Analysis of the Lindenbergh Baby Kidnapping Case
Uploaded by soccermaniac on Jun 11, 2006 |
|
|
Analysis of the Lindenbergh Baby Kidnapping Case
KIDNAPPED, on March 1st 1932, between 8 and 10 pm, from his home in Hopewell New Jersey. The Lindbergh baby,Charles, roughly 20 months old, was taken from his crib. The first suspects were speculated to be gangsters, on one else would commit such a crime. The perpetrator left a ransom note on the baby?s window sill demanding $50,000 dollars for the return of their son. After the money was paid a note was given saying the child was on a boat off Massachusetts coast. No baby was found there, but a body of a child was found on May 12, 1932 just miles from the Lindbergh home, face down in the dirt, partially decomposed. The autopsy done on the child revealed it was the Lindbergh?s son. It took more than two years to track down the murderer a Bruno Richard Hauptmann. He was an illegal German immigrant with a criminal record in his past. This man Bruno Hauptmann is considered a very guilty person in the eyes of most, and he is also guilty to this offence because of the overwhelming amount of direct and indirect evidence. So I feel this man is guilty in every way, and was rightly prosecuted for this offence.
This case had many pieces of direct evidence that were used to convict Mr. Hauptmann to a guilty charge. Some of these pieces of evidence were money that Hauptmann used one night, at a theatre. The money he used was a gold certificate, one which the ransom money was paid in, this would link him directly to the crime because the ransom money was gold certificate and the serial numbers were recorded. Another piece of direct evidence that was given was the voice of ?Cemetery John?. Mr. Lindbergh thought this voice was the voice of Mr. Hauptman, and he testified this at the court house.
Another piece of direct evidence was when one eye- witness saw a truck, with a ladder in the back pull quickly into a ditch. The eye- witness testified that the man driving the truck was Mr. Hauptmann. The ladder was also made from the boards in Mr. Hauptmann?s garage attic floor. One other major piece of direct evidence in the case was the chisel. The chisel was a very major part in this case; as the experts believe that the chisel from Mr. Hauptmann?s tool box was used to pry open the baby?s window. This was a key piece of evidence, which played a very big role in the case.
Some Other key pieces of direct evidence in this case is the money found in Mr. Hauptmann?s garage. The ransom money was hidden in the walls of the garage in a shellac can. They found about 14,000 dollars of the ransom money, and the rest was said to be spent. This money was a very key piece of evidence, as the money was gold certificate and recorded so they knew it was the ransom money.
There was only a few pieces of indirect evidence in the Lindberg case. One major piece of indirect evidence was rail 16 in the attic of Mr. Hauptmann?s garage. Many police officers and agents checked up in the attic, only to find no evidence. Later another police officer decided to go up and look for evidence. He found that the 16th rail of the attic was taken out and supposedly used for the ladder. This is indirect evidence because really they were not sure if this was real evidence, or it was just planted to frame Mr. Hauptman.
Shown all of the evidence that was presented in the trial, Bruno Hauptmann, is guilty as charged for the kidnap, and murder of the Lindberg baby. This man is and should be sentenced to execution for such a terrible offence that has been committed. All the evidence that has been shown has been taken into account, and the verdict of execution of such a terrible man, is proper, and equally right. |
|
|