The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-02-19
Liberal Viewpoint
BY DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES


DERHAPs the most natural and commendable
Il reaction to the Hauptmann case will be
sigh of relief. Now we may be able to get some
real news on important events-the state Of the
nation ard the set-up in foreign affairs.
The original kidnapping knocked the japanese
| Chinese war of the front page and the trial
| threatened to obscure the record of world events
The publicity horsepower of the Lingbergh myth
Will certainly constitute and interesting problem
for future students of American history.
My own prejudices were all linked UP with
the detection and conviction of the person who
kidnapped the Lindbergh baby Having long been
a friend and admirer Of Dwight Morrow, few
persons had a warmer interest in the arrest,
conviction and punishment of the daStardly cul-
prit who engineered and executed the kidnapping.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that the formal
conviction of Hauptmann by any means settles
this question.
Hauptmanns conviction and sentence settle
the case legally at least for the time being but
no sane criminologst will be likely to admit that
they settle the problem 1t all in point of literal
! fact.
TN my way of looking at the case, which I have
4 followed carefully in the papers, the whole
affair was colossal burlesque and one Of the
outstanding proofs of the utter futility of the
| jury trial as method of ascertaining guilt or
innocence.
The responsibility of Hauptmann for the kid
mapping and murder had to be determined on the
basis of a rigorous scientific analysis of a large
number Of highly technical and difficult facts
the issue Of which battery of liars and periurers
was to be believed, the psychological testing of
credbility of the witnesses the science of lumber
Identification, the problems of handwriting and
the like.
Trained experts from the Department of JUS
tice might have passed on these matters with
| intelligence and competence, but the unframed
! lay jury at Pennington might just as we'll have
been called upon to decide as between NIillikan
and Jeans on the issue of cosmic rays. Their
Judgment may be legally all important and con-
elusive, but from the standpoint of scientific and
reliable fact it must be branded as utterly
worthless.
EOR many years the jury trial has been
special study of mine. I have rarely, if ever
read more staggering example of irresponsible
teroc1ty and venomous verbiage than Atty Gen.
Wilentz final summation for the prosecution
Mr.. Reilly trailed behind only because he was
called upon by mis- position in the case to appeal
to mercy and sympathy rather than to sadism
and blood-letting. One hesitates to imagine
what he might have said if he had been in the
role of prosecutor.
The great lesson of the Hauptmann case is
the necessity of wiping out the jury system root
and branch, once and for all. I would like to
know anything about it now. If Hauptmann is
not guilty, then the demand of the mob for
victim and scapegOat and the Difference of the
jury to this demand will raise up great if not
inSuperable, obstacles to our ever discovering
the actual culprit.
Sacco and Vanzetti were sent to the chair
for crime which we now know they did not
commit. But the fact that they were sacrificed
to the mob now prevents us from prosecuting
the guilty parties whose identity has now been
established almost beyond the slightest perad-
venture of a doubt
HAD paid board of scientific experts been
l. l. in charge of handling the Hauptmann case
we would now know whether or not he is guilty
The great majority of the identification wit
nesseS for the prosecution and the alibi wit
nesSes for the defense would have been thrown
outside AZ once as most palpable frauds and
Takers There would have been no hired pro-
cession OF alleged experts on lumber or hand
writing. The board would itself have possessed
all this knowledge and it's information would not
have been stultifled by partisanship Such a
board would have gone right to Hauptmann's
attic and looked at the floor. 1t would have
settled the genuineneSs of the controverted lad
der-whether the Stat and the nailholes were
deliberately planted and substituted by the
prosecution or whether they were genuine and
real-a very vital point which the trial has not
settled in the mind of any competent and
skeptical person
The Hauptmann trial is said to have cost
100000 and yet we are still in the dark as to
the major facts involved. Experts would have
handled the case for a maximum of $4,000 and
we would know what we wish to-whether
Hauptmann is guilty or whether we should con-
tnue the search for the contemplate being who
tbo nrif