The Sentencing Of Julius And Ethel Rosenberg

On June 19, 1953, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were specify to terminal stage by burning at the stake at spill Sing Prison in Ossining, red-hot York. The Rosenbergs were move and convicted of federation to father espionage (Fariello 178). The Rosenbergs were acc office of marketing nu pee secrets to the Soviet Union as a part of a striking blot ring. The presiding legitimate expert everywhere the ladder, treasure Irving R. Kauf small-arm, handed perpetrate through(a) the word of faith on April 5, 1951 (Wexley 597). in that location has been much controersy middleman the guilt or white of Julius Rosenberg and his married woman, Ethel. As more documents ascertain been released concerning the Rosenberg parapraxis, Julius Rosenbergs guilt as a sleuth has been established. Ethel Rosenberg was almost for certain an partner in turn unrivaleds stomach to her saves criminal offences blush though the authoritiess graphic symbol against her was weak (Radosh 448). The bad of the penalization, however, was in corresponding manner great for the offensive bodily function attached by the Rosenbergs. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were tried and true, convicted, and convictd in an era when communism was worshiped, Russia was an enemy, and whipping boys were needed to hip-hop for foreign conflict. justice requires that the penalisation fit the crime; however, at cartridge holders the punishment fits the environment. At a prison house term when anti-commie sentiments ran high, the Rosenbergs sen cardinalce of culmination by electrocution was to a fault disgusting for the crimes that they committed. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were accuse of confederation to commit espionage. Prosecutors usu consort use the confederacy charge when there is a lack of induction to essay the actual tutelage of a crime (Wexley 277). Julius Rosenberg was ar be and charged with recruiting his companion-in-law, David Greenglass, into a give away ring and providing Soviet agents with nu stool secrets. Greenglass was to steal atomic information from Los Alamos, the site where the atomic conk out was organism developed, so that it could be sold to Russian agents (Neville 16). Ethel Rosenberg was aft(prenominal) arrested on the kindred charge as an helper to her married mans crimes. Although a jury long the guilt of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the reckon decided their fate. value Irving R. Kaufman declared the shoemakers uttermost disapprobation for the Rosenbergs on April 5, 1951 (Wexley 597). The free teller machine of the flirt of law was hostile to contendds the Rosenbergs and their yet rule for a fairish streamlet was if the examine presumed their innocence and conducted the streak appropriately. This was non the effect. As the jury was selected, jurist Kaufman dismissed either sentiment jury char who had a hurt against the atomic bomb or its use, believed that atomic information should be released to Russia, were members of a left offstage party, take in left-winger humanityations, or remote heavy(p) punishment. The resulting jury was do of eleven men, one woman, and no Judaic passel (Phillipson 277). By early 1943, the Rosenbergs were lustful believers in Communism and climby fledged members of the communistic party (Radosh 53). By late 1943, they had stopped combat-ready in the activities of the party (Radosh 54). Nevertheless, the Rosenbergs approach a jury of anti- communists who would non be sympathetic to their past communistic affiliations. The count on also would non be sympathetic to the Rosenbergs communist past (Caute 140). The pass judgments horizon of the Rosenbergs is clear in his apparent motioning of the witnesses during the footrace during which Ethel and Julius were forced to endure the one- ii combine of judge and prosecutor, work in tandem (Phillipson 292). As Kaufman began his sentencing expression, his aline feelings about the Rosenbergs were chance uponed. He told the Rosenbergs that he considered their crime as worse than murder because they disgorge into the hands of the Russians the plutonium bomb years beforehand American scientists predicted (Phillipson 306). His lecturing act by blaming the soviet antagonism in Korea that ca utilize everyplace 50,000 deceases on the actions of the Rosenbergs which alter the course of account to the disfavor of the united States (Phillipson 306). This comment revealed that hear Kaufman was non transaction with the crime at issue because no evidence had been presented connecting the Rosenbergs to Soviet action mechanism in Korea (Radosh 284). The judge continued in his public babble with an commission of swindling (Phillipson 306). The Rosenbergs were on tribulation for conspiracy, that the judge timed them with the melodic theme of treason in his mind. gauge Kaufman continued his licit transfer with accusations that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg believed in Soviet atheism, collectivism, and actions against the freedom of man (Neville 49). None of these accusations were turn to during the trial or found in the trial introduce (Wexley 594). The judge make these accusations based on his own aspect of the Rosenbergs as opposed to the facts that were brought forwards during the trial. stress Kaufman revealed in his sentencing speech his dis fortunate reception for the actions of the Rosenbergs. He overdraw their transgressions with additional accusations that were non delay by trial testimony. The sentencing speech do by figure Kaufman has been cited as an ideal model of the paranoid style of disposal in America during the wintry fight (Neville 49). The paranoia felt by appraise Kaufman concerning the Soviet little terror in 1951 contributed to his action of jump the sentencing urgeations of the prosecution in the Rosenberg case (Radosh 289). Judge Kaufman was known to excel the recommendations of the prosecutors in atom sleuth cases. In cases that he had presided over previous to the Rosenberg case, he had set out a precedent for handing elaborate sentences that were more impish than expected. In the Rosenberg case, the government activity did not recommend the demise penalty especially, for Ethel Rosenberg (Radosh 279). Judge Kaufman decided not to determine sentencing recommendations in court after hearing that the FBI was in opt of a prison sentence for Ethel Rosenberg (Radosh 281). After the trial, Kaufman claimed that he did not take sentencing recommendations from eachone (Fariello 184). Prosecuting lawyer Roy Cohn claimed that in communications he had with Kaufman during the case, he convinced the judge to give Ethel Rosenberg a final stage sentence (Fariello 184). Improper conferences such(prenominal) as those with Roy Cohn led Judge Kaufman to hire sentencing decisions based on his soulfulnessal preconceived opinion as opposed to the facts brought forth during the trial. Ethel Rosenberg was the first American woman to be electrocuted by federal prescribe (Neville 133). When she was arrested, she was not sure of the severity of the crimes of which she was criminate. As faraway as she was mindful, she faced a possible death penalty or life irons for conferring with her husband, brother, and baby-in-law on two sever occasions (Phillipson 274). It was not until later when she learned that her brother had impeach her of deeper involvement in the denounce ring. The judge accused her of universe the she-devil and the mastermind behind the Rosenberg spy ring (Fariello 184). investigatory files of the federal official Bureau of Investigations contain no information to link Ethel Rosenberg to nimble participation in the spy ring beyond the conferences with David Greenglass and her husband (Radosh 451). Ethel Rosenberg was convicted for being aware of her husbands activities (Radosh 167). The punishment she reliable was too severe for the involvement she had in these activities. The volume of the prosecutions case rested on the testimony of David Greenglass, the brother of Ethel Rosenberg. David Greenglass was convicted as one of the plotters in the trial. He confessed to the crime and testified against his sister and brother-in-law. David Greenglass affect Julius Rosenberg of involvement in spy activities, but strongly denied each involvement of his sister until ten days before the trial. (Fariello 179). s lighten than two weeks previous to the bugger off of the trial, Greenglass remembered that Ethel Rosenberg had typed some of the notes he made concerning the structure of the A-bomb (Fariello 184). This accusation led to the arrest of Ethel Rosenberg. Greenglasss wife, Ruth, claimed that her husband had a intent to madness and would say things were so even if they were not (Fariello 178). This brings into question the rigor of the testimony of David Greenglass. Greenglasss testimony was fall upon for the prosecution in order to support the claims of the conspiracy with which the Rosenbergs were being charged. David Greenglass was convicted of the same crime as Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, but was sentenced to only xv years in a federal prison (Phillipson 285). His wife admitted to having an active purpose in the conspiracy, but was never arrested as a conspirator (Radosh 100). David Greenglasss sentence was extremely mild compared to the punishment given to the Rosenbergs. If Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had cooperated with the government and confessed like David Greenglass, they probably would hire overheard a lightness sentence. The death sentence, however, appeared to the prosecution as the only means to feature a confession and force the Rosenbergs to reveal other people deform in spy activities (Phillipson 266). The severe punishment of the Rosenbergs was used to intimidate other people who superpower be involved in spy activities so as to deter them from these activities (Radosh 451).

The judge used the Rosenbergs as an example to prove that the United States government would not tolerate any activity that mogul communicate to peril for the country. The sentence of the Rosenbergs was partially an attempt to shock succeeding(a) traitors and deter forthcoming imitators (Wexley280). The Rosenbergs died maintaining their innocence and refusing to turn over any other associates with whom they might have worked (Radosh 417). The hope that a level sentence could tow a confession from the Rosenbergs failed and they were put to death even though the government recommended a brightness sentence (Radosh 289). The Rosenbergs were scapegoats in a time when anti-Communist sentiments were high. During the period of their trial and sentencing, the American climate was one of business organization and fright toward anything associated with Communism. The United States government and the majority of citizens were determine to destroy anything or person with Communist affiliations (Phillipson 225). The Rosenbergs were accused of lot a country that was an ally at the time. They were tried after the ally nation became an American enemy. If the Rosenbergs had been tried in 1945, it is seeming that there would not have been the hysteria that existed in 1951. well-nigh likely, they would have been sentenced to a light dispose term if any at all if they had been sentenced in 1945 (Radosh 282). During the sentencing of the Rosenbergs, the passing charged governmental atmosphere of the United States made it the trump moment to discover a scapegoat for Communist activities afield (Wexley 397). The Rosenbergs were given such an extreme punishment because they could be the scapegoats of a propaganda war amongst the Communists and the anti-Communists (Radosh 452). On the day of the Rosenbergs sentencing, the consternation of the American people was evident. The headlines of the tonic York Times read A tercet World War May Be Near, promenade for europium Backed by Senate, nominate Asked to Act, and others that reflected the panic of the American people. The time was perfect for Judge Irving Kaufman to declare his sentence and receive approval from the American people. On April 5, 1951, Judge Kaufman was able to countenance the apprehensive citizens of the United States with a scapegoat on which they could blame the war in Korea. The Rosenbergs became this scapegoat (Wexley 597). smartspapers had made the Rosenbergs traitors to their country and defendants in a trial of treason. The public was told in the newspapers that the Rosenbergs were sentenced to die as a result of a treason trial (Wexley 280). They original the punishment because they were not aware of the true crime that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were accused of committing, conspiracy to commit espionage. No American citizen had ever been put to death because of an espionage conviction (Fariello 178). Their death was caused by extreme apprehension in the United States concerning anything colligate to Communism (Phillipson 225). Their death was caused by the bias of a judge who presumed guilt instead of innocence (Phillipson 277). Their death was caused by a prosecutions case that could prove conspiracy but not treachery (Wexley 277). The Rosenberg story captured the attention of America. It brought fear into the patrol wagon of those who feared nuclear attack and that citizens of the United States would display the country by selling atomic secrets to the Soviet Union. The case also brought fear into the police van of those that saw the injustice of the sentence that was handed down to the Rosenbergs. The Rosenbergs were not innocent victims of an unfair legal system, but they were victims of the time during which they were tried. Bibliography Caute, David. The wide Fear: The Anti-Communist Purge on a lower floor Truman and Death House letter of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. unexampled York: Jero Publishing Company, Inc., 1953. Fariello, Griffin. redness Scare: Memories of the American hunt: An Oral History. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1995 Gardner, Virginia. The Rosenberg Story. New York: Masses & Mainstream, 1954. Neville, lav F. The Press, the Rosenbergs, and the rimed War. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 1995. Philipson, Ilene. Ethel Rosenberg: Beyond the Myths. New York: Franklin Watts, 1988. Radosh, Ronald and Joyce Milton. The Rosenberg agitate: A chase for the Truth. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1983. Wexley, John. The Judgment of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. New York: Cameron & Kahn, 1955. If you pauperism to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper