<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Case Closed: Lindy did it.
Review: As a 25+ year law enforcement veteran, and current homicide detective (and NO, I was not involved in the O.J. investigation) my first impression upon hearing of this book and its premise, was to dismiss it out of hand. After all, I had read most everything else about the Lindbergh case and there had never been a hint that the kidnap was anything but real. Then I read the book. It's true, the book is not exceedingly well written but these two guys are not professional journalists. What I sensed as I read was the presence of a fellow dogged police investigator (Monier) and, what I have begrugingly come to admire over the years: the skeptical mind of the criminal defense lawyer (Ahlgren). In tandem, their approach to sleuthing an old case is deadly. As I proceeded through the book all the crazy facts of the case which had never seemed to make sense to anyone, and which had provided much of the lure to the Lindbergh case, suddenly seemed to fall into place. The authors show in Lindbergh himself those personality traits which, in my own experience, are consistent with a parent who commits a terrible crime, and then concocts a cover-up. Did Lindy in fact do it? The authors are honest enough to conceed that Lindy as culprit is only one of many scenarios, although one that has previosly been overlooked by the journalists and other amateurs who have studied this case. For me, in my own experience, I'd say it's the most likely explanation.
Rating: 
Summary: Condescending, sloppy, and utterly unprofessional
Review: First off, I am neither a huge fan nor a huge detractor of Charles A. Lindbergh; I acknowledge and appreciate his contributions (which are many) to the field of aviation, and beyond that I have no opinion of him as a person. Therefore, I read this book with a completely open mind regarding the disappearance of his son, Charles A. Lindbergh Jr., in March of 1932.
First, the positive -- "Crime of the Century" presents a fascinating 'alternative' solution as to solving the mystery regarding the child's disappearance, and it outlines a scenario which can go far in convincing the casual reader that Lindbergh had motive and opportunity to commit a crime for which an "innocent man" was eventually given the death penalty.
Second, the far more prevalent negative -- "Crime of the Century" is written in a sloppy, meandering, and poorly-edited manner, one which will turn off a lot of readers as being annoying and inexcusably unprofessional considering the fact that the authors are literally damning the respected name of a long-dead celebrity. Furthermore, the authors of this book have apparently picked and chosen their "evidence" from an a la carte table of other, more powerful artifacts that utterly contradict the entire premise of their book. In other words, the authors have either ignored established evidence that doesn't support their own thesis, or nipped and tucked at the pieces of evidence they did choose so that they would conveniently fit the slots they created in their story. Still further, the authors do a slapdash job of citing sources -- they make wild, bold claims about what people "thought" or people's "characteristics" without the slightest inclination to say where on earth they have the evidence to support such claims. Their "notes" at the back of the book are inadequate and perfunctory, making their entire book seem like something of a gossipy editorial rather than a cold, hard analysis that can withstand assault by doubters.
Perhaps most annoying of all about this book is that the authors do not concede that their thesis is a POSSIBILITY among many, but rather THE answer to what happened. This strikes me as both disrespectful to the vast body of work already published about this case -- work which is generally, I dare say, infinitely superior to this one both in dedication to research and in presentation -- and to the weighty subject matter at hand. A baby was murdered. A family grieved.
Rather than do the sensible (and responsible) thing of taking in all the evidence compiled by other researchers over the years and exploring all avenues to where such evidence leads, describing to the reader why other theories are flawed where as their own has so convinced them that they are willing to call a national hero not only a murderer, but also a DOUBLE murderer (because if Lindbergh was guilty he led directly to Haupmann's execution), the authors of this book have chosen instead to write a sloppy, poorly-executed book that focuses on sensationalism rather than responsible investigation.
They look at all the evidence from a biased viewpoint, contort potentially useful evidence so that it supports their biased viewpoint, and conveniently do not mention any evidence which refutes their biased viewpoint.
The authors of this book have a wonderful and absolutely plausible scenario. They fall flat on their faces, however, because they don't take the time to destroy other theories in a methodical manner. They waste many pages on interesting but useless "background" information on Lindbergh's life -- ostensibly to establish Lindbergh's 'shady' personality, although I suspect part of the reason might be to flesh out their book, since the amount of "research" they did could have been condensed to a paper of about 15 pages rather than the meandering 250 page mess it eventually became. They could have much more usefully filled those extra pages with responsible documentation of sources and methodical dismantling of established theories regarding this case.
This book should be one star, but it gets two for its interesting theory.
Rating: 
Summary: Still questions
Review: In this book, Ahlgren and Monier construct an alternate hypothesis of the circumstances surrounding the death of Charles Lindbergh, Jr., in 1932 (read some of the other reviews to find out who their suspect is). The authors are trained crime professionals and their guess is a plausible one. But it is just that - a guess. The trail is colder than the South Pole. There are many possible hypotheses as to what happened to the Lindbergh baby and this is only one of them. Ahlgren and Monier present a convincing case that Bruno Hauptmann, the man arrested, convicted, and executed for the kidnapping, was either innocent or, at worst, a subsidiary figure in a kidnapping ring. He was ruthlessly "framed" by the New York and New Jersey police, who concocted additional evidence to build a case against Hauptmann. However, Ahlgren and Monier never explain how a large percentage of the Lindbergh ransom money ended up in Hauptmann's possession. Furthermore, the case for Hauptmann has also been made by other books and documentaries. This book should be very interesting to people who have an interest in the Lindbergh kidnapping case. However, readers should not rely on it as their one and only book to tell them about the "Crime of the Century."
Rating: 
Summary: Typical of the time
Review: The belief that Lindbergh killed his own son is unfortunately the prevalent one in America. That's sad, because that accusation never reached the mainstream until many years after Lindbergh's death, and that those accusations were nursed and spread by people (I won't say who) who had, and have, good reason to hate Lindbergh and would have, and do have, a vested interest in getting others to hate him. Apparently, they have succeeded.
Rating:
Summary: Famous'Infamous
Review: The national reputation of Charles A. Lindbergh Jr.--"The Lone Eagle"--was of close-to-heroic proportions. But off-duty professional snoops Ahlgren and Monier scratched below the glossy surface (as would today's F.B.I. profilers) and found a warped personality. They have put together a convincing argument (circumstantial, just like the "official" one) that Lindbergh himself, in a practical joke gone horribly wrong, accidentally dropped the baby and buried him in a shallow grave nearby. Especially unconscionable was his waiting till Hauptman fried before leaving the country. Hauptman's only crime was in trying to claim the ransome money--but he was the only one of the hundreds who sought it to be burned for "murder."
Justice in the 30s was much different than today's, but the public hysteria over the famous is much the same.
The book could have used a professional copy editor/proofreader.
Rating:
Summary: A bad, bad book
Review: The only way a reader could give any credibility to the authors' outlandish and contradictory theories (either Charles Lindbergh or his sister-in-law killed the baby!) is to ignore the actual evidence which overwhelmingly proves Bruno Hauptman's guilt. And that's exactly what the authors do: They ignore the fact that large amounts of ransom money was found at Hauptman's house, that the unique mis-spellings in the ranson notes (for example, hyphenation of "New-York") matched handwriting samples from Hauptmann written from before the kidnapping (pretty hard to fabricate or forge pre-existing business documents), that Hauptmann was a notorious "second-story" burglar back in Germany, etc., etc. The authors focus on the weak pieces of evidence against Hauptman and then knock down that evidence--a classic "Straw Man" strategy. The authors base their theory on an affidavit which, (they casually mention) was "lost" years ago. Now THAT'S SOME PROOF!!!!
If you are seriously interested in this crime, read one or both of Jim Fischer's books.
Rating:
Summary: Should have been footnoted throughout
Review: The problem with so many of the Lindbergh Kidnapping books is that they are the products of various authors who are pushing some theory, personal observation, an unproven conclusion or an interpretation. This book would have been fabulous, if the authors would have taken the time to footnote each and every one of their "established facts" and "proveable conclusions." Real investigators do this, scientific investigators do this, lawyers trying cases use footnotes and citations, and so do professional historians. The authors should go back through their book and footnote everything in it---as I believe serious students of the Kidnapping, other investigators and future readers will want to know where they got this or that fact, observation, conclusion, and why they came to this or that interpretation. The problem with most of the books that deal with the Lindbergh Kidnapping is that they are the product of research that is NOT careful, scientific and methodical---nor do they use data, documents and facts that are proveable. This book is disappointing on account of it's lacking the application of the scientic method appropriate to the authors' investigations--footnotes and other citations would have given their work the veracity that it deserves. Without them, it's just another hack job.
Rating: 
Summary: A Compelling Theory
Review: The theory that Charles Lindbergh might have committed the kidnapping as a 'joke' (he was well known for pulling bizarre and risky practical jokes on friends and family) was a possibility that was never considered by the police who investigated the kidnapping at the time. It should have been considered! Contemporary readers have the benefit of knowing about the Ramsey case, the Susan Smith case and many other sad stories of parents harming their own children.People who dismiss Ahlgren and Monier's book and theory that Lindy was involved in his son's disappearance and death must have the stars of Lindbergh's fame clouding their eyes. One also needs to realize that Lindbergh's contribution to American culture as an aviator did not make him a perfect man or father. If Lindbergh did what Ahlgren and Monier suggest he did, he was guilty of poor judgment and had an amazing lack of protective parental instincts for his son, but he was not a cold blooded killer. There were many 'loose ends' in the state's case against Bruno Richard Hauptmann. This book offers some very plausible explanations for many of the previously unexplained or poorly explained events surrounding the 'kidnapping' and death of Charles Lindbergh, jr. It is not perfectly written, but it's well worth the read.
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely Awful
Review: This is a stupid book, written by people who lack the education, background, motivation, and writing skills to convince anyone who doesn't sit around all day watching talk shows or reading tabloids that their theory is plausible. They have an interesting theory but can't back it up. Sorry.
By the way, looking at their personal photos on the back cover just makes me want to slap both of them.
Rating:
Summary: The worst book ever written on the subject
Review: This is without question the worst book written on the Lindbergh kidnapping. The authors offer a theory that Lindbergh accidentally killed his son and then created the kidnapping to cover his blunder. Lindbergh then coldly sat idly by and allowed Hauptmann to be executed.
The problem with this book is that there is not one single, solitary, piece or scintilla of evidence to support the theory. In actuality, the official records reveal that Lindbergh did not have sufficient time to do all of the things he would have had to have accomplished for this foolish theory to work.
The authors also claim to have visited the New Jersey State Police Museum and Archives to research the case. I have personally spoken to my friend, Mark Falzini, who informs me that neither author ever set foot in the archives. They sent a letter requesting a few photos and so forth, but that was it.
In the strongest possible terms, I caution anyone about buying or reading this book. It is tabloid journalism at best, libel at worst.
<< 1 >>
|
