Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
bob mills for richard and forum
what can we presume?
Sat Mar 10, 2018 09:57

If we presume that the Eaglet's abductor was a LONE KIDNAPPER, then Richard is right, caring for him alone would have been more difficult than killing him. But I've always thought the central questions that gave rise to the LKH Forum were 1) "Was Hauptmann guilty? and 2) "Regardless of the answer to that question, did the kidnapper act alone?"

Here, using ex post facto logic, we're presuming the answer is "Yes" to the second question. If we make that presumption, then the debate is irreconcilable.

On the other hand, if this kidnapping were like virtually every other episode in the ongoing "snatch racket" of that era, then provisions for an abducted child would have been routinely made. And, given that everyone involved in the case (except David Wilentz, Dudley Schonfeld, and 12 jurors) took it for granted that the kidnapping was a gang operation, I'd argue strongly against making the contrary assumption.

  • when did the baby die?Richard E Sloan, Fri Mar 9 16:19
    Nobody has mentioned that a kidnapper with a live baby was no asset! The baby would need someone to take care of him and at a pre-determined hideout where nobody would hear him cry. The baby was... more
    • what can we presume? — bob mills for richard and forum, Sat Mar 10 09:57
      • lone wolf?Richard E Sloan, Sat Mar 10 11:11
        hat's an interesting response. I am not convinced Bruno was the man who actually snatched the baby. Maybe there WAS a plan to take him alive but he was dropped when the ladder cracked, which changed... more
    • goof in a sentenceRichard Sloan, Fri Mar 9 16:24
      I meant to write "The idea that the heavy footprint was due to the kidnapper suddenly landing in the mud because the ladder rail split IS A GOOD ONE." But.... etc;
Click here to receive daily updates