Sacco and Vanzetti: Judicial Murder
Bartolomeo Vanzetti & Niccola Sacco Sacco and Vanzetti were immigrants who fled poverty in their native Italy, only to find the same in America. They were both also committed anarchists and followers of that advocate of violent revolution, Luigi Galleani. Ferdinando Niccola Sacco, was a cobbler born in Foggia, Italy, in 1891. He emigrated to the United States when aged 17. He never really mastered the English language and never felt the need to do so as he rarely emerged from the emigre Italian community. Bartolomeo Vanzetti was a fishmonger from Villafaletto. They didn't meet one another until 1917, when both fled to Mexico to avoid the draft. This was to play heavily against them at their various trials. Their seeming lack of patriotism and unwillingness to fight for their adopted country only seemed to reinforce the view that they were an alien species in American society and as such intrinsically un-American. When, in fact, they were simply anti-war They were to stand trial accused of the murder of a payroll clerk, Frederick Parmenter, and a security guard, Alessandro Berardelli, who were delivering the payroll of $15,776 for the Slater Morill Shoe Company in Braintree, Massachusetts on 15 April, 1920. They were arrested on 5 May, 1920, in Brockton, as they were in the process of picking up a car believed to have been used in the robbery. The car belonged to Mario Buda, who was the known revolutionary, Luigi Galleani's, chief bomb-maker. Buda, who accompanied Sacco and Vanzetti, along with a friend, escaped the police trap on a motorcycle. Sacco and Vanzetti were not so lucky however, and were arrested after boarding a streetcar. Both were found to be armed and in possession of anarchist literature. Sacco was also found to have shotgun shells in his pockets that were similar to those used in the crime. This was to prove to be vital evidence at the subsequent trials. Neither of them had criminal records. Both Sacco and Vanzetti pleaded their innocence claiming that they were the victims of social and political prejudice; and there is little doubt that the presiding Judge, Webster Thayer (who had requested to preside at the trial) guided the jury toward a guilty verdict. He reportedly told the jury that, "This man (Vanzetti) although he may not have committed the crime attributed to him, is nevertheless culpable because he is the enemy of our existing institutions". There is, however, no evidence of this in the Court transcripts. Both men were committed anarchists and it seems likely that they participated in the bombing campaigns of Luigi Galleani, at some level. They were known to Mario Buda and many of those who had previously been arrested were associates of theirs. Vanzetti, prior to his trial for murder had been convicted of armed robbery, when the Judge was again, Webster Thayer. Also, despite their declarations of innocence of the crimes of which they had been charged, neither of them disavowed their belief in violent revolution as a legitimate tool with which to oppose oppression. At the time of their arrest both Sacco and Vanzetti lied to
the police. They did this fearing they would be deported, as indeed, Galleani had been in 1919. Their initial false testimony to the police was to seriously prejudice their case later. The Evidence At the time of the robbery, Vanzetti claimed to have been selling fish. Witnesses were produced who testified that they had bought fish from him. Unfortunately for Vanzetti, they were all Italian and therefore not believed. Sacco, stated that he was at the time in Boston trying to obtain a passport from the Italian Consulate. Their Defence Attorney, Fred Moore, whom Judge Thayer had described as a long-haired Californian radical, managed to track down the clerk who had dealt with Sacco's application. But the clerk refused to return to America from Sicily to give evidence claiming ill-health. Sacco also claimed to have had dinner with friends in Boston. Again witnesses testifying to this fact were produced, but again they were Italians. The ballistics evidence produced by the prosecution was equivocal, inconsistent and flawed. It was claimed that as the calibre of Sacco's gun was so obsolete only the ammunition found on his person could possibly have been fired from it. Yet only one of the four bullets recovered from the security guards body anywhere near matched the calibre of Sacco's gun. Again, Vanzetti's revolver was a 38 calibre, the bullets found at the scene were 32 calibre. The prosecution then claimed that Vanzetti had wrested the security guards revolver from his person and then shot him in cold blood with his own gun. Yet the security guard had apparently been unarmed. His gun having been sent for repair. Berardelli's wife stated that had her husband retrieved his gun from the repair shop he might still be alive. There seemed to be little, if any, evidence that linked Vanzetti to the crime at all. The other main piece of evidence against the pair was Sacco's cap, supposedly found at the scene of the crime. In a farcical moment reminiscent of a more recent trial, Sacco was asked to try on the cap, it was too small for him. Eyewitness accounts of the crime were varied and inconclusive. Some placed Sacco and Vanzetti at the scene, others did not. Some later recanted their statements, others recanted their recantations. After all the evidence was in, it took just three hours for the jury to reach their verdict - guilty. The press had a field day, and comments supposedly made by the Judge like "I will get them good and proper" and "Did you see what I did with those anarchist bastards today" became widely circulated. Even the jury chairman was heard to remark "Damn them they should hang anyway".
Protest in vain Defence committees were set up around the world and the case of Sacco and Vanzetti became an international cause celebre. Demands were made for a retrial and funds raised. Two appeals were held but the verdict was upheld in both cases. Sacco and Vanzetti were sentenced to die in the electric chair. Whilst in prison awaiting execution Sacco was told by a gangster, Celestine Medeiros (also awaiting execution) that he had been part of the gang that had committed the crime. Judge Thayer refused a further retrial based on his testimony. The Execution "It is true they can execute the body, but they cannot execute the idea which is bound to live. (Niccola Sacco)
"I would not wish on any of them what I have had to suffer for things I am not guilty of. But I have suffered for things I am guilty of. I am suffering because I am a radical, and I am indeed a radical. I have suffered because I am an Italian, and I am indeed an Italian. If you could execute me two times, and if I could be reborn to other times, I would live again to do what I have already done". ( Bartolomeo Vanzetti ) Sacco and Vanzetti were executed on 23 August, 1927. They both met their deaths with great calmness and assurance. Vanzetti, shook hands with his gaolers and thanked them for their kindness. His final words were "I wish to forgive some people for what they are doing to me". Sacco, whose English was fractured at best, shouted "Viva I'anarchia! Farewell Mia Madre!" The Reaction Liberal opinion around the world was outraged at the severity of the punishment and what they believed was the injustice of the verdict. Petitions of condemnation were signed, politicians spoke out, and the press savaged the American judicial system. Others, however, reacted more strongly. In Buenos Aires the headquarters of Citibank were bombed as also was the Bank of Boston, and an attempt was made on President Hoover's life. Niccola Sacco's wife wrote a letter to the anarchist believed to be behind the bombings, Severino di Giovanni, thanking him for his efforts on her husbands behalf. Postscript John Upton Sinclair, the socialist author and politician who had been a prominent and outspoken supporter of Sacco and Vanzetti, recalled meeting their defence attorney, Fred Moore, after the executions:� Alone in a hotel room with Fred, I begged him to tell me the full truth. He then told me that the men were guilty, and he told me in every detail how he had framed a set of alibis for them� . . . I faced the most ethical problem of my life. I had come to Boston with the announcement that I would write the truth about the case. But Sinclair doubted the credibility of Moore's statement - I heard certain things about Fred Moore. I had heard that he was using drugs. In 1941, the anarchist Carlo Tresca, a member of the Sacco and Vanzetti Defence Committee stated that "Sacco was guilty but Vanzetti was not". Mario Buda later claimed that Sacco was there. In 1952, labour leader, Anthony Ramuglia, claimed that he had been asked to provide a false alibi for Sacco by Fred Moore. In 1982, a letter emerged concerning Giovanni Gambera, one of the four anarchist leaders who had organised Sacco and Vanzetti's defence. In the letter he claimed that everyone within the anarchist inner-circle knew that Sacco was guilty and Vanzetti was not. In 1961, further ballistic tests were carried out on Sacco's gun. The results showed that the bullets that killed Alessandro Berardelli had indeed been fired from it. These results were confirmed by more tests carried out in 1983. Though by this time no one could be sure that the gun being tested was Sacco's at all. Regardless of what has come to light since it seems that the evidence to prove either Sacco's or Vanzetti's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt didn't exist at the time of their trial. The proceedings were not conducted in a fair and impartial way, that their conviction was politically motivated, and that they were victims not just of a miscarriage of justice but of judicial murder. "Any stigma and disgrace should be forever removed from the names of Niccola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti". (Michael Dukakis, Governor of Massachusetts, 1977) .