Reply to all three responses 1. The main fact that supports this argument is ho

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Reply to all three responses
1. The main fact that supports this argument is ho

Reply to all three responses
1. The main fact that supports this argument is how eager the court was to make them guilty. If they were actually being judged for what they did, then the court would be unbiased and would deem them as innocent when the evidence showed that they most likely did not do it. However, they went out of their way to create fake evidence, and even when that failed, still deemed them guilty. This proves that there is most likely another reason for convicting them aside from what they potentially did. Another major signifier were the statements during the trial. The eye witnesses had a very negative attitude towards Irish people and the people of the court made it a very big deal that Sacco and Vanzetti were anarchists despite it having zero relation to the case. This makes it obvious that the reason the court wanted to declare Sacco and Vanzetti guilty so badly was because of their identity as an anarchist and an immigrant.
2. There was proof of tampering with evidence, pressuring witnesses, harassment outside of court, declaring guilty without proper evidence, and denying appeals without a proper reassessment. Especially in Vanzetti’s case, he was declared guilty “on the whole of being guilty”, which is another way of saying that they had close to no proper evidence. I believe that this case should have been declared a mistrial so that they can go free, or at least a redo on the trial under fair circumstances. The evidence shows that it is extremely unlikely that they did it, and even if they did, the Judicial system has wronged them so much to the point that they should be allowed to go free unless a major reliable incriminating piece of evidence is found.
3. The cases are similar in that the prosecution tampered with evidence to wrongly accuse innocent people out of racist motives. The two main differences are the outcome and that the Sacco and Vanzetti trial was also affected by their status as an anarchist. This reveals that the justice system can be abused if all of the people in authority act to abuse the system. A lot more is being done to prevent this from happening in more recent times, but the O.J. Simpson trial reveals that this still is a major threat and a possibility that we need to be wary of and work to eliminate.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!