The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-02-11

e plot.
Among his sensational
charges were that the now
famous "kidnap ladder"
found on the estate after the
kidnapping was a Estate
plant" and that it had never
been used in the crime.
He ridiculed with all the sarcasm
at his command the states "sce-
mario" and the fiction" that a man
could have climbed the ladder into
the nursery, committed the abduc-
ton, and decentralization the lads
der broke under his weight-with-
out arousing the whole household.
Mr.. Reilly pointed to the silencs
of the Lindbergh's little fox terrier,
during the kidnapping, as proof that
mo strangers were about"
Hauptmann Watches Jury
Throughout his plea, thers was
silence in the courtroom, save for
Mr.. Reilly's voice, which rose and
fell through the gamut of sarcasm,
invective, soft pleading, and sober
argument.
Col. Lindhergh, his lips drawn
into a tight line, watched him in-
tently. The hollow eyes of the pris-
oner rested throughout on the jury
He appeared to approve the powers
full summation. His face bore flush
that was unusual. and he hlinked
and swallowed rapidly as his chief
counsel brought out point after
point in his favor.
Hauptmann had listened stolidly
while Prosecutor Anthony M. Hauck
Jr. demanded his conviction on ths
charge of murder, but noted with
satisfaction that the prosecutors
plea ended without a demand that
the jury send him to the electric
chair.
stabbed by Own Employees"
Mr.. Hauck's summation had been
matter fact. A cold recital Of
the circumStantial incidents by
which the government deems
Hauptmann constructed the kid
nap ladder, committed the abduc-
ton, lost" the baby through its
accidental death when the ladder
broke, buried him in the Sourlands
grave, and then collected Col.
Lindberghs $4,000 ransom.
Hauck is no orator. His appear.
ance, for As minutes, before the
Hunterdan County jury was neces-
sary because he is the prosecutor
of record. He told all that was
necessary to link the prisoner to
the crime, but left the forensic dra-
MATES to Atty. Gen. David T. Will
entz, who will make the closing
arguments.
MIR. Reilly's charge that Col.
Lindbergh was stabbed in the
back by the disloyalty of those
who worked for him, was the first
ton before the four women and
eight men who are to determine
whether to send Hauptmann to the
electric chair, give him life impris-
onnent, or free him entirely of
completely in the crime.
Casts Host of Insiruations
It was also his first indication
that he would carry through to It's
conclusion the defense theory that
persons within the Lindbergh home
either carried out the kidnapping and
murder or were parties to it.
Mr.. Reilly recalled to the jury's
minds the many pulling coinci-
dences Of the kidnapping. He asked
them who knew the Lindberghs
would be in Hopewen on the night
of March /, 1892" and cast a host of
insinuations against the servants In
the household.
The Bull of Brooklyn" beginning
in a low-pitched voice and contin-
uing to his laundering clinaxes.
called the jury's attention to the
difference between this family of
wealth and influence" and that Of
this poor Bronx carpenter"
Outlines State Case
His first plea was that the de-
PENDANT must not only be proved
guilty beyond a peradventure Of a
doubt, but that it was not necessary
for him to prove his innocence.
THE state must prove him guilty."
he declared.
Prosecutor Hauck outlined the
states case against Hauptmann, and
demanded a verdict of guilty of
murder. He delivered in dispassion-
ate tones a cold recital of the Lind
bergh crime and the various pieces
of evidence linking the Bronx car
penter to the kidnapping. the MUIR
der. and the later extortion of
$50, 900 from Col. Lindbergh.
Mr.. Hauck, standing befors ths