The Washington times., 1935-06-20
CHARGE TO JURY.
CITED AS FULL
Of B|AS
Attorneys Go Before Court OF
Errors and Appeals in Plea
For New Kidnap Trial

For new kIuIIdp II'oI
CONTINUED from Page y
IN the State prison a mile and q
half away. 49,,
Colonel Lindbergh and Justice
Thomas w. Trenchard also were
absent. .,.o,,,
head Of the State troopers, re-
NAMED outside the court room 70
direct the big detail OF ponce
guarding the building.
one Of the most controversial
exhibits at the trial, the gro
tesoue ladder used by the LIND
bergh kidnaper, was carried 1nCo
the court room before the heavy
oaken doors were locked.
Egbert Rosecrans Of defense
counsel opened the arguments,
submitted brief Of 100 pages In
which 16 points were listed as a
basis for new trial.
Score Trial Judge
The principal contentious in the
brief were that Attorney General
Wilentz's summation at the trial
violated the common law and
constitutional rights Of Haupt-
mann; that Wilentz "bull-dozed,
browbeat, belittled and chaStised"
Hauptmann on the witness stand
and that Justice Trenchard'S
charge to the jury was prejudicial
to the defendant.
The defense lawyers condemned
the daily presence of Colonel Lind
bergh at the trial, asserting his
presence had a prejudicial effect
on the jury. The defense further
said:
"The tone and language Of
the judge in many parts was
that of an advocate for the
prosecution and therefore not
such judicial presentation Of
the case as the defendant was
entitled to-"
Rosecrans especially stressed
the charge that the State switched
its theory of how the murder was
committed in it's closing argument,
not giving the ex-machine gunner
chance to answer.
Change in Murder
Rosecrans declared the State
contended throughout the trial
the baby was killed while being
taken down the ladder from its
nursery, but on the last day as
serted it was bledgeoned to death
in the nursery.
There was no basis to support
the burglary charge which formed
the basis Of the murder indics-
ment, he argued, and Hunterton
county was improperly given juris-
diction of the case.
The brief charged that many Of
the States witnesses were either
incompetent or untruthful, and
that some came to testify for the
sole purpose of getting in the pub
Lie spotlight.
The right of Trooper Kelly to
testify as an expert on finger
prints was challenged as were the
witness stand stories of DR.. John
F. "Jafsie" Condor, the ransom
intermediary; Hildegarde Alexan-
der, the Bronx beauty who said
she saw Hauptmann trailing Con-
don at the time of the ransom
negotiations; AmaduS Hochmuth,
the 87-year-old mountaineer who
said he saw Hauptmann near the
Lindbergh home the day Of the
kidnapping in March, 1882, and all
Of the handwriting experts.
BallyhOo Under Fire
Rosecrans also cited the uproar
which surrounded the entire trial
and it's effects on the jury. He
declared all the testimony he
challenged sis unworthy of COM
mon belief and should have been
utterly and entirely diSregarded
by the jury and unquestionably
would have been so disregarded in
the average case, one which did
not include Colonel Lindbergh,
one Of Americas foremost citi-
ZenS."
He argued the State could not
explain away the absence of
Hauptmann'S fingerprints on any
OF the money or implements he
was accused Of handling, yet in
dulged in legal gymnastics to
spell out its theory of the death
Of the child"
Judge Frederick A. Pope of de.
tense counsel shared the argu.
ments with Rosecrans. He vigor.
ously challenged the value Of the
testimony by the States wood ex-