Customer Reviews

Scapegoat: The Lonesome Death of Bruno Richard Hauptmann

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Anthony Scaduto was a police reporter for the 'New York Post' who specialized in articles on organized crime. In April 1973 he was told about "the true Lindbergh Story". Scaduto never believed in Hauptmann's guilt from childhood, and his later experiences as a police reporter. His three years of research convinced him that Hauptmann was innocent of the kidnapping and was executed as a scapegoat for a cover-up. This very readable book explains his initial investigation and background in Chapter 1. Scaduto tells about the murders of Dr. and Mrs. Nimer (pp.20-26), and how it influenced his approach to this case. Chapter 2 summarizes the kidnapping, and how this story overshadowed the real economic and social ills of that time. It helped to sell radios (p.36). Pages 43-44 tell how the upper class readily used organized crime when it suited their purposes.

The first ransom note was photographed and copies of it were distributed to identify its penmanship (this would allow forgery). After the body of a child was found, Parker asked if it could have decomposed so much in 72 days (p.65)? If the child was killed when kidnapped, why no bloodstains? There was a difference between the folding of bills passed earlier, and those in Hauptmann's possession (p.98). Anna Hauptmann gave Richard his alibi for the two days (p.104). Lindbergh's identification of Hauptmann convinced the jury of his guilt (p.124). The problem in this is described on pages 125-127. The plaster cast of "John's" footprint didn't match Hauptmann (p.137). The problem of handwriting experts is explained (pp.142-143); they're not infallible. The ladder found at the Lindbergh home was made by an amateur, not a skilled carpenter (p.167). Was Hauptmann investigated in 1933 and cleared by his handwriting (p.171)? Page 180 explains the trick use of a 3/4" chisel by Koehler. Expert witnesses testify for the side that pays them (p.182). Could Hauptmann's employment records have been tampered (p.189)? The judge reviewed the facts of the case against Hauptmann (p.219). The jury quickly found Hauptmann guilty, but were delayed by considering a recommendation of mercy (p.220). Scaduto wonders about the search in the attic; could it have been delayed (p.227)?

Chapter 12 tells of the abduction of Paul Wendel, and his confession to the kidnapping. The baby slept (p.243). To find another man guilty of the crime would damage the career of the prosecutor, and others (p.253). This story should enlighten you to the politics of justice. Could Wendel have just made it up? Everything he said was known to the public (p.261). An affidavit told where Hauptmann was on March 1, 1932 (p.280). Was there corroboration for this? There is a "retraction" on page 283. Scaduto examined the copies of the employment records (pp.284-285). There was a problem with eyewitnesses Perrone and Condon. Chapter 15 lists the problems with the original description of "John" and Hauptmann (pp.310-311). Chapter 16 tells of other discrepancies in the record. Could there have been collusion among the investigating authorities (p.340)? Hauptmann's financial records were suppressed (p.347). Hauptmann did not have any ransom money until after Fisch died (p.363). Did the note left in the nursery differ from the other ransom letters (p.370)? Did it imitate a German style (p.377)? Was Rail 16 manufactured evidence (p.382)? Chapter 17 concludes that the evidence against Hauptmann was perjured or manufactured (p.400). Chapter 18 tells how Hauptmann offered to take "lie detector" and truth-serum tests (p.415). Nothing prevented his execution. Chapter 19 has his interviews with Mrs. Hauptmann, who lived long enough to read this book. Chapter 20 tells how Isidor Fisch had the ransom gold notes in November 1933 (p.459). Chapter 21 tells of Jonathan Kwitny's article on how a mafioso profited from major land deals when the NJ Dept. of Transportation purchased lands. What bank was the silent partner? David Wilentz's son was also a lawyer and politician. As Chief Justice of the NJ Supreme Court he was adamantly opposed to capital punishment. This may be the Final Verdict on Hauptmann.

When you read this or any other book watch how they deal with the most important clue. Whoever had the Lindbergh Baby's sleeping outfit was the kidnapper and killer. Do they treat this as a minor detail?

Mr. Scaduto's book tends to be all over the place, but the fact is that he has presented a concise, literate and very compelling case for Richard Hauptmann (he abandoned the name Bruno after he left Germany.) Mr. Scaduto presents evidence that shows Mr. Hauptmann was at best, a peripheral accessory to the Lindbergh kidnapping. However, all the evidence taken together is so compelling that you must realize that Mr. Hauptmann was just "in the wrong place at the wrong time."

The police and New Jersey prosecutor's had a high profile kidnapping case and they wanted to solve it fast. The police and prosecutor David Wilentz were not above manufacturing evidence in order to solve this case.

Mr. Scaduto clearly points out that racism (Mr. Hauptmann was a German emigre and Mr. Lindbergh was a staunch conservative) was a factor; Richard Hauptmann was an experienced carpenter; it is not logical that he would have built a ladder that badly; his counsel was a drunken has-been lawyer; there were plenty of other suspects that the police rejected. Lindbergh heard only two words two years earlier from the kidnapper and he was able to identify them as Mr. Hauptmann's? That is what my father would call "a crock of ----."

The evidence that Mr. Scaduto has presented has withstood the test of time and only the most conservative of people really believe that Mr. Hauptmann was guilty. This book was worth my time and I believe it will be worth yours. I also recommend Ludovic Kennedy's book "The Airman and The Carpenter."

After thoroughly researching this murder and after reading several books on this subject, I find Scaduto's book to be the most factual and well researched. I know many of those who've written reviews of this book don't want to believe the facts presented in this book, but it doesn't take much effort to discover that they are, in fact, the truth.
Excellent, easy to read book. I highly recommend it!!

this was a good book. i'd like to get that out before hand. i think that in real life, the actual event was more mysterious and intriging. while i'm not rating a movie, i think that an event that captured an entire nation's attention and sombody accused of killing "the eaglet" that everybody hated, could have used a better book. i would suggest reading about the "Lindbergh Kidnapping" before you read this book, so you don't get lost.

Mr. Scadutos book gives us an intresting way the famous are treated in criminal proceedings. The conclusion that I have drawn from reading this book is this Did Hauptmann commit the crime? I don't know. Did he get a fair trial? NO WAY, The lying witness (Amandus Hochmuth), the identification of Hauptmanns voice by Charles Lindbergh (two words that were spoken almost two years before. The inept defense counsel, and the way of the oh so helpful Doctor Condon who was threatened with arrest as an accomplice if he didn't identify Hauptmann. What I find most compelling about this book is the way Lindbergh himself took control of the investigation. I don't completly buy the Paul Wendell story but it is another facet of the book that makes the story intresting.

The book is rather boorish at some points, Scaduto goes to great lenghts to show his own skepticism about his source Murray Bleefeld perhaps to great. he does draw his own conclusions which a writer does but he does state that he was not able to get into the files of the New Jersey state police where supposedly the "smoking gun" would be.

Overall I give three stars for content due dilligence and a compelling tale

The real reason behind the Lindburgh kidnapping or at least why the real criminals were not revealed.
Mr. S Fisch being the real criminal would of helped stop the war. Sam Byck gets a movie made about
him to change history ect....

Don't let the facts get in the way.

It is the same tosh as Ludovic Kennedy's The Airmand and the Carpenter.

Obviously, I was a very strange kid because I was reading this in grade school when everyone else was reading Judy Blume. A daring expose that busted wide open the generally accepted explanation of the infamous Lindbergh kidnapping case. (Has lots of fascinating and gory pictures, too)

Anthony Scaduto's book caused great controversy in 1976. It started a major trend toward the position that Bruno Richard Hauptmann was an innocent man, falsely framed for a heinous crime.

When reading this book, one must remember that Mr. Scaduto did not have access to the hundreds of thousands of documents at the New Jersey State Police Museum and Archives. If he had, he would never have made some of the wild accusations contained within this work.

There is very little substance or evidentiary support for this work. It is an excellent example of an author researching a subject with the express intent of reaching a stated cause, i.e. Hauptmann's innocence. It is much preferable to simply look for the truth and accept the evidence found. Instead, Scaduto discards contrary information and offers his own spin. The entire book is based upon the story of a man convicted of aiding Ellis Parker and several others in the kidnapping, assault, and framing of a man they forced to falsely confess to the crime. With a foundation of sand, the book has little or nothing to build upon.

Mr. Scaduto's book and his conclusions should be viewed with a skeptical eye. His stated purpose of clearing Hauptmann has blinded him to any other possible conclusion. His statement that every witness was a liar and every piece of evidence a forgery demonstrates a narrowness of mind which permeates the entire work.

Bruno Richard Hauptmann was the kidnapper and murderer of Charles Lindbergh, Jr. No speculative or fictionalized evidence by Anthony Scaduto or anyone else can change that unalterable fact.

I would give this book zero stars except that Amazon won't let me. What a waste of paper.