Talk:Lindbergh kidnapping

Blood libel

Given that Lindbergh is commonly thought to have been anti-semitic, isn't it possible that he interpreted the kidnapping as a form of medieval blood libel ? Was he already anti-semitic by the time of the kidnapping, or did he become even more anti-Jewish after the crime occured ? ADM (talk) 12:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Copyright

I find the writing style and language of this article (e.g. cahoots, equivocal, doldrums) unusual for modern English. Would not be surprised if much of it has been lifted from a book or similar 78.53.230.193 (talk) 14:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Which book? The words are not antiquated, and there are still living people who talk and write that way. Perhaps the article was written by an older person. Your own grammar leaves something to be desired. --Bluejay Young (talk) 17:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Dwight Morrow

Ambiguous link to Dwight Morrow in the 'See Also' section. can someone please explain why there is a link to Dwight Morrow who died 2 years before the Lindbergh kidnapping occurred ? when you visit the link there seems to be no correlation between the two pages. this issue isnt confined to this page. is it usual practice to link unrelated information ? chris mcmullen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.12.147 (talk) 04:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

There is indeed a connection and a very strong one at that. As the Dwight Morrow article details, he is the father of Anne Morrow Lindbergh. Anne Morrow Lindbergh was the wife of Charles Lindbergh and the mother of the kidnapped Lindbergh baby. In other words, Dwight Morrow was the kidnapped baby's maternal grandfather. This is the reason that the article is listed in the "See also" section. Thanks. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC))

Objectivity

The problem with this article is there are so many contradictory things that need to be included. For instance, the family doctor at first denied the baby was the Lindbergh baby, then he later said it was, then denied it again. So if you're going to source it you can easily pick and find a credible source depending on which date you use. Same for anything Jafsie said. He constantly switched sides about whether or not anything was true. He clearly wanted attention and would say whatever to get it. But this article is definately slanted. All the evidence brought against Bruno could've just as easily been planted by cops desperate to make a conviction. I'm not saying it was, but if you're gonna write an article don't include something as fact without explaining WHY it is fact and also presenting the rebuttle of the evidence. For every piece of evidence against Bruno there are at least two way if not a lot more, of explaining it away. The only thing for certain is that Bruno is guilty of having ransom money 99.17.104.162 (talk) 03:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)Vera Lynne

Agreed, and you could fix it yourself, but all the contradictory evidence has to be properly researched and cited. --Bluejay Young (talk) 17:28, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Man claiming to be Charles A. Lindbergh

I just thought I'd throw this out there. I don't know if it can be incorporated into the article, but I thought it was interesting. http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_14383573?source=most_viewed Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

That link wrought some minor havoc with my PC. In any case, I recall a People Magazine article some years ago about a guy claiming to be the Lindbergh baby. Don't recall his name. However, the Lindbergh baby's body was found in a shallow grave not far from the Lindbergh home not long after the crime, and typically these guys won't submit to DNA tests since it would prove that they're humbugs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Theory

I personally don't support this, but I've heard it said that the baby was dropped on its head and killed when he was kidnapped, which is supposedly supported by the body being found close to the home and the depressions outside the windows. Is this at least theorized, or just nonsense? --75.173.18.129 (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, the person I heard it from (my father) saw me typing and said that the perpetrators (plural) confessed about it when they were in jail, and said to look it up on Wikipedia. :S --75.173.18.129 (talk) 18:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I too thought about this. The article mentions nothing about how or why the baby was killed. There have to have been theories at least...--Threedots dead (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

J. J. Faulkner

This article contains many flat assertions that contradict well-established sources. In such a case, there really is a need for citation. For example, in regard to the large deposit of ransom Gold Certificates, the FBI's website states "One was found bearing the name and address of "J.J. Faulkner, 537 West 149th Street," and had marked thereon "gold certificates," "$10 and $20" in the amount of $2,980. Despite extensive investigation, this depositor was never located."(http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/lindber/lindbernew.htm)

Now surely, one can challenge the accuracy of the FBI's claims but one should cite the evidence, not simply assert a differing view. --Rrawson (talk) 21:52, 12 May 2010 (UTC)RBR

thats exactly what i was thinking when i was reading all of this. it makes sense. stole the baby, dropped it doing down the ladder, got nervous, threw the baby in a ditch as they were leaving.. and pretended that the baby was still alive. makes sense to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.12.41 (talk) 07:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Proceeding

I think the article would be improved immeasurably if additional constructions of the form, Person X then proceeded to do such-and-such were sprinkled throughout. EEng (talk) 02:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

The page was recently vandalized

I have been using this page over the last few weeks, and some of the information was recently changed. In one section, it says that the child was raped when he wasn't. John Condon's name was also changed in one section. I don't know enough about this topic to correct it myself, but if someone does, please do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfbullington (talk • contribs) 20:46, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

• It should be fixed, let me know if I missed anything. Monty₈₄₅ (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Lindbergh kidnapping in film

The Lindbergh kidnapping was also the basis for the kidnapping depicted in "Raising Arizona," a film by the Coen brothers.

Cheers,

24.196.131.146 (talk) 05:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Kristy, 8/3/2011

Another "In TV".

In an episode of "JAG", Harmon Rabb asks a sarcastic rhetorical question: "are they re-opening the Lindburgh kidnapping case?". Old_Wombat (talk) 09:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)