A few weeks ago, we learned about the Sacco and Vanzetti case in class. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, two known anarchists, were accused of the paymaster and a guard of a shoe factory and stealing $15,000. In the years that followed the trial and conviction of the two men, there has been much controversy about whether the two men were really the murderers, or if they had been falsely convicted. Many people think that Sacco and Vanzetti were, in fact, innocent and that whoever had shot the paymaster had gotten away with their crime. They point to the fact that the incident seemed like an amateur robbery. It was done in broad daylight, in the open, and they killed two people to get the $15,000. This didn’t match the style of anarchis violence at that time. Additionally, the ballistics evidence was very weak. The cartridges found at the site of South Braintree did not match those found in possession of Sacco and Vanzetti. Sacco’s “bullet 3” was shot sometime between May and December, and was not the one actually linked to Sacco. Furthermore, the serial number of the guard’s gun did not match that of the gun found in Vanzetti’s possession. Judge Webster Thayer was also known to be opposed to anarchists. He made a very biased statement about the case to a professor at his alma mater university, and the professor made this remark public.
After Sacco and Vanzetti had been convicted, another anarchist committed to the crime. Medeiros provided new information about the trial about the cars, etc., but his partner, Morelli, refused to confess. Judge Thayer denied the request for retrial.
Those who believe that Sacco and Vanzetti were indeed guilty point to their background as “militant revolutionists.” They were known to have participated in anarchists bombings. At their first interrogation, both men lie about being anarchists and deny knowing Boba. The prosecution used the behavior of the men the night of their arrest as evidence. Using the term, “consciousness of guilt,” the prosecution said that a person who is innocent will speak openly and truthfully about where they were when the crime was committed. Following this line of reasoning, Sacco and Vanzetti’s lies were designed to hide the truth about what they were doing. The prosecution also exposed the fact that the pair fled to Mexico to avoid the draft; this made them seem “unpatriotic” and obviously did not win them the support of the jurors.
The justice system is supposed to be about exposing the truth and punishing the guilty for what they’ve done, but it almost feels like it’s about Sacco and Vanzetti’s beliefs (anarchism) and the fact that they are immigrants.
This is a really good blog post. You included all the information, and I also like how you included what you though about the Sako and Vanzetti case.
ReplyDeleteYou have a lot of very detailed information here. This was a very informative post that really refreshed my memory on the trial, thank you!
ReplyDelete