Weekly Article 02.11.11

Check out this site that provides information about the Trial of Sacco and Vanzetti. For this weekly article, take on the role of a CSI investigator as if they had been around in the 1920s, and investigate the case. Research the site and the primary documents that are provided to develop a case supporting or one against Sacco and Vanzetti. You must utilize information and resources to back up your case.

Due to evidence and investigation that the CSI have come across we believe Sacco and Vanzetti where involved with the murders. Eye witness place Sacco and Vanzetti in the area at the time of the murder which is hard evidence against the case. One eye witness saw Vanzetti get of a train at East Braintree at 10 o'clock. Another eye witness says they saw Vanzetti in the back of a car near south Braintree square between ten and twelve. After an eye witness heard gun shots he saw Vanzetti driving a car near South Braintree station. All of these eye witness could have been wrong, but one of them has to be correct. It comes to my attention that Sacco was absent from work all day wen the murders occurred. Which is very odd to me. Seven eye witness say to saw Sacco in the area at the time of the murders. While others say he say the bandits and one of them was him but failed to complete a identification. After we arrested Sacco he told us numerous lies about his whereabouts and denied holding anarchist or radical beliefs. This prosecution suggested that theses lies showed consciousness of guilt. The gun found on Vanzetti at the time of his arrested was a 38 calibre Harrington and Richardson Revolver with the hammer repaired. Evidence presented that paymaster guard Berardelli also had a hammer repaired. He told us he bought the gun at a store but could not remember which one, he also lied about how much the gun cost and where the bullets came from. Ballistics expert Proctor testified that bullet 3 was consistent with being fired through Sacco's pistol. Expert Van Amburgh noted a scratch on bullet 3 likely to be made by a defect in the rifling of Sacco's pistol. The picture to the top right shows the ballistic evidence of Sacco's pistol and relates Sacco to the murder. At the time of their arrest Sacco and Vanzetti had just gone to the house of the owner of a car repair shop were a man connected with a stolen Buick that was presumed to be the car used in the murder had taken an overland to be repaired. Due to the evidence i have presented you with i must conclude Sacco and Vanzetti guilty and be up for the death penalty. A map of the murder shows that the murder was conducted on a main road, easy for the murderer to get away in a car. Why would Sacco and Vanzetti lie about were they bought their guns and were they where at the time of the murder. It makes no sense the only reason i can conclude and must use is that they are guilty.


http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/SaccoV/s&vevidence.html

Weekly Article 03

Over the past few weeks a non-profit organization known as WikiLeaks has dropped bombshells with the release (or "leaks) of important classified documents from governments around the world. The argument from the organization is that they want to keep governments "open" about their issues and policy. Read some articlesabout the WikiLeaks debaucle and express your thoughts about the global issue. This post should be in the format of a letter to the editor of a major newspaper expressing your opinion (an OpEd).


To Daily Mail


Due to a non-profit organization known as WikiLeaks has been giving classified information to governments all over the world. This is not a good idea as governments could get very angry and not like what the information is about which could start lots of problems. Such as wars, strikes, and riots in cities and countries. What gives the right to these organization to give out information? There are no rules or laws about giving out information and the organizations are not doing anything wrong. But hurting governments and countries relationships which could possibly start world war III. Keeping governments open about issues and policy's might be a good idea but you do not know how they will react to the information and what consequences will occur due to this information being released. I don't know what the organizations are trying to accomplish but its not right what there doing. Like many people say what governments do not know will not hurt them. Which is right in the case for everyones own good and safety. If governments are open they can help each other much better if they know everything about the government. Then we can all live under one government we wont need countries or branches of government anymore and there would be no more wars. Sort of like Communism, which may not work for todays world.