Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Michael 5260
Re: Bert Farrar
Tue Aug 7, 2018 14:47

Something had to have happened for the prosecution to have been afraid that Farrar might change sides. If they had a fear of that happening in 1932, before there was any trial, they would have dropped him immediately. No messing around with him. The man could do what he wanted in 1932.

The important time period would be between September 15, 1934(when Hauptmann was picked up) and January 2, 1935(when Hauptmann's trial started. This time period would be when Farrar would have examined the handwritings, written his report, and submitted it to the prosecution. Now he would have been a part of the prosecution's case.

If there had been any suspicion that Farrar was going to do something weird he would have been issued a subpoena. A subpoena ad testificandum (you are going to testify whether you want to or not) or a subpoena duces tecum (produce documents, materials or other tangible evidence whether you want to or not). The duces tecum would be the documents he studied and the handwriting exhibits he constructed for his court appearance. If the prosecution was really afraid or sufficiently pissed Farrar would have received both subpoenas. Farrar would have been subject to penalty if he failed to respond to either subpoena and his government job would have gone down the tubes.

Do you know if Farrar was issued any kind of subpoena? This would be a very good place to start.

  • Re: Bert FarrarMichael, Tue Aug 7 07:43
    His name is misspelled all over the place Script. I've even seen it as "Farrer" too so when you look closer at him be sure to try all of these spellings. Like I said below, the issues extended into... more
    • Re: Bert Farrar — Michael 5260, Tue Aug 7 14:47
      • Re: Bert FarrarMichael, Wed Aug 8 08:56
        Script, Be careful letting your mind wander. It was a pretty simple thing. I don't know, maybe I am so used to seeing this stuff (as it concerns this case) to the point that I am now desensitized to... more
        • Re: Bert FarrarMichael 5260, Wed Aug 8 10:27
          You are correct about the trial being a play on a stage. All hi-profile trials have a tendency to be that way. There is always the element of "theater" involved. I think this comes about because a... more
          • Re: Bert FarrarAnonymous, Wed Aug 8 13:21
            Farrar wanted to testify (if nothing else it would look great on his C.V. for future trials). Problem was that at this point, Wilentz did not trust what he would ultimately say on the stand. To solve ... more
            • david wilentz, may his name live in infamybob mills for anonymous and forum, Thu Aug 9 18:49
              Wilentz played a fast one on everybody. A permanent stain on New Jersey justice.
              • Re: david wilentz, may his name live in infamysteve for bob, Fri Aug 10 11:36
                don't forget he was tripping over evidence as somebody once said. don't blame wilentz for hauptmanns bad showing on the stand.
                • wilentzbob mills for steve romeo and forum, Fri Aug 10 18:58
                  Steve, Hauptmann wasn't required to take the stand in his own defense. He did so voluntarily. If the trial were held today, Wilentz would have been scolded by the judge for misconduct. He might have... more
                • There's no question Wilentz took liberties as a prosecutor, but Hauptmann set himself up for everything he got by not coming clean.
              • And the irony is that we probably never would have heard of David Wilentz, had it not been for a mentally-ill German carpenter from the Bronx.
                • WilentzJack, Sun Sep 2 02:49
                  Right, but Wilentz was really just doing his job, what he's supposed to be doing every day. I'd say he did it pretty well.
                  • WilentzJack, Thu Sep 6 06:22
                    Ever see the movie "Requiem for a Heavyweight? Had Anthony Quinn, and a young Cassius Clay in it. That movie is like the way things really work.
                  • david wilentz of the great state of new jerseybob mills for jack and forum, Mon Sep 3 09:44
                    Wilentz relied on two witnesses that he knew (or should have known) were worthless. Amandus Hochmuth was legally blind, and Millard Whited was a notorious liar who first said he hadn't seen anyone... more
                    • Wilentz and the Real WorldJack for Bob and Forum, Mon Sep 3 13:09
                      Yer right Bob, but Wilentz was just making happen what the real world including Mr. Lindbergh wanted done. I'd say he did a really good job.
Click here to receive daily updates