@@kitsunelee007 I doubt very much it was common practice to let the father of a missing child take charge of the investigation. I would have thought then, as now, the parents would be the first people they would look at.
The comments about Charles Lindbergh’s shame about his son’s imperfections hit home. I had an uncle I never knew, born in 1949 or so, who had Down’s Syndrome. He was put in an institution when he was 2 years old and his brother - my dad - never saw or heard of him again, and it haunted and saddened my dad his whole life.
It’s in terrible taste, and I never would, but people do joke about babies in peril. Just look up the many FB posts of babies in large cooking pots holding a spoon, as some kind of “joke.” It’s awful, but I doubt any of theses people later cooked their kids. And this was a time when people openly joked about domestic violence and thought drunk driving was humorous.
My aunt actually went on a blind date with Lindberg - when he lived in St. Louis. One date - according to her - was more than enough. Said she had never met such a strange person. Strange, and not in a good way.
Lindbergh finding the ransom note after the nursery was already searched, not going to the function he was expected at, insisting no one see the baby between 8- 10, not allowing the authorities at the money drop off or those with experience in the investigation, doing a dry run by hiding his baby for hours in a closet (who does that?). I didn't even know the child had developmental issues, nor of the other masty elements of his personality.
The fact that he hid his child in a closet for hours as a practical joke tells a lot about Lindburg. That is a pretty sickening prank. He possibly did it in anticipation of the kidnapping/murder in order to buy more time.
Years ago i was a driver for a Senior Citizen program and i asked one of the passengers (who happened to be 100 years old) what was the one thing that affected her most in her life and she said the Linberg child abduction. This was such a big story and affected so many people...
You missed a couple of critical points. His cruelty toward his son was persistent. He would throw things at the child to make him fall. The child had special needs and had developmental delays. The photo they released to the press was of the child many many months before. Lindbergh was a serial womanizer and had children with at least 2 other women. He insisted the dog be kept out of the room that night - the only time he did. I've no doubt he was involved, possibly as ringleader. Hauptmann may not have even known about his involvement (assuming Hauptmann was involved at all). A Nazi sympathizer, Lindbergh was no hero
Even if it could be proved beyond doubt that what you have pieced together here in the way that you have is the truth, that doesn't mean that Lindbergh was responsible for his son's death. It seems strange that he would wait literally YEARS before getting Hauptmann framed. The story was old news. Why start it up again? Lindy could have found someone else to frame a lot sooner.
My paternal grandfather hated my father, the baby. My father had problems with his ears so my grandfather would box Papa" ears so they would bleed. My father was the kindest human being I ever have known.
All of the photos they used for the baby were over a year old, and it's said that something was medically wrong with the baby and as he got older it was more apparent. Lindbergh who was big on eugenics, was ashamed of the baby and his physical and mental conditions, was harsh towards the baby and wouldn't even hold him.
@@davidaltman8831 there's a letter from the little boys doctor to the grandma and I guess that there is quite a few statements from people around the family. It's really interesting and not too hard to find info on it. It just shows how secretive that kind of stuff was back then, more shameful
Yes.The child's developmental problems were most probably the result of Lindberg insisting that hie wife(I think she was in the third trimester)accompany him on a flight to the west coast.During the trip Ann suffered from altitude sickness and hypoxia which understandably affected the child's developing brain and nervous system.
@@docsmithdc This is just another conspiracy theory, not fact. Planes in 30's did fly at the altitudes that we fly at today, making the hypoxia theory moot. Otherwise no one would have flown on a plane anywhere and air travel was getting to be common by the 30's.
@@gusmonster59 However, they were on a 2 week tour and, important, they flew in an open cockpit. What wouldve been fine oxygen-wise for a grown man might not have been enough for a heavily pregnant woman and her baby. But, yes, its only speculation. What is certain is, that the baby was on a special diet from birth, hinting that it was known from birth, that he suffered some medical condition. Also certain is, that he had a bigger than normal head and other symptoms of rickets, which became more and more obvious, as he grew older, hence why the rabid eugenicist LIndbergh had only very few photos taken of his son in situations and angles to downplay those malformations, and why he provided the police with a photo from his sons 1st birthday, over 10 months earlier, when his son disappeared, coz any newer photo wouldve exposed his "imperfect" son to the world. Providing a 10 month old photo for a 20 month old baby is ludicrous, there are huge differences in such a time. All this is fact. Further speculation on Lindbergh's motives for providing the old photo, hiding his sons condition or whether he had anything to do with the babys death, that is just that - speculation. After the completely botched police investigation, which as mentioned Lindbergh was allowed to insert himself into and ran in an either completely insane amateur way or a deliberately obstructive way, and the many years passing by, we'll never know for sure. On a sidenote, as a European Ive had more experience than wished for with Americans concerning European accents. Basically, Americans are so pisspoor at accents, that any European accent is considered German, coz thats what they know from the movies, unless its a really heavy French accent. Even we Scandinavians, when portrayed by Americans, are given a German accent, which is really hard on the ears. Granted, it might have been different b4 WWII, but still, the accents, Americans had experience with back then, were also German and French. And again, Americans tend to rank anything not obviously French as German. So the thought of some old American doctor being able to correctly recognize an accent is extremely low. More likely, he heard an accent and, as Americans have for the many decades since and still do, assumed, it must be German. Even many Europeans able to discern several accents, as we're surrounded by them, have difficulty with some. So unless the doctor was a doctor of linguistics with a specialty in accents and their origins, I find the "German accent" determination utterly unreliable. It couldve been any of a couple of dozens European accents, that Americans still to this day consider and portray (no, not just in movies, from regular Americans too) as German, even tho they sound very different from each other for those of us living over here.
I believe Dorothy Parker made some comment at the time to, that blatantly accused Lindhberg indeed did it! There was indeed much talk about the possibility of lindhngerg being the culprit. The problem was back then infanticide was such a taboo subject; heck even today it still is!
The public had no idea who the real Charles Lindbergh really was. He and his wife although they would have five more children, their marriage was difficult at best. He had at least three affairs that produced a total of six offspring.
That is likely the case, but doesn’t show much, as if you asked Chris Watts or other clearly guilty people’s parents if thrydid it, they will also say he was innocent.
I have tremendous respect for Anna Hauptmann. When she was asked to lie to help her husband, she refused, simply because it was wrong. She did have a blind spot when it came to her husband, the evidence showing his guilt is persuasive. What will never be known is whether the baby died because of the broken ladder or if the kidnapper killed the baby deliberately.
There's a lot more to this story that wasn't shared in this video. I used to collect Lindbergh memorabilia, but years ago when the whole story came out, I got rid of it. Today I don't want to have anything of him in my house.
@@ronratcliffe2219 agreed he likely did the kidnapping himself he had quiet n ego and his beliefs about superior race plus he was not very supportive of his American wife either.
Are you kidding me? The Lindberghs were terrorized by communist Bolshevik jews and had their baby kidnapped and murdered for his political views . It’s quite sad For someone like you who was an admirer -to swallow such a disgusting evil and overtly fake narrative hook line and sinker you should be ashamed
Charles Lindbergh was an American hero who found himself persona non grata and then targeted by a very powerful force who was in the process of taking control of the entire western world and beyond via fractional reserve “banking” and unscrupulous media Hollywood types who were mastering blackmail extortion and bribery to wield unrelenting power in the government’s of our countries
I think Lindbergh did it himself. His behavior that evening was odd and out of character. He had also previously taken the boy from his crib and hidden him, telling the nurse and Anne that someone had "stolen our baby." The window sill of the window through which the boy had supposedly been taken was neither wet nor muddy. The ransom note was not found until AFTER the house had been searched; no one had seen it during the initial searching of the nursery. Lindbergh had been seen earlier in the evening with a ladder in his car. He then inserted himself into the investigation and even into the prosecution. Lindbergh was a staunch believer in eugenics -- to the point of supporting Hitler. Charles, Jr. had multiple physical issues that kept him from walking normally, and may have caused intellectual damage. The boy's head was abnormally large, and his legs showed symptoms of rickets. He had been kept out of the public eye, and had not been photographed for months at the time of his death. Lindbergh's obsession with eugenics ultimately lead him to father several children in Germany with five different women, two of whom were sisters. If the kidnapping was not an inside job, it seems too bizarre and complicated for one semi-literate man to have carried out alone.
How could he be put "in charge" of investigating his own son's abduction? Why would the authorities allow such an absurd request to be honored? The buck should stop with law enforcement not the victim's father. This alone casts doubt on everything.
He was a "celebrity" and national hero. Look at the all the celebrity cover-ups and breathless reporting of every "celebrity's" idiotic opinion the entertainment media does in the 3rd decade of the 21st century.
I watched another documentary that focused on Lindbert's obsession with genetics. He was worried that his son was slow in both mental and physical development. After all of his children were grown, he moved to Hawaii and left Anne in their home on the continent.
@@unowen9668 I remember reading an article in "People" magazine about a man who claimed to be Jr.. Since a substantial number of people believed that Jr. was not dead, it is possible. His claim was that he was offered for adoption as a toddler. He looked similar and was believed to have been born at the same time. He also had some unique foot characteristics as well. At that point, none of the Lindberg family knew about the other sets of children in Europe, so they totally disavowed him. The guy's claim turn out to be true. New Jersey would not even have to pay restitution on that either.
@@MSinistrari As if Lindbergh would set up an elaborate kidnapping plot, With others, to get rid of his little son, there a myriad of ways he could have done that & no hassles at all. You kids need to stick to the one hour made up TV shows that tell ya the ending, True crime is Way over your heads.
There was a PBS documentary about the case. Very reputable documentary makers. They said Hauptman most likely dropped the baby while coming down the ladder, thus fracturing his skull. Lindberg was a terrible person. In it up to his neck.
I've read that the child had terrible trouble walking, & fell often. And that his father used to sit on the sofa watching, & pelting him with accent cushions, knocking him down, while laughing at him. If true, heartbreaking. 💔
Yes, believe that Will Rogers was at least one of the people that told about the pillow thing. He did it so often that the boy would just plop down on the floor when he saw his "father" pick up a pillow.
One story is that Lindbergh INTENTIONALLY killed his son because he hated that his son had problems with his little legs and struggled to learn to walk, compared to other babies they knew of. In the eyes of Lindbergh, his son didn’t fit the “image” of a “superior, Arian” child due to some physical issues, and it was a source of shame and even anger on Lindbergh’s part. An actor in Hollywood who befriended the Lindberghs, would say that when he visited the couple, the baby would struggle to walk across the living room and when he tried, Charles would kick him down with his foot, repeatedly! The hateful father, Charles, was an arrogant bully who was ashamed of his own child!! 😢 Lindbergh is no “hero!”
@@johnr7279 The police investigators eventually admitted years later that there was actually MORE evidence linking Lindbergh to his own child’s murder than the man who was convicted! At the time of the crime, no one wanted to investigate an “American hero.” Lindbergh took full advantage of that, and became very “involved” in the investigation. Gee, I wonder why…….
@@susanfabian1521 maybe but certainly a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of appearances. This is certainly one of the most contentious unresolved criminal cases of all time!
I had read the same thing, that the child was deemed "slow." Charles had a real problem with this evidently. Also, who hides a baby in a closet for hours? Good lord!
@1:40 Lindberg is not famous for making the first non-stop flight from New York City to Paris. He is famous for the first non-stop SOLO flight across the Atlantic.
@@davidaltman8831 - Actually, Linderg was about the135th person to do a non-stop flight across the Atlantic. Alcock and Brown did the first nonstop flight in 1919, 8 years before Lindberg's flight. But Lindberg did it solo.
My mom remembered the story very well about the Lindbergh baby. The baby wasn't the perfect child like his father wanted and he was embarrassed. My mom said it had been reported the baby had mental and physical disabilities. As my mom said: "everyone knew Lindbergh had the child kidnapped and murdered because he couldn't except the fact the little boy had problems." Another crime where the elite gets by with murder.
He was a notsee eugen icist so having a disabled child reflected negatively on him by his own belief system and in the eyes of his own chosen community
No offense but it doesn't really seem like your mom's memory about a rumor claiming the child had issues and wasn't "perfect" and that he was "embarrassed" about these things should really be something you or anyone else should use to determine whether somebody murdered their child!! I've read letters and I've read transcripts taken from interviews at the actual time this happened when people's memories still aren't perfect but are better than "remembering a story very well" it's still so amazing to me how little evidence of guilt people need to start a public mob type lynching of someone's character! Shameful honestly!
That is just Ridiculous & the fact that he & his Same wife went on to have more children, just shows that he wasn't worried about other 'faults'. The child had rickets, big deal.
Ricketts is not a genetic or inheritable condition. It's the result of a nutritional deficiency, and can be treated. It's not likely it was the cause of anyone wanting to get rid of him. It's more likely an accident resulted in the baby's death and the kidnapping was a cover-up. The nursemaid may have been the one responsible, or even the father or mother.
@@pookiesis1465 And, so What? Loads of U.S. citizens were interested in that. So according to Your brain cells, all who were interested in eugenics, murder their kids if they have some imperfection. Grow Up.
@@bethryan9077 it’s not Ridiculous! He was an awful person, praised Hitler. Hitler gave him the service cross of the German eagle! He had a whole other family in Germany, wife and kids.
After reading the comments I am reminded of Where's Molly, about a brother's search for his sister. The "different" children that were supposed to just be forgotten. Well done on this.
Anne Marrow Lindbergh was an introverted soul. Her husband was dominant, abusive. He took credit for much of her aviation accomplishments. Her writings are eye opening to how unhappy her life and marriage were. If you have never read her books, I encourage you to.
@@nathalie_desrosiers start with Gift from the Sea...it is just a beautiful book! It is how she healed after losing her son. I would also suggest a book called "The Aviator's Wife" by Melanie Benjamin. This book is so well written and I came away with such an affection for Anne Morrow Lindbergh!
@@virgilstarkwell8383 Maybe Hauptmann was telling the truth about Isidor Fisch leaving the box with the ransom money in it in his care. Hauptmann said he didn't open the box and find the money in it until a rain shower caused a leak in his closet where he kept the box, that he immediately took the box out to keep it from getting wet. It was then, he said, that he found the cash in the box. Since this was after finding out about Fisch's death in Germany, Hauptmann believed that he was entitled to keep the cash since Fisch had owed him some money. Unfortunately, everyone was so convinced that Hauptmann was guilty, that his story about Isidor Fisch was never taken seriously during the trial, and the press made fun of it, calling it "the Fischy (fishy) story." However, there was never any evidence of Hauptmann spending any of the ransom money BEFORE the death of Isidor Fisch, except for the testimony of a ticket girl at a movie theater near Greenwich Village in New York City who claimed that a man resembling Hauptmann had paid for a movie ticket with a bill that was identified as a part of the ransom money. This supposedly occurred before the time that Hauptmann said he received the box with the money from Isidor Fisch. But several of Hauptmann's friends and relatives testified that he couldn't have been at that theater, because he was with them at his home -- CELEBRATING HIS BIRTHDAY! But, for some reason, the jury ignored their testimony, preferring to listen to the ticket girl, who may have either been mistaken or lying. If her testimony was false, then there's still no proof that Hauptmann had spent any of the ransom money before Fisch's death, but this fact too was ignored by the jury. There was also another fact that was never mentioned at the trial and was hardly ever investigated by the authorities. Isidor Fisch was a rather mysterious man who allegedly had connections with the underworld. Organized Crime had been suspected of involvement in the kidnapping right from the very beginning. Ironically, one of the many people who offered their help in searching for the baby was the notorious Chicago racketeer, Al Capone. Speaking of the underworld, Colonel Lindbergh had the first ransom note circulated among known gangsters, hoping to get their help in finding his missing son. This could have given professional con artists a chance to copy the handwriting in the note and to forge some of the other ransom notes, most of which were used as evidence against Bruno Richard Hauptmann during the trial. Could he have been falsely convicted and executed because of phony ransom letters that had nothing to do with the case?
Yes, Lindbergh was proNazi . He would go to Germany's "Lebensborn" and impregnate German women. He spoke German. He was not a nice person. The book was called," Suspect No.1 by Lise Pearlmann."
Lindbergh saw his children for only a few months a year. He kept track of each child's infractions (including such things as gum-chewing) and insisted that Anne track every penny of household expenses in account books
This whole case screams inside job. I think Lindbergh was trying to pull another vicious prank & he dropped his son, whom he disliked because he wasn't "perfect". He didn't bank on his son being found so soon. Hauptman was framed.
I agree Hauptman was framed for the kidnapping, although he was likely part of the extortion of the ransom money. The remains which Lindbergh identified as his son did not turn up for several months after the crime, however.
I truly believe it was a tale of abuse, neglect and murder of their own child. Most people don't realize that Charles treated the baby with disdain. The child had birth defects that Charles could never deal with and accept.
@@abrahamedelstein4806 years ago, I did an in depth college paper of the Lindbergh trial. It's not widely known that the trial had to be postponed several times due to the healing of Hauptmann's wounds from the beatings he endured while trying to get a confession. The fact also that falsification of employment records and searches of Hauptmann's home weeks after the original search that turns up magical evidence, and finally, the star prosecuting witnesses had a mental breakdown and confessed to fabricating the "Gang" story but, was said to be a trustworthy man. Yes, Hauptmann was killed as an innocent man.
@@elizabethbogle3533 , I believe that his wife Anne, was terrified of Charles and would follow his lead. She could have been a battered wife and traumatized. What is truly crazy is, the nanny, a young woman, took her own life just weeks after the supposed crime. I believe she was about to spill her guts about the family life.
@@johnberryhill8106Hauptmann confessed to having gotten the ransom money from Fisch, who most likely did it, my problem is the slander of Lindbergh that you're engaged in.
Scotland Yard top inspector confidentially told J.Edgar Hoover that already they were discovering that the parents were often the first and prime suspects. Lindbergh took charge of the investigation himself and would not let the FBI in.
@@virgilstarkwell8383 True but the 'Yard' had already noticed the first suspects in such murders were the parents. Kidnapping was just an easy distraction.
Very well told story, but what a horribly sad ending. I had previously heard bits and pieces of this in the past, but if it was Charles senior, oh god, I can't even imagine that. How awful. All I can add, is my heart aches for that sweet, little baby boy.
If Lindy had wanted to get rid of his "imperfect" child he could have smothered it in the crib & no questions would have been followed up due to his celebrity. It makes no sense at all to go through these complex backflips if a well known person in the early 20th century wanted to get rid of such a small child.
I heard a theory that the original plan was to ‘kidnap’ Junior and after he was recovered use the kidnapping as an excuse to hide him away; permanently.
This was the era of "we have a child in a facility we don't talk about". The kid could have hung out with the Kennedy daughter. I don't understand why people assume Lindbergh did it considering all the evidence that someone went to the trouble of building a ladder and then played games with the cops and Condon for weeks. Let's say Lindbergh planned an elaborate prank with the ladder and the kid dies, the suggestion would be that his next step was to create an elaborate symbol for the ransom note that he needs to plant. I could go on about how unlikely the rest of the story gets if you demand Lindbergh was responsible. Lindbergh was loved and hated like almost no one before him, often by the same people. It's as if Kim Kardashian had a kid stolen, people would be convinced of her guilt without an iota of evidence just because of how they feel about her. Lindbergh was not a monster but he definitely wasn't a normal person either. His actions with the German American Bund only further drew people's ire and I think rational review of this incident is very rare.
I've heard this theory from other people as well. In those, there was also discussion of his involvement in eugenics along with his many illegitimate children he had with 2 German women.
He was heavily into eugenics and if there was anything too wrong with the baby (who was old enough to show problems) he well could have killed the child himself. He was also a closet supporter of Adolf Hitler. My Mom and her parents told me of the suspicious (Mom was just out of High School when it happened.)
Hauptman was at the very least, involved and got a third of the money. He also had been arrested in Germany for doing the same thing. That is completely obvious and indisputable. It is also fair to say that Lindbergh probably had a hand in it himself. He perjured himself multiple times, and even being there that night was completely out of touch with Lindbergh's habits, and anyone there would have had no idea Lindbergh was there. He had a love of eugenics, and probably had the child killed because he was sickly and poorly.
i think he meant to have the child anonomously put in an institution but he was accidently dropped and fatally injured while being removed from the house
@Dina Cap Hey, that fits the facts. Bravo. That's a fair point. The only problem I have with it is that if you look at the skull fracture, it is EXACTLY like someone hit him in the head, behind the ear, with a hammer, almost like I used to see old time tough guys like my dad put animals down with a coup-de-gras. So, MAYBE he hit his head and then they just took a hammer and whacked him to end his suffering. But I'm not sure.
@@Mr.MikeBarksdale Yeah, I agree, the hit on the head is not in a place, u could expect from a fall. Its not impossible, but its much more likely, it was done on purpose.
I vividly remember my grandpa telling me about this story (it was headline news when he was a kid) and even HE gave the side eye and always told me he thought the family covered it up. He thought it was an accident though.
The story my grandma told was that Linbergh was into eugentics (ie the pure white race) and that his son, baby here, was what was told as "metally unfit" or "r-t@rded" which was against the eugenics belief
Yeah, eugenics isnt just about "pure white race", its about the "perfect human". Any imperfections are intolerable to eugenicists. The Nazis "Aryan race" was actually inspired by US eugenicists and co-opted to make Germans the perfect humans.
13:03 “Persistent theories of his innocence persist.” What a great sentence. Let me give you some more: - barking dogs bark - this leaking faucet leaks - the broken vending machine is out of order
Well, all I can say is that the sheer brazenness of this atrocity stupefies me. What's alarming is the fact that the kidnapping happened so quickly and silently and with such ease. And the ladder--enormously risky. And what's up with simply dumping the baby's body? No attempt to bury or hide. Such a crude crime. Whoever did the actual physical abducting did it in an almost laughably unprofessional way and obviously panicked. And how did that individual know where to place the ladder? It seems to me that if it weren't an inside job, hurriedly put together, it would have been accomplished much more skillfully and the baby could have lived. Finally, how could Anne Morrow Lindbergh NOT have known of or at least strongly suspected her husband's treachery? Of course, violent crimes against children never make any sense to begin with.
Hauptmann did it, without any reasonable doubt. The forensic wood evidence in this case is compelling. He had possession of the ransom money. The letter writer was a German speaker, like Hauptmann. His cover story was ludicrous. Hauptmann built the ladder and ineptly kidnapped and killed the baby and then panicked. He may or may not have had an accomplice, but he definitely did it. No need for the diplomatic “whoever did it.”
I think Lindbergh was responsible. The admission to the crime would have saved the guy from the death penalty, and he wouldn't do it, plus he did head the investigation, turning down the FBI assistance but accepting help from criminals. There is no reason why the ladder that was made by him could not have been taken and used to throw suspicion away from Lindbergh as well
Well, His wife Anne had no clue about his second family in Germany so it is quite plausible that he had her hoodwinked, also he had "hidden" the baby from her before and played it off as a " joke" , so possible. Personally I think Hauptman was involved ,(Norman Schwarzkopf said that when his father died he read all his dads notes on the case and agreed with the verdict).
Both the Lindberghs were involved. No doubt it would have been easier to blame someone else rather than acknowledge that their baby was not 'normal' and had to be 'eliminated'
@@kcbarbo78 Don't be so certain about Hauptmann being guilty. It's a well-known fact that some of the evidence was fake or had been tampered with, that some of the witnesses lied or embellished their testimony, that evidence that might have cleared Hauptmann was never brought up at the trial or was hidden, and that the ransom money may have originally been in the hands of Hauptmann's friend, Isidor Fisch, who was suspected of having connections with Organized Crime (many people thought the mob may have kidnapped the baby). Even if Hauptmann was involved in this crime, there's a possibility that he didn't act alone, that he either had accomplices or he WAS an accomplice to someone else. Right from the start, many people, especially Colonel Norman Schwarzkopf, head of the New Jersey State Police, believed that the kidnapping was an inside job, and there's evidence that suggests this. If the kidnapper had placed the ladder directly beneath the window of the baby's room, he must have had inside information, and had known exactly where the baby was at the time. But no one knew that except the Lindberghs and their servants. They also knew that the Lindberghs were originally planning to leave the estate that night, but they changed their minds because the baby had caught a cold. Hauptmann knew nothing about all this, because he had never been to the Lindbergh estate before, nor did he have access to the building, or ever met the Lindberghs in person. There's no way he could have known which room was the child's nursery. A few people connected with the case believed that Hauptmann had not acted alone. Colonel Lindbergh's wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, once said that "Hauptmann may have been guilty, but he was not the only one." A year after Hauptmann's execution, Dr. John Condon, the "go-between" who delivered the ransom money to the mysterious "Cemetery John," wrote an article for "Liberty" magazine entitled "Did Hauptmann Have Accomplices?" As I pointed out before, New Jersey State Police Colonel Schwarzkopf believed that the crime was an inside job, that others were involved. Yet, after Hauptmann was convicted and sentenced to death, Schwarzkopf announced that he was abandoning the hunt for any possible accomplices or accessories in the kidnapping. That makes no sense at all! Why would he insist on the existence of a conspiracy to abduct the child, and then change his mind without explanation? Maybe he figured that since the law had already convicted at least one person of the "Crime of the Century," and sentenced him to death in the electric chair, then the public was satisfied that justice was done, and that looking for others involved would mean the investigation would have to start all over again, and the public couldn't stand it. So, they just focused on evidence pointing to Bruno Richard Hauptmann as the sole kidnapper, the sole extortionist, and the sole murderer. One could liken it to the way the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was investigated, whereby the police and the Warren Commission only examined evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin, and ignored any facts that even remotely suggested a larger conspiracy.
I think they dropped him coming out of the house on the ladder. I dont think it was intentional but an accident. I think they still went thru with the ransom plan, but the child was dead early on.
You forgot to mention how the outdoor part of the crime scene was basically contaminated by reporters, friends, etc. (Plus Grampa Simpson once claimed he was the Lindbergh baby 😂)
I think Lindbergh was responsible for the death of his own son. The baby was born with a bit of a defect & I think that Lindbergh was embarrassed, as he fashioned himself after Hitler's idea of a perfect Aryan. He couldn't stand the imperfections. The guy who was charged with the murder was innocent. The fact that he paid for a horrific crime that he didn't commit still bothers me.
Hauptman may have been involved in a money-laundering or extortion scheme but innocent of the kidnapping. Lindbergh let many people see the code on the bottom of the ransom note. Some people may have duplicated the code to get money out of Lindbergh. It is possible that Lindbergh wanted to have his son institutionalized but could not get his wife to agree to such a plan. He may have used the "kidnap" ruse to have the child removed from his home. The child's death may have been an accident. The body was found in an area that had already been searched.
Let's see, the executed killer suddenly had thousands of dollars, a new car, a new radio, constantly losing at the stock market all on a waitress and laborer pay. He had a history of second story burglary and violence. He had the number of the negotiator written on his wall. A car just like his was seen the night of the kidnapping near the Hopewell Lindbergh House. The ladder was fixed with wood from his attic. The remaining money was found in his house. Yeah, right, that screams innocent. smh only morons think Hauptmann innocent.
Who all were involved will probably never be known, but there was definitely more than one person involved. I think the baby was killed when the rung on the ladder broke and the baby was dropped. After the body was found it was determined that he died from a blow to the head consistent with the drop from the ladder. There are so many rumors and theories about this case that there are hundreds of books pushing dozens of theories.
For a Start, there were 12 ransom notes in total. If you do some research, you will find that many aspects of the Ramsey case, are related to this one. The perps did their homework & not only about the Ramseys, but neighbours & friends. They also did their homework about many famous kidnapping & murder cases as is Evidenced about a whole lot of aspects that they carried out within the house & some aspects within the note itself. As vile sociopaths, they not only thought they were very clever, but also very amusing. The Ramseys were Proven Innocent a Long time ago.
The thing is the narrator used the word "partner" in the correct manner, as in business partner lol It's so annoying to hear the word being used in any other manner today 😆
My dad was investigated.they thought the maid switched the babies and the lindbergh baby was taken and raised by another family. The maid committed suicide when they came to question her
This is a little mixed up. Betty Gow was the Lindbergh's nursemaid. The maid who committed suicide was Violet Sharp, who worked for Anne Lindbergh's family.
Ive never thought much of CL as far as being a hero is concerned. Even less so when I learned of his shortcomings and treatment of his son. I have no doubt that he was the ring leader of his sons kidnapping and murder.
I am completely shocked. I’ve never even heard of a suspicion that Charles Lindbergh had killed his own son. Never. I’m a true crime buff and I’ve always thought Bruno was framed or at the least, not alone in the crime. It has never crossed my mind that his father killed him. I’ve never even heard of his cruelty to his child, womanizing yes, I’ve heard that, but not the other. I wish my mother was still alive so we could discuss it. I’m blown away and now a lot of pieces fall more into place.
And the video doesn't even mention his double life in Europe, and only hints at his supremacist leanings. He was a terrible and cruel person, fully aware that his popularity afforded him leeway.
Hauptman kept a journal of his spending. Accountants for the court traced almost all of the $50,000. He hadn't had a job since the day the ransom was delivered. He lost a lot of the ransom money in the stock market in 1932. He spent $400 on a radio. He paid for the wife to go to Germany and see if he would be arrested if he returned. He paid two years of rent. The one thing that he shouldn't have done was spend the ransom bills while he was in the car that he bought without a job. The license plate and the change in the currency by FDR were his undoing.
@@dalemmmm Was he framed by the two women that he held and robbed at gunpoint in Germany? Was he framed by the mayor of the town in Germany that he robbed when he came thru the 2nd story window? Was he framed by the court's accountants that traced his spending of the ransom money?
@@SusanMarie3 I think he was the only one involved. Most people would have the common sense to avoid the kidnapping of the most famous baby in the world. There was a guy -from New Jersey that had begun a cross-country trip shortly before the kidnapping and he said that he was stopped countless times after the kidnapping while on his trip. He said the only reason appeared to be that his license showed he was from N.J. It was too small amount of ransom, even in 1932, for the risk involved in kidnapping such a high profile baby to split among multiple people. Hauptmann kept a meticulous record of his spending and the court's accountants were able to trace most of the spending to within a couple thousand of $50,000. A N.Y. psychiatrist that profiled the ransom notes, predicted the kidnapper would be one man, German, and living in the Bronx. Scotland Yard predicted that the initials of the kidnapper would be BRH. Look at the sign on the ransom notes.
It’s odd asking for a random for a child that is already dead. That’s what happened in the Ramsey case. That makes me think that a family member was involved and covering up for what they did.
The Ramseys were Proven Innocent a Long time ago with a mountain of Actual evidence & by a bunch of Actual experts under the umbrella of Law Enforcement, including, expert Seasoned investigators, expert Crime Scene techs & expert DNA & forensic Scientists. As in relation to This case, you kids have Zero logical thought processes & clearly, True crime is Way over your heads. Why would Lindbergh set up an elaborate kidnap plot just to get rid of his child? There are Many ways to carry out such a heinous deed & Nobody left hanging around who would Blab.. Jeez. I feel pity for all those who believe everything you read from the books full of False & misleading information that are put out for One reason, Money & so, onto all the utube 'shows'.
@@valerieneal2747 This is part of the problem for all those like Yourself - you don't know Anything about the crime, the case Or about what was Actually perpetrated upon this poor child. Nor do you Care to Find Out, what Really happened to JonBenet Ramsey because y’all too busy bangin on with a load of Garbage about every member of JonBenet’s family instead & all because you watch TV shows & pick out whatever suits your hateful agenda & repeat that as if all true. There most certainly are plenty of posters who have Intelligence, common sense & logical thought processes, who can work out sensible scenarios of what may have happened But, few dare to venture onto these hate-filled pages. . The Ramseys were officially & publicly Exonerated with an Abundance of Real evidence. Just because You Don’t Know about that evidence, does Not Mean that it doesn’t exist. All those under the umbrella of Law Enforcement - Did deal with Case Evidence, law enforcement including - expert Seasoned investigators, forensic DNA Scientists & expert Crime Scene techs. That Case Evidence included - the autopsy photos, the X-ray photo of the skull, the Authentic autopsy report, hundreds of crime scene photos, cops’ walk-thru videos, police reports, affidavits, depositions, evidence lists, witness statements, videos & Full transcripts of John & Patsy’s police interviews of ’97, ’98 & 2000, other recorded interviews, over 200 evidence items, forensic items, the full layout of the Whole 7,000 sq ft mansion - being all 4 storeys & also, what was Out of Place & what was Missing. All is in Evidence & a great deal is online for all to source. Until this case is brought to trial for criminal proceedings, the general public will Never get to know the True Facts about this case, nor the ins & outs or the bits & pieces that, Make Up the Puzzle. Unless you start some Actual Research online, but that takes a whole lot of hard slog & one needs some experience just to tell the difference between a fake document & an Authentic one. Reddit for example & the proliferation of videos on YT are Still full of False & Misleading information whether old TV programmes or new Utube 'shows' & both put Fake pages on the screen As If from police files, including Fake writing ‘samples’ & Fake individual ‘letter’ samples as if Patsy did that too. Producers through the years have always edited their programmes to suit Their agendas & flash photos & pages on the screen in the middle of whatever dialogue, whether these were the Ramseys TV interviews or parts of their police interviews. All of the Same misleading & False information that’s been going around for 26 years & counting. You people need to wake up to yourselves. Obviously too many in the public domain believe all that they read in trashy magazines as well & whatever is on the back of your cereal boxes. As long as it’s Against this fine upstanding family, Anything goes & it all must be true. * BTW - who would WRITE a ransom note & on their Own notepad & use their Own marker & then put both of those items near the phone For The COPS? There is something seriously very Wrong with all those who believe Patsy did That!. Why would she say the note was found on the Back Staircase for Heaven’s Sake? One would have said it was found on the child’s Pillow! And woops the body is still in the house. Why write a 3 Page ridiculous note anyway? One would stage a break in & call the cops. SIMPLE. I pity all those who can’t even figure out the Basics of this heinous crime, which was In Fact very, Very well Planned. Way too many so-called ‘experts’ & so-called ‘authors’ jumped on the bandwagon to find their version of fame & to make Money from this high profile crime & they Keep At It because of - all those who are naïve, ignorant, highly gullible, hateful, brainwashed & cruel. Then there’s all those who are just plain Stupid. There’s such an abundance of Ramsey bashers, the never-ending ‘shows’ full of the same old BS will, never end. One would say - feeding the beast.
Even assuming Hauptmann was guilty, things still don't add up. Like just how did Hauptmann pull off the kidnapping all by himself without being detected?
Lindbergh accidentally killed the baby and got Hauptmann to help him. Something tells me that Hauptmann had no idea what he was getting into and was surprised that Lindbergh left him to take the fall. Considering how Lindbergh was able to cover his tracks for decades, leads me to believe that he knew how to play people.
Then why didn't Hauptmann rat him out to try to save his own life? That makes no sense to me. When your life is on the line, you don't owe anybody anything.
@@TheAzmountaineer- Hauptmann wasn’t involved. His friend Isidor Fisch was. Fisch had the ransom money. He just left it at Hauptmann’s house because Fisch was going to visit Germany and wasn’t taking the money with him. If Fisch hadn’t died in Germany he would’ve come and retrieved the money from Hauptmann when he returned. Hauptmann didn’t even know what was in the boxes. He only opened them a while after Fisch died. He asked Fisch’s family if he could open and keep whatever was in the boxes. They said yes. So Hauptmann couldn’t rat anybody out. He wasn’t in on it and knew nothing about it. The governor of New Jersey offered Hauptmann a deal. If Hauptmann would confess the governor would waive the death penalty and Hauptmann would have a life sentence. You’d think that anyone who was guilty and even some who weren’t would jump at that offer. Hauptmann said no, that he wasn’t going to confess to something he didn’t do.
Why did the police wait 3-4 yrs to arrest Hauptmann if he wasn't involved? Why waste all that time and money? Quickly find a career criminal, find him guilty. No one is the wiser if Lindbergh killed his kid. This Theory about Lindbergh killing his kid, weird as Lindbergh was, he was not a killer.
The man at the cemetery could've been Hauptman himself ( remember his face was covered) or maybe just an opportunistic con man. But I wonder if maybe Lindberg had arranged for the baby to be spirited away and placed either in an institution or with another family. In this way they would be free of raising a baby they didn't want and they wouldn't have to look bad for not wanting him. Just a theory. I realize we'll never know for sure.
It is believed by some that Lindberg murdered his own son but that Hauptmann took advantage of that crime to try and embezzle money. Hauptmann was an embezzler, but probably not the murderer. Lindberg was 'odd' to say the least and had antipathy towards the child, due to it's defects. Lindberg had a secret life that nobody knew about, he had a series of lovers in Germany and fathered 6 children out of wedlock, this is without question. He had a public personality and a private personality that were miles apart.
Much of the “evidence” against Lindbergh seems consistent with his controlling personality. Also, this doesn’t explain the evidence against Hauptmann. If Lindbergh killed his son, how did Hauptmann get the ransom money, how did a piece of wood from his home get on the ladder, etc.
could this be two separate events? Charles playing a joke dropped his son causing his death which lead to the story of a kidnapping. a conman pretends to be the kidnapper sends the ransom letter and Charles goes along with this.
Yes, many have speculated that was exactly what happened. Lindbergh allowed 2 guys connected to the crime world to borrow the kidnap note, and the underworld was soon aware of the unusual signature, so could easily send fake follow up ransom notes.
General Schwarzkopf's father was the head of the New Jersey State Police. General Schwarzkopf said he read the files which his father had in his attic. General Schwarzkopf then said there is NO doubt that this case was correctly resolved.
I did a report on this my senior year in high school. I knew nothing about it before. The idea that Lindbergh was involved in the kidnapping and death of his own baby was not public at that time. I never, ever thought Hauptmann was guilty. It was difficult for me believing deeply that an innocent man had been executed just because the public was crying out for someone to pay the price for the crime whether he did it or not. I was 17. My stance on the death penalty hadn’t really formed yet. After doing this report my stance on the death penalty solidified and has not moved. I’m against it because it is possible to execute an innocent man. I’m in favor of life in prison with no opportunity of parole. If someone is sentenced to life in prison and later is proven to be innocent, we can’t give him the years back, but we can let him go. Give him the rest of his years back along with monetary compensation. If we execute him and after that he’s proven to be innocent, there’s nothing we can do. We can’t bring him back to life. Death is permanent. Humans make mistakes. Lindbergh was all kinds of sick, disgusting, disturbing, cruel and he was a eugenicist. If you don’t know what that is, think Hitler and the Nazis. This happened in the 1930’s right around the same time as Hitler’s rise to power. Lindbergh admired Hitler’s eugenicist views. Lindbergh also aspired to creating a superior race of people and eliminating those he thought were unfit. He believed himself to be one of the superior race. Baby Charly was not “superior race material”. He supposedly had mental development delays. I’m not sure what. He also had physical imperfections. Baby Charly had a disease like rickets. It wasn’t rickets, but similar. It made his bones soft. There was a sunlamp near his crib to give him more vitamin D in the hope of helping his bones harden. He had hammertoes. His head was too big. That could be linked to mental delays or less than normal intelligence. He couldn’t walk properly as a child of his age should. He did walk but I think he walked on his toes without his heels touching the floor. His gait was unsteady and he fell much more than a child of his age should. Lindbergh could not let anyone know that his son had mental and physical imperfections. Lindbergh, who considered himself to be of the superior race could not have an imperfect, unfit son tainting the family name and possibly the family bloodline. So Lindbergh had to get rid of the baby before people found out the truth. I don’t believe that the plan was for the baby to die right away. In fact, the plan may have really been for the baby to be kidnapped and taken far away where he could live and would never be linked to Lindbergh. There’s a slight risk in that, but there was no global news media, no TV, no Internet. It would’ve been much easier to do then than now. The plan may have involved killing the baby to 100% eliminate the risk of the baby ever being linked back to Lindbergh but still I don’t think it was supposed to happen the way it did at the time it did. Lindbergh had 3 mistresses in Germany. Two of them were each other’s sisters. (Not his sisters, just to clarify). The other was unrelated. I think that he had 2 children by one sister, 3 by the other, and 1 by the other mistress. He also had 6 children or so with his wife. He was a busy, busy boy. Poor Baby Charly!
So many people don't understand it is cheaper to keep them. The millions spent on appeals is much more than a cot and three hots, Even if the convicted lives a long and very unhappy life.
They should have shown the photographs of the baby's corpse which Lindbergh identified as his son. It was skeletal, for example, only ribs and spine were left of the midsection. Some , not much, tissue clung to the skull. It would have been impossible for the corpse to have been identified as the baby, but Lindbergh insisted it was. One theory was he just wanted it over, as his wife, considered delicate by nature, was on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Another theory is it was the nurse, who had a boyfriend, who committed the crime together. I can't remember what I read ages ago, but they had some link to the wood the latter was made from. This is quite good but it ended so abruptly.
I saw a documentary where they tried to do a DNA test on the ladder to see if it was made of the same wood from the guy's attic, but I think the state of NJ wouldn't let them have access to it or something. If they'd do that they could crack the case.
There was a whole investigation into the ladder, the type of wood that was used, the tools that were used to make it etc... and it was linked to Hauptmann. The missing piece of wood was found in his attic
@@stephaniegilcher4577 Yeah, I know about all of that. But they never did a DNA test because it didn't exist back then. As much evidence as there is with the ladder, there are still a lot of people who doubt the validity of the wood grain test they did back then. They have all kinds of theories about how Hauptmann could've been framed or how the testimony from the wood expert wasn't right, etc. But if a DNA test could be done, it would put a lot of that stuff to rest. (but then again, maybe not, because there'd probably be a lot of conspiracy nuts saying the wood they tested it against didn't really come from the right house or it was planted, all kinds of crazy stuff.) Personally, I think Hauptmann totally did the kidnapping, but there had to be at least one or two other people that helped him, who never got caught. I think either the kid choked to death from the chloroform or got knocked out when the ladder broke. So they panicked and dumped him in the first secluded spot they could find because they didn't want to risk getting caught with him in the car. The area where they dumped him is right up the road from the school I went to, so I get how that could've been the case because it was, and still kind of is, the first significantly secluded spot on the way out of town, when you're heading up Carter RD, that way.
@@stephaniegilcher4577 I'm not saying he couldn't have been involved. But I think Hauptmann is the one who actually made the ladder and used it to climb up into the bedroom and take the kid. I think someone else was most likely driving the car and there were probably also others who told him when the Lindberghs were going to be there and where the bedroom was.
@@Melissa0774 with that ladder? 2 police officers said right away it looked staged. They were removed from the investigation. Too many red flags regarding Lindbergh
@@JDCUSA I don't come to conclusions until I do my research. I've read her books and I think she is a fake compared to the actual known facts of her life. From reading reliable historical recollections, HE was a verifiable MONSTER. Again, I ask: How could any woman (especially a woman of means like her) stay with such a horrid person? Especially since there is evidence he killed his own son which she HAD to have known. BTW when I want to know about a person, I read multiple books, pro and con, about them and oay attention to their own words and actions. One wonders why you are invested in defending them? What led you to do so? Research? Manipulation? Are you related?
@@JDCUSA I WOULD ADVISE THE SAME TO YOU, BUT I SUSPECT YOU ARE "WOKE," WHICH MEANS YOU FOLLOW THE PARTY LIES IN EVERYTHING, WITHOUT QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO MORAL AUTHORITY OR GUIDE IN LIFE.
I have seen a lot of videos on this case over the decades but only recently did I hear about theories Lindbergh was involved. It’s plausible. One show I watched said he was a practical joker but he must have been sick because there some things you just don’t joke about.. pranking your wife about your child being missing isn’t ok. I had heard previously that he was in the process of pranking his wife when the child died. I didn’t know until this video that he had done it before. I think the fact he secretly fathered a dozen or more children afterwards is telling.
@@lizbrown7232 Umm, kerosene smells to high hell deary & the Fumes alone would be a Clue. Jeez. . I am soo sorry you kids believe Everything you read on the back of your Cornflake boxes. Get a Grip.
To all the commenters. I read, I heard, Someone said, Someone knows someone that thinks something. It's all conjecture. We will never Really Know what happened. It's all very Sad.
The baby always looks sad. To think this baby was put in a closet for hours and had things thrown at him breaks my heart. Lindbergh was a very privileged individual who was undeserving of adoration. He was evil to his own child.
It seems like the evidence against Lindbergh is circumstantial and there’s a mountain of actual evidence that Hauptmann did it. Hauptmann was spending money on stuff he couldn’t afford, including sending his wife to Germany, before they found some ransom money in his garage, the wood on the ladder was from his attic, and Hauptmann had a sketch for a homemade ladder in his journal.
Why would he rip out a board from his own attic? It sounds very odd. He himself said there was store nearby where he could buy a board for just a few cents, which sounds more logical. Was he a cheapskate or something?
I read Scott Berg’s biography of Lindbergh (highly recommend). Berg makes a compelling case for Hauptmann’s guilt, but Hauptmann almost certainly didn’t act alone and his co-conspirators were never identified or prosecuted. Lindbergh was no saint, but I don’t believe he was involved in any way in his child’s kidnapping.
Some of the evidence was manufactured. Hauptman probably did not kidnap the child but was guilty of extortion and/or money laundering. Today parents would be the first suspects.
Supposedly 1 board used in the ladder was matched with a sawed off end in the attic. However, there are several problems with that, including, but not limited to, that the sawed off end was not originally found, when the house was searched, only later after a multitude of ppl had been through, and the "wood expert" made several dubious claims, that could not be substantiated.
@@mgkelly3389 That house was still being built & so, the ladder could have been taken there before by workmen involved, maybe even Hauptman himself & it was an extendable ladder, so not anywhere near as long as the photos show. Hauptman wasn't the only one who committed this heinous crime, at least one other with him on the night. BTW - Kidnappers don't have such a bright idea on the same night that they commit the crime. Jeez.
@@mgkelly3389 id does but they said it was proven to come from wood from his own attic so he is definetlt more than just extorting them. It looks more likely both are involved to some degree and we will never get the truth
My grandmother had a neighbour who personally knew Bruno Hauptmann. This neighbour was from Germany and I believe she and Hauptmann would speak to one another in German. She always believed that the child’s death was likely an accident: that he intended to kidnap him (most likely out of financial desperation so that he could collect the ransom) and accidentally dropped him coming down the ladder. She said Hauptmann was a ‘friendly’ man, but of course this in no way excuses his actions. Those were just her experiences and her view of what she believed happened.
With all due respect to your Granny’s neighbor, she most likely, like most people at that time, couldn’t ever conceive of Lindbergh murdering his own son, hence the blaming of Hauptmann. After reading and watching documentaries on this case, I believe Charles Lindbergh himself murdered his own child.
He was a criminal, he was in and out of prison in Germany so he was not friendly. And the baby was killed because he had a hole in his skull. Maybe from a hammer etc. So it was not an accident
The Lindberghs had not planned to stay at the house because it was not completed at the time. Baby Charles was suffering from a cold and the parents decided it was better not to move him. Also why did it take so long to find the baby’s body? Why let a virtual stranger act as Lindbergh’s liaison? Did they ever consider that maybe Lindbergh didn’t take the baby but hired someone to do it? Is it possible that the death was an accident changing the severity of the crime?
This is just character assassination. There is no proof that Lindbergh killed his son and plenty to implicate Hauptmann. Eric Hoffer wrote in >True Believer
Is it possible that Lindbergh took the baby out of the nursery intending to hide him as a pank and to "find" him n an hour or so. But the ladder broke and he dropped the baby who died so Lindbergh had to make it look like the kid was taken perhaps he spread the ransom money.
If he took the baby, he could just have walked out of the house with him, no need to actually climb down the ladder. His wife was having a bath, the nanny was taking a break in the kitchen chatting with the butler and his wife.
There is much about Lindbergh's past that you've failed to include. He was a prankster of the worst sort. For example, he once filled a fellow soldier's canteen with kerosene.
Hauptmann went to his death proclaiming his innocence, the bulk of the money turned up in Germany - a fact that was hidden from the public. Clearly indicating someone else was involved in the kidnapping
BTW, Condon's address & telephone number were found by police written with a pencil in a closet in Haupmann's house. He recognized he had written the address "because he was interested in the case" (!) but he couldnt explain why he had written also his phone number. Also, Haupmann's wife declared (at a time when a wife could testify against her hubby) that she had never seen a shoe box where he said he had kept Fisch's. Also, if Fisch had gotten so much money as Haupmann claimed he did, he hid it very well because he wouldn't spend any part of it seeking medical treatment to the illness that took him away. Of course misers usually prefer to die of a disease rather than spend any of their money trying to get a cure..! From where I stand Haupmann looks pretty guilty, even more so when people close to Fisch including his landlord testiefied that he could barely afford his rent. And who in the world leaves the country and leaves behind in the house of a guy who isnt even a friend, just a business partner to whom he owes $7.500, a shoe box full with $40.000, who would do something so stupid even more so when he is slowly dying of TB...?
Correction: the ladder was not found leaning against the house; it was lying on the ground. The narrator even says 'it broke.' How is it that there was not a speck of dirt from the outside in the nursery? If someone had come into the room, there would have been some evidence. And, there was a very slim amount of time that the toddler could have been removed from the house - none of it makes sense. I've wondered if there was an accident and Lindbergh concocted the kidnapping to cover it up. He took over the investigation (big mistake), he wouldn't let the police use scent dogs, told them where they could and could not search. It's all very suspect. Bruno Hauptman was most certainly a scapegoat.
Allowing Lindbergh to be involved in the investigation is beyond bizarre.
Different time in history, completely different rules applied.
@@kitsunelee007 I doubt very much it was common practice to let the father of a missing child take charge of the investigation. I would have thought then, as now, the parents would be the first people they would look at.
@@tatata1543 That was odd that Lindbergh was personally involved but times were indeed different than now.
He paid the right people.
He was a larger than life hero and a first class narcissist. The authorities were all little weak men. We will never know what happened
The comments about Charles Lindbergh’s shame about his son’s imperfections hit home. I had an uncle I never knew, born in 1949 or so, who had Down’s Syndrome. He was put in an institution when he was 2 years old and his brother - my dad - never saw or heard of him again, and it haunted and saddened my dad his whole life.
That was very common at the time.
So sad because they are such loving people from what ive seen.
That little boy must've been heartbroken to be left there. 😢
That baby didn't have Down Syndrome!
Well you need only watch the available video to know the child has something… maybe autism?
He forced his wife to fly at high altitude. She got sick from lack of oxygen and it affected the baby.
Nobody jokes about hiding a baby.
It's not a joke if baby comes up missing in future then it's a dry run
It’s in terrible taste, and I never would, but people do joke about babies in peril. Just look up the many FB posts of babies in large cooking pots holding a spoon, as some kind of “joke.”
It’s awful, but I doubt any of theses people later cooked their kids.
And this was a time when people openly joked about domestic violence and thought drunk driving was humorous.
He left a baby in a closet for hours? That’s very odd.
My aunt actually went on a blind date with Lindberg - when he lived in St. Louis. One date - according to her - was more than enough. Said she had never met such a strange person. Strange, and not in a good way.
@@patriciaking7150Interesting.
@@patriciaking7150 Even if he didn't kill his son, he was NOT a good person. At all.
Odd is an understatement. What kind of father hides his baby in a closet and leaves it there for hours, and thinks it's all a huge joke?
Lindbergh finding the ransom note after the nursery was already searched, not going to the function he was expected at, insisting no one see the baby between 8- 10, not allowing the authorities at the money drop off or those with experience in the investigation, doing a dry run by hiding his baby for hours in a closet (who does that?). I didn't even know the child had developmental issues, nor of the other masty elements of his personality.
He was guilty 💯
Limberg ordered the baby body to be cremated and he even watched the cremation being done. Very suspicious.
The fact that he hid his child in a closet for hours as a practical joke tells a lot about Lindburg. That is a pretty sickening prank. He possibly did it in anticipation of the kidnapping/murder in order to buy more time.
Trial run?
@@glenncordova4027 Yeah sure, the 'trial run' that would have lead him straight to the Death Chamber. Doh.
@@bethryan9077 There was no death chamber for Lindbergh.
@@glenncordova4027 I was being sarcastic
Beth’s just trolling
Years ago i was a driver for a Senior Citizen program and i asked one of the passengers (who happened to be 100 years old) what was the one thing that affected her most in her life and she said the Linberg child abduction. This was such a big story and affected so many people...
You missed a couple of critical points. His cruelty toward his son was persistent. He would throw things at the child to make him fall. The child had special needs and had developmental delays. The photo they released to the press was of the child many many months before. Lindbergh was a serial womanizer and had children with at least 2 other women. He insisted the dog be kept out of the room that night - the only time he did. I've no doubt he was involved, possibly as ringleader. Hauptmann may not have even known about his involvement (assuming Hauptmann was involved at all). A Nazi sympathizer, Lindbergh was no hero
Even if it could be proved beyond doubt that what you have pieced together here in the way that you have is the truth, that doesn't mean that Lindbergh was responsible for his son's death. It seems strange that he would wait literally YEARS before getting Hauptmann framed. The story was old news. Why start it up again? Lindy could have found someone else to frame a lot sooner.
What kind of mother tolerates that kind of mistreatment of her child, a baby no less?
You know nothing of the Lindberghs. This post proves it.
That about covers it.
My paternal grandfather hated my father, the baby. My father had problems with his ears so my grandfather would box Papa" ears so they would bleed. My father was the kindest human being I ever have known.
All of the photos they used for the baby were over a year old, and it's said that something was medically wrong with the baby and as he got older it was more apparent. Lindbergh who was big on eugenics, was ashamed of the baby and his physical and mental conditions, was harsh towards the baby and wouldn't even hold him.
do they know for a fact there was something wrong with his son?
@@davidaltman8831 there's a letter from the little boys doctor to the grandma and I guess that there is quite a few statements from people around the family. It's really interesting and not too hard to find info on it. It just shows how secretive that kind of stuff was back then, more shameful
Yes.The child's developmental problems were most probably the result of Lindberg insisting that hie wife(I think she was in the third trimester)accompany him on a flight to the west coast.During the trip Ann suffered from altitude sickness and hypoxia which understandably affected the child's developing brain and nervous system.
@@docsmithdc This is just another conspiracy theory, not fact. Planes in 30's did fly at the altitudes that we fly at today, making the hypoxia theory moot. Otherwise no one would have flown on a plane anywhere and air travel was getting to be common by the 30's.
@@gusmonster59 However, they were on a 2 week tour and, important, they flew in an open cockpit. What wouldve been fine oxygen-wise for a grown man might not have been enough for a heavily pregnant woman and her baby. But, yes, its only speculation.
What is certain is, that the baby was on a special diet from birth, hinting that it was known from birth, that he suffered some medical condition. Also certain is, that he had a bigger than normal head and other symptoms of rickets, which became more and more obvious, as he grew older, hence why the rabid eugenicist LIndbergh had only very few photos taken of his son in situations and angles to downplay those malformations, and why he provided the police with a photo from his sons 1st birthday, over 10 months earlier, when his son disappeared, coz any newer photo wouldve exposed his "imperfect" son to the world. Providing a 10 month old photo for a 20 month old baby is ludicrous, there are huge differences in such a time.
All this is fact. Further speculation on Lindbergh's motives for providing the old photo, hiding his sons condition or whether he had anything to do with the babys death, that is just that - speculation. After the completely botched police investigation, which as mentioned Lindbergh was allowed to insert himself into and ran in an either completely insane amateur way or a deliberately obstructive way, and the many years passing by, we'll never know for sure.
On a sidenote, as a European Ive had more experience than wished for with Americans concerning European accents. Basically, Americans are so pisspoor at accents, that any European accent is considered German, coz thats what they know from the movies, unless its a really heavy French accent. Even we Scandinavians, when portrayed by Americans, are given a German accent, which is really hard on the ears. Granted, it might have been different b4 WWII, but still, the accents, Americans had experience with back then, were also German and French. And again, Americans tend to rank anything not obviously French as German.
So the thought of some old American doctor being able to correctly recognize an accent is extremely low. More likely, he heard an accent and, as Americans have for the many decades since and still do, assumed, it must be German. Even many Europeans able to discern several accents, as we're surrounded by them, have difficulty with some. So unless the doctor was a doctor of linguistics with a specialty in accents and their origins, I find the "German accent" determination utterly unreliable. It couldve been any of a couple of dozens European accents, that Americans still to this day consider and portray (no, not just in movies, from regular Americans too) as German, even tho they sound very different from each other for those of us living over here.
My mother who was alive at the time said everyone believed that Lindbergh did it and framed Haupman
What a bunch of dummies.
My Dad said the same thing: his parents were convinced if he didn't do it, he knew who did.
It's comforting to know that conspiracy theories were alive and well back then too.
I’ve never believed that Hauptmann was guilty.
I believe Dorothy Parker made some comment at the time to, that blatantly accused Lindhberg indeed did it! There was indeed much talk about the possibility of lindhngerg being the culprit. The problem was back then infanticide was such a taboo subject; heck even today it still is!
The public had no idea who the real Charles Lindbergh really was. He and his wife although they would have five more children, their marriage was difficult at best. He had at least three affairs that produced a total of six offspring.
... and a second family in Germany ....
@@marymitchell8625at least TWO families.
Bruno Hauptmann’s wife proclaimed her husband’s innocence for several decades until her own death😢
That is likely the case, but doesn’t show much, as if you asked Chris Watts or other clearly guilty people’s parents if thrydid it, they will also say he was innocent.
I have tremendous respect for Anna Hauptmann. When she was asked to lie to help her husband, she refused, simply because it was wrong. She did have a blind spot when it came to her husband, the evidence showing his guilt is persuasive. What will never be known is whether the baby died because of the broken ladder or if the kidnapper killed the baby deliberately.
There's a lot more to this story that wasn't shared in this video. I used to collect Lindbergh memorabilia, but years ago when the whole story came out, I got rid of it. Today I don't want to have anything of him in my house.
Could you give a couple of examples of what was not told in this video? Thanks in advance
@@ronratcliffe2219 agreed he likely did the kidnapping himself he had quiet n ego and his beliefs about superior race plus he was not very supportive of his American wife either.
Are you kidding me? The Lindberghs were terrorized by communist Bolshevik jews and had their baby kidnapped and murdered for his political views . It’s quite sad For someone like you who was an admirer -to swallow such a disgusting evil and overtly fake narrative hook line and sinker you should be ashamed
Charles Lindbergh was an American hero who found himself persona non grata and then targeted by a very powerful force who was in the process of taking control of the entire western world and beyond via fractional reserve “banking” and unscrupulous media Hollywood types who were mastering blackmail extortion and bribery to wield unrelenting power in the government’s of our countries
Ridiculous propaganda
I think Lindbergh did it himself. His behavior that evening was odd and out of character. He had also previously taken the boy from his crib and hidden him, telling the nurse and Anne that someone had "stolen our baby." The window sill of the window through which the boy had supposedly been taken was neither wet nor muddy. The ransom note was not found until AFTER the house had been searched; no one had seen it during the initial searching of the nursery. Lindbergh had been seen earlier in the evening with a ladder in his car. He then inserted himself into the investigation and even into the prosecution.
Lindbergh was a staunch believer in eugenics -- to the point of supporting Hitler. Charles, Jr. had multiple physical issues that kept him from walking normally, and may have caused intellectual damage. The boy's head was abnormally large, and his legs showed symptoms of rickets. He had been kept out of the public eye, and had not been photographed for months at the time of his death. Lindbergh's obsession with eugenics ultimately lead him to father several children in Germany with five different women, two of whom were sisters.
If the kidnapping was not an inside job, it seems too bizarre and complicated for one semi-literate man to have carried out alone.
LMAO.
Yep I totally believe that
@@Linda-pw8gx Yep, you people are off your heads.
@@bethryan9077 he was a major ass
Sacrifice of first born is required to become a 33 Degree Mason. GHW BUSH did the same with his first born REBECCA to become a 33 Degree Mason.
How could he be put "in charge" of investigating his own son's abduction? Why would the authorities allow such an absurd request to be honored? The buck should stop with law enforcement not the victim's father. This alone casts doubt on everything.
He was a control freak
He was a "celebrity" and national hero. Look at the all the celebrity cover-ups and breathless reporting of every "celebrity's" idiotic opinion the entertainment media does in the 3rd decade of the 21st century.
He was idolized by the public at the time. They had a tickertape parade for him in NYC. He could do no wrong.
@@carlaschultheis3662 because he was “Lindbergh the celebrity “ and possible baby killer
...and threatened to KILL law enforcement officers🤨
Bizarre
I watched another documentary that focused on Lindbert's obsession with genetics. He was worried that his son was slow in both mental and physical development. After all of his children were grown, he moved to Hawaii and left Anne in their home on the continent.
He's buried in Hana, on Maui.
LINDBERGH WAS A MONSTER.
@@unowen9668 I remember reading an article in "People" magazine about a man who claimed to be Jr.. Since a substantial number of people believed that Jr. was not dead, it is possible. His claim was that he was offered for adoption as a toddler. He looked similar and was believed to have been born at the same time. He also had some unique foot characteristics as well. At that point, none of the Lindberg family knew about the other sets of children in Europe, so they totally disavowed him. The guy's claim turn out to be true. New Jersey would not even have to pay restitution on that either.
@@barbaraiverson2035 Lindbergh had a number of children with other women. Funny that now, it would be a simple paternity test
I have always believed that Charles Lindberg had a hand in it
Ridiculous. Authors put out books to Make Money & say Whatever. These docs, do the Same for the Same reason.
The more I've read on the case, I have to agree he was involved with what happened.
I agree.
@@MSinistrari As if Lindbergh would set up an elaborate kidnapping plot, With others, to get rid of his little son, there a myriad of ways he could have done that & no hassles at all. You kids need to stick to the one hour made up TV shows that tell ya the ending, True crime is Way over your heads.
There was a PBS documentary about the case. Very reputable documentary makers. They said Hauptman most likely dropped the baby while coming down the ladder, thus fracturing his skull. Lindberg was a terrible person. In it up to his neck.
I think his “hiding the baby” was him testing to see how long he could go unnoticed
I've read that the child had terrible trouble walking, & fell often. And that his father used to sit on the sofa watching, & pelting him with accent cushions, knocking him down, while laughing at him. If true, heartbreaking. 💔
He wasn’t known for being a loving, involved parent.
@@pamelasimone5084 DIDN'T STOP HIM FROM MAKING BABIES WITH OTHER WOMEN, EITHER. HE WAS A MISOGYNISTIC, RACIST PIG.
Yes, believe that Will Rogers was at least one of the people that told about the pillow thing. He did it so often that the boy would just plop down on the floor when he saw his "father" pick up a pillow.
@@Joanla1954
Really tragic. A far cry from committing murder, but still makes it easier to believe him capable of it. 😔
I heard the same thing
I'm a grandma now and i can still hear my mothers words ... Charles is the one that did it 💯
Or maybe the dingo took the baby
One story is that Lindbergh INTENTIONALLY killed his son because he hated that his son had problems with his little legs and struggled to learn to walk, compared to other babies they knew of. In the eyes of Lindbergh, his son didn’t fit the “image” of a “superior, Arian” child due to some physical issues, and it was a source of shame and even anger on Lindbergh’s part. An actor in Hollywood who befriended the Lindberghs, would say that when he visited the couple, the baby would struggle to walk across the living room and when he tried, Charles would kick him down with his foot, repeatedly! The hateful father, Charles, was an arrogant bully who was ashamed of his own child!! 😢 Lindbergh is no “hero!”
Lindbergh was not a pleasant individual, that much is known.
@@johnr7279 The police investigators eventually admitted years later that there was actually MORE evidence linking Lindbergh to his own child’s murder than the man who was convicted! At the time of the crime, no one wanted to investigate an “American hero.” Lindbergh took full advantage of that, and became very “involved” in the investigation. Gee, I wonder why…….
@@johnr7279 I think the child died by accident while he had the boy & he covered it up by scape goating the German immigrant.
@@susanfabian1521 maybe but certainly a lot of trouble to go to for the sake of appearances. This is certainly one of the most contentious unresolved criminal cases of all time!
I had read the same thing, that the child was deemed "slow." Charles had a real problem with this evidently. Also, who hides a baby in a closet for hours? Good lord!
@1:40 Lindberg is not famous for making the first non-stop flight from New York City to Paris. He is famous for the first non-stop SOLO flight across the Atlantic.
That was the very same flight!
@@AndyMangele - Yes it is, but the aspect that is famous was that was a solo trans Atlantic flight, not the exact start/end points.
@@spacecadet35 Okay - I see your point!
actually it was the first non stop flight, yeah there had been at least one other flight across the atlantic but his was the first non-stop.
@@davidaltman8831 - Actually, Linderg was about the135th person to do a non-stop flight across the Atlantic. Alcock and Brown did the first nonstop flight in 1919, 8 years before Lindberg's flight. But Lindberg did it solo.
My mom remembered the story very well about the Lindbergh baby. The baby wasn't the perfect child like his father wanted and he was embarrassed. My mom said it had been reported the baby had mental and physical disabilities. As my mom said: "everyone knew Lindbergh had the child kidnapped and murdered because he couldn't except the fact the little boy had problems." Another crime where the elite gets by with murder.
I'm glad that people around at the time knew what's what.
He was a notsee eugen icist so having a disabled child reflected negatively on him by his own belief system and in the eyes of his own chosen community
Í agree 👍💯
No offense but it doesn't really seem like your mom's memory about a rumor claiming the child had issues and wasn't "perfect" and that he was "embarrassed" about these things should really be something you or anyone else should use to determine whether somebody murdered their child!! I've read letters and I've read transcripts taken from interviews at the actual time this happened when people's memories still aren't perfect but are better than "remembering a story very well" it's still so amazing to me how little evidence of guilt people need to start a public mob type lynching of someone's character! Shameful honestly!
@@no_peaceThe baby wasn't disabled what the hell are you talking about!?
That hiding the baby thing is bizarre and a new one to me. He could've because he was a major ass.
What I have read about Lindberg I fully believe he was quite capable of murdering his physically imperfect son.
That is just Ridiculous & the fact that he & his Same wife went on to have more children, just shows that he wasn't worried about other 'faults'. The child had rickets, big deal.
@@bethryan9077 he was into eugenics.
Ricketts is not a genetic or inheritable condition. It's the result of a nutritional deficiency, and can be treated. It's not likely it was the cause of anyone wanting to get rid of him. It's more likely an accident resulted in the baby's death and the kidnapping was a cover-up. The nursemaid may have been the one responsible, or even the father or mother.
@@pookiesis1465 And, so What? Loads of U.S. citizens were interested in that. So according to Your brain cells, all who were interested in eugenics, murder their kids if they have some imperfection. Grow Up.
@@bethryan9077 it’s not Ridiculous! He was an awful person, praised Hitler. Hitler gave him the service cross of the German eagle! He had a whole other family in Germany, wife and kids.
After reading the comments I am reminded of Where's Molly, about a brother's search for his sister. The "different" children that were supposed to just be forgotten. Well done on this.
Anne Marrow Lindbergh was an introverted soul. Her husband was dominant, abusive. He took credit for much of her aviation accomplishments. Her writings are eye opening to how unhappy her life and marriage were. If you have never read her books, I encourage you to.
Went to Wikipedia, she wrote too many books. Have a particular one to recommend? Or at least to start with?
@@nathalie_desrosiers start with Gift from the Sea...it is just a beautiful book! It is how she healed after losing her son. I would also suggest a book called "The Aviator's Wife" by Melanie Benjamin. This book is so well written and I came away with such an affection for Anne Morrow Lindbergh!
He had several families children in Europe.
Thank you.
There is a great book about Lindbergh’s involvement in Nazism and his son’s death. Very believable, unfortunately
Really? Then how did Hauptman and/or Fisch get a big chunk of the ransom $$???
Yup. Baby was not perfect.his highness did not like that,but they killed the prisoner anyway.makes one wonder.
@@virgilstarkwell8383
Maybe Hauptmann was telling the truth about Isidor Fisch leaving the box with the ransom money in it in his care. Hauptmann said he didn't open the box and find the money in it until a rain shower caused a leak in his closet where he kept the box, that he immediately took the box out to keep it from getting wet. It was then, he said, that he found the cash in the box. Since this was after finding out about Fisch's death in Germany, Hauptmann believed that he was entitled to keep the cash since Fisch had owed him some money.
Unfortunately, everyone was so convinced that Hauptmann was guilty, that his story about Isidor Fisch was never taken seriously during the trial, and the press made fun of it, calling it "the Fischy (fishy) story." However, there was never any evidence of Hauptmann spending any of the ransom money BEFORE the death of Isidor Fisch, except for the testimony of a ticket girl at a movie theater near Greenwich Village in New York City who claimed that a man resembling Hauptmann had paid for a movie ticket with a bill that was identified as a part of the ransom money. This supposedly occurred before the time that Hauptmann said he received the box with the money from Isidor Fisch. But several of Hauptmann's friends and relatives testified that he couldn't have been at that theater, because he was with them at his home -- CELEBRATING HIS BIRTHDAY! But, for some reason, the jury ignored their testimony, preferring to listen to the ticket girl, who may have either been mistaken or lying.
If her testimony was false, then there's still no proof that Hauptmann had spent any of the ransom money before Fisch's death, but this fact too was ignored by the jury.
There was also another fact that was never mentioned at the trial and was hardly ever investigated by the authorities. Isidor Fisch was a rather mysterious man who allegedly had connections with the underworld. Organized Crime had been suspected of involvement in the kidnapping right from the very beginning. Ironically, one of the many people who offered their help in searching for the baby was the notorious Chicago racketeer, Al Capone.
Speaking of the underworld, Colonel Lindbergh had the first ransom note circulated among known gangsters, hoping to get their help in finding his missing son. This could have given professional con artists a chance to copy the handwriting in the note and to forge some of the other ransom notes, most of which were used as evidence against Bruno Richard Hauptmann during the trial. Could he have been falsely convicted and executed because of phony ransom letters that had nothing to do with the case?
Can you tell the name of this book,please!
Yes, Lindbergh was proNazi . He would go to Germany's "Lebensborn" and impregnate German women. He spoke German. He was not a nice person. The book was called," Suspect No.1 by Lise Pearlmann."
"persistent theories of his innocence persist" 🤔
I saw that as well.
Redundancy is redundant.
I also posted this same comment as well too in addition to yours!
AI script
Lindbergh saw his children for only a few months a year. He kept track of each child's infractions (including such things as gum-chewing) and insisted that Anne track every penny of household expenses in account books
HE WAS AN EVIL, CONTROLLING BASTARD.
A real bastard in fact. No hero. I wonder if she ever wrote a biography of their married life. I doubt it.
Not unusual for a USA citizen of the Cavalier tribe. Standard behavior.
The more I read/hear about this man, the more he disgusts me.
I would have left that guy so fast!
This whole case screams inside job. I think Lindbergh was trying to pull another vicious prank & he dropped his son, whom he disliked because he wasn't "perfect". He didn't bank on his son being found so soon. Hauptman was framed.
I agree Hauptman was framed for the kidnapping, although he was likely part of the extortion of the ransom money. The remains which Lindbergh identified as his son did not turn up for several months after the crime, however.
@@lizbrown7232 I forgot about that. I still dislike Lindbergh intensely.
I always thought it was bizarre for the kidnapper to put the ladder under exactly the right window. It was a big house. What was the chances?
I truly believe it was a tale of abuse, neglect and murder of their own child. Most people don't realize that Charles treated the baby with disdain. The child had birth defects that Charles could never deal with and accept.
Let's just ignore the fact that Hauptmann was in possession of the ransom money. Shameful slanderous sheit.
@@abrahamedelstein4806 years ago, I did an in depth college paper of the Lindbergh trial.
It's not widely known that the trial had to be postponed several times due to the healing of Hauptmann's wounds from the beatings he endured while trying to get a confession.
The fact also that falsification of employment records and searches of Hauptmann's home weeks after the original search that turns up magical evidence, and finally, the star prosecuting witnesses had a mental breakdown and confessed to fabricating the "Gang" story but, was said to be a trustworthy man.
Yes, Hauptmann was killed as an innocent man.
How could his mother allow that?
@@elizabethbogle3533 , I believe that his wife Anne, was terrified of Charles and would follow his lead. She could have been a battered wife and traumatized.
What is truly crazy is, the nanny, a young woman, took her own life just weeks after the supposed crime. I believe she was about to spill her guts about the family life.
@@johnberryhill8106Hauptmann confessed to having gotten the ransom money from Fisch, who most likely did it, my problem is the slander of Lindbergh that you're engaged in.
Scotland Yard top inspector confidentially told J.Edgar Hoover that already they were discovering that the parents were often the first and prime suspects. Lindbergh took charge of the investigation himself and would not let the FBI in.
J. Edgar Hoover, the transvestite.
@@Goodkidjr43 No evidence beyond the word of a Mafioso supports that.
Yeah but how much experience did the FBI have with kidnaps at that time recalling that kidnap was NOT a federal crime until after the Lindbergh baby.
@@virgilstarkwell8383 True but the 'Yard' had already noticed the first suspects in such murders were the parents. Kidnapping was just an easy distraction.
Typical.that bafoon caused so much pain in people's lives for decades. There's that pedestal again.
Very well told story, but what a horribly sad ending. I had previously heard bits and pieces of this in the past, but if it was Charles senior, oh god, I can't even imagine that. How awful. All I can add, is my heart aches for that sweet, little baby boy.
My mother lived nearby and said the whole case was convoluted. It was a set up. Everything was poorly handled.
Firelight from 1997.
The problem is the guy who got the ransom isn't always the guy who took the baby. Sometimes it's just a scammer.
If Lindy had wanted to get rid of his "imperfect" child he could have smothered it in the crib & no questions would have been followed up due to his celebrity. It makes no sense at all to go through these complex backflips if a well known person in the early 20th century wanted to get rid of such a small child.
You make an excellent point. If it was Charles why not smother him in his bed and claim crib death.
I heard a theory that the original plan was to ‘kidnap’ Junior and after he was recovered use the kidnapping as an excuse to hide him away; permanently.
This was the era of "we have a child in a facility we don't talk about". The kid could have hung out with the Kennedy daughter.
I don't understand why people assume Lindbergh did it considering all the evidence that someone went to the trouble of building a ladder and then played games with the cops and Condon for weeks. Let's say Lindbergh planned an elaborate prank with the ladder and the kid dies, the suggestion would be that his next step was to create an elaborate symbol for the ransom note that he needs to plant. I could go on about how unlikely the rest of the story gets if you demand Lindbergh was responsible.
Lindbergh was loved and hated like almost no one before him, often by the same people. It's as if Kim Kardashian had a kid stolen, people would be convinced of her guilt without an iota of evidence just because of how they feel about her. Lindbergh was not a monster but he definitely wasn't a normal person either. His actions with the German American Bund only further drew people's ire and I think rational review of this incident is very rare.
A really sensible observation. Too many people have put two and two together and got 137
@@kalifogg6610That makes a lot of sense
I've heard this theory from other people as well. In those, there was also discussion of his involvement in eugenics along with his many illegitimate children he had with 2 German women.
Yeah there's a lot behind that part of it!
The little child Charlie junior had ricketts And for eugenics that's a non perfect child
@@kattsforeveryone he had more than ricketts wrong with him. he had an oversize head and balance problems
He was heavily into eugenics and if there was anything too wrong with the baby (who was old enough to show problems) he well could have killed the child himself. He was also a closet supporter of Adolf Hitler. My Mom and her parents told me of the suspicious (Mom was just out of High School when it happened.)
@@dinacap2660 Look at the photos - his head is a normal size, and all toddlers have balance problems. It's called learning to walk.
Hauptman was at the very least, involved and got a third of the money. He also had been arrested in Germany for doing the same thing. That is completely obvious and indisputable. It is also fair to say that Lindbergh probably had a hand in it himself. He perjured himself multiple times, and even being there that night was completely out of touch with Lindbergh's habits, and anyone there would have had no idea Lindbergh was there. He had a love of eugenics, and probably had the child killed because he was sickly and poorly.
i think he meant to have the child anonomously put in an institution but he was accidently dropped and fatally injured while being removed from the house
@Dina Cap Hey, that fits the facts. Bravo. That's a fair point. The only problem I have with it is that if you look at the skull fracture, it is EXACTLY like someone hit him in the head, behind the ear, with a hammer, almost like I used to see old time tough guys like my dad put animals down with a coup-de-gras. So, MAYBE he hit his head and then they just took a hammer and whacked him to end his suffering. But I'm not sure.
@@Mr.MikeBarksdale Yeah, I agree, the hit on the head is not in a place, u could expect from a fall. Its not impossible, but its much more likely, it was done on purpose.
@@dinacap2660good point
The child also had a Club Foot which was not in keeping with a perfect race.
I vividly remember my grandpa telling me about this story (it was headline news when he was a kid) and even HE gave the side eye and always told me he thought the family covered it up. He thought it was an accident though.
The story my grandma told was that Linbergh was into eugentics (ie the pure white race) and that his son, baby here, was what was told as "metally unfit" or "r-t@rded" which was against the eugenics belief
Yeah, eugenics isnt just about "pure white race", its about the "perfect human". Any imperfections are intolerable to eugenicists.
The Nazis "Aryan race" was actually inspired by US eugenicists and co-opted to make Germans the perfect humans.
Right, yet he had More kids with the Same wife. Doh.
He had 2 secret families with German women. He wanted to preserve his superior seed.
13:03
“Persistent theories of his innocence persist.”
What a great sentence. Let me give you some more:
- barking dogs bark
- this leaking faucet leaks
- the broken vending machine is out of order
I noticed that right away.... Or should I put it, that attention grabbing error grabbed my attention.
My brain flexed as well when I heard that sentence. Score another win for The Department of Redundancy Department.
WHO-T-F hides a baby ''in a closet for hours'' as a practical joke?????
Well, all I can say is that the sheer brazenness of this atrocity stupefies me. What's alarming is the fact that the kidnapping happened so quickly and silently and with such ease. And the ladder--enormously risky. And what's up with simply dumping the baby's body? No attempt to bury or hide. Such a crude crime. Whoever did the actual physical abducting did it in an almost laughably unprofessional way and obviously panicked. And how did that individual know where to place the ladder? It seems to me that if it weren't an inside job, hurriedly put together, it would have been accomplished much more skillfully and the baby could have lived. Finally, how could Anne Morrow Lindbergh NOT have known of or at least strongly suspected her husband's treachery? Of course, violent crimes against children never make any sense to begin with.
Hauptmann did it, without any reasonable doubt. The forensic wood evidence in this case is compelling. He had possession of the ransom money. The letter writer was a German speaker, like Hauptmann. His cover story was ludicrous. Hauptmann built the ladder and ineptly kidnapped and killed the baby and then panicked. He may or may not have had an accomplice, but he definitely did it. No need for the diplomatic “whoever did it.”
I think Lindbergh was responsible. The admission to the crime would have saved the guy from the death penalty, and he wouldn't do it, plus he did head the investigation, turning down the FBI assistance but accepting help from criminals. There is no reason why the ladder that was made by him could not have been taken and used to throw suspicion away from Lindbergh as well
Well, His wife Anne had no clue about his second family in Germany so it is quite plausible that he had her hoodwinked, also he had "hidden" the baby from her before and played it off as a " joke" , so possible. Personally I think Hauptman was involved ,(Norman Schwarzkopf said that when his father died he read all his dads notes on the case and agreed with the verdict).
Both the Lindberghs were involved. No doubt it would have been easier to blame someone else rather than acknowledge that their baby was not 'normal' and had to be 'eliminated'
@@kcbarbo78
Don't be so certain about Hauptmann being guilty. It's a well-known fact that some of the evidence was fake or had been tampered with, that some of the witnesses lied or embellished their testimony, that evidence that might have cleared Hauptmann was never brought up at the trial or was hidden, and that the ransom money may have originally been in the hands of Hauptmann's friend, Isidor Fisch, who was suspected of having connections with Organized Crime (many people thought the mob may have kidnapped the baby).
Even if Hauptmann was involved in this crime, there's a possibility that he didn't act alone, that he either had accomplices or he WAS an accomplice to someone else.
Right from the start, many people, especially Colonel Norman Schwarzkopf, head of the New Jersey State Police, believed that the kidnapping was an inside job, and there's evidence that suggests this.
If the kidnapper had placed the ladder directly beneath the window of the baby's room, he must have had inside information, and had known exactly where the baby was at the time. But no one knew that except the Lindberghs and their servants. They also knew that the Lindberghs were originally planning to leave the estate that night, but they changed their minds because the baby had caught a cold.
Hauptmann knew nothing about all this, because he had never been to the Lindbergh estate before, nor did he have access to the building, or ever met the Lindberghs in person. There's no way he could have known which room was the child's nursery.
A few people connected with the case believed that Hauptmann had not acted alone. Colonel Lindbergh's wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, once said that "Hauptmann may have been guilty, but he was not the only one." A year after Hauptmann's execution, Dr. John Condon, the "go-between" who delivered the ransom money to the mysterious "Cemetery John," wrote an article for "Liberty" magazine entitled "Did Hauptmann Have Accomplices?"
As I pointed out before, New Jersey State Police Colonel Schwarzkopf believed that the crime was an inside job, that others were involved. Yet, after Hauptmann was convicted and sentenced to death, Schwarzkopf announced that he was abandoning the hunt for any possible accomplices or accessories in the kidnapping. That makes no sense at all! Why would he insist on the existence of a conspiracy to abduct the child, and then change his mind without explanation?
Maybe he figured that since the law had already convicted at least one person of the "Crime of the Century," and sentenced him to death in the electric chair, then the public was satisfied that justice was done, and that looking for others involved would mean the investigation would have to start all over again, and the public couldn't stand it. So, they just focused on evidence pointing to Bruno Richard Hauptmann as the sole kidnapper, the sole extortionist, and the sole murderer.
One could liken it to the way the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was investigated, whereby the police and the Warren Commission only examined evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin, and ignored any facts that even remotely suggested a larger conspiracy.
I think they dropped him coming out of the house on the ladder. I dont think it was intentional but an accident. I think they still went thru with the ransom plan, but the child was dead early on.
Probably
I agree
Evie I think you are correct.
Occam's Razor?
Agreed
You forgot to mention how the outdoor part of the crime scene was basically contaminated by reporters, friends, etc. (Plus Grampa Simpson once claimed he was the Lindbergh baby 😂)
I think Lindbergh was responsible for the death of his own son. The baby was born with a bit of a defect & I think that Lindbergh was embarrassed, as he fashioned himself after Hitler's idea of a perfect Aryan. He couldn't stand the imperfections. The guy who was charged with the murder was innocent. The fact that he paid for a horrific crime that he didn't commit still bothers me.
Hauptman may have been involved in a money-laundering or extortion scheme but innocent of the kidnapping. Lindbergh let many people see the code on the bottom of the ransom note. Some people may have duplicated the code to get money out of Lindbergh. It is possible that Lindbergh wanted to have his son institutionalized but could not get his wife to agree to such a plan. He may have used the "kidnap" ruse to have the child removed from his home. The child's death may have been an accident. The body was found in an area that had already been searched.
⚡⚡⚡⚡🗣️⚡⚡⚡⚡
"Owwwwww!"
Let's see, the executed killer suddenly had thousands of dollars, a new car, a new radio, constantly losing at the stock market all on a waitress and laborer pay. He had a history of second story burglary and violence. He had the number of the negotiator written on his wall. A car just like his was seen the night of the kidnapping near the Hopewell Lindbergh House. The ladder was fixed with wood from his attic. The remaining money was found in his house. Yeah, right, that screams innocent. smh only morons think Hauptmann innocent.
Ye, the evidence against Hauptmann is overwhelming, which makes Lindburgh's shortcomings as a human being irrelevant.
How would a stranger know where the boys room was in a large house they lived in
I believe at one point the baby's nurse was under suspicion
Always,be careful whom u put on a pedestal!
Every single person, with the exception of the God- man, the Lord Jesus Christ, is flawed. Only God is to be worshipped.
Who all were involved will probably never be known, but there was definitely more than one person involved. I think the baby was killed when the rung on the ladder broke and the baby was dropped. After the body was found it was determined that he died from a blow to the head consistent with the drop from the ladder. There are so many rumors and theories about this case that there are hundreds of books pushing dozens of theories.
Very good theory.
He had a hole in his skull not consistent with falling/accident
Lindbergh was good friends with a med Dr experimenting in eugenics here in usa.
See how short, concise and non-dramatic this random note is? Unlike the Ramsey's 3 page bs that read like a (bad) Hollywood prop.
For a Start, there were 12 ransom notes in total. If you do some research, you will find that many aspects of the Ramsey case, are related to this one. The perps did their homework & not only about the Ramseys, but neighbours & friends. They also did their homework about many famous kidnapping & murder cases as is Evidenced about a whole lot of aspects that they carried out within the house & some aspects within the note itself. As vile sociopaths, they not only thought they were very clever, but also very amusing. The Ramseys were Proven Innocent a Long time ago.
I found it hard to believe that Bruno was "an innocent man", too much evidence pointing figures at him.
Anne Morrow was the daughter of J P Morgan and Dwight Morrow? I think someone got the Anne's crossed.
😂
Dwight was a partner with JP Morgan & Co. 1914
The thing is the narrator used the word "partner" in the correct manner, as in business partner lol It's so annoying to hear the word being used in any other manner today 😆
@@karlepaul6632Language is not static. It’s fluid, and definitions change. Has happened for millennia
Such a sad story. That poor little angel. Linbergh knows something, he surely was behind it. RIP little one.
Youre judge,jury and executioner. You must know absolutely everything.i will pray 4 u.
I watched one RUclips video and now I'm an expert 😂
Revelation 21:3,4
John 5:28
Isaiah 35:5,6
@@ashleyglisson4046😆😆😆
My dad was investigated.they thought the maid switched the babies and the lindbergh baby was taken and raised by another family. The maid committed suicide when they came to question her
Are you saying that Anne Morrow Lindbergh's maid committed suicide?
This is a little mixed up. Betty Gow was the Lindbergh's nursemaid. The maid who committed suicide was Violet Sharp, who worked for Anne Lindbergh's family.
Ive never thought much of CL as far as being a hero is concerned. Even less so when I learned of his shortcomings and treatment of his son. I have no doubt that he was the ring leader of his sons kidnapping and murder.
I am completely shocked. I’ve never even heard of a suspicion that Charles Lindbergh had killed his own son. Never. I’m a true crime buff and I’ve always thought Bruno was framed or at the least, not alone in the crime. It has never crossed my mind that his father killed him. I’ve never even heard of his cruelty to his child, womanizing yes, I’ve heard that, but not the other. I wish my mother was still alive so we could discuss it. I’m blown away and now a lot of pieces fall more into place.
And the video doesn't even mention his double life in Europe, and only hints at his supremacist leanings. He was a terrible and cruel person, fully aware that his popularity afforded him leeway.
@@nanabutner Wrong…I’ve met Charles Lindbergh, have you? He was kind and loving.
John 5:28
Revelation 21:3 4
Isaiah 35:5,6
🙏🏽🕊♥️
@@nanabutner😮😢
Hauptman kept a journal of his spending. Accountants for the court traced almost all of the $50,000. He hadn't had a job since the day the ransom was delivered. He lost a lot of the ransom money in the stock market in 1932. He spent $400 on a radio. He paid for the wife to go to Germany and see if he would be arrested if he returned. He paid two years of rent. The one thing that he shouldn't have done was spend the ransom bills while he was in the car that he bought without a job. The license plate and the change in the currency by FDR were his undoing.
I believe he was framed by Lindbergh!
@@dalemmmm Was he framed by the two women that he held and robbed at gunpoint in Germany?
Was he framed by the mayor of the town in Germany that he robbed when he came thru the 2nd story window?
Was he framed by the court's accountants that traced his spending of the ransom money?
Exactly! The marked ransom money was found in his possession! Hauptmann was definitely involved.
@@SusanMarie3 I think he was the only one involved. Most people would have the common sense to avoid the kidnapping of the most famous baby in the world. There was a guy -from New Jersey that had begun a cross-country trip shortly before the kidnapping and he said that he was stopped countless times after the kidnapping while on his trip. He said the only reason appeared to be that his license showed he was from N.J.
It was too small amount of ransom, even in 1932, for the risk involved in kidnapping such a high profile baby to split among multiple people. Hauptmann kept a meticulous record of his spending and the court's accountants were able to trace most of the spending to within a couple thousand of $50,000.
A N.Y. psychiatrist that profiled the ransom notes, predicted the kidnapper would be one man, German, and living in the Bronx. Scotland Yard predicted that the initials of the kidnapper would be BRH. Look at the sign on the ransom notes.
It seems obvious that Hauptman had a third of the ransom money in his house so without doubt Hauptman was involved but the other two got away with it.
It’s odd asking for a random for a child that is already dead. That’s what happened in the Ramsey case. That makes me think that a family member was involved and covering up for what they did.
The Ramseys were Proven Innocent a Long time ago with a mountain of Actual evidence & by a bunch of Actual experts under the umbrella of Law Enforcement, including, expert Seasoned investigators, expert Crime Scene techs & expert DNA & forensic Scientists.
As in relation to This case, you kids have Zero logical thought processes & clearly, True crime is Way over your heads. Why would Lindbergh set up an elaborate kidnap plot just to get rid of his child? There are Many ways to carry out such a heinous deed & Nobody left hanging around who would Blab.. Jeez.
I feel pity for all those who believe everything you read from the books full of False & misleading information that are put out for One reason, Money & so, onto all the utube 'shows'.
I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE SAMETHING ABOUT JON BENET. EITHER THE FATHER OR BROTHER KILLED HER. BROKE MY HEART.
@@valerieneal2747 This is part of the problem for all those like Yourself - you don't know Anything about the crime, the case Or about what was Actually perpetrated upon this poor child. Nor do you Care to Find Out, what Really happened to JonBenet Ramsey because y’all too busy bangin on with a load of Garbage about every member of JonBenet’s family instead & all because you watch TV shows & pick out whatever suits your hateful agenda & repeat that as if all true. There most certainly are plenty of posters who have Intelligence, common sense & logical thought processes, who can work out sensible scenarios of what may have happened But, few dare to venture onto these hate-filled pages. . The Ramseys were officially & publicly Exonerated with an Abundance of Real evidence. Just because You Don’t Know about that evidence, does Not Mean that it doesn’t exist. All those under the umbrella of Law Enforcement - Did deal with Case Evidence, law enforcement including - expert Seasoned investigators, forensic DNA Scientists & expert Crime Scene techs. That Case Evidence included - the autopsy photos, the X-ray photo of the skull, the Authentic autopsy report, hundreds of crime scene photos, cops’ walk-thru videos, police reports, affidavits, depositions, evidence lists, witness statements, videos & Full transcripts of John & Patsy’s police interviews of ’97, ’98 & 2000, other recorded interviews, over 200 evidence items, forensic items, the full layout of the Whole 7,000 sq ft mansion - being all 4 storeys & also, what was Out of Place & what was Missing. All is in Evidence & a great deal is online for all to source. Until this case is brought to trial for criminal proceedings, the general public will Never get to know the True Facts about this case, nor the ins & outs or the bits & pieces that, Make Up the Puzzle. Unless you start some Actual Research online, but that takes a whole lot of hard slog & one needs some experience just to tell the difference between a fake document & an Authentic one. Reddit for example & the proliferation of videos on YT are Still full of False & Misleading information whether old TV programmes or new Utube 'shows' & both put Fake pages on the screen As If from police files, including Fake writing ‘samples’ & Fake individual ‘letter’ samples as if Patsy did that too. Producers through the years have always edited their programmes to suit Their agendas & flash photos & pages on the screen in the middle of whatever dialogue, whether these were the Ramseys TV interviews or parts of their police interviews. All of the Same misleading & False information that’s been going around for 26 years & counting. You people need to wake up to yourselves. Obviously too many in the public domain believe all that they read in trashy magazines as well & whatever is on the back of your cereal boxes. As long as it’s Against this fine upstanding family, Anything goes & it all must be true. * BTW - who would WRITE a ransom note & on their Own notepad & use their Own marker & then put both of those items near the phone For The COPS? There is something seriously very Wrong with all those who believe Patsy did That!. Why would she say the note was found on the Back Staircase for Heaven’s Sake? One would have said it was found on the child’s Pillow! And woops the body is still in the house. Why write a 3 Page ridiculous note anyway? One would stage a break in & call the cops. SIMPLE. I pity all those who can’t even figure out the Basics of this heinous crime, which was In Fact very, Very well Planned. Way too many so-called ‘experts’ & so-called ‘authors’ jumped on the bandwagon to find their version of fame & to make Money from this high profile crime & they Keep At It because of - all those who are naïve, ignorant, highly gullible, hateful, brainwashed & cruel. Then there’s all those who are just plain Stupid. There’s such an abundance of Ramsey bashers, the never-ending ‘shows’ full of the same old BS will, never end. One would say - feeding the beast.
Yes, except it's not odd at all. It's pretty common.
@@joeybrazil2024 Oh really, name the cases where 'it's pretty common'.
Bruno was offered 1$million and no execution for a confession. A million dollars at height of great depression. He didn't do it.
Who offered him $1 million???
A lot of things have never properly added up on this case, at least for me.
Even assuming Hauptmann was guilty, things still don't add up. Like just how did Hauptmann pull off the kidnapping all by himself without being detected?
Lindbergh accidentally killed the baby and got Hauptmann to help him. Something tells me that Hauptmann had no idea what he was getting into and was surprised that Lindbergh left him to take the fall. Considering how Lindbergh was able to cover his tracks for decades, leads me to believe that he knew how to play people.
He certainly played the police. So brazen. What a creep.
Would he also be a malignant narcissist besides a psychopathic murderer???
Then why didn't Hauptmann rat him out to try to save his own life? That makes no sense to me. When your life is on the line, you don't owe anybody anything.
@@margaretcastell9429- Absolutely. He was all of those things.
@@TheAzmountaineer- Hauptmann wasn’t involved. His friend Isidor Fisch was. Fisch had the ransom money. He just left it at Hauptmann’s house because Fisch was going to visit Germany and wasn’t taking the money with him. If Fisch hadn’t died in Germany he would’ve come and retrieved the money from Hauptmann when he returned. Hauptmann didn’t even know what was in the boxes. He only opened them a while after Fisch died. He asked Fisch’s family if he could open and keep whatever was in the boxes. They said yes.
So Hauptmann couldn’t rat anybody out. He wasn’t in on it and knew nothing about it.
The governor of New Jersey offered Hauptmann a deal. If Hauptmann would confess the governor would waive the death penalty and Hauptmann would have a life sentence. You’d think that anyone who was guilty and even some who weren’t would jump at that offer. Hauptmann said no, that he wasn’t going to confess to something he didn’t do.
Why did the police wait 3-4 yrs to arrest Hauptmann if he wasn't involved? Why waste all that time and money? Quickly find a career criminal, find him guilty. No one is the wiser if Lindbergh killed his kid. This Theory about Lindbergh killing his kid, weird as Lindbergh was, he was not a killer.
That child looks fine, the German guy did it, ladder, money, everything
If Lindbergh himself committed the crime, how does one explain away the ransom money in Hauptmann's garage? Or the man at the cemetery?
SET UP.
The man at the cemetery could've been Hauptman himself ( remember his face was covered) or maybe just an opportunistic con man. But I wonder if maybe Lindberg had arranged for the baby to be spirited away and placed either in an institution or with another family. In this way they would be free of raising a baby they didn't want and they wouldn't have to look bad for not wanting him. Just a theory. I realize we'll never know for sure.
It is believed by some that Lindberg murdered his own son but that Hauptmann took advantage of that crime to try and embezzle money. Hauptmann was an embezzler, but probably not the murderer. Lindberg was 'odd' to say the least and had antipathy towards the child, due to it's defects. Lindberg had a secret life that nobody knew about, he had a series of lovers in Germany and fathered 6 children out of wedlock, this is without question. He had a public personality and a private personality that were miles apart.
He wasn't much of a carpenter if his homemade ladder broke
😂🎉👍
A fact Hauptmann used in his own defence during the trial, that he himself wasn't capable of making such a poorly made structure.
@@thatchap Yeah, he seemed more offended that he was accused of being a bad carpenter than a baby killer.
That is a good point !!
He needed a second occupation I guess, but what?
Much of the “evidence” against Lindbergh seems consistent with his controlling personality.
Also, this doesn’t explain the evidence against Hauptmann. If Lindbergh killed his son, how did Hauptmann get the ransom money, how did a piece of wood from his home get on the ladder, etc.
could this be two separate events? Charles playing a joke dropped his son causing his death which lead to the story of a kidnapping. a conman pretends to be the kidnapper sends the ransom letter and Charles goes along with this.
Yes, many have speculated that was exactly what happened. Lindbergh allowed 2 guys connected to the crime world to borrow the kidnap note, and the underworld was soon aware of the unusual signature, so could easily send fake follow up ransom notes.
Sure could be.
Still the problem of the ladder cut from lumber n Hauptman residence.
General Schwarzkopf's father was the head of the New Jersey State Police. General Schwarzkopf said he read the files which his father had in his attic. General Schwarzkopf then said there is NO doubt that this case was correctly resolved.
Anyone who reads the actual facts of the case knows that they got the right person.
That's curious, my dad was always right about things, too 😀
Still want to know how the kidnappers knew they had stayed the extra night at Highfields
was the nanny involved?
He very probably was involved his wife gave an interview many decades later and what she didn’t say spoke volumes about how she disliked Lindbergh.
I did a report on this my senior year in high school. I knew nothing about it before. The idea that Lindbergh was involved in the kidnapping and death of his own baby was not public at that time.
I never, ever thought Hauptmann was guilty. It was difficult for me believing deeply that an innocent man had been executed just because the public was crying out for someone to pay the price for the crime whether he did it or not.
I was 17. My stance on the death penalty hadn’t really formed yet. After doing this report my stance on the death penalty solidified and has not moved. I’m against it because it is possible to execute an innocent man. I’m in favor of life in prison with no opportunity of parole. If someone is sentenced to life in prison and later is proven to be innocent, we can’t give him the years back, but we can let him go. Give him the rest of his years back along with monetary compensation. If we execute him and after that he’s proven to be innocent, there’s nothing we can do. We can’t bring him back to life. Death is permanent. Humans make mistakes.
Lindbergh was all kinds of sick, disgusting, disturbing, cruel and he was a eugenicist. If you don’t know what that is, think Hitler and the Nazis. This happened in the 1930’s right around the same time as Hitler’s rise to power. Lindbergh admired Hitler’s eugenicist views. Lindbergh also aspired to creating a superior race of people and eliminating those he thought were unfit.
He believed himself to be one of the superior race. Baby Charly was not “superior race material”. He supposedly had mental development delays. I’m not sure what. He also had physical imperfections. Baby Charly had a disease like rickets. It wasn’t rickets, but similar. It made his bones soft. There was a sunlamp near his crib to give him more vitamin D in the hope of helping his bones harden. He had hammertoes. His head was too big. That could be linked to mental delays or less than normal intelligence. He couldn’t walk properly as a child of his age should. He did walk but I think he walked on his toes without his heels touching the floor. His gait was unsteady and he fell much more than a child of his age should.
Lindbergh could not let anyone know that his son had mental and physical imperfections. Lindbergh, who considered himself to be of the superior race could not have an imperfect, unfit son tainting the family name and possibly the family bloodline. So Lindbergh had to get rid of the baby before people found out the truth.
I don’t believe that the plan was for the baby to die right away. In fact, the plan may have really been for the baby to be kidnapped and taken far away where he could live and would never be linked to Lindbergh. There’s a slight risk in that, but there was no global news media, no TV, no Internet. It would’ve been much easier to do then than now. The plan may have involved killing the baby to 100% eliminate the risk of the baby ever being linked back to Lindbergh but still I don’t think it was supposed to happen the way it did at the time it did.
Lindbergh had 3 mistresses in Germany. Two of them were each other’s sisters. (Not his sisters, just to clarify). The other was unrelated. I think that he had 2 children by one sister, 3 by the other, and 1 by the other mistress. He also had 6 children or so with his wife. He was a busy, busy boy.
Poor Baby Charly!
So many people don't understand it is cheaper to keep them. The millions spent on appeals is much more than a cot and three hots, Even if the convicted lives a long and very unhappy life.
They should have shown the photographs of the baby's corpse which Lindbergh identified as his son. It was skeletal, for example, only ribs and spine were left of the midsection. Some , not much, tissue clung to the skull. It would have been impossible for the corpse to have been identified as the baby, but Lindbergh insisted it was. One theory was he just wanted it over, as his wife, considered delicate by nature, was on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Another theory is it was the nurse, who had a boyfriend, who committed the crime together. I can't remember what I read ages ago, but they had some link to the wood the latter was made from. This is quite good but it ended so abruptly.
I saw a documentary where they tried to do a DNA test on the ladder to see if it was made of the same wood from the guy's attic, but I think the state of NJ wouldn't let them have access to it or something. If they'd do that they could crack the case.
There was a whole investigation into the ladder, the type of wood that was used, the tools that were used to make it etc... and it was linked to Hauptmann. The missing piece of wood was found in his attic
@@stephaniegilcher4577 Yeah, I know about all of that. But they never did a DNA test because it didn't exist back then. As much evidence as there is with the ladder, there are still a lot of people who doubt the validity of the wood grain test they did back then. They have all kinds of theories about how Hauptmann could've been framed or how the testimony from the wood expert wasn't right, etc. But if a DNA test could be done, it would put a lot of that stuff to rest. (but then again, maybe not, because there'd probably be a lot of conspiracy nuts saying the wood they tested it against didn't really come from the right house or it was planted, all kinds of crazy stuff.) Personally, I think Hauptmann totally did the kidnapping, but there had to be at least one or two other people that helped him, who never got caught. I think either the kid choked to death from the chloroform or got knocked out when the ladder broke. So they panicked and dumped him in the first secluded spot they could find because they didn't want to risk getting caught with him in the car. The area where they dumped him is right up the road from the school I went to, so I get how that could've been the case because it was, and still kind of is, the first significantly secluded spot on the way out of town, when you're heading up Carter RD, that way.
@@Melissa0774 I really think Lindbergh was involved.. too many red flags
@@stephaniegilcher4577 I'm not saying he couldn't have been involved. But I think Hauptmann is the one who actually made the ladder and used it to climb up into the bedroom and take the kid. I think someone else was most likely driving the car and there were probably also others who told him when the Lindberghs were going to be there and where the bedroom was.
@@Melissa0774 with that ladder? 2 police officers said right away it looked staged. They were removed from the investigation. Too many red flags regarding Lindbergh
My question: What kind of woman would tolerate this monster? She lived the rest of her life as an icon, an author, and beloved grieving other.
THAT IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW.
Women who like clout and money, which is 90% of them
@sagrammyfour
You are very easily manipulated. Try some objective research, intellectual honesty and critical think for once in your existence.
@@JDCUSA I don't come to conclusions until I do my research. I've read her books and I think she is a fake compared to the actual known facts of her life. From reading reliable historical recollections, HE was a verifiable MONSTER. Again, I ask: How could any woman (especially a woman of means like her) stay with such a horrid person? Especially since there is evidence he killed his own son which she HAD to have known. BTW when I want to know about a person, I read multiple books, pro and con, about them and oay attention to their own words and actions. One wonders why you are invested in defending them? What led you to do so? Research? Manipulation? Are you related?
@@JDCUSA I WOULD ADVISE THE SAME TO YOU, BUT I SUSPECT YOU ARE "WOKE," WHICH MEANS YOU FOLLOW THE PARTY LIES IN EVERYTHING, WITHOUT QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO MORAL AUTHORITY OR GUIDE IN LIFE.
I have seen a lot of videos on this case over the decades but only recently did I hear about theories Lindbergh was involved. It’s plausible. One show I watched said he was a practical joker but he must have been sick because there some things you just don’t joke about.. pranking your wife about your child being missing isn’t ok. I had heard previously that he was in the process of pranking his wife when the child died. I didn’t know until this video that he had done it before. I think the fact he secretly fathered a dozen or more children afterwards is telling.
Yep, one 'author' says he fathered 3, next author says 7, next - 13. LOL. Hauptman was just one involved from the Bronx who was Caught. End of.
He once filled a water pitcher with kerosene as a prank. His roommate, who drank from it, could've died.
@@lizbrown7232 Wow! Hadn’t heard that one.
@@lizbrown7232 Umm, kerosene smells to high hell deary & the Fumes alone would be a Clue. Jeez. . I am soo sorry you kids believe Everything you read on the back of your Cornflake boxes. Get a Grip.
To all the commenters. I read, I heard, Someone said, Someone knows someone that thinks something. It's all conjecture. We will never Really Know what happened. It's all very Sad.
The baby always looks sad. To think this baby was put in a closet for hours and had things thrown at him breaks my heart. Lindbergh was a very privileged individual who was undeserving of adoration. He was evil to his own child.
I've also heard compelling evidence that Hoover's FBI framed Hauptman so Hoover could claim he'd 😊solved the case.
They had Hauptmann dead to right on the extortion. The wood, for the ladder, seems to point to him for the attempted kidnapping as well. Sorry.
I remember my mother saying that people suspected the parents of doing this to their baby.
Having lived in Jersey my entire life this story is mythological here
How did the abductor know where the baby's room was located? It was a big house.
There was a servant named Violet who gave information.
I'm 70 now but believe it or not we learned this stuff in grade school.
A great exposition of the tragic loss of a precious child.
It seems like the evidence against Lindbergh is circumstantial and there’s a mountain of actual evidence that Hauptmann did it. Hauptmann was spending money on stuff he couldn’t afford, including sending his wife to Germany, before they found some ransom money in his garage, the wood on the ladder was from his attic, and Hauptmann had a sketch for a homemade ladder in his journal.
Why would he rip out a board from his own attic? It sounds very odd. He himself said there was store nearby where he could buy a board for just a few cents, which sounds more logical. Was he a cheapskate or something?
What happened to that poor baby was beyond terrible. So horribly tragic.
How would anybody but an insider know precisely which bedroom the child slept in?
I read Scott Berg’s biography of Lindbergh (highly recommend). Berg makes a compelling case for Hauptmann’s guilt, but Hauptmann almost certainly didn’t act alone and his co-conspirators were never identified or prosecuted. Lindbergh was no saint, but I don’t believe he was involved in any way in his child’s kidnapping.
Could the nurse have been in some way involved?
Someone in that household killed that child, probably Lindbergh himself.
Pretty sure you said the ladder found was made from boards in his attic. That ties him to the scene or someone with access to his house but its enough
Some of the evidence was manufactured. Hauptman probably did not kidnap the child but was guilty of extortion and/or money laundering. Today parents would be the first suspects.
Supposedly 1 board used in the ladder was matched with a sawed off end in the attic. However, there are several problems with that, including, but not limited to, that the sawed off end was not originally found, when the house was searched, only later after a multitude of ppl had been through, and the "wood expert" made several dubious claims, that could not be substantiated.
It seems pretty dubious that someone would carry such a big ladder all the way to the Lindbergh house.
@@mgkelly3389 That house was still being built & so, the ladder could have been taken there before by workmen involved, maybe even Hauptman himself & it was an extendable ladder, so not anywhere near as long as the photos show. Hauptman wasn't the only one who committed this heinous crime, at least one other with him on the night. BTW - Kidnappers don't have such a bright idea on the same night that they commit the crime. Jeez.
@@mgkelly3389 id does but they said it was proven to come from wood from his own attic so he is definetlt more than just extorting them. It looks more likely both are involved to some degree and we will never get the truth
My grandmother had a neighbour who personally knew Bruno Hauptmann. This neighbour was from Germany and I believe she and Hauptmann would speak to one another in German. She always believed that the child’s death was likely an accident: that he intended to kidnap him (most likely out of financial desperation so that he could collect the ransom) and accidentally dropped him coming down the ladder. She said Hauptmann was a ‘friendly’ man, but of course this in no way excuses his actions. Those were just her experiences and her view of what she believed happened.
With all due respect to your Granny’s neighbor, she most likely, like most people at that time, couldn’t ever conceive of Lindbergh murdering his own son, hence the blaming of Hauptmann. After reading and watching documentaries on this case, I believe Charles Lindbergh himself murdered his own child.
@@culturalobserver8721 I BELIEVE LINDBERGH MURDERED THAT BABY TOO.
@@valerieneal2747 Totally agree.
He was a criminal, he was in and out of prison in Germany so he was not friendly. And the baby was killed because he had a hole in his skull. Maybe from a hammer etc. So it was not an accident
The Lindberghs had not planned to stay at the house because it was not completed at the time. Baby Charles was suffering from a cold and the parents decided it was better not to move him.
Also why did it take so long to find the baby’s body?
Why let a virtual stranger act as Lindbergh’s liaison?
Did they ever consider that maybe Lindbergh didn’t take the baby but hired someone to do it? Is it possible that the death was an accident changing the severity of the crime?
My parents were living at the time, they thought Condon's involvement was very strange and suspicious.
This is just character assassination. There is no proof that Lindbergh killed his son and plenty to implicate Hauptmann. Eric Hoffer wrote in >True Believer
Is it possible that Lindbergh took the baby out of the nursery intending to hide him as a pank and to "find" him n an hour or so. But the ladder broke and he dropped the baby who died so Lindbergh had to make it look like the kid was taken perhaps he spread the ransom money.
Make your own ladder shop?
If he took the baby, he could just have walked out of the house with him, no need to actually climb down the ladder. His wife was having a bath, the nanny was taking a break in the kitchen chatting with the butler and his wife.
WTF KIND OF 'PARENT' DOES THAT TO A BABY??
Old have bn a bluff the ladder charles Lindbergh has hidden the child before.
There is much about Lindbergh's past that you've failed to include. He was a prankster of the worst sort. For example, he once filled a fellow soldier's canteen with kerosene.
Hauptmann went to his death proclaiming his innocence, the bulk of the money turned up in Germany - a fact that was hidden from the public. Clearly indicating someone else was involved in the kidnapping
BTW, Condon's address & telephone number were found by police written with a pencil in a closet in Haupmann's house. He recognized he had written the address "because he was interested in the case" (!) but he couldnt explain why he had written also his phone number. Also, Haupmann's wife declared (at a time when a wife could testify against her hubby) that she had never seen a shoe box where he said he had kept Fisch's. Also, if Fisch had gotten so much money as Haupmann claimed he did, he hid it very well because he wouldn't spend any part of it seeking medical treatment to the illness that took him away. Of course misers usually prefer to die of a disease rather than spend any of their money trying to get a cure..!
From where I stand Haupmann looks pretty guilty, even more so when people close to Fisch including his landlord testiefied that he could barely afford his rent. And who in the world leaves the country and leaves behind in the house of a guy who isnt even a friend, just a business partner to whom he owes $7.500, a shoe box full with $40.000, who would do something so stupid even more so when he is slowly dying of TB...?
Correction: the ladder was not found leaning against the house; it was lying on the ground. The narrator even says 'it broke.' How is it that there was not a speck of dirt from the outside in the nursery? If someone had come into the room, there would have been some evidence. And, there was a very slim amount of time that the toddler could have been removed from the house - none of it makes sense. I've wondered if there was an accident and Lindbergh concocted the kidnapping to cover it up. He took over the investigation (big mistake), he wouldn't let the police use scent dogs, told them where they could and could not search. It's all very suspect. Bruno Hauptman was most certainly a scapegoat.