Abstract

The trial of Bruno Hauptmann is critiqued in terms of the overriding prosecutorial interest in securing the death penalty. The intricate and ingenious methods by which the prosecution blended the law of New Jersey and the common law and the trial testimony of numerous witnesses, both scientific and lay persons, to achieve its objective are explicated. The author mentions other alternatives to those employed as well as the strategies of prosecution and defense at the trial.

Issue Section:
Research Papers
Keywords:
plenary session, jurisprudence, Lindbergh kidnapping case

References

1.
Such a characterization is not intended to praise with faint damn, as does Professor Seidman who viewed the Hauptmann trial as “not a high point in the history of criminal justice in this country,.“Seidman,” The Trial and Execution of Bruno Richard Hauptmann: Still Another Case that ‘Will not Die’
,”
Georgetown Law Journal
[, Vol.
66
, No.
1
,
1977
. p. 14.
2.
Kuntsler
,
First Degree
.
Oceana Publications
,
New York
.
1960
. pp.
137
–
150
.
3.
See note 2.
4.
Dickinson Law Review
, Vol.
40
,
1936
, pp.
193
–
199
.
The article in the now nonlaw school published Journal of Criminal Law. Criminology and Police Science traced the legal aspects of the Hauptmann trial with more care and comprehension than any other to date. See Journal of Criminal Law
.
Criminzology and Police Science
, Vol.
26
,
1936
, p. 759.
5.
Hauptmann v. New Jersey, 296 U.S. 649 (1935).
6.
State v. Hauptmann, 180 Atl. 809 (N.J. Ct. E. & A. 1935).
7.
Ex Parte Hauptmann, 297 U.S. 693 (1936).
8.
See note 1.
9.
See note 1 at p. 16, footnote 85.
10.
See note 1 at p. 42.
11.
Waller
,
Kidnap
,
The Dial Press
,
New York
,
1961
, p. 582.
12.
Shakespeare, Cymbeline.
13.
See note 11 p. 222.
14.
Pollock
 II and
Maitland
,
The History of English Law
, 2d. ed.,
Lawyers' Literary Club
,
Washington, DC
,
1959
, p. 450;
Walsh
,
A Histoly of Anglo-American Law
, 2nd. ed., p. 24.
15.
Holmes
,
The Common Law, Little
,
Brown and Company
,
Boston
,
1881
, p. 41.
16.
See note 15.
17.
Pound
 and
Frankfurter
, Eds.,
Criminal Justice in Cleveland
,
The Cleveland Foundation
,
Cleveland
,
1922
, p. 576.
18.
See note 17.
19.
“
Both Guilty
,”
New Republic
,
27
02
1935
, p. 62. See also Waller, see note 11 at p.
269
–
271
.
20.
Transcript p. 6.
21.
Transcript p. 7.
22.
Transcript p. 7.
23.
Transcript p. 7.
24.
391 U.S. 510.
25.
People v. Smith, 136 Cal. App. 3d. 961 (1982); Hovey v. Superior Court, 616 P.2d; 1301 (Cal. 1980); Smith v. Balkcom, 660 F.2d 573 (5th Cir. 1981).
26.
Transcript pp. 7525–7526 which is a reference, apparently, to Matthew 7:1.
27.
Harking back to Levitacus 24:17.
28.
As expounded at Exodus 21:23–25.
29.
Dyson v. U.S., 450 A.2d 432, 438 (D.C. App. 1982).
30.
Transcript pp. 7572–7573.
31.
Transcript p. 4407.
32.
Transcript p. 4449.
33.
Transcript p. 4363.
34.
Transcript p. 245.
35.
See note 34.
36.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 813.
37.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1783. sec. 114. Not until 1933 was kidnapping a capital crime in New Jersey. See N.J.R.S. 2A:118-1 (1951). See 56 N.J.L.J. 196 (1933). Under current New Jersey Law, kidnapping is no longer punishable by death. N.J.S.A. 2C:13-1(c) (effective 1 Sept. 1979).
38.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1780, sections 106 and 107.
39.
Keedy
, “
History of the Pennsylvania Statute Creating Degrees of Murder
,”
University of Pennsylvania Law Review
, Vol.
97
,
1949
, p. 759.
40.
Blaekstone
,
Commentaries on the Laws of England
, Vol.
IV
,
Beacon Press
,
Boston
,
1962
, pp. 200 and 223.
41.
Powers v. Comm. 615 S.W. 735, 741 (Ky. 1901).
42.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1780. section 107.
43.
Fletcher
,
Rethinking Criminal Law
,
Little Brown and Company
.
Boston
,
1978
, p. 318.
44.
N.J.S.A. 2A:138-2(a) (1951).
45.
Prosser
, “
The Lindbergh Case Revisited: George Waller's Kidnap
,”
Minnesota Law Review
, Vol.
46
,
1961
, pp. 383, 386.
46.
Stephen
,
A General View of the Criminal Law of England
, 2nd. ed.,
Macmillan and Company
,
London
,
1890
, p. 75.
47.
Clark and Marshall, A Treatise on the Law of Crimes, 7th. ed., Callaghan & Co., Chicago, 1967, p. 637. It has also been derided as “a euphonious phrase used to conceal the absence of an idea.” Perkins, “A Re-Examination of Malice Aforethought,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 43, 1934, p. 537. In general, see Anno, “Modem Status of the Rules Requiring Malice 'Aforethought,” ‘Deliberation,’ or ‘Premeditation.’
48.
Hale
,
History of the Pleas to the Crown
, Vol.
1
,
Professional Books Limited
,
London
,
1971
, p. 44.
49.
Waller, see note 11 at p. 274.
50.
Davidson
, “
The Story of the Century
,”
American Heritage Magazine
, Vol.
27
.
02
1976
. pp. 23, 29.
51.
See note 50.
52.
United States Constitution, Amendment VI: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . .. to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation . . . . ”
53.
State v. Wein. 404 A.2d. 302, 305 (N.J. 1979). N.J.R.R. 3:4-3 now requires an indictment to state “the essential facts constituting the offense charged.”
54.
Transcript p. 4560.
55.
Waller, see note 11 at pp. 279–280. Waller says that the last question. No. 12. in the request for a bill of particulars asked: “By what method does the State contend Charles A. Lindbergh, Jr., met his death?” On the contrary, however, the request was phrased: “What does the State contend was the cause of the death of the said Charles A. Lindbergh, Jr.?” See Transcript p. 4560. The inquiries, it is to be noted, are substantially at variance. Waller also claims defense attorney “Reilly appealed to the New Jersey Supreme Court” to force compliance with his twelve demands. But, the record does not reflect any such appeal, nor did New Jersey even have a Supreme Court at that time.
56.
State v. Hunt, 138 A,2d. 1, 5 (N.J. 1958); State v. Brink, 73 A.2d. 249 (N.J. 1950), cert. denied 340 U.S. 839.
57.
People v. Nichols, 230 N.Y. 221, 129 N.E. 883 (1921); People v. Roper, 250 N.Y. 170. 181 N.E. 88 (1932).
58.
N.J.R.R. 3:7-5.
59.
Russell v. U.S., 369 U.S. 749 (1962).
60.
Hauptmann's Brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on petition for certiorari, p. 19.
61.
Transcript p. 4338.
62.
See note 60 and Transcript p. 4406.
63.
See note 60 at p. 20 and Transcript p. 4407.
64.
State v. Grillo, 93 A.2d. 328, 334 (N.J. 1952).
65.
Whipple
,
The Lindbergh Crime
,
Blue Ribbon Books
,
New York
,
1935
, pp.
241
–
243
.
66.
Transcript p. 233.
67.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1780, section 107.
68.
Fisher
 and
Maguire
, “
Kidnapping and the So-called Lindbergh Law
,”
New York University Law Review
. Vol.
12
,
1935
. p. 646; Finley, “
The Lindbergh Law
,”
George Washhinlgton Law Review
, Vol.
28
,
1940
, p. 908;
Perkins
 and
Boyce
,
Criminal Law
, 3rd. ed.,
The Foundation Press
,
Mineola, New York
,
1982
, p. 229.
69.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1787, sec. 131 (burglary); 2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1785, sec. 120 (robbery).
70.
Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 279.
71.
Exhibit S-52.
72.
Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 280.
73.
State v. Hill, 221 A.2d 725 (N.J. 1966), State v. Wolf, 207 A.2d. 670 (1965), State v. Greely & Deady, 95 A.2d 1, 4 (N.J. 1953).
74.
LaFave
 and
Scott
,
Handbook on Criminal Law
,
West Publishing Co.
,
St. Paul, MI
,
1972
, pp.
701
–
702
.
75.
See note 74.
76.
People v. Needham, 155 N.W. 2d. 267 (Mich. App. 1967), State v. Hoag. 114 A.2d 573 (N.J. Super, 1955).
77.
Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 280.
78.
State v. Cottone, 145 A.2d. 509 (N.J. Super. 1958).
79.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6.
80.
Coke, Third Institute, p. 63 as cited in II Pollock and Maitland, see note 14 at p. 492.
81.
Blaekstone, see note 40 at p. 254.
82.
Stephen
,
A Histor), of the Criminal Law of England
, Vol.
III
 
Macmillan and Company
,
London
,
1883
, p. 1S0.
83.
East
,
Pleas of the Crown
, Vol.
II
,
Professional Books, Ltd.
.
London
,
1972
, p. 484.
84.
N.J.S.A. 2C:18-7.
85.
Blankenship v. State, 447 A.2d. 428 (Del. 1982).
86.
Model Penal Code, Tentative Draft 11, sec. 221.1, page 57 (1960).
87.
LaFave and Scott, see note 74 at p. 716.
88.
LaFave and Scott, see note 74 at p. 715.
89.
Hale. see note 48 at p. 550.
90.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 818.
91.
Transcript p. 4514.
92.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 819.
93.
LaFave and Scott, see note 74 at p. 716.
94.
Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 256.
95.
Russell
,
A Treatise on Crimes and Misdemeanors
. 4th. ed., Vol.
II
,
Stevens & Sons
,
London
,
1865
, pp.
2
–
6
.
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
96.
Transcript p. 874.
97.
Transcript p. 876.
98.
Transcript p. 324.
99.
See note 98.
100.
See note 98.
101.
Transcript p. 326.
102.
Transcript p. 325.
103.
Waller, see note 11 at 3 and 592. An additional reference appears at p. 138.
104.
Scaduto
,
Scapegoat
,
E.P. Putnam's Sons
,
New York
,
1976
.
105.
Id. at page 39.
106.
Mrs. Lindbergh's statement at pp. 3 and 4.
107.
Transcript p. 636.
108.
Transcript p, 647. Scaduto, see note 104 at p. 30 erroneously asserts that “it was the southwest window which was warped.”
109.
Transcript p, 647.
110.
Transcript p. 679.
111.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 826.
112.
Davidson, see note 50 at p. 28.
113.
U.S.v. Clifford, 543 F. Supp. 424 (D.C.W.D. Pa. 1982), reversed on other grounds in U.S. 3rd Circuit on 8 March 1983.
114.
See note 113.
115.
But it is used for investigative purposes. See,
Rice
,
Berkeley
, “
Between the Lines of Threatening Messages
,”
Psychology Today
, Vol.
52
,
09
1981
.
116.
Zierold
,
Norman
,
Little Charley Ross
,
Little Brown and Company
,
Boston
,
1967
. Linguistic analysis is said, also, to have played a role at the poisoning murder trial of Roland B. Molineux in New York City in 1898. Borowitz, “
Packaged Death
,” 69 A.B.A.J. 282 March 1982.
117.
Waller, see note 11 at p. 141.
118.
Carroll v. State, 634 S.W. 2d. 99 (Ark. 1982).
119.
Zito
, “
Did the Evidence Fit the Crime?
,”
Life
,
03
1982
, p. 42.
120.
Prepared by S.F.C. Richard Tidey on 27 March 1980.
121.
Davidson, see note 50.
122.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 818. See also the authorities cited in footnote 68.
123.
2 Compiled Statutes N.J., 1910, p. 1787, sec. 131.
124.
Stephen, see note 82 at p. 122.
125.
Perkins, see note 68 at p. 292; Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 260 and Pollock and Maitland, see note 14 at p. 498.
126.
Stephen, see note 124 at p. 129.
127.
Transcript p. 4513.
128.
State v. Hauptmann. see note 6 at p. 819.
129.
See note 128.
130.
Hale, Summary of the Pleas to the Crown, p. 66; Hale, see note 48 at p. 509.
131.
Pollock and Maitland, see note 14 at p. 499.
132.
Stephen
,
A Digest of the Criminal Law
, 6th. ed.,
Macmillan and Company
,
London
,
1904
, p. 253.
133.
Blackstone, see note 40 at p. 272.
134.
See note 133. See also Hale, History of the Pleas to the Crown, Vol. 1, p. 515.
135.
Stephen, see note 124 at p. 138.
136.
Stephen, see note 124 at p. 143.
137.
Stephen, see note 124 at p. 143.
138.
Stephen, see note 124 at pp. 138–139.
139.
Russell, see note 95 at p. 261.
140.
Perkins
 and
Boyce
, see note 68 at p. 296.
141.
Stephen
. see note 124 at p. 143.
142.
52 C.J.S. sec. 2(b), p. 406.
143.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 818.
144.
State v. Miller, 272 P.2d 539, 541–542 (N.J. Super 1971).
145.
State v. Lucero, 648 P.2d 350 (N.M. 1982).
146.
Stephen
, see note 124 at p. 132.
147.
People v. Thompson, 165 Cal. Rptr. 289, 293 (1980).
148.
East, see note 83 at p. 655. Clark and Marshall, see note 47 at pp. 825–826. Pollock and Maitland, see note 14 at p. 499, quoting from Bracton.
149.
Perkins, see note 68 at p. 327 footnote 62 citing People v. Brown, 38 P. 518 (Cal. 1894).
150.
Holmes, see note 15 at p. 71.
151.
Holmes, see note 15 at p. 72.
152.
Transcript p. 337.
153.
Report from Lt. Vincent M. Peterson, New Jersey State Police, Forensic Science Bureau.
154.
Transcript p. 348.
155.
Scaduto, see note 104 at p. 123.
156.
State v. Hauptmann. see note 6 at p. 819.
157.
State v. Hauptmann. see note 6 at p. 819.
158.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at pp. 819–820.
159.
LaFave and Scott, see note 74 at p. 639.
160.
State v. Watts. 212 S.E. 2d. 557 (N.C. App. 1975).
161.
Rex v. Dickerson, (Russ. & R. 420); Clark and Marshall, see note 47 at p. 825, footnote 96; Russell, see note 95 at pp. 159–160.
162.
East, see note 83 at p. 661.
163.
State v. Butler, 143 A.2d. 530, 550 (N.J. 1958).
164.
52A C.J.S. 150, p. 700.
165.
State v. Butler, see note 163.
166.
State v. Butler, see note 163.
167.
Transcript pp. 640–642.
168.
Whipple, see note 65 at p. 314.
169.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 814.
170.
Transcript p. 2635.
171.
See note 170.
172.
Flanagan v. Henderson, 496 F.2d 1274 (5th Cir. 1974).
173.
People v. Townsend, 141 N.E. 2d. 729 (III. 1957); State v. Dampher, 109 N.E. 2d. 705 (Ill. 1963).
174.
People v. Woods. 118 N.E. 2d 248 (Ill. 1954).
175.
State v. Hauptmann. see note 6 at p. 813.
176.
Transcript p. 2641.
177.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 820.
178.
State v. Hauptmann, see note 6 at p. 820.
179.
Perkins and Boyce, see note 68 at p. 135 quoting from State v. Fouquette, 221 P.2d., 404. 416–7 (Nev. 1950).
180.
State v. Metalski, 185 Atl. 351 (N.J. 1936); see also State v. Artis, 269 A.2d. 1, 5 (N.J. 1970).
181.
U.S.v. Naples, 192 F. Supp. 23 (D.C.D.C. 1961) in which Judge Holtzoff canvasses the authorities.
182.
Milsom
,
Historical Foundations of the Common Law
, 2nd. ed.,
Butterworths
,
Toronto
,
1981
, p. 417.
183.
Id. at p. 403.
184.
Id. at p. 428.
185.
English Homicide Act of 1957, ch. 11, sec. 1.
186.
Model Penal Code,
Tentative Draft #9
, p. 37 (
1959
).
187.
Model Penal Code. Proposed official Draft, sec. 210.2, p. 125 (1962).
188.
Del. Code Ann., tit. 11, sec. 636(a)(2) (Rev. 1974) which requires proof that the accused “recklessly” caused the death if it occurs “in furtherance of the commission of a felony or immediate flight therefrom.”
189.
Alaska Stat., sec. 11.41.100 (1962) (murder in first degree).
190.
Hawaii Rev. Stat. 707-701 (1976).
191.
Kentucky Rev. Stat. 507.020.
192.
People v. Aaron, 299 N.W. 2d 304 (Mich. 1980).
193.
State v. Cramp, 32 Cr. L. Rptr. 2323 (1/19/83) (Kansas Sup. Ct., 12/3/82); People v. Wilson. 462 P.2d 22, 28 (Cal. 1969).
194.
Fletcher
, “
Reflections on Felony-Murder
,”
S.W.U.L. Review
, Vol.
12
,
1981
, pp. 413, 415.
195.
Fletcher
, see note at p. 319.
196.
Fletcher, see note 194 at p. 425.
197.
N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3(c). See also Ky.Rev.Stat. 507.020(2) which requires an “intentional” homicide in the commission of certain enumerated felonies.
198.
Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979).
199.
Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968).
200.
Waller
. see note at p. 494.
201.
Shakespeare
.
Macbeth
. Act II, sc. ii. line 15.
This content is only available via PDF.
All rights reserved. This material may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or in part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, film, or other distribution and storage media, without the written consent of ASTM International.
You do not currently have access to this content.