Lab Questions Forensic Science Essay

1. What is the crime that the video focuses on? The crime that the video focuses on is the kidnapping and death of Charles Lindbergh Jr. 2. What evidence did investigators attain about the crime in the 1930s? A homemade ladder left by the perpetrator, it was 8-10 at night when the crime occurred, nobody heard the kid crying from his room, and on that point was a pay off note left at the scene of the crime. 3. What evidence did investigators use to find a suspect? What was found at Hauptmanns home that linked to the crime? One piece of evidence used to find a suspect was the gold certificate money that was prone in the ransom. The stuff found at Hauptmanns home linking him to the crime were $14,000 of the ransom money, a handgun, and other suspicious items. 4. What information does the ladder give rhetorical scientists? Rail 16 of the ladder was identified as cosmos a piece of a floorboard from Hauptmanns attic, linking him to the making of it at his home.5. Why is it believed that Hauptmann had accomplices in the crime? It was believed that Hauptmann had accomplices for this crime because 2/3 of the ransom money was not in his possession as well as Douglass experience as a psychological profiler, commenting that you need multiple offenders who can reinforce individually other psychologically as well as feed off each other to commit a crime such as this, as well as that it was risky to attempt a crime such as the kidnapping and murder of the Lindbergh baby alone. 6. What evidence exists to cast suspicion on caper Knoll? What evidence exists to suggest that he wasnt involved? John was allegedly the name of the man given the ransom at the Bronx cemetery, casting suspicion on him. However, what kind of clears the air for him a little bit is Dr. Condons accounts, which frankly seemed to be somewhat inconsistent, as well as the present day handwriting analysis which makes points to it being unlikely that John Knoll wrote the ransom notes.7. What evidence exi sts to suggest that Charles Lindbergh himself was involved in the kidnapping and death of his son? Do you agree or disagree with this theory? Why? The evidence that patently suggests that Lindbergh was involved was his hatred of the police, his behavior, and the keeping of the ransom notes and meetings secret, making people believe he was hiding something. I dont want to believe that Lindbergh would machinate the kidnapping of his own child, but, in that location is evidence pointing to him doing such a thing, and the biggest piece of it would be his interest in the eugenics movement. There are some people thatwould go to great lengths to try to have the best kid they could (even though the best kid they could have is one that they produced to begin with, anomaly or no anomaly). 8. ground on the evidence presented in the video, what do you conceptualize happened? What evidence supports your theory? Personally, what I believe happened is that the kidnapping of the baby was indee d orchestrated by Charles Lindbergh, and that there were at a minimum three people involved, those being Lindbergh, Knoll, and Hauptmann. I also believe that there was a possibility of more people being involved, frankly, it wouldnt surprise me if more people were involved in this case.Id like to focus on Knoll for a bit. What I think directly links him to the case is the feature that he suddenly came into a large sum of money and was spending it extravagantly, as well as the fact that he remained in Europe until Hauptmann was convicted. While some people could verbalism at that as a coincidence, I dont believe it to be a coincidence, I think that he was laying low in Germany until the trial was over. The next thing I would like to take a relish at is the handwriting analyses. What was found during each analysis of Knoll and Hauptmanns handwritings was that it was unlikely that either of them had been the writers of the ransom note, which I feel supports my theory that chances ar e there were more than just them involved. Its a possibility that Lindbergh himself could have written those notes, if you absolutely think about it.The final thing I want to look at the death itself. I feel like the death itself was an accident, the kidnapping wasnt, but to me, I think death itself was. I can see Lindbergh wanting(p) to get rid of his baby and putting him in an institution because of the fact that he had imperfect genes (as classified by Lindbergh), but to kill ones own baby because of their genetics? That to me doesnt make sense, although, the thought of getting rid of your baby just because they dont have good genes doesnt make sense to me either, I would love my baby no matter what. I dont think Lindbergh wanted his baby dead, just in an institution. The bottom line is this, what I believe happened was an intentional kidnapping and an unintentional homicide with at the very least 3 perpetrators.