Bruno Richard Hauptmann

[justins5256]

I know this was not on UM but what say you guys? Guilty or innocent?

[joshypiano]

I'm pretty sure he was guilty. Among other incriminating evidence I know when they re-examined the case they had several forensic experts who corraborated the writing from the ransom note to Hauptman's handwriting.
Hauptmann's claim that the money found in his garage was left by a friend of his, Isidor Fisch doesn't fly with me. Why would Fisch leave the money with Hauptmann and then leave for Germany shortly after? My guess is that if Hauptmann wasn't involved by himself then he was involved somehow. I 'm sure he and Fisch were working together. Perhaps Fisch was the mastermind and had Hauptman write the note and did some of the go between work, and the $15,000 found in Hauptmann's garage (of the original $50,000) was his share. Or perhaps Hauptmann was the mastermind and wrote the notes but Fisch was the go between. After all Hauptmann couldn't really ever be positively identified as the person who picked up the ransom money.
In either event I just don't think Hauptman was guilt free. He and Fisch were good buddies and worked together, sharing a common bond of language and heritage in a foreign country. If one knew about having done it then I'm pretty sure the other did as well.

[crystaldawn]

Innocent

[Mikado]

Totally guilty, the wooden ladder was made from the joists in his own attic, ffs! After 75 years, theres plenty of time for revisionists to make up a false story, making him look somewhat innocent but, the evidence in this case would hold up in ANY court. Then OR now.

[Todd Mueller]

This is from Wikipedia, so take it for what it's worth:

"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. These results apparently confirmed the conclusions drawn by the original investigators."

Can anyone verify this information?

[joshypiano]

I don't know about the specifics ie. the examiners names and if it was on Forensic Files or not....but I do remember hearing about the handwriting on the news.

[MavFan92]

I say innocent.

According to journals kept by Hauptmann, he and Fisch had indeed been business partners. But the two did not meet until after the kidnapping so it's doubyful they were in cahoots with the kidnapping or seizing of the ransom money. Fisch had been a swindler, he was involved with illegal and underground activities and had business and personal friends in the area of the Lindbergh home. He could have seen the house weeks or even months before the crime. He left several suitcases with Hauptmann for safe keeping before he left for Germany. He probably didn't want to risk entering the country with such a large sum of money that he would have to declare.

Most of the eyewitnesses that testified against Hauptmann were either liars or mistaken. One example..a man named Amandus Hochmuth swore it was Hauptmann he saw driving past the Lindbergh estate a day before the crime. State records show that soon afterwards, Hochmuth applied for welfare in the state of NY and it was granted because "He is almost legally blind." He could not have identified anyone.

The body that was found was in such a severe state of decomposition that upon looking at it, a family doctor said, "If you gave me a million dollars I could not identify this thing." Charles Lindbergh made the ID solely by counting the number of teeth. Any child of the same age would have the same number of teeth. So the chance remains that that was not the Lindbergh's baby. Which means that no murder has been proven, which means that Hauptmann was absolutely wrongly convicted. They never proved a murder!

Years ago I read a testimony by Hilda Braunlich, who was dismissed during the Hauptmann trial as a handwriting expert becuase she would testify that police tampered with the ransom notes. She said all they did was round off the letters and numbers to make them look more like Hauptmann's writing. It was very obvious, she said.

According to police, Hauptmann took floorboards from his attic, went to his garage (In which there was a great deal of lumber) to construct this crude ladder. The ladder was broken on sevral rungs, crudely made, unable to support the weight of the kidnapper. Hauptmann was a carpenter by trade. e would have built a better ladder, KWIM?

Lindbergh identified Hauptmann as the man he met in the Bronx cemetary the night the ransom money was paid. He made the ID a full two years after that night after hearing him say only two words, "Hey doctor." After meeting Hauptmann, and speaking with him, he still could not make up his mind. Even John F Condon, the go-between helping CL, could not make a positive ID. It was not until later they said "Yes, it's him." In the interim, Condon could have been coerced, threatened with violence, or threatened with arrest as an accomplice if he did not make the ID.

Since Lindbergh was such a hero, the most famous man of his time, and for such a terrible crime, it was the feeling of "someone must pay". Hauptmann was caught with the money, that's what got him in trouble. After that, police framed him, tampered with and distorted evidence, all in an attempt to convict Hauptmann. And they sent him to the electric chair.

[justins5256]

Originally Posted by MavFan92

I say innocent.

I see I'm not the only "In Search Of" fan here

[MavFan92]

I have that episode memorized!!!!