A New Series From The Free Press | The Lindbergh Conspiracies (EP03)

Summary

The Free Press Investigates: The Lindbergh Conspiracies

Episode 3: Follow the Money
Release Date: June 2, 2026
Host: Joe Nocera
Featured Guests: Richard Cahill, Jim Davidson, Greg Algren, Renell Delmont, Kurt Perlak, Maria Fredericks

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the pivotal role of the ransom money in the Lindbergh kidnapping investigation. Through expert interviews and narrative analysis, the episode examines how money traced the investigation, why suspicions fell on Bruno Richard Hauptmann, and the many controversies surrounding his arrest and conviction. The hosts scrutinize the strengths and failings of the evidence, revealing why the "crime of the century" remains a source of widespread debate and conspiracy.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Lindbergh’s Controversial Demand Regarding Ransom Money

[00:55]

• Lindbergh instructed the bank not to keep a record of serial numbers on the ransom bills, hoping to ease the return of his kidnapped son.
• This action is cited by skeptics as additional suspicion of Lindbergh’s own involvement in the crime.

“He instructed the bank…to make sure they kept no record of the serial numbers of the bills. That way the money couldn't be traced. I kid you not.”
— Joe Nocera [00:47]

• Elmer Irey (U.S. Treasury) overruled Lindbergh, insisting serial numbers be recorded or the Treasury would drop the case.

2. The Gold Certificate Strategy

[02:38]

• Elmer Irey knew of impending U.S. laws outlawing gold certificate hoarding, so a substantial part of the ransom was paid using these distinctive and soon-to-be-withdrawn bills.
• The Treasury meticulously recorded 5,100 serial numbers used for the ransom, making eventual tracing possible.

“A substantial part of the ransom was paid in gold certificates. Because in 1933…they would become much easier to spot.”
— Richard Cahill [02:38]

3. Tracing the Money to Bruno Richard Hauptmann

[03:55]

• Over years, ransom money slowly surfaced in New York banks, often too late for meaningful leads.
• Breakthrough: In 1934, a gas station attendant took note of a customer paying with a $10 gold certificate, recording his license plate. The bank recognized it as ransom money, leading police directly to Hauptmann.

“They discovered the car belonged to…Bruno Richard Hauptmann, a German carpenter.”
— Joe Nocera [05:05]

4. The Narrowing Focus on Hauptmann

[05:21]

• Once Hauptmann was arrested, authorities effectively dropped other leads and alternatives.
• Hauptmann’s checkered past in Germany—a young petty criminal and stowaway to America—was heavily scrutinized in court.

“Once they had Hauptmann, the investigators had one clear cut goal, to gather enough evidence to put him in the electric chair.”
— Joe Nocera [05:40]

5. Prejudice and Questionable Police Tactics

[07:57] / [10:12]

• Anti-German sentiment and suspicion of “illegal aliens” influenced public perception and judicial treatment of Hauptmann.
• Police resorted to coercive interrogations and intimidation to extract a confession and silence alibis.

“They take Hauptmann into the police station… and basically beat the hell out of the guy… having him up constantly, forcing him to copy the ransom notes as they were and so on.”
— Jim Davidson [10:12]

• Hauptmann’s inability to fluently express himself in English further hurt his case in court.

“He screamed out, ‘Everybody had baby carriages.’ Well, nobody knew what he meant…”
— Richard Cahill [08:24]

6. The Role of Isidor Fisch

[09:24]

• Hauptmann claimed another German immigrant, Isidor Fisch, had left him the money. Fisch did, in provable fact, die in Germany and had used ransom gold certificates to buy his ticket home.
• Authorities found this angle inconvenient and dropped it.

“But with Fisch dead, prosecutors had zero interest in pursuing an angle that might exonerate Hauptmann.”
— Joe Nocera [09:35]

7. The Evidence: Ladder, Tools, and the Closet

[12:13]

• Physical evidence, like tool marks and wood from Hauptmann’s attic, linked him to the crime.
• Condon’s address and phone number appearing inside Hauptmann’s closet is still debated; some suggest another journalist wrote it, but Hauptmann acknowledged it at trial—allegedly due to confusion or pressure.

8. Doubts and Alternative Theories

[13:49]

• Many pieces of evidence have counterpoints or alternative explanations.
• Some believe Hauptmann could have been an extortionist—not the actual kidnapper.
• Guests highlight the impossibility of someone from the Bronx finding the remote Lindbergh home by chance.

“I don’t think the evidence puts him in Hopewell.”
— Greg Algren [14:41]

9. The Role of Prejudice and Psychology

[17:00]/[17:27]

• Psychologist Jerry Cross and others cite the climate of anti-German feeling in America—suggesting Hauptmann’s conviction and execution were partly motivated by national prejudice and hysteria.

“That was extremely important…because something was gurgling in the American unconscious. They knew something was going to happen, but it hadn’t happened yet. Hitler is appearing. Nazism is starting to show its face, and then the Lindbergh child is kidnapped. I think it’s a premonition…”
— Richard Cahill [17:27]

10. Handwriting and the Ransom Notes

[19:02]

• Multiple ransom notes were sent; experts at the time claimed Hauptmann wrote them, but modern visual analysis (and some experts) note that different handwriting appears.
• Author Maria Fredericks raises concerns about coerced handwriting samples.

“You don’t have to be a handwriting expert, but they are written by different people from the night of to here. It doesn’t all match.”
— Poppy (paraphrased by Richard Cahill) [20:04]

11. DNA Testing Stonewalled

[20:12]

• Envelopes and stamps used in the ransom communications could contain the perpetrator’s DNA—a modern test could settle guilt or innocence.
• New Jersey authorities have repeatedly refused DNA testing requests without explanation.

“It would be really simple to determine Haltmann's guilt or innocence right now. Simple how? With DNA. But whenever the New Jersey State Police Museum has been asked… it is always said no.”
— Joe Nocera [20:12]

• Kurt Perlak, attorney and Lindbergh case scholar, continues to push for DNA testing, facing institutional indifference or resistance.

“If nobody cares about this, then, then why do you guys care about it? Why can't you allow some DNA testing on a couple pieces of paper? Yeah, no, we're not going to do that.”
— Kurt Perlak [21:55]

12. The Official Narrative & Open Questions

[22:18+]

• Police and prosecutors built a case of Hauptmann acting alone: driving from NYC to secluded Hopewell, building and climbing a ladder, abducting the baby, and returning to the Bronx undetected.
• Questions remain: if Hauptmann was simply an extortionist, why not confess to charge-reducing crimes? Did he really get a fair trial, or was he doomed by circumstance and hysteria?

“If the kidnapping itself was the crime of the century, the trial that took place…was the trial of the century. The question nobody was asking in the 1930s is the question today. Did Richard Bruno Hauptmann get a fair trial?”
— Joe Nocera [24:41]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the chain of evidence:
  “They had their man—or did they?”
  — Joe Nocera [05:40]

• On investigative tunnel vision:
  “Once Hauptmann was arrested, the investigators stopped looking into other possible suspects.”
  — Joe Nocera [05:40]

• On the impossibility of Hauptmann acting alone:
  “To have somebody from the Bronx come out and find this house is almost an impossibility…”
  — Jim Davidson [11:01]

• On whether Hauptmann could have been an extortionist, not a kidnapper:
  “It's not black or white. I'm not saying he was an extortionist. … I don't think the evidence puts him in Hopewell.”
  — Greg Algren [14:41]

• On the lack of interest in reexamining the evidence with DNA:
  “It was just—the answer is no. So like they wanted me to clearly go away.”
  — Kurt Perlak [21:55]

• Reflection on justice:
  “The whole country wanted to see the guy die.”
  — Joe Nocera [24:26]

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:55: Lindbergh’s demand to avoid recording serial numbers; Irey’s intervention
• 02:38: Use of gold certificates and the rationale
• 03:55: Discovery of Hauptmann via gold certificate at a gas station
• 05:21: Investigators dropping all leads but Hauptmann
• 07:57 / 10:12: Prejudice, pressure, and brutality by police
• 09:24: The Isidor Fisch connection
• 12:13: Physical evidence: tools, ladder, and closet inscription
• 17:27: Psychological and historical perspective on anti-German sentiment
• 19:02 / 20:04: Debate over handwriting on ransom notes
• 20:12: Frustration around DNA testing refusal
• 22:18–24:41: Recap of the police case; discussion of trial and fairness

---

Conclusion

Episode 3 of "The Lindbergh Conspiracies" masterfully dissects the money trail and the ensuing investigation, laying bare the messiness and contradictions in what seemed an open-and-shut case. Through interviews and historical context, the show questions the adequacy of the evidence, the role of bias and prejudice, and whether justice truly prevailed in the trial (and execution) of Bruno Richard Hauptmann. The lingering lack of DNA testing and institutional reluctance to revisit the case serve as a chilling reminder that the full truth behind the "crime of the century" may still be out of reach.

Teaser:
The next episode will focus on the centerpiece of justice: Did Hauptmann get a fair trial?

Transcript

[Joe Nocera]

You survived the Miami Weekend, nailed the speech, and maxed out your credit card in the name of friendship. Now you've got one hangover, four pastel dresses, and zero reasons to wear them again. Sell them on, Depop. Just snap a few photos and we'll take care of the rest. And you at least get some of your dignity money back. Someone on Depop wants what you've got. Start selling now, Depop. Where taste recognizes taste. Before we get started, just to let you know, if you want to binge this whole series today and without ads, you should become a paid subscriber to the Free Press. Our paid subscribers can listen to all six episodes right now with no ads and will gain all the other benefits of a paid free press subscription. That's access to our journalism, podcasts, community features and event perks. Subscribe today and save yourself waiting for the next episode. Remember when I said that Charles Lindbergh did a lot of boneheaded things during the search for his kidnapped son? Well, let me give you a primo example. He instructed the bank that was putting together the ransom money, the money that John Condon was going to give to Cemetery John, to make sure they kept no record of the serial numbers of the bills. That way the money couldn't be traced. I kid you not. Why in the world would the great aviator suggest such a thing? Well, he felt that the easier he made it for the kidnappers to get away, the better the chances they would give him his child back. Of course, for those who now take a darker view of Lindbergh's actions, it's just another data point suggesting his involvement in the crime. He wanted to make it easy for the kidnappers because, you know, he was in on it. As usual, Norman Schwarzkopf was willing to go along, but that treasury official, Elma Iray, the guy who put Al Capone in jail and refused to let him out for Lindbergh's sake, he put his foot down. His title was Chief Law Enforcement officer of the U.S. treasury. And he told Lindbergh that if the money went to the kidnappers unmarked, the Treasury Department would abandon the case. Reluctantly, Lindbergh went along with Irae's demand. And though he didn't tell this to Lindbergh, Irey had a little trick up his sleeve.

[Richard Cahill]

When they put the ransom together, they had Elmer Iray. And he knew. It wasn't well known, but he knew that President Roosevelt was going to order all gold certificates to be turned in. It was going to be illegal to hoard gold. So they made sure A substantial part of the ransom was paid in gold certificates. Because in 1933, when this was going to happen, and Ira knew it was going to happen, they would become much easier to spot.

[Joe Nocera]

Gold certificates were bills that were backed not just by the US Government like the Dollariz, but by actual gold reserves. You know, the bricks in Fort Knox. They had a distinctive look. At Irae's instructions, The treasury team recorded a master list of every serial number of the gold certificate bills intended for ransom. Since smaller denominations of the bill, such as fives and tens and twenties, were going to be used in the ransom. The list was long, like 5,100 serial numbers. That was the money that Jaffse handed over to Cemetery John.

[Richard Cahill]

We all know that they sent out lists of the serial numbers on the bills to all the bank tellers and so forth. But checking every bill like this, the odds of them catching it isn't very good.

[Joe Nocera]

But.

[Richard Cahill]

But when it's just gold certificates and they're unusual to see, it's, you know, and they're under orders, you will check every gold certificate.

[Joe Nocera]

Over the course of the next few years, small amounts of the ransom money did show up in banks, mostly in the Bronx. But by the time the banks figured out a particular bill was part of the ransom, too much time had passed for the teller to remember who turned it in. But then, on September 15, 1934, more than two years after little Lindy was taken, a brown Dodge sedan pulled into a gas station. The driver was well dressed, and he spoke in a foreign accent. The manager of the station filled the tank, and when it came time to pay, the customer handed over a $10 gold certificate. Now, the attendant didn't suspect the man of being the Lindbergh kidnapper. He was just worried that he was going to get stiffed because the bank wouldn't accept the bill, which were no longer legal tender. So he wrote the license plate on the back of the bill just in case. This time, when the certificate was deposited, the bank quickly realized it was part of the ransom. The teller recalled that it had been deposited by a filling station. The police tracked down the right station, spoke to the manager, traced the license plate. And discovered the car belonged to, you guessed it, Bruno Richard Hauptman, a German carpenter.

[Jim Davidson]

They arrested Haltman even though they had other leads for other people at the time. They just dropped all the other leads and didn't want to pursue anything. That money kept appearing in New York. And they said, oh, forget about it. We're not going to track the money anymore.

[Joe Nocera]

So that was it they had their man or did they? I'm Joe Nocera and for the Free Press, this is the Lindbergh conspiracies. This is episode three, Follow the Money. Once Hoffman was arrested, the investigators stopped looking into other possible suspects. Bruno Richard Hoffman was the guiltiest man I ever knew, Elma Ire wrote after he retired. Once they had Hauptman, the investigators had one clear cut goal, to gather enough evidence to put him in the electric chair. Some of that evidence was real and undeniable, but some of it was, well, pretty shaky. And that's a polite way of putting it. In Germany, where Hauptman grew up, he was a small time crook who had spent some time in prison for burglary and theft. Historian Anthony Scudutto, who wrote a book about the case, unearthed anecdotes that show Hauptman was clearly a rather cheeky criminal. While exercising in the jail yard one day, Haltman slipped through an open gate, but not without leaving his prison clothes on the doorstep with a note that read, best wishes to the police. He was 24 when he came to America as a stowaway in July 1923. It was his second attempt, the first time he'd been caught and sent back. A decade after coming to America, Hartman was living in the Bronx and working as an itinerant carpenter with his wife Anna, who, by the way, fiercely defended him until her death in 1994 at the age of 95. She worked part time in a bakery. They had just had a son named Manfred. Like most germans in the U.S. hoffman faced prejudice. A holdover from World War I, Renell Delma has a rather pithy way of putting it.

[Renell Delmont]

German Illegal alien. Anybody heard about illegal aliens lately?

[Joe Nocera]

Hoffman spoke broken English and that was one bit of evidence against him. The gas station attendant, Jaffse Lindbergh, they all said the man they heard had a strong German accent. Remember, hey, Doc? But his inability to speak English fluently hurt him in ways that went well beyond the evidence, especially during the trial. Here's Richard Cahill.

[Richard Cahill]

When he was being cross examined, he was asked about his past and his criminal past. And one of the offenses that he had been charged and convicted of in Germany was a robbery, an armed robbery where there were women who had baby carriages and he and another person held them up at gunpoint. And they were trying to say, oh, how could you do that with a baby and the child and so forth. And he screamed out, everybody had baby carriages. Well, nobody knew what he meant. What he meant was that at that time period in Germany. There was horrible inflation, and it was a very difficult time. And what a lot of people did is they would hide their valuables in a baby carriage because what monster would go through a baby carriage but he couldn't express it?

[Joe Nocera]

But then there was this. When investigators searched his property for clues, they found $14,000 in gold certificates. Certificates that were unquestionably part of the ransom. Houptman did have an explanation for this. Retired cop, Greg Algren.

[Greg Algren]

He had a story about another immigrant having given him the money to keep before going back to Germany and dying of natural causes, tuberculosis. I believe that story could be correct.

[Joe Nocera]

As a matter of fact, there was such a fellow, another German immigrant named Isidor Fisch. And he did go back to Germany in December 1933, nine months before Haltmann was arrested. And he did die of tuberculosis. After Hauptman was arrested, investigators retrieved the bills Fish had used to pay for his return trip. And you know what they were? Gold certificates with serial numbers that showed they'd been part of the ransom. But with Fish dead, prosecutors had zero interest in pursuing an angle that might exonerate Haltman.

[Jim Davidson]

They take Haltman into the police station in New York, the Greenwich police Station, and basically beat the hell out of the guy using a hammer wrapped in a sock and everything else. And sleep, depriving him, having him up constantly, forcing him to copy the ransom notes as they were and so on.

[Joe Nocera]

He won't fess up. Evidence that might suggest Hauptman didn't do it or at least didn't do it alone is completely ignored.

[Jim Davidson]

Now, I gotta tell you, from living in the Sarah Lynns across the driveway,

[Joe Nocera]

you might remember from previous episodes Jim Davidson telling us he lived in the area. In fact, he lived very close to the Lindbergh house in Hopewell.

[Jim Davidson]

They only paved that road in 1969. Right now you can barely get two cars across it. Back then, it was literally a trail and no signs up on the mountain. And to have somebody from the Bronx come out and find this house is almost an impossibility. But yet, once Haltman found the money, that's how everything changed.

[Joe Nocera]

And they didn't want to hear anything that distracted from the possibility that Bruno was their guy.

[Jim Davidson]

And it was also interesting how the state police intimidated anybody that would back Haltman's excuse. Like the day the ransom money was paid, it was his birthday and they were having a party at his house, and that didn't mean anything to the police. And if somebody like Hans Kuppelberg, Hans

[Joe Nocera]

and Bruno were best friends, came forward

[Jim Davidson]

and said, you know, I was at this party. They said, well, then you're going to be an accessory to the crime. So, you know, one by one, any of Haltman's alibis were just intimidated out of the picture.

[Joe Nocera]

To be fair, investigators kept finding evidence pointing to Hauptman's guilt, too. Remember, he was a carpenter. Tool marks on the ladder matched tools he owned. And he seemed to have a set of chisels that matched the chisel found at the scene of the crime. Then there was the ladder, the infamous ladder. Some of the wood used to make the ladder was found to match wood used as flooring in his attic. At his trial, a wood expert would say as much. And then there's something really odd. Condon's telephone number and address were found scrawled on a door frame inside Hauptman's closet. Author Maria Fredericks thinks all of these unanswered questions are what keep modern day investigators tantalized and frustrated.

[Renell Delmont]

I think the fact that the crime scene was not properly secured, that footprint evidence was eradicated, the fact that when you're dealing with a family of the wealth and influence of the Lindberghs and the person who is executed happens to be a poor undocumented immigrant, I do think that the evidence with Houtman, the latter evidence, the fact that when he was asked about having Condon's number written in his closet, I think the unanswered questions of how did Houtman go from the Bronx to Hopewell, New Jersey? What did he intend to do with the child?

[Joe Nocera]

In fact, with every piece of evidence against Hoffman, there always seems to be something else that sheds doubt on it. Like that phone number in the closet. A journalist later said he wrote it. But then why did Hauptman agree that he'd been the one to write it?

[Renell Delmont]

Hauptman's answer was, oh, I was a little bit interested in the trial, so I guess I jotted it down. Well, if I hadn't put Jaffsey's number in my closet, I would not say that I had.

[Joe Nocera]

Greg Algren, the former cop who thinks the kidnapping was a Lindbergh prank gone wrong, says there's plenty to point to Bruno being an extortionist, but not a kidnapper. In other words, the reason he saw Condon's note in the Bronx Home News was because he lived in the Bronx and he saw an opportunity.

[Greg Algren]

He could very well have been an extortionist. And I think one of the mistakes that people who came before us made is that they feel, well, if Hoatman didn't do it, then he must be innocent, must be this guy who was framed, right? Then he must be this poor individual. But it's not black or white. I'm not saying he was an extortionist. I mean, the fish story could be correct. But they really wanted to put him in Hopewell. I don't think the evidence puts him in Hopewell. So if you say, look, he's an extortionist, if he had gotten up on the stand and said, I tried to make money off this, I did all these things, and you take all of that away, he concedes that. What evidence is there that he's in hope?

[Richard Cahill]

So you think he basically was an opportunist. Maybe he knew people who were involved, he acted upon that and then paid.

[Greg Algren]

That's a part of the bill, the

[Richard Cahill]

death penalty for that decision, but just was not actually involved in the kidnapping itself.

[Greg Algren]

I mean, Lindbergh goes to the press and says, we will pay a ransom, no questions asked. There'll be no prosecution, just give us the baby. He says that in the middle of the American Depression. I mean, guess what happens? I mean, every con artist in the world is coming forward and deluging hope on New Jersey with ransom demands and tips and everything else. We know the money was handed over. The last is there was no stranger of ducks. So it's unlikely it was a stranger abduction.

[Joe Nocera]

Because he's an ex cop, Algren tends to be open to a variety of possibilities. When a case hasn't been solved, it doesn't matter to him whether it's the Lindbergh kidnapping or a local homicide. Renell Delmont, though, is convinced that Hoffman was railroaded and that Lindbergh is largely responsible. When we were at the cemetery, Greg and Ornell got pretty animated about this. Well, that's their story. It may not be true. She's talking about Condon and Lindbergh. Remember, Ronelle thinks Lindbergh was in on it and Condon over time became a co conspirator.

[Greg Algren]

Right, but we don't. All we know is what I say this all the time. In my case, somebody will say, well, this happened. And I'll say, no, we don't know that that's what happened. All we know is that that's what witness A said happened. Right, the liar or the witness B

[Joe Nocera]

be the other liar. Right? Two people who.

[Greg Algren]

All we ever know in case is what people say about it. We don't know what happened.

[Renell Delmont]

That's my point.

[Joe Nocera]

Papi and I spoke to a psychologist named Jerry Cross. He believes Haltmann was innocent. And he puts a lot of weight on the fact that he was German. To him, there was significant prejudice towards Germans after World War I and maybe, just maybe, residing in the American psyche with something more, a premonition even. Hoffman goes to a gas station and

[Richard Cahill]

says, I got a nice $20 bill. And that's how he gets arrested. He didn't know if this was the Lindbergh money, but he's spending the Lindbergh money, and that's how he got caught. And he was totally innocent, but he was a German. That was extremely important that he began put to death because something was gurgling in the American unconscious. They knew something was going to happen, but it hadn't happened yet. Hitler is appearing. Nazism is starting to show its face, and then the Lindbergh child is kidnapped. I think it's a premonition rather than a reflection of the past.

[Joe Nocera]

Why are you so convinced that Hoffman was innocent?

[Richard Cahill]

Oh, simple. I could do a forensic approach, but I'll do a psychological approach. If you're guilty. I mean, he had a wife and he had a newborn baby, and he was offered, I don't know, 75 or $95,000. He was going to go to the electric chair and a journal said, we'll give you 95,000. You tell us the story. That money will go to your wife and their children. They'll be taking care of the rest of your life. And if he was guilty, that wouldn't have been a bad idea. But he said, no, I will never do that. He turned down the money. An innocent man would do that, but

[Jim Davidson]

a guilty man would not do that.

[Joe Nocera]

The ransom notes, of course, were important pieces of evidence. So the question became, had Hauptman written them? Prosecutors hoped handwriting analysis would tie him to the crime.

[Renell Delmont]

The handwriting is somewhat disputed because the police apparently told him to write and specific ways.

[Joe Nocera]

That's author Mariah Fredericks, but I think

[Renell Delmont]

they have hand driving that he wrote prior to the investigation, and it's still a pretty good match.

[Joe Nocera]

Here's the cool thing. You can actually go down to the New Jersey State Police Museum, where there's a big Lindbergh exhibit that includes a handful of the ransom notes. Needless to say, Poppy and I did exactly that. On a crisp October day last year,

[Richard Cahill]

we have on here replications of the various key ransom notes. And what is immediately obvious seeing them like this is different writers.

[Joe Nocera]

In all, The Lindberghs received 15 ransom notes and 13 envelopes. The most important one, of course, is the first one, the one that was left by the window on the night of. Poppy came to a pretty quick conclusion when she compared the original ransom note to the others in the Lindbergh exhibit.

[Richard Cahill]

You don't have to be a handwriting expert, but they are written by different people from the night of to here. It doesn't all match.

[Joe Nocera]

Although the handwriting experts said all the notes were written by Hauptman. The naked eye says otherwise. Or at least Poppy's naked eye. And I gotta tell you, mine too. Here we come to a pretty interesting modern day twist in the plot. It would be really simple to determine Haltmann's guilt or innocence right now. Simple how? With DNA. Of course, the kidnapper had to lick the envelope to seal it and he also had to lick the back of the stamp. All these years later, the DNA of the kidnapper would still be on the envelope and the stamp. But whenever the New Jersey State Police Museum has been asked to do DNA testing of the ransom note, it is always said no. When we asked their rationale, they wouldn't even discuss the matter. They acted like we wanted them to divulge the nuclear code. Anything with DNA testing, typing, anything to do with any forensic examination, we can't

[Richard Cahill]

discuss at this time.

[Joe Nocera]

Kurt Perlak is a lawyer and Lindberghologist who has filed multiple lawsuits against the museum to get the envelopes tested.

[Kurt Perlak]

I think that the only way to get real justice here is to find out out of these 225,000 pieces of paper, the 15 or so that might have tangible DNA should be examined, should be tested. And if Houtman's DNA is on those 15 pieces of paper, great. I think it's more likely than not that at least one of those pieces of paper does not have Houghton's DNA on them.

[Joe Nocera]

Kurt says that officials at the museum have tried to put him off from pursuing this by telling him the Lindbergh kidnapping is a nothing burger.

[Kurt Perlak]

Kurt, this is a 90 year old case that nobody cares about anymore. So my answer back to that was, well, that's great. If nobody cares about this, then, then why do you guys care about it? Why can't you allow some DNA testing on a couple pieces of paper? Yeah, no, we're not going to do that. And they weren't really giving a reason as to why. It was just the answer is no. So like they wanted me to clearly go away.

[Joe Nocera]

But God bless him, he hasn't. We'll catch up with him again later. Meanwhile, let's head back to the 1930s. Here's the case the police were building against Bruno. A German immigrant drove from the Bronx to Hopewell, somehow made his way to Lindbergh's house in the woods. He then lucked out because it turned out to be the rare weekday the Lindberghs were there. He climbed into the warped, unlocked window using a ladder he had built himself. He grabbed the baby and climbed out without leaving a fingerprint or a mud stain from his boots. How did the baby die? The investigator's theory was that the ladder cracked, causing Kaufman to drop the baby. Little Lindy died when his head hit the ground. In a panic, he disposed of the body in the woods. Then he began sending the Lindbergh ransom notes and took the money from Condit in the cemetery. For a long time he didn't spend the money because he assumed the banks had the serial numbers. But eventually he couldn't wait anymore and he used one too many gold certificates and he got caught. The state of New Jersey always viewed it as an open and shut case. He climbed in, he grabbed a baby, he climbed out, he dropped the baby. End of story. But if that's not what really happened, if Hoffman was just an extortionist trying to make a fast buck, why not just confess that and save himself?

[Greg Algren]

Rosie Hoffman gets on the jury box up in the jury Witten's box in 1935, and he says, I'm a real jerk. I saw an opportunity to make money and saw Jassy's announcement in the Bronx News. I figured I could make some easy money, so I figured I'd scam a national hero. I'm sorry I did that. I'm ashamed of myself. Yes, I did that. I took the money, I went to the cemetery, I pocketed the money. I used it to buy things over the years. But I wasn't on that ladder. In Hopewell, does the jury convict?

[Joe Nocera]

Yes.

[Renell Delmont]

There was no way he was gonna live.

[Joe Nocera]

The whole country wanted to see the guy die.

[Richard Cahill]

I think if you admit to one, they're like, what else is this guy lying about? Doesn't matter that he was truthful about this one thing. It must be a ploy to cover up his larger crime, which was the kidnapping.

[Joe Nocera]

One thing's for sure. If the kidnapping itself was the crime of the century, the trial that took place In January and February 1935 was the trial of the century. The question nobody was asking in the 1930s is the question today. Did Richard Bruno Hoffman get a fair trial? That's next time.