|
|
Sacco and Vanzetti: The Breakdown of the Legal System Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were viewed by the American public as anarchists and radicalists. When these men were on trial for murder, the people involved in the case viewed them this way as well. Sacco and Vanzetti were fighting for their lives against people like Webster Thayer, the presiding judge of the case, and Fredrick Katzmann, the prosecutor who saw these men as the American public did. Because everyone, even people involved in the case, only paid attention to their political views and not evidence, Sacco and Vanzetti were convicted not because they were guilty of murder, but because they were guilty of having radical views. If the jury had looked only at the evidence, neither Sacco nor Vanzetti would have been convicted (Montgomery 3). On April 19, 1920, Sacco and Vanzetti were with a man named Ferruchio Coacci, who had a warrant out for his arrest and deportation. Because Sacco and Vanzetti were with him on the day he was detained, they were arrested as well. On that fateful day, Sacco had a .32-caliber gun on his person, and Vanzetti had four shotgun shells. A few weeks before they were arrested, there was a double homicide in which one victim was killed by a .32-caliber bullet and the other by a shotgun. Because of this fact, the police became suspicious and began interrogations (Montgomery 7). The interrogations Sacco and Vanzetti were put through were very grueling, and both men, because of their poor knowledge of English, were often confused about what they were being asked. With no lawyer present, the police easily made the men appear guilty. Due to these interrogations, the case went to trial (Montgomery 9), during which the defense showed that the gun found on Sacco and the shells found on Vanzetti were not those used in the murders, and that each man had an alibi (Montgomery 131-42).
|
