What do you think?
Rate this book
Lindbergh: The Crime
Edgar Award This “sensational” and “absolutely compelling” true crime tale finally answers the Who really killed the Lindbergh baby? (San Francisco Chronicle). On the night of March 1, 1932, celebrated aviator Charles Lindbergh’s infant son was kidnapped from his New Jersey home. The family paid $50,000 to get “Little Lindy” back, but his remains were discovered in a grove of trees four miles from the Lindbergh house. More than two years after the abduction, Bruno Hauptmann, an unemployed carpenter and illegal German immigrant, was caught with $20,000 of the ransom money. He was arrested, tried, and executed for the crime. But did he really do it? New York Times–bestselling author Noel Behn spent eight years investigating the case, revisiting old evidence, discovering new information, and shining a bright light on the controversial actions of public figures such as New Jersey Governor Harold Hoffman, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, New Jersey State Police Superintendent H. Norman Schwarzkopf, and Charles Lindbergh himself. The result is a fascinating and convincing new theory of the crime that exonerates Hauptmann and names a killer far closer to the Lindbergh family. A finalist for the Edgar Award, Lindbergh “not only provides answers to the riddles of the ‘Crime of the Century,’ but hurls us into time past, to a special moment in American history” (Peter Maas, New York Times–bestselling author of Underboss).
496 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1994
117 people are currently reading
218 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
March 9, 2022
Noel Behn's Lindbergh: The Crime offers an absurd take on the "Kidnapping of the Century," the kidnapping and murder of Charles Lindbergh Jr. in 1932. Behn (a novelist who occasionally dabbled in historical/crime writing - perhaps a red flag already) is a revisionist who claims that convicted killer Bruno Hauptmann was framed or at least wrongly convicted, an opinion which is fairly common although I've yet to see a truly convincing argument for it. Behn certainly doesn't provide one. Although he provides some tantalizing evidence that the investigation was mishandled and flawed if not inaccurate evidence was used to convict Hauptmann, like many conspiracy theorists he stumbles trying to find an alternate explanation. He postulates that Charles Jr. was killed by Lindbergh's unstable sister-in-law and the whole circus was Lindy's attempt to cover it up. This doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny because Behn doesn't present any strong evidence this was the case - he blatantly frames it as "if you assume X happened, then my theory makes sense" and bumbles on acting as if that's all he needs. It's the classic conspiracy theorist's dodge: the "official story" has some minor flaws, so I can make up whatever nonsense I want and not bother defending it. Who's to say who's right? Well, most discerning readers can provide their own judgment.
December 23, 2017
I'm honestly mystified on how to rate Noel Behn's book, "Lindbergh: The Crime". For most of the book, Behn takes a good look at Charles Lindbergh and the literal circus of journalistic, criminal, and societal madness of the kidnapping of "the Eaglet" - as Charles Lindbergh, Jr is referred to -in 1932. It's the last part of the book - where Behn postulates a theory on who really killed that baby - that the book takes flight into unreality.
Noel Behn's book was originally published in 1995. This was after Lindbergh's death in 1974, but before the death of his wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh in 2001. I think it was also before the fact of Lindbergh's second, third, and fourth families - all fathered with German women during his marriage to Anne - was known. I don't think this new edition of the book gets into anything that has come out since the original publication. Noel Behn died in 1998. But from what Behn has written. Charles A Lindbergh comes across as a rather strange man, something most other biographers seem to agree with. (For those readers who want to know more about Lindbergh's life, you might want to read A Scott Berg's bio "Lindbergh", which was published in 1999.)
The Lindbergh kidnapping took place - according to most historians - on March 1, 1932, at the Lindbergh's isolated new house in New Jersey. The media circus over the disappearance, the ransom notes, the sad discovery of the baby's battered body two months later was only bettered by the hoopla of the arrest, trial, and execution of a German immigrant, Bruno Richard Hauptmann in 1934. But, DID Hauptmann actually kidnap and kill the baby? He was certainly caught spending some of the ransom money? The Lindbergh case was certainly badly handled by the police in New Jersey and by the state's courts system after Hauptmann's arrest. A particular circus with a revolving cast of very odd characters - from media and political figures to crime lords to retired teachers - was involved the payment of the ransom.
Noel Behn has an alternate theory on who did the murder...and who covered it up and attempted to distract the police. It is a point that I don't think Behn proved in the book. For one thing, the crime and the coverup seemed to involve more than one person, and when two or more people are involved in a plot - particularly one of this size and historical magnitude - someone was going to talk. Behn simply doesn't make a strong enough case for this alternate theory. He throws the red meat out there...but doesn't follow up.
So, I'm giving the Noel Behn reprint four stars. The parts about the characters, the background, the crime, trial, and execution of Bruno Richard Hauptmann - is actually quite good. But the part about who ACTUALLY did the crime was weak sauce.
Noel Behn's book was originally published in 1995. This was after Lindbergh's death in 1974, but before the death of his wife, Anne Morrow Lindbergh in 2001. I think it was also before the fact of Lindbergh's second, third, and fourth families - all fathered with German women during his marriage to Anne - was known. I don't think this new edition of the book gets into anything that has come out since the original publication. Noel Behn died in 1998. But from what Behn has written. Charles A Lindbergh comes across as a rather strange man, something most other biographers seem to agree with. (For those readers who want to know more about Lindbergh's life, you might want to read A Scott Berg's bio "Lindbergh", which was published in 1999.)
The Lindbergh kidnapping took place - according to most historians - on March 1, 1932, at the Lindbergh's isolated new house in New Jersey. The media circus over the disappearance, the ransom notes, the sad discovery of the baby's battered body two months later was only bettered by the hoopla of the arrest, trial, and execution of a German immigrant, Bruno Richard Hauptmann in 1934. But, DID Hauptmann actually kidnap and kill the baby? He was certainly caught spending some of the ransom money? The Lindbergh case was certainly badly handled by the police in New Jersey and by the state's courts system after Hauptmann's arrest. A particular circus with a revolving cast of very odd characters - from media and political figures to crime lords to retired teachers - was involved the payment of the ransom.
Noel Behn has an alternate theory on who did the murder...and who covered it up and attempted to distract the police. It is a point that I don't think Behn proved in the book. For one thing, the crime and the coverup seemed to involve more than one person, and when two or more people are involved in a plot - particularly one of this size and historical magnitude - someone was going to talk. Behn simply doesn't make a strong enough case for this alternate theory. He throws the red meat out there...but doesn't follow up.
So, I'm giving the Noel Behn reprint four stars. The parts about the characters, the background, the crime, trial, and execution of Bruno Richard Hauptmann - is actually quite good. But the part about who ACTUALLY did the crime was weak sauce.
June 12, 2021
This book messed with my head in the best way. I say in my profile that I love books that overturn my apple cart. Apples everywhere on my path. I am actually a little creeped out, to be honest.
1. There was no kidnapping. I won't spoil it for you, but that poor baby was not kidnapped.
2. Lindbergh was this strange figure who could just approach anyone and tell them he was now working for/with them...and it was so. We should never give anyone that much power again. No education or qualifications, and he would be working on scientific or government projects because he wanted to. Insane.
3. Charles Lindbergh was not a good person at all. He was a controlling narcissist and a Nazi sympathizer.
4. Everything you have heard about this case--how the board from Bruno Hauptmann's attic perfectly matched the missing rung of the ladder, for instance--is wrong.
Trust me, this book is the definitive work on the case, written from all available case documents, including some that were private until given to the author, and it took eight years to research and write.
1. There was no kidnapping. I won't spoil it for you, but that poor baby was not kidnapped.
2. Lindbergh was this strange figure who could just approach anyone and tell them he was now working for/with them...and it was so. We should never give anyone that much power again. No education or qualifications, and he would be working on scientific or government projects because he wanted to. Insane.
3. Charles Lindbergh was not a good person at all. He was a controlling narcissist and a Nazi sympathizer.
4. Everything you have heard about this case--how the board from Bruno Hauptmann's attic perfectly matched the missing rung of the ladder, for instance--is wrong.
Trust me, this book is the definitive work on the case, written from all available case documents, including some that were private until given to the author, and it took eight years to research and write.
July 20, 2024
I overall found this book, and the authors attempt at keeping his audience reading by not fully divulging his final deduction until right near the end, ensuring we would keep reading. Viewing the details from multiple sides gives a well-rounded view of the conspiracy surrounding the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. I enjoy diving into a good conspiracy, and I feel the author has done a great job in convincing me, or at least having me see his point of view. My biggest criticism of the book is the long-winded background descriptions of many key players and people involved in the story. While background is necessary, it often felt like it went on and on for pages and pages, which I found boring and honestly found myself skimming at some points. Overall, this book makes you think and acknowledge how easily someone can make you believe anything if they have enough control and power. It's definitely an interesting read.
January 23, 2018
As others have said, this is a tricky book to rate.
I've been reading about the Lindbergh kidnapping since the late '70s. This book contained information that I hadn't seen before, which I found interesting. It's bibliography is quite extensive, so that's helpful.
I appreciated that Behn included so many of the players, and he did a good job of introducing them and keeping them sorted out with a minimum of confusion; however, Behn allows his personal opinions about the various "characters" to creep in rather than presenting facts and allowing the reader to formulate their own opinions. There is so much detail that has been added that is just not necessary to the story of the kidnapping. Two examples, delving into the personalities, careers, and detailing the platforms of the two candidates for president in the 1928 and 1932 elections, and all of the trials and tribulations of Gov. Harold Hoffman's political career. There are already so many characters to keep track of that repeated distractions of extraneous information makes that task even more difficult and bogs down the narrative.
I also found distracting Behn's method of referring to the characters. Lindbergh was often referred to by his full name or as "Charles A. Lindbergh" or even worse, "The Lone Eagle". Is his middle name or initial really necessary? Referring to Lindbergh, Jr., as "The Eaglet" drove me to distraction. Most of the other people had nicknames, too, and Behn mentioned it too frequently (Finn Henrik ("Red") Johnsen, William J. ("Wild Bill") Donnally, Paul T. ("Pop") Gebhart), Jack ("Legs") Diamond, Vincent ("Mad Dog") Coll.... ). Even characters who were mentioned in passing had full titles and nicknames included (General John J. ("Black Jack") Pershing, General Henry H. ("Hap") Arnold, Lieutenant Arthur T. ("Buster") Keaten and endless others.) Maddening and distracting.
Including all of the people that got involved in the case gives you a clear sense of the mass confusion that was going on. While I don't believe the author convincingly proved his premise of how the child died, this book gives you a good sense of the odd behavior of Lindbergh and his wife. Lindbergh was given an inordinate amount of control over the investigation, and it seems clear that he knew more than what he was telling. Have things really changed all that much? Reading anything about the JonBenet Ramsey case convinces me the answer is no. People with wealth, fame, and social status are given privileges that they shouldn't have, and the end result is that cases are compromised because of it.
The recounting of Hauptmann's court case and eventual execution leaves me feeling sad and angry at the extent of the manipulation of the "evidence" and the outright lies told to convict him. I never believed that Hauptmann was in any way connected to the actual kidnapping, and this book certainly reinforces that belief.
On the plus side, the author's chronology helps the reader keep track of the many players in the story. On the negative side, lots of extraneous information and a conclusion that is not strongly supported by evidence and is not convincing.
I've been reading about the Lindbergh kidnapping since the late '70s. This book contained information that I hadn't seen before, which I found interesting. It's bibliography is quite extensive, so that's helpful.
I appreciated that Behn included so many of the players, and he did a good job of introducing them and keeping them sorted out with a minimum of confusion; however, Behn allows his personal opinions about the various "characters" to creep in rather than presenting facts and allowing the reader to formulate their own opinions. There is so much detail that has been added that is just not necessary to the story of the kidnapping. Two examples, delving into the personalities, careers, and detailing the platforms of the two candidates for president in the 1928 and 1932 elections, and all of the trials and tribulations of Gov. Harold Hoffman's political career. There are already so many characters to keep track of that repeated distractions of extraneous information makes that task even more difficult and bogs down the narrative.
I also found distracting Behn's method of referring to the characters. Lindbergh was often referred to by his full name or as "Charles A. Lindbergh" or even worse, "The Lone Eagle". Is his middle name or initial really necessary? Referring to Lindbergh, Jr., as "The Eaglet" drove me to distraction. Most of the other people had nicknames, too, and Behn mentioned it too frequently (Finn Henrik ("Red") Johnsen, William J. ("Wild Bill") Donnally, Paul T. ("Pop") Gebhart), Jack ("Legs") Diamond, Vincent ("Mad Dog") Coll.... ). Even characters who were mentioned in passing had full titles and nicknames included (General John J. ("Black Jack") Pershing, General Henry H. ("Hap") Arnold, Lieutenant Arthur T. ("Buster") Keaten and endless others.) Maddening and distracting.
Including all of the people that got involved in the case gives you a clear sense of the mass confusion that was going on. While I don't believe the author convincingly proved his premise of how the child died, this book gives you a good sense of the odd behavior of Lindbergh and his wife. Lindbergh was given an inordinate amount of control over the investigation, and it seems clear that he knew more than what he was telling. Have things really changed all that much? Reading anything about the JonBenet Ramsey case convinces me the answer is no. People with wealth, fame, and social status are given privileges that they shouldn't have, and the end result is that cases are compromised because of it.
The recounting of Hauptmann's court case and eventual execution leaves me feeling sad and angry at the extent of the manipulation of the "evidence" and the outright lies told to convict him. I never believed that Hauptmann was in any way connected to the actual kidnapping, and this book certainly reinforces that belief.
On the plus side, the author's chronology helps the reader keep track of the many players in the story. On the negative side, lots of extraneous information and a conclusion that is not strongly supported by evidence and is not convincing.
April 10, 2020
Lindbergh the Crime
The first part of this book — the take of the kidnapping itself, is well written and interesting. The second part, where the author delves into various people and their connections, suffers because he’s trying to support his theory of who was in on the “kidnapping” lie but since he hasn’t explained that, the reader is left wondering why they’re having to plough through espionage figures in the 1930s. The third part where the author presents his theory that the child’s aunt killed the baby and the kidnapping was just a conspiracy to protect her, falls flatter than a pancake. By the authors own estimation over 30 people were in on the secret and nobody ever breathed a word of it. Why? Why would Anne Morrow Lindbergh protect her sister — whom the author has already stated she had a contentious relationship with— from the consequences of having killed her own child? Why would Charles Lindbergh be so invested in protecting his sister in law? Who would the 30 other people keep their mouths shut while one innocent person was deported, another committed suicide, and most importantly someone they knew was totally innocent was electrocuted to death? And why would they all keep this secret for 40 and more years after Elisabeth Morrow died? Why would Elisabeth Morrow kill her own nephew and how did she do it ? Where were the baby’s parents that weekend and why was Elisabeth alone with the baby?
The authors third section reads like a dream he has rather then the carefully researched conclusions he claims
The first part of this book — the take of the kidnapping itself, is well written and interesting. The second part, where the author delves into various people and their connections, suffers because he’s trying to support his theory of who was in on the “kidnapping” lie but since he hasn’t explained that, the reader is left wondering why they’re having to plough through espionage figures in the 1930s. The third part where the author presents his theory that the child’s aunt killed the baby and the kidnapping was just a conspiracy to protect her, falls flatter than a pancake. By the authors own estimation over 30 people were in on the secret and nobody ever breathed a word of it. Why? Why would Anne Morrow Lindbergh protect her sister — whom the author has already stated she had a contentious relationship with— from the consequences of having killed her own child? Why would Charles Lindbergh be so invested in protecting his sister in law? Who would the 30 other people keep their mouths shut while one innocent person was deported, another committed suicide, and most importantly someone they knew was totally innocent was electrocuted to death? And why would they all keep this secret for 40 and more years after Elisabeth Morrow died? Why would Elisabeth Morrow kill her own nephew and how did she do it ? Where were the baby’s parents that weekend and why was Elisabeth alone with the baby?
The authors third section reads like a dream he has rather then the carefully researched conclusions he claims
February 11, 2018
Exhaustive Review of the Crime...
This was a highly detailed and complicated account of the “story” behind the “supposed” kidnapping of the little eaglet. The reader isn’t introduced to the author’s “real” story/theory until the last few chapters of the book. I will not divulge the contents here; however, the information is compelling. I will say that I do believe that the person who died for the crime was innocent (of the kidnapping), who bought the money (“speculative” at much less than the shown value of the cash) thinking it was probably forged and had no clue that it was part of a ransom. After his partner died, he probably felt he had free use of the money and began to spend it around town, bringing the wrath of the world down upon his head.
It was a difficult book to get through... many, many names and too much information that had nothing to do with anything. I had to force myself to get through the book and found myself skipping entire paragraphs (and pages, in some parts) because it was just information about persons involved (no matter who they were or what the role—no matter how small!—in the “kidnapping’). It does paint a picture of what life was like in the 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s: prominent people, the newspaper and TV industries, the court system, politics, and the underworld.
I said it was exhaustive... and I feel exhausted after finally finishing it!
This was a highly detailed and complicated account of the “story” behind the “supposed” kidnapping of the little eaglet. The reader isn’t introduced to the author’s “real” story/theory until the last few chapters of the book. I will not divulge the contents here; however, the information is compelling. I will say that I do believe that the person who died for the crime was innocent (of the kidnapping), who bought the money (“speculative” at much less than the shown value of the cash) thinking it was probably forged and had no clue that it was part of a ransom. After his partner died, he probably felt he had free use of the money and began to spend it around town, bringing the wrath of the world down upon his head.
It was a difficult book to get through... many, many names and too much information that had nothing to do with anything. I had to force myself to get through the book and found myself skipping entire paragraphs (and pages, in some parts) because it was just information about persons involved (no matter who they were or what the role—no matter how small!—in the “kidnapping’). It does paint a picture of what life was like in the 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s: prominent people, the newspaper and TV industries, the court system, politics, and the underworld.
I said it was exhaustive... and I feel exhausted after finally finishing it!
June 17, 2018
Way too long and got off track
I had high hopes for this book and it started out just fine. But after setting the scene of the crime and offering some plausible suggestions of what could have taken place, the author went into much detail about the persons involved. Some of this information had no bearing on the story or the crime, including the end where Lindbergh’s World War II exploits were discussed. I suppose the author was trying to explore Lindbergh’s character in full detail, but the book was supposed to be about the crime of the death of his first born, not a study of Lindbergh himself. I was somewhat disappointed, but did manage to wade through it to the end.
I had high hopes for this book and it started out just fine. But after setting the scene of the crime and offering some plausible suggestions of what could have taken place, the author went into much detail about the persons involved. Some of this information had no bearing on the story or the crime, including the end where Lindbergh’s World War II exploits were discussed. I suppose the author was trying to explore Lindbergh’s character in full detail, but the book was supposed to be about the crime of the death of his first born, not a study of Lindbergh himself. I was somewhat disappointed, but did manage to wade through it to the end.
May 22, 2020
Lindbergh: The Crime presents the Lindburgh baby's kidnapping in a whole new light. The book is part new evidence and part conspiracy theory. What can be said is that, no matter what theory or theories one believes, it is a very complex case. As I was reading, I often felt I was reading a surreal novel filled with manipulative people at the highest levels. If the subject interests you, read the book and draw your own conclusions. I'm not convinced, in the same way the author is, that the kidnapping was an inside job. But neither am I convinced that the man convicted and who died in the electric chair was solely responsible.
August 29, 2023
3
Strong overview of the case—specifically in regard to how the authorities just basically put Lindbergh in charge of the case. Disappointing in lack of substantive evidence regarding his subject/suspect. I’m definitely in the Hauptmann is innocent camp—but other books make more convincing cases. Part of this is the structure of the book—i’m over 600 pages—there’s only about 20-30 that outline his accusations.
Strong overview of the case—specifically in regard to how the authorities just basically put Lindbergh in charge of the case. Disappointing in lack of substantive evidence regarding his subject/suspect. I’m definitely in the Hauptmann is innocent camp—but other books make more convincing cases. Part of this is the structure of the book—i’m over 600 pages—there’s only about 20-30 that outline his accusations.
November 26, 2017
this is my 2nd book i read on the kidnapping. this is my favorite true crime topic so i have a total of 11 books on this topic. i enjoyed this book it has a lot of information on the crime and the people involved. the author is open about his conclusion and why. as always this crime is open to debate which why enjoy iy.
October 23, 2017
Reads like a thesis - very dense and sucks all of the interest out of the story. Read for about a third of the book, then started to scan and didn't miss much since Behn repeats himself over and over. The author's conclusion is also highly speculative.
May 21, 2020
This is probably the best theory on the case. Everything is theory because"evidence" has been lost, mishandled or destroyed. Lindbergh was a brave pilot, but a lousy person. It was either him or his sister in law.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 8, 2023
Very interesting. Portrayed the chaos of the kidnapping and the extortion and the trial very well. The authors further investigation adds an interesting element to what actually happened. Well researched.
October 26, 2017
This is not an easy read--more like a thesis in format, and the author skips around a lot and repeats himself--but the information is interesting and thought-provoking.
November 29, 2017
I didn't buy into Behn's theory, at all...not that I have a particular theory. The writing is pretty tiresome, too.
May 18, 2019
Interesting
Very detailed and analytical examination of the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. Interesting but a bit dry. Nonetheless well worth the read.
Very detailed and analytical examination of the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. Interesting but a bit dry. Nonetheless well worth the read.
December 30, 2019
Very interesting
This book was enlightening to me because I wasn't familiar with all the controversy involved in the kidnapping. The author's assessment of what happened made sense.
This book was enlightening to me because I wasn't familiar with all the controversy involved in the kidnapping. The author's assessment of what happened made sense.
January 14, 2020
Way too long and drawn out. Got bored
April 7, 2021
Very dull and long.
November 13, 2024
I enjoyed this book. I’ve read a few books on this topic and this one had new theories and evidence. Fascinating back story about the NJ governor and his investigation.
March 4, 2017
After reading the Aviator's Wife I wanted more info on the Lindbergh kidnapping, which some believe was a hoax. This book along with Internet searches makes me think it was a cover up also and an innocent man was put to death because of Lindbergh's need to remain in control and handle all situations.
September 15, 2010
Wow, unbelievable. This book has completely altered the way I look at American history and crime. I am now officially jaded. The novel was inundated with facts and information (which can make for a difficult read)but ultimately lead to the credibility of the author and his final conclusion. I believe he has most likely solved the crime but due to the tampering of physical evidence and the time that has gone by Bruno Hauptman's name will never be cleared. I know this crime will occupy my thoughts for a long time as did the Jon Benet Ramsey case, I will always hold out hope that the Ramsey case will get solved, I must!!
December 11, 2012
Interesting to read for background and questions about Hauptmann's conviction, and fascinating if the author's theory is true - but I'm not sure he can claim he knows "who dun it" based on Anne Lindbergh not including all the details of what was going on with the kidnapping in a letter to her sister = sister must be murderer.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 26, 2011
Not a quick read by any means - deep and full of facts , info and lots of characters . Well worth the time it takes to read it though - gives you a real different view of things and lots to think about . Thanks Jill !
Read
January 8, 2009Interesting, a full accounting of the baby's kidnapping and the aftermath, but premise is shaky.
February 27, 2013
I never knew much about the Lindberghs or the story of the kidnapping, so this was an enlightening book for me. Interesting theory.
May 15, 2013
I thoroughly enjoyed this book despite it being a bit tedious. I learned a lot about this infamous case and while I don't entirely agree with the author's conclusion, there's a lot I do agree with.
February 18, 2015
Although the actual crime is intriguing, I found this book difficult to follow and Mr. Behn's theory of the crime improbable.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews