Nicola Sacco (pronounced [niˈkɔːla ˈsakko]; April 22, 1891 – August 23, 1927) and Bartolomeo Vanzetti (pronounced [bartoloˈmɛːo vanˈtsetti, -ˈdzet-]; June 11, 1888 – August 23, 1927) were Italian immigrants and anarchists who were controversially convicted of murdering Alessandro Berardelli and Frederick Parmenter, a guard and a paymaster, during the April 15, 1920, armed robbery of the Slater and Morrill Shoe Company in Braintree, Massachusetts, United States. Seven years later, they were executed in the electric chair at Charlestown State Prison.
After a few hours' deliberation on July 14, 1921, the jury
convicted Sacco and Vanzetti of first-degree murder and they were sentenced to
death by the trial judge. Anti-Italianism, anti-immigrant, and anti-anarchist
bias was suspected as having heavily influenced the verdict. A series of
appeals followed, funded largely by the private Sacco and Vanzetti Defense
Committee. The appeals were based on recanted testimony, conflicting ballistics
evidence, a prejudicial pretrial statement by the jury foreman, and a
confession by an alleged participant in the robbery. All appeals were denied by
trial judge Webster Thayer and also later denied by the Massachusetts Supreme
Judicial Court. By 1926, the case had drawn worldwide attention. As details of
the trial and the men's suspected innocence became known, Sacco and Vanzetti
became the center of one of the largest causes célèbres in modern history. In
1927, protests on their behalf were held in every major city in North America
and Europe, as well as in Tokyo, Sydney, Melbourne, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro,
Buenos Aires, Dubai, Montevideo, Johannesburg, and Auckland.
Celebrated writers, artists, and academics pleaded for their
pardon or for a new trial. Harvard law professor and future Supreme Court
justice Felix Frankfurter argued for their innocence in a widely read Atlantic
Monthly article that was later published in book form. Even the Italian fascist
dictator Benito Mussolini was convinced of their innocence and attempted to
pressure American authorities to have them released. The two were scheduled to
be executed in April 1927, accelerating the outcry. Responding to a massive
influx of telegrams urging their pardon, Massachusetts governor Alvan T. Fuller
appointed a three-man commission to investigate the case. After weeks of secret
deliberation that included interviews with the judge, lawyers, and several
witnesses, the commission upheld the verdict. Sacco and Vanzetti were executed
in the electric chair just after midnight on August 23, 1927.
Investigations in the aftermath of the executions continued
throughout the 1930s and '40s. The publication of the men's letters, containing
eloquent professions of innocence, intensified the public's belief in their
wrongful execution. However, a ballistic test performed in 1961 proved that the
pistol found on Sacco was indeed used to commit the murders. On August 23,
1977—the 50th anniversary of the executions—Massachusetts Governor Michael
Dukakis issued a proclamation that Sacco and Vanzetti had been unfairly tried
and convicted and that "any disgrace
should be forever removed from their names".
Background
Sacco and Vanzetti
Sacco was a shoemaker and a night watchman, born April 22,
1891, in Torremaggiore, Province of Foggia, Apulia region (in Italian: Puglia),
Italy, who migrated to the United States at the age of seventeen. Before
immigrating, according to a letter he sent while imprisoned, Sacco worked on
his father's vineyard, often sleeping out in the field at night to prevent animals
from destroying the crops. Vanzetti was a fishmonger born June 11, 1888, in
Villafalletto, Province of Cuneo, Piedmont region. Both left Italy for the US
in 1908, although they did not meet until a 1917 strike.
The men were believed to be followers of Luigi Galleani, an
Italian anarchist who advocated revolutionary violence, including bombing and
assassination. Galleani published Cronaca Sovversiva (Subversive Chronicle), a
periodical that advocated violent revolution, and a bomb-making manual called La
Salute è in voi! (Salvation Is within You!). At the time, Italian anarchists—in
particular the Galleanist group—ranked at the top of the United States
government's list of dangerous enemies. Since 1914, the Galleanists had been
identified as suspects in several violent bombings and assassination attempts,
including an attempted mass poisoning. Publication of Cronaca Sovversiva was
suppressed in July 1918, and the government deported Galleani and eight of his
closest associates on June 24, 1919.
Other Galleanists remained active for three years, 60 of
whom waged an intermittent campaign of violence against US politicians, judges,
and other federal and local officials, especially those who had supported
deportation of alien radicals. Among the dozen or more violent acts was the
bombing of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer's home on June 2, 1919. In that
incident, Carlo Valdinocci, a former editor of Cronaca Sovversiva, was killed
when the bomb intended for Palmer exploded in the editor's hands. Radical pamphlets
entitled "Plain Words" signed
"The Anarchist Fighters"
were found at the scene of this and several other midnight bombings that night.
Several Galleanist associates were suspected or interrogated
about their roles in the bombing incidents. Two days before Sacco and Vanzetti
were arrested, a Galleanist named Andrea Salsedo fell to his death from the US
Justice Department's Bureau of Investigation (BOI) offices on the 14th floor of
15 Park Row in New York City. Salsedo had worked in the Canzani Printshop in
Brooklyn, to where federal agents traced the "Plain Words" leaflet.
Roberto Elia, a fellow New York printer and admitted
anarchist, was later deposed in the inquiry, and testified that Salsedo had
committed suicide for fear of betraying the others. He portrayed himself as the
'strong' one who had resisted the police. According to anarchist writer Carlo
Tresca, Elia changed his story later, stating that Federal agents had thrown
Salsedo out the window.
Robbery
The Slater-Morrill Shoe Company factory was located on Pearl
Street in Braintree, Massachusetts. On April 15, 1920, two men were robbed and
killed while transporting the company's payroll in two large steel boxes to the
main factory. One of them, Alessandro Berardelli—a security guard—was shot four
times as he reached for his hip-holstered .38-caliber, Harrington &
Richardson revolver; his gun was not recovered from the scene. The other man,
Frederick Parmenter—a paymaster who was unarmed—was shot twice: once in the
chest and a second time, fatally, in the back as he attempted to flee. The
robbers seized the payroll boxes and escaped in a stolen dark blue Buick that
was carrying several other men.
As the car was being driven away by Michael Codispoti, the
robbers fired wildly at company workers nearby. A coroner's report and
subsequent ballistic investigation revealed that six bullets removed from the
murdered men's bodies were of .32 automatic (ACP) caliber. Five of these
.32-caliber bullets were all fired from a single semi-automatic pistol, a .32-caliber
Savage Model 1907, which used particularly narrow-grooved barrel rifling with a
right-hand twist. Two of the bullets were recovered from Berardelli's body.
Four .32 automatic brass shell casings were found at the murder scene,
manufactured by one of three firms: Peters, Winchester, or Remington. The
Winchester cartridge case was of a relatively obsolete cartridge loading, which
had been discontinued from production some years earlier. Two days after the
robbery, police located the robbers' Buick; several 12-gauge shotgun shells
were found on the ground nearby.
Arrests and
indictment
Mario Buda
An earlier attempted (unsuccessful) robbery of another shoe
factory payroll occurred on December 24, 1919, in Bridgewater, Massachusetts,
by four persons identified as Italian who used a car that was seen escaping to
Cochesett in West Bridgewater. A delivery truck for the L.Q. White Shoe Factory
was taking a $33,113.31 payroll with a driver, paymaster and a police
constable. The assailants in a car tried to hijack the truck with one robber
using a pistol and the other a double-barreled shotgun. Police speculated that
Italian anarchists perpetrated the robberies to finance their activities.
Bridgewater Police Chief Michael E. Stewart suspected that known Italian anarchist
Ferruccio Coacci was involved. Stewart discovered that Mario Buda (aka 'Mike' Boda) lived with Coacci.
When Chief Stewart later arrived at the Coacci home, only
Buda was living there, and when questioned, he said that Coacci owned a .32
Savage automatic pistol, which he kept in the kitchen. A search of the kitchen
did not locate the gun, but Stewart found (in a kitchen drawer) a
manufacturer's technical diagram for a Model 1907 of the exact type of .32
caliber pistol used to shoot Parmenter and Berardelli. Stewart asked Buda if he
owned a gun, and the man produced a .32-caliber Spanish-made automatic pistol.
Buda told police that he owned a 1914 Overland automobile, which was being
repaired. The car was delivered for repairs four days after the Braintree
crimes, but it was old and apparently had not been run for five months. Tire
tracks were seen near the abandoned Buick getaway car, and Chief Stewart
surmised that two cars had been used in the getaway, and that Buda's car might
have been the second car.
When Stewart discovered that Coacci had worked for both shoe
factories that had been robbed, he returned with the Bridgewater police. Mario
Buda was not home, but on May 5, 1920, he arrived at the garage with three
other men, later identified as Sacco, Vanzetti, and Riccardo Orciani. The four
men knew each other well; Buda would later refer to Sacco and Vanzetti as "the best friends I had in
America".
Sacco and Vanzetti boarded a streetcar but were tracked down
and soon arrested. When searched by police, both denied owning any guns, but
were found to be holding loaded pistols. Sacco was found to have an Italian
passport, anarchist literature, a loaded .32 Colt Model 1903 automatic pistol,
and twenty-three .32 automatic cartridges in his possession; several of those
bullet cases were of the same obsolescent type as the empty Winchester .32
casing found at the crime scene, and others were manufactured by the firms of
Peters and Remington, much like other casings found at the scene. Vanzetti had
four 12-gauge shotgun shells and a five-shot nickel-plated .38-caliber
Harrington & Richardson revolver similar to the .38 carried by Berardelli,
the slain Braintree guard, whose weapon was not found at the scene of the
crime. When they were questioned, the pair denied any connection to anarchists.
Orciani was arrested May 6, but gave the alibi that he had
been at work on the day of both crimes. Sacco had been at work on the day of
the Bridgewater crimes but said that he had the day off on April 15—the day of
the Braintree crimes—and was charged with those murders. The self-employed
Vanzetti had no such alibis and was charged for the attempted robbery and
attempted murder in Bridgewater and the robbery and murder in the Braintree
crimes. Sacco and Vanzetti were charged with the crime of murder on May 5,
1920, and indicted four months later on September 14.
Following Sacco and Vanzetti's indictment for murder for the
Braintree robbery, Galleanists and anarchists in the United States and abroad
began a campaign of violent retaliation. Two days later on September 16, 1920,
Mario Buda allegedly orchestrated the Wall Street bombing, where a time-delay
dynamite bomb packed with heavy iron sash-weights in a horse-drawn cart
exploded, killing 38 people and wounding 134. In 1921, a booby trap bomb mailed
to the American ambassador in Paris exploded, wounding his valet. For the next
six years, bombs exploded at other American embassies all over the world.
Trials
Bridgewater crimes
trial
Rather than accept court-appointed counsel, Vanzetti chose
to be represented by John P. Vahey, a former foundry superintendent and future
state court judge who had been practicing law since 1905, most notably with his
brother James H. Vahey and his law partner Charles Hiller Innes. James Graham,
who was recommended by supporters, also served as defense counsel. Frederick G.
Katzmann, the Norfolk and Plymouth County District Attorney, prosecuted the
case. The presiding judge was Webster Thayer, who was already assigned to the
court before this case was scheduled. A few weeks earlier he had given a speech
to new American citizens decrying Bolshevism and anarchism's threat to American
institutions. He supported the suppression of functionally violent radical
speech, and incitement to commit violent acts. He was known to dislike
foreigners but was considered to be a fair judge.
The trial began on June 22, 1920. The prosecution presented
several witnesses who put Vanzetti at the scene of the crime. Their
descriptions varied, especially with respect to the shape and length of
Vanzetti's mustache. Physical evidence included a shotgun shell retrieved at
the scene of the crime and several shells found on Vanzetti when he was
arrested.
The defense produced 16 witnesses, all Italians from
Plymouth, who testified that at the time of the attempted robbery they had
bought eels from Vanzetti for Eastertide, in accordance with their traditions.
Such details reinforced the difference between the Italians and the jurors.
Some testified in imperfect English, others through an interpreter, whose
inability to speak the same dialect of Italian as the witnesses hampered his
effectiveness. On cross examination, the prosecution found it easy to make the
witnesses appear confused about dates. A boy who testified admitted to rehearsing
his testimony. "You learned it just
like a piece at school?" the prosecutor asked. "Sure", he replied. The defense tried to rebut the
eyewitnesses with testimony that Vanzetti always wore his mustache in a
distinctive long style, but the prosecution rebutted this.
The defense case went badly and Vanzetti did not testify in
his own defense. During the trial, he said that his lawyers had opposed putting
him on the stand. That same year, defense attorney Vahey told the governor that
Vanzetti had refused his advice to testify. Decades later, a lawyer who
assisted Vahey in the defense said that the defense attorneys left the choice
to Vanzetti, but warned him that it would be difficult to prevent the
prosecution from using cross examination to challenge the credibility of his
character based on his political beliefs. He said that Vanzetti chose not to
testify after consulting with Sacco. Herbert B. Ehrmann, who later joined the
defense team, wrote many years later that the dangers of putting Vanzetti on
the stand were very real. Another legal analysis of the case faulted the
defense for not offering more to the jury by letting Vanzetti testify,
concluding that by his remaining silent it "left
the jury to decide between the eyewitnesses and the alibi witness without his
aid. In these circumstances a verdict of not guilty would have been very
unusual". That analysis claimed that "no one could say that the case was closely tried or vigorously
fought for the defendant".
Vanzetti complained during his sentencing on April 9, 1927,
for the Braintree crimes, that Vahey "sold
me for thirty golden money like Judas sold Jesus Christ." He accused
Vahey of having conspired with the prosecutor "to agitate still more the
passion of the juror, the prejudice of the juror" towards "people of our principles, against the
foreigner, against slackers."
On July 1, 1920, the jury deliberated for five hours and
returned guilty verdicts on both counts, armed robbery and first-degree murder.
Before sentencing, Judge Thayer learned that during deliberations, the jury had
tampered with the shotgun shells found on Vanzetti at the time of his arrest to
determine if the shot they contained was of sufficient size to kill a man.
Since that prejudiced the jury's verdict on the murder charge, Thayer declared
that part a mistrial. On August 16, 1920, he sentenced Vanzetti on the charge
of armed robbery to a term of 12 to 15 years in prison, the maximum sentence
allowed.
Sacco and Vanzetti both denounced Thayer. Vanzetti wrote, "I will try to see Thayer death before
his pronunciation of our sentence" and asked fellow anarchists for "revenge, revenge in our names and the
names of our living and dead."
In 1927, advocates for Sacco and Vanzetti charged that this
case was brought first because a conviction for the Bridgewater crimes would
help convict him for the Braintree crimes, where evidence against him was weak.
The prosecution countered that the timing was driven by the schedules of
different courts that handled the cases. The defense raised only minor objections
in an appeal that was not accepted. A few years later, Vahey joined Katzmann's
law firm.
Braintree crimes
trial
Sacco and Vanzetti went on trial for their lives on May 31,
1921, at Dedham, Norfolk County, Massachusetts, for the Braintree robbery and
murders. Webster Thayer again presided; he had asked to be assigned to the
trial. Katzmann again prosecuted for the State. Vanzetti was represented by
brothers Jeremiah and Thomas McAnraney. Sacco was represented by Fred H. Moore
and William J. Callahan. The choice of Moore, a former attorney for the
Industrial Workers of the World, proved a key mistake for the defense. A
notorious radical from California, Moore quickly enraged Judge Thayer with his
courtroom demeanor, often doffing his jacket and once, his shoes. Reporters
covering the case were amazed to hear Judge Thayer, during a lunch recess,
proclaim, "I'll show them that no
long-haired anarchist from California can run this court!" and later, "You wait till I give my charge to the
jury. I'll show them."
Authorities anticipated a possible bomb attack and had the
Dedham courtroom outfitted with heavy, sliding steel doors and cast-iron
shutters that were painted to appear wooden. Each day during the trial, the
courthouse was placed under heavy police security, and Sacco and Vanzetti were
escorted to and from the courtroom by armed guards.
The Commonwealth relied on evidence that Sacco was absent
from his work in a shoe factory on the day of the murders; that the defendants
were in the neighborhood of the Braintree robbery-murder scene on the morning
when it occurred, being identified as having been there seen separately and
also together; that the Buick getaway car was also in the neighborhood and that
Vanzetti was near and in it; that Sacco was seen near the scene of the murders
before they occurred and also was seen to shoot Berardelli after Berardelli
fell and that that shot caused his death; that used shell casings were left at
the scene of the murders, some of which could have been found to have been
discharged from a .32 pistol afterwards found on Sacco; that a cap was found at
the scene of the murders, which witnesses identified as resembling one formerly
worn by Sacco; and that both men were members of anarchist cells that espoused
violence, including assassination. Among the more important witnesses called by
the prosecution was salesman Carlos E. Goodridge, who stated that as the
getaway car raced within twenty-five feet of him, one of the car's occupants,
whom he identified as being Sacco, pointed a gun in his direction.
Much of the trial focused on material evidence, notably
bullets, guns, and the cap. Prosecution witnesses testified that Bullet III,
the .32-caliber bullet that had fatally wounded Berardelli, was from a
discontinued Winchester .32 Auto cartridge loading so obsolete that the only
bullets similar to it that anyone could locate to make comparisons were those
found in the cartridges in Sacco's pockets.
In court, District Attorney Katzmann called two forensic gun
expert witnesses, Capt. Charles Van Amburgh of Springfield Armory and Capt.
William Proctor of the Massachusetts State Police, who testified that they
believed that of the four bullets recovered from Berardelli's body, Bullet
III—the fatal bullet—exhibited rifling marks consistent with those found on
bullets fired from Sacco's .32 Colt Automatic pistol. In rebuttal, two defense
forensic gun experts testified that Bullet III did not match any of the test
bullets from Sacco's Colt. After the trial, Capt. Proctor signed an affidavit
stating that he could not positively identify Sacco's .32 Colt as the only
pistol that could have fired Bullet III. This meant that Bullet III could have
been fired from any of the 300,000 .32 Colt Automatic pistols then in
circulation. All witnesses to the shooting testified that they saw one gunman
shoot Berardelli four times, yet the defense never questioned how only one of
four bullets found in the deceased guard was identified as being fired from
Sacco's Colt.
Vanzetti was being tried under Massachusetts' felony-murder
rule, and the prosecution sought to implicate him in the Braintree robbery by
the testimony of several witnesses: one testified that he was in the getaway
car, and others who stated they saw Vanzetti in the vicinity of the Braintree factory
around the time of the robbery. No direct evidence tied Vanzetti's .38
nickel-plated Harrington & Richardson five-shot revolver to the crime
scene, except for the fact that it was identical in type and appearance to one
owned by the slain guard Berardelli, which was missing from the crime scene.
All six bullets recovered from the victims were .32 calibers, fired from at
least two different automatic pistols.
The prosecution claimed Vanzetti's .38 revolvers had
originally belonged to the slain Berardelli, and that it had been taken from
his body during the robbery. No one testified to seeing anyone take the gun,
but Berardelli had an empty holster and no gun on him when he was found.
Additionally, witnesses to the payroll shooting had described Berardelli as
reaching for his gun on his hip when he was cut down by pistol fire from the
robbers.
District Attorney Katzmann pointed out that Vanzetti had
lied at the time of his arrest, when making statements about the .38 revolver
found in his possession. He claimed that the revolver was his own, and that he
carried it for self-protection, yet he incorrectly described it to police as a
six-shot revolver instead of a five-shot. Vanzetti also told police that he had
purchased only one box of cartridges for the gun, all of the same make, yet his
revolver was loaded with five .38 cartridges of varying brands. At the time of
his arrest, Vanzetti also claimed that he had bought the gun at a store (but
could not remember which one), and that it cost $18 or $19 (three times its
actual market value). He lied about where he had obtained the .38 cartridges
found in the revolver.
The prosecution traced the history of Berardelli's .38
Harrington & Richardson (H&R) revolver. Berardelli's wife testified
that she and her husband dropped off the gun for repair at the Iver Johnson Co.
of Boston a few weeks before the murder. According to the foreman of the Iver
Johnson repair shop, Berardelli's revolver was given a repair tag with the
number of 94765, and this number was recorded in the repair logbook with the
statement "H. & R. revolver,
.38-calibre, new hammer, repairing, half an hour". However, the shop
books did not record the gun's serial number, and the caliber was apparently
incorrectly labeled as .32 instead of .38-caliber. The shop foreman testified
that a new spring and hammer were put into Berardelli's Harrington &
Richardson revolver. The gun was claimed and the half-hour repair paid for,
though the date and identity of the claimant were not recorded. After examining Vanzetti's .38 revolvers, the
foreman testified that Vanzetti's gun had a new replacement hammer in keeping
with the repair performed on Berardelli's revolver. The foreman explained that
the shop was always kept busy repairing 20 to 30 revolvers per day, which made
it very hard to remember individual guns or keep reliable records of when they
were picked up by their owners. But, he said that unclaimed guns were sold by
Iver Johnson at the end of each year, and the shop had no record of an
unclaimed gun sale of Berardelli's revolver. To reinforce the conclusion that
Berardelli had reclaimed his revolver from the repair shop, the prosecution
called a witness who testified that he had seen Berardelli in possession of a
.38 nickel-plated revolver the Saturday night before the Braintree robbery.
After hearing testimony from the repair shop employee that "the repair shop had no record of
Berardelli picking up the gun, the gun was not in the shop nor had it been
sold", the defense put Vanzetti on the stand where he testified that "he had actually bought the gun several
months earlier from fellow anarchist Luigi Falzini for five dollars"—in
contradiction to what he had told police upon his arrest. This was corroborated
by Luigi Falzini (Falsini), a friend of Vanzetti's and a fellow Galleanist, who
stated that, after buying the .38 revolver from one Riccardo Orciani, he sold
it to Vanzetti. The defense also called two expert witnesses, a Mr. Burns and a
Mr. Fitzgerald, who each testified that no new spring and hammer had ever been
installed in the revolver found in Vanzetti's possession.
The District Attorney's final piece of material evidence was
a flop-eared cap claimed to have been Sacco's. Sacco tried the cap on in court
and, according to two newspaper sketch artists who ran cartoons the next day;
it was too small, sitting high on his head. But Katzmann insisted the cap
fitted Sacco and, noting a hole in the back where Sacco had hung the cap on a
nail each day, continued to refer to it as his, and in denying later appeals,
Judge Thayer often cited the cap as material evidence. During the 1927 Lowell
Commission investigation, however, Braintree's Police Chief admitted that he
had torn the cap open upon finding it at the crime scene a full day after the
murders. Doubting the cap was Sacco's, the chief told the commission it could
not have lain in the street "for
thirty hours with the State Police, the local police, and two or three thousand
people there."
Controversy clouded the prosecution witnesses who identified
Sacco as having been at the scene of the crime. One, a bookkeeper named Mary
Splaine, precisely described Sacco as the man she saw firing from the getaway
car. From Felix Frankfurter's account from The Atlantic Monthly article:
Viewing the scene from
a distance of from sixty to eighty feet, she saw a man previously unknown to
her in a car traveling at the rate of from fifteen to eighteen miles per hour,
and she saw him only for a distance of about thirty feet—that is to say, for
from one and a half to three seconds.
Yet cross examination revealed that Splaine was unable to
identify Sacco at the inquest but had recall of great details of Sacco's
appearance over a year later. While a few others singled out Sacco or Vanzetti
as the men they had seen at the scene of the crime, far more witnesses, both
prosecution and defense, could not identify them.
The defendants' radical politics may have played a role in
the verdict. Judge Thayer, though a sworn enemy of anarchists, warned the
defense against bringing anarchism into the trial. Yet defense attorney Fred
Moore felt he had to call both Sacco and Vanzetti as witnesses to let them
explain why they were fully armed when arrested. Both men testified that they
had been rounding up radical literature when apprehended, and that they had
feared another government deportation raid. Yet both hurt their case with
rambling discourses on radical politics that the prosecution mocked. The
prosecution also brought out that both men had fled the draft by going to
Mexico in 1917.
The jury ultimately reached a guilty verdict. The verdicts
and the likelihood of death sentences immediately roused international opinion.
Demonstrations were held in 60 Italian cities and a flood of mail was sent to
the American embassy in Paris. Demonstrations followed in a number of Latin
American cities. Anatole France, veteran of the campaign for Alfred Dreyfus and
recipient of the 1921 Nobel Prize for Literature, wrote an "Appeal to the American People": "The death of Sacco and Vanzetti will make martyrs of them and
cover you with shame. You are a great people. You ought to be a just
people."
Jury
The 12 jurors were sequestered at the courthouse for the entirety
of the six-week trial. They slept on cots in the courthouse's grand jury room
and bathed in the basement of the jail. To celebrate the 4th of July, they were
brought to Scituate, Massachusetts and given a lobster dinner.
To get a full jury, courthouse officials had to go to
extraordinary lengths. Over 600 men were interviewed, with the most common
reason for dismissal being their opposition to the death penalty. One man, a
sugar dealer, tried to pretend that he was deaf in an attempt to get out of
serving on the jury. When he was discovered, by answering a question posed by
the judge, Sacco and Vanzetti were sent into fits of laughter.
After 500 potential jurors were interviewed, but only seven
selected, deputies from the Norfolk County Sheriff's office went out to
workplaces, club meetings, concerts, and elsewhere to bring in additional
potential jurors. One man, ultimately selected, was brought from his wedding
dinner. The Quincy man had to postpone his honeymoon until after the trial.
No comments:
Post a Comment