Let me begin by offering my sincere condolences to the decendants of the Franks Family who lost their 14-year-old son Robert "Bobby" Franks. The 14 year old Bobby Franks, from an affluent Chicago neighborhood, in 1924, was murdered in cold blood and his body mutilated then discarded in a water catch basin some 25 miles away. His murder at the hands of Richard Loeb (who was Bobby's second cousin) age 18, and Nathan Leopold age 19, who in 1924 were two young men who obviously felt they were above the law when they planned to kidnap and then murder the younger 14 year old Bobby Franks. Loeb was a second cousin to the younger Bobby Franks and they lived across the street from one another. Bobby had played tennis over at the Loeb's house on several occasions.
This documentary was first rate, and I believe some of the earlier IMDB reviewers were obviously in favor of capital punishment. The well known civil liberty lawyer Clarence Darrow on the other hand was an advocate to abolish capital punishment and he used the trial of the two young admitted murderers Richard Loeb 18, and Nathan Leopold 19, who admitted to the police of their kidnapping and murder of young Bobby Franks, as his avenue to express his personal disdain for capital punishment by presenting a string of psychiatrists, and psychologists that outlined that these two young men were not functioning in the normal manner as most young men in the society during the 1920's.
I understand Clarence Darrow's approach in a judge only trial, and to having Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold plead guilty as the evidence (and by their own admissions) against them was overwhleming. Court documents and the excessive newspaper coverage exploited that Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold were homsexuals and in a romantic relationship. What was left for Judge John Caverly to decide was should these men hang for their hideous crimes, or rot in prison to the end of their natural lives?
After a lengthy trial, Judge John Caverly chose to send both of them to prison with life sentences. Twelve years into Richard Loeb's sentence he was murdered by another prisoner (who earlier on a portion of Loeb's family allowance was being paid to protect their son in prison) in the shower with a straight razor slicing his throat open and bleeding out. The prisoner who murdered Richard Loeb was James E. Day and he was found not guilty after telling the authorities that Loeb was making sexual advances toward him, and he was only defending himself.
As for Nathan Leopold, he was released from prison in March 1958, and he moved to Santurce, Puerto Rico, to avoid media attention where he married a widowed florist.
After watching the documentary, and seeing how both young men were actually spoiled teenagers (just nearing manhood) lived a life of wealth and privilege that granted them a life of never wanting for anything, except maybe more hands on parenting rather than being raised by paid caregivers, thus the question nature versus nurture?
This is an excellent documentary with great insight into the crime of murder in the 1920's era and the thinking behind capital punishment. It may not have been a perfect crime but this documentary is worthy of a perfect 10/10 rating.
This documentary was first rate, and I believe some of the earlier IMDB reviewers were obviously in favor of capital punishment. The well known civil liberty lawyer Clarence Darrow on the other hand was an advocate to abolish capital punishment and he used the trial of the two young admitted murderers Richard Loeb 18, and Nathan Leopold 19, who admitted to the police of their kidnapping and murder of young Bobby Franks, as his avenue to express his personal disdain for capital punishment by presenting a string of psychiatrists, and psychologists that outlined that these two young men were not functioning in the normal manner as most young men in the society during the 1920's.
I understand Clarence Darrow's approach in a judge only trial, and to having Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold plead guilty as the evidence (and by their own admissions) against them was overwhleming. Court documents and the excessive newspaper coverage exploited that Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold were homsexuals and in a romantic relationship. What was left for Judge John Caverly to decide was should these men hang for their hideous crimes, or rot in prison to the end of their natural lives?
After a lengthy trial, Judge John Caverly chose to send both of them to prison with life sentences. Twelve years into Richard Loeb's sentence he was murdered by another prisoner (who earlier on a portion of Loeb's family allowance was being paid to protect their son in prison) in the shower with a straight razor slicing his throat open and bleeding out. The prisoner who murdered Richard Loeb was James E. Day and he was found not guilty after telling the authorities that Loeb was making sexual advances toward him, and he was only defending himself.
As for Nathan Leopold, he was released from prison in March 1958, and he moved to Santurce, Puerto Rico, to avoid media attention where he married a widowed florist.
After watching the documentary, and seeing how both young men were actually spoiled teenagers (just nearing manhood) lived a life of wealth and privilege that granted them a life of never wanting for anything, except maybe more hands on parenting rather than being raised by paid caregivers, thus the question nature versus nurture?
This is an excellent documentary with great insight into the crime of murder in the 1920's era and the thinking behind capital punishment. It may not have been a perfect crime but this documentary is worthy of a perfect 10/10 rating.