Guilty by Association: The Trial of Sacco & Vanzetti
TIME:
1914, Beginning of WWI – August 23, 1927
PLACE:
New England and New York
POLITICAL MOOD:
Conservative, Patriotic
“Paranoid” might be another term that would best describe the political mood of the United States U.S.
Reacting to this fear, in October, 1918, Congress passed the Anarchist Exclusion Act, which was a law to control resident aliens involved in anarchism or revolutionary political organizations. The Sedition Act of 1918 was also passed as a tool to investigate or arrest any person using “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the American government, its flag, or its armed forces. Congress also expanded the role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by creating the Department of General Intelligence. J. Edgar Hoover was selected as director; he established illegal information files on questionable and ordinary citizens alike. These Acts demolished civil liberties. Without warrants, thousands of innocent people, including school teachers and professors, were tracked, arrested, questioned, tortured, jailed in deplorable conditions, and/or deported. People were denied counsel or any contact with the outside world.
SETTING:
Influencing the setting at this time were several bombings in New York and other New England states. Starting in 1914, these bombs targeted judges, businessmen, and elected officials; they killed or injured hundreds of people and destroyed millions of dollars worth of property. A majority of the bombings were claimed or otherwise assumed to be by the Galleani Anarchists. The Galleani Anarchists were a group of revolutionaries, established by Italian immigrant Luigi Galleani, who emphatically opposed US involvement in WWI.
Based in Barre , Vermont
CRIMES:
December, 24, 1919 - Four men attempt to rob the payroll truck of the L.Q. White Shoe Company in Bridgewater , Massachusetts
April 15, 1920 – Two men, Frederick Parmenter and Allesandro Berardelli, are killed in an armed robbery of the Slater & Morrell Shoe Company in South Braintree , Massachusetts
ACCUSED:
Nicola Sacco
Born in 1891 in Torremaggiore , Italy , Sacco immigrated to the United States Milford , Massachusetts Italy Stoughton , Massachusetts
Proposed “radical” behavior:
- Helped defend Arturo Giovannitti, an Italian immigrant, who had been arrested questionable murder charge in 1912.
- Attended weekly meetings of Circolo di Studi Sociali, an anarchist group, in1913.
- Subscribed and wrote for Galleani’s Cronaca Sovversiva newsletter. Collected and donated funds to anarchist activities.
- Openly opposed WWI.
- Fled to Mexico for a few months, with Venzetti, to avoid conscription in the US
Bartolomeo Vanzetti
Born in Villaffelletto , Italy New York City , Connecticut , and Massachusetts Plymouth , Massachusetts Mexico and the Midwest, Plymouth , Massachusetts
Proposed “radical” behavior:
- Read and enjoyed political philosophy.
- Read, wrote and donated money to Cronaca Sovversiva, Galleani’s anarchist newsletter.
- Went to weekly anarchist meetings.
- Was a member of the Brini clan.
- Openly opposed WWI.
- Fled, with Sacco, to Mexico
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE/DEFENSE EVIDENCE:
Armed Robbery/Vanzetti - L.Q. White Shoe Company Robbery in Bridgewater , Massachusetts
1. When Sacco and Vanzetti were initially arrested for the South Braintree , MA Bridgewater , Massachusetts
2. Vanzetti lies to police regarding his politics, guns, why he was in Bridgewater
3. Vanzetti tells same lies to the District Attorney.
4. Vanzetti previously linked in 1918 to Cronaca Sovversiva when newsletter offices were raided by police.
DEFENSE EVIDENCE
1. The shotgun shells, in this case, were apparently never examined by an expert. Without any other evidence, the shells could have been linked to ANY murder or NO murder at all. Authorities made assumptions with no other evidence.
2. /3. Vanzetti had extremely limited knowledge of the English language. Questions and answers could have easily been misunderstood, especially if the questions, by police and DA, were misleading.
4. Supporting a controversial newsletter does not make a person a robber
5. Judge Webster Thayer committed several acts unbecoming to a judge when he publically spoke out regarding the biased instructions he was going to give the jury. He also told a court stenographer: “get the hell out of here” while she was legally trying to record a sidebar conversation.
VERDICT:
Bartolomeo Vanzetti found guilty of attempted, armed robbery at the L.Q. White Shoe Company in Bridgewater , Massachusetts
CONCLUSION:
It appears that the judge and jury were using Vanzetti’s political views, and Italian immigrant background, to convict him of a robbery. There was absolutely no evidence supporting the Prosecutions case. A motion for re-trial could have been submitted to the courts based on the comments of the Judge and/or the lack of solid evidence. A motion to appeal could have been made by the Defense; there was not enough time to gather eyewitness, or evidence on behalf of the defendant because the trial was scheduled and concluded so quickly. Vanzetti was innocent.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE/DEFENSE EVIDENCE:
Armed Robbery and Murder of Two Employees – Slater & Morrill Shoe Company, South Braintree , Massachusetts
1. Sacco and Vanzetti were arrested in Brockton , Massachusetts
2. After exhausting a pool of 500 jurors, the Judge orders police to round up more potential jurors.
3. Eyewitnesses Carrigan, Bostock, Wade, Splaine, Pelser, Andres, LaCangie, Dolbeare, Heron, Tracy, Goodrich positively identify both men in their testimonies before jury.
4. Arresting Officer Connolly claimed Sacco and Vanzetti reached for their guns upon arrest.
5. Employees of Ivers Johnson Company claim Vanzetti had “same kind of gun” that murdered victim Verardelli.
6. Sacco’s boss testifies cap found at scene was similar to one Sacco wore.
7. “Ballistics” expert testifies shells found in Vanzetti’s pocket “consistent” with those fired by Sacco’s gun, but not identical match.
8. Eyewitnesses chosen because they thought perpetrators looked Italian.
9. Political beliefs thoroughly examined.
10. Testimony from witnesses claim the Buick, found in East Bridgewater , was the same one used in the robbery/murder.
1. Sacco and Vanzetti were arrested and searched because they were “suspicious characters”, a judgment made solely by the arresting officer and made possible by the Anarchist Exclusion Act.
2. “Potential” jurors could be questioned about their political and racial beliefs benefitting the prosecution.
3. Witnesses, upon Cross-examination, recanted their testimony.
Carrigan, Bostock, Wade – could not identify anyone.
Splaine – Couldn’t absolutely identify Sacco in get-away vehicle.
Pelser – Never saw robbery; claims the DA pressured him to falsely identify Sacco
Andrews – retracts her original statement saying government forced her into identifying Sacco and Vanzetti.
Heron, Tracy – Claim they saw the Defendants in East Braintree the day of the robbery, but not at the scene of the crime.
Goodrich – Was a known felon, testified under a false name and was given a deal by the DA to indentify the Defendants in exchange for dropping a larceny charge.
4. No eyewitnesses to this event.
5. Same kind of gun does not mean it was the exact gun. Testimony possibly made by people not familiar with different types of guns.
6. Cap does not fit Sacco, ala OJ.7. “Ballistics” expert testifies shells found in Vanzetti’s pocket “consistent” with those fired by Sacco’s gun, but not identical match.
7. Expert recants testimony and claims’ using the word “consistent” was prearranged by the DA to deliberately mislead the jurors into believing it actually was Sacco’s gun.
8. Racial profiling.
9. Political beliefs do not imply guilt.
10. Zero evidence connects Sacco or Vanzetti to the Buick.
VERDICT:
Nicola Sacco found guilty of murder in the first degree.
Bartolomeo Vanzetti found guilty of murder in the first degree.
SENTENCE:
Nicola Sacco sentenced to death by electrocution.
Bartolomeo Vanzetti sentenced to death by electrocution.
UNRESOLVED EXTENUATING CURCUMSTANCES:
Further research on the Sacco and Vanzetti case reveals other interesting facts that were not mentioned in the trial nor taken into consideration when motions for a retrial were denied eight times by Judge Webster Thayer (who had previously convicted Vanzetti of armed robbery); an appeal was denied once by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
- Police questioned many Italian immigrants regarding this case; it appears that Sacco and Vanzetti were chosen as suspects simply because police believed they needed the money to support their anarchist activities.
- Sacco and Vanzetti were carrying guns. The guns were never linked to the case.
- Both Sacco and Vanzetti had reliable alibis. The prosecution revealed that those providing support of alibis were Italian Immigrants.
- Neither defendant could speak English. It was apparent that the answers they gave in court meant they did not understand the question.
- Were painted as “unpatriotic” because they fled to Mexico
- Were questioned extensively on their political beliefs.
- Judge Thayer denied a motion for retrial even though in 1925 Celestino Madeirios confessed to being a member of the gang that killed the employees of the shoe company. Madeirios also named the four other people involved in the robbery.
- The Morelli Brothers were never investigated even though they were criminals who committed similar robberies in Massachusetts
CONCLUSION:
Considering the cloud of immigrant prejudice, the atmosphere of the “red scare” during the time of this trial, and the absolute lack of evidence by prosecutors, it is clear that Italian immigrants, Sacco and Vanzetti, were made the scapegoats of fear. Authorities, under huge pressure by the public, needed to demonstrate their ability to keep America
