| Lindbergh Baby Analysis | Intro to Criminal Justice | Courtney Brown
10-20-2015
|

The Lindbergh baby case was one of the most controversial cases due to the families’ popularity and it highlighted some questionable actions within the criminal justice system. The case was a pivotal point in history and shaped the justice system for that era. All of the components, police, courts and corrections, played a significant role in the case. Each component highlighted distinct and questionable actions within their scope of responsibilities. Due to this being such a high profile case these controversial actions were magnified. As with any crime that is committed, the police are the initial point of contact. The police are there to provide emergency services and to investigate crimes. The police played an important role in the process by investigating the crime and finding evidence that would eventually lead them to apprehend and offender. From the beginning the police were already experiencing setbacks due to a lack of detail and information. The offender left no footprints and the only evidence were scratches made by a ladder that was used to gain entry into a window. Although the police did not have much evidence in the beginning they eventually complied a significant about of forensic evidence against Mr. Hauptmann. According to encyclopida.com the most important piece of evidence was the wooden ladder that was examined by numerous wood experts.
The case was then turned over to the courts to conduct a fair trial. This case highly publicized because Hauptmann’s defense was paid for by the New York Journal in exchange for the rights to the story. Some would say that the trial was not fair because it was based solely on circumstantial evidence and there were also violations of handwriting analysis protocol. Mr. Hauptmann was instructed by the police to write more statements and told him the spelling of certain words. During this process they also had him to copy copies of the ransom notes. In my personal opinion the courts were extremely flawed in this case. Hauptmann’s lead counsel Edward J Reilly, publicly announced that he thought Hauptmann was guilty. He had also been consuming alcohol at lunch during the trial (Ramsland 2009, FBI 2013).The corrections agencies now has the duty to carry out the sentencing executed by the courts which was death.
During Hauptmann’s arraignment he was advised of his charges of murder. At that time he plead not guilty and was denied bail. At some point Hauptmann asked to be allowed to undertake a polygraph test but his legal counsel saw no significance in doing so. The federal appeals court had already ruled that polygraph tests would be inadmissible in court. The adjudication process for this case was to go to trial. I am not sure if Hauptmann was ever offered a plea bargain but at one point was told that if he confessed, his death sentence could be commuted to life. On February 13th 1935 Hauptmann was found guilty of first degree murder and sentenced to death by electrocution. According to an article that was published in the Daily News on February 14, 1935 by Martin Sommers Attorney General David T. Wilentz moved for an immediate sentencing. Justice Thomas W. Trenchard sentenced him to death stating “Bruno Richard Hauptmann, you have been convicted of murder in the first degree. The sentence of the court is that you shall suffer death in the time and place and manner provided by law.” The judge then gave him and execution week to start on Monday March 18th. The courts have a duty to uphold the law and found Bruno Richard Hauptmann guilty and sentenced him to death.
Hauptmann’s corrections process began once his sentence of death was enforced. This process was delayed quite a bit due to appeals that were submitted by his lawyers. After the appeals the correction process was complete when he was executed on April 3, 1936 at state prison in Trenton, NJ. The Lindbergh baby case soon led congress to pass the Federal Kidnapping Act. This law made kidnapping a federal offense and allowed investigators on the federal level the ability to pursue offenders across state jurisdictions. Some believe that it was not possible for one man to have commit this crime and that justice was not served.

References
Bruno Richard Hauptmann is sentenced to die in 1935. (2015, February 12). Retrieved October 20, 2015, from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/bruno-richard-hauptmann-sentenced-die-1935-article-1.2110007

"Lindbergh Kidnapping and Murder." World of Forensic Science. 2005. Retrieved October 20, 2015 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3448300347.html

Ramsland, K. (2009) | Bating the Devil’s Game: A History of Forensic Science and Criminal Investigation, Berkley Books, New York |