Reading 4191-7

TEXT OF READING 4191-7

Text

Date: 12/30/1935 Sex: F Age: 25 ReadingID: 11938

This psychic reading given by Edgar Cayce at his home on Arctic Crescent, Virginia Beach, Va., this 30th day of December, 1935, in accordance with request made by Harold G. Hoffman, Governor of New Jersey, through David E. Kahn, Active Member of the Ass”n for Research & Enlightenment, Inc.

[Edgar Cayce; Gertrude Cayce, Conductor; Gladys Davis, Steno. Hugh Lynn Cayce and Edgar Evans Cayce.]

Time of Reading State House, 11:35 to 11:45 A. M. Eastern Standard Time. Trenton, N.J.

1. GC: You will have before you the request for information through this channel which has come from Harold G. Hoffman, Governor of New Jersey, as per phone call and special delivery letter as a result of conversation vith David E. Kahn in regard to the case of Bruno Richard Hauptmann, convicted of the murder of Charles Augustus Lindburgh, Jr. You will tell us whether this request from Governor Hoffman is the proper approach for securing information which may be of help in clearing up this case, and whether such information may be given in another reading. Explain just what our approach for such information should be in order to be of help, if it is possible, in this situation.

2. EC: In considering the seeking and the purposes, and the desires on the part of all concerned, much must be taken into consideration as to not only the approach but that responsibility which each individual bears toward his own activities in reference to his dealings with his fellow man and his purposes in same.

3. That there has been information given through this channel is as evidence that there was, there is, a source of - and there is - a supply.

4. As to whether such information may be made compatible with the idea and ideals of individuals seeking for knowledge, and for the wisdom to apply such knowledge, rests solely with the individuals seeking same.

5. That there may be those activities which bring justice and purpose to those individuals seeking, to that individual in the present under bondage for that of which he is only partially guilty, these - and the consideration of what people will say - must be weighed in the balance.

6. THEN, if there is NONE of that called curiosity, but rather the seeking in that manner, in that purpose, in that way which says, means (and the individuals act that way), ‘The will of the Lord, the will of God, be done IN and THROUGH me,’ THEN may there be the seeking - and THEN may information be given!

7. We are through for the present.

Copy to Mr. William S. Lutz, Executive Department, State House, Trenton, New Jersey - SPECIAL PERSONAL - DELIVERY - STRICTLY PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTAL ” ” Mr. David E. Kahn, 44 West 77th St., Apt. 14-W, New York City - Special Delivery ” ” Ass’n file

Reports

Reports & Follow-up

R1. 12/30/35 HLC’s letter to William S. Lutz, State House, Trenton, New Jersey: ”…The special delivery letter containing questions on the the case under consideration was received this morning and the information contained herein was obtained.

“Through years of experimentation we have found it most advisable to set up as nearly as possible the direct contact between one seeking information through this channel and the psychic. Too, we are naturally concerned in making the proper attunement over the effect on the psychic resulting from mental contact with conditions such as surround this case. The above is given in order that you may understand just why the first approach was made in this manner.

“In simple words the enclosed reading may be briefly stated as follows: Hauptmann is only partially guilty of this crime. If Governor Hoffman will eliminate any element of curiosity in seeking information of this nature, if he will take the responsibility in following the leads given though they may bring criticism from many quarters, help may be received through this channel in clearing up this situation.

“As an organization we are interested in studying and checking all types of psychic information, especially those as manifested through this particular channel. The psychic is personally interested in being of help and aiding in any way possible in seeing that ‘the truth’ is brought to light in this situation. As I am sure is true of Governor Hoffman, we must insist that no publicity be given regarding any connection with this case - regardless of the outcome.

“A second request for information direct or through Mr. Kahn will signify an understanding and agreement to the propositions contained in the enclosed reading and will receive immediate attention. The questions already on hand will be included.

“We are most desirous of being of help but appreciate the tremendous responsibility involved and so ask that Governor Hoffman give this angle careful consideration…”

R2. 1/6/36 EC’s letter to David E. Kahn: ”…You saw what was gotten at the first Jersey reading - haven’t heard any more from them and don’t want to mess into it unless they ask for it. Then I will do all I can, but do not want this kind of notoriety…”

R3. 9/61 THE READER’S DIGEST carried a condensation from the book by George Waller entitled KIDNAP: The Story of the Lindbergh Case - The Dial Press, Inc., 461 Park Ave., S., N.Y., N.Y.

R4. 5/71 See book, THE OUTER LIMITS OF EDGAR CAYCE’S POWER [by Hugh Lynn and Edgar Evans Cayce, published by Harper & Row.] quoting the [4191] series.

R5. 9/72 See newspaper publicity in The National Tattler, etc., in re possibility of Harold Roy Olson of Westport, Conn., being the LIVE Lindbergh baby.

R6. 3/18/73 (Sunday) Virginian-Pilot book review by Brinkley Goranson:

THE LINDBERGHS - HOUR OF GOLD, HOUR OF LEAD. Diaries and Letters of Anne Morrow Lindbergh, 1929-1932. Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich. 340 pp. $7.95.

VOLUME II of Anne Morrow Lindbergh’s diaries and letters resumes where Volume I, “Bring Me a Unicorn” left off - with the announcement of her intended marriage to Charles Lindbergh.

They had met in Mexico City - Anne Morrow, shy, intelligent, with an as yet unformed but certain literary bent; Lindbergh, already the “lone eagle,” famous, jealous of his privacy but unable to keep it for long in the face of a fawning public

• where her father was United States Ambassador to Mexico. They were married in a quiet family ceremony in May, 1929, at her home in Englewood, N.J. They left the wedding ceremony in disguise, driving off in a cabin motorboat. “Sure sure that it is right and the pangs are not doubt,” Anne Lindbergh confided to her diary.

Intolerant of publicity, the Lindberghs spent much time and effort trying to evade it. They used code names in messages and correspondence. Lindbergh referred to himself as “Boyd”

• suggesting perhaps, in Brooklynese, the word, “bird”.

Trying to avoid strangers became almost an obsession and any infringement on their private lives they considered a kind of blasphemy. She writes, “I have gotten utterly bitter about it. I have no patience, no understanding, no sympathy with the people who stare and follow and giggle at us; who ask questions, crowd, want to know about our private life.”

How much this introspective and intellectual woman treasured privacy and the tranquility that comes from being alone and quiet is expressed in her book “Gift from the Sea,” where loneliness becomes personal and alive. Her wish for privacy was sincere; she writes of going to a concert alone, “And I looked at the people who were not alone and pitied them.”

Nevertheless, these early years of marriage were her “hour of gold.” She tells how she learned to navigate a plane, to assist her husband as his radio operator, and to take aerial photographs on survey flights they made charting transcontinental routes for commercial aviation. They were always in the news, although they hated it, and they stayed on the front page when they made their pioneering flights to Latin America and the Orient.

Mrs. Lindbergh’s first reference to her first pregnancy comes in a letter to her mother in which she writes that her sister should not start making bibs with rabbits on them yet until it is sure. Charles Jr. was born, and 18 months later at the Lindbergh’s secluded home in Hopewell, N.J., the “hour of lead” descended.

The words are from an Emily Dickenson poem:

“This is the hour of lead Remembered if outlived As freezing persons recollect the snow - First chill, then stupor, then the letting go.”

In her introduction to this section of her book, Mrs. Lindbergh explains why she now is willing to expose the pain and horror of a tragedy that took place 40 years ago. One reason is that such an inextricable part of her life story could not be omitted in an honest record. Because so much that was published at the time was concocted of rumors, she believes now that a personal account should be made. Yet she says she still could not bear to expose it if she did not believe that others may be helped through their trials.

What follows is a poignant revelation of the emotions and grief and tragedy. She wonders now how she could have been so calm and attributes it to the element of hope and her being surrounded by disciplined people, notably her husband. On May 12, 1932, her baby’s body was found dead in a ditch not far from the Lindbergh home, killed by a blow on the head.

On that day she wrote: “I feel strongly a sense of peace - not peace, but an end to restlessness, a finality, as though I were sleeping in a grave.” The tortured dreams and feelings of insecurity that followed were relieved by the birth of a second son, Jon, three months later.

These letters and diary entries were written by a person who gives the impression of wholeness. One leaves the last page of this volume looking forward to the next, for it too surely will be a memoir of a remarkable woman.

R7. 1/25/77 National Enquirer article by John Blosser:

MAN EXECUTED FOR KIDNAP-MURDER OF LINDBERGH’S BABY WAS INNOCENT, REVEALS SCIENTIFIC ‘TRUTH DETECTOR’

Bruno Richard Hauptmann, who died in the electric chair for the kidnap-murder of the Lindbergh baby, was telling the complete, absolute truth when he repeatedly proclaimed his innocence.

That’s the bombshell discovery of the truth-detecting Psychological Stress Evaluator (PSE), which tested Hauptmann’s voice in statements he made at his trial and shortly before his April 3, 1936, execution.

“I have no doubt in my mind that Hauptmann died an innocent man,” declared Charles R. McQuiston, codeveloper of the PSE. “We executed the wrong man, and the real kidnapper got away with the crime.” McQuiston analyzed two rare film sound tracks obtained by THE ENQUIRER. The first came from a hidden movie camera inside the New Jersey courtroom where Hauptmann stood trial.

The hapless defendant was being mercilessly grilled by Prosecutor David T. Wilentz.

Here are some portions of the testimony, and the PSE’s verdict:

WILENTZ: “Did you take the Lindbergh baby?” HAUPTMANN: “No. I did not.”

Noted McQuiston, “This response shows a complete lack of stress. I have to believe him.”

WILENTZ: “Did you not lie under oath?” HAUPTMANN: “No.” WILENTZ: “You lied under oath.” HAUPTMANN: “I did not.”

Bruno Hauptmann’s voice on the readout of the Psychological Stress Evaluator shows, says expert Charles R. McQuiston, that he was telling the truth when, in answer to the prosecutor’s assertion, “You lied under oath,” Hauptmann replied, “I did not.”

McQuiston declared, “Hauptmann’s statement is made with great emphasis, but without stress. He is telling the truth.”

While in prison awaiting death, Hauptmann made an impassioned public appeal for help.

As the camera whirred, Hauptmann said, “I want to tell the people of America that I am innocent of the crime of murder.

“I never saw the Lindbergh baby and I never was in Hopewell or near Hopewell (the Lindbergh’s hometown) and I never received any money from Dr. Condon (Dr. John F. Condon, who served as an intermediary between the Lindberghs and the kidnapper, and delivered the ransom money).”

McQuiston broke this speech down line by line and word by word, and ran it through the PSE. He concluded there was no stress in Hauptmann’s voice - and therefore, he was telling the truth. The PSE is so reliable that its results have been accepted as court evidence in five states. Over 100 government investigative agencies use it as a tool in battling crime.

McQuiston also analyzed the testimony of a key prosecution witness whose testimony helped doom Hauptmann. Wood expert Arthur Koehler swore that a piece of wood taken from the defendant’s attic precisely matched the wood in the ladder used during the kidnapping.

Koehler testified, “I noted that the grain of the two matches up perfectly.” McQuiston explained, “This man is saying he’s very sure, but there is strong stress on the words ‘that’ and ‘matches’. This leads me to believe Koehler was either lying, or not as certain about his findings as he testified in court.

“If Hauptmann were tried today, he would walk away a free man. I am thoroughly convinced of that.”

R8. 2/7/81 (Saturday) Virginian-Pilot article:

LINDBERGH FILES CONTRADICT

FLEMINGTON, N.J. (AP) - FBI files that were sealed for nearly 50 years contradict the testimony of several key prosecution witnesses who helped send Bruno Richard Hauptmann to the electric chair for the kidnap-murder of the Lindbergh baby.

The kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh’s infant son was one of the most notorious crimes of the 1930’s and was heavily covered by newspapers and radio throughout the United States. Lindbergh became a national hero in 1927 by flying the Spirit of St. Louis on the first solo flight from New York to Paris.

Hauptmann was convicted largely on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of several expert witnesses after one of the most notorious kidnapping trials in American history. He contended that he was not guilty throughout the five-week trial and until his electrocution in Trenton, N.J., on April 3, 1936.

Information in the FBI files was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and published jointly in Thursday’s editions of the Hunterdon County Democrat and the New Brunswick Home News.

Although kidnapping did not become a federal crime until after the Lindbergh case, FBI agents were involved in the sweeping 2-1/2 year investigation, the newspapers said.

Nineteen-month-old Charles Lindbergh Jr. disappeared from his second-floor nursery at the Lindbergh’s home in the village of Hopewell, N.J., on March 1, 1932, and was found dead after Lindbergh and a go-between dropped off a $50,000 ransom at a Bronx, N.Y. cemetery.

A letter from then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover says FBI tests indicated there were fingerprints on ransom notes, though the state’s expert testified none existed, according to the newspapers.

The files say a taxi driver’s “positive” identification of Hauptmann as the man who asked him to deliver a ransom note came 2-1/2 years after the event and after a “pep talk” by a police inspector.

The go-between who handed over the ransom money in a New York cemetery apparently told FBI agents after Hauptmann’s arrest that Hauptmann could not be the man he dealt with. But at the trial, he said Hauptmann was the man.

Police arrested Hauptmann, a 35-year-old Bronx carpenter, on Sept. 14, 1934, and found $15,000 of the ransom money in a shoe box in his garage the next day. Hauptmann said the money had been given to him for safekeeping by a friend and business partner leaving for Germany.

Copies of the FBI files were turned over to the Hunterdon County Democrat by two Philadelphia-area researchers. Thomas Kelly and his nephew, James Kelly, filed the Freedom of Information request after studying the Lindbergh case for nearly 30 years.

R9. 11/24/81 (Tuesday) The Ledger-Star article:

LINDBERGH KIDNAP FILES BEING OPENED

EWING TOWNSHIP, N.J. (AP) - The kidnapping and murder of the Lindbergh baby gripped the nation 49 years ago. Now, the evidence that led to the execution of a man for the crime is being released, little by little.

For years, lawyer Robert Bryan has been trying to get the files opened. On Monday a judge allowed two of his researchers and a pool of three news reporters to begin sifting through the evidence that led to the electrocution of Bruno Richard Hauptmann.

Anna Hauptmann, 83, the widow of the convicted killer, is suing the state for $100 million in damages, claiming her husband is innocent. Bryan, on her behalf, demanded the files be opened.

In a separate case, Bryan also represents a man who claims to be the Lindbergh child.

Rummaging through the 90,000 pages of reports and a huge volume of physical evidence by just five people is expected to take several weeks. Bryan would not say what he and his researchers are seeking.

“I’d be foolish to go into a ball game and tell the other side what plays we’re going to run,” he said.

One of the things Bryan wants to determine is what evidence still exists. “State police conceded last March 2 that a number of items were missing,” he said.

The first child of aviation pioneer Charles Lindbergh and Anne Morrow Lindbergh disappeared from his nursery at the family’s home near Englewood, N.J. After Hauptmann was convicted, the evidence used against him was taken here to the headquarters of the New Jersey State Police and has been sealed ever since.

Gov. Bredan Byrne on Oct. 9 ordered the files opened, and on Monday a federal judge in Newark ruled that The Associated Press, United Press International and The Record newspaper of Hackensack, N.J. each could have one researcher present each day to sift through the files.

The ruling was a victory for Bryan, who went to U.S. District Judge Frederick Lacey after state police Col. Clinton Pagano’s said only four researchers could look at the files.

The first file, opened Monday evening and given to the AP for examination, was a transcript of Hauptmann’s questioning by authorities in New York City, where he was arrested.

Hauptmann said a telephone number for a ransom go-between found penciled in his closet was written by him after he read a newspaper.

“Your only explanation for writing Dr. (James) Condon’s address on this board and the phone number is that you were probably reading the paper in the closet and you marked it down?” Bronx District Attorney Samuel Foley asked. According to the transcript, Hauptmann reaffirmed the statement.

R10. 8/22/84 (Wednesday) The Ledger-Star article:

WIDOW GIVEN INDIGENCY IN LINDBERGH SUIT NEWARK, N.J. - A federal judge has decided to allow the widow of Bruno Richard Hauptmann to proceed as an indigent in a court case stemming from her husband’s execution for the 1932 kidnapping and murder of the infant son of aviator Charles A. Lindbergh.

Anna Hauptmann, 85, of Yeadon, Pa., said in court papers filed in Newark that her only income is a $313 monthly Social Security check.

As a result, U.S. District Judge Frederick Lacey on Tuesday granted the request that she be considered an indigent, permitting her to seek a waiver of certain court costs, in her appeal of the dismissal of her $100 million wrongful-death suit.

In addition, her attorneys said they plan to collect no fee for their work.

Lacey dismissed the remaining legal issues of the suit on April 5. But she is taking her case to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals because she believes her claims still are valid, her attorneys said.

The judge ruled in a 23-page decision in April that most of her claims against the state, the FBI and the Hearst Corp. for its reporting on the case were filed too late or did not present sufficient evidence.

She contended that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy leading to the allegedly malicious prosecution and execution of her husband in 1936.

Lacey dismissed the bulk of the case on Aug. 11, 1983, when he ruled that there was little or no evidence to support her charge that state officials covered up the case for 50 years.

He said that Hauptmann’s civil rights were not violated during the investigation or his widely publicized trial.

The opinion handed down in April dealt with a few legal issues not previously decided.

“The case was dismissed mostly on technical ground,” said Trudy Maran, an attorney for Hauptmann’s widow.

“Without a trial, we won’t have an opportunity to clear his name once and for all. All we want is a trial,” Maran added.

She said her client continues to contend that the statute of limitations for filing the suit did not run out before she initiated the case.

Lacey said Hauptmann died 45 years before the suit was filed and that New Jersey law requires malicious prosecution suits to be filed within two years and wrongful death suits within six years.

R11. 11/6/84 (Tuesday) Ledger-Star article:

NEW BOOK SAYS LINDBERGH SCOUTED GERMAN AIR POWER

STANFORD, Calif. (AP) - Charles A. Lindbergh, whose pre-World War II trips to Germany and acceptance of a Nazi medal drew strong criticism in his own country, made detailed reports of his observations on German air power to U.S. military officials, according to a recently published book.

Lindbergh’s visits to Germany were arranged by Truman Smith, who represented the U.S. military in pre-war Berlin, according to Smith’s papers that were gathered into the book “Berlin Alert: The Memoirs and Reports of Truman Smith.”

The book did not call Lindbergh a spy or agent for the United States but strongly implied that the visits had the blessing of the U.S. military because Smith had arranged them. The book said Lindbergh agreed to visit Germany and tour the Luftwaffe installations and aircraft facilities.

Smith, who died in 1970, was successful in arranging the visits because he correctly guessed that the Germans would be anxious to impress the air hero with their air excellence, the book said.

Smith said Lindbergh, who became an American hero after making the first solo flight across the Atlantic in 1927, made reports to the American military, describing Germany’s emergence as an air power.

The book’s contents were described as a volume of previously unpublished autobiographical writings and documents drawn from the Truman Smith Collection at Stanford University. It was published by Stanford’s Hoover Institution Press this year at the urging of Smith’s widow.

According to an introduction by Robert Hessen, the Hoover Institution’s deputy archivist, the American public construed Lindbergh’s acceptance of a Nazi medal presented by Herman Goering as an endorsement of Nazism.

Actually, Hessen said, “Neither Lindbergh nor Smith had any advance knowledge of Goering’s (medal) plan, and the one American officer who did know failed to warn them.”

Hessen said Lindbergh “would not have been able to refuse the medal without offending Goering and thereby defeating a major purpose of his (Lindbergh’s) 1938 mission, to persuade Goering that German Jews who were emigrating should not be forced to leave penniless.”

Smith interviewed Hitler in the 1920s and estimated him to be “a fanatical man whose power over the mob is immense.” Both he and Lindbergh were denounced as Nazi sympathizers in 1940 and accused of deliberately exaggerating the strength of the Luftwaffe in order to discourage America from standing up to Hitler.

The book contends that although Lindbergh came to admire many German scientists, he had no sympathy for Nazi aims.

R12. 10/13/85 (Sunday) The Virginian Pilot and Ledger-Star article:

DEFENDING HIS NAME - ANNA M. HAUPTMANN - SEEKS TO CLEAR LATE HUSBAND

Anna M. Hauptmann has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate her lawsuit seeking to clear the name of her husband, who was convicted and executed in the 1932 kidnapping and murder of aviator Charles A. Lindbergh’s son.

The 86-year-old widow contends that her deceased husband, Bruno Richard Hauptmann, did not kill Lindbergh’s 20-month-old boy.

“My position remains the same - that the trial of the century was probably the greatest fraud in the history of jurisprudence,” said her lawyer, Robert Bryan.

A U.S. District judge ruled last year that most of Anna Hauptmann’s claims against the state, the FBI and the Hearst Corp. for its reporting on the case were filed too late or presented insufficient evidence.

R13. 10/22/85 The Ledger-Star article:

LINDBERGH KIDNAP DATA AWAITED - MAN SAYS FINGERPRINTS WILL SHOW HE IS THE ABDUCTED CHILD

TRENTON, N.J. - A man who claims to be the son of aviator Charles A. Lindbergh says newly discovered fingerprints will prove that the victim of the “crime of the century” was actually an unidentified baby.

Long-missing documents, which include the fingerprints attributed to the Lindbergh baby, were found recently in a garage in a South Amboy home and were to be displayed today.

“If we can get good copies of the prints and experts compare them and come up with a legitimate match or pretty close to a legitimate match, then…that makes it all the more certain that is who I am,” said Harold Olson, 57, of Westport, Conn.

Olson, a computer supplies salesman, is one of several people claiming to be Lindbergh’s son. Kenneth Kerwin of Biddeford, Maine, is another.

Olson said Monday he believes he is the avaiator’s child because, “among other things,” he has 21 “body identifications that match the Lindbergh baby.”

He also said he will request copies of the fingerprints to prove his true identity. “If I were to stake my life on it, they’re going to match,” he said.

But Col. Clinton L. Pagano, superintendent of the state police, said a review of the 20,000 documents will not provide any shocking disclosures about the case. Pagano declined to discuss details but said the documents were to be displayed at a news conference today.

Bruno Richard Hauptmann was executed in 1936 for the murder of Charles Lindbergh Jr.

Hauptmann’s 86-year-old widow, Anna, is also looking forward to the release of the documents. “I’ve waited all these years for the truth,” says the Yeadon, Pa., resident. “My husband did not kidnap the Lindbergh baby.”

The documents were found at the home of the late Harold Hoffman, a former New Jersey governor who believed that Hauptmann was wrongly convicted. Hoffman borrowed the fingerprints and other material as part of a private investigation about 50 years ago but never returned them.

After the kidnapping, the decomposed body of a young child was discovered in the area, but no prints could be lifted from the body, police said.

State police Capt. Joseph Kobus said that the fingerprints taken from the nursery were available “before, during and after the trial” but that they disappeared when Hoffman confiscated them for his private investigation.

The disappearance of the prints fueled theories that Hauptmann was framed or that the child was never killed.

Meanwhile, Anna Hauptmann’s attorney, San Francisco lawyer Robert Bryan, has filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate her lawsuit seeking to clear Hauptmann’s name.

A federal judge in Newark dismissed her claims for $100 million in damages against the state, the FBI and the Hearst Corp. for its reporting of the case.

The judge found that her claims were filed too late or failed to present sufficient information.

R14. 6/27/93 See Source File Key #4191 for Asbury Park Press Sunday article about the Lindbergh case entitled “Haunted by the Past” re 4191-7.

Background

Background

B1. See 4191-1 through 4191-6.

B2. 12/28/35 David E. Kahn’s letter following phone conversation of himself and Governor Hoffman from Trenton, N.J., to EC in Detroit, Saturday night 12/26/35 between 11 - 12 o’clock: ”…I’ve had such a bad cold I almost went to bed. I could hardly talk over the phone the other night. I wrote the Governor and he telephoned me to come to Trenton which I did. He is very fine and very sincere. I hope something is worked out - Hugh Lynn should go up there with the reading and see Lutz [William S. Lutz, State House, Trenton, New Jersey] and insist on seeing the Governor. It will give us a fine standing in Jersey if we wanted laws passed as in Virginia…”

B3. 12/29/35 Questions submitted for 4191-7 by Governor Hoffman of New Jersey via David E. Kahn:

“The name of the subject is Bruno Richard Hauptmann, convicted of murder of Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr. He is presently incarcerated at Trenton State Prison at Trenton, New Jersey, in a cell adjoining the Death House.

1. Is Bruno Richard Hauptmann alone guilty of the murder of the Lindbergh child?
2. Or were there others - how many - who?
3. If so, what part did they play?
4. Will Bruno Richard Hauptmann die in the electric chair on January 13th? Or when? Or at all?
5. If not, will some new development save him?
6. If there are others, where may they be located?
7. Is Hauptmann protecting Mrs. Hauptmann, or any other relative?
8. What are his relations with Dr. Condon, and when did Hauptmann first meet Condon?
9. Is the Lindbergh child dead or alive?
10. If dead, how did he die?
11. Is a certain man in a California prison implicated, and what is his name?
12. If he is implicated, to what extent?
13. A certain publication contemplates a move in this case - what is its name and how successful will it be?
14. Why did Colonel Lindbergh leave this country and who was responsible for his going?
15. What does Colonel Lindbergh know about this case other than evidence submitted at the trial?
16. Has Mr. Wilentz or Colonel Schwarzkopf any information that might be helpful in clearing all doubt in this case?
17. What should be done for the sake of justice and humanity in this case?
18. What agency of the State Government can help the Governor solve this problem?
19. What is the procedure to ascertain full truth in this case?
20. Why doesn’t Hauptmann tell all he knows about the real criminals?
21. How did he get the marked money if not implicated?
22. Was the ladder real or planted evidence, and if the latter, planted by whom?
23. Which ones of the prisoners’ attorneys can be best trusted?
24. What are Hauptmann’s real thoughts at the present time about this case?…”

B4. See Source Key File #4191 for envelope dated 12/30/35 from Governor Hoffman of New Jersey addressed to EC containing above letter and questions re 4191-7.

Mentioned Entities

Germany, Trial of Jesus, David Kahn, King David, Purpose, New York City, Hugh Lynn Cayce, California, Edgar Evans Cayce, Free Will, John (Apostle), Mexico, Photography (Atlantean), Atlantic Ocean, Dreams, France, Gertrude Cayce, Gladys Davis, Ideal, Joseph (Husband of Mary)

Source: The Complete Edgar Cayce Readings, A.R.E. CD-ROM (2006). Reading 4191-7, ReadingID 11938.