Bartolomeo Vanzetti Case Analysis

Chapter 11, Saco and Vanzetti, in After the Fact begins with a story of an armed robbery in a bank and an armed robbery and murder to a man on the side of the road in Massachusetts during the time of the nativist mood in America. The Braintree and Bridgewater crimes, in 1919 and 1920, seemed to show a patterned and drew attention to Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti. Sacco and Vanzetti, two Italian anarchists, where were soon arrested for the crimes. After a long trial, suspicious evidence and six years of appeals the two were convicted and sentenced to the electric chair. Moving on in the chapter we are introduced to another story, around the same time as the previous one, of employers going on strike and radicals creating an uprising in the labor industries.

In order to write Giovanni and Lusanna, Gene Brucker had to rely on primary historical sources, such as notarial transcripts and Florentine catasto records, which provide information created at the time and place, rather than speculative information created later on, but were also subject to the biases of those whose testimony and information were recorded at the time.

Wine retailer More Vino LTD is located in Port of Spain, Trinidad. It operates four subunits: wholesaling and distribution, a retail store, a bar, a restaurant, and a delivery service, making it a successful multilevel business.

Main Idea – Legislative Branch: Over the years the death penalty discussed and altered on several occasions.

The case that shocked Chicago ravaged the front pages of newspapers, was the talk of the town, and became infamous throughout Illinois and the U.S. The savage and questionable murder of a young, sweet boy proved all anyone could talk about in summer 1924. The media went haywire when the details about the murder and motive seemed different than any before. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb committed a murder so violent and brutal that their excuse committing it was simply because they wanted to commit the perfect crime. The Leopold and Loeb trial contained so many nuances, twists, and turns that the media rightfully dubbed it the “Crime of the Century.” The trial Chicago v. Leopold and Loeb of 1924 brought together America by bringing awareness to capital punishment in the justice system.

Which of the following was evidence to support Vanzetti's innocence during the Braintree robbery and double murder trial?

Buckley v. Valeo: Buckley v. Valeo was a court case where the judges held limits on how much could be spend on elections. This was unconstitutional to what the count case came out to be

The great american melting pot of the industrial age was reaching its boiling point. Slums were overcrowded and the factory workers were just replaceable parts of a commercial machine that kept wages low and revenue high. Any uncooperative worker was replaceable at an even lower cost due to the heavy flow of migrants to the United States. These poor newcomers worked at any rate, which put many Americans out of jobs. The unemployed were angry and upset that they had been replaced by immigrant workers, and it became apparent in hate crimes, political parties such as the nativists, race riots, and police brutality. One day in Braintree, Massachusetts, two italian immigrants, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, were arrested for an armed robbery of a shoe factory with two deaths (Kronenwetter). The two men claimed that they were innocent, yet the prosecution accused them relentlessly. Of the 33 eyewitnesses brought to the stand during the length of the trial, only seven people identified sacco, and four recognized Vanzetti. Every person that claimed to see sacco said he was wearing something different. The prosecution brought 16 men who thought they recognized sacco, but only 7 really did. They also brought 4 men that recognized Vanzetti, but they were very weak,

Lots of newspaper printed their antiradical opinion and dirtied Sacco and Vanzetti’s names and published about how they dodged the military draft, and how they both were carrying guns during the time of their arrest. The Department of Justice even released propaganda to excite and unify the public against radicals (Russell). Already the case was being judged in advance by the people who did not even know the evidence. Judge Thayer told the jurors to have confidence and most interpreted that as to not be afraid and have the courage to convict the men (2). The trial lasted 35 days and as Sacco and Vanzetti were tried they were put in shackles and questioned in a steel cage in the courtroom (a somewhat common practice in Massachusetts), however this being treated as criminals gave a bad first impression and worsened the juror preconceived bias’ against them (Streissguth). Though the American opinion was somewhat sway during the trial, most including the jurors joined the bandwagon of hating foreign radicals which further stacked the odds against the innocent pair. For this particular case there around 180 witnesses to testify but there was an acute disagreement for almost every key witnesses’ testimony (Stark). For example while one witness saw Sacco caning fish across town, another witness saw him at a restaurant with Vanzetti while another saw him at the scene of the crime (Sacco and Vanzetti Trial). There was confusion about how they got away as well, though the prosecution determined they did not drive a getaway car witnesses testified see Vanzetti driving away. Several witnesses could not identify Vanzetti when he was only 10 feet away from them but one woman gave a thorough and perfect description after seeing him for one second out of a two story window (2). Another woman

In 1921, two Italian anarchists were declared guilty of murder of a paymaster and his guard along with armed theft in South Braintree, Massachusetts (Linder). Upon arrest, they were found to be armed with pistols. Despite having supported alibis on the day of the murder, they were still sentenced to be executed through electric chair by Judge Webster Thayer. Protests erupted around the world due to the fact that the judge’s decision had been affected by anti-radical and nativist feelings which were a result of the Red Scare.

It was the best of times and it was the most noticeably awful of times. The 1920's was an extraordinary time in America. Business was blasting, autos were all over the place, there were brave new designs, and blissful jazz music to listen and move to. Notwithstanding all the great things happening, there were some exceptionally dim times. Throughout the early 1920's and there was much pressure and dread of nonnatives in America. Nonnatives were frequently connected with socialism and turmoil (Stark 1). These radicals were being extradited every day for apprehension of uproars and resistance. Attacks were headed against communists and in excess of 10,000 associated with socialism were captured, commonly without fitting warrants. Additionally throughout this time, there was a string of bank burglaries and the police were watchful for outlaws that were free to move around at will. At that point on April 15, 1920 two men were shot to death and $15,766 was stolen. The two killers were said to be Italian foreigners ("Sacco and Vanzetti Trial"). In frenzy, the police hunt down two revolutionary Italian foreigners at fault the homicide on. Twenty days after the fact, on May 5, 1920, the unfortunate twosome of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were captured while getting an auto associated with the homicide ("Sacco-Vanzetti Case"). The two men were attempted and discovered liable under conditional confirmation (Stark 1). There was clear verification that witnesses were lying and

Two innocent Italian men, speaking out against an all white Jury, were blamed for the murder of two white men which resulted in death by the electric chair. Although no hard evidence was held against them, these men were charged because the trial occurred during a time when the Red Scare had made a huge influence on the way people viewed non-americans. These two men were named Sacco and Vanzetti and they were believed to be anarchists due to their ethnicity which brought about an unjust trial which, in return, sparked a fire within the United States. The Sacco and Vanzetti case brought to the surface the problems dealing with discrimination against immigrants because their trial was believed to be unjust; therefore, we now have laws abolishing the injustice and discrimination towards immigrants.

At the beginning of the century, Americans were disappointed with the outcome of the European war. This resulted them to go against all things foreign, which included racial political ideas and immigrants. The country had to face many decisions made by communists, which created the Red Scare. The Red Scare was a spread of the fear of communism. One of the most important cases involving the Red Scare was the Sacco and Vanzetti case. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, who were Italian, atheists, conscientious objectors, and radicals, were both accused of the murder of a paymaster and his guard at South Braintree, Massachusetts. They were both holding revolvers and told lies to the judge and court, but the flaws in evidence proved they were not guilty. “Many critics believed that the accused had been found guilty of radicalism rather than murder- that they were martyrs in the ‘class struggle’” (Race and Ethnicity Packet). Their conviction illustrated the unfairness of the trial based on the beliefs and race. The American jury and judge for the trial was

“It was the crime of the century” are the worlds that were roared around the world in 1924. As two intelligent young men with Harvard experience and wealth, evolved from petty crimes to murder. Defense attorney Clarence Darrow was begged to defend these culpable boys and plead against the capital punishment. Knowing that the entire town wanted to see Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb heads on a platter, Darrow attempted appealing to a judge rather than a jury. Darrow fought, Darrow persuaded, Darrow won. (Asyndeton) Darrows’ 12-hour speech was able to convince the judge, and the reason this was possible was because of the numerous rhetorical strategies used.

The preface introduces the background of RAFFAELE SOLLECITO and AMANDA KNOX. Raffaele explains how the Italian government and prosecution presumed their guilt in the murder of MEREDITH KERCHER and fed the media a false premise of that guilt. Raffaele admits that he and Amanda had made mistakes in their lives, but they we certainly not capable of such a heinous crime.