Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: gofaster on December 19, 2002, 02:57:37 PM
-
This was the case that released the term "wilding" on the American consciousness to describe the acts of teenage gang members roaming about New York City committing various acts of violent crime, principally the rape and near-murder of a woman jogging through Central Park.
This case made headlines, big time, during the trial. I, for one, was hoping they'd all get life sentences as a signal that we were getting tough on juvenile crime.
Now its back in the media, with a disturbing twist.
========From Yahoo News=========
Judge Vacates Convictions in Jogger Case
Thu Dec 19,12:31 PM ET
By SAMUEL MAULL, Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK - A judge dismissed the convictions Thursday of all five men who served years in prison for the 1989 rape and beating of a jogger in Central Park, a crime that exposed the city's racial tensions and made national headlines.
The courtroom, filled with the family and friends of the defendants, burst into cheers and applause as state Justice Charles Tejada announced his ruling.
"Justice was done," said City Councilman Bill Perkins, a supporter of the five. "Unfortunately, it took 13 years of tribulations for the Central Park Five, not to mention the years of suffering for their families."
The five men weren't in the courtroom to hear the ruling Thursday. All have finished their sentences, though one was reincarcerated for an unrelated crime.
Sharonne Salaam, mother of defendant Yusef Salaam, said her son was now "beyond anger and he's beyond joy. ... We have to improve this system so that only the guilty suffer."
Perkins and defense attorney Michael Warren called for an investigation to determine who was responsible for what the councilman called "this miscarriage of justice."
Authorities a year ago began investigating claims by a serial rapist who said he alone attacked the 28-year-old woman as she jogged in Central Park on April 19, 1989. DNA testing showed semen samples from the scene belonged to Matias Reyes and new forensic tests, more precise than those used a decade ago, failed to link the five convicted men to the rape.
Two weeks ago, District Attorney Robert Morgenthau cited that evidence in recommending that all convictions in the case be dropped.
Prosecutors have said they have no plans to retry any of the five.
Lawyers from the police detectives' union tried unsuccessfully to block Tejada's ruling be requesting an evidentiary hearing first.
The primary evidence in the case had been confessions that the five, all black and Hispanic boys ranging in age from 14 to 16 at the time, had made to detectives.
Supporters argued that the statements were coerced. Prosecutors also had no forensic evidence to link any of them to the crime scene.
The five, now ages 28 to 30, completed prison sentences ranging from 5 1/2 to 13 years on their convictions. Their lawyers have said they are considering lawsuits. 13 years is a long time to be in prison for a crime you didn't commit.
At the time of the attack, authorities said a roaming gang of youths was in the park for a night of "wilding" — randomly attacking anyone who came into their path.
The jogger, a white investment banker, was found near death in a puddle of mud and blood in the north end of the park. She was in coma for 12 days but eventually recovered. She now lives in a Connecticut suburb and works for a nonprofit organization and is expected to have a book out in April. During the trial, the prosecution introduced a brown t-shirt as evidence, with the explanation that the shirt was a common white t-shirt stained brown with the victim's blood.
Besides rape and assault convictions in connection with the jogger, the five also were convicted on charges including assault, robbery, sex abuse and rioting stemming from allegations they attacked and harassed other people in the park that night. A good example of witnesses concocting stories as a twisted form of sympathy or attention-getting?
Raymond Santana, Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson and Kharey Wise confessed on videotape. A detective testified at trial that Salaam made incriminating admissions to him but never on videotape.
Prosecutors earlier this month asked the court to void the convictions on the basis of the evidence against Reyes, including a semen sample that proved through DNA that he had assaulted the jogger. Reyes, 31, is serving time for murder and rape.
The ruling could clear the way for the release of Santana, who is currently imprisoned on an unrelated drug charge. Based on his conviction in the jogger case, he was sentenced as a prior felon, said his attorney, Roger Wareham.
Santana, serving a 3 1/2 to 7-year sentence, would be eligible for parole next July. A review of Santana's sentence is scheduled for Monday, and Wareham was calling for his immediate release
-
That is just sick.
Two trials, jury verdicts, other victims beaten and maimed in the same conviction (where victims positively identified attackers) - they count for nothing in the face of judicial activism. Those guys will have clear record.
There was not a shred of new evidence that juries and defendents' lawyers did not know about other than the word of a criminal who has nothing to lose - having life in prison and statute of limitation expired anyway.
Supporters argued that the statements were coerced.
Of course they were videotaped, made in the presence of parents or guardians according to the law, and the defendants actually boasted of what they've done.
miko
-
you'd confess to a brutal rape you did not commit on video why?
give them less than a year and they'll be back in the bighouse
-
Authorities a year ago began investigating claims by a serial rapist who said he alone attacked the 28-year-old woman as she jogged in Central Park on April 19, 1989. DNA testing showed semen samples from the scene belonged to Matias Reyes and new forensic tests, more precise than those used a decade ago, failed to link the five convicted men to the rape.
DNA doesn't lie.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
you'd confess to a brutal rape you did not commit on video why?
Because they were kids.
Well, that's what you get when no prove is required to decide whether someone is guilty or not. Add to that that uneducated normal people (at least without a university level degree in law) deciding based on whatever they want, you can get some stupid results. I don't think a case like this is an exception.
-
midnight Target: DNA doesn't lie.
Both juries knew all along that there was sperm that did not belong to any of the five accused. They knew all along that there was the sixth rapist - at least.
The DNA did not disprove any of the previous evidence.
They twice found them guilty on other evidence - their descriptions of the act, dirt and grass in their underwear, videotaped confessions/boasts in the presence of their lawyers and parents, etc.
How does knowing the name of that sixth rapist make any difference to their guilt?
How about the other victims beside the raped woman - beaten and kicked on the ground - those crimes were covered by the same trials. How come they are sudennly not guilty of aggravated assault? What, those victims count for nothing?
The scumbag's statute expired, he is in jail for life anyway. By testifying he got out of the boring jail cell for a few days and got some entertainment/publicity. What does he lose by taking all blame? He would do it for free - let alone for a pack of cigarettes of a few bucks.
Those guys get records cleared, one gets sentence reduced. Obviously a good insentive to pay the scumbag.
I am not saying they should rot in jail or whatever without consideration. But if there is really a new evidence, the case should have been retried, not thrown out.
miko
-
What about the female victim?..Did she say she was attacked by a swarming gang or a lone attacker?..Did she ID the youths?
:confused:
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
What about the female victim?..Did she say she was attacked by a swarming gang or a lone attacker?..Did she ID the youths?
:confused:
She suffered from amnesia and could not remember the attack.
BTW miko, there was a 6th teen convicted, but not tied to the rape of the woman. The "confessions" were actually implications of the other suspects. None said "yes I did it", all said "yes he did it".
No DNA evidence linked any of the convicted to the crime, but the DNA does link Mr. Reyes conclusively.
-
midnight Target: No DNA evidence linked any of the convicted to the crime..
Right. But that was known at the time of the trials.
but the DNA does link Mr. Reyes conclusively
That means he was there. It was always known the owner of the sperm was involved. How does attaching a name to a sperm prove they were not there?
There is only a word of a vicious criminal who has nothing to lose and plenty to gain by such admission.
The only new evidence pertaining to their guilt or innocence is just that - his unsubstantiated statement. I bet if he got caught and claimed being alone during the original trials, the case would not have been thrown out but would be continued. Even though there would have been more reasons to believe him.
miko
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
DNA doesn't lie.
Someone tell that to the OJ Jury.
-
Anyone want to guess if there is a big lawsuit coming soon from five "innocent" rapists? Sometimes the justice system makes me wanna throw up.
-
After seeing the Michelle Moore-Bosko story on Discovery I don't see how any US Court can rely on confessions to convict people.
-
Sometimes the justice system makes me wanna throw up.
Um, Steve?
Aren't YOU part of the Justice System?
-
The case was revisited earlier this year when convicted rapist and murderer Matias Reyes confessed that he alone had raped the woman in Central Park on April 19, 1989. DNA evidence backed up Reyes' confession. No other biological evidence was left at the crime scene.
Reyes was never questioned at the time of the crime. But The New York Times is reporting that an NYPD sex crimes detective in 1989 had determined Reyes to be a prime suspect in another Central Park rape that occurred just two nights before the April 19th attack.
But, the Times reports, the detective was soon transferred to another case. Reyes was never questioned. He would go on to rape and kill one woman and rape three more on the Upper East Side. He was never linked to the Central Park Jogger case, which at the time was considered a closed case.
A reconstruction of the night of the crime by the New York Times has also displayed a significant conflict: at the time the jogger was believed to have been attacked, the police also claimed that the teenagers were involved in muggings elsewhere in the park. But no evidence beyond the tainted videotaped confessions implicate the boys in the muggings either.
Just possible that they were innocent of this crime huh?
-
No doubt they were a bunch of little salamanders but they were probably innocent of this particular crime (although probably guilty of others).
-
midnight Target: Just possible that they were innocent of this crime huh?
Always possible. After all, we had two human juries consider that case, not God himself. It is supposed to be for a jury to decide, not for any judge if a person is guilty or innocent.
"tainted videotaped confessions"
Did it become tainted after defence examined those and jury made conclusions based on them? Here is a case for mistrial. No need to wait for Matias Reyes to be caught.
"at the time the jogger was believed to have been attacked, the police also claimed that the teenagers were involved in muggings elsewhere in the park"
Here is a contradiction right away - how could they be involved in muggings? I mean, if you are involved in one mugging, you cannot be involved in the second one at the same time. So since they were involved in several, they could not have been involved in any one - being elsewhere on another mugging which they could not commit either because of yet another one...
I wonder why the defence did not point that out to the juries?
Anyway, I am sure that if they were still in jail - or could sue the city for damages because of unlawfull imprisonment (which they cannot since they cooperated in their own conviction by admitting the guilt, among other reasons), the prosecutors would have gone for another trial. Since they have already served their sentences, prosecutors just decided not to bother and the law be damned...
They may be innocent - sure. We have the word of two juries against his. The criminals now have a great way to escape punishment - which they would have learned sooner had they read "The Godfather" - desperate criminal assuming the guilt.
miko
-
Miko..your not covering the case very closely...
Attacks that the 5 where known to be at because of the victims testimony made it near imposible to be at the rape of that woman..
Its not like there was varios un identified sperm recovered from the victum. there was only one persons recovered. and that was the man who has now confesed.
There was no physical evidence that multiple people attacked her.
You say there is no new evidence that they are inocent of the rape..but there was never any evidence that they were guilty of it exept their coerced testimony.
Where they guilty of other things..yes they were . But they werent convicted of those things because they would have not been able to be convicted of the rape as the commiting of both crimes was physically impossible.
They did enough time for the swarming attacks. they should not have the rape on their records if they didnt commit it.
its pretty clear to me...
-
I hope you guys realize that there have been thousands of cases of people being imprisoned when they were truely innocent.
Quite a few cases where white victims have 'postively identified' the black assailents have been erroneous. Its harder to identify a person of another race than it is to identify someone of your own race. I can think of one case where a black guy was in prison for 7 years before DNA evidence proved he was innocent.
Do I have confidence in the legal system? Nope- I put my trust in expensive lawyers.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
After seeing the Michelle Moore-Bosko story on Discovery I don't see how any US Court can rely on confessions to convict people.
My thoughts too.
Coerced confessions are too easy to get, and police to often use badly flawed methods of getting thos confessions.
-
All the more reason to carry a gun, kill your attacker so they don't sue for wrongful imprisonment.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Um, Steve?
Aren't YOU part of the Justice System?
MT, you would not believe some of the toejam I have seen taking place in the "justice" system. Innocent guys sent away for years in prison or guilty diddlying rapists walking because the vicitim is too scared to testify. Working inside the justice system just strips you of any illusions you might have had about "right and wrong" and generally makes you lose faith in humanity.
-
I wonder what any of you would do, had you been arrested in the park that day.
-
Let's sum it up: The legal system in the US sucks.
-
let's say the victim was your daughter...
Would you consider vigilantism? Please don't use a gun tho.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
let's say the victim was your daughter...
Would you consider vigilantism? Please don't use a gun tho.
lazs
becoming Charles Bronson in Death Wish (http://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=A12933) would be a real possibility
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
MT, you would not believe some of the toejam I have seen taking place in the "justice" system. Innocent guys sent away for years in prison or guilty diddlying rapists walking because the vicitim is too scared to testify. Working inside the justice system just strips you of any illusions you might have had about "right and wrong" and generally makes you lose faith in humanity.
Yikes!
Is this why Sweden has the worlds highest suicide rate?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Yikes!
Is this why Sweden has the worlds highest suicide rate?
Thats a myth.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Thats a myth.
I stand corrected... last time I believe the Guiness Book of World Records :)
Suicide rates
A persistent myth about Sweden is that its citizens are exceptionally prone to suicide. It is true that Sweden's suicide rate is above the world average. But it is not the highest, and has been steadily declining in recent decades. Below, the rates per 100,000 Males/Females in selected countries during 1994-95:
33.0/11.9 Austria
29.3/15.6 Denmark
31.6/11.5 France
55.5/16.8 Hungary
22.2/09.5 Sweden
30.9/12.2 Switz.
19.6/04.6 U.S.A.
-
Pongo: Miko..your not covering the case very closely...
Right. But I am sure the two juries were.
there was only one persons recovered. and that was the man who has now confesed.
And the jurys knew that.
but there was never any evidence that they were guilty of it exept their coerced testimony.
And the juror's and defending lawyers knew that too.
The case is not overturned because the testimony was proved coerced - despite presence of lawyers/guardians.
The testimony is claimed coerced becasue the case is overturned. If they are declared innocent, surely, the testimony cannot be correct. And surely that makes police the criminals.
That's the whole purpose of having a court proceedings and a jury - to determine guilt or innocence. Judge can declare the trial invalid - but not determine guilt.
Where they guilty of other things..yes they were . But they werent convicted of those things because they would have not been able to be convicted of the rape as the commiting of both crimes was physically impossible.
Plainly the both juries were sure - unanimously - that the perpetrators had time to accomplish all of those things.
They did enough time for the swarming attacks. they should not have the rape on their records if they didnt commit it.
They are cleared of either, not just the rape.
s pretty clear to me...
You must have some special perception. We, the mortals, have to rely on jury's verdict. Surely, they may be innocent - and found such by the next jury.
We even agree that a person may be legally guilty while really innocent becasue of a jury mistake.
I never said those guys were innocent - I was not there.
It's just that declaring their trial invalid - for whatever reason - does not clear their names. It makes them "not innocent until proven guilty" again but still suspects.
For whatever reasons the DA may prefer not to press charges against them - big mistake.
Even though they served their term, the stupid masses and crooked politicians equate overturning the verdict with proving the innocence - and crime of the police.
Fow all I know, police may be criminals. Let's have a trial and if the juty acquits based on whatever "new" evidence. Then we should really go after police rather than leave it hanging...
My personal opinion that the "new" evidence is nothing new. Of course when dealing with human lives it's better to err on the side of presunmption of innocense - overthrow on technicality, however irrelevant it seems to me - and retry.
If we do not retry for any other reasons, we should not make the same conclusions as if they were formally acquitted.
miko
-
You seem to value process over justice. I guess we disagree on that.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
You seem to value process over justice. I guess we disagree on that.
You seem to think that there is such a thing as justice in the legal system. You are wrong.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
You seem to value process over justice. I guess we disagree on that.
Without due process.. period.
Perhaps we should look back on chatue D'if as an example of "justice" as you see it, You can punish people just because you can beat a confession out of them.
perhaps you should re-evaluate your morality.
-
Pongo: You seem to value process over justice. I guess we disagree on that.
Not at all. I want justice for all - including the police officers who's careers are being ruined as we speak. And NYC population who's police department is getting demoralised and dismantled.
There must be a trial of someone to resolve the issue - of those five or of the policemen who "fabricated" the confessions. I have no problem if some policemen are found gulty and thrown out - then we can be sure the police dept. is clean and let them get on with their job.
miko
-
This is rich...so now the cops beat the confessions out of the rapists too huh?
-
DOODY: You can punish people just because you can beat a confession out of them.
You can beat any confessions you want - if the lawyer was not present - and a parent/guardian in case of a minor, like this case - they will not be admitted as evidence.
miko
-
Lost track of your point now miko.
So you want to put the Cops on trial for coercing the accused now? Is that what your saying?
-
My point is that a judge does not determine guilt or innocence - only a jury does.
Some people here in New York do not want to be content with the fact that the verdict was overturned. They treat it as determination of innocence and proof or a crime commited by some other people - and a pretext for a witchhunt.
I would surely want a trial for anyone seving as a policeman and being accused of coercing the admition. I do not want a corrupted police.
Alternatively, if those five were retried now and found guilty again, it would clear the policemen as well.
miko
-
But judges determine guilt all the time. If the person elects trial by judge instead of Jury.