Post by Brian on May 9, 2009 2:21:59 GMT -5
01/02/07 at 03:00 AM
Bizzarocharlie
Hi, I thought I would write to everyone interested in trying to find out exactly why something like this is still being discussed to this very day. I am sure that everyone has their theory on why Charlie did it, but the answer is neither controversial nor misguided(at least in his mind).
Charlie was a farmer. Farmers were(and are and should} be considered the guys with the food. Everyone eats, so farmers have a right to think that they are commissioned by God to feed not only their family, but the entire community. The bigger the farm, the bigger the responsibility. Farmers, of course, pay attention to weather patterns to predict the size and time of the harvest, and calculate everything depending on Mother Nature to make it happen.
October 29, 1929, the Stock Market Crash occurred. This of course does not effect the weather, but is outside of the average farmers mindset, Charlie had just bought the farm he lived on in 1927, and was paying a mortgage. He owned 2 vehicles(more than usual) and was in debt. When the Germanton bank closed(banks felt the crash immediately), Charlie either had to pay the mortgage or lose everything!!!!!!!!!!!!
Charlie, being the proud man that he was, probably got the idea as soon as he learned that he could no longer provide for his family. In his mind, he was moving up in the world; when he found out that he was losing everything, he immediately feared for the worst. Timing is everything, and just dropped out, SURPRISE SURPRISE SURPRISE!
Everyone said he loved his family, and I'm sure he did, He may have abused his children and his wife, but to take them all out is not normal; he folded their arms and put pillows under their heads as if to say that he respected them. The murders on Christmas day were to get the attention of the world. Charlie probably thought that the world was coming to an end(his was in a big way) and he did not want HIS family to be left behind. I think it was a mercy killing, and he did not want to do it. He also did not want to kill himself and leave them behind.
Charlie is a victim of the economic climate of the time, and he thought he was doing the right thing.
01/02/07 at 01/02/07 AM
ladebug
Let each of us hope our father,brother,husband does not have a fear of his world closing in and take out everyone he loves there by taking away each persons right to live out there own destiny.
Ladebug
01/02/07 at 09:49 AM
sissy
I guess in a way the killing of the family was there destiny. Know one will ever now for sure if Charlie killed his family out of fear of not being able to take care of them, or fear of them being shunned by the community if they found out what was or was not happening between him and Marie, Only God knows for sure the reason.
01/02/07 at 09:53 AM
Maria
Well ain't that the truth Ladebug. To value money over your children's lives is a frightening concept.
Welcome home Bazarro Charlie, long time since you stopped by my place. Hope you've been well. I know alot of people committed suicide during the great depression...jumped out of windows slot of them, but Charlie Lawson is the only one I've heard of to take his whole family with him..if indeedy that was his reason. There were other and saner choices he could have made...like selling one or two of his trucks...not spending that large amount of money that it surely cost him to buy new store bought clothes for all nine of them and having a family portrait made at a professional studio. He drew that amount of money it cost for those things out of the bank yet left the rest of his money in there...why? He also had a one thousand dollar life insurance policy with Shenandoah Life Insurance Company which he could hove cashed in I'm pretty sure. No one else in Stokes County committed suicide and murdered their families because of the stock market crash. And I've heard that he was better off financially than most of the other families in Stokes County at that time. According to the auction sale of his assets (which by the way was an incredible amount) two months after his death, alot of people bought hundreds of items he owned..."they" (the neighbors and friends and family of Charlie) though poorer than him, had money to spend and did spend it. Tobacco was Charlie's main livelihood and it flourished. I still use their products today, so having said all this let me conclude with "I have doubts" that this was the "proverbial" reason. But you have brought up an important topic here, one we haven't explored before so I do thank you. Your friend Maria
MARIA
01/02/07 at 03:10 PM
Hymes
I believe the main reason that this tragedy happened was because of mental illness. I think he became paranoid schizophrenic worrying that someone or something was after him or his family. He kept checking his guns inside the cabin to make sure they were loaded. His headaches could have been brought on buy excessive stress which caused his severe rash. When his daughter was suspected of being pregnant, it was too much for him & the shame it would bring on his family. His only way out was suicide &. he took them with him. So sad that this could not have been prevented.
01/05/07 at 05:22 AM
Bizzarocharlie
Marie!!! I love you like my own mom; I don't see her that much either, and I apologize. You are a force of nature and I respect that; Matt has been a catalyst for me to grow and learn, and I am simply trying to say that in my study and understanding of who Charlie Lawson was most of his life could never accept the changes that the world was going through preceding the murders. Matt told me that Charlie was a great farmer, but not much of a businessman. Today is littered with examples of Joe Yuppie overextending himself and never getting out of debt. Charlie was a leader in the community, but I'm sure his business partners demanded payment on time.
The bank of Germanton, from what I understand, closed. People still grew food, tobacco, etc. However, the Depression did change the power structure of industry, and also the prices of every commodity to plummet; so what this means is that if you bet on Wake Forest winning the Orange Bowl, you lost. The notion of organized crime killing the Lawson's can only be supposed if there is the reality of Charlie owing them money(alot of it). That being said, if the family was used as collateral, Charlie would be the gentleman to not let those bad guys have the satisfaction. A gambler who loses big is desperate and dangerous.
Despite the child abuse that had to have gone on, as many a man has beat down members of his family, this did not mean he would want them dead. Love is tough sometimes, and I believe Charlie was a proud man, and did not want to shame his family by killing them. The only way a proud man would do something like that is so someone else could not. Somehow Charlie believed that the world was coming to an end, and he had no other choice. Demented, yes. But pride does kill.
I try to understand, as everyone else does . By trying to understand Charlie, the answers are simple, albeit not preferred.
01/05/07 at O8:02 AM
Maria
Well hello to you too Charlie. If Charlie killed his family so no one else would why did he wait until Arthur left and then kill the rest of them??? Why leave one alive? But theories abound and discussing them is a way for us to look at every angle, every aspect of that terrible deed. Then each person reaches his or her own conclusion. A conclusion reached without examining all aspects of it leaves the door wide open for mistakes. Give me all the facts I always say, be they right or wrong, then let me make up my own mind. That's the only way to go for me. So I do thank you for beginning to the table this theory. And hey, I love you like my own son.
MARIA
01/05/07 at 01:58 PM
ChinbeardXIV
Hello, all. Just thinking again and this time I'm taking the easy road. I've always been told to use the KISS philosophy in regard to human behavior: Keep It Simple, Stupid' In the case of Charlie Lawson, for us to believe that anyone else killed his family (and him), we'd have to make huge assumptions. The most simple (KISS) explanation is that Charlie Lawson used his own weapons to kill his own family on his own property.
I used to always feel like Arthur (Buck) Lawson should have been a suspect, but after 77 years, there's never been a reason to back up that theory.
The mob theory is a good one and I've tried really hard to make it fit, but there's just nothing to corroborate it.
As much as I hate to admit it, maybe that bump on the noggin threw ol' Charlie for a loop and sent him over the edge. I can't prove the theory is true, but it takes a lot less assumption to make it fit.
I truly love hearing everyone's well-thought ideas and explanations' Please keep them coming... CBXIV
"To err is human; to forgive is divine." —Alexander Pope
01/05/07 at 07:07 PM
jackhammer
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinbeardXIV
I used to always feel like Arthur (Buck) Lawson should have been a suspect but after 77 years, there's never been a reason to back up that theory.
CBXIV
I agree with that, Chinbeard. I've actually only known about the Lawson Family since this Christmas, so most of you all here have years more info and interest than I do. But, I thought the same thing about Arthur being a suspect early on. While I suspect that he had nothing to do do with his family's deaths, in today's world I think the the sole survivor of something like this would definitely be a person of interest.
JMO.
01/05/07 at 07:22 PM
ecalhoun
As far as Arthur, he was at the house and with everyone when Charlie shot himself in the woods, so I think it was
pretty clear that he wasn't involved in that death. Also, he had his cousin Sanders as a witness to his whereabouts
for the entire time, as well as the store keeper.
But for me, it's pretty amazing how little of an investigation was done at all. At the time, the coroner had the power
to convene a jury on the spot, which he did, and the men declared Charlie the killer pretty much right after the
suicide.
Break of Dawn Productions "Bringing Light to the Darkest Night"
01/05/07 at 10:37 PM
Matt32
i'm with eric there. arthur's Non-complicity in the crime is Far beyond a shadow of a doubt, due to the fact that he had many credible witnesses around him for the entire day. It was the insta-jury thing that really surprised both me and eric during our research, when we were hunting down any surviving medical or law enforcement documentation of the crime. That's the main reason there was no police report filed. They considered Charlie the killer from moment one; the only speculation left, as far as they were concerned, lay in his motive, which isn't the purpose of their documentation.
many can do what no One can-together, we Can beat domestic violence-
01/06/07 at 01:04 AM
Matt32
but this thread's very existence proves just how right i was to cast martin as Charlie in the recreations. it was his job as an actor to put himself in Charlie's head inasmuch as he could, become Charlie, see the world from his perspective, to justify to himself how he could have these thoughts to himself in the privacy of the space between his ears, between his ribcage and spine, to have them flicker to life across his face for the posterity of steve davis' camera between action and cut time after time after time. one of the very greatest pleasures of my life as a director were realized this past fall with martin's amazing performance, and to reflect on it all from when he first walked through the doors where we were handing out audition flyers to here, where martin as a 'conduit' can still access the 'spirit of charlie' that we created together for a brief period still stuns me. this story has more levels still and more stories wrapped around it, all of which make me prouder to know martin and be the first to 'discover' his talent as an actor and showcase it to the world.
one more piece of proof here- martin's beard and middle of his back-long ponytail contributed to many people's initial confusion about my certainty that we were looking at 'Charlie Lawson', in fact, i remember being quite 'Ahab' about it- soon as i laid Eyes on the guy i muttered to Eric urgently 'Heyman, gimme the flyers, we just found our Charlie Lawson'- eric being the guy he is who sees what i see as soon as i say it before anyone else does saw it too, so all the concerned and consternated folks hung up on his appearance had director And producer Ahabin' em and i shudder to think of what would have been had Anybody else played this role.
but one of the components i noticed from the 1st audition through the last "Cut! That's a wrap!" was how martin had this amazing ability to Appear as if he were harming the children (and i mean looked like he Wanted to hurt em, Really wanted to- other actors had it backward- but that's another digression for another post) while never once scaring Any of them in the slightest. Parents at the 1st few auditions looked at him funny at first, but they quickly saw how the kids took instantly to him, yet were able to get in character and 'be frightened' when i yelled "Action!"- to them, martin's duality was obvious- he was a really nice guy who'd never harm them, but he was Also a convincing boogeyman on cue- it was like a lightswitch Perfectly under his command- one second martin, next second Boom! Charlie Lawson's on the set- this alone would have gotten him the job, because it was critical to me that no kids be harmed AT ALL during this production and i never saw anyone who Appeared on surface level 'safer' that the kids responded better to. which implies stories about how the kids Didn't take to more 'normal' looking Charlies, but i'll leave those be to highlight martin here, beyond the extra hair and tie dyed shirt i saw through to the spitting image of CL he became, from the moment i laid eyes on the guy, i Never doubted for one more second we had our 'Charlie Lawson'.
the truest reaction for me came from the kids who ran terrified out of the premiere (which martin should be proud of; he knows now that he'll haunt some kids' nightmares for life, which puts him in a pantheon including Robert 'Freddy Krueger' Englund, Kane 'Jason Voorhees' Hodder, and Doug 'Pinhead' Bradley- difference is Martin pulled this off by bringing to life a Real killer, a task at least Equally as challenging as breathing life into the vacuum of a fictional script if not much more so) and the involuntary physical reactions that overcame elder members of the family who watched some of the test footage while I watched them before an interview you see in the film. I was afraid I'd overstepped an important boundary in depicting their ancestors till they wiped their eyes at the end and thanked me for using this horror to help prevent another while treating their kin with dignity and respect. Then they gave me the interview that has people talking still, proving to me that we must have done Something right- they wouldn't have opened up like they did if they hadn't seen we'd treat them with respect, let's hear it for William h. macy's evil twin here, y'all! who else wants to see him nominated for an award?
Bizzarocharlie
Hi, I thought I would write to everyone interested in trying to find out exactly why something like this is still being discussed to this very day. I am sure that everyone has their theory on why Charlie did it, but the answer is neither controversial nor misguided(at least in his mind).
Charlie was a farmer. Farmers were(and are and should} be considered the guys with the food. Everyone eats, so farmers have a right to think that they are commissioned by God to feed not only their family, but the entire community. The bigger the farm, the bigger the responsibility. Farmers, of course, pay attention to weather patterns to predict the size and time of the harvest, and calculate everything depending on Mother Nature to make it happen.
October 29, 1929, the Stock Market Crash occurred. This of course does not effect the weather, but is outside of the average farmers mindset, Charlie had just bought the farm he lived on in 1927, and was paying a mortgage. He owned 2 vehicles(more than usual) and was in debt. When the Germanton bank closed(banks felt the crash immediately), Charlie either had to pay the mortgage or lose everything!!!!!!!!!!!!
Charlie, being the proud man that he was, probably got the idea as soon as he learned that he could no longer provide for his family. In his mind, he was moving up in the world; when he found out that he was losing everything, he immediately feared for the worst. Timing is everything, and just dropped out, SURPRISE SURPRISE SURPRISE!
Everyone said he loved his family, and I'm sure he did, He may have abused his children and his wife, but to take them all out is not normal; he folded their arms and put pillows under their heads as if to say that he respected them. The murders on Christmas day were to get the attention of the world. Charlie probably thought that the world was coming to an end(his was in a big way) and he did not want HIS family to be left behind. I think it was a mercy killing, and he did not want to do it. He also did not want to kill himself and leave them behind.
Charlie is a victim of the economic climate of the time, and he thought he was doing the right thing.
01/02/07 at 01/02/07 AM
ladebug
Let each of us hope our father,brother,husband does not have a fear of his world closing in and take out everyone he loves there by taking away each persons right to live out there own destiny.
Ladebug
01/02/07 at 09:49 AM
sissy
I guess in a way the killing of the family was there destiny. Know one will ever now for sure if Charlie killed his family out of fear of not being able to take care of them, or fear of them being shunned by the community if they found out what was or was not happening between him and Marie, Only God knows for sure the reason.
01/02/07 at 09:53 AM
Maria
Well ain't that the truth Ladebug. To value money over your children's lives is a frightening concept.
Welcome home Bazarro Charlie, long time since you stopped by my place. Hope you've been well. I know alot of people committed suicide during the great depression...jumped out of windows slot of them, but Charlie Lawson is the only one I've heard of to take his whole family with him..if indeedy that was his reason. There were other and saner choices he could have made...like selling one or two of his trucks...not spending that large amount of money that it surely cost him to buy new store bought clothes for all nine of them and having a family portrait made at a professional studio. He drew that amount of money it cost for those things out of the bank yet left the rest of his money in there...why? He also had a one thousand dollar life insurance policy with Shenandoah Life Insurance Company which he could hove cashed in I'm pretty sure. No one else in Stokes County committed suicide and murdered their families because of the stock market crash. And I've heard that he was better off financially than most of the other families in Stokes County at that time. According to the auction sale of his assets (which by the way was an incredible amount) two months after his death, alot of people bought hundreds of items he owned..."they" (the neighbors and friends and family of Charlie) though poorer than him, had money to spend and did spend it. Tobacco was Charlie's main livelihood and it flourished. I still use their products today, so having said all this let me conclude with "I have doubts" that this was the "proverbial" reason. But you have brought up an important topic here, one we haven't explored before so I do thank you. Your friend Maria
MARIA
01/02/07 at 03:10 PM
Hymes
I believe the main reason that this tragedy happened was because of mental illness. I think he became paranoid schizophrenic worrying that someone or something was after him or his family. He kept checking his guns inside the cabin to make sure they were loaded. His headaches could have been brought on buy excessive stress which caused his severe rash. When his daughter was suspected of being pregnant, it was too much for him & the shame it would bring on his family. His only way out was suicide &. he took them with him. So sad that this could not have been prevented.
01/05/07 at 05:22 AM
Bizzarocharlie
Marie!!! I love you like my own mom; I don't see her that much either, and I apologize. You are a force of nature and I respect that; Matt has been a catalyst for me to grow and learn, and I am simply trying to say that in my study and understanding of who Charlie Lawson was most of his life could never accept the changes that the world was going through preceding the murders. Matt told me that Charlie was a great farmer, but not much of a businessman. Today is littered with examples of Joe Yuppie overextending himself and never getting out of debt. Charlie was a leader in the community, but I'm sure his business partners demanded payment on time.
The bank of Germanton, from what I understand, closed. People still grew food, tobacco, etc. However, the Depression did change the power structure of industry, and also the prices of every commodity to plummet; so what this means is that if you bet on Wake Forest winning the Orange Bowl, you lost. The notion of organized crime killing the Lawson's can only be supposed if there is the reality of Charlie owing them money(alot of it). That being said, if the family was used as collateral, Charlie would be the gentleman to not let those bad guys have the satisfaction. A gambler who loses big is desperate and dangerous.
Despite the child abuse that had to have gone on, as many a man has beat down members of his family, this did not mean he would want them dead. Love is tough sometimes, and I believe Charlie was a proud man, and did not want to shame his family by killing them. The only way a proud man would do something like that is so someone else could not. Somehow Charlie believed that the world was coming to an end, and he had no other choice. Demented, yes. But pride does kill.
I try to understand, as everyone else does . By trying to understand Charlie, the answers are simple, albeit not preferred.
01/05/07 at O8:02 AM
Maria
Well hello to you too Charlie. If Charlie killed his family so no one else would why did he wait until Arthur left and then kill the rest of them??? Why leave one alive? But theories abound and discussing them is a way for us to look at every angle, every aspect of that terrible deed. Then each person reaches his or her own conclusion. A conclusion reached without examining all aspects of it leaves the door wide open for mistakes. Give me all the facts I always say, be they right or wrong, then let me make up my own mind. That's the only way to go for me. So I do thank you for beginning to the table this theory. And hey, I love you like my own son.
MARIA
01/05/07 at 01:58 PM
ChinbeardXIV
Hello, all. Just thinking again and this time I'm taking the easy road. I've always been told to use the KISS philosophy in regard to human behavior: Keep It Simple, Stupid' In the case of Charlie Lawson, for us to believe that anyone else killed his family (and him), we'd have to make huge assumptions. The most simple (KISS) explanation is that Charlie Lawson used his own weapons to kill his own family on his own property.
I used to always feel like Arthur (Buck) Lawson should have been a suspect, but after 77 years, there's never been a reason to back up that theory.
The mob theory is a good one and I've tried really hard to make it fit, but there's just nothing to corroborate it.
As much as I hate to admit it, maybe that bump on the noggin threw ol' Charlie for a loop and sent him over the edge. I can't prove the theory is true, but it takes a lot less assumption to make it fit.
I truly love hearing everyone's well-thought ideas and explanations' Please keep them coming... CBXIV
"To err is human; to forgive is divine." —Alexander Pope
01/05/07 at 07:07 PM
jackhammer
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChinbeardXIV
I used to always feel like Arthur (Buck) Lawson should have been a suspect but after 77 years, there's never been a reason to back up that theory.
CBXIV
I agree with that, Chinbeard. I've actually only known about the Lawson Family since this Christmas, so most of you all here have years more info and interest than I do. But, I thought the same thing about Arthur being a suspect early on. While I suspect that he had nothing to do do with his family's deaths, in today's world I think the the sole survivor of something like this would definitely be a person of interest.
JMO.
01/05/07 at 07:22 PM
ecalhoun
As far as Arthur, he was at the house and with everyone when Charlie shot himself in the woods, so I think it was
pretty clear that he wasn't involved in that death. Also, he had his cousin Sanders as a witness to his whereabouts
for the entire time, as well as the store keeper.
But for me, it's pretty amazing how little of an investigation was done at all. At the time, the coroner had the power
to convene a jury on the spot, which he did, and the men declared Charlie the killer pretty much right after the
suicide.
Break of Dawn Productions "Bringing Light to the Darkest Night"
01/05/07 at 10:37 PM
Matt32
i'm with eric there. arthur's Non-complicity in the crime is Far beyond a shadow of a doubt, due to the fact that he had many credible witnesses around him for the entire day. It was the insta-jury thing that really surprised both me and eric during our research, when we were hunting down any surviving medical or law enforcement documentation of the crime. That's the main reason there was no police report filed. They considered Charlie the killer from moment one; the only speculation left, as far as they were concerned, lay in his motive, which isn't the purpose of their documentation.
many can do what no One can-together, we Can beat domestic violence-
01/06/07 at 01:04 AM
Matt32
but this thread's very existence proves just how right i was to cast martin as Charlie in the recreations. it was his job as an actor to put himself in Charlie's head inasmuch as he could, become Charlie, see the world from his perspective, to justify to himself how he could have these thoughts to himself in the privacy of the space between his ears, between his ribcage and spine, to have them flicker to life across his face for the posterity of steve davis' camera between action and cut time after time after time. one of the very greatest pleasures of my life as a director were realized this past fall with martin's amazing performance, and to reflect on it all from when he first walked through the doors where we were handing out audition flyers to here, where martin as a 'conduit' can still access the 'spirit of charlie' that we created together for a brief period still stuns me. this story has more levels still and more stories wrapped around it, all of which make me prouder to know martin and be the first to 'discover' his talent as an actor and showcase it to the world.
one more piece of proof here- martin's beard and middle of his back-long ponytail contributed to many people's initial confusion about my certainty that we were looking at 'Charlie Lawson', in fact, i remember being quite 'Ahab' about it- soon as i laid Eyes on the guy i muttered to Eric urgently 'Heyman, gimme the flyers, we just found our Charlie Lawson'- eric being the guy he is who sees what i see as soon as i say it before anyone else does saw it too, so all the concerned and consternated folks hung up on his appearance had director And producer Ahabin' em and i shudder to think of what would have been had Anybody else played this role.
but one of the components i noticed from the 1st audition through the last "Cut! That's a wrap!" was how martin had this amazing ability to Appear as if he were harming the children (and i mean looked like he Wanted to hurt em, Really wanted to- other actors had it backward- but that's another digression for another post) while never once scaring Any of them in the slightest. Parents at the 1st few auditions looked at him funny at first, but they quickly saw how the kids took instantly to him, yet were able to get in character and 'be frightened' when i yelled "Action!"- to them, martin's duality was obvious- he was a really nice guy who'd never harm them, but he was Also a convincing boogeyman on cue- it was like a lightswitch Perfectly under his command- one second martin, next second Boom! Charlie Lawson's on the set- this alone would have gotten him the job, because it was critical to me that no kids be harmed AT ALL during this production and i never saw anyone who Appeared on surface level 'safer' that the kids responded better to. which implies stories about how the kids Didn't take to more 'normal' looking Charlies, but i'll leave those be to highlight martin here, beyond the extra hair and tie dyed shirt i saw through to the spitting image of CL he became, from the moment i laid eyes on the guy, i Never doubted for one more second we had our 'Charlie Lawson'.
the truest reaction for me came from the kids who ran terrified out of the premiere (which martin should be proud of; he knows now that he'll haunt some kids' nightmares for life, which puts him in a pantheon including Robert 'Freddy Krueger' Englund, Kane 'Jason Voorhees' Hodder, and Doug 'Pinhead' Bradley- difference is Martin pulled this off by bringing to life a Real killer, a task at least Equally as challenging as breathing life into the vacuum of a fictional script if not much more so) and the involuntary physical reactions that overcame elder members of the family who watched some of the test footage while I watched them before an interview you see in the film. I was afraid I'd overstepped an important boundary in depicting their ancestors till they wiped their eyes at the end and thanked me for using this horror to help prevent another while treating their kin with dignity and respect. Then they gave me the interview that has people talking still, proving to me that we must have done Something right- they wouldn't have opened up like they did if they hadn't seen we'd treat them with respect, let's hear it for William h. macy's evil twin here, y'all! who else wants to see him nominated for an award?