The police, courts, and the correction facilities did an outstanding job in finding out the details of the case. However, there were a few questions raised as to how the case was handled. The Lindbergh baby had been kidnapped. After the child's nurse had notified the parents of the child missing, they reported the issue to the local authorities (Shoenfeld, 1936). The police were informed and had a difficult job determining whether or not this was an inside job or not since the kidnapping occurred at home and nobody noticed anything out of the ordinary. The baby had been abducted, and a ransom note had been left at the Lindbergh residence (Shoenfeld, 1936). The note demanded that the parents of the child pay the kidnappers $50,000 within two days. They were also warned not to involve the police or notify the public about the kidnapping.
The parents of the child acted contrary to what they had been told and notified the Hopewell police. The Hopewell Police then gave the report to the New Jersey State Police who took over the investigation (Shoenfeld, 1936). The police made sure that everybody was treated as a suspect. The close fami ly members, friends, as well as the staff, were investigated.
The police conducted their investigations and found out that there was a chisel which had been used by the kidnappers to force the window to the nursery open. The police also found footprints near a homemade ladder which had been used to get access to the nursery window. The police met and conducted a police conference whereby they involved the governor of New Jersey (Shoenfeld, 1936). They also showed their support to the parents of the infant by also inviting senior police officials to the conference. Private investigators were also included in the case. The police and the FBI worked together to solve the case (Shoenfeld, 1936). The president also showed his support by giving all the investigative bodies that worked for the government to review the case. However, after a series of investigations, the police were able to apprehend the main culprit, Hauptmann. Hauptmann was a 35-year-old man with a previous criminal record for theft. After being paid the ransom, Hauptmann started trading in the stocks since he had enough money to do so.
The Supreme Court indicted Hauptmann of murder and charged him with extortion. Hauptmann was accused of writing the ransom notes. However, some of the handwriting experts disagreed with this view since there were differences in the manner that he wrote and the manner in which the person writing the ransom notes had (Shoenfeld, 1936). Hauptmann wrote in fluent English. The notes were written in broken English. However, some of his letters matched the ones from the notes. The police cleared all evidence from his residence not giving the defense an opportunity to look for viable evidence that would be used by the defense. The defense argued that his voice was different from the one used by the kidnappers (Shoenfeld, 1936). However, Hauptmann was not able to explain to the jury where he was on the day of the crime. He was also not able to explain why his handwriting matched to that of the ransom notes. There was evidence of Hauptmann’s shoe size being the same size as the shoe that made footprints at the crime scene. The defense also argued that the tools found at his home resembled those that could have made marks on the ladder used to kidnap the baby and make an escape. An eye witness also identified him as the man who had delivered the fifth ransom note (Shoenfeld, 1936). Hauptmann also owned the vehicle that was seen within the compound of the Lindbergh house the day before the kidnapping occurred. The skull of the baby kidnapped was found a few meters from his parent’s home. The Supreme Court of Bronx County, New York found Hauptmann guilty of first-degree murder. The defense tried to appeal, but the appeal was denied. Hauptmann was electrocuted (Hughes, 1936). Hauptmann made his first appearance concerning the case in court on 26 September 1934.
The jury felt that Hauptmann was not fit to be corrected since the crime he had committed was grievous (Fisher, 1994). He was given the maximum punishment which is death. The jury took 11 hours to deliberate on the case. However, after Hauptmann had been electrocuted, reporters brought up questions on the way the case was handled. They believed that the policed had not carried out their investigations correctly (Hughes, 1936). The wife of the supposed criminal tried to sue the Federal government severally saying that the evidence on her husband, Hauptmann had been planted at the scene of the crime (Fisher, 1994). Her case was denied. The media also argued that the case was not properly conducted, and there were questions about the fairness of the trial (Hughes, 1936). One of the reasons that the case was mishandled was that the defense had not been given an opportunity to conduct their investigations in Hauptmann's residence before the evidence was taken away by the police raised a few questions. The adjudication concerning the case was upheld by the Supreme Court which supported the verdict of the lower court in sentencing Hauptmann to death. Some people argued that the case was rushed and that political power pressured the police as well as the jury in finalizing the case.
References
Fisher, J. (1994). The Lindbergh Case: A Story of Two Lives. Rutgers University Press.
Hughes, H. M. (1936). The Lindbergh case: A study of human interest and politics. American journal of sociology, 32-54.
Shoenfeld, D. D. (1936). The Crime and the Criminal: A Psychiatric Study of the Lindbergh Case. Covici-Friede.
