Meghan Hyer Mrs. Virginia Brown English 11 Honors 10 April 2024 The Case of Sacco and Vanzetti Life was easy for an immigrant during the 1920s. All immigrants had to do included simply assimilate into White culture, speak English, follow the laws, cause no harm, work hard and long hours, don’t complain, respect superiors, adopt White customs, promote democracy, and support the United States. Easy, right? Especially coming from a foreign country that functions completely differently. However, immigrants struggled to abide by these unrealistic standards. As a result, immigrants felt displaced and discriminated against. The case of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti exemplifies how prejudice and nativism in American society during the 1920s
…show more content…
Additionally, Vanzetti’s presence at the crime remained difficult to prove based on the discrepancies in the evidence. The final decision declared Sacco and Vanzetti guilty. Following the establishment of the verdict, efforts were made to suggest a defective trial. Jury members believed they were deceived by Katzmann. Specifically, the ballistic expert claimed his testimony was manipulated to frame Sacco as the gunman; however, he intended to explain that the ballistic report could also have been applied to other guns and not specific to Sacco’s gun. Katzmann decided to distort his questions for the ballistic expert to deceive the jury and pin the blame on Sacco. Despite requests for a new trial, all were denied (Reed 870-871). Overall, the trial of Sacco and Vanzetti culminated in the fear of America’s downfall, extreme anti-immigration sentiment, and questionable court practices. In 1920s American society, the “communist threat” ideology got the best of the citizens and the democratic court system. Out of fear of American downfall, individuals lost trust in those around them, retreating to a more secure, yet restrictive
Additionally, Vanzetti’s presence at the crime remained difficult to prove based on the discrepancies in the evidence. The final decision declared Sacco and Vanzetti guilty. Following the establishment of the verdict, efforts were made to suggest a defective trial. Jury members believed they were deceived by Katzmann. Specifically, the ballistic expert claimed his testimony was manipulated to frame Sacco as the gunman; however, he intended to explain that the ballistic report could also have been applied to other guns and not specific to Sacco’s gun. Katzmann decided to distort his questions for the ballistic expert to deceive the jury and pin the blame on Sacco. Despite requests for a new trial, all were denied (Reed 870-871). Overall, the trial of Sacco and Vanzetti culminated in the fear of America’s downfall, extreme anti-immigration sentiment, and questionable court practices. In 1920s American society, the “communist threat” ideology got the best of the citizens and the democratic court system. Out of fear of American downfall, individuals lost trust in those around them, retreating to a more secure, yet restrictive