Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

by G.Russell Giradin & William J. Helmer

Moderator: Liz

User avatar
gemini
Posts: 3907
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby gemini » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:10 pm

Liz wrote:
nebraska wrote:I will stand by my answer that Dillinger was a scapegoat. Yes, he was guilty of some crimes, but he was made to be an exaggerated example of all criminals for even larger crimes for the advancement of Hoover and his FBI. So while he wasn't completely innocent, his crimes didn't deserve the hoopla they received.

Yes, that is exactly how I view it.


Me too.
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

User avatar
trygirl
Posts: 1048
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:48 am
Location: in the shade

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby trygirl » Thu Jul 16, 2009 6:55 pm

gemini wrote:
Liz wrote:
nebraska wrote:I will stand by my answer that Dillinger was a scapegoat. Yes, he was guilty of some crimes, but he was made to be an exaggerated example of all criminals for even larger crimes for the advancement of Hoover and his FBI. So while he wasn't completely innocent, his crimes didn't deserve the hoopla they received.

Yes, that is exactly how I view it.


Me too.


I still don't believe Dillinger was a scapegoat. A disposable tool, yes, but certainly not someone the FBI could blame for the entire crime wave or the failing banks. He was simply the victim of arrogance and one ambitious man's hyperbolic spin. Anna Sage was more one than Johnnie. She got condemned for bringing down the country's Robin Hood but her volition was not without coercion. Dillinger got the short end of the stick but that's because he was dealing with bigger criminals than himself. Hoover was just better at it.
I'm not a brand, I'm more of a variety. - Johnny Depp

User avatar
gemini
Posts: 3907
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby gemini » Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:25 pm

trygirl wrote:
gemini wrote:
Liz wrote:Yes, that is exactly how I view it.


Me too.


I still don't believe Dillinger was a scapegoat. A disposable tool, yes, but certainly not someone the FBI could blame for the entire crime wave or the failing banks. He was simply the victim of arrogance and one ambitious man's hyperbolic spin. Anna Sage was more one than Johnnie. She got condemned for bringing down the country's Robin Hood but her volition was not without coercion. Dillinger got the short end of the stick but that's because he was dealing with bigger criminals than himself. Hoover was just better at it.

I agree with your point that Ana was a scapegoat. ( but I still think Dillnger was a scapegoat for the Mob)
Ana had been worried about her long running deportation proceedings long before she got around to turning Dillinger in. Zarovich's ex wife listed Ana as the other woman in her divorce in the 1920s and Zarkovich had been Ana's protector ever since. He protected her until 1932 when a new governor refused her request for a pardon. Dillinger infers in the PE book that he had paid Zarkovich off for protection and both books hint that he was the one who got him to stay in Ana's apartment. It sounds to me that Zarkovich was far more Dillinger's nemesis than Ana who went along with it for the money and hopes they would help her fight deportation. Funny it worked the opposite and when they didn't help her, her notoriety helped get her deported.
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers



Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

User avatar
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
Posts: 10378
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Austin

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby DeppInTheHeartOfTexas » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:08 pm

Checking in here quickly while on vacation. :sailboat: I think sacrifical lamb is the term I"ll go with, although he was certainly not an innocent! Dillinger also played into the FBI's hands of needing a Public Enemy #1 by enjoying and cultivating his status as a public figure. I also believe Zarkovich played a major role in bringing him down, either to protect himself or to line his own pocket, or both. I didn't buy the subplot in the movie with the mob blaming Dillinger for the change in federal law enough to want to bring him down.
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!

User avatar
gemini
Posts: 3907
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby gemini » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:30 pm

DeppInTheHeartOfTexas wrote:Checking in here quickly while on vacation. :sailboat: I think sacrifical lamb is the term I"ll go with, although he was certainly not an innocent! Dillinger also played into the FBI's hands of needing a Public Enemy #1 by enjoying and cultivating his status as a public figure. I also believe Zarkovich played a major role in bringing him down, either to protect himself or to line his own pocket, or both. I didn't buy the subplot in the movie with the mob blaming Dillinger for the change in federal law enough to want to bring him down.

The film was the first that I saw that the mob might be affected by the laws used to get Dillinger. I always leaned more toward the theory that many of the banks robberies were fixed and I figured the mob was in on the fix and they may not have wanted Dillinger captured alive to talk. ( Nor would the banks. )
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers



Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

User avatar
deppaura
Posts: 548
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:27 pm
Location: Kensington, CA

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby deppaura » Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:10 pm

Boy, I find all this speculation mind boggling and such guess work. Even with so called documentation, writings, it is all still mysterious??? I'm just curious about all the confusion. Even in non-fiction, I guess we can't depend on facts presented?

User avatar
Liz
ONBC Moderator
Posts: 12927
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:13 pm
Location: The Left Coast

Status: Offline

Re: Dillinger Question #10 ~ A Scapegoat?

Unread postby Liz » Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:35 am

I agree deppaura. It is all just speculation. But that is what we spend most of our time discussing here at ONBC. :lol: That's what makes it fun. We will never really know for sure.
You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.


Return to “Dillinger: The Untold Story”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest