Civil Liberty? The Trial of Sacco and Vanzetti During the height of the first so-called "red scare" in the United States from 1919 to 1920, two Italian anarchist immigrants, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, were charged and tried for murder but the evidence against them was spurious (Robbins 178). Throughout what many observers termed "the trial of the century," Sacco and Vanzetti experienced prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. Consequently, these two men were found guilty, sentenced to death and were executed on August 23, 1927 (Bertrand Russell 4). To determine the facts, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature to determine if the charges against Sacco and Vanzetti were valid, and what steps the government took to secure their conviction. A summary of the research and important findings about the "trial of the century" are provided in the conclusion.

Review and Discussion

In reality, Sacco and Vanzetti had the cards stacked against them before they were ever charged with murder. The post-World War I red scare fueled antiradical sentiment, but the postwar recession was also an important force in shaping American public opinion against radicals at the time (Robbins 179). The trial was presided over by Judge Webster Thayer who had served a number of years as a moderately successful lawyer before taking the bench (Neville 27). According to Neville, Judge Thayer was in his early 60s, and was "an unabashed patriot given to hackneyed speeches from the bench that sometimes...

The judge was also dismayed at the amount of international attention the case attracted (Neville 27). In fact Judge Thayer received a number of death threats during the pendency of the trial (Neville 27). According to Neville, "Thayer enjoyed talking about the case outside the courtroom. The judge was fond of expressing off-the-record opinions to reporters during lunch breaks, a habit that would return to haunt him with a vengeance in this case" (27). In fact, Avrich emphasizes that, "The judge in the case, Webster Thayer, likewise revealed his bias. Outside the courtroom, during the trial and the appeals that followed, he made remarks that bristled with animosity towards the defendants" (37). In addition, Avrich points out that, "The district attorney, Frederick G. Katzmann, conducted a highly unscrupulous prosecution, coaching and badgering witnesses, withholding exculpatory evidence from the defense, and perhaps even tampering with physical evidence" (37).
In 1926, Bertrand Russell joined the international effort to save Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti because "many believed [they] had been wrongly convicted of murder" (Bertrand Russell 4). In this regard, Russell noted at the time, "I am forced to conclude that they were condemned on account of their political opinions" (Bertrand Russell 4). The historical record shows that Russell's attempts to save their lives were not successful and the two anarchists were put to death on August 23, 1927 (Bertrand Russell 4). Likewise, even H.G. Wells weighed in on this case by writing an essay, "The Proposed Murder of Two Radicals," which the New York Times refused by publish; the article was eventually published in 1929 in a book of Wells' essays (Bertrand Russell 5).

The kangaroo court that convicted Sacco and Vanzetti was even criticized a half a century later in a proclamation on the fiftieth anniversary of their execution by then Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis who said, "The atmosphere of their trial and appeals were permeated by prejudice against foreigners and hostility toward unorthodox political views" (Proclamation by Gov. Michael S. Dukakis of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti Memorial Day 2). Indeed, Governor Dukakis lambasted the prosecutors and judge in this case by saying, "The conduct of many of the officials involved in…