The Lindbergh Baby Kidnapping Trial (Headline Court Cases) [Library Binding]

Judy Monroe (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 2000 | Series: Headline Court Cases

Presents information about the kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh's baby in 1932, the investigation of the crime, and the subsequent trial of Bruno Hauptmann; includes commentary on the decision.

Product Details

• Reading level: Ages 12 and up
  
• Library Binding: 128 pages
• Publisher: Enslow Publishers (July 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0766013898
• ISBN-13: 978-0766013896
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.3 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 13.9 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 2.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #651,667 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Simplified Story of this Court Case, June 14, 2006

By 

Acute Observer (By the Shore NJ) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Lindbergh Baby Kidnapping Trial (Headline Court Cases) (Library Binding)

At 10pm March 1, 1932 baby Charles Lindbergh Jr was found missing from his bedroom. The local police were called, then the family lawyer; next the NJ State Police. Chapter Two tells of America in the 1920s. There are mistakes here. The 18th Amendment gave Congress the right to control (prohibit) alcoholic drinks. The Volstead Act limited the alcoholic content to 3%; this prohibited liquor, wine, and beer. The depressed wages in the 1920s led to the Great Depression when people had little money to buy what they needed or wanted. Kidnapping for ransom grew during the 1920s as gangs operated with little fear from the corrupt municipal and state governments. A monoplane has one wing (p.16).

Two years later some of the ransom money was found in the possession of a Bronx carpenter. There were 3 theories about the crime (p.29). A ransom note came in the mail, and a stranger was contacted as a go-between. Lindbergh and Condon paid the ransom money to a lone man, but baby Charles was not returned. Two months later a body identified as baby Charles was found in a shallow grave; it was cremated. The police first considered this an inside job; it was unusual for the Lindberghs to stay there Monday night. The police deprived Hauptmann of food, water, and sleep, then beat him; but he never confessed. Hauptmann was extradited to NJ. The trial in Flemington was a media circus (p.50).

Chapter Four gives the prosecution's case, based on circumstantial evidence (facts that appear to connect the defendant to the crime). Witnesses said Hauptmann was near the Lindbergh home prior to 3-1-1932, and had taken the ransom money. Anyone who commits a burglary and kills someone is guilty of murder in the first degree. The witnesses' testimony is summarized. One witness who identified Hauptmann was legally blind (p.63)! $14,600 (out of $50,000) in ransom money was found hidden in Hauptmann's garage. A "wood technologist" testified that rail 16 from the ladder had been taken from Hauptmann's attic floor (p.72). Chapter Five presents the Hauptmann defense. Witnesses would testify that Hauptmann had an alibi for the kidnapping and ransom money exchange. Hauptmann's journal had his notes that damaged his testimony, as well as his earlier lies (pp.83-84). Hauptmann's wife backed his story. Some of Hauptmann's witnesses were bootleggers, part of the criminal class. Curiously, a dozen witnesses called by the defense ignored the court's orders (p.92)!

The jury quickly voted guilty (Chapter Six). Some said the death penalty was wrong because the evidence was circumstantial (p.98). Hauptmann's lawyers filed appeals on the basis that he didn't get a fair trial: "tried and convicted in the newspapers" (p.103). The legal appeals failed and Hauptmann was executed. One after effect was to ban cameras from most American trials for the next 6 decades. Some said the trial was unfair even by the standards of that time (p.108). Charles Lindbergh later revealed his reactionary pro-Nazi feelings, tainting his reputation and questioning his judgment. Some began to question the trial and verdict after a newspaper reporter wrote that Hauptmann was a "Scapegoat". Other books have also questioned the official theory of the crime. Could one man alone have driven to a strange place on a day the family was normally away? Why didn't their dog bark in the night? Was evidence tampered with to convict the only man caught with ransom money? No one disputed that Hauptmann had some of the ransom money. Whoever kidnapped baby Charles had the sleeping suit. Note how this important clue is skipped over in this and other books.