Ferdinando Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were two Italian anarchists convicted of murder and robbery in Massachusetts in 1920. Although there were many disputes to if they were guilty or innocent and whether or not their trials were even fair. Although there were evidence showing and proving that they were guilty, some of it was questionable and their defense also gave decent reason for their innocence and ineligible eye witnesses. To determine if the result of the trial was fair, I decided to play the role of a CSI Investigator in 1920 and look at the evidence to make a fair conclusion.
The first piece of evidence against Sacco were the eye witnesses. Several of them put Sacco around Braintree at the time of the crime. However, the defense calls that none of the witnesses were exactly sure of their identification of the criminal as Sacco. Ballistics evidence claims that a bullet found could NOT have been fired from Sacco's gun but after conducting tests at the Mass Police Lab, it's found that the bullet WAS shot from his gun. Sacco also skipped work on the day of the crime but had alimony for being at Boni's restaurant. Seven witnesses testified.
THEN, evidence against Vanzetti are as followed: Eyewitnesses, including Levangie, said he saw Vanzetti driving a car near Braintree after he heard shots. But others testified that Levangie told them he first saw no one, then he saw a light-haired driver (Vanzetti dark-haired). Vanzetti's defense of selling fish in Plymouth. Six witnesses verified they saw him. Last evidence is Vanzetti's gun, a 38 calibre Harrington & Richardson revolver with a repaired hammer, just like the one paymaster guard Berardelli had at the time he was shot. Vanzetti said he bought it from a friend but lied about the cost. He, however, testified he bought the gun from a friend months ago using cash he received from his fish peddling business and was concerned about recent hold-ups. His friend, Falzini, testified he sold him the gun. (Although in 1977 reports reveal Berardelli's revolver was a .32 not .38, it was no use as the trial ended in 1927).
The result of the trial was both Sacco & Vanzetti were executed because they were both found guilty. Now there were some notes regarding the two and the prosecution. It was well shown and noticed that Vanzetti's case was much weaker than Sacco's, and the possibility that Vanzetti could be innocent, the judge had already made his decision and it was final. Much less than Sacco, Vanzetti continually proclaimed his innocence and even Sacco was incensed about it, rather his own conviction. The prosecution also noticed this and even had some doubts of their own as soon as the verdict was set.
My decision, much like the prosecution's is that although all evidence shows Sacco as guilty, Vanzetti might as well be innocent as the evidences put against him don't exactly place him with much to do about the murders. In 1982, Francis Russell was informed in a letter from Giovanni Gamberi's son saying "Sacco was guilty" and "Vanzetti innocent as far as the actual participation in the killing." Now Vanzetti could be charged with the robberies he's done before with Sacco, but certainly NOT charged with murder.
IMG src: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Sacco_e_Vanzetti.PNG
