Soviet Espionage In the United States During the Cold War - The Controversy Surrounding the Execution of Ethel Rosenberg
Was Ethel Rosenberg Wrongfully Executed?
Extended Essay - History
Word Count: 3372
Introduction
The execution of Ethel Rosenberg on the 19th of June, 1953 on the basis of conspiracy to commit espionage was although shocking to onlookers around the world, an inherent consequence of the American political terrorism that was present in the nation during the 1950s. An abundance of Cold War historians have agreed that this execution confirmed the anti-communist hysteria that governed American society at the time, prompting the guiding question of this investigation: “Was Ethel Rosenberg wrongfully executed?”
This research question is crucial to the decipherment between the American moral duty to uphold national security and rightful sentencing and trial as both Ethel Rosenberg and her husband Julius Rosenberg were the only two American spies which were executed during the Cold War. Investigating the preceding years of the Rosenberg’s past means recognising how a seemingly innocent wife and mother of two enthralled herself so deeply in communism and was subsequently executed due to her personal affiliations. This essay aims to evaluate a variety of both primary and secondary sources ranging from courtroom transcripts to scholar’s interpretations of the events leading up to the execution, as this will aid in considering the different factors which enabled the American government to justify the whole ordeal from a national standpoint, and a global one. Ethel Rosenberg’s execution is an undoubtedly monumental event in American history, not only because it publicised the flaws of the American judicial system, but also because it highlighted the lack of female advocacy within Western societies alike. Today we have feminist movements which aim to globally promote social awareness about issues regarding female rights and general equality, but in a time when a divided government and society was fueled with a potent hatred for communism on one front, and a disdain for women as a whole on the other, who was to advocate for women such as Ethel? For this reason, revisiting cases such as these, which in a way shaped our perception of “criminal” treatment and subsequent punishment is valuable to the progressive implementation of laws that aim to advocate for and protect human rights.
Recognised also as “The Crime of the Century”1, the Rosenberg execution is one of the most fiercely debated examples of conflict in judicial principle in the history of the American justice system. This is because of the overwhelming consequence of division in morality within the public as well as within the American government which came alongside the Rosenberg case. After the 80’s rightwing shift in politics2, some Americans felt that the Rosenbergs’ fate was the unfortunate result of neurotic anti-communist feelings within the country and the court, whilst others who pertained a firmer sense of nationalistic pride considered their execution to have been justice rightfully served. In the early 1950s, less than an estimated 50,000 Americans out of the total United States population of about 150 million people were known members of a Communist organisation3, yet the phenomenon and subsequent movement known as “the Red Scare'' reached an all-time–high around the time of the Rosenberg Trials. This hysteria was fueled by McCarthyism and can be metaphorically described as the ‘Salem witch hunt of the 20th century’. It, therefore, brings this investigation to the forefront of two opposing perspectives: one justifying the execution of Ethel Rosenberg, while the other advocating on behalf of her innocence.
Analysis
The Case Against Ethel Rosenberg
Those in favour of the Rosenberg’s execution argue that Ethel herself chose to remain a ‘defiant Stalinist character’, who twisted her conviction into a social statement in order to preach her views on Western corruption and voluntarily deprived her children of a parental figure and a mother4. Many believed that Ethel’s devotion to the communist cause was so astonishingly tenacious, that she sacrificed herself in order to protect it, instead of pleading guilty by means of self-preservation. When concluding the reason for her unwillingness to accept a guilty plea, and until her final days denying any responsibility for passing on atomic secrets, one must look 20 years back. Since the early 1930s, Ethel Rosenberg was an active participants in the Young Communist League and through her involvement in the organisation met her husband Julius Rosenberg. In the years leading up to their execution, Julius had been discharged from his position as an engineer and inspector at Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories at Fort Monmouth5 when his association with communism became public knowledge. It was known that Julius was deeply involved with espionage for the Soviet Union6 since around 1942; He later recruited David and Ruth Greenglass. ‘The Rosenberg spy Ring’ was thought to have been started in the mid-1930s, at The City College of New York7 by a group of passionate adolescents. Historians such as John Earl Haynes8 concur that Ethel’s efforts to support her husband at the expense of national security in America granted her not only a reputation of being a traitor to her children and to her government but also as an individual who put at risk the Jews of the United States who were already facing the wrath of anti-semetism which swept through the nation, as well as unjust accusations of being communists.
Although the execution of the pair was appalling in the sense that no similar executions had taken place during the rise of Mccarthysim, some scholars and historians alike continue to argue that it was a necessary step for the American Government following the Holocaust in order to show that no exceptions would be made for Jews in the name of national security. It must also be noted that the reason for which this was possible was because at the time of the sentencing, over 70 percent9 of the American public supported the Rosenberg’s death sentence; inferably as a result of misinformation regarding the Soviet Union’s “robust industrial espionage apparatus”10 in New York being circulated by the government or in the context of the ongoing Korean War. Nevertheless, the crucial evidence presented in the trials which implicated Ethel as having played a significant role in arming foreign powers with confidential information about the atom bomb was provided primarily by David Greenglass and his wife Ruth. Of the jury transcripts released to the public in 2008, David Greenglass’s official testimony remained sealed as per his official request for privacy. What is known however is that according to courtroom transcripts11, on the witness stand, David testified that in November of the year 1944 12 his wife Ruth had expressed to him Julius Rosenberg’s interest in his work, given that David at the time was stationed in Los Alamos as a machinist in the laboratory responsible for the assembly of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima atomic bombs. The pair also stated that they had witnessed Ethel ‘voluntarily’ typing up information on her Remington portable typewriter13 which David had passed on to Julius,14 and identified Ethel and Julius as their primary recruiters. This information would later be used as essential evidence and justification on behalf of the FBI of Ethel’s ‘significant’ involvement; Inevitably setting her fate in stone.
Proving Ethel Rosenberg’s Innocence
The aspect of moral conflict resides in the inconsistency of the jurors, Judge Irving Kaufman, who was a Jewish “man of libertarian principles”15, and within the court as a whole. Not only did David Greenglass admit to having given comprehensive sketches of the atomic lens moulds16 (which were being actively used in experimentations of detonation) but he also gave Julius a detailed description of the Nagasaki bomb (Fat Man)17and as a result served only ten years in prison. Both of these contributions were thought to be vital to the Soviet construction and subsequent detonation of Joe-4 (the fourth Soviet thermonuclear weapon to date) on August 12th, 1953, and were arguably much more catastrophic to preserving confidentiality of the American atomic project than Ethel’s doings. For this reason, Judge Kaufman's words: "Plain, deliberate, contemplated murder is dwarfed in magnitude by comparison with the crime you have committed," 18 seem backhanded, as he paints Ethel as a ‘danger to the American society’ all whilst dismissing the severity of the Greenglass’s participation.
Thus, arises the theory that the court was prevailed by some degree of either malicious premeditation within the court, anti-semetism or misogyny, and surfaces the prospect of Ethel’s innocence. “The Venona Files''19 were the official decryption of confidential Soviet reports and were conducted by the CIA’s National Security department; They formally established Julius’ participation in said Soviet espionage organisation, and proved that there lacked any genuine inclination that Ethel was directly involved. However, The Venona Files at the time were highly classified20 and therefore not permitted to be used as evidence during the trials. Historians arguing on behalf of Ethel’s innocence state that had they been used, the court would have reason to exonerate Ethel. For instance, several code names in the files addressed Julius such as: “King” and “Liberal”21, whereas Ethel was guilelessly referred to as “Ethel”, or the “King’s wife”, implying that her involvement was so minimal that her identity did not require to be kept secret and therefore no alias was needed. The sole mention of Ethel reads as follows:
“Information on LIBERAL’S wife. Surname that of her husband, first name ETHEL, 29 years old. Married five years. Finished secondary school. A FELLOWCOUNTRYWOMAN since 1938. Sufficiently well developed politically. Knows about her husband’s work and the role of METR and NIL. In view of delicate health does not work. Is characterised positively and as a devoted person.”22
Upon reading, it is admissible that this mention regards Ethel not as the apostate individual and treacherous spy which the court painted her out to be, but instead as a wife, a secondary school graduate, a communist (FELLOWCOUNTRYWOMAN) and a “devoted person”. This being said, with the benefit of hindsight it is clear that the unavailability of this document during the trials was the unfortunate consequence of poor international relations at the time of the trials which called for stringent secrecy of national records, as well as inadequate timing since it was released just over fourty years later.
In the year 2004 another controversial depiction of the Rosenberg trials became available to the public, and added to the discontent surrounding Ethel’s execution. The First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Nikita Sergeyevich Kruschev provided a new testimony through his private journals: The Khrushchev Memoirs. Although the credibility of Krushchev, whose interests were believed to have lied solely in preserving the reputation of the Soviet Union following the decline of the Soviet regime under his predecessor Stalin, these memoirs are important to take into consideration due to his opportunity for insight in American-Soviet relations. Throughout the memoirs, Kruschev makes a series of indirect references to conversations he had had with Stalin, which imply that Stalin himself had mentioned at one point or another that the Rosenbergs had provided the Soviets with a ‘sufficient amount of information’ for the development of the bomb. The most conversed excerpt from the memoirs reads that Julius and Ethel “had provided very significant help in accelerating the production of our atomic bomb” 23 which contradicts the view that all of the evidence against Ethel was manufactured, and that she was a victim of government conspiracy and miscarriage on the judicial front. He goes on to express his gratitude for the Rosenbergs, guilelessly thanking them for having spared themselves for the Soviet “proletarian cause”. Many believed that the release of these memoirs nearly four decades after the predicament would aid the world in its decipherment between morality and public duty, however it seems as though these publications only reaffirmed the controversial verdict.24 Contradicting Krushchev’s writings however is director of the Soviet Atomic Bomb construction, Boris V. Brokhovich who insisted in a 1989 interview with The New York Times that the Soviet Union’s atomic developments were merely a matter of trial and error and directly stated “We got nothing from the Rosenbergs”, and that “You sat the Rosenbergs in the electric chair for nothing”25. As a highly ranked engineer and physicist, it comes without saying that Brokhovich was personally aware of the many spies which provided the Soviets with nuclear information and secrets. The fact that he denied that the Rosenberg’s involvement, with no evidence of any personal gains or with this being said any gains to his nation, is indicative that the Rosenbergs provided no critical aid to the Soviet’s construction of the atomic bomb.
On another note, Anne Sebba’s novel Ethel Rosenberg - An American Tragedy presents
recent evidence which suggests that Ethel's death was the outcome of a premeditated perversion
of justice. Sebba herself underscores that “... the authorities knew that the actual evidence of Ethel’s “espionage” was non-existent...”26 as well as that “The judge had used all of his considerable legal and political connections to get appointed to the Ethel and Julius trial.” 27 This supports the verdict that the ultimate conviction was the product of a fraudulent court which resorted to an “ambiguous, if not unconstitutional, execution of justice in the name of national security” 28 and that the execution was promoted in the media and in public demonstrations by fearful nationalistic Americans who at times of national crisis, demanded immediate action. The lack of incriminating evidence for Ethel's conviction is also at many times royally undermined, given the lack of publications with specifics such as that “out of 3000 coded cables sent from the USA to Russia, Ethel is mentioned only once- as a “devoted person”29. This goes to show that the trial was in a way orchestrated against Ethel, and brings this investigation to the next point of question: the trial itself.
recent evidence which suggests that Ethel's death was the outcome of a premeditated perversion
of justice. Sebba herself underscores that “... the authorities knew that the actual evidence of Ethel’s “espionage” was non-existent...”26 as well as that “The judge had used all of his considerable legal and political connections to get appointed to the Ethel and Julius trial.” 27 This supports the verdict that the ultimate conviction was the product of a fraudulent court which resorted to an “ambiguous, if not unconstitutional, execution of justice in the name of national security” 28 and that the execution was promoted in the media and in public demonstrations by fearful nationalistic Americans who at times of national crisis, demanded immediate action. The lack of incriminating evidence for Ethel's conviction is also at many times royally undermined, given the lack of publications with specifics such as that “out of 3000 coded cables sent from the USA to Russia, Ethel is mentioned only once- as a “devoted person”29. This goes to show that the trial was in a way orchestrated against Ethel, and brings this investigation to the next point of question: the trial itself.
Merely two days after Julius Rosenberg was arrested, J Edgar Hoover, a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation was sent a letter stating that Julius was aware of the specific identities of other spies in the ring, and that his confession could be influenced by the prosecution of his wife, Ethel30. This strategy, later referred to as “the lever strategy”31 is what ultimately inveigled the judicial approach towards Ethel specifically from that moment on. A compelling character in the trials was Fyke Farmer, a lawyer in private practice who was utterly distraught by the evident miscarriage of justice with the intent of bettering political purposes, and who went to astounding lengths to interfere with the convictions32. He relentlessly tried to expose the perspective that the Rosenbergs had been tried under the incorrect law: the 1917 Espionage Act, which authorised the execution of convicted soviet spies solely with the intention to give national secrets to a foreign enemy, instead of the Atomic Energy Act of 1946. Even after his efforts, Kaufman rejected the petition and the trials continued to plan. With nearly 1⁄3 of New York’s population being Jewish at the time of the trials, the fact that not a single juror present during Ethel and Julius’ trials was Jewish is certainly dubious. Anne Sebba argues in her novel that this was because “Jews did not want to be responsible for sending other Jews to their death”, and in turn absented themselves from the trials33. It is questionable however, whether or not the withdrawals were decided by the jurors themselves or by the prosecution and Judge Kaufman. Judge Irving Kaufman himself was on many occasions accused of ‘reverse anti-semitism’34 and provided thorough instructions which limited the appointing of potentially left-wing jurors, subsequently skewing the scale of justness. Even after the thorough research conducted by revisionists such as Walter and Miriam Schneir35 who laboured over uncovering the truth, and other investigators and writers alike, throughout the process of my research I have found that no one has considered the implication of a predetermined jury. The truth as we know it reads as follows: of the jurors, 11 of whom were men and the 12th a woman36, all were openly in favour of capital punishment, and none of them were Jewish. Oddly enough, of the other participants, Judge Irving Kaufman was Jewish, the prosecutor was Jewish, and the defendants (Ethel and Julius Rosenberg) were also Jewish, and this circumstance itself speaks for the motives of Judge Kaufman who “wanted to make an example of someone who had disgraced the Jewish people” and punish the Rosenbergs for “the disgrace they had brought upon their race”37. Nevertheless, no matter how “unbiased” and “unaffected” these jurors claimed to be in regard to the Rosenberg case, they lived in a nation whose government obsessively riddled the media with anti-communist news articles and publications, so confidently claiming that their minds were “white sheets of paper” as described by Judge Kaufman is another falsified claim added to the compilation. It was also argued that the Rosenberg’s silence and refusal to accept a guilty plea was their own cynical interpretation of vengeance for their communist cause, however their silence can be explained by considering that they felt the need to protect a vast number of other agents who they believed had not yet been discovered as accomplices in the ordeal, and who would perhaps continue their work38. It is evident that the Rosenbergs knew that any confession could potentially connect them to other Soviet spies and endanger the lives of their fellow comrades whilst also harming the Soviet cause they gave their lives to uphold.39
In the September of 1945 Ruth and David Greenglass had paid an overdue visit to the Rosenbergs in their New York apartment. As he relayed his most recent details to Julius, a woman, whether it was his sister Ethel Rosenberg, or his wife Ruth Greenglass typed them on a Remington typewriter40. Although seemingly unimportant at the time, this deed was not brought to the attention of the prosecutors until five years later when Mr. Greenglass testified that Ethel was responsible for typing the notes in the New York apartment; pinning the blame on his sister and brother in law. His exact words read: “Just so had she, on countless other occasions, sat at the typewriter and struck the keys, blow by blow, against her own country in the interests of the Soviets.” This came as a shock to not only Ethel but to the court as at first David was unwilling to incriminate his sister, but suffered a change in heart upon hearing the possible prosecution of his wife. Through his confession, he avoided the prosecution of his Ruth completely and was sentenced 15 years, only actually serving nine and a half41. The unfortunate turn of events brings us to nearly half a century later42 when he confessed to having lied during the trials to spare Ruth from being prosecuted; also claiming that this decision was due to the urges of prosecutor Roy Cohn to use the Rosenbergs as the scapegoats.43
Conclusion
The historical evidence used throughout this investigation provides a sufficient argument for both opposing perspectives on Ethel Rosenberg’s degree of guilt, and whether or not her execution was just. This essay argues that although Ethel Rosenberg’s innocence has been challenged through the recent years by a variety of Orthodox historians, it is clear that her sentencing to the death penalty on the basis of conspiracy to commit espionage did not accuratly reflect the severity of her ‘crime’, or conspiracy to commit it for that matter. Popular opinion during the 1940 and 1950’s, coinciding with the McCarthyist era, will agree with the writings of said Orthodox historians that any degree of national treason is deserving of stringent capital punishment. However this investigation proved that the doings of Ethel Rosenberg were in fact not beneficial to supplying the Soviet Union with any vital atomic secrets at all, and that the idea that she was a significant character in said Soviet espionage organisation was merely a fabrication of the FBI and the appointed Judge in trial. With so many contradicting opinions and sources, it may seem difficult to decipher between falsifications in the media; However to say that the outcome of the Rosenberg trials was indicative and appropriate of Ethel’s contribution to Soviet knowledge of the atom bomb is far fetched. Thus, this essay concludes with the fact that for one reason or another, Ethel Rosenberg was singled out to be the unfortunate victim of a fear-consumed nation desperate to regain control of the internal communist threat which they believed to have infiltrated and impaired the American society.
FOOTNOTES
1“Digital History.” n.d. Digital History. Accessed October 4, 2022.
https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=1167.
2 Schrank, Bernice. “Reading the Rosenbergs after Venona.” Labour / Le Travail 49 (2002): 189. https://doi.org/10.2307/25149218.
3 “Anti-Communism in the 1950s | AP US History Study Guide from The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.” n.d. AP Gilder Lehrman. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://ap.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/fifties/essays/anti-communism-1950s.
2 Schrank, Bernice. “Reading the Rosenbergs after Venona.” Labour / Le Travail 49 (2002): 189. https://doi.org/10.2307/25149218.
3 “Anti-Communism in the 1950s | AP US History Study Guide from The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.” n.d. AP Gilder Lehrman. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://ap.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/fifties/essays/anti-communism-1950s.
4Ivry, Benjamin. 2021. “Was Ethel Rosenberg really a tragic figure?” The
Forward.
https://forward.com/culture/471545/was-ethel-rosenberg-really-a-tragic-figure-anne-senna-an-american-tragedy/.
5 “Julius Rosenberg | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” n.d. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://www.atomicheritage.org/profile/julius-rosenberg.
6 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. N.p.: Orion Publishing Company.
7 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
8 Haynes, John E., Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev. 2009. Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America. Translated by Philip Redko and Steven Shabad. N.p.: Yale University Press.
5 “Julius Rosenberg | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” n.d. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://www.atomicheritage.org/profile/julius-rosenberg.
6 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. N.p.: Orion Publishing Company.
7 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
8 Haynes, John E., Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev. 2009. Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America. Translated by Philip Redko and Steven Shabad. N.p.: Yale University Press.
9 Abrams, Rebecca. 2021. “Fact and fiction in the execution of Ethel
Rosenberg.” Financial Times.
https://www.ft.com/content/2f56fce9-55f2-4057-8d0c-cfd6e3df7645.
10 Haynes, John E., Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev. 2009. Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America. Translated by Philip Redko and Steven Shabad. N.p.: Yale University Press.
11 “Rosenberg Grand Jury Transcripts | National Archives.” n.d. National Archives |. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://www.archives.gov/research/court-records/rosenberg-jury.
12 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
10 Haynes, John E., Harvey Klehr, and Alexander Vassiliev. 2009. Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America. Translated by Philip Redko and Steven Shabad. N.p.: Yale University Press.
11 “Rosenberg Grand Jury Transcripts | National Archives.” n.d. National Archives |. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://www.archives.gov/research/court-records/rosenberg-jury.
12 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
13 Bloch, Emanuel, and John Simkin. n.d. “Ethel Rosenberg.” Spartacus
Educational. Accessed November 2, 2022.
https://spartacus-educational.com/USArosenbergE.htm.
14 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. N.p.: Orion Publishing Company.
15 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
16 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
17 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
14 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. N.p.: Orion Publishing Company.
15 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
16 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
17 Anders, Roger M. “The Rosenberg Case Revisited: The Greenglass Testimony and the Protection of Atomic Secrets.” The American Historical Review 83, no. 2 (1978): 389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1862323.
18 WOLISTON, JACK. n.d. “Rosenbergs go silently to electric chair.”
UPI.com. Accessed November 17, 2022.
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1953/06/20/Rosenbergs-go-silently-to-electric-chair/5084629411212/.
19 Orndorff, Andrea, and David Greenglass. n.d. “Cold War Case Files: The Rosenberg Trial – Was Justice Fairly Served?” UMBC. Accessed September 16, 2022. https://www2.umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/pdf/historylabs/Rosenberg_Spy_Case_-_Was_Justice_Fairly_Served.Printer Friendly.pdf.
20“The Rosenberg Trial | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” 2018. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/rosenberg-trial.
21 “The Rosenberg Trial | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” 2018. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/rosenberg-trial.
19 Orndorff, Andrea, and David Greenglass. n.d. “Cold War Case Files: The Rosenberg Trial – Was Justice Fairly Served?” UMBC. Accessed September 16, 2022. https://www2.umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/pdf/historylabs/Rosenberg_Spy_Case_-_Was_Justice_Fairly_Served.Printer Friendly.pdf.
20“The Rosenberg Trial | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” 2018. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/rosenberg-trial.
21 “The Rosenberg Trial | Atomic Heritage Foundation.” 2018. Atomic Heritage Foundation |. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/rosenberg-trial.
22 Benson and Warner, "New York 1657 to Moscow, 27 November 1944," Venona, 381.
23McFadden, Robert D. 1990. “Khrushchev on Rosenbergs: Stoking Old
Embers.” The New York Times, September 25, 1990, 3.
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1990/09/25/663790.html?pageNumber=3.
24 McFadden, Robert D. 1990. “Khrushchev on Rosenbergs: Stoking Old Embers.” The New York Times, September 25, 1990, 3. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1990/09/25/663790.html?pageNumber=3.
25 McFadden, Robert D. 1990. “Khrushchev on Rosenbergs: Stoking Old Embers.” The New York Times, September 25, 1990, 3. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1990/09/25/663790.html?pageNumber=3.
24 McFadden, Robert D. 1990. “Khrushchev on Rosenbergs: Stoking Old Embers.” The New York Times, September 25, 1990, 3. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1990/09/25/663790.html?pageNumber=3.
25 McFadden, Robert D. 1990. “Khrushchev on Rosenbergs: Stoking Old Embers.” The New York Times, September 25, 1990, 3. https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1990/09/25/663790.html?pageNumber=3.
26 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. Pg 126.: Orion Publishing Company.
27 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. Pg 128.: Orion Publishing Company.
28 Wells, Christina E. n.d. “"Fear and Loathing in Constitutional Decision-Making" by Christina E. Wells.” University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/facpubs/396/.
29 Williams, Isobel. 2021. “Gerald Jacobs: Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy.” PressReader. https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-critic-9yj3/20210601/281685437752677.
30 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
31 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 160. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
27 Sebba, Anne. 2021. Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy. Pg 128.: Orion Publishing Company.
28 Wells, Christina E. n.d. “"Fear and Loathing in Constitutional Decision-Making" by Christina E. Wells.” University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. Accessed November 17, 2022. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/facpubs/396/.
29 Williams, Isobel. 2021. “Gerald Jacobs: Ethel Rosenberg: A Cold War Tragedy.” PressReader. https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-critic-9yj3/20210601/281685437752677.
30 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
31 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 160. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
32 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.”
Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 171. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
33Philpot, Robert. 2021. “Was the Rosenberg trial America's Dreyfus affair?” The Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/was-the-rosenberg-trial-americas-dreyfus-affair/.
34 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
35 Morgan, Ted. 1975. “The Rosenberg Jury | Esquire | MAY 1975.” Esquire Classic. https://classic.esquire.com/article/1975/5/1/the-rosenberg-jury.
36 Morgan, Ted. 1975. “The Rosenberg Jury | Esquire | MAY 1975.” Esquire Classic. https://classic.esquire.com/article/1975/5/1/the-rosenberg-jury.
33Philpot, Robert. 2021. “Was the Rosenberg trial America's Dreyfus affair?” The Times of Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/was-the-rosenberg-trial-americas-dreyfus-affair/.
34 Harris, Richard. “Worse than Murder: The Lawyers and the Rosenbergs.” Grand Street 3, no. 2 (1984): 159–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/25006607.
35 Morgan, Ted. 1975. “The Rosenberg Jury | Esquire | MAY 1975.” Esquire Classic. https://classic.esquire.com/article/1975/5/1/the-rosenberg-jury.
36 Morgan, Ted. 1975. “The Rosenberg Jury | Esquire | MAY 1975.” Esquire Classic. https://classic.esquire.com/article/1975/5/1/the-rosenberg-jury.
37 Morgan, Ted. 1975. “The Rosenberg Jury | Esquire | MAY 1975.” Esquire
Classic.
https://classic.esquire.com/article/1975/5/1/the-rosenberg-jury.
38 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
39 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
40 McFadden, Robert D. 2014. “David Greenglass, the Brother Who Doomed Ethel Rosenberg, Dies at 92 (Published 2014).” The New York Times.
38 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
39 Usdin, Steven T. “The Rosenberg Ring Revealed: Industrial-Scale Conventional and Nuclear Espionage.” Journal of Cold War Studies 11, no. 3 (2009): 91–143. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26923054.
40 McFadden, Robert D. 2014. “David Greenglass, the Brother Who Doomed Ethel Rosenberg, Dies at 92 (Published 2014).” The New York Times.
41McFadden, Robert D. 2014. “David Greenglass, the Brother Who Doomed
Ethel Rosenberg, Dies at 92 (Published 2014).” The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/us/david-greenglass-spy-who-helped-seal-the-rosenbergs-doom-dies-at-92.ht
ml.
42McFadden, Robert D. 2014. “David Greenglass, the Brother Who Doomed Ethel Rosenberg, Dies at 92 (Published 2014).” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/us/david-greenglass-spy-who-helped-seal-the-rosenbergs-doom-dies-at-92.ht ml.
43Sebba, Anne. 2014. “David Greenglass, spy who sent sister Ethel Rosenberg to electric chair, dies.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/15/david-greenglass-spy-who-sent-sister-ethel-rosenberg-to-electric-c hair-dies.
42McFadden, Robert D. 2014. “David Greenglass, the Brother Who Doomed Ethel Rosenberg, Dies at 92 (Published 2014).” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/us/david-greenglass-spy-who-helped-seal-the-rosenbergs-doom-dies-at-92.ht ml.
43Sebba, Anne. 2014. “David Greenglass, spy who sent sister Ethel Rosenberg to electric chair, dies.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/15/david-greenglass-spy-who-sent-sister-ethel-rosenberg-to-electric-c hair-dies.
