Customer Reviews

Lindbergh Case

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

No matter what else one may think about this work, Fisher's book deserves to be read, if for no other reason than that it presents a thorough survey of the ''official evidence'' in the police files. Right at the beginning, he says that he believes Hauptmann to have been guilty, but then throughout the course of the book presents facts, among reams of other evidence, which indicate the distinct possibility that Hauptmann was innocent ---reasonable doubt at the very least. And, rather mysteriously in my view, he leaves out and/ or ignores crucial evidence from previously published authors like Anthony Scaduto and Ludovic Kennedy.

Boards in the Hauptmann attic, for example, which the government claimed were material from which the kidnappers' ladder was made, were disputed as legitimate evidence by defense experts, experts who never testified because Hauptmann's chief lawyer didn't bother to have them do so, quite possibly because of a continuous and severe lack of money with which to conduct investigations and cover witnesses' expenses.

Then again, defense fees were being largely covered by William Randolph Hearst, a fact which, given Hearst's record of suspiciously motivated involvement in other noteworthy national situations, should make any observer immediately cautious because it raises the distinct possibility of Hearst having been interested only in the publicity value of the case rather than in matters of guilt or innocence.

Further, Fisher ignores the dirty tricks alleged to have been undertaken by the prosecution and denigrates NJ Governor Harold Hoffman's attempts to save Hauptmann from death by having him admit his guilt. Hauptmann, however, rather than confess to something which he always maintained that he did not do, chose to be electrocuted --- making an almost undeniably impressive deathbed statement in declaration of his innocence.

As to Hauptmann's alibi, that he was at home the night of the kidnapping, a fact testified to by several witnesses, Fisher also downplays that, as he does with evidence that it was not Hauptmann's car seen near the Lindbergh house on the night of the crime. In short, he fails to refute the compelling evidence offered by Scaduto and Kennedy. Nonetheless, this is a must read book b/c Fisher has had access to police files that even Scaduto & Kennedy couldn't obtain. All in all, though, in all the books taken together there's an extraordinarily strong case to be made that Richard Hauptmann was framed.

"The Lindbergh Case", Jim Fisher, Rutgers Univ. Press, NJ, 1987 ISBN: 0-8135-1233-6, HC 430 pages plus 30 pages of Notes, Sources & Index plus 22 B & W photographs. 10 1/4" x 7 1/4".

Jim Fisher, lawyer, previous FBI agent and teacher of Criminal Justice, has chronicaled, rather tersely, the A to Z of the Lindbergh case using records not previously released until 1981, the NJSP records and the Hoffman papers, etc.

The author's writing style blends factual or verbatim quotations with a thoughtfully reconstructured conversational dialogue that admittedly departs from the purest journalism, but garners acceptance by utilizing adequate notes, etc. to effect a pleasant conversational style prose that makes reading almost effortless and ought not alter veridicality.

A lot of "loose ends" are tied or concluded, and many factoids are included so that much detail prevails that appeared lacking in previous books I've read on this case, some of them via Notes but others spelled out in great details, i.e. the details and results of the jury's many votings, the verdicts and setting & re-setting of execution dates, last minute appeals, etc. However, in the end, the reader like the author will find the evidence given to the jurors is compelling beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a long book and the print is small, but the intent, the evidence, and its presentation provides a cerebrally ambitious journey for the reader.

Having just finished the three current main books on the Lindbergh baby disappearance (no one can ever again assume there was a kidnapping) Jim Fisher's was the most disappointing. Fisher merely trots out the prosecution's 1935 presentation, uses literary license to add in some manufactured dialogue, and then boldly states that Hauptmann was guilty. Although he is openly and embarrasingly hostile to the two other major works in this case ("Lindbergh, the Crime" by Noel Behn and "Crime of the Century: The Lindbergh Kidnapping Hoax" by Ahlgren & Monier) the ironic fact remains that all three books pretty much agree on the correct sequence of undisputed facts surrounding the child's disappearance. But whereas the other two books offer contemporary investigative analysis in concluding that there was no kidnapping, only an accidental (or worse) death of the child followed by a hasty and clumsy kidnap cover-up, Fisher never attempts to answer the lingering questions which have haunted this case for over six decades: How would a real kidnapper have known or even suspected that the Lindberghs were home that week day eveing when they had only been staying at the Flemington house on weekends, and the decision to stay over on that Tuesday had only been made by Lindbergh himself that morning? How did Lindbergh "find" a ranson note in plain view in the nursery when he entered it alone, hours after the child had disappeared, and after others had searched the room without seeing it? Why did Lindbergh telephone his lawyer before calling the State police? Why did both Lindbergh's wife Anne and the nursemaid both originally suspect that Lindbergh himself had taken the child? And why had Lindbergh hidden the baby in a closet two weeks earlier and tried to claim then that the baby had been kidnapped? There are too many questions in this case, and Fisher's book doesn't provide plausible explanations.

Jim Fisher's book is an excellent achievement. He brought forth many facts and pieces of evidence which had never previously been disclosed. He has done a great service to Lindbergh researchers everywhere.

However, his exuberance and desire to prove Hauptmann guilty have resulted in several problems. First, he creates dialogue based on letters and documents contained within the archives. However, the substance of the dialogue creates false impressions. For example, there is a fictitious conversation during which Hauptmann suggests that he would enter a plea bargain if different police authorities handled the case. Th actual letter merely states that Hauptmann once asked if he could ever expect leniency. The differences between the facts and the created dialogue are striking and significant.

Additionally, Fisher relies upon the word of a former archivist as a citation in support of several claims, such as the folding of a $20.00 gold certificate found on Hauptmann's person when he was arrested. The official documents do not support the previous archivist's assertions.

In conclusion, while Fisher's book offers remarkable evidence and demonstrates significant time and effort in research, there are certain factual errors and created dialogue which take a great deal away from this book. I do recommend it though.

Author Jim Fisher is a criminology professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, and is a former FBI agent. He has produced what I think is the most thorough and comprehensive overview of all aspects of the Lindbergh case record. The result is a readable (not sensational) chronicle of virtually all the facets and personalities of this complex and still-baffling case.

"The Lindbergh Case" covers every aspect of the sensational 1932 kidnap/murder case and its aftermath, drawing extensively from public and non-public sources. I thought that Fisher evenhandedly examined all credible evidence remaining in the records. He says up front, however, that his conclusion is that Hauptman acted alone, planning the kidnap and cold-bloodedly killing Lindbergh's infant son for the ransom money.

I appreciated Fisher's candor. But just as much, any thoughtful reader will appreciate Fisher's inclusion of much evidence that flatly contradicts his conclusion, or at least points to reasonable doubts about Hauptman's sole guilt.

Fisher's evenhanded and thorough approach destroys today's most scurillous theory about the Lindbergh baby's death -- that Charles Lindbergh killed the baby himself. If the idea was ever seriously credible, the weight of the evidence for Hauptman and other conspirator(s) snatching the baby is overwhelming ... in fact, Fisher dutifully includes the account of a Jersey State trooper, who saw 2 sets of footprints leading away from the house in the mud before the yard was trampled. As I say, Mr. Fisher is thorough and honest in his reporting -- he concludes Hauptmann acted alone but includes ample data that render his conclusion inexplicable, or at least questionable.

Fisher also documents and details the strange and disquieting cast of characters swirling around Richard Hauptman in the Bronx, New York, from 1932 to 1935. Isidore Fisch -- who eyewitnesses linked to the ransom money and the Bronx cemetery where the ransom drop was made. Numerous witnesses testified that Fisch went around with a shoebox full of traceable gold notes from the ransom -- he kept leaving the box where people could steal it (to spend the money and get caught). But people kept giving the box back to Fisch without stealing a dime, comically vexing the conspirator's ideas about human nature and leaving him with a fortune he knew he couldn't spend. Fisch fled the U.S. for Leipzig Germany (he applied for his trip the day after the Lindberg baby's body was found) -- his family reported he died shortly afterward. Hauptmann claimed that Fisch left the shoebox with him -- a Brother in crime?

Then there's John Condon, who attached himself to Lindbergh after developing inside information about the crime. Fisher details how this teacher and youth leader, a "pillar of the community", somehow disturbed parents enough that they pulled their boys and girls from Condon's athletic and scouting groups in the Bronx. Condon behaved erratically and weirdly when he first confronted Hauptmann in a lineup, too. Investigators felt the men knew one another - and Condon expected to be arrested along with Hauptmann. And there is another overlooked fact: Condon's telephone number jotted on the wall of a secret cabinet in Hauptmann's garage, where the gold ransom notes were stashed. Curiouser and curiouser.

Fisher's book includes all these details, described accurately without conclusions -- in fact his conclusions don't fit a lot of the facts he presents. That's why I feel the book is a very good one -- the best I'm aware of by far.

Still there's no discussion of possible motives besides greed. For instance, Fisher doesn't examine the powerful enemies of Lindbergh's father, Rep. Augustus Lindbergh of Minnesota. He was a congressman from 1906-12 and opponent of the Rockefeller/Morgan Anglo-American banking and industrial interests that were seeking to create and control the Federal Reserve System, which is still owned and directed by them. The senior Lindbergh strongly opposed these powerful international bankers and monopolists and hampered their achievement of complete, governmentally sanctioned control over American credit, finance, and industry until well after World War I.

Interestingly, these same financial interests actually employed Charles A. Lindbergh after his heroic transatlantic crossing (he was hired by John D. Rockefeller Jr. to work at Rockefeller University). It's pretty obvious that the congressman's enemies -- British and American money power -- subsequently monitored the hero aviator's every move for the rest of his life. Furthermore these men knew more than a year in advance that the gold certificates of the Lindberg ransom would become traceable soon after the money was paid. How? Because Lindbergh's employers (among others in the US and Europe) were working on President Hoover to outlaw America's gold-backed currency and instead surrender the gold to the conspiracy as part of an American bankruptcy to the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve System. (The directive to declare a state of emergency by proclamation and surrender US gold reserves came to Hoover from the President of the NY Federal Reserve bank -- the letter from John Corrigan survived and turned up in Hoover's presidential papers, and the courageous archivists of the Hoover Institution published it instead of suppressing it in the 1970s. Roosevelt obeyed the conspiracy the day he was inaugurated, of course.)

So, in this reader's mind, questions still remain. WHO ELSE besides Bruno Richard Hauptmann organized and executed the Lindbergh kidnap? Was the baby killed deliberately or accidentally? And what was their REAL motive?

Read this book for a clear and complete presentation of the facts, but then read more about the Lindbergh kidnap, investigations, and trial ... and wonder.

Jim Fisher's book is outstanding. You don't have to believe that Lindbergh killed is son. You don't have to believe the Fich story. No theories here, just the facts. Courageous, fascinating, and totally convincing.

I enjoyed the Lindbergh Case by Jim Fisher. Some other reviewers found it frustrating because they have difficulty squaring it with some versions of alternative history presented by other authors. However, as an exhaustive account of the official investigation taken directly from the investigative files, this book can't be beat. So in that respect it should be a starting point for people interested in this case.

The purpose of research is to review the historical record and available evidence and other author's interpretation of the evidence and to come to each person's own conclusion. Some people get frustrated because so many different author's have offered different conclusions. Only if you look at history as black and white should such a conundrum be upsetting. Surely the purpose of examining the evidence yourself is to come to an independent conclusion. For example, the answers to the Kennedy puzzle are available if you sift through much of the work on the subject(hint: elements within the CIA carried out the assissination w/operational assistance from individuals linked to the Mafia). The Lindbergh case is similar in that many author's have written books with alternative conclusions; this book is an excellent and entertaining way to become familiar with government's version of events. Recommended.

Having been taught by Jim Fisher in all aspects of crime investigation during college, I can honestly say this man is a genious. He leaves no stone unturned when it comes to investigating any crime. I wish I was still in school to hear his opinions on the Ramsey murder investigation. Awaiting his next publication.

The Lindbergh kipnap-murder case threatens to become as popular a subject for opportunistic true-crime writers as the Kennedy assassination. There seems to be something about conspiracy theories involving well-known murders that American readers find irresistible. Jim Fisher began his own research on the Lindbergh case after reading such books as Anthony Scadudo's "Scapegoat." Fisher's exhaustive research is painstakingly, if not very excitingly, presented in "The Lindbergh Case." The author looks carefully at the evidence, examines it from all sides, and opines that the case against Hauptmann is not merely persuasive but overwhelming. Naturally, his conclusion does not appeal to conspiracy theorists any more than the Warren Commission Report appealed to Mark Lane and his heirs and assigns. If Fisher is right, and I believe he is, then out the window goes (or should go) their topic of conversation or, if they're writers, their publishing opportunity. If Fisher is wrong, one must assume a wide-ranging and intricate conspiracy among law enforcement officials to frame Hauptmann, a conspiracy as unlikely as the one alleged by O.J. Simpson's defense team against the LAPD. Fisher's account is detailed, sensible, balanced, and credible. He did his research without a predetermined thesis and came to the conclusion (never a high-concept, best-selling one) that the jury got it right. Enough Hauptmann-didn't-do-it malarkey. Yes, Hauptmann's widow sincerely believed that her husband wasn't guilty. Yes, there were discrepancies in some details of the evidence. But to believe, after reading Jim Fisher's long and comprehensive book, that Bruno Richard Hauptmann didn't do it is to believe that little green men may someday be found on Mars.

This book was far denser than it's size belied at first glance. Owing to the tremendous number of documents the author reviewed, each page was chock full of people, description and details. I almost feel as if I never need to read another book on the subject, because it's hard to imagine anything not covered in this volume.

For the most part, it was well written. People were presented fairly and the unfolding story was kept neatly organized - not a small task with the sheer number of individuals, locations, sidelines and subplots involved. The editing less than flawless, especially at the end - "form" instead of "from" and other small but distracting errors seemed especially noticeable.

My only real complaint is that the book ended very abruptly. The man was executed and cremated. Bam. End of story. No wrap up notes about what happened to his wife and child, the key prosecutors or even the Lindberghs beyond a perfunctory note that they moved to England. It seemed quite out of place, given the pace and setup of the rest of the work.

If you're looking for a book on the Lindbergh baby or true crime, though, the detail and solid research behind this one makes it a good choice!