|
Post by rmc1971 on Apr 12, 2007 5:00:44 GMT -5
Anyone have any in-depth info on Hauptmann's criminal activity in Germany. I know the basic stories that he robbed the mayor's house with the use of a ladder, which obviously hurt him in the LKC.
Also that he and another robbed a woman 'pushing a baby carriage', which is damning as well. That is how I always seen it in print, since no baby was explicitly mentioned, I have assumed there was no baby even though the woman had a carriage. In post WWI Germany, she could have been transporting food or money with the carriage. Does anyone have detailed info on this?
I was always curious about his escapes from prison in Germany and his ability to be a successful stowaway on multiple occasions.
Obviously, Hauptmann was no babe in the woods as far as criminal activity goes. On the one hand, I could write off some some of the German crimes as part of life immediately after post-WWI. On the other, maybe there is something there that can shed more light on his background and his profile.
|
|
|
Post by Giszmo on Apr 12, 2007 7:19:10 GMT -5
The State Police Museum has his German record on file. You can probably get a copy there. I think Michael has their contact info.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 12, 2007 7:52:19 GMT -5
Gismo, you are absolutely right! They do have copies of his crimes/charges from Germany and other material concerning investigations about these crimes. I believe these are in the 1600 files and other stuff can be found in the Hoffman Collection. If anyone is thinking about a visit or calling here is the contact information (ask for Mark Falzini): www.njspmuseum.org/contact.htmlHauptmann's criminal record doesn't seem as bad as - those who want it to be - portray it. I personally place the blame of Fisher's books because it appears to me that he is purposely attempting to not only make them look worse by lack of detail and omission, but to insult those who may hold another opinion about the situation once they actually do see the details. Of course it doesn't help when people read his books, steal his material without researching the source, and then pawn it off as if its their material they had independently researched themselves. People then see this theft and subsequent "regurgitation" then assume its yet another "expert" who found the same information when nothing could be further from the truth. The worst of these crimes seems to be the "highway robbery" of the two women pushing "baby" carriages. Here's what the records actually reveal: On March 20, 1919 Petzold and Hauptmann were hungry and having no money or food decided to hunt in the woods near Wiesa and Neblschutz. They had no luck. Petzold had Hauptmann's army pistol and came upon the two women. These women were told to stop and unpack. At first the women refused to stop and Petzold pointed the gun at the women and said: "We'll shoot, were Radicals." Hauptmann was reported to have told Petzold to shoot but the report does not quote him, so we don't know exactly what was said. When one reads all of the documentation it is clear they were bluffing. If they wanted to harm the women they would have simply walked up, knocked them out, and then took their food. The police report claims the gun was loaded but Hauptmann claimed it wasn't. It's also clear those carriages were merely being used as a method to transport and/or disguise. There were no babies in these carriages. Although I can't find a reference to this fact in Fisher's books, I am quite sure he was aware of this. So why wouldn't he mention such an important fact? Anyway, when the women stopped, Hauptmann and Petzold took 9 bread rolls, 8 foodstuff cards, and a pocketbook with 3 marks in it. The women were not harmed and this was considered "highway robbery" by the German Authorities. I recently stumbled upon more information concerning the frequency of such occurrences in Post-WWI since many people were literally starving... I will try to find it again.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Apr 12, 2007 7:57:42 GMT -5
That is what I actually was getting at Michael. In post WWI Germany, with the massive inflation, people literally were bringing home paychecks in wheelbarrows. With the food shortages since 1915, many people would haul what they could find in whatever they had available for transport.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 12, 2007 8:41:53 GMT -5
BTW - Happy Birthday RMC.
I have been skimming through one of the many Auto-Biographies attributed to Hauptmann. I say "attributed" because it is quite obvious he had help writing it. The one I am now reading says the gun had bullets in the clip but none in the chamber. He also claimed that Petzold would have never fired it.
I am getting the sense that Hauptmann is trying to show that he felt betrayed by the Motherland. That is, he fought for his country only to be mistreated for doing so. He claims he was discharged by the Army without shoes and had to walk home in slippers. He also claims that his first run-in with the law was an incident which occurred on that return trip.....someone laughing at him because he had no money causing him to "box his ears" with pleasure.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Apr 13, 2007 5:43:24 GMT -5
From what I understand the email connected to the link above for the NJSP Archives doesn't get to Mark directly. Here is his email for direct contact concerning information concerning the case: LPPFALZM@gw.njsp.org Feel free to contact him.
|
|
|
Post by rmc1971 on Mar 15, 2008 17:27:56 GMT -5
One other question I have if anyone knows: In Hauptmann's crime in Germany where he entered the mayor's house via ladder, was he known to have built that ladder himself?
|
|
|
Post by acondon on Mar 16, 2008 5:47:45 GMT -5
re when Hauptmann entered the Mayor's house is Germany, using a ladder, did he build the ladder himself.
That is a VERY good question. I hope that Michael knows as I am now curious, also.
Pat
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 16, 2008 8:14:01 GMT -5
There were actually (9) separate cases in Germany. The one you are asking about is listed as Case #2. I have the Country Court records from Bautzen. According to the records (which have been translated into English): The criminals climbed in an open window in the home of the Mayor and forced open a writing desk with a crow bar and took out 2 to 300 marks in cash also a silver pocket watch with a gold chain. They divided the money but Hauptmann kept the watch. The victim was Mayor Schierach. One thing I realize is there are many sources for information. I believe the ladder being mentioned as involved in this crime was brought out by Wilentz during the trial. My books are still packed so I am hoping there are references in them once I get to them - that I can look up in my files. Anyone know of any? I also want to look through a couple of the Auto-Biographies to see what Hauptmann says. Some things I think are worthy of mention.... As I read through these 9 Cases I see that Hauptmann is usually involved with another. Also, he seems to be breaking windows, and using a crow bar. It is also mentioned in one of the reports he was thought to have used gloves to hide his fingerprints.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 16, 2008 8:39:57 GMT -5
That's exactly why I believe what I do. It's his MO. It's also why I immediately picked out the flat pry bar made from an old leaf spring among Hauptmann's tools when Mark and I were examining them. It's the tool of choice.
|
|
dena
Detective
Posts: 129
|
Post by dena on Mar 16, 2008 13:27:37 GMT -5
This is indeed interesting. It shows that BRH was involved in a very gutsy crime. To rob the mayor. Again, I wonder if there was some sort of class envy at work here. Or perhaps the mayor was just the wealthiest citizen around & they thought he would have the best loot.
But he used a prybar. Worked with a partner.
In another crime he held 2 women up at gunpoint. Again with a partner. And heres the thing that bothers me about that. Even people who are starving will often just feed themselves. There is a difference between taking food because you are starving at that moment & taking it for later. But it sounds as if BRH & his partner took all of the food those women had probably foraged for. And since they had it in carriages maybe they even had children. I know I am speculating here, but if I am corect, that was a very cold hearted act he & his partner perpetrated.
I have always thought the reason that BRH did not give up the gang was because out of fear for the safety of his family. But learning as I am about his past crimes, and knowing he was in prison, do you think it could been more an act of self preservation rather than a noble attempt to keep his family safe? Snitches in prison are the lowest on the food chain nowadays.
But was this also true in 1932 & BRH knew his life wouldn't be worth a plug nickel if he squeeled? And although surely he realized at some point he was going to fry in the chair, it was better to die that way than to be known as a snitch? Do we knowif he had given up his partners back in Germany when caught, or kept his mouth shut then?
btw, I am going to try & find it again in my files, but I have a report on which the premise is that, (in regard to "profiling") , a person who has used a partner in the past generally does not strike out on their own. Esp on a big crime. Although they may have started out by committing petty crimes together. They need each other for "support". But this was specifically in regard to partners who murder. Serial killers. So Im not sure if that is applicable here.
Usually, when criminals have got away with something before, they become emboldened. Has anyone ever checked to see if there was a rash of unsolved robberies/burglaries in the NYC/NJ area in the 1920's through 1934?
I must say, I am really changing my position on BRH & his possible involvement. Something I never thought I would do. And while I do find it so disturbing that BRH may have been executed for a crime that technically, he did not commit, he may have played a big part in it.
The old saying comes to mind "If you're going to lay with dogs, you are going to get fleas".
Maybe Hauptman had been hanging out with too many dogs.
But as always, I cannot disregard Lindberghs actions in doing everything he possibly could to hurt & sabotage the investigation. CAL had to have had a REASON for doing this. Charles Lindbergh did nothing without a reason, imho.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 16, 2008 16:34:42 GMT -5
So why no pry marks, and no broken glass on the Nursery window? Hauptmann just had to know what he faced with those shutters being closed and the window being locked. Yet nothing. Here's his tools of choice being unused. Surely whoever did this knew the shutters were warped and the window unlocked....but how?
There were no children in the carriages and they were only being used to transport the food. They had been hunting all day and didn't get anything. According to Hauptmann they were hungry and the gun was unloaded. No one was injured, and he claimed to have been very embarrassed about it - especially when he told Anna.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 16, 2008 17:26:05 GMT -5
My point is that Hauptmann had the right tool, the experience, and the opportunity. Each can determine what to make of it all.
I think Dena has made an excellent point about the baby carriage robbery. Regardless of whether the gun was loaded or not, they deprived these woman and their families of food. I know, these were desperate times in Germany, my family lived through it.. But this is still a brazen and opportunistic act and one in which Hauptmann clearly feels more entitled to the food than the woman. I don't mean to paint him as public enemy #1 here, but I do wonder how many other crimes he was involved in both in Germany and here, in which he was not arrested or even suspected.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,652
|
Post by Joe on Mar 16, 2008 17:40:49 GMT -5
Michael, Hauptmann and Petzold had already just cleaned up in their nighttime robberies and would have been flush with enough cash and property to feed many families for a year given the rate of inflation and buying power of the mark in 1919. Yet shortly after these crimes, they pull the armed robbery on two defenseless women whom I'm sure could in no way afford to give up the food they needed for their own families. Hauptmann was 19 at the time and by no means too old to have to suck it up and live at home for a while. From all accounts, Pauline Hauptmann wasn't starving and they had a roof over their heads. Times were uncertain everywhere in Germany but to resort to the kind of actions Hauptmann did in light of his personal circumstances is criminal, plain and simple. His prison sentence reflected the seriousness of his crimes.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 17, 2008 11:53:25 GMT -5
Still looking for reference to this ladder but can't find anything. My trial transcripts are still packed away - perhaps someone can check them out for us along with the references in the books.... Thought I give Anna Hauptmann a little time on the board to give us her perspective concerning this subject: Richard Hauptmann, at the tender age of seventeen, was thrown into the hell of the World War. Like millions of other young men, he was to witness the terrific destructive forces devised by man for destroying other human beings. Richard came out of the war with many shattered ideals. Like thousands of others, he found it hard to find again a place of himself in society and in the workaday world. He found that with Peace there was little or no work for returning soldiers. he had given his all to the Fatherland... but his homeland, in the chaos of post was readjustments, could not offer its sons either work or sustenance.
Much has been written about the so-called "criminal record of Hauptmann in Germany." None of the newspapers seriously considered the character of the "crimes" he was supposed to have committed. That would not be interesting reading.... nor a popular thing to do at that time, when press and radio broadcasts found it more interesting to paint Richard Hauptmann as an arch criminal capable of committing the most serious types of crime.
This young boy, fresh from the horrors of war.... hungry and without shelter, did steal. He stole bread. He did not steal, as the papers would have one believe, food from baby carriages...from mothers and babies. In Europe, the baby carriage is used by the poor as a cart to carry every conceivable thing too heavy to carry in one's arms. Almost every family has an old dilapidated carriage that is used as a cart... and most of them have no baby for the carriage. It is as most a general cart as the push carts of our lower east side. So the picture of Richard snatching food from "baby carriages"... with the inference that the food was stolen from babies and mothers, is not only an untrue picture...but so distorted that it hurt Richard.
Any human being, being hungry and with little prospects of work, would probably yield to the impulse that compelled Richard to steal "food". I am not excusing theft, - but I do contend that there are times when human endurance and need sometimes weaken the moral resistance to a point where self preservation is paramount.
Richard Hauptmann was never a criminal in the real meaning of the term. He did enter this country illegally as a stowaway. Many of our finest citizens have been stowaways. He secured work almost immediately. He was happy and contented. He worked hard at honest labor ... he saved what he could ... and sent home money to his mother regularly. The most beautiful thing in Richard's character is his great love for his mother... and his devotion to her at all times. [Anna Hauptmann - written September, 1935]
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 17, 2008 12:49:14 GMT -5
You think her view would be the same if she had been pushing the carriage that day? I wonder. Still for me the more salient facts are the type of crimes, the use of an accomplice, the rather poor ( if any) planning of the crime and the disposal of the loot. I know one can look at this and say there is proof that Hauptmann couldn't have "masterminded" the LKC. I guess I am just exploring an alternative, that he in fact was just up to his old tricks.
|
|
|
Post by acondon on Mar 27, 2008 6:12:36 GMT -5
Anna Hauptmann talks about Richard not having shelter or food. Was his mother also "homeless" and without food or could Hauptmann have lived with her, even temporarily?
I do understand the situation in Germany after WW1, in fact, that situation of hopelessness is what directly enabled Hitler to come to power. I am one who thinks the Treaty of Versailles was too harsh, but then again, WW1 was a horrendous war. People in the US remember their war dead and the boys that came back missing limbs or gassed etc.
Going back to Anna's statement, why didn't Richard stay with his mother. There must have been some work repairing damage from WW1. I am sure he could have worked for food.
Pat
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,652
|
Post by Joe on Mar 27, 2008 7:32:48 GMT -5
Pat, I've never seen anything factual to suggest he couldn't have survived living with his mother at home until times improved and mentioned the same point above. He robbed two homes of enough cash, securities and possessions to feed many families for a year. Shortly afterwards, he robs the two women of their rationed food. He has no excuses and Anna Hauptrmann should have known better than launching into this blatant sympathy song.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 27, 2008 19:07:16 GMT -5
Just reading the obituary of another famous NJ killer, John List. It seems probable that his combat experience in WWII had a direct corollary to his actions. It seems just as probable to me that a young Richard Hauptmann was forever psychologically damaged in the Great War.
|
|
dena
Detective
Posts: 129
|
Post by dena on Mar 29, 2008 16:50:33 GMT -5
Kev, you don't think that List's weird mother had nothing to do with his later actions?
I can think of no excuse for why he killed his wife & kids. Reprehensible. But when it came to his mother, I have to ask, what took him so long?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 29, 2008 17:09:35 GMT -5
Dena, I honestly don't know. The List home where the murders took place was Westfield which is right next to where I grew up. I always had heard that he just went off the deep end when he lost his job. I know he actually got dressed for work and pretended to take the train into the city for some time. It's just recently that I read that he had served in serious combat during the war and a fellow soldier feels that experience deeply scarred him. I have often wondered what scars Hauptmann carried from his war experience. I think it is something that we can never fully understand. Then again it might have been something predating that or a combination of both.
|
|
dena
Detective
Posts: 129
|
Post by dena on Mar 30, 2008 0:11:50 GMT -5
I didn't mean to sound as flip as that came out. She just did everything she could to keep him a mamas boy for her own emotional needs, I think. Thats so unfair to do to a kid. But you are right. Maybe he would have been able to handle the stress of the war without what his mom had done & vice versa. You know, I read the book about List & the thing that was most sad to me was he had been the one who took care of the kids. His wife was an invalid. I think he had really loved them in his own way. He believed if he killed them, God would forgive murder, but didn't commit suicide because God wouldnt forgive a suicide. Thats very twisted logic.
I have heard that kids in that area grew up with John List as the bogeyman. Did you experience any of that growing up?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Mar 30, 2008 7:13:32 GMT -5
Bogeyman, I haven't heard that in some time! Yeah, it was quite a shock to everyone. Westfield was such an ideal town known to be somewhat affluent. Things like this just don't happen in towns like that, right?
Twisted logic. That's the right term alright. Better that I end my children's lives rather than let them suffer the hardship of life. It's almost an alternate universe where wrong is right and right is wrong. I wonder, when I see so many brilliant people analyzing this case looking for rational explanations for what happened and getting nowhere, if it isn't that same twisted logic at work. Can we ever really visit that alternate universe? And if we can, can we ever make any sense of it?
|
|
dena
Detective
Posts: 129
|
Post by dena on Mar 30, 2008 7:52:30 GMT -5
No, we cannot. But I think people (I know I sure do anyway) want to find a REASON for this behavior. And no matter how many times I read about it, or hear about or are horrified by it, I still try to put order to the chaos & horror of it. Where there is NONE. And will never be any. And I think if we can truly make SENSE out of it, if we have reached that point where it makes so much sense that it almost seems reasonable, then we have maybe looked too far into the abyss. On the other hand, its almost 6:00 AM, I have not slept too well, & maybe I shouldn't try to think too deeply when Im so tired.
|
|