Posted on 12/28/2005 9:06:32 AM PST by mcvey
Well, folks, after defending Sacco and Vanzettir for EIGHT decades, historians are finally beginning to admit that they were, in fact, guilty. Moreover, if you take a look at the comments, you will see that historians have known for three decades (at least) that their stories regarding Sacco-Vanzetti story were false. While this trial is always pictured as one where a WASP judge simply bullied two Italian immigrants to the electric chair, Upton Sinclair actually was afraid to release the truth because:
1.) He was afraid he would be killed by the anarchists (not the WASPy Judge;)
2. He was afraid he would lose sales overseas (stories about how thuggish and close-minded Americans are always sell well in thuggish and close-minded societies;)
3.) He still believed, despite the evidence, that someday, someplace thuggish, close-minded American Judges WOULD railroad somebody.
There is no end to the inanity among professional historians, but their continued gross dishonesty is ignored because few have the background to challenge them and few media outlets would carry such a change.
McVey
[By the way, the original story apparently came out of the LA Times.]
You are absolutely right!
Sinclair Lewis' purported opinions are of little or no probative value, one way or the other. The facts in the case speak for themselves. The most damning fact, is that when arrested Sacco was in possession of the murder gun. At his trial Sacco did not dispute his possession of the gun. At the time of the trial, the comparator microscope was not available, it was invented shortly thereafter. During the appeals process, on seeing the results of a comparison of test rounds from the gun taken from Sacco and the murder bullets, the ballistics expert for the defense, a mechanical engineering professor from MIT, resigned from the defense team. Supporters of Sacco and Vanzetti have tried to throw up a smoke screen about chain of custody, switched weapons, etc, but once one accepts as axiomatic that Sacco and Vanzetti were framed by a giant conspiracy, evidence is useless.
Francis Russell, a Boston historian, thought that Sacco was incontrovertibly a member of the murder party, but that Vanzetti was most likely merely an accessory after the fact. In 1920, accessories to murder were electrocuted, but if Vanzetti had admitted his guilt his sentence would have probably been mitigated.
Ya know, thanks to you, I finally got it. Thank you. (I think?)
I have an old Life Magazine from the period. I think the reporting was fairly balanced. The police let Kennedy off. The press told enough for people to know the truth.
Wilentz DELIBERATELY blocked the will of the people and legislature of the State of New Jersey by assuring NO executions were carried out during his tenure.
I believe that New Jersey State Law required Wilentz to be a resident of the State of New Jersey as Supreme Court Justice, but he had a residence in New York where he apparently spent the greater part of his time.
I can't understand why you are defending a guy who refused to carry out the law of the State of New Jersey by blocking all executions during his tenure.
I had never been to the History News Network before. Very interesting place and I have bookmarked it. Thanks.
Lefties never change.
They've been lying about S&V for 70+ years.
And Sam Sheppard and Doc MacDonald.
Sounds to me that you have a problem categorizing all Germans as NAZIs. And you also have a problem extending that prejudice towards anyone who questions anything done to a German.
In short, you appear to have a problem.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/state/la-me-sinclair24dec24,1,5286806.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
See the story
I just emailed this story to her.
Thanks.
All I need to know is Vince got to the Park a couple hours before his car. What a guy.
Neither Hauptmann, Sacco, nor Vanzetti got what would pass as a fair trial. For that matter, neither did that Scott Peterson guy, out in Modesto. Suppression of evidence, prejudicial pre-trial publicity, screwy jurors, screwier judges, etc. Whether they did it or not, IMHO, is not the most important thing. Getting the right guy, but with the wrong methods endangers everybody. Maybe an innocent guy, next time.
On the other side of the coin, OJ benefitted from an unfair trial. His attorneys not only played the race card, but the jurors just knew that what the "authorities" have to say ain't always necessarily so. Of course, they knew this from decades of liberals telling them so. No matter. In the NYC Courts, many bad boys walk on the race card with a black jury all the time. OJ walked. Martha Stewart, with whom I would have walked out of the courtroom, didn't.
Gen. Schwarzkopf's old man was head of the NJ State Police, at the time. What a weird case! Bruno definitely got a raw deal.
Wasn't JFK Jr. interested in running for the same NY senate seat as Hildabeast in 2000? Wasn't he posed to announce that, the same day his plane was recovered from the bottom of the Atlantic?
I think Clinton Pagano, the Fascist who headed the New Jersey State Police until he retired several years ago, was also involved somehow in this case.
Pagano had the State Police wear riding pants and boots even when they no longer used horses.
I don't know if the guy is still alive or not, but apparently a number of his brothers became law-enforcement officers in Jersey.
Jersey is a weird place.
Glad I left.
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. mentioned this case a lot in one of his books. Sorry I don't remember which one and I don't remember why.
Me thinks Webb "Carpmouth" Hubbell is closer.
Now billions of former Soviet citizens who grew up gnawing on Sakko i Vantsetti pencils will have to be reeducated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.