,
Stan |
eliza cline
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 - 10:40 pm: |
|
James Ellroy does indeed believe that Hodel Sr. is most likely the murderer. Ellroy has a preface in the new paperback edition of "Avenger", endorsing Steve Hodel's theory. Ellroy just didn't want his story being tinkered with--probably merely for reasons of artistic pride.
I didn't care for Ellroy's novel because he took a real case distorted it completely. If he wanted to write a work of fiction he shouldn't have used the victim's real name. The character of Elizabeth Short, in Ellroy's novel, bears little or no resemblance to the real victim. Ellroy's character is promiscuous and even a little sleazy. Although I will have to say that Ellroy's attitude toward her is sympathetic. Still, I imagine his portrayal of Beth was hurtful to her still-living family. |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 202
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Hi Eliza,
So does Ellroy also go along with Hodel's proposal that his dad killed Geneva Ellroy as well as many others? If so, how does that fit in with the "Swarthy Man" theory?
Regards,
Stan |
Mark McGlone
Police Constable
Username: Kidtwist
Post Number: 2
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:07 pm: |
|
Actually, I believe Hodel says that his father's supposed partner in crime, Fred Sexton (who he describes as swarthy) killed Geneva Ellroy. I don't know what Ellroy thinks of that. |
Stanley D. Reid
Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 205
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 9:25 pm: |
|
Hi Mark,
Good to see you registered. It looks like Hodel is ready to tailor his tale to fit anything. I suppose the JFK assassination is next.
Best regards,
Stan |
lm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - 1:03 pm: |
|
www.blackdahlia.info
is a new website which has some solid information about Elizabeth Short and the investigation -- including documents from the DA's files, transcript from the inquest, an extensive chronology, some quotes from people who knew Elizabeth Short and surprisingly, her signature from a classmate's yearbook. Check it out! |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 4:07 pm: |
|
Wow. A thousand thanks to "lm"!
This site appears to be owned "Childhood Shadows" author Mary Pacios. As I have said before, despite her frankly absurd suspect, I found Pacios' book to be substantially factual. There's loads of stuff on this site that's not in the book, and thankfully she does not try to work her pet theory any further than she already has in the book.
This is the closest thing to a "casebook" on the BD case we have, or are likely to have any time soon. |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
More primary-source Dahlia info hits cyberspace...
It appears the FBI's Black Dahlia files are now available for free on the FBI Freedom of Information site:
http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/short_e.htm
I scanned through them. Since the FBI wasn't a major player in the investigation, there's nothing here nearly as meaty as in the DA files on www.blackdahlia.info. Still, the bit I read would seem to put the final nail in the coffin of the ever-popular "infantile genitalia" canard. People sure do love that one! |
Mark McGlone
Police Constable
Username: Kidtwist
Post Number: 9
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 10:24 pm: |
|
Yeah, I think Gilmore's completely discredited at this point. He had me fooled. I think he still claims to have the autopsy report, which he won't show anyone.
I'm still waiting for someone to write the definitive account of this case. I'm hoping that Harnisch comes out with his book soon, but I haven't heard anything in quite a while. I don't agree with his theory, but if someone writes a book that just sticks to the truth it will be a major improvement on what's gone before. No need to peddle an outlandish suspect for the truth to be interesting. |
Mak Eckne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 8:56 am: |
|
I wonder if Harnisch and his publisher are holding the book off so that its release coincides with the hype surrounding the big budget Black Dahlia movie next year. That would be a pretty good marketing strategy. |
Mak Eckne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 5:45 pm: |
|
Anyone interested in this case should listen to Larry Harnisch on The Crime Hunter Show with Eric Leonard, KFI AM 640...from 11-27-04:
http://www.kfi640.com/ch112704.html
|
lm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 1:33 pm: |
|
Wow. A 1,000 welcomes to "ERey"!
Just visited www.blackdahlia.info again. Found out that a British TV crew has been doing some shooting for a TV program that will air in
England and Ireland. Check out the News section of that website.
|
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 1:51 pm: |
|
I'll make the short since my last two or three attempts and posting never showed up:
"Advanced reader copies" of the Donald Wolfe book have started showing up on eBay, if anyone is interested. |
Mark McGlone
Sergeant
Username: Kidtwist
Post Number: 13
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 5:53 pm: |
|
Thanks for the tip about Wolfe's book, but going by the subtitle and Wolfe's Marilyn Monroe book it sounds like another wild conspriacy theory. I just wish someone would write a book on this crime without pushing another suspect (or suspects) on us. I almost made the mistake of pre-ordering this book from Amazon. I'm glad I took the time to look at what else Wolfe had written first.
(Message edited by kidtwist on November 24, 2005) |
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 622
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, November 24, 2005 - 8:55 pm: |
|
Hi Mark,
I agree; that subtitle will likely lose Mr. Wolfe some book sales. Sounds like another case of celebrityitis like PAV in the JTR case. I can almost guess who the mobsters and the mogul are but I shall exercise decorum and refrain. My fear is that these movies will try to "solve" the case as well.
I wish someone would write a detailed account of the matter then leave us with a list of proposed suspects and the cases both for and against them like some of the Ripper books do. That way we could pick out our favorite candidate or decide to discount them all.
Stan |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, November 27, 2005 - 5:07 pm: |
|
I wouldn't worry too much about Wolfe's lurid pitch costing him sales. A cheesy advanced reader copy of his book just went for $50 -- plus $7 shipping -- on eBay. This for a book that you'll be able to get in hardcopy for $18 when it comes out. I think Wolfe and his publisher know their market only too well.
I, too, would dearly like to see an even-handed, non-"solution"-oriented account of this crime, if only because so much nonsense has already been written about it.
But remember, it took nearly 100 years for the Whitechapel murders to get that kind of treatment. I'm afraid we're still back in the "Dr. Stanley" phase when it comes to this one. |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, December 11, 2005 - 6:53 pm: |
|
Here's a pretty detailed description of the Donald Wolfe book, from the publisher's site. Please note this gives away "spoilers" for the book, but I never did get how (supposed) nonfiction could be "spoiled" by giving away the plot.
It also includes a bunch of reader reviews -- all glowing, but what would you expect from the publisher's site? |
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 683
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Monday, December 12, 2005 - 2:56 pm: |
|
Thanks for that link ERey. I guessed the ganster right but not the mogul which I assumed was in the movie business. His solution sounds like one that can probably be disproven and almost certainly not be proven, otherwise it would be all over the news by now. Beyond that, I see no need to revise my previous post.
Stan |
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 14, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
Black Dahlia Mystery link - http://www.bethshort.com/
I found this looking for something else. |
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 698
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 20, 2005 - 11:09 pm: |
|
I see that the CBS 48 Hours Mystery show is on again Saturday about the BD murder. Wonder if they'll update it to throw Siegel into the mix.
Stan |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, December 22, 2005 - 12:20 pm: |
|
I don't suppose the reason CBS 48 Hours Mystery is airing this show for a third time has anything to do with one of the producers of the show being rumored to be trying to parlay Hodel's book into a movie deal for himself. (The guy is thanked effusively in the acknowlegements of the paperback.)
I mean, I'm sure that doesn't have a thing to do with it... |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, December 30, 2005 - 11:32 am: |
|
I'll keep this short again, since my posts seem to have something less than a 50-50 chance of showing up...
I read the Wolfe book and I do think it's worth a look. That's not to say I buy Wolfe's "solution" (be serious, people!) or even think he is dealing on the level with the reader. Still, Wolfe book is worth reading if only because it's the first book on the case to at least have the format and style of legitimate nonfiction. That alone is a huge step up.
I can give the book this wholehearted but very faint praise: This is the best book on the case so far. But that's sure not saying much.
I'll post more later if others are interested, and if the posting gods allow. |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 710
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 4:56 pm: |
|
Hello All
After reading the Wolfe book I have to come to the conclusion that the man has opened up new leads in the case and explored some interesting areas for further speculation. The book is certainly worth reading and it should be seen as edifying in that it is the first book published after what appears to be the release of portions of the LAPD BD file. The book also substantiates the story of roughly how the crime went down in LAPD's Rogue Cops wherein two officers are described as having more or less stumbled into the slaughterhouse where the crime took place. This happened as a result of their survieling a vehical whose occupants were behaving strangely. Then again the Wolfe book should substantiate Rogue Cops in that the latter was written by Vince Carter who contributed a good deal of information on the crime to Mr. Wolfe.
Conversely, I would have to say that Wolfe shows a tendency toward asking the reader to accept great leaps of faith. For example his contention that Benny Siegel was a major player in the crime because he was the major underworld player in Hollywood at the time. Anyone who knows anything about the golden age of Hollywood knows that organized crime played a major role in the behind the scenes activities of the studios, the police and many of the major celebrities. Wolfe doesn't have to dredge up stories like that of gangster involvement in the death of the likes of Thelma Todd and the story of her infamous roadside cafe to prove the aforementioned.
I can't buy the idea that Siegel marked Beth Short's face by pistolwhipping her simply because he was prone to pistol whip people when he was enraged. To earn a nickname like "Bugs" in the underworld takes some doing in that it shows even your underworld associates think you are an obvious lunatic. That doesn't mean he pistolwhipped Beth Short or for that matter that he ever knew of her.
Furthermore, the connection of William Chandler of the LA Times publishing fame is wholly unsubstantiated. The man would have a good case for libel if he were alive today. Nevertheless, if the autopsy secret was indeed the fact that Short was pregnant when killed I can accept that. She need not have been impregnated by the so called most powerful man in LA to for Wolfe to prove his theory of the crime. When he claims to have ascertained the motive he appears to go off the deep end into speculation.
Having spoiled the story for anyone who hasn't read the book I will end by saying that a good deal of the information rings true. It is the conclusions drawn from that information which I would take issue with. For example, the evidence he presents as to the fact that the bisection of the corpse was indicative of the work of a surgeon and Short's having to resort to being a professional tease and semi-prostitute to survive after failing as an actress are almost inarguable.
All The Best
Gary |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1315
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Dear Gary:
Wasn't Seigel more or less the representative of the Luciano family in Las Vegas at that time and Mickey Cohen the head man [ before he was hauled off to prison for tax evasion ] in Los Angeles in 1947 ? Happy new year,by the way. |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1733
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 1:31 am: |
|
Hi Howard, Gary, et al
I have not yet read the Wolfe book but would agree that it sounds as if the book if filled with wishful thinking and leaps of faith. I don't believe Beth Short was part of a ring of prostitutes which goes further than the research of other authors who have investigated the case. Nor do I believe she was pregnant. The manner in which she was disfigured, bisected and displayed argues against the idea that powerful forces did this simply because she was pregnant.
If you want to get rid of an inconvenient woman you make her disappear, you don't go through the rigamarole that was done to this victim. Just as in the Ripper case, the Royal conspiracy theory takes some believing because the powers that be could make the women disappear instead of doing what was done, which as in the Black Dahlia case appears to betray the hand of a serial killer more than a mob-style hit.
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
http://christophertgeorge.blogspot.com/
|
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 714
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 2:15 pm: |
|
Hi All
Howard-Seigel was trying to gain control of the Vegas market by building a huge casino that was more or less testament to his ego. He was operating on behalf of "Lucky" Luciano and Meyer Lansky from whom he was borrowing money to build his casino which as I recall was the Flamingo.
Mickey Cohen was his main rival in LA which Seigel was still trying to hold onto while spreading himself much too thin with the Vegas operation. There is no question that Seigel was really a Vegas operative in 47. In the book Wolfe tries to get around this by showing evidence of travel records for Seigel at the time of the killing. Seigel was travelling back and forth between the two areas at the time so this would not be remarkable in and of itself.
By the way, when Cohen had Seigel killed in June of 47 legend has it that the gunman was ordered to shoot out Seigels eyes. Pictures of the body, which are not in the book, show this clearly took place. The gunman straffed bullets across his eyeline and his left eye was blown clear across the room. Seigels bright blue eyes were known to be his pride and joy.
Chris-The BD killing was indeed a mutilation and what profilers would call a display murder. This would make it a very atypical mob motivated murder of a person who would in mob terms be nothing more than an annoyance. It strikes me that more than one person was involved in the murder, but I would agree that the primary killer had to be a sexual psychopath of the serial killer variety. I have always believed that the Georgette Baurdorf bathtub murder and the Short Killings were connected. Wolfe makes this connection and states that the two worked together at the Hollywood Canteen in 1944.
Further, there were an additional string of unsolved murders of females which at least one newspaper writer attempted to connect with the Dahlia killing. Interesting most of these victims were fringe or failed actress hopefuls. LA had no shortage of girls who seem to be the victims of choice for the sexual serial killer. They may not have been prostitutes in the generally accepted sense of the term. Rather I would say they survived on their looks and their ability to attract male attention and with either the promise or prospect of sexual favors in return for anything from a free meal to rent and grocery money.
All The Best
Gary |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1319
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Gary:
Thanks for the reply. I have that photo of Seigel and his left eye is blown out in the photo that appeared in Hollywood Babylon,by Ken Anger.
One minor note..When you said that Mickey Cohen had Seigel murdered, do you mean that Luciano/Lansky hired shooters from Cohen or that Cohen went over the head of Lansky/Luciano and had Bugs whacked on his own? I've always heard that ONLY Luciano/Lansky could have ordered that hit, as Seigel was still part of the East Coast mob. Not that you are stating that,but is Mr. Wolfe? Thanks.... |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 716
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 6:54 pm: |
|
Hi Howard
Wolfe indicates that Cohen was behind the hit. Now I have to reach back a bit in my memory of mob hierarchy and recall why I didn't feel I could take issue with this point. It was more complicated than Wolfe makes it sound. My thinking is largely in accord with yours with regard to the fact that without the Luciano/Lansky approval tacit or otherwise, the hit couldn't have taken place. It strikes me that Seigel had fallen out of favor with Luciano/Lansky. They were funding the Flamingo and it was quickly becoming obvious by the time of the hit on Seigel that he was in way over his head and could not repay the loans he had obtained from Luciano/Lansky. Seigel was selling off real estate he held in LA for less than market value because he needed cash badly. He had staked his future on the Vegas venture and it was becoming a money pit. You don't borrow millions from the East Coast syndicate and find yourself unable to repay them without risking losing your protection. That means death with either the order of Luciano/Lansky or the word going out that there would be no retaliation if rival Cohen should finally eliminate a liability.
This is precisely what Seigel had become to the East Coast.
One of those scenarios likely took place. While they may not have directly ordered the hit, all they had to do was make it known to Cohen that protection had been withdrawn and there would be no reprisals for the murder. From there it would be just a matter of some inside information as to where and when Seigel would be most vulnerable. This way Seigel would be more than oblivious to the fact that his fate was sealed.
In my earlier post I meant to clarify two things which slipped my mind. Namely that Wolfe was wrong on two counts. Seigel was not the major underworld LA player at the time. He had diversified himself out of that role with the Vegas venture. In addition Norman Chandler whom Wolfe names as the most powerful man in LA at the time of the Dahlia killing was nothing of the sort. He wasn't even the most powerful man in publishing in LA. William Randolf Hearst held that honor. As you probably know Hearst very likely murdered Thomas Ince when he mistakenly shot Ince while trying to shoot the man he caught in bed with his mistress Marion Davies, aboard his pleasure ship in 1924. The man sleeping with Davies MAY have been Charlie Chaplin.
Ah the golden age of Hollywood.
All The Best
Gary |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1321
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 7:15 pm: |
|
Gary:
Yes sir...
While they may not have
directly ordered the hit, all they had to do was make it known to
Cohen that protection had been withdrawn and there would be no
reprisals for the murder..."
This "Pontius Pilate" scenario on the part of Lansky/Luciano and Genovese as well,is probably a more accurate scenario. Its hard to imagine Cohen on his own and considered small potatoes,as L.A. was small potatoes then, could whack a Murder Inc. founding member and boyhood friend of Lansky without the approval or indifference to his murder. Seigel was known from L.A. to Florida,while Mickey C. was a local player......
Thanks for the reply Gary...the book seems interesting. |
Thomas C. Wescott
Chief Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 523
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 12:35 am: |
|
Hello all,
I'm reading this book and almost done with it. It's a great book, but I have to agree with you guys that I haven some doubts here. If Norman Chandler had impregnated Beth, you'd think he'd take her immediately to an abortionist within his circle. This clearly didn't happen because a) she had the names (or aliases) of 4 abortionists in her handbook, and b) Apparently she was relieved of this 'burden' after death. And, like Chris points out, it makes absolutely no sense to mutilate her in a way not known to LA - guaranteeing massive press - when you're a public figure with ties to this woman and your motive, allegedly, was to silence her! The Arthur "Dagwood" Lake revelation was worth the price of the book alone and disposes of all the nonsensical Orson Welles theories.
The Maurice Clements stuff was interesting, and he may very well be involved in the murder, and it's compelling to think that whoever he was a go-between for was likely her killer.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 717
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 8:17 am: |
|
Hello All
The Maurice Clements link caught my attention as well. There are just too many witnesses testifying to his hanging around Beth, giving her money, picking her up, driving her around town and very openly offering to pay her rent. He was clearly the kind of seedy joker to have attracted the notice of anyone who saw him with Beth and by all accounts a number of people did indeed notice him.
If the Dahlia saw him as just a rather repugnant admirer with ready cash it is not impossible that he was the man she was intending to meet when she wandered out of the Biltmore after lying about her intention to meet her sister.
All The Best
Gary. |
Mark McGlone
Sergeant
Username: Kidtwist
Post Number: 14
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 08, 2006 - 3:02 pm: |
|
I haven't read this book, and I have a low tolerance for conspiracy theories, but I may read it.
Is the Elizabeth Short-Georgette Bauerdorf connection a significant part of his theory? Because it's my understanding that the idea that these two worked together at the Hollywood Canteen was an invention of John Gilmore, and no one has ever presented any evidence that they even knew each other, let alone worked together. If he's taking large amounts of Gilmore for gospel, then it's hard to have much respect for his theory. Most likely the murderer of Elizabeth Short was a lone pervert. In fact any theory that says otherwise has two strikes against it as far as I'm concerned. |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 7:23 pm: |
|
Gary,
When you say you have always believed the Short and Bauerdorf murders were connected, do you mean even before your read John Gilmore's Severed?
I thought Wolfe's lionizing of Severed, when it suits his purposes, was one of the most disappointing aspects of his book. Trying to tie Gilmore's pet suspect into Wolfe's own theory felt to me like a sop to the Gilmore's many devoted fan, or maybe even an attempt to keep the reportedly highly litigious Gilmore himself off his back. Connecting the Bauerdorf murder made almost no sense, even on Wolfe's own term. Is Wilson supposed to have committed that murder, or did he just happen to be standing around when it happened, as he was during the Short murder, according to Wolfe?
All the fealty to Gilmore was a little hard to take after Wolfe had shown, for anyone who can put two and two together, that vast swathes of Severed are complete fiction and many of Gilmore public statement about the case are highly dubious.
In the same way, Wolfe treats the late Will Fowler as an authoritative source when it suits him, while at the same time reproducing a letter in which Fowler admits to habitually lying about the case. |
ERey
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 03, 2006 - 10:39 am: |
|
Wolfe does make a reasonably credible case that, toward the end of his life, Siegel was "bugs" enough to dump the mutilated body of one of Brenda Allen's call girls in the "backyard" of his mob rival Jack Dragna -- Allen's business being sort of disputed "turf" between Siegel and Dragna, according to Wolfe. He also uses Siegel's FBI files to put Siegel in the right place at exactly the right time to have killed Short.
What Wolfe fails to do, via any credible source, is show that Short was in any way involved with Brenda Allen's (or any other) call girl service, or, as Gary says, Bugsy Siegel ever heard of her. Or for that matter that Norman Chandler, the man who Wolfe claims got her pregnant, ever heard of her, either.
Still, I give Wolfe credit for actually annotating his information with sources that the reader can evaluate. You know, just like real nonfiction. Imagine that! |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 726
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 08, 2006 - 7:09 pm: |
|
Hello All
The Bauerdorf connection that I made came about as a result of a conversation I had with a local deputy coroner. This was prior to the publication of the Gilmore book. I mentioned the bathtub murder of Ms Bauerdorf and asked for his opinion as to whether the Short murder had a bathtub connection. His opinion was that there was a fairly probable chance that the Dahlia murder, wherein the body was drained of blood could have taken place in a bathtub. Further, that Short had her arms tied above her head at some point COULD be a further indication that the body may have been secured to the faucets.
We kicked this idea around and we both agreed that it was very probable that a bathtub would have been the place To fully drain the body of blood after she had been tied up and tortured. Since the arms and legs were bound it struck me that since death was due to the trauma and loss of blood when the mouth was slashed as well as concussion of the brain from repeated blows, the blood would have been flowing freely from the mouth area at the time of death. The logical place to put the body to allow the blood to drain would be the bathtub. We concluded that it was not necessary for the arms to have been tied to the faucets at the time of death. Rather that the liklihood was that Short's body was moved to the bathtub after it was bound while she was being tortured. This could have been to an exposed ceiling pipe or various other objects.
To fully drain the body of all blood also bespeaks of a bathtub connection.
When it came time to bisect the body this could have taken place in a bathtub while the arms were then bound to the faucets to secure the body for bisection. We both felt that the bisection was the work of someone who was familiar with human anatomy since the pictures showed a precise and clean bisection.
As for Wolfe's connection between the Bauerdoef and Short murders The primary basis of his argument seems to be that Short's name was found in Bauerdorf's address book. He does not and I feel probably cannot substantiate this alleged fact without producing the document. He does mention that a fellow Hollywood Canteen associate saw them both working at the Canteen at the same time. This may or may not have been the case and the 'asscoiate' could be mistaken or have had the thought placed in her her mind at the author's suggestion. She could then have extrapolated from there. Conversely, she does mention speaking to Bauerforf and it is not impossible that she would have remembered her conversations with Bauerdorf after she was brutally murdered.
This does not, however prove conclusively that Short was a fellow employee at the same time as Bauerdorf.
As far as the contention that Short had to have been the work of a lone pervert-I would postulate that to subdue, torture and then cleanly bisect the body with anatomical precision bespeaks of the very real possibility that a sexual deviant may have acted with the aid of at least one other person.
By the way isn't Kidtwist the nickname of Abe Reles, a boxer turned strong arm man for a gang of hoods?
All The Best
Gary |
Stanley D. Reid
Chief Inspector
Username: Sreid
Post Number: 727
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 08, 2006 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Hi all,
Aha! 'Kidtwist, the canary who couldn't fly.'
I don't really see why this bisection is called expert. Wouldn't anyone cut straight through when slicing a body in half, that is, if they had a knife that was long enough and sharp enough? Separating the body between vertebrae could be figured out by anyone who's ever carved a turkey.
Best wishes,
Stan |
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1338
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 08, 2006 - 8:42 pm: |
|
Gary:
Yeah,as Stan said...Kid Twist was tossed out of a window despite police at his front door. he could not fly.
ERey:
In your opinion,do you feel that a mobster pretty high up on the ladder like Siegel,would get his hands personally dirty in anything so sordid? Thank you.
Stan:
Maybe not an "expert" bisection,but maybe at least one from someone with adequate knowledge of the human body? Remember,only one person in the family carves the turkey at Thanksgiving ! |
Mark McGlone
Sergeant
Username: Kidtwist
Post Number: 15
Registered: 6-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 08, 2006 - 9:43 pm: |
|
Yes, that's where I got the Kidtwist nickname, and I use it on a lot of internet forums. Most people think it means I like to dance. I got it from Burton Turkus' book on Murder Incorporated.
Well, I guess I'm going to have to get Wolfe's book. I assume nobody here thinks it's a complete waste of time. I actually enjoyed Hodel's book even though I thought it was a lot of crap. Wolfe at least seems to be a better writer. Good thing I got a Border Books gift card for Christmas.
(Message edited by kidtwist on January 08, 2006) |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Chief Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 727
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 09, 2006 - 11:29 pm: |
|
Hi All
As I said the bisection was made with anatomical precision. The body was bisected at precisely the point where the lumbar vertebrae separate most cleanly. Wolfe makes this point, however it has been a point of interest that was first noted at the time the body was found.
I happened to glance through a book today I have lying around. It is called the Greatest Unsolved Crimes in History by an author by the name of Wilkes. In the section on the Dahlia he makes the most amazing claim imaginable. He says that during a conversation with John Gilmore, Mr. Gilmore told him that he located the infamous Al Morrison by tracking him to Chicago. He managed to locate the elusive Morrison in a bar. He then went on to tell Wilkes that even though the bartender pointed Mr. Morrison out to him and confirmed his identity, he was too apprehensive to approach him and talk to him about the case. I don't know about anyone else, but to my mind this story defies credulity.
All The Best
Gary |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page