The Waterbury Democrat., 1935-01-23

No, i1 wasn't necessary. we pushed them in with our fingers.
 Peacock showed the witness z package of nails.
 Q. What are these nails? A They are nails I asked Officer Cramer to remove from the attic board.
 c. Did you match the grain ir the ladder piece with the board if the attic flooring? A. Yes.
 Q. Did it match? A. Per. fectly.
 The board removed by Born, mann was offered in evidence Frederick Pope of defense, ob. jected.
 Attorney Peacock replied thai the state intended to show that this board was of the same piece of timber as that used in a rail on the kidnap ladder.
 It was admitted into evidence A triangular piece of wood found in the garage likewise was intro- duced.
 Pope cross examined.
 Pope, cross examining the wit ness, asked: "Wouuid the rail from the ladder completely fill the va cant place in the attic fooring?" A. No. The board was about eight feet long and the section of the ladder Is little over six feet long.
 c. After the Hauptmann's va cated their house, the state police rented it, didn't they? A, Yes.
 Q. And you refused to permit the defense to inspect the house ? A. never got any such request.
 c. You are the man who paid the rent? A. Yes.
 Q. Will you permit the defense lawyers in inspect the house before this trial ends? A. You have my permission. .r
 The defendant sat apparently unmoved while the state trooper connected the flooring in his home with the wood used In the kidnap ladder.
 Bornmann was excused a n q a five minute recess was ordered.
 Charles w. Enkler of the New York police department was the next witness.
 He testified to the visit to the attic in the Hauptmann home with Trooper Bornmann and several other officers.
 0. Tell the jury what you did ? A. We looked around. Bornmann drew our attention to an eight foot board missing on the southwest side.
 Q. Were you with MT Koehler and the others when they, took rail 16 and compared it with the other boards? A. Yes.
 Enkler took a section of the ladder--the one which the state contends came out of Hauptmann' 2 attic-and showed the jury how the nails that were in the attic beam fitted into it's holes.
 o. The nails fitted? A. Yes.
 c. They were slanted little ?
 A photograph exhibited by Pea cock was held up before the jury.
 Peacock then held up the sec- ton of board from the attic.
 Enkler showed the jury where he had placed his name and shield number on the board and identi- fled a knot in the timber.
 Enkler was turned over to Pope for cross examination.
 Q. How long have you been a carpenter? A. 16 years.
 c. You said you were able to put the nails through the board that you say is the rail of the ladder? A. Yes.
 Q. How far? A. About three quarters of an inch.
 The attorney complained that in the cross beams in the foreground the attic photographs perspective appeared more widely spaced than those in the rear.
 0. In that respect the picture is deceptive isn't 1t? A. Yes. <e
 Enkler, a police department car penter, explained to Pope the method of laying attic floors.
 Q. Now in order to fit the nail holes. you had to move the board away from the next one to fit in the nails? A. Oh. yes, about an inch.
 Pope brought out from the wit ness that he had not seen the lad der rail when it was a part of the ladder, but had been so informed by other officers when the attic ex- pertinent was made.
 Pope and Reilly suggested the attic was not Hauptmanns.
 There were two families in the house." Reilly said.
 we maintain that it was Haupt- mann's attic. your honor" Wilentz replied. "The on.y way you could get into it was. through Haupt- mann's closet"
 Enkler was excused and Anselm Cramer, another New York police carpenter, was called.
 He likewise was present when police visited the Hauptmann home. His story of the missing board and the nail experiments was essentially the same as that of the other officers.
 Cramer was excused and Arthur Koehler, department of agriculture wood expert, was the next witness
 Koehler, of Madison, Wis, said that he was the expert on identifi- cation of woods for the United States government.
 Q. How many pieces of wood g year do you examine? A. Be- tween 1000 and 5000.
 K. Has 1t become necessary for you to testify In court? A. Yes.
 c. Will you name some of the cases? 4. Tn 1923. testified in the case of the state of WiscoAein vs John Magnuson.
 c. Was that murder trial? A. It was.
 He named half dozen other