Post by bookrefuge on Jul 8, 2013 9:03:21 GMT -5
As some of you know, I started out on this board as what some pejoratively call a “Hauptmanite”—I believed Hauptmann was innocent, largely based on the unfair trial he was given—which smacked of a frameup—as well as other inconsistencies.
However, Kevkon’s wood evidence, when added to Rab’s financial evidence, began pulling me into the “Hauptmann guilty” camp. And when I saw that the autopsy doctor said Charlie was shot—long before the hidden Lilliput was even discovered—it made sense to me that Hauptmann, if acting alone, having no means of taking care of Charlie, would have intended to kill him on the night of the kidnapping—and what faster way than a shot to the head with a small pistol (away from Highfields)? So gradually, the evidence has changed my mind about Hauptmann’s guilt.
Still, I couldn’t accept Hauptmann as “lone wolf” for a variety of reasons. I think the biggest is his knowledge that Charlie would be at Highfields on a Tuesday, something that had never happened before. Of course, it smacks of “inside information” that Hauptmann couldn’t have had access to.
Kevkon suggested, as I recall, that Hauptmann errantly thought Charlie always lived at Highfields and that BRH went there on March 1 on that mistaken assumption. I can’t buy that—I can’t buy that the “crime of the century” resulted from a combination of stupidity and sheer luck.
However, Dave has given me an idea, and I think there is a credible way of explaining how Hauptmann “knew about Tuesday.” It isn’t my intention to iron out other difficulties of the case here—just the Tuesday issue.
Let’s start with the thesis that Hauptmann worked alone. I’m not convinced that he did, but let’s use that as a working hypothesis.
Now if you were Hauptmann, working alone, how would plan this job? You don’t have any inside contacts—you don’t know Violet Sharp, the Whateleys, or anyone else inside the Lindbergh-Morrow households.
If I was Hauptmann, I would have two sources of intel: (1) my own observations of Highfields, which was gradually being constructed; and (2) newspaper reports on the Lindberghs, which could keep me apprised about their movements (e.g., if Lindbergh was going out of the country, this is the sort of thing I could learn from newspapers).
Let’s first address the issue of casing Highfields. Hauptmann could have initially read about the house in the newspapers. Also, there were a lot of Germans in the Hopewell region; we’ve talked on this board about some who lived both there and in the Bronx. So it’s possible that Hauptmann heard a fellow German in the Bronx—someone who’d seen the Highfields property or even worked there—say something like, “You know, that place the Lindberghs are moving to is awfully isolated. I’m surprised that a wealthy family would feel safe down there.”
It’s often been said that Highfields is difficult to find. But if Hauptmann made several trips to “case the joint,” eventually it would have become easy. Sure, he would have had to ask directions the first time.
I think one thing we can all agree on: Hauptmann was a good driver. He drove across the country, taking turns driving with his friend Kloppenburg. He also took hunting trips to places like Maine. So I don’t think anyone would dispute that Hauptmann was a guy who could use maps and find his way to new places. Even the cops who arrested him took note of his driving skill on that day.
By the way, compare that to John Knoll. I don’t believe that Zorn, in his book, even provides any evidence that Knoll could drive a car at all.
Anyway, another objection to Hauptmann casing Highfields is: How could he do it without being noticed? Wouldn’t the locals have noticed a stranger coming and going?
I think there are a couple of answers. I believe that the ransom notes were correct in saying the caper had been planned for a long time. Hauptmann probably began casing Highfields in 1931. The Lindberghs were the subject of tabloids and curiosity seekers. If Hauptmann was seen looking at the house while being built, he probably would have been dismissed as a curious onlooker. Nothing would have smelled of “suspicion” or “criminal intent” about a man looking at an unoccupied house under construction.
Another thing. Lots of men from various trades must have been working at Highfields. Presumably some drove there in their own cars. If Hauptmann had his tool box on the back of his car at that time, he probably would have looked like just another tradesman. He probably could have even driven up close to the house, and other workers wouldn’t have considered him suspicious, assuming he was working on some task unrelated to their own. No one would have said to Hauptmann, “Your papers, please.”
Now as the house neared completion, it would have been more difficult to survey Highfields, but far from impossible. During the week, only the Whateleys were there. There were no surveillance cameras back then, and even the Whateleys wouldn’t be constantly peering out the windows for possible strangers. I think Hauptmann would not have been restricted to binoculars—I think he could have actually sneaked right up to the house and had a close-up look, at things like the boardwalk and the lower shutters, especially if he saw the Whateleys take off in their car on an errand.
With Anna working in the bakery, and BRH’s carpentry work seasonal, there would have been plenty of opportunities for him to drive to Hopewell, memorize the route, and plan the crime, including a burial spot for the child. I think Hauptmann probably had Highfields throroughly cased, and perhaps even said to himself, “By the time Colonel Lindbergh moves in here, I will know the terrain even better than he himself.”
I don’t think Hauptmann was planning on March 1st at all. I thinking he was waiting for warmer weather, after the Lindberghs had settled in. And then, when the newspapers reported Lindbergh was flying somewhere (perhaps even with Anne) that would be his moment to strike.
So why do we have the crime on March 1st? I think it was a COMBINATION of both careful planning and luck.
Let’s say that in late February, Hauptmann is working out the last details of the crime. He has been preparing the ladder for some time, testing it away from Highfields. And he wants to case Highfields another time. But he’s learned that weekends are not a good time—he went there once on a weekend and Highfields was full of the Lindberghs and their guests—he hadn’t been able to do anything that weekend--too risky. Safest time is weekdays, when only the two caretakers are there.
So which day of the week to go? Tuesday, March 1st is out—he’s scheduled to start work at the Majestic, and he expects to be working there all week after that. So he’ll head down on Monday, February 29.
But that Monday, Hauptmann sees something shocking—a child is there. And yes, it’s Charlie, with his unmistakable curly hair. And he recognizes Anne Lindbergh, who he’s seen photos of. Now I don’t think Anne would have taken Charlie out that day, not with his cold. And unfortunately we don’t have a “Falzini timeline” for Monday like we do for Tuesday. But I’m going to guess that Hauptmann was there late in the day—better for cover—and it was dark enough that lights were on in the house, and he sees mother and child.
And suddenly it hits Hauptmann. His PERFECT STORM has suddenly arrived:
--The child is here now, with only the mother and the two caretakers.
--With the house still unfinished, there are no curtains yet—he can see all activity inside.
--According to Hauptmann’s other source of intel—newspapers-- tomorrow evening, Tuesday, Charles Lindbergh will be giving a speech at NYU. No risk of Lindbergh being home during a snatch.
--Tomorrow, Tuesday, is also Anna’s day to work late at the bakery.
As Hauptmann drives back to the Bronx, his mind is buzzing. He can’t do the snatch tonight, Monday—there’d never be time, too many preparations to be made, details to take care if, and besides, Tuesday is better anyway. Yes, it’s got to be tomorrow, Tuesday. He’s not SURE Charlie will still be there, but for $50,000 it’s worth the risk. Back in the Bronx, Hauptmann needs to make a last adjustment to the ladder. Why doesn’t he go to the lumber yard for that needed piece? Because it’s too late in the day—the lumber yard is closed. So he takes that piece of wood the workmen left from the attic, and cuts it into “Rail 16.” Why doesn’t he wait and go to the lumber yard the following day? Because he’s decided he’s still going to report to the Majestic the next morning—that will be the front end of his alibi, and Anna at the bakery will be the back end.
I realize there is quite a bit of controversy over whether or not Hauptmann worked at the Majestic on March 1—the doctoring of records, for example. I will not enter into that controversy here, but for the sake of this model, I’ll suggest that Hauptmann found a way to leave work early.
In this model, he arrives in Hopewell near dusk, is the man spotted by Lupica. He parks his car on Featherbed Lane, which has been his plan all along. It’s a good spot to hide a car and the nearest side street to Highfields. It’s his car the Conovers hear.
Under the cover of darkness, Hauptmann walks to Highfields. Of course, he doesn’t take the ladder—he’s not SURE Charlie is still there; he needs to recon. Sure enough, Charlie is there. Drat, a nurse has been added. But at least, as expected, no Lindbergh. BRH sees Anne and Betty struggling to close the bad shutter. He realizes that is his best entry point.
After he sees Betty turn off the nursery light at about 7:50, there is no time to lose. He hurries back to Featherbed Lane. This back-and-forth to Featherbed would explain the footprints Oscar Bush later found. I believe he had no intention of trying to haul that ladder over the horrible terrain. I think Hauptmann did just what Kevkon says—he boldly drove right up the driveway, a little short of the house, and dropped off the ladder. This would account for the “car on gravel” sound Anne said she heard between 8:05 and 8:10. Not knowing how long the job would take, or what obstacles he might encounter, Hauptmann then parked the car off-road in the dark on the road near the abandoned house and made his way back up on foot [of course, where are the footprints validating this? Footprints were found going DOWN, but not UP to the house. He walked up the driveway, perhaps? I don’t have a strong answer for this.]
Then, as he’s readying the ladder for the snatch—a nasty surprise. A horn honks. Lindbergh is home much earlier than BRH expected. But there’s no turning back now. The ladder is there, and there’s no way he is going to haul it back down to the road and try for another night.
When the Lindberghs settle into their living room, and lights are still off in the nursery, Hauptmann makes his move. I suggest that the sound Lindbergh heard about 9PM (I know many doubt him), the sound the neighbors heard of their dog chasing someone near the abandoned house at about 9PM, combined with the set of footprints that Lindbergh, DeGaetano and Bornmann followed from the ladder to near the abandoned house, all match up very well.
Although we have superficial evidence of a gang (e.g., the apparent cemetery lookouts, Condon’s Italians, Perrone’s short-distance fare), when you come down to it, our most rock-solid evidence is always ONE MAN—one man talks to Perrone; one man meets Condon in the cemetery; one man was seen by Lupica; one man was found with a stash of ransom loot.
In sum, it is BELIEVABLE to me that Hauptmann could have “known about Tuesday” in the way I’ve described—no inside tip. He went there purely on recon, spotted Charlie to his surprise, sensed opportunity knocking, and accelerated his kidnapping plan.
Before others shred this theory, let me say that I recognize there are still problems with the idea of Hauptmann acting alone.
One is this: Why was the ladder moved 75 feet from the house? The only way Hauptmann could have done this would be to put Charlie down. If Charlie’s still alive, but has only been doped (with say, a rag soaked in ether), why would Hauptmann risk the kid’s waking up and crying while he moves the ladder? But if Charlie is already dead (Dave thinks he was strangled in the crib), why would BRH put a dead child down while he moves the ladder 75 feet? That dead child would mean a MURDER RAP and the ELECTRIC CHAIR. So I should think that, whether the child was alive OR dead, Hauptmann’s priority should have been to escape as quickly as possible—moving the ladder should not have been a priority. Even If he was afraid the wind would blow it over and alert people inside, I still don’t see why he had to move it as far as 75 feet.
There is one other matter that I think casts doubt on the whole theory of Hauptmann doing the kidnap—and it has nothing to do with the scene at Highfields. Rather, it’s Anna and the bakery. Normally, Anna worked from 7AM to 5PM at Fredericksen’s bakery. But on Tuesdays she would cover for Mrs. Fredericksen, and would stay until 9 to 9:30 PM. BRH would take her home, and would usually hang out at the bakery and have his supper there on those Tuesday evenings.
But if my scenario was correct, and Hauptmann made the snatch at about 9PM, and then disposed of the child’s body, I can’t see him getting back to that Bronx bakery much before 11 to 11:30 PM. He would have had to pick up Anna late, or make arrangements for someone else to take her home. He would have had to make excuses—and I don’t think she’d buy that he had to work at the Majestic that late. Surely Anna would have remembered such a departure from routine, and the Lindbergh kidnapping—like the Kennedy assassination or 9-11—would have stamped the date in her mind. “The Lindbergh kidnapping—oh, yes, that was the night Richard couldn’t pick me up.” And although Kevkon has expressed doubts about her, I DON’T believe Anna would have lied about that night. Hauptmann also had other witnesses placing him in the bakery that evening—Carlstrom and Kiss—and even if they weren’t perfect witnesses, they beat the hell out of Whited and Hochmuth.
But all I really wanted to answer in this thread was: Could Hauptmann know about Tuesday? I now believe he could. But issues like the ladder movement and the bakery continue to raise doubts about his acting alone, and maybe deserve threads of their own.
However, Kevkon’s wood evidence, when added to Rab’s financial evidence, began pulling me into the “Hauptmann guilty” camp. And when I saw that the autopsy doctor said Charlie was shot—long before the hidden Lilliput was even discovered—it made sense to me that Hauptmann, if acting alone, having no means of taking care of Charlie, would have intended to kill him on the night of the kidnapping—and what faster way than a shot to the head with a small pistol (away from Highfields)? So gradually, the evidence has changed my mind about Hauptmann’s guilt.
Still, I couldn’t accept Hauptmann as “lone wolf” for a variety of reasons. I think the biggest is his knowledge that Charlie would be at Highfields on a Tuesday, something that had never happened before. Of course, it smacks of “inside information” that Hauptmann couldn’t have had access to.
Kevkon suggested, as I recall, that Hauptmann errantly thought Charlie always lived at Highfields and that BRH went there on March 1 on that mistaken assumption. I can’t buy that—I can’t buy that the “crime of the century” resulted from a combination of stupidity and sheer luck.
However, Dave has given me an idea, and I think there is a credible way of explaining how Hauptmann “knew about Tuesday.” It isn’t my intention to iron out other difficulties of the case here—just the Tuesday issue.
Let’s start with the thesis that Hauptmann worked alone. I’m not convinced that he did, but let’s use that as a working hypothesis.
Now if you were Hauptmann, working alone, how would plan this job? You don’t have any inside contacts—you don’t know Violet Sharp, the Whateleys, or anyone else inside the Lindbergh-Morrow households.
If I was Hauptmann, I would have two sources of intel: (1) my own observations of Highfields, which was gradually being constructed; and (2) newspaper reports on the Lindberghs, which could keep me apprised about their movements (e.g., if Lindbergh was going out of the country, this is the sort of thing I could learn from newspapers).
Let’s first address the issue of casing Highfields. Hauptmann could have initially read about the house in the newspapers. Also, there were a lot of Germans in the Hopewell region; we’ve talked on this board about some who lived both there and in the Bronx. So it’s possible that Hauptmann heard a fellow German in the Bronx—someone who’d seen the Highfields property or even worked there—say something like, “You know, that place the Lindberghs are moving to is awfully isolated. I’m surprised that a wealthy family would feel safe down there.”
It’s often been said that Highfields is difficult to find. But if Hauptmann made several trips to “case the joint,” eventually it would have become easy. Sure, he would have had to ask directions the first time.
I think one thing we can all agree on: Hauptmann was a good driver. He drove across the country, taking turns driving with his friend Kloppenburg. He also took hunting trips to places like Maine. So I don’t think anyone would dispute that Hauptmann was a guy who could use maps and find his way to new places. Even the cops who arrested him took note of his driving skill on that day.
By the way, compare that to John Knoll. I don’t believe that Zorn, in his book, even provides any evidence that Knoll could drive a car at all.
Anyway, another objection to Hauptmann casing Highfields is: How could he do it without being noticed? Wouldn’t the locals have noticed a stranger coming and going?
I think there are a couple of answers. I believe that the ransom notes were correct in saying the caper had been planned for a long time. Hauptmann probably began casing Highfields in 1931. The Lindberghs were the subject of tabloids and curiosity seekers. If Hauptmann was seen looking at the house while being built, he probably would have been dismissed as a curious onlooker. Nothing would have smelled of “suspicion” or “criminal intent” about a man looking at an unoccupied house under construction.
Another thing. Lots of men from various trades must have been working at Highfields. Presumably some drove there in their own cars. If Hauptmann had his tool box on the back of his car at that time, he probably would have looked like just another tradesman. He probably could have even driven up close to the house, and other workers wouldn’t have considered him suspicious, assuming he was working on some task unrelated to their own. No one would have said to Hauptmann, “Your papers, please.”
Now as the house neared completion, it would have been more difficult to survey Highfields, but far from impossible. During the week, only the Whateleys were there. There were no surveillance cameras back then, and even the Whateleys wouldn’t be constantly peering out the windows for possible strangers. I think Hauptmann would not have been restricted to binoculars—I think he could have actually sneaked right up to the house and had a close-up look, at things like the boardwalk and the lower shutters, especially if he saw the Whateleys take off in their car on an errand.
With Anna working in the bakery, and BRH’s carpentry work seasonal, there would have been plenty of opportunities for him to drive to Hopewell, memorize the route, and plan the crime, including a burial spot for the child. I think Hauptmann probably had Highfields throroughly cased, and perhaps even said to himself, “By the time Colonel Lindbergh moves in here, I will know the terrain even better than he himself.”
I don’t think Hauptmann was planning on March 1st at all. I thinking he was waiting for warmer weather, after the Lindberghs had settled in. And then, when the newspapers reported Lindbergh was flying somewhere (perhaps even with Anne) that would be his moment to strike.
So why do we have the crime on March 1st? I think it was a COMBINATION of both careful planning and luck.
Let’s say that in late February, Hauptmann is working out the last details of the crime. He has been preparing the ladder for some time, testing it away from Highfields. And he wants to case Highfields another time. But he’s learned that weekends are not a good time—he went there once on a weekend and Highfields was full of the Lindberghs and their guests—he hadn’t been able to do anything that weekend--too risky. Safest time is weekdays, when only the two caretakers are there.
So which day of the week to go? Tuesday, March 1st is out—he’s scheduled to start work at the Majestic, and he expects to be working there all week after that. So he’ll head down on Monday, February 29.
But that Monday, Hauptmann sees something shocking—a child is there. And yes, it’s Charlie, with his unmistakable curly hair. And he recognizes Anne Lindbergh, who he’s seen photos of. Now I don’t think Anne would have taken Charlie out that day, not with his cold. And unfortunately we don’t have a “Falzini timeline” for Monday like we do for Tuesday. But I’m going to guess that Hauptmann was there late in the day—better for cover—and it was dark enough that lights were on in the house, and he sees mother and child.
And suddenly it hits Hauptmann. His PERFECT STORM has suddenly arrived:
--The child is here now, with only the mother and the two caretakers.
--With the house still unfinished, there are no curtains yet—he can see all activity inside.
--According to Hauptmann’s other source of intel—newspapers-- tomorrow evening, Tuesday, Charles Lindbergh will be giving a speech at NYU. No risk of Lindbergh being home during a snatch.
--Tomorrow, Tuesday, is also Anna’s day to work late at the bakery.
As Hauptmann drives back to the Bronx, his mind is buzzing. He can’t do the snatch tonight, Monday—there’d never be time, too many preparations to be made, details to take care if, and besides, Tuesday is better anyway. Yes, it’s got to be tomorrow, Tuesday. He’s not SURE Charlie will still be there, but for $50,000 it’s worth the risk. Back in the Bronx, Hauptmann needs to make a last adjustment to the ladder. Why doesn’t he go to the lumber yard for that needed piece? Because it’s too late in the day—the lumber yard is closed. So he takes that piece of wood the workmen left from the attic, and cuts it into “Rail 16.” Why doesn’t he wait and go to the lumber yard the following day? Because he’s decided he’s still going to report to the Majestic the next morning—that will be the front end of his alibi, and Anna at the bakery will be the back end.
I realize there is quite a bit of controversy over whether or not Hauptmann worked at the Majestic on March 1—the doctoring of records, for example. I will not enter into that controversy here, but for the sake of this model, I’ll suggest that Hauptmann found a way to leave work early.
In this model, he arrives in Hopewell near dusk, is the man spotted by Lupica. He parks his car on Featherbed Lane, which has been his plan all along. It’s a good spot to hide a car and the nearest side street to Highfields. It’s his car the Conovers hear.
Under the cover of darkness, Hauptmann walks to Highfields. Of course, he doesn’t take the ladder—he’s not SURE Charlie is still there; he needs to recon. Sure enough, Charlie is there. Drat, a nurse has been added. But at least, as expected, no Lindbergh. BRH sees Anne and Betty struggling to close the bad shutter. He realizes that is his best entry point.
After he sees Betty turn off the nursery light at about 7:50, there is no time to lose. He hurries back to Featherbed Lane. This back-and-forth to Featherbed would explain the footprints Oscar Bush later found. I believe he had no intention of trying to haul that ladder over the horrible terrain. I think Hauptmann did just what Kevkon says—he boldly drove right up the driveway, a little short of the house, and dropped off the ladder. This would account for the “car on gravel” sound Anne said she heard between 8:05 and 8:10. Not knowing how long the job would take, or what obstacles he might encounter, Hauptmann then parked the car off-road in the dark on the road near the abandoned house and made his way back up on foot [of course, where are the footprints validating this? Footprints were found going DOWN, but not UP to the house. He walked up the driveway, perhaps? I don’t have a strong answer for this.]
Then, as he’s readying the ladder for the snatch—a nasty surprise. A horn honks. Lindbergh is home much earlier than BRH expected. But there’s no turning back now. The ladder is there, and there’s no way he is going to haul it back down to the road and try for another night.
When the Lindberghs settle into their living room, and lights are still off in the nursery, Hauptmann makes his move. I suggest that the sound Lindbergh heard about 9PM (I know many doubt him), the sound the neighbors heard of their dog chasing someone near the abandoned house at about 9PM, combined with the set of footprints that Lindbergh, DeGaetano and Bornmann followed from the ladder to near the abandoned house, all match up very well.
Although we have superficial evidence of a gang (e.g., the apparent cemetery lookouts, Condon’s Italians, Perrone’s short-distance fare), when you come down to it, our most rock-solid evidence is always ONE MAN—one man talks to Perrone; one man meets Condon in the cemetery; one man was seen by Lupica; one man was found with a stash of ransom loot.
In sum, it is BELIEVABLE to me that Hauptmann could have “known about Tuesday” in the way I’ve described—no inside tip. He went there purely on recon, spotted Charlie to his surprise, sensed opportunity knocking, and accelerated his kidnapping plan.
Before others shred this theory, let me say that I recognize there are still problems with the idea of Hauptmann acting alone.
One is this: Why was the ladder moved 75 feet from the house? The only way Hauptmann could have done this would be to put Charlie down. If Charlie’s still alive, but has only been doped (with say, a rag soaked in ether), why would Hauptmann risk the kid’s waking up and crying while he moves the ladder? But if Charlie is already dead (Dave thinks he was strangled in the crib), why would BRH put a dead child down while he moves the ladder 75 feet? That dead child would mean a MURDER RAP and the ELECTRIC CHAIR. So I should think that, whether the child was alive OR dead, Hauptmann’s priority should have been to escape as quickly as possible—moving the ladder should not have been a priority. Even If he was afraid the wind would blow it over and alert people inside, I still don’t see why he had to move it as far as 75 feet.
There is one other matter that I think casts doubt on the whole theory of Hauptmann doing the kidnap—and it has nothing to do with the scene at Highfields. Rather, it’s Anna and the bakery. Normally, Anna worked from 7AM to 5PM at Fredericksen’s bakery. But on Tuesdays she would cover for Mrs. Fredericksen, and would stay until 9 to 9:30 PM. BRH would take her home, and would usually hang out at the bakery and have his supper there on those Tuesday evenings.
But if my scenario was correct, and Hauptmann made the snatch at about 9PM, and then disposed of the child’s body, I can’t see him getting back to that Bronx bakery much before 11 to 11:30 PM. He would have had to pick up Anna late, or make arrangements for someone else to take her home. He would have had to make excuses—and I don’t think she’d buy that he had to work at the Majestic that late. Surely Anna would have remembered such a departure from routine, and the Lindbergh kidnapping—like the Kennedy assassination or 9-11—would have stamped the date in her mind. “The Lindbergh kidnapping—oh, yes, that was the night Richard couldn’t pick me up.” And although Kevkon has expressed doubts about her, I DON’T believe Anna would have lied about that night. Hauptmann also had other witnesses placing him in the bakery that evening—Carlstrom and Kiss—and even if they weren’t perfect witnesses, they beat the hell out of Whited and Hochmuth.
But all I really wanted to answer in this thread was: Could Hauptmann know about Tuesday? I now believe he could. But issues like the ladder movement and the bakery continue to raise doubts about his acting alone, and maybe deserve threads of their own.