Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were, without question, foreign-born anarchists. Whether the pair committed armed robbery and murder in 1021 and whether they received a fair trial for those crimes are questions that persist to this day. The trials of Sacco and Vanzetti are my May Trials of the Month.
Both men emigrated from Italy in 1908. Upon his arrival, Nicola Sacco found work as a shoemaker in the Boston area. Bartolomeo Vanzetti labored as a fishmonger. They were believed to be followers of Luigi Galleani, an anarchist who advocated bombing and assassination as tactics for revolutionary change.
On April 15th, 1920, the paymaster and a security guard of the Slater-Morrill Shoe Company were robbed and killed while transporting the payroll to the shoe factory. The robbers shot the guard four times as he reached for his gun. The guard’s weapon was never found at the scene. The unarmed paymaster was shot twice, the second time in 1the back while fleeing. A watch cap and multiple shell casings were recovered at the scene by civilians and turned over to the police. The heist appeared to be part of a string of robberies committed in the Boston area. Police speculated that Italian anarchists conducted the crimes to finance revolutionary activities.
Witnesses had noted an unfamiliar Buick around the factory in the hours before the crime. The observers said the car had five occupants, “likely Italian men.” An abandoned Buick was later recovered outside of Boston. Police theorized that a man named Mario Boda may have stored the Buick. The authorities went looking for him. As they neared his location, the police saw two other men running off toward the local streetcar.
Police found Sacco and Vanzetti on the steetcar. Sacco was armed with a Colt handgun while Vanzetti carried a revolver that was consistent with the dead security guard’s missing weapon. They also found anarchist literature. Both men denied knowing Mario Boda or having any involvement in the crime.
Supporters of the two men hired Fred Moore to defend Sacco in court. Moore, an attorney who frequently represented radicals, decided that the best strategy was to politicize the trial. He began to drumbeat the message that the murder trial was a sham designed to frame two working-class immigrants. As the trial neared, unrest within Boston and around the country over the threat posed by immigrants grew. Sacco and Vanzetti’s indictments coincided with an uptick in bombings by Galleanists.
The trial began on May 31st, 1921. The government’s evidence showed that Sacco missed work on the day of the robbery. Witnesses put both men in the area of the factory, separately and together. Witnesses identified Sacco as one of the gunmen. No witnesses put Vanzetti at the scene at the time of the robbery. Some argue that the government’s witnesses testified far more decisively in court than during pre-trial proceedings, leading many to believe that had been coached.
The defense produced a series of alibi witnesses for both men. The evidence put Sacco in Boston and Vanzetti in Plymouth on the day of the robbery. The witnesses were mostly friends and acquaintances of the defendant.
Government experts testified that a bullet recovered from the dead security guard’s body had rifling consistent with a projectile test-fired from Sacco’s gun. The defendant’s experts testified that it did not match. The government linked the weapon that Vanzetti carried at the time of his arrest to the security guard. No one, however, had seen anyone take the gun at the time of the robbery. The dead man’s holster was found to be empty afterward. Vanzetti, the police testified, lied in his statements to them about how he came into possession of the handgun.
Finally, the cap recovered at the scene was linked to Sacco. He tried it on in court. Some said it was woefully too small. The prosecutor argued that it fit perfectly.
Both defendants testified at the trial. Their radical politics and flight to avoid serving during World War I were exposed on cross-examination.
Despite the inconsistencies in testimony, the defendants were convicted after three hours of deliberation. They were subsequently sentenced to death. Although many fought in the courts and the press to stop the executions, the death penalty was enforced on August 23rd, 1927.
This brief summary does not capture all of the facts. Forensic testing in subsequent years has strengthened the belief that Sacco’s gun fired the fatal shot into the security guard. Many historians believe that Sacco at least committed the offense. Doubts about Vanzetti’s involvement remain. Regardless of actual guilt, the Commonwealth of Massachusett’s website holds that neither man received a fair trial.
Although a century old, elements of the case still seem fresh. The dramatic episode requiring the defendant to try on the cap is reminiscent of the OJ Simpson trial. The attempts to harness the media and to create a show trial may remind readers of many contemporary cases. Thousands of people protested at the defendants’ executions. At trial, experts battled over the significance of forensic evidence. The trial provoked a national argument about the role of immigrants in the commission of crime. These topics continue to resonate.
For their ongoing relevance, the trials of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti are my May Trials of the Month.
Mark Thielman