31–40 of 83 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The perpetrator confessed after they were in prison.
In fact the supposed perpetrator confessed after he met at least one of the 5 in prison. I say supposed as he was never actually convicted of the crime.
I'm puzzled: did they actually put five people in jail, even though there was actually one perpetrator? Convicting the wrong person is one (terrifying) mistake, but making a five-fold mistake in the number of criminals is… incredible.
> The report concluded that the five men whose convictions had been vacated had "most likely" participated in the beating and rape of the jogger and that the "most likely scenario" was that "both the defendants and Reyes assaulted her, perhaps successively."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case#Armst...
I really resented my parents growing up because they would never let me play outside. I was raised in Central Brooklyn in the 90s and stories like The Central Park Five and Abner Louima were cautionary tales in our neighborhood. We were too broke for summer programs so I spent a lot of my summers watching daytime TV, playing video games and browsing the internet. Brooklyn has changed a lot since the Regan / Bush days…
I'm puzzled: did they actually put five people in jail, even though there was actually one perpetrator? Convicting the wrong person is one (terrifying) mistake, but making a five-fold mistake in the number of criminals is… incredible.
The Armstrong report is pretty clear in saying how likely it is the 5 were involved in the assault: > The report concluded that the five men whose convictions had been vacated had "most likely" participated in the beating and rape of the jogger and that the "most likely scenario" was that "both the defendants and Reyes assaulted her, perhaps successively." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_jogger_case#Armst.…
Wise, 16, wasn’t a suspect, but he agreed to go with his friend for moral support. He ended up being charged as well
No description of why he would be charged. Clearly a gross miscarriage of justice.
Armstrong report:
In addition, several statements were made by witnesses to officers investigating the incident and by the defendants, speaking outside the formal interrogation process, which directly contradict Reyes’s claim that he acted alone, and evidence the participation of the defendants. They include inculpatory statements by defendants Wise, Richardson and Santana both to police officers and to civilian witnesses who reported the statements to police. Santana and Richardson separately pointed out the location of the rape when brought to Central Park. When Wise was questioned, he made reference to a man named “Rudy” who took the jogger’s Walkman; the description of the jogger’s “Walkman pouch” was similar to Reyes’s description of a “fanny pack.” At the time of this interview, the police had no way of knowing that the jogger had a Walkman or that she carried it in a pouch. Wise also commented on the amount of blood at the spot where the rape occurred. When asked why he was so surprised by the amount of blood, he answered, “I knew she was bleeding but I didn’t know how bad she was. It was really dark. I couldn’t see how much blood there was at night.”
> Was what happened to the Central Park Five completely wrong, or simply incomplete? I read Sarah Burns’ book, The Central Park Five, expecting a plaintiff’s brief, and it is that—she was an intern for lawyers pursuing civil claims on their behalf as a college student, in the summer of 2003. She believes passionately that the Five hadn’t raped the jogger; she is more circumspect in her treatment of their other felonies: “At some point, the metal bar from Korey’s house that Yusef had carried in the park had been used to beat Laughlin.” She is enthusiastic in her support of Ryan’s assessment, but doesn’t include this quote on their conduct that night: “The other crimes committed on April 19 were grave and inexcusable—unprovoked attacks on strangers, apparently undertaken for the fun of it, which left some terrorized, two knocked into unconsciousness, and one seriously injured.”
Obviously that doesn’t justify the false conviction or some of the associated tactics. But it is important context. As we saw with “Making of a Murderer,” these investigations are complex. It’s easy to portray a one-sided narrative that obscures how the justice system can be led to the wrong result, to make it seem like this black box that capriciously chews up and spits out totally random people. Usually, when it happens, there is an explanation. The explanation might involve racism, or human error, or misconduct. But it’s almost never totally the result of those things.
I'm puzzled: did they actually put five people in jail, even though there was actually one perpetrator? Convicting the wrong person is one (terrifying) mistake, but making a five-fold mistake in the number of criminals is… incredible.
> I'm puzzled: did they actually put five people in jail, even though there was actually one perpetrator? It's actually a pretty complicated case. I'd recommend reading both the recommendation from Morgenthau to vacate the convictions[1] (which ended up happening) and the Armstrong report[2] (which came to the conclusion that the Central Park Five were most likely involved in the attack). Doctors involved in the case…
Are you saying the police found DNA of one or more of the five on the victim?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know you probably didn't mean mistake in this way, but for the record: the conviction was a mistake, but the corrupt investigation and aggressive prosecution were entirely intentional. NYC's criminal justice system is structured to produce these kinds of outcomes for minorities accused of crimes.
Stop-and-frisk is ongoing in New York despite years of data on the fact that police almost exclusively target young Black and Latino men and that the policy has little to no discernible effect on crime prevention or criminal apprehension. The NY branch of the ACLU is a good place to find a summary of the data[1], such as: "in 2011, Black and Latino New Yorkers made up 24 percent of the population in Park Slope, but 7…
It is only "radical" as a notion because they are in power - we wouldn't bat an eye at banning gang members from high trust jobs even if they were never convicted of anything - just being part of an organization party to such crimes makes them unworthy of the priveledge. So why treat this bad apple orchard any differently?
One of the things I hate about coverage of false convictions is that all the nuance gets lost. It’s important to note that the Central Park five were convicted of multiple attacks in the park, of which the rape of the jogger was one. Their responsibility for the other felonies are not seriously contested: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-myth-of-the-central-park-f... > Was what happened to the Central Park Five comp…
From the Armstrong Report:
We believe the inconsistencies contained in the various statements were not such as to destroy their reliability. On the other hand, there was a general consistency that ran through the defendants' descriptions of the attack on the female jogger: she was knocked down on the road, dragged into the woods, hit and molested by several defendants, sexually abused by some while others held her arms and legs, and left semiconscious in a state of undress.
Lots of discussions about whether they truly were guilty of this crime or another.
Not much being said about the fact that they were children and that even if they did commit another crime at another time or were witnesses to the crime or whatever, it's not necessarily a "good thing" that they were in jail long into adulthood.
Hacker News showing its true colors here.
I really resented my parents growing up because they would never let me play outside. I was raised in Central Brooklyn in the 90s and stories like The Central Park Five and Abner Louima were cautionary tales in our neighborhood. We were too broke for summer programs so I spent a lot of my summers watching daytime TV, playing video games and browsing the internet. Brooklyn has changed a lot since the Regan / Bush days…
To be clear, since it might not be obvious to some readers: the fear your parents had about playing outside is what the police might do to you, as opposed to concerns about crime or general violence, is that correct?
I understand the push for crime reduction policies, lots of minorities (who are victims of crimes themselves) wanted a tougher approach. Unfortunately the politics of the day was that the cruelest types of punishments won out. Three strikes and stop and frisk have devastated the community.