Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on May 14, 2022 20:39:05 GMT -5
"Better they should let a hundred guilty men live than to send me, an innocent man, to the chair. What harm could I do anybody behind these walls? Why don't they hold me until we get a chance to prove my innocence?"
For a long time now, I've been curious as to what the controversial tagline actually means to fellow researchers.
I believe it's become a kind of feel-good but lame "elephant in the room" and that the man who apparently uttered these words, was simply a straight-up liar who didn't want to have to give in and admit as much.
What is the consensus here?
|
|
hiram
Detective
Posts: 124
|
Post by hiram on May 15, 2022 3:57:33 GMT -5
Interesting question, Joe, with several possible responses. Hauptmann did not possess a clever mind. In his earlier criminal attempts he simply attempted to escape confinement and was successful. He persisted in his method of leaving Germany illegally. Escaping the chair was his goal as he managed to persuade his spiritual advisors and at least one lawyer of his innocence. It was a way out, perhaps his only way. It's also possible, however, that he was innocent in his own eyes. If the child died in an accident, or if he did not commit the murder, he would have thought himself innocent of the charge regardless of his role in the crime. Kidnapping and extortion were criminal acts, but not at that time deserving of execution. It was the death of the child that brought him the chair. Yet he would not admit what part he played but stuck to his claim of innocence. He viewed himself as a victim of circumstances and made the statement for that reason.
|
|
|
Post by xjd on May 15, 2022 9:51:45 GMT -5
that is a really interesting question. on one hand, i think if Hauptmann had any info to give he would have done so. didn't they offer him life in prison in exchange for info on others who might have been involved? so why wouldn't he take that deal? some speculate that he didn't want to rat out the rest of the gang because his family would have been vulnerable to revenge.
on the other hand, he was very stubborn and probably got through life believing what he wanted to believe. i do think he played a part in the ladder making, ransom notes, was maybe Cemetery John, but i don't think he was at the actual kidnapping. so i agree that he told himself he was innocent of the death/murder of Charlie.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on May 22, 2022 10:04:22 GMT -5
Interesting question, Joe, with several possible responses. Hauptmann did not possess a clever mind. In his earlier criminal attempts he simply attempted to escape confinement and was successful. He persisted in his method of leaving Germany illegally. Escaping the chair was his goal as he managed to persuade his spiritual advisors and at least one lawyer of his innocence. It was a way out, perhaps his only way. It's also possible, however, that he was innocent in his own eyes. If the child died in an accident, or if he did not commit the murder, he would have thought himself innocent of the charge regardless of his role in the crime. Kidnapping and extortion were criminal acts, but not at that time deserving of execution. It was the death of the child that brought him the chair. Yet he would not admit what part he played but stuck to his claim of innocence. He viewed himself as a victim of circumstances and made the statement for that reason. Yes, it could well be that in some strange and misguided way, Hauptmann viewed himself as innocent of the actual crime of murder, if he himself did not intentionally kill the child. I think more than than any other quality, Hauptmann possessed a cunning mind, which for the most part, was devoid of common human sentiments and emotions. Essentially the way he saw it, if it worked for him, that's all that mattered. He was charged under the felony murder doctrine, because kidnapping was not punishable by death in the state of New Jersey. His guilt therefore, as demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt through the ladder construction, ransom note handwriting and possession of much of the ransom money, puts him squarely in that territory. How therefore, can a truly innocent man justify such a statement, at the same time he was professing to his wife and the man he became the closest to after the trial, his lawyer Lloyd Fisher, words to the effect, "If I knew anything at all about this crime, I would tell you?" Of course, every one of the above statements can be further dissected in the interests of judicial interpretation, and perhaps the real truth could have been drawn out of Hauptmann in time and under the right questioning and conditions. At the end of the day though, they would not have served him well other than perhaps avoiding death, and probably only put other people at the risk of experiencing a similar fate.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Joe on May 22, 2022 10:27:56 GMT -5
that is a really interesting question. on one hand, i think if Hauptmann had any info to give he would have done so. didn't they offer him life in prison in exchange for info on others who might have been involved? so why wouldn't he take that deal? some speculate that he didn't want to rat out the rest of the gang because his family would have been vulnerable to revenge. on the other hand, he was very stubborn and probably got through life believing what he wanted to believe. i do think he played a part in the ladder making, ransom notes, was maybe Cemetery John, but i don't think he was at the actual kidnapping. so i agree that he told himself he was innocent of the death/murder of Charlie. Hauptmann was offered cash and the possibility of a prison sentence in exchange for a truthful and verifiable personal confession that also named any others involved. I'm sure he would have considered these options, but also believe he felt by this time, he was in much too deep to extract himself in any meaningful way that would work for him. Hauptmann's lines of battle were established following his arrest and treatment at the hands of authorities and only strengthened by the prosecution's attack on his name at the Flemington Trial. A life in prison would not have appealed to him at all, nor would the spectre of his wife and child being viewed by the public as the wife and child of a confessed murderer, while he languished without them. In the end, the only way out was to accept his fate. His parting shot to the world, "They think when I die, the case will die. They think it will be like a book I close. But the book, it will never close," reminds me a bit of the note he left to authorities of Bautzen Prison, "Best wishes to the police."
|
|