The Case That Never Dies: The Lindbergh Kidnapping

by Lloyd C. Gardner

Book Overview

Winner of the 2004 New Jersey Studies Academic Alliance Book Award for Scholarly Non-Fiction Named a 2005 Honor Book by the New Jersey Council for the Humanities Essential reading for anyone... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0813533856
• ISBN13: 9780813533858
• Release Date: May 2004
• Publisher: Rutgers University Press
• Length: 480 Pages
• Weight: 1.93 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.3" x 6.4" x 9.5"
• Grade Range: Grade 10 to Postsecondary

Customer Reviews

This was a terrific book!!!!

I have read many books about the Lindbergh kidnapping. I feel Lloyd Gardner's book is thoroughly and thoughtfully researched. I have read it twice carefully and each time I read it I discovered new information. Who was John Condon? Why did Violet Sharpe commit suicide? Why did Lindbergh act so strangely the night of March 1,1932? Does a parent call his attorney before calling the police when he suspects his 20 month old child is missing? There are so many bizarre events surrounding the disappearance of the Lindbergh baby that it is no surprise that Lloyd Gardner titled his book "The Case That Never Dies". The trial was a farce and a circus: an embarrassment to the State of New Jersey. Read it!!!!

Most OBJECTIVE Book

Gardner has produced a book that allows the reader to consider the evidence and make thier own conclusions without being presented a prosecution brief of a Jim Fisher(Lindberg Case-1987). Bruno Richard Hauptmann appear to have been involved. But the key word is appears. Gardner does a good job showing inconsistencies of a John Condon ( a bigot by the way that wanted to blame the I-talians).He explores the weirdness of the crime itself. The Lindbergs normally were not at that house on Tuesdays. The window was unlocked,the right shutter was warped,the baby was not to be disturbed by a Charles Lindbergh routine from 7-10,that demanded that the baby was to be left alone.This suggests inside help contrary to the lone wolf theory. The flimsy ladder allegedly made by the carpenter Hauptmann. The narrow window,the lack of any prints which is contrary that a lone wolf wiped down the room and could have commited the crine . Other details such as the ladder being set off to the right of the window,indicated to the police that the kidnapper (Isido Fisch)was left handed. I don't believe that in the case of Hauptman,that is the fact . The footprints that don,t fit Hauptmann left at the house or the cemetery where the ransom was paid off . The window was closed upon leaving the bedroom so the lone wolf Hauptmann had to do wife down the room, find the off set ladder with his legs,carry the baby and close the window all of this by himself . This is not believable and this smells of inside help-indeed Violet Sharpe a maid in the other Morrow house committed suciide after being evasive. This book demonstrates that the hand writing that doesn't match as much as Fisher's book claims. I use to believe that Hauptman did this by himself but this book rasied enough doubts. I cannot understand the criticism on the scholarship on the book. Sure there are mistakes but is calling Joe Perrone, John Perrone enought to dismiss this book? A good book by some psychologist would be why some people attack anyone that raises concerns that Hauptmann did this alone? Why the emotion in protecting police mishandling of the case,after 70 years? Lindbergh was a national hero and with that fame came this horror but Lindbergh sqandered much of the good wiil from this tragedyy by coming a friend of the Third Reich and making speeches that were Anti Semitic. After 70 years we need more of this scholardhip . I recommend any serious researcher of this case to get this book and use the info the serch out new leads as the table that was found recently 2002 that appears to be the template for the ransom notes

"An Historian's Review of the Lindbergh "Eaglet" Kidnapping in 1932"

"The Case That Never Dies: The Lindbergh Kidnapping", Lloyd Gardner, Rutgers Univ. Ress, NJ, 2004. ISBN: 0-8135-3385-6, HC 415 pgs., plus Notes 44 pgs., Biblio. 4 pgs., Index 14 pgs., and 30 B & W Photographs/Illustrations. 9 1/2" x 6 1/2". Gardner, a distinguished Prof. of History & author of a dozen books gives a fair-minded exaustive analysis of the Lindbergh baby's kidnapping (Mar. 1, 1932), ransom, murder, and the subsequent apprehension, trial (Jan. 2, 1935), conviction and execution (Apr. 3, 1936) of german immigrant Bruno Richard Hauptmann (BRH). To the chagrin of many readers, but more-so to the author's credit, is Gardner's neutrality or foregoing of taking one side or the other, but rather walking a fine line to avoid and evade bias, prefering facts to speak for themselves but still pointing out errors made by authorities & both legal counsels. The writer drew heavily upon FBI records and from the official Police records, papers and documents in repositaries, museums, etc. Of interest are photographs of the colorful notables and of the Lindbergh's home floor plans. The book has 16 chapters, each rather sharply devoted to the testimony or viewpoints of a specific person, topic or subject matter. The read is tedious at times for much is built upon recorded witness testimony in and out of court, oft "she-says he-says", and at many times outbursts from questionable sources having questionable motives -- but all of which is part and parcel of the Hauptmann trial. We learn, for example, of the tricky and complicated money transfers by BRH in a variety of business schemes and con games, stock market tradings, possibly money laundering, and how the ransom money gold certificates were crucial in finding BRH, and of the sundry hiding sites BRH used to stash away the ransom moneys. The author also deals with the previously noted imperfections of baby Lindbergh, alleged to have overlapping of toes bilaterally, enlarged cranium with open fontanelle and mention is made of possible rickets (not uncommon in those days, but no mention of possible hydrocephalus). Gardner also notes the 1948 discovery by Bolliard in NJ of writing on the underside of a small table that also had a small metal brace whose holes were discovered by Falzini in 2002 to matched the markings of the ransom notes precisely. "It was a two million dollar funeral", although BRH was a declared pauper, brought to bear by the states of NJ, NY and the USA to "turn a human being into a whisp of smoke and a jar of dust", said Lloyd Fisher. In the end, "Gardner concludes that there was insuffient evidence to convict him (BRH) of first-degree murder." It remains the finest documented book I've encountered on this subject, a must read.

Filled with long forgotton and lost details

After reading the other reviews I was apprehensive about purchasing this book, but I was pleasently surprised by it. The author has spent much time ferreting out those small but important details that make the Lindbergh kidnapping so enigmatic and entrancing. While there may be mistakes to be found in this work, I don't think they in any way detract from the overall balance of the book. I found Lloyd Gardner's book to be insightful and well tempered. Highly recommended for the serious or first time Lindbergh kidnapping reader.

Beware The Theorists

There is something in the nature of crimes of note (and the conspiracies and competing theories they engender) that bring out the zealot in all of us. Such seems to be the case with the reactions to Dr Gardner's The Case That Never Dies : The Lindbergh Kidnapping. As noted elsewhere, Dr Gardner is the first professional historian to tackle the case, at least in book form. And his credentials are impressive: a professor of history at Rutgers University and the recipient of two Fulbright Professorships and a Guggenheim Fellowship. But credentials count for little when faced with the competing theories of die-hard case followers. Dr Gardner's work is without doubt the best researched of all books on the case and a raft of new information is brought to the fore, all of it meticulously footnoted. However, where Dr Gardner differs from previous authors is his overall approach to analysing the case and the evidence. While the other major works are best described as "theory" books - i.e. they set out to prove Hauptmann innocent or Hauptmann guilty and wear such motives on their sleeves - Dr Gardner instead attempts to put the events in historical context and draws parallels with modern day attitudes to capital punishment. He poses more questions than he answers; he gives fertile ground for additional research. This, perhaps, is the nub of the problem for the self-appointed experts. Discourse on the case today tends to focus on competing - and hotly disputed - theories. There is no generally accepted truth of the Lindbergh case, save that accepted in a court of law in Flemington in 1935. And that, after all, is but one theory. What seems to have enraged the natives is Dr Gardner's refusal to adopt a particular theory, his reluctance to draw conclusions, to join them on whatever side of the fence they happen to be. But that is a reflection of the book that they wished to read (or in some cases write) rather than the book which Dr Gardner - as is his right - chose to pen. The book itself does contain some typos and there are some minor errors (and other alleged errors which are in fact just differences of interpretation), but to distort these into damnation of the book as a whole is to rather miss the point. For any student of the crime, this is an indispensable read and the most thorough reference book on the case. One doesn't have to agree with all of Dr Gardner's interpretations because the evidence itself is presented so clearly and is so well referenced that anyone who wishes to research further can do so off the back of Dr Gardner's hard work. The book focuses on the central timeline and the arrest and conviction of Hauptmann. The tangential stories of hoaxers Curtis and Means are given little further exposure as Dr Gardner chooses to concentrate on the meat of the case. Expertise on the Lindbergh case is not measured through any long-service medal, or by commitment to any official theory but rather by recognising that however much