Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

« Conduct Unbecoming a Widow | Main | Mr. Baker’s Murder Gland »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Qalmlea

I think when people scream "circumstantial," what they really mean is "there exists a plausible alternative." In this case, it is possible that Finch did at least some, if not all, of the work. However, it does not seem to matter much here: if he Hauptmann wrote the ransom note, he was at minimum an accomplice.

BobH

The name is Fisch.

Since first reading abut this case may years ago, I've never douted Hauptmann's guilt. It might plausibly be argued that Fisch was an accomplice, but thats irrelevant to Hauptmann's guilt.

Michael

It's not that simple. Every point of evidence can be challenged. Everything that had to occur in order for this crime to be perpetrated by an immigrant german carpenter alone and without inside help would have been impossible.

Study the case a little further and you will be drawn into its mysteries for life!

Jennifer Murdley

I think all of this is complete shit! How the hell could somebody do this? What a bastard! His mind was just full of shit, that is all. He was a damn sick guy, with a big ass. When he did something like that, he should had screamed WHAT THE FUCK!!!! That always helps me!!! Shit all the ones who are reading it!

carole gill

With reference to Michael's point that Hauptmann would have needed inside help--I'm open to that. It's just unfortunate that a maid in the employ of the Lindbergh's, one Violet Sharp, committed suicide by swallowing poison rather than enduring further questioning by the Police. I always thought that very odd. But naturally it was the ultimate "dead" end--as poor Violet could no longer be questioned.

A Voice of Sanity

I have no problem with circumstantial evidence. However I see no connection between the extortion and the kidnapping - they may well have been two separate crimes. And far too much evidence was either created or destroyed by the police - including a time sheet showing that Hauptmann was working at the time. The prosecutor's reliance on extraordinary invective and slander is also more than a suggestion that he knew he had no evidence for the kidnapping/murder.
------------------------
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Hauptmann
In the latter part of the 20th Century, the case against Hauptmann has come under serious scrutiny. For instance, one item of evidence at his trial was a scrawled phone number on a board in his closet, which was the number of the man who delivered the ransom, Dr. Joseph F. Condon. A juror at the trial said this was the one item of evidence that convinced her the most, but a reporter later admitted he had written the number himself. It is also alleged that the eyewitnesses who placed Hauptmann at the Lindbergh estate near the time of the crime were untrustworthy (including one legally blind man who had claimed to have seen Hauptmann entering the Lindbergh home), and that neither Lindbergh nor the go-between who delivered the ransom initially identified Hauptmann as the recipient. It has been alleged that the police beat Hauptmann and intimidated other witnesses, and some claim that the police planted or doctored evidence such as the ladder. There is also proof that the police doctored Hauptmann's time cards and ignored fellow workers who stated that Hauptmann was working the day of the kidnapping. These and other findings prompted J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI to question the manner in which the investigation and trial were conducted (highly unusual behavior for him). Hauptmann's widow campaigned to have her husband's conviction reversed until the end of her life.

The television show Forensic Files on Court TV asked modern forensic scientists to reexamine two key pieces of evidence against Hauptmann. Kelvin Keraga concluded that the ladder used in the kidnapping was made from wood that had previously been part of Hauptmann's attic. Three forensic document examiners, Grant Sperry, Gideon Epstein, and Peter E. Baier, Ph.D., working independently of each other, all concluded that Hauptmann had written the ransom demand.
------------------------
It has been noted that there were many such ladders around the Lindbergh home as it was under construction. It's hard to see why a carpenter would make such a thing, make it in that way and then leave it behind.

Technomad

Hauptmann had done second-story work before; he had a bad rep in his hometown in Germany. His story of Isador Fisch leaving the money with him doesn't ring true---the money was someplace that Anna Hauptmann would have had to notice it, but she always said she never saw it. He also _quit his job_ in the depths of the Depression the day after the ransom was handed over, and started throwing money around, although he'd barely had a pot to p*ss in before.

It would be impossible to fake up so much circumstantial evidence---and why would the authorities want to go after an innocent man? Can you _imagine_ the scandal if they'd been caught framing someone? The hullaballoo would have made Watergate look like nothing much.

About the only question in my mind is whether Hauptmann ever intended to let the poor baby live. I don't think he ever meant to let the child live---even a wife as mindlessly loyal as Anna Hauptmann would have been asking questions if her husband came strolling in with a strange baby the day after the whole country was ringing with the news that the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped.

carole gill

I live in the U.K. and saw an interesting documentary on the Crime and Investigation Channel here the other day.
The entire case was re-examined by three handwriting experts (one from Germany) as well as experts in the fields of wood analysis.
Their findings were conclusive that:
-Hauptmann did write the ransom notes.
-that the ladder did, in fact, come from the floorboards in Hauptmann's home.
This was all done using state of the art technology.
The general opinion afterwards was that Hauptmann probably acted alone. But whether he did or not, he was still guilty of this terrible crime.
If he didn't act alone and that, to my mind is entirely possible, then there were others who should have been brought to justice as well.
But as for Bruno Hauptmann, he was guilty too, whether wholly or in part. And he deserved to pay with his life.

A Voice of Sanity

"Their findings were conclusive that:
-Hauptmann did write the ransom notes.
-that the ladder did, in fact, come from the floorboards in Hauptmann's home."
--------------------------------
How do you know that the police didn't get Hauptmann to copy the notes "for comparison" and then exchange them?
How do you know they didn't switch boards?
They weren't above beating a confession out of people in those days - or faking evidence. Tunnel vision is nothing new and it isn't just in recent days that the police and prosecutors are willing to hide evidence of innocence.

carole gill

no go, voice.

A Voice of Sanity

No go?

"The report, compiled by special prosecutors Edward Egan and Robert Boyle, confirmed that Chicago police, under the leadership of Commander Jon Burge, likely tortured dozens of black suspects for nearly two decades. Burge’s detectives in the city’s Area Two police district used illegal techniques like electrical shocks to the genitals, Russian roulette, beatings, suffocation, and mock executions".

And you expect me to believe that cops like these wouldn't alter or destroy evidence?

carole gill

Don't flatter yourself.
I won't even read anything that you post.
Clearly you have an agenda that is quite apart from these discussion forums or anything related to them.
And since you also appear to have a great many socialization problems, I choose not to ever, under any circumstances, respond to you or to anything you write.

carole gill

Above comment was directed soley to the Voice, himself.
The one and only Voice of Sanity.

A Voice of Sanity

carole gill said: "I won't even read anything that you post.
Clearly you have an agenda that is quite apart from these discussion forums or anything related to them.
And since you also appear to have a great many socialization problems, I choose not to ever, under any circumstances, respond to you or to anything you write".

And yet you just did exactly that. My only 'agenda' is to point out the dreck from the gold. And clearly your only agenda is to personally attack those you cannot argue with. I have zero "socialization problems". You, however, have problems making any sort of logical argument, and nothing less will influence me. Your personal attacks indicate that it is you who has "socialization problems" since you are clearly disturbed by someone who makes his case logically and based on facts and not on hysteria.
Define the term "Erased" as used in Strong's book.

A Voice of Sanity

carole gill said: "I won't even read anything that you post.
Clearly you have an agenda that is quite apart from these discussion forums or anything related to them.
And since you also appear to have a great many socialization problems, I choose not to ever, under any circumstances, respond to you or to anything you write".

And yet you just did exactly that. My only 'agenda' is to point out the dreck from the gold. And clearly your only agenda is to personally attack those you cannot argue with. I have zero "socialization problems". You, however, have problems making any sort of logical argument, and nothing less will influence me. Your personal attacks indicate that it is you who has "socialization problems" since you are clearly disturbed by someone who makes his case logically and based on facts and not on hysteria.
Define the term "Erased" as used in Strong's book.

carole gill

Technomad,
I agree about Hauptmann's guilt.
But I actually don't think he meant the child to die.
But you raise an excellent point.
what exactly would he have done with the baby had he lived?
gives me pause for thought truthfully.
Here's a question--
Do you feel anyone else was involved?
I'm open to that truthfully, because the Lindberghs weren't expected to be there that night.
Interested in what you have to say about that.

becca

weel those are some great facts there i think he is guilty

MEmery

All Right Ladys and Gentlemen I think Hauptman in Completely guilty. we are doing aclassroom arguememnt about this subject and our side pleading he is guilty has over 300 facts on why he would be guilty. there is one key factor all you guys left out: the ransom Money in gold notes. Nobody had that kind of money back in the great depression. the 70,000 back then is equal to about 1.2 milluion now. and he quit his job the day after the ransom was paid. also on 1 of the gold pieces there was a license plate number written in by a gas station clerk it match that exact of hauptmans car. also there was a mysterious car driving around the hauptmans neighborhood that day and matched the description to hauptmans car. AND to a voice of sanity you have to remember that back then everyone desriminated against blacks. they couldnt even imagine a day where we would have a black president and that day has come. They wouldnt blame and kill an innocent man for nothing. therefore i state my case: BRUNO HAUPTMAN WAS DEFFINATLEY GUILTY> study on this topic and all answers point to him.

Michael

Carole,

Do look into this and don't be misled by those who cite Wikipedia as the end all source. Fact is, what Voice of Insanity wrote is totally incorrect and isn't even what's on that site anymore because its been corrected.

I've done 9 years of Archival Research now and I am willing to bet those who are TELLING you what to believe wouldn't know an Archive if it fell out of the sky and hit them on the head.

A Voice of Sanity

Moronic Michael: Here is current information from Wikipedia:

"Erastus Mead Hudson was a fingerprint expert who knew the then-rare silver nitrate process of collecting fingerprints off wood and other surfaces on which the previous powder method could not detect fingerprints. He found that Hauptmann's fingerprints were not on the wood, even in places that the man who made the ladder would have to have touched. Upon reporting this to a police officer and stating that they must look further, the officer said "Good God, don't tell us that, Doctor!". The ladder was then washed of all fingerprints, and Schwarzkopt refused to make it public that Hauptmann's prints were not on the ladder."

Yes, sure, nothing wrong there - just a man sent to death using evidence which was faked and destroyed.

Michael


To: "Voice of Insanity"

Funny that you chose to avoid my point. Instead you went back to the only thing you seem to know how to do - read Wikipedia then use it as your only & "end all" source.

Lucky for you the newest piece you posted is based upon Dr. Gardner's book, The Case That Never Dies. It is simply the best book on the Case ever written. Have you actually read it? If so, why not cite it instead of a bunch of "hodge-podge" which is at best unreliable thrown together on Wikipedia?

And so, as a result of my post above, you have labled me "Moronic." But while you are consulting Wikipedia, I am reading the actual Police Reports and Memos on the Case. Additionally, I am acknowldged and footnoted in Lloyd's book, you know, the one Wikipedia relied on for your information above concerning the Ladder and Dr. Hudson.

It takes a little more then reading a web-site to tell others what to believe and what not to believe. Read Lloyd's book, and if you have any specific questions just ask me - I'd be happy to pull the file concerning anything you are interested about.

http://lindberghkidnap.proboards56.com/index.cgi

Susan j. sager

This Lindbergh baby kidnapping was something spoken about several times by my Grandparents Sager and Grandmother Parker. How could Hauptman know which window to go to to find the little fellow if in fact he had not had some direction/help from persons INSIDE the house.

I recalled asking (I was perhaps 8/9 years old at the time) did they think Hauptman was the one to snatch the child. All three said yes, but with help from some other person or persons.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search CLEWS

  • Google

    WWW
    CLEWS