Long Live Equality! In South Braintree, Massachusetts, two men were tried and convicted of a crime because of their ethnic background. A robbery at the Slater-Morrill Shoe Factory had taken place. As the payroll distributors were exiting the building, two men attacked them, snatching a box containing the money. The men leaving the factory were both shot and killed, while the two attackers escaped in a getaway car. The two suspected attackers, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, faced prejudices inside and out of the courts. In the end, both even faced the lethal electric chair. To this day, it is undetermined who the true robbers are. However, many factors prevented Sacco and Vanzetti from experiencing a fair trial. Discrimination within …show more content…
Following the robbery, a hat was brought into evidence and ultimately became an asset to the case. “[Fred] Loring’s testimony implied that the cap had been found immediately after the shooting. Later it was learned that the cap had actually been found more than twenty-four hours after the crime” (Tejada 145). During this time period, many men wore the similar flat cap that was retrieved. Thousands of people had walked that same street after the incident. Thus, the hat could have belonged to nearly anyone. Additionally, when tested the hat did not even fit Sacco’s head properly. It was believed to have belonged to Sacco, however, because it had a tear in the back. Sacco’s did have a tear from being hung on a nail each morning. “Now Gallivan told the advisory committee that he was the one who had torn the lining, while searching for a label or name tag that might help him identify the owner” (Tejada 236). In addition to the hat, a gun was also used as evidence. The gun that Vanzetti was supposedly carrying had been stolen from one of the guards. This claim by the Prosecution is incorrect. “The guard's weapon was a .32 caliber revolver with a different serial number - evidence withheld from the defense” (Pernicone 3). This proves that the weapon found on scene had not been stolen by Vanzetti since this weapon was a .38 caliber, not matching the guard’s. Thus, this major basis for conviction was …show more content…
The newspaper at the time was crucial to many families. Thus, media had a great influence on society. Everything contained in the daily newspaper was taken very seriously. The more positive spectrum of the news on the case contained supporters of Sacco and Vanzetti. “In Georgia, the ‘Macon Telegraph’ called on its readers to ‘make a lot of noise about this rotten business up in Massachusetts’” (Temkin 90). Defenders were often “radicals, trade unionists, intellectuals, liberals, and even some conservatives” (World of Forensic Science). On the other hand, many newspapers also showed the same discrimination observed within court. Vanzetti said, “The jury don’t know nothing about us. They have never seen us. The only thing that they know is the bad things the newspaper have said on the Plymouth trial” (Linder 6). Supporters of cruelty in the case often held trust in the American system of justice and had no doubts on the judgements of Thayer. These people also believed that Sacco and Vanzetti should bear the greatest of punishments. The New York Times portrayed rather optimistic conclusions on the day preceding the executions. “A love of justice is still a powerful motive in this country… The long delay in determining the fate of the two men is a reproach to American justice” (Temkin 280 n19). Readers of the New York Times could see how the case was completely fair, where,