DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Carrie Brown : Murder In The East River Hotel
HTML https://carriebrown.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Editorials & Essays
*****************************************************
#Post#: 2967--------------------------------------------------
What If The Manhattan Press Had Access To Damon's Third &
Jennings Only Affidavit?
DIR By: HowBrown1953
Date: August 29, 2024, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Students of the case are well aware of the press reaction in
Manhattan when George Damon and his story appeared out of the
blue in 1901.
The press mentioned that Damon had a farmhand who returned to
Cranford on the morning of the 24th and left the estate a few
days later, leaving behind a key and bloody shirt.
The press, in Manhattan, gave Damon a wide berth and did not
question why it took him so long to come forward, despite the
excessive number of excuses he gave for his reluctance, when one
or two, on the outside, would have sufficed. No Manhattan
newspapers questioned anything Damon said. The rest is history.
In Washington, two newspapers were critical of Damon's
reluctance to come forward. Their criticism was based solely on
the fact that he took so long to come forward, not on the
content of his four affidavits which the out-of-town reporters
probably did not have access to.
I won't get into the issue of those in New York who were present
with Damon when they went to Mulberry Street or filed affidavits
around the same time in 1901 too much, but I will just say, that
I find it almost impossible that they didn't know what Damon
would eventually put into the affidavits.
Which brings me to the subject of the thread. At no point in any
newspaper were the contents of James Jennings' affidavit
provided. Naturally, his affidavit, like those of the others who
filed affidavits, would be secondary in importance to what
Damon's affidavits would provide.
The Governor either knew that Jennings' affidavit ran contrary
to Damon's or he decided Damon's was closer to the truth and
Jennings' less so. Did the State pay attention to the
differences between the description of the farmhand provided by
Miniter & Damon? Again, we have to assume that the State decided
to accept Damon's as the more credible or, possibly, the State
overlooked the differences.
I've gone over these things before, like a broken record to
some, but therein is an issue that, at least to me, is of real
importance.
That issue being whether or not independent reporters ( those
not involved with filing affidavits) were given access to
Damon's third affidavit or the one submitted by Jennings.
Had one or more compared the sketch, in fact, the only sketch of
the killer ever published, and compared what Damon swore to as
the facial and physical features of his farmhand to that sketch,
would one have had the courage to challenge his alleged
evidence?
As to Jennings, we might be able to envision him not wanting to
have anything to do with the 1901 proceedings, other than
submitting an affidavit at the request of the District Attorney,
as he had not been involved with the East River Hotel for over 9
years at that point. Nothing in the activities had anything to
do with him or his holdings. By that point in time, he had
already moved on with his life. Whether or not the contents of
his affidavit, all relative to the key, which, of course, he
said was not like those used on that floor back in 1891, were
accepted, he probably couldn't have cared less.
Although newspapers in Manhattan DID mention the names of
reporters who had filed affidavits and in most cases what the
affidavits contained, no reference to Jennings or the contents
of his affidavit were published in Manhattan papers.
It's just something to consider: What someone from the press or
in a position of high to average prominence and who had access
to or even heard about the differences in the farmhand's
description or that Jennings disputed the authenticity of the
key might have done......
I believe had someone done so, some people in the 'Free Frenchy'
camp would have been squirming.
#Post#: 2968--------------------------------------------------
Re: What If The Manhattan Press Had Access To Damon's Third
& Jennings Only Affidavits?
DIR By: HowBrown1953
Date: August 29, 2024, 7:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
List of possible reasons the State commutated Ali's sentence,
compiled by Pete Damgaard and myself:
1. In 1898, French diplomat Jules Cambon negotiated the Treaty
of Paris, which in effect dismantled the Spanish Empire and was
the beginning of the United States' ascension to being a major
player in world affairs. Cambon had signed petitions and written
letters to the US Secretary of State urging the Sec. of State to
persuade New York to free Ali. Could the eventual release of Ali
been a 'favor' to Cambon and his cause for his role in the
history-making treaty between Spain and the US? This is
mentioned on the 'Jules Cambon' thread.
2. The sentiment of more than a few that Ali had been sentenced
to prison without the police being able to locate the elusive C.
Kniclo. The police, at one point, were quoted as saying that
they wanted to locate C. Kniclo to find out what he did after
leaving Brown in her room, presumably while still alive. At the
end of April, the police, at least, were satisfied they had the
right man.
Nevertheless, there were those in the press ( not all, by the
way) who felt an injustice had been done, suggesting either a
police frame-up or a conviction based on 'faulty' science. It
is very unlikely that anyone knowing much about the case, even
career politicians, were unaware of these rumors.
3. Damon was respected ( not by all ) in his community, had been
a well-established businessman for several decades and came with
two associates to present substantiating affidavits.
4. Aside from Jules Cambon, the French had been pressuring
Albany since 1897 for Ali's release. Three previous Governors
had rejected their pressure. Did Governor Odell simply throw in
the towel and acquiesce to the French although the key could not
be authenticated? Was it a matter of the New York authorities
having had enough of the pressure from the French?
5. The fact that the key was a tangible object and not just a
theory: that the story of a hired hand along with the key made
the latter more plausible: and that combined, they presented an
alternative suspect to the convicted man and a reasonable
substitute for C. Kniclo?
6. Damon is backed by a letter of recommendation from the
Governor of New Jersey.
7. A consequence of the process of “cleaning up” and reforming
the NYPD. The constant claims of Ali being railroaded by the
police were problematic because they would seem to confirm the
image of the police as corrupt, incompetent, brutal.
Releasing Ali was a way of distancing the administration from
the old NYPD: no more claims of a police frame-up while
implicitly stating that such old methods (whether the claims
were true or not) were no longer tolerated.
8. The passage of time. By 1901, few other than those involved
with the pardon efforts cared about the case anymore. It was
yesterday's news.
#Post#: 2973--------------------------------------------------
Re: What If The Manhattan Press Had Access To Damon's Third
& Jennings Only Affidavit?
DIR By: Kattrup
Date: September 1, 2024, 1:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Howard Brown link ---
>
>
> It's just something to consider: What someone from the press
or in a position of high to average prominence and who had
access to or even heard about the differences in the farmhand's
description or that Jennings disputed the authenticity of the
key might have done......
>
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think Damon's third affidavit would have changed
anything, but Jennings' statement would probably have raised a
question mark and could conceivably have thrown a wrench in the
pardon works.
The papers were generally sympathetic to the pardon effort but
would likely have still reported on the statement. I don't think
that it would have ultimately mattered.
The governor's office chose to lend more weight to the pardon
campaign, for various reasons and to make a persistent nagging
minority go away and stop bothering them. For reasons I've
already mentioned I think Jennings was wrong and I think it
likely that people back then would have the same concerns with
his recollection, if his story were to be investigated further.
I also think there were other affidavits supporting the pardon
effort - those of the journalists - and while the key was the
clincher, the governor's office considered those as well when
making the decision.
#Post#: 2977--------------------------------------------------
Re: What If The Manhattan Press Had Access To Damon's Third
& Jennings Only Affidavit?
DIR By: HowBrown1953
Date: September 1, 2024, 7:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't think Damon's third affidavit would have changed
anything, but Jennings' statement would probably have raised a
question mark and could conceivably have thrown a wrench in the
pardon works.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the first sentence, Pete.
The first affidavit's content did not make any reference to the
description of the farmhand. Neither did the second one, a
confirmation of the first affidavit.
But if the press had had access to the third one, which they did
not, I suggest that someone, perhaps someone curious as to why
it took ten years for Damon to pop up, had compared what he said
to the sketch, then someone would have said something.
Nothing from the third affidavit was ever published in the
newspapers.
The papers were generally sympathetic to the pardon effort but
would likely have still reported on the statement. I don't think
that it would have ultimately mattered.
Why not? If Jennings' affidavit, obtained by compliance and not
coercion, disputed the authenticity of the key and then the
third affidavit's content comes across a newsman's desk who is
aware of what the widely distributed sketch looked like, that
should have created some discussion although I think Damon's
social class more or less trumped any opposition to any
discrepancies in his affidavits.
The governor's office chose to lend more weight to the pardon
campaign, for various reasons and to make a persistent nagging
minority go away and stop bothering them. For reasons I've
already mentioned I think Jennings was wrong and I think it
likely that people back then would have the same concerns with
his recollection, if his story were to be investigated further.
I also think there were other affidavits supporting the pardon
effort - those of the journalists - and while the key was the
clincher, the governor's office considered those as well when
making the decision.
Sono d'accordo, amico...with the exception being any flat-out
dismissal of Jennings' account.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1