Evening star., 1935-02-10
Nearing the End.

was started at remington, N. j., IIlaI
has engaged the attention OF the
American people as has no other case
In the history Of this country. It is
expected that by the end Of the sixth
week, next Wednesday, it will have
been concluded. The man on trial
Is accused of having kidnapped for
ransom the infant son Of Charles
Lindbergh and in the abduction of
the child caused its death, which
under the laws of New Jersey is a
capital offense. The accusation is
based in main upon the charge that
Hauptmann took from an agent Of
the child's father a large sum OF
money. His identity was not dis
closed until nearly thirty-one months
after the kidnapping. He was caught
after passing one of the identical
money notes which had been thus
transferred. He was thereupon in
dicted for extortion in New York and
later upon the presentation of evil
dence which pointed to his partici-
patton in the kidnapping was indicted
in New Jersey for murder.
The State has presented evidence
Indicating Hauptmann's presence
near the Lindbergh home on the
night of the kidnapping; also evidence
that he built ladder which was found
near the scene of the crime and had
presumably been used to effect the
taking of the child. 1t has also pre-
sented evidence of Hauptmann's pos
session Of large amount Of the
ransom money, taken from hiding
places in his dwelling after his arrest.
Hauptmann's defense has been that
Of positive denial, supported by evi-
dence to establish the claim that he
was not at or near the Lindbergh
home on the night Of the kidnapping,
but elsewhere, and that he was not
at the place where the ransom money
wes delivered, but at his own home.
In short, the main defense of Haupt-
mann in support of his denial Is that
of alibi. The veracity, the accuracy
Of memory and the character of these
aIibi witnesses have been challenged
by the State.
In the face Of the established fact
that Hauptmann had possession of
and had passed portion of the ram
som money, it was necessary for the
defense to account for it, which 1t
has sought to do by in effect accusing
q friend and one-time partner of
Hauptmann's, now dead, Of being,
singly or with others, the kidnaper
and the receiver of the ransom funds.
While the burden of proof rests
legally upon the prosecution, the de-
fense has in this case virtually as
sumed the burden Of proving that
the deceased Fisch was the kidnaper
and the taker of the ransom.
In a capital case in which the
identity of the slayer Is disputed,
where denial is the plea of the
accused, the effort of the defense is
to raise in the minds of the jurors
a reasonable doubt, in the absence of
positive Identification. That has evil
dently been the strategy of the de-
fenSe in this trial, to cause some of
the jurors, If not all of them, to ques-
ton the sufficiency Of the accusative
testimony. Should any. even one,
of the twelve jurors hold such doubt
unyieldingly to the end a mistrial
would occur. On the other hand
either conviction or acquittal requires
o unanimous verdict.
Whatever the outcome Of this case,
which should be settled within the
next two or three days, it will go
into history as most unpleasant
and discouraging spectacle. For it
has been made the occasion of SEN
sationalism Of procedure and Of q
swarning attendance of morbid
minded and sensation-seeking spec
tators, turning a solemn ceremony Of
Justice, with a mans life at stake,
into a veritable public entertainment.