The Mammoth Book of Celebrity Murders (72 page)

As with all high-profile cases a range of alternative theories emerged, some gaining support over the years since the events unfolded.

The most widely spread conspiracy theory suggets that Lindbergh himself might have accidentally killed his own child, and panicking, staged the kidnapping in order to avoid a criminal
prosecution of his own. This could explain why nobody heard any suspicious noises at the time of the kidnapping, why the guard dogs did not bark and why the baby did not cry. It might also explain
why the ransom letter was apparently overlooked on first inspection of the nursery – Lindbergh hadn’t written it then, doing so as an afterthought to support the kidnapping story. The
Lindberghs had a strict routine and would normally have been at their other house on the night of the alleged kidnapping. Either the kidnapper had some inside knowledge, or as the conspiracy would
have it, it was Lindbergh himself. The conspiracy theorists are also encouraged by the burial of the child so close to the Lindbergh house, firstly for convenience – Lindbergh wouldn’t
have had time to travel further afield – but perhaps more importantly, because he wanted the comfort of having the child close by. There was no suggestion at the time of Lindbergh’s
involvement in his child’s death – indeed, would he have paid a ransom knowing full well the boy was dead?

Hauptmann’s guilt was based on the evidence which was presented, however alternative theories have been put forward which suggest that although he was guilty of using the ransom money,
maybe he was not guilty of the murder.

Other theories suggest that the Judge and the police were complicit in providing the evidence to implicate Hauptmann. It has been suggested that the police planted the evidence in a bid to clear
up a case which was demanding much of America’s attention. One point of controversy surrounds the name and address of Dr Condon, written in pencil on the inside of the cupboard. As the
kidnappers had been careful to remove all fingerprints from the child’s bedroom, would it not seem a significant lapse in judgment therefore to leave this rather important piece of evidence
in such an obvious place. Since Hauptmann did not have a great grasp of English, it has been speculated that Condon’s details were actually written there by the police. In fact, to read the
words at all would have involved taking out the shelving and, with the use of a torch as there was no other illumination, squeezing into the space and craning one’s neck at an acute angle. If
this information was important to Hauptmann, why choose the inside of a cupboard to record it? If he was wishing to secrete the address and telephone number, surely it would have been much easier
to have written it on a piece of paper and then hidden the paper? In any case, as he didn’t have a telephone, he would have needed to take the number with him so that he could dial it from a
public telephone box. And then there was the question of why bother to record the name anyway? Condon was listed in the telephone directory, of which there was a copy in each and every public
telephone kiosk. Which leaves the police themselves – how were they able to spot such a well-hidden message on the wall? They didn’t remove the shelving, yet they still found the
details.

The trial came to court some two years after the murder had taken place yet no one questioned why Lindbergh and Condon were so sure that it was Haupmann’s voice they had heard in the
cemetery. Could it be that Lindbergh, just like the rest of America, wanted revenge. Indeed, had he been involved in the child’s disappearance himself then having someone else in the dock
would be the ideal distraction.

The eyewitnesses also came under scrutiny, some proving to be less than reliable. After the execution of Hauptmann, Governor Hoffman called for one of the eyewitnesses, Amandus Hochmuth, to
visit him in order to clarify if he was entitled to any of the reward money. Hoffman had heard a rumour that Hochmuth was having trouble with his eyesight and began to question his ability to
identify Hauptmann. When Hochmuth arrived at his office he asked him to identify an object in his room, namely a silver cup filled with flowers, to which Hochmuth, staring intently, observed that
it was a lady’s hat. Hoffman was said to have been shocked – if his experiment was correct, then that eyewitness testimony should have been wiped from the records. Hoffman wondered if
the financially embarrassed Hochmuth had simply come forward in order to collect the reward. He was given a total payment of $250. Perhaps Hochmuth had, like everyone else who read the papers,
assumed he was doing a public service that justly deserved a small payment.

Another witness, Millard Whited, was also called before Hoffman; he too admitted that the lure of the reward money was hard to resist. His statements had changed from the time he first came
forward, often contradicting one another. Nevertheless he was paid $150 initially and $35 a day for his expenses during the trial, money which was provided by the prosecution.

The final witness, Charles J. Rossiter did not come forward with his information until Hauptmann was in police custody, claiming that until he had seen his face in the newspapers, he
hadn’t realized the significance of the encounter. Rossiter though had unresolved issues with his statement. Despite the fact that he was able to convince the jury, two years after the event,
that it was Hauptmann he had seen by the stalled car, he had in fact failed to pick Hauptmann out of a photographic line-up just weeks after his arrest. That didn’t deter the police as they
arranged for Rossiter to see Hauptmann in the flesh, after which his memory was jolted and he was able to confirm that Hauptmann was the driver of the car. Whether or not he had seen Hauptmann, or
even anyone vaguely resembling him, is not known for sure; what is known is that Rossiter was another man who could really use the reward money – just before coming forward to the police he
had lost his job.

With Hoffman now carrying a significant doubt as to the validity of the verdict, he continued to ponder the evidence which had been presented. The only physical evidence which tied Hauptmann to
the crime was the wooden ladder, and the suggestion that it had been made from floorboards out of Hauptmann’s loft. Just as he had with the other witnesses, Hoffman now arranged to meet the
“wood expert”, Keohler, only this time at Hauptmann’s home. Taking the wooden rail upstairs they compared it to the floorboards which were in the loft, immediately seeing some
obvious discrepancies. The floorboards in Hauptmann’s loft were nailed down with seven nails per segment, whereas the one they were holding contained 23 nail holes. The biggest and most
obvious discrepancy though was the width of the rail – it measured some 16th of an inch thicker than the rest of the attic boards, a difference the expert found hard to explain.

The case will remain shrouded in mystery, but the Lindberghs soon managed to get their lives back and indeed had five more children after Charlie. Lindbergh lived until he was in his mid
seventies, passing away in 1974, just before completing his autobiography, entitled
Autobiography of Values
, in which he allocated a dozen or so paragraphs to the kidnapping and death of his
son, the 2½-year manhunt, the ensuing trial, and how these events affected his family.

If Hauptmann didn’t murder Lindbergh’s son, then the ease with which he was convicted must surely be down to the press, whose headlines practically insisted that he was guilty. And
then, just as they have on many occassions, though this time far too late, the press altered their stance – having been hard on Hauptmann after the child’s murder, they became hard on
Lindbergh and the witnesses after Hauptmann’s execution, thus extracting a second story out of Lindbergh’s loss.

The Lindbergh story did not end with the execution of Hauptmann, indeed it continues to this present day, still managing to fill precious column inches. There is one conspiracy theory which did
not die with Hauptmann, one which suggests that young Charles Lindbergh was not killed by his kidnappers. The conspiracy still raging today suggests that Lindbergh may have had his son adopted,
embarrassed by a physical affliction the poor boy had been born with. When a man claiming to be Charles Lindbergh III requested that DNA tests be taken both from himself and other members of the
Lindbergh family, all members of the Lindbergh family refused.