The Central Park 5 - When will true justice be served? (New York: gated, storage)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you know the confessions were coersed? Because you were told they were? How do you know you were told the truth?
And do you think someone spending couple of hours reading about the case becomes an expert?
I admit, I am not an expert but neither are you nor Evelyn2019. But I know that Ann Coulter spent a lot of time researching this case. How about you refute the facts she mentions?
Ann Coulter**| July 25, 2018
*
The city of New York released thousands of documents from the 1989 Central Park rape case last week, provoking more weeping and gnashing of teeth over Donald Trump's full-page ads in four New York newspapers taken out soon after that attack with the headline:
"BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY.
"BRING BACK OUR POLICE!"
His ad never mentioned the Central Park rape, but talked about New York families -- "White, Black, Hispanic and Asian" -- unable to enjoy walks through the park at dusk. Of muggers and murderers, he said, "I no longer want to understand their anger. I want them to understand our anger. ... They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes."
According to the media, the five convicted boys were INNOCENT — and Trump would have executed the poor lads! Apart from the "innocent" moniker, the rape victim miraculously survived, there was no murder, so this is nonsense.
But let's look at how "innocent" they were.
On April 19, 1989, investment banker Trisha Meili went for a run through Central Park around 9 p.m., whereupon she was attacked by a wolf pack looking for a "white girl," dragged 100 yards into the woods, stripped, beaten with a pipe and a brick, raped and left for dead.
By the time the police found Meili, she'd lost three-quarters of her blood. Her case was initially assigned to the homicide unit of the D.A.'s office because none of her doctors thought she would make it through the night.
Of the 37 youths brought in for questioning about the multiple violent attacks in the park that night, only 10 were charged with a crime and only five for the rape of the jogger: Antron McCray, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson and Korey Wise. All five confessed -- four on videotape with adult relatives present and one with a parent present, but not on videotape.
Two unanimous, multicultural juries convicted them, despite aggressive defense lawyers putting on their best case.
But the media have a different method of judging guilt and innocence. They don't look at irrelevant factors, such as evidence, but at relevant factors such as the race of the accused and the victim.
Unfortunately for Meili, she was guilty of white privilege, while her attackers belonged to the "people of color" Brahmin caste. So, after waiting an interminable 13 years, the media proclaimed that the five convicts had been "exonerated" by DNA evidence!
DNA evidence didn't convict them, so it couldn't exonerate them. This was a gang attack. It was always known that another rapist "got away," as the prosecutor told the jury, and that none of the defendants' DNA was found in the jogger's cervix or on her sock -- the only samples that were taken.
While it blows most people away to find out that none of the suspects' DNA was found on Meili, the whole trick is that they're looking at it through a modern lens. Today, these kids' DNA would have been found*all*over the crime scene. But in 1989, DNA was a primitive science. The cops wouldn't have even looked for such evidence back then.
The case was solved with other evidence -- and there was a lot of it.
On the drive to the precinct, Raymond Santana blurted out, "I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel the woman's t--s." The cops didn't even know about a rape yet.
Yusef Salaam announced to the detective interviewing him, "I was there, but I didn't rape her." Even if true, under the law, anyone who participated in the attack on Meili is guilty of her rape.
Two of Korey Wise's friends said that when they ran into him on the street the day after the attack, he told them the cops were after him. "You heard about that woman that was beat up and raped in the park last night? That was us!"
Taken to the scene of the crime by a detective and a prosecutor, he said, "Damn, damn, that's a lot of blood. ... I knew she was bleeding, but I didn't know how bad she was. It was dark. I couldn't see how much blood there was at night."
Wise also told a detective that someone he thought was named "Rudy" stole the jogger's Walkman and belt pouch. The jogger was still in a coma. The police did not know yet that a Walkman had been stolen from her.
Wise told a friend's sister, Melody Jackson, that he didn't rape the jogger; he "only held her legs down while Kevin (Richardson) f---ed her." Jackson volunteered this information to the police, thinking it would help Wise.
The night of the attack, Richardson told an acquaintance, "We just raped somebody." The crotch of his underwear was suspiciously stained with semen, grass stains, dirt and debris. Walking near the crime scene with a detective the next day, Richardson said, "This is where we got her ... where the raping occurred."
Santana and Richardson independently brought investigators to the precise location of the attack on the jogger.
Recall that, when all these statements were made, no one -- not the police, the witnesses, the suspects, or their friends and acquaintances -- knew whether Meili would emerge from her coma and be able to identify her attackers.
Sarah Burns, who co-wrote and co-directed the propaganda film "The Central Park Five" with her father (whose reputation she has now destroyed), waved away the defendants' confessions -- forget all the other evidence -- in a 2016 New York Times op-ed, explaining: "The power imbalance in an interrogation room is extreme, especially when the suspects are young teenagers, afraid of the police and unfamiliar with the justice system or their rights."
Burns has studied the trial transcripts so closely that she called the prosecutor by the wrong name in her op-ed. Far from trembling and afraid, as Burns imagines, the suspects were singing the rap song "Wild Thing" for hours in the precinct house, laughing and joking about raping the jogger. One of the attackers said, "It was fun."
When a cop told Santana that he should have been out with a girlfriend rather than mugging people in Central Park, Santana responded, "I already got mines," and laughed with another boy from the park. One of the youths arrested that night stated on videotape that he heard Santana and another boy laughing about "how they 'made a woman bleed.'"
But none of that matters. Again, the victim was a privileged white woman (BAD!) and the perpetrators were youths of color (GOOD!). So the media lied and claimed the DNA evidence "exonerated" them.
This allegation was based on Matias Reyes' confession to the attack. His DNA matched the unidentified DNA on the jogger -- proving nothing, other than that he was the one who "got away." He is also the "Rudy" who stole her Walkman, as Wise said at the time. Reyes admitted he took it. How did Wise know that?
A cellmate of Reyes claims he said that he heard a woman screaming in the park that night and ran to join in the rape.
The "exoneration" comes down to Reyes' unsubstantiated claim that he acted alone. Years of careful investigation, videotaped confessions, witness statements, assembling evidence, trial by jury and repeated appeals -- all that is nothing compared to the word of an upstanding citizen like Reyes, a violent psychopath who sexually assaulted his own mother and raped and murdered a pregnant woman while her children heard the attack through the bedroom door.
That's the sum total of the "exoneration": the word of a psycho.
Noticeably, Reyes faced absolutely no penalty for his confession -- the statute of limitations had run out years earlier. Before he confessed, Reyes had been moved to Korey Wise's cellblock. He requested a transfer on the grounds that he feared retaliation from Wise's gang. All he had to do was confess -- with no penalty -- and announce that he acted alone. The Social Justice Warriors would take it from there.
Not even a monster's self-serving "confession" can explain away the five attackers' other crimes that night -- vicious beatings that left one parkgoer unconscious and another permanently injured.
Ann Coulter is a deranged right wing pundit.
Not exactly a professional investigator.
I doubt the city paid millions of dollars for nothing, and I doubt the the prosecutors were fired from a variety of jobs for nothing. Those men were innocent and those prosecutors are now facing economic consequences for screwing over 5 innocent men.
1) I don't understand your point. They tested the DNA and it didn't match any of the boys. You're making excuses and I'd have to ask you why. Regarding the scratching, I believe you're spreading misinformation.
Lack of DNA evidence especially in 1989 is not grounds for acquittal. One perp raped the jogger and left his DNA in her. That doesn't mean the other five didn't beat her nearly to death and sexually abuse her. As I pointed out the young man who was convicted of killing the Howard Beach jogger was also convicted of sexual abuse even though there was no DNA evidence that tied him to to sexually abusing her. Again, lack of DNA evidence is not proof of innocence.
I am not spreading misinformation about the scratching, that's what the officer said in the video which you apparently did not watch. Call him a liar if you wish but that's his claim, not mine.
but it would have been prevented had she not gone into an unsafe park, alone, at night
like really, she couldnt have jogged arond the block where people are, but had to go into an unsafe park..........................................real ly??????????????????????????
It’s a free country, she has every right to go into the park if she wants to. Rape is wrong period, and most rapes do not occur in parks. Men like you spend more time attacking the victims of rape than condemning the rapist or rape itself. So keep smacking as long as it’s yourself because defending sex offenders and attacking take victims is the lowest one can go.
moral of the story, don't be part of a gang of hoodlums assaulting and harassing innocent people in the park for no reason other than being a piece of sh*t
And don’t be a white prosecutor who convicts men for crimes they didn’t commit. Those women had become celebrities, and now they’re being fired from everything they had gotten as a result of this. Not a happy legacy.
How do you know the confessions were coersed? Because you were told they were? How do you know you were told the truth?
And do you think someone spending couple of hours reading about the case becomes an expert?
I admit, I am not an expert but neither are you nor Evelyn2019. But I know that Ann Coulter spent a lot of time researching this case. How about you refute the facts she mentions?
Ann Coulter**| July 25, 2018
*
The city of New York released thousands of documents from the 1989 Central Park rape case last week, provoking more weeping and gnashing of teeth over Donald Trump's full-page ads in four New York newspapers taken out soon after that attack with the headline:
"BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY.
"BRING BACK OUR POLICE!"
His ad never mentioned the Central Park rape, but talked about New York families -- "White, Black, Hispanic and Asian" -- unable to enjoy walks through the park at dusk. Of muggers and murderers, he said, "I no longer want to understand their anger. I want them to understand our anger. ... They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes."
According to the media, the five convicted boys were INNOCENT — and Trump would have executed the poor lads! Apart from the "innocent" moniker, the rape victim miraculously survived, there was no murder, so this is nonsense.
But let's look at how "innocent" they were.
On April 19, 1989, investment banker Trisha Meili went for a run through Central Park around 9 p.m., whereupon she was attacked by a wolf pack looking for a "white girl," dragged 100 yards into the woods, stripped, beaten with a pipe and a brick, raped and left for dead.
By the time the police found Meili, she'd lost three-quarters of her blood. Her case was initially assigned to the homicide unit of the D.A.'s office because none of her doctors thought she would make it through the night.
Of the 37 youths brought in for questioning about the multiple violent attacks in the park that night, only 10 were charged with a crime and only five for the rape of the jogger: Antron McCray, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson and Korey Wise. All five confessed -- four on videotape with adult relatives present and one with a parent present, but not on videotape.
Two unanimous, multicultural juries convicted them, despite aggressive defense lawyers putting on their best case.
But the media have a different method of judging guilt and innocence. They don't look at irrelevant factors, such as evidence, but at relevant factors such as the race of the accused and the victim.
Unfortunately for Meili, she was guilty of white privilege, while her attackers belonged to the "people of color" Brahmin caste. So, after waiting an interminable 13 years, the media proclaimed that the five convicts had been "exonerated" by DNA evidence!
DNA evidence didn't convict them, so it couldn't exonerate them. This was a gang attack. It was always known that another rapist "got away," as the prosecutor told the jury, and that none of the defendants' DNA was found in the jogger's cervix or on her sock -- the only samples that were taken.
While it blows most people away to find out that none of the suspects' DNA was found on Meili, the whole trick is that they're looking at it through a modern lens. Today, these kids' DNA would have been found*all*over the crime scene. But in 1989, DNA was a primitive science. The cops wouldn't have even looked for such evidence back then.
The case was solved with other evidence -- and there was a lot of it.
On the drive to the precinct, Raymond Santana blurted out, "I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel the woman's t--s." The cops didn't even know about a rape yet.
Yusef Salaam announced to the detective interviewing him, "I was there, but I didn't rape her." Even if true, under the law, anyone who participated in the attack on Meili is guilty of her rape.
Two of Korey Wise's friends said that when they ran into him on the street the day after the attack, he told them the cops were after him. "You heard about that woman that was beat up and raped in the park last night? That was us!"
Taken to the scene of the crime by a detective and a prosecutor, he said, "Damn, damn, that's a lot of blood. ... I knew she was bleeding, but I didn't know how bad she was. It was dark. I couldn't see how much blood there was at night."
Wise also told a detective that someone he thought was named "Rudy" stole the jogger's Walkman and belt pouch. The jogger was still in a coma. The police did not know yet that a Walkman had been stolen from her.
Wise told a friend's sister, Melody Jackson, that he didn't rape the jogger; he "only held her legs down while Kevin (Richardson) f---ed her." Jackson volunteered this information to the police, thinking it would help Wise.
The night of the attack, Richardson told an acquaintance, "We just raped somebody." The crotch of his underwear was suspiciously stained with semen, grass stains, dirt and debris. Walking near the crime scene with a detective the next day, Richardson said, "This is where we got her ... where the raping occurred."
Santana and Richardson independently brought investigators to the precise location of the attack on the jogger.
Recall that, when all these statements were made, no one -- not the police, the witnesses, the suspects, or their friends and acquaintances -- knew whether Meili would emerge from her coma and be able to identify her attackers.
Sarah Burns, who co-wrote and co-directed the propaganda film "The Central Park Five" with her father (whose reputation she has now destroyed), waved away the defendants' confessions -- forget all the other evidence -- in a 2016 New York Times op-ed, explaining: "The power imbalance in an interrogation room is extreme, especially when the suspects are young teenagers, afraid of the police and unfamiliar with the justice system or their rights."
Burns has studied the trial transcripts so closely that she called the prosecutor by the wrong name in her op-ed. Far from trembling and afraid, as Burns imagines, the suspects were singing the rap song "Wild Thing" for hours in the precinct house, laughing and joking about raping the jogger. One of the attackers said, "It was fun."
When a cop told Santana that he should have been out with a girlfriend rather than mugging people in Central Park, Santana responded, "I already got mines," and laughed with another boy from the park. One of the youths arrested that night stated on videotape that he heard Santana and another boy laughing about "how they 'made a woman bleed.'"
But none of that matters. Again, the victim was a privileged white woman (BAD!) and the perpetrators were youths of color (GOOD!). So the media lied and claimed the DNA evidence "exonerated" them.
This allegation was based on Matias Reyes' confession to the attack. His DNA matched the unidentified DNA on the jogger -- proving nothing, other than that he was the one who "got away." He is also the "Rudy" who stole her Walkman, as Wise said at the time. Reyes admitted he took it. How did Wise know that?
A cellmate of Reyes claims he said that he heard a woman screaming in the park that night and ran to join in the rape.
The "exoneration" comes down to Reyes' unsubstantiated claim that he acted alone. Years of careful investigation, videotaped confessions, witness statements, assembling evidence, trial by jury and repeated appeals -- all that is nothing compared to the word of an upstanding citizen like Reyes, a violent psychopath who sexually assaulted his own mother and raped and murdered a pregnant woman while her children heard the attack through the bedroom door.
That's the sum total of the "exoneration": the word of a psycho.
Noticeably, Reyes faced absolutely no penalty for his confession -- the statute of limitations had run out years earlier. Before he confessed, Reyes had been moved to Korey Wise's cellblock. He requested a transfer on the grounds that he feared retaliation from Wise's gang. All he had to do was confess -- with no penalty -- and announce that he acted alone. The Social Justice Warriors would take it from there.
Not even a monster's self-serving "confession" can explain away the five attackers' other crimes that night -- vicious beatings that left one parkgoer unconscious and another permanently injured.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banbuk77
THE WILDING OF LINDA FAIRSTEIN
June 12, 2019
The African folktale version of the 1989 Central Park gang-rape has swept the populace! The mob thirsts for vengeance against evil spirits, like Linda Fairstein.
In the past week, Fairstein, the head of the sex crimes unit of the Manhattan District Attorney's office during the trials of the accused rapists, has been exiled from society, like an albino chased from the village at the instigation of witch doctors. In a matter of days, she's been forced off of a half-dozen corporate boards, dropped by her publisher and dumped by her talent agency.
The people doing the ostracizing are full of crap, have no idea what they’re talking about, and get all their information about the case from Hollywood fantasy movies -- most recently, the Netflix TV series "When They See Us" by Ava DuVernay, a major beneficiary of the #OscarsSoWhite campaign.
The actual evidence against the five boys convicted of the rape was overwhelming. Nothing has changed that.
This week, we’ll look not at the proof of their guilt, but at the proof of their alleged "exonerations."
In 2002, the convictions of the five Central Park rapists were vacated on the word of a psychopath, Matias Reyes, who suddenly announced that he, too, raped the jogger -- not a surprise -- and also that he’d acted alone -- not possible.
The real reason the convictions were vacated was that the sainted Robert Morgenthau, Manhattan D.A. since the Fillmore administration, discovered that, during his tenure in office, the slaves had been freed and given the vote. The only facts he cared about were: 1) an election was coming; and 2) so was his impending death. Overturning those convictions would assure him both re-election and an adulatory New York Times obituary.
AD FEEDBACK
The media demanded a rewrite, and Morgenthau was just the man to do it.
Reyes’ “confession” changed nothing about the evidence presented at trial. It was always known that other rapists got away: A small sample of semen on the jogger’s sock and cervix did not match any of the defendants'. That’s why, in her summation, prosecutor Elizabeth Lederer told the jury: "Others who were not caught raped her and got away."
Now we know: Reyes was one of those who “got away.”
Unlike the confessions of the boys convicted of the attack, Reyes's confession would result in no punishment. To the contrary, he was rewarded with a highly desirable prison transfer. Coincidentally, his conscience struck only after he was imprisoned with one of the convicted Central Park rapists, Kharey Wise, who happened to be the leader of a prison gang.
To be extra sure that the psychopath was telling the truth:
-- Reyes was never given a polygraph test.
-- The police were prohibited from interviewing him.
-- In fact, the police were prevented from even reviewing transcripts of the D.A.’s interviews with Reyes.
-- The police were further barred from interviewing Reyes’ prison acquaintances -- who said he’d admitted to joining a rape already in progress after hearing the jogger’s screams.
Ah, the argy-bargy of our hallowed adversary system of justice!
The maniacally repeated claim that “there was no physical evidence to tie the boys to the crime” is utter nonsense intended to fool the stupid.
What “physical evidence” were they expecting? There were no tire tracks, footprints, bullet casings or gun powder residue to be tested. The jogger’s pulverized body was found lying in a puddle of mud. The only conceivable “physical evidence” would be DNA.
But the use of DNA to solve crimes was nearly unheard of in 1989. No police force in the country would look for DNA to make a case. It was only about a year earlier that DNA had been used for the first time in any criminal court in the U.S. (Florida).
The very month that the jogger was attacked, newspapers were excitedly reporting on a novel forensic technique, a “still unfolding laboratory discovery, a genetic ‘fingerprint’ created from the body's deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA” -- as the Chicago Tribune put it.
Even five years later, DNA evidence wasn’t enough to convict O.J. Simpson.
Remember Robert Chambers, the “Preppie Killer”? He killed Jennifer Levin in Central Park three years before the Central Park wilding. Guess what? There was no “physical evidence” tying Chambers to Levin’s murder, either. Police solved it the same way they solved the Central Park rape case: circumstantial evidence and a confession.
Does anyone think Chambers is innocent? (No -- he’s white.)
Which reminds me: There was no “physical evidence” tying David Berkowitz to the Son of Sam killings. Nor was there any “physical evidence” tying John Gotti to the murder of Paul Castellano. There was no “physical evidence” tying Lee Harvey Oswald to President Kennedy’s assassination. Are they all innocent, too?
Hard to believe, but it was possible for crimes to be solved before 2001! (That's about when the use of DNA in criminal cases became widespread.)
What the police had against the Central Park Five were detailed confessions, on videotape, given in the presence of their parents or adult relatives; the deeply incriminating statements of at least a half-dozen of their friends and acquaintances; and the defendants’ knowledge of facts about the crime that only the perpetrators would know.
We’ll review some of the guilt evidence next week.
COPYRIGHT 2019 ANN COULTER
I was incorrect in my post. You are spreading disinformation, not misinformation. LOL and the fact that to spread your lies you had to go to Ann Coulter LOL. Really?!!?
Lack of DNA evidence especially in 1989 is not grounds for acquittal. One perp raped the jogger and left his DNA in her. That doesn't mean the other five didn't beat her nearly to death and sexually abuse her. As I pointed out the young man who was convicted of killing the Howard Beach jogger was also convicted of sexual abuse even though there was no DNA evidence that tied him to to sexually abusing her. Again, lack of DNA evidence is not proof of innocence.
I am not spreading misinformation about the scratching, that's what the officer said in the video which you apparently did not watch. Call him a liar if you wish but that's his claim, not mine.
Are you serious dude? If she scratched him, his DNA would have been under her fingernails. The DNA found on the jogger did not match the five boys. It was someone else's but they got arrested for the rape when NONE of their DNA was found ANYWHERE near to the scene of the crime.
There is ZERO proof they boys beat her up/sexually abused her. You are making sh** up.
I doubt the city paid millions of dollars for nothing, and I doubt the the prosecutors were fired from a variety of jobs for nothing. Those men were innocent and those prosecutors are now facing economic consequences for screwing over 5 innocent men.
I heard that many time that she is a right wing blah blah ... don't listen to her. I don't ever remember anyone challenging the facts she presents.
At least she spent multiple hours researching this case, unlike you and the like who only watched a fiction movie about it.
So in the articles I posted, she presents some facts from the trials that contradict the movie narrative:
She presents some facts (the confessions were not coerced and were made in the presents of parents, the DNA samples were taken from only 2 places since that was not a well used method then, the multiple witnesses who said the accused mentioned the rape, etc).
Do you have anything to refute these facts? I don't think so since you defaulted right to the liberal talking point about disregarding anything that contradicts liberal mantra.
P.S.
And your point about a liberal NYC paying millions to poor victims as a proof of something is ridiculous. Liberal cities pay millions left and right to poor victims of police misdeeds.
Even more ridiculous your argument about her being chased out of all the jobs as a proof she committed anything wrong. ARe you saying those employers became expert on the case overnight and decided she did something wrong? Or more likely scenario : they were facing protests from progressive mobs , so they decided to let her go instead?
I was incorrect in my post. You are spreading disinformation, not misinformation. LOL and the fact that to spread your lies you had to go to Ann Coulter LOL. Really?!!?
Can you take any one of the facts Coulter mentioned and refute it?
After all, you seem to be an expert and spent countless hours reading all the documents about this case.
Or will it be usual liberal smirk about not needing to argue with right wing liars (aka I don't have anything concrete to refute the facts presented, but since I don't believe them they must be not true and a person stating them is a liar and I don't want to waste my time arguing with liars).
Take just one fact and present a proof it is a lie. Preferably from court documents, not from a movie made by a progressive warrior.
but it would have been prevented had she not gone into an unsafe park, alone, at night
like really, she couldnt have jogged arond the block where people are, but had to go into an unsafe park..........................................real ly??????????????????????????
That's victim blaming. Should we also blame women for drinking too much and this being the cause of their rape? Or what about when someone is talking on their phone walking and someone robs them. Is it their fault too? Or what about the black man who was picking up trash on HIS property the other day only to have a herd of police officers harass him with at least one pointing a gun at him for picking up trash on HIS property? Is it his fault too?
Can you take any one of the facts Coulter mentioned and refute it?
After all, you seem to be an expert and spent countless hours reading all the documents about this case.
Or will it be usual liberal smirk about not needing to argue with right wing liars (aka I don't have anything concrete to refute the facts presented, but since I don't believe them they must be not true and a person stating them is a liar and I don't want to waste my time arguing with liars).
Take just one fact and present a proof it is a lie. Preferably from court documents, not from a movie made by a progressive warrior.
I'll talk about your first point. The ad was referring the CP5 and this is so obvious. Trump spent $85,000 on these ads. He here:
He talks about rapists returning to the streets (he was talking about the CP5) after being found innocent. The proof is there. Real facts.
I haven't said anything about liberal versus right wing. You are the ONLY one bringing party this party that up. I'm talking about facts and evidence, which you seem to ignore. The rest of what you wrote is pure b.s. You are quoting from a liar.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
