First, some people think that Bruno Hauptmann killing the baby is false. People do not believe he actually did it. “Conspiracy buffs have long held that Bruno Richard Hauptmann was framed for the 1932 Hopewell, New Jersey, Lindbergh baby kidnapping and murder case and it has become more plausible to the public that there might have been a conspiracy. ” (Robbins). “Hauptmann asserted his innocence throughout the trial, raising enough suspicion in the eyes of the public that there are people who, to this day, feel that the police persecuted an innocent man” (Galens). Even though that he did not confess like the police detectives wanted him to, does not mean that he didn’t do it. “At the time, some people suggested that Hauptmann must have been part of a plot, that for several reasons he could not have acted alone” (Zorn). Meaning,…show more content… But then again, he had all the evidence with him or in his possession that would make the police believe that he was indeed the person who committed the crime. So there is some evidence to suggest the Hauptmann was not the only one who had helped commit the murder and kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh’s son.
Lastly, there have been concrete evidence against Hauptmann to prove that he committed the crime. Evidence including "The twenty dollar bill was checked against the ransom list and found the be a Lindbergh bill" (Fisher). So this means that Hauptmann had the Lindbergh ransom dollar bill in his possession. Also, "Hauptmann's tree-shaded home was ten blocks from the National Lumber and Millwork company, where lumber similar to that of the kidnap ladder had been
