The Controversial Trial Of Leopold And Loeb

Have you ever been in a courtroom and thought about how the court decide if the verdict of the accused party is guilty or not? How can you recognize if there was sufficient evidence to determine if the verdict was just or unjust? How would know if a trial was fair? There are many trials in history to look at. One of Chicago most controversial murder trial, I would have to say, is the trial of Leopold and Loeb in determining if their trial was just or unjust.

When looking at the detailed about this trial let’s examine the background of the defendants. In 1924 Nathan F. Leopold and Richard A. Loeb were charged with kidnapping and murder of 14-year-old victim who was a cousin of Loeb; Bobby franks. They were both sentenced to life imprisonment

Over the course of a year the two boys came up with a plan to commit murder just for the thrill of it. In the book “Great American Trials” it’s says in a chapter (“The more they detailed their plan, the stronger their compulsion to carry it out became. In March 1924, according to a report later prepared by leading psychiatrists for their defense, “they decided to get any young boy whom they knew to be of a family, knock him unconscious, take him to a certain culvert, strangle him, dispose of all his clothes, and push the body deep into this funnel-shaped culvert, through which the water flowed, expecting the body to entirely decompose and never be found.” 83-84). After the crime they committed, Leopold and

Loeb sent a ransom note to Frank’s family demanding $10,000 of untraceable bills and stated that

Bobby Frank was unharmed when in all reality, they already murder him.

Leopold and Loeb almost got away with the perfect murder until the next day someone spotted the young Bobby’s body and notified the authority. There was a crucial piece of evidence that one of

The people back then believed in an eye for an eye. They believed that they should hang at the gallows but Darrow opposed the death penalty. He felt that he could play

Leopold and Loeb trial to his advantage to show the American people that it was an act of vengeance and had no place in the judicial system. This is supported in Criminal Minds (“Like Crowe, Darrow knew that he might be able to play the trial of Leopold and Loeb to his advantage. Darrow was passionately opposed to the death penalty; he saw it as a barbaric and vengeful punishment that served no purpose except to satisfy the mob. The trial would provide him with the means to persuade the American public that the death penalty had no place in the modern judicial system.”)

I feel like Leopold and Loeb did received a fair and just trial but I think the verdict that was made by Judge John R. Cavalry was not just enough for taking a young boy’s life. The punishment was