"Sacco and Vanzetti"

After hearing about this trial for the first time, I had very mixed emotions. I personally can not determine if Sacco and Vanzetti were both guilty or innocent. There was lots of evidence that supported both the defense and prosecution. From the classroom document, we were able to chart out the evidence for both sides. Although in my document I had almost double the evidence to prove that they were guilty, I am still not 100 percent sure that they were. I believe that in this case, the evidence should have depended on quality versus quantity. The evidence to prove them guilty was solely based off the fact that they were Anarchists, and from in class discussions we know that Anarchists were hated at the time. The prosecution did have hard cold evidence to prove guilt in them. The defense did indeed have evidence to counter the prosecution but it was never really appreciated as the majority of the jury was prejudice towards Sacco and Vanzetti. This leads me to my next idea which is that the trial itself was not fair. The majority of the jury was anti-Anarchist. From the documentary that we watched, we learned that the jury took only a few hours to deliberate and come up with the verdict. As we know, they were found guilty and sentenced to execution. This trial was one of the most controversial trials in history. The fact that the jury took only a few hours to decided these two men's faith is very suspicious. I believe that this was a trial against proving Anarchists guilty, rather than proving these men guilty of a crime that they may have not committed. This trial reminds me of the God in America trial. Both of these trials got side tracked and did not focus on their actual case. Although I can not determine if they were indeed guilty or not, I still believe that the correctional and justice system did not do its job properly.