Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2022 11:39:50 GMT -5
Greetings to all! As a new member, I realize that questions that i pose may have been answered multiple times and I would like to apologize in advance. I have followed the case off and on over the past 20 years or so, and have read the most notable book by Fisher, Scaduto, Kennedy, etc. but have never seen a credible explanation by the prosecution for how Hauptmann knew that the Lindberghs would be remaining at Hopewell that fateful March 1st. Perhaps I have missed this in my readings. For example, Fisher in "Ghosts of Hopewell" states that "Hauptmann was careful, but he was not immune to bad luck-on that particular Tuesday, the Lindberghs were still in Hopewell. But it was too late to turn back now......" Was Fisher just intimating that Hauptmann was just lucky to find the child there? Makes no sense to me! Finally, I have been an advocate for Hauptmann's guilt based on so may factors like the money, handwriting, etc. But now, I may need to rethink my opinions! Thanks for reading.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Apr 5, 2022 12:28:08 GMT -5
That’s one of the great mysteries of the whole thing—at least if it’s assumed Hauptmann acted alone. If that was all, I could believe he just got lucky: That was the Lindbergh house, so the Lindberghs must be there and he happened to be right that night. But there’s a problem with that: While I could buy that Hauptmann got lucky, or, barring that, that someone let it slip that, contrary to their normal routine, the Lindberghs would be in Hopewell that night, how did Hauptmann also know which was the nursery window? He watched the house beforehand? First, from where? The house, specifically the nursery windows, faced onto open fields back then, and besides, prior surveillance would’ve revealed the Lindberghs weren’t around on Tuesdays, so why choose to strike then? Anyway, watching a house is only going to tell you, at most, whether or not anyone’s home; it’s pretty useless in determining interior layout or which room is which. With no realistic way for Hauptmann to have gotten the nursery’s location from the literal or figurative outside then, by definition, that information had to have somehow come from the inside—someone familiar with the family’s routine, the house’s layout, and so on—that is, a household/family member.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2022 12:52:49 GMT -5
Thanks for your reply. Your reply has brought up additional questions about Hauptmann's guilt. I am really surprised that the Defense did not jump on that question during the trial. Also wondering if any members of the jury pondered that question as well. I do remembering reading something about the possible theory that Hauptmann might have been a carpenter on the site when the home at Hopewell was built! Unfortunately, I cannot remember the source. If true, that could answer some questions about familiarity with the home and area. Personally, my instincts lead me to question Red Johnson's & other members of the Lindbergh/Morrow households for possible involvement. Remember when JAFSI was questioning Cemetery John outside of the cemetery and Red Johnson's name came up and Cemetery John said that Red Johnson was not involved? Is that a coincidence or was Hauptmann following the information in the newspapers? That certainly is likely but I still feel that there is something about the household staff, ie Gow, Johnson, Sharpe, etc. having inside information about the baby remaining at Hopewell beyond the weekend.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 5, 2022 15:37:40 GMT -5
Thanks for your reply. Your reply has brought up additional questions about Hauptmann's guilt. I am really surprised that the Defense did not jump on that question during the trial. Also wondering if any members of the jury pondered that question as well. I do remembering reading something about the possible theory that Hauptmann might have been a carpenter on the site when the home at Hopewell was built! Unfortunately, I cannot remember the source. If true, that could answer some questions about familiarity with the home and area. Personally, my instincts lead me to question Red Johnson's & other members of the Lindbergh/Morrow households for possible involvement. Remember when JAFSI was questioning Cemetery John outside of the cemetery and Red Johnson's name came up and Cemetery John said that Red Johnson was not involved? Is that a coincidence or was Hauptmann following the information in the newspapers? That certainly is likely but I still feel that there is something about the household staff, ie Gow, Johnson, Sharpe, etc. having inside information about the baby remaining at Hopewell beyond the weekend. The Prosecution tried to have its cake and eat it too. Supposedly he repeatedly cased the house, but also adlibbed his way through the parts they couldn't explain. Of course it makes no sense, and its what led investigators to originally believe it was an inside job, locals were involved, or both. The Secret Symbol alone proves planning. What's the point if the kid isn't even there? Or to tell the family not to make anything public or notifying the police - but forget to cut the phone lines? To build a ladder to perfect specifications - to include the top section rails fitting perfectly into the shutter louvers - but not actually using that 3rd section? To navigate the boardwalk perfectly without stepping in the mud when Anne herself couldn't seem to do it during the daylight hours. Like LJ intimated ... the list goes on and on. Anyway, I think it was Fisher's theory (I could be wrong since its been a while since I've opened one of his books) that Hauptmann originally planned the kidnapping for Englewood but once there supposedly found him gone so went to Hopewell knowing he had to be there. This, of course, is bogus. Englewood had security guards, and the kidnap ladder was too short to reach the nursery window at Next Day Hill. BTW: I hope you decide to stay and keep this conversation going.
|
|
|
Post by lightningjew on Apr 5, 2022 15:51:03 GMT -5
The Lindbergh and Morrow staffs certainly would've been aware that the Lindberghs would be in Hopewell that Tuesday, but since most of the Morrow staff had never been to Highfields, they wouldn't have known where the nursery was. Only household members would've been aware of that AND the fact that the family would be there past the Monday. Meanwhile, the construction crew on Highfields was pretty thoroughly investigated, and nothing ever came of it. Barring investigators overlooking Hauptmann having worked there as a carpenter during construction--which would be quite the oversight and smoking gun, if true, but I've never heard of that--again, I think we're realistically left with a household member passing all the necessary information onto the kidnappers, as to where CAL Jr. would be and when. The FBI summary of the case does report that the houseman Whateley gave tours to passersby when the Lindberghs weren't around, so anyone could've done interior reconnaissance, but those tours never happened, the FBI summary being inaccurate on that point.
|
|
|
Post by trojanusc on Apr 5, 2022 23:32:02 GMT -5
Greetings to all! As a new member, I realize that questions that i pose may have been answered multiple times and I would like to apologize in advance. I have followed the case off and on over the past 20 years or so, and have read the most notable book by Fisher, Scaduto, Kennedy, etc. but have never seen a credible explanation by the prosecution for how Hauptmann knew that the Lindberghs would be remaining at Hopewell that fateful March 1st. Perhaps I have missed this in my readings. For example, Fisher in "Ghosts of Hopewell" states that "Hauptmann was careful, but he was not immune to bad luck-on that particular Tuesday, the Lindberghs were still in Hopewell. But it was too late to turn back now......" Was Fisher just intimating that Hauptmann was just lucky to find the child there? Makes no sense to me! Finally, I have been an advocate for Hauptmann's guilt based on so may factors like the money, handwriting, etc. But now, I may need to rethink my opinions! Thanks for reading. You could say Hauptmann just got lucky with the night of the kidnap, but as lightningjew mentions you have to contend with the house layout. Then you have to contend with the fact the kidnapping happened supposedly at dinnertime, the time of the night that literally every member of the household is not only home but also awake. On top of that, you have to realize that the criminals approached on a very narrow boardwalk, set the ladder down with one attempt (there's only one set of indentations in the mud) and know not only which room was the nursery, but that it was empty (there were no footprints showing they stepped far enough back from the house to see what was going on inside, plus the shutters were closed but not locked). Then, the cherry on top of all of it, is that Lindbergh himself had a once in a lifetime "oopsie" and somehow missed a big engagement that night, with at least one witness seeing his car nearby far earlier than he claimed. He was never really pressed on his whereabouts. The whole thing is preposterous on its face and were it anybody but Lindbergh, this all would have had a very different outcome.
|
|
|
Post by hurtelable on Apr 6, 2022 19:43:12 GMT -5
Wilentz and crew didn't need to make an air-tight case against Hauptmann, because the vast predominance 0f the media had stirred up public antagonism against Hauptmann to the point that the trial became more of a spectacle than a just legal proceeding. As pointed out by just about everyone on this thread, the prosecution could never place Hauptmann beyond a reasonable doubt on the Lindbergh premises on the day/night of the alleged kidnapping. If justice were to be truly served, Hauptmann should have been held not guilty on the kidnapping charge and remanded back to New York to face an extortion charge. Yes, he was involved in the scheme that went down but he couldn't possibly have carried out the whole sequence of events as a one-man job. Just too complex.
As a sad footnote, Wilentz became a very prosperous man from the plaudits he received from the media in the wake of the Hauptmann conviction, despite the inadequacies of his work at Flemington. The law firm he founded is currently a behemoth known as Wilentz, Goldman, and Spitzer, with offices in Woodbridge, NJ, Eatontown, NJ, New York, and Philadelphia.
|
|