Lindbergh Baby Case

Kaplan University

Lindbergh Baby Case

This assignment will present a 700-1050-word analysis of the Lindbergh Baby Case. The discussion will consist of a discussion of how the three components of the criminal justice system (police, courts, corrections) apply to the case; a discussion of first appearance, preliminary hearing and arraignment of the case; the role of adjudication; sentencing; and corrections as they are applied to this case. At least one reference will be provided and literature cited where appropriate.

Application of Police, Courts, Corrections to the Case

In this case the police responded to the kidnapping of the Lindbergh’s twenty moth old son, Charles Jr, on the night of March 1, 1932. The investigation became embroiled with jurisdictional battles between the three investigating agencies; the New Jersey State Police, the New York City Police, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (“What Happened”, n.d.). The police investigation focused around the ransom note that had been left on the window sill. The note described the ransom amount and bills required, as well as a threat to not notify the police. The note itself was poorly written and was filled with many grammatical errors and misspellings. Among the likely suspects, the police managed to single one out, Bruno Richard Hauptmann. On September 18, 1934, a marked bill that had been used as part of the ransom money appeared at a bank teller. The bill was later tracked down to Hauptmann who, after a short period of surveillance, was apprehended by the police. Hauptmann’s writing was compared to the writing in the ransom note left behind. During the investigation, it was also uncovered that Hauptmann had a criminal history robbery.

During the court phase, Bruno Richard Hauptmann was indicted on charges of extortion in New York, and only a week and a half later was indicted for murder in New Jersey (“What Happened”, n.d.). On January 3, 1935, Hauptmann’s trial began in Flemington, New Jersey (“What Happened”, n.d.). The trial was very short and only lasted five weeks. The prosecution’s case against Hauptmann provided evidence collected and investigated by the police. Evidence such as Hauptmann’s hand writing samples matching the ransom note and his tools matching the tool marks on the latter were, even though circumstantial, crucial in fining Hauptmann guilty of first degree murder. Hauptmann was sentenced to death by the court on February 13, 1935 and, after multiple denied appeals, was electrocuted on April 3, 1936 (“What Happened”, n.d.).

The role of corrections in this case was simple but yet complicated at the same time. Due to jurisdictional battles stated earlier, Hauptmann was held in prison in multiple states. After his indictments the New York governor surrendered Hauptmann to the governor of New Jersey and was moved to the Hunterdon County Jail to await trial. As previously stated earlier, on April 3, 1936, the New Jersey Department of Corrections carried out Hauptmann’s death sentence.

First Appearance, Preliminary Hearing, and Arraignment

During the 1st appearance in this case Bruno Richard Hauptmann provided his general information to the court. Next he is informed of his rights, most importantly his right to a lawyer and that one will be provided should he not be able to afford one. Hauptmann was then informed of his charges. In Hauptmann’s case, New York charged him with extortion and New Jersey charged him with murder.

During the preliminary hearing in this case the prosecutors presented enough evidence to convince the judge to charge Hauptmann with both extortion and murder. It was also decided in which territorial jurisdiction the court would be in (Schmalleger, 2015). The preliminary hearing allowed the prosecution to bring forth witnesses like Dr. Condon as well as the for the defense to cross examine. Finally, a date or in Hauptmann’s situation two dates, an arraignment date was scheduled.

During the arraignment in this case Hauptmann pled not guilty to his charges. Hauptmann would be indicted on the charges of extortion and murder. After his indictment Hauptmann was surrendered and transferred to the state of New Jersey. Because of Hauptmann’s not guilty plea, his trial was set to begin on January 3, 1935.

Role of Adjudication, Sentencing, and Corrections

Adjudication is “A judicial decision or sentence” (“Adjudication”, n.d.). For this case, the adjudication process consisted of Hauptmann’s trial and his verdict. Both the prosecution and defense presented their cases to the jury. After all the evidence and testimonies were presented the jury then deliberated. After five weeks the jury found Bruno Richard Hauptmann guilty of first degree murder.

The sentencing phase consists of “The imposition of a criminal sanction by a judicial authority” (Schmalleger, 2015). In this case Hauptmann was sentenced to death by electrocution. Although Hauptmann appealed many times, all were denied. Hauptmann’s sentence was carried out on April 3, 1936.

Corrections emphasizes “Punishment and Rehabilitation” (“Role of the Correctional System”, n.d.). In this case, corrections played a custodial role as well as carried out Hauptmann’s sentence. Multiple correctional facilities, from different states, held Hauptmann for some amount of time. Once it was decided that he would be held and tried in New Jersey, Hauptmann was then transferred between facilities. After his sentencing, the responsibility of carrying out Hauptmann’s punishment fell upon the corrections. Correctional officers went through with the execution at 8:47 PM on April 3, 1936 (“What Happened”, n.d.).

Conclusion

This assignment has presented a 700-1050-word analysis of the Lindbergh Baby Case. The discussion consisted of a discussion of how the three components of the criminal justice system (police, courts, corrections) apply to the case; a discussion of first appearance, preliminary hearing and arraignment of the case; the role of adjudication; sentencing; and corrections as they are applied to this case. At least one reference was provided and literature cited where appropriate.