Sacco and Vanzetti: Ballistic Fingerprinting
The 1920’s or the roaring twenties as it is commonly referred to, ushered in an era of gangsters, flapper dresses, the post war red scare, and one of the most politically charged trials of the decade (Newby, 2007). During this period in American history there were high tensions of racial, ethnic, and political intolerance. The backlash of said intolerance bore fear in the hearts of many; living in fear of being labeled a communist. The era saw an emergence of anarchist militant groups and dozens of terroristic attacks on authorities(Newby, 2007).
Discussion
Still called the case that will not die, the Sacco and Vanzetti case was one such example that coincided with high political tensions. Nicola …show more content…
The defense and prosecution both brought in witnesses to testify on the ballistic fingerprinting evidence (Fisher, 2008). Consequently both sides contradicted each other. The ultimate question was whether or not the bullet recovered from one of the guards, was fired from the weapon recovered from Nicola Sacco (Fisher, 2008). One of the challenges faced by the prosecution was that the bullet recovered from the guard was no longer produced and the only comparison to be made was from the bullets taken out of Sacco’s pockets after his arrest (Owen, 2009). The firing test was conducted using the recovered rounds and a comparison was mode. The jury felt that the match was a close enough one and rendered a guilty verdict and both men were sentenced to die (Owen, 2009). The guilty verdict was overturned after questions were raised to the validity of the ballistic tests. A known scam artist and self-proclaimed expert Alexander Hamilton, raised enough concerns to mandate a retrial (Newby, 2007). Years earlier, it was this same Hamilton character that almost cost an innocent man his life. Hamilton presented unscientific ballistic evidence to the jury but it was eventually discredited (Owen, …show more content…
It was through this creation that Calvin Goddard, in the 1927 retrial of Sacco and Vanzetti was able to prove inconclusively that a bullet fired during test fire of Sacco’s weapon matched perfectly to one of the recovered bullets from the deceased guard (Fisher, 2008). The subject of forensic ballistics was gaining recognition in the forensic community and in the court system as a tried and trustworthy science (Russell, 1985).
Calvin Goddard, at one time an army physician, had, by this time (1927), engineered the comparison microscope. It was through this technology that he was able to influence the prosecution and the defense team, that the infamous bullet number three, was in fact fired from Sacco’s weapon (Fisher, 2008). In a letter to the Governor of Massachusetts, Calvin explained the technology behind his
The 1920’s or the roaring twenties as it is commonly referred to, ushered in an era of gangsters, flapper dresses, the post war red scare, and one of the most politically charged trials of the decade (Newby, 2007). During this period in American history there were high tensions of racial, ethnic, and political intolerance. The backlash of said intolerance bore fear in the hearts of many; living in fear of being labeled a communist. The era saw an emergence of anarchist militant groups and dozens of terroristic attacks on authorities(Newby, 2007).
Discussion
Still called the case that will not die, the Sacco and Vanzetti case was one such example that coincided with high political tensions. Nicola …show more content…
The defense and prosecution both brought in witnesses to testify on the ballistic fingerprinting evidence (Fisher, 2008). Consequently both sides contradicted each other. The ultimate question was whether or not the bullet recovered from one of the guards, was fired from the weapon recovered from Nicola Sacco (Fisher, 2008). One of the challenges faced by the prosecution was that the bullet recovered from the guard was no longer produced and the only comparison to be made was from the bullets taken out of Sacco’s pockets after his arrest (Owen, 2009). The firing test was conducted using the recovered rounds and a comparison was mode. The jury felt that the match was a close enough one and rendered a guilty verdict and both men were sentenced to die (Owen, 2009). The guilty verdict was overturned after questions were raised to the validity of the ballistic tests. A known scam artist and self-proclaimed expert Alexander Hamilton, raised enough concerns to mandate a retrial (Newby, 2007). Years earlier, it was this same Hamilton character that almost cost an innocent man his life. Hamilton presented unscientific ballistic evidence to the jury but it was eventually discredited (Owen, …show more content…
It was through this creation that Calvin Goddard, in the 1927 retrial of Sacco and Vanzetti was able to prove inconclusively that a bullet fired during test fire of Sacco’s weapon matched perfectly to one of the recovered bullets from the deceased guard (Fisher, 2008). The subject of forensic ballistics was gaining recognition in the forensic community and in the court system as a tried and trustworthy science (Russell, 1985).
Calvin Goddard, at one time an army physician, had, by this time (1927), engineered the comparison microscope. It was through this technology that he was able to influence the prosecution and the defense team, that the infamous bullet number three, was in fact fired from Sacco’s weapon (Fisher, 2008). In a letter to the Governor of Massachusetts, Calvin explained the technology behind his