Sacco And Vanzetti Analysis

738 Words3 Pages

Russell Aiuto, in his article “Sacco and Vanzetti,” describes the events that led to and followed the executions of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti. On April 15, 1920, two men shot and killed a paymaster and guard in Braintree, Massachusetts. The two men escaped with three accomplices, successfully nabbing nearly 16,000 dollars. Although five men were involved, only two, Sacco and Vanzetti, were ever arrested, tried, and convicted for the crime. The trial against Sacco and Vanzetti was poorly conducted. Prosecution leader Frederick Katzmann cross examined the two suspects in a bad fashion. Furthermore, the verdict was determined without enough concrete evidence.
Soon after the South Braintree theft, Sacco and Vanzetti were arrested. …show more content…

In the Sacco and Vanzetti trial of 1921 however, this was not the case. There was a large gap in what prosecution and defense claimed to have happened, and even today, there is much speculation on the truth behind the prosecution’s accusations and proof. When discussing the trial, Aiuto, in his article “Sacco and Vanzetti,” describes the prosecution 's strategy (aside from cross examination). According to Aiuto, “The case for the prosecution was developed along three principal lines. First, Katzmann produced eye-witnesses... Second, Katzmann centered on the bullets... The third line of the prosecution’s case was ‘consciousness of guilt’” (Aiuto 5). Prosecution planned to persuade Sacco and Vanzetti’s guilt by placing them on the scene of the crime, proving that the bullets were fired from their weapons, and that they acted guilty. Strangely enough, only one of the eleven witness actually saw the shooting, and even the one ducked for cover once it began. Also, both Sacco and Vanzetti had alabi’s that placed them away from the crime scene. Next the gun analyst for the prosecution could only skeptically claim that one of the bullets was fired from Sacco’s gun, whereas Katzmann took this answer, claimed it was true and fed it to the Jury. On the last count of acting guilty, Sacco and Vanzetti were able to answer, that carrying arms were because of safety or transportation of money, and

Open Document