In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

more testimony from the hauptmanns When hauptmann returned to the witness stand on monday morning, most courtroom observers expected Wilentz to question the witness with the same hammering style he had used on Friday. instead, Wilentz started slowly and had the witness discuss his various bank accounts and assets. hauptmann agreed that he was very careful about recording his finances in his various account books. The attorney general’s interest piqued when hauptmann admitted that some of his transactions were intentionally left out of the books. When asked to explain, hauptmann replied, “i saved money besides that my wife should not know. i put nothing in the book.” “oh. in other words, you were hiding it on your wife?” Wilentz asked. after hauptmann nodded affirmatively, Wilentz continued, “Well, you were hiding a lot of things on your wife, weren’t you?” “no, sir,” hauptmann interjected, “it is only the money i kept.”1 Without missing a beat, Wilentz asked about hauptmann’s relationship with Gerta henkel. he brought out that the two had met at hunter island while anna was away in europe. it was clear to those in the room that Wilentz was intimating that hauptmann and henkel had been having an affair. Wilentz paused for a moment to allow the jury to absorb the unspoken accusation before asking his next question.2 “let me ask you,” Wilentz began, “When you found $14,000 or more in gold, how did you feel, did you cry?” “i was excited,” hauptmann offered. Wilentz asked the defendant whether he told his wife about the money. he admitted that he had not told her. “didn’t she work and slave in a bakery and bring to you when you and she got married, her earnings and savings?” Wilentz asked angrily. “That has got nothing to do with them $14,000 at all,” hauptmann protested. Wilentz was determined not to let this go. he mentioned that anna had bought all of the furniture when the couple first started their home. “she gave you every dollar she had in the world, didn’t she?” Wilentz asked in a raised voice.| 277 || 32 | | 278 | hauptmann’s ladder “so did i,” hauptmann insisted, “except these $14,000.” “you were partners, weren’t you, both working hard?” “yes.” “But,” Wilentz countered, “When you found $14,000 in gold, no more partnership with the wife?” “absolutely not,” the witness shouted, “Why should i make my wife excited about it?” Wilentz was clearly dissatisfied with the answers he was receiving. he demanded to know why hauptmann was hiding money from his wife, and why he had not told her about the $14,000 in gold certificates. hauptmann explained that he was considering building a house for his wife as a surprise.3 The prosecutor changed topics and began discussing the ransom notes and some of the misspellings. he pointed out how the writer of the letters had a peculiar habit of putting the letter “n” in inappropriate places and asked the witness. “That is a habit of yours, isn’t it, putting ‘n’s’ where they don’t belong?” “no,” the defendant answered. Wilentz responded to this answer by handing hauptmann a check. after the witness admitted he had written out this check for $74.00, Wilentz asked him to report to the jury how he had spelled the word “seventy.” hauptmann had spelled it “s-e-n-V-e-t-y.”4 Wilentz presented numerous examples of spelling errors that the defendant had made. exhibit after exhibit showed spelling errors that seemed remarkably similar to those in the ransom letters. Wilentz made sure to point them out to the jury. he seemed to have an almost endless supply of writing samples with spelling errors.5 after showing yet another error taken from hauptmann’s book, Wilentz pointed to drawings of a window and a ladder (which very much resembled the kidnapper’s ladder) and accused the witness of drawing them. hauptmann denied this, saying, “a little child used to come in our house and play inside and he put them in.”6 on and on went the questioning. Wilentz hammered away at hauptmann about his finances and various examples of his handwriting. he reviewed numerous figures and accounts, but always maintained a tone that demonstrated his contempt for the witness. turning to the finding of $14,000, Wilentz asked in a slow and deliberate pace, “When you took that money from the shoe box down into that garage and...

Share