Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were two Italian men who were accused of a murder and robbery. In South Braintree, Massachusetts, there was a shoe company but it's paymaster, who was delivering money, was robbed by two Italian men. On April 15, 1920 two men shot a gun and killed the paymaster of the shoe company and his guard, Alessandro Berardelli (Britannica.com). The murders were illustrated as two Italian men who killed the paymaster and his guard in South Braintree, Massachusetts, and stole over $15,000. Sacco and Vanzetti were possibly in the wrong place at the wrong time because when they went to go get their car in Brockton, Massachusetts, they were arrested for being associated with the crime. They were convicted of the crime …show more content…
More and more people began to see that Sacco and Vanzetti were incident during the sex years on death row. During those six years they sent out letters that convinced some of the public that they were innocent (Time.com). Especially since both Sacco and Vanzetti did not have a criminal record. This trial lasted about seven years and on April 9, 1927, Sacco and Vanzetti were sentenced to death( Britannica.com). On the last court date, April 9th, Bartolomeo made his last statement, “Yes. What I say is that I am innocent,” (Vanzetti, Bartolomeo). Sacco and Vanzetti fought against the court proving their innocence for seven years, but Judge Webster Thayer did not look to support their case and had been so against them from the start because they were immigrants. He had been so against them because of the Red Scare era that had been going (U-S- History).Vanzetti makes it known in his last statement that the Judge was always against them, “We have proved that there could not have been another Judge on the face of the earth more prejudiced and more cruel than you have been against us.” (Vanzetti, Bartolomeo). The Judge believed they were guilty because they were anarchist who were against the United
On July 6, 2010, both of them were scheduled for their sentence in the United States District Court in Honolulu, Hawaii, but they failed to appear. For this type of crime, the FBI is rewarding $10,000 for information leading to the Dimitrions'
Bartolomeo Vanzetti moved to the United States from Italy and became a fish peddler. These men were two Italian anarchists and were connected with a long string of crimes in their area. As time went on, they were caught by the state and were charged. They were accused of murdering an official and stealing more than $15,000 from a shoe store in Massachusetts (Sacco-Vanzetti Case). Sacco and Vanzetti were arrested after a robbery in South Braintree, Massachusetts, which included the murders of two guards.
For example, David Kaiser (historian) states that the prosecutor used false evidence against Sacco and Vanzetti. The evidence shows that bullet 3 and shell w were indeed fired from Sacco’s colt, but they were fired after Fredrick Parmenter and Alessandro Beradelli had already been murdered. This shows once again that the prosecutor wanted these Italian anarchists to be founded guilty even through false evidence. Lincoln Robbins (retired school teacher) knows just about all the facts about the Sacco and Vanzetti case. Lincoln Robbins has been studying the trial of Sacco and Vanzetti for over 30 years now.
Sacco and Vanzetti were in the Braintree area at the time, and when stopped by police, both vehemently denied any participation in the murders, and furthermore denied any gun ownership. When searched by police, Nicola Sacco had anarchist pamphlet materials and a .32 caliber Colt, not unlike the weapon used in the double homicide. Vanzetti possessed a .38 caliber revolver identical to the weapon missing from the slain security guard’s holster. (Reed, Barry C., "The Sacco-Vanzetti Case: The Trial of the Century", ABA Journal, August 1960, pp. 867–869)
In the south back in the 1930’s there were many Americans who did not know the meaning of equality for all. With this being the case, many black people faced discrimination daily and it followed through to the legal systems especially in the south where both being compared took place. The evidence provided in both trials proved to be weak. Despite this, both defendants had determined lawyers who believed in justice.
Jason was strong. I wasn’t sure how he got that way. Maybe because he had to handle everything by himself, but that wouldn’t make sense. He never learned how to be strong. He just was.
While the Manson family was digging the “Bottomless Pit” , in Death Valley, police raided the area and arrested the family(crimemuseum.org, 2017). The trial began on June 15, 1970, the Tate-LaBianca trial was against Manson, Watson, Atkins, and Krewinkel. They were charged with seven counts of murder and one count of conspiracy. Kasabian, revived immunity for testifying and describing the murders. After one month a jury was selected, Kasabian was on the stand for 18 days.
One after another victim-to-victim fell to the unjust and unlawful acts of the justice system of the time without any help from the surrounding society. Justine was the first to fall because of how no one stood up for her in the society that lived all around her therefore she took the fall for everything. Second to feel the heat was Mr. De Lacy who consequently dragged the whole family down the government did not want Mr. De Lacy poking around anymore so they framed him. No one tried to appeal the trial or even tried to find evidence to help his case. Finally Victor, the one who sat there and did not speak up for Justine, felt the cold shoulder from society too when he was accused of murder.
The results of the trial in Stamford was that Mercy Disborough was temporarily convicted of witchcraft while Goody Clawson was acquitted. The consequences for Mercy Disborough were that despite months and jail and continued peer accusation, she was acquitted. The consequences for the townspeople are blurrier, but it is evident that persistent hysteria was not one of them. The results of the trial in Stamford were largely reigned in from the massive hysteria and mass convictions associated with contemporary witch trials by the law.
This had a great impact on Tom Robinson's trial because he was seen as inferior to the jury, Bob Ewell, and his daughter, Mayella Ewell. The jury decided to take the words of the superior even though Tom was not guilty. The results of the trial were biased because of the unfair laws that even influenced the decisions of the jury during the
This is shown again during interrogation and even in his trial. He answered questions willingly and simply claimed “he had done his duty” (pg.19). The police attempted to get any related anarchist information from him and were
He was taken directly to a prison and held there for a time. None of the reasons for arrest were good or true reasons. As far as the crowd, they were very rowdy in throughout all of the trials. As far as similarities
The reason people might believe this is because many people were being arrested without legal due. The text supporting this statement states, “U.S. Attorney General Palmer led the infamous “Palmer Raids” of 1919 – 1920, in which thousands of suspected radical activists, most of them immigrants, were arrested and hundreds deported without legal due process.” However, this argument is weak because the government had a right to be fearful of all the destruction occurring in the United States and the people causing it. Therefore, they took action against suspected people, and arrested them. This is why xenophobia in the 1920’s wasn’t unfounded paranoia, and instead a justified
The new decision led to a cyclone of accusations because people realized the possibility of their condemnation regardless they were guilty or innocent. Many helped that system by untrue confessions to save their lives. Miller, among others, refused to surrender to questioning. People who were revealed communists suffered greatly (Bly 2-5).
Eva Gail Peterson was raped and murdered on May 4th, 1979 in front of her four year old son. Phillip Bivens and two other men were wrongly accused of the crime and was convicted. The exoneration of Dixon, Bivens, and Ruffin was made possible through the lawyers of the innocence project, the fact that there was no evidence pointing to their involvement, and the advantage of DNA testing. The night of the murder Phillip Bivens had been on leave from a halfway house, where he was sent after stealing some beer from a store.