Posted on 12/10/2002 9:18:04 AM PST by mrustow
On December 5, I sent the following letter to the New York Times. You can bet the ranch the newspaper, which stopped printing my letters five years ago, will never publish it.
To the Editor:
In your December 6 editorial ("Injustice in the Jogger Case") supporting Manhattan D.A. Robert Morgenthau's call to exonerate the five men convicted in the 1989 Central Park Jogger case, you write, "Fair-minded people are appalled by the prosecutorial missteps and overreaching that led to the faulty convictions of five teenagers..."
I submit that fair-minded people who have followed the case since its bloody inception, are appalled that a public servant would cave in to racial extremists who demonized the victim, and who never wanted any non-whites to be punished for this heinous crime. The boys were questioned and confessed in front of their parents, implicating themselves and each other. They were guilty as hell, and prosecutors worked heroically, in the face of constant racial harassment and threats. The police always knew that they had not caught all of the attackers.
On April 19, 1989, dozens of young men assumed that they could terrorize people based on the color of their skin. Thirteen years later, Robert Morgenthau and the New York Times have told them that they were right, all along. Injustice, indeed. Shame on both of you.
Signed,
Nicholas Stix
Not according to Yusef Salaam, whose accomplices said that he was the one who hit her in the head with a steel pipe, fracturing her skull, and causing her to lose all that blood. Ten years ago on 60 Mintues, he suggested that maybe the jogger was "faking" her injuries.
If you read the press at the time (particularly the NY Post which covered it daily and extensively), there was absolutely no doubt that all these scumbags were responsible.
Correct.
When they are all rotting in hell, they can roast marshmallows over their nice, toasty fire pit with the Carr Brothers.
It's truly frightening that a psychotic like Reyes can be taken "seriously" -- there was no way he did all that damage to the jogger himself. Now the rest of these ba$tards will sue the city, and reap millions for their "damages" they incurred.
Morgenthau's go-fer, Nancy Ryan, did not question a single detail of Reyes' story, his lack of details for most of the story, or his statemtn that he had not worked his way so far uptown. she actively obstruicted justice, by interrupting detectives when they tired to ask him questions, and telling other inmates in the same prison to refuse to cooperate with NYPD detectives who sought to investigate Reyes' credibility. Ryan also refused to interview the prosecutors and lead detectives from the case. the fix was in, from the get-go.
Note too that Reyes is a little guy, and was 17 or 18 at the time, and surely weighed a lot less than he does now, after 13 years in a taxpayer-financed, body-building program. No way did he drag a woman in superb condition, fighting for her life, 200 yards by himself.
Robert Morgenthau is a classic, patrician phony, the kind Harry Truman called a "high hat." He's full of sanctimony, but acts purely from expedience and the narrowest self-interest.
See then?
Only saving grace seems to me -- & as far as I'm concerned -- is that you first survived an attack by the kind of vicious monsters that city has been known to spawn.
Then next?
You survived the screwed up NYCity political scene, afterwards. [read: legal *system*]
For those two things -- & those two things alone -- I for one am grateful.
You could've wound-up like Bernie Getz. {sp?}
There're precious few who could tell you about what the, "truth" is concerning life in NYCity.
...that's all I'm going to say on the subject.
I think class warfare has a lot to do with it. New York socialists use racist, violent blacks and Hispanics to beat up on working-class and lower-middle-class whites, to help keep the whites in their place. (The destruction of standards in the City University system also has served that purpose, since CUNY was for generations the main route to the middle-class for talented but poor whites.)
It's not as if blacks READ the Times.
Ok. I get ya. I haven't been following these new developments to the case in every detail.
So how are they excluding the possibility that Reyes didn't act in concert with the other guys?
journalism and justice=politics
Does it have any at all?
Ya know, I thought it did.
I thought that the stuff they reported was true or at least they attempted to be accurate, but that they just left out the parts they didn't like. Here, I think they've crossed over the line. And that's why I think this may turn out to be more important than they might wish.
ML/NJ
1. By refusing to question any of countless gaps in Reyes' claims, or permitting him to be cross examined in a court of law.
2. By ignoring the self-incriminating statements of Yusef Salaam.
3. By ignoring the confessions of the other four boys, in addition to the bragging some made of having killed the jogger, before they found out she was still alive.
4. By ignoring the improbability of one small man having dragged a very athletic, if petite woman 200 yards against her will.
5. By thoroughly obstructing NYPD detectives' attempt to investigate Reyes, including telling other inmates to refuse to answer detectives' questions.
6. By refusing to interview the prosecutors and lead detectives from the original case.
The legal theory is actually sound -- the convictions were overturned based on the prosecutor's belief that if this evidence had been available at the time, the outcome of the trial would probably have been different.
This is not to defend the D.A. here -- in fact, he had absolutely no reason to throw out the other convictions that were handed down in that trial (for assault and battery by these young thugs during their "wilding" spree that night).
Interestingly, the defense attorneys truly botched the case because they had a perfect alibi for their clients. If they had constructed the timeline properly for that night, they could have shown that the thugs could not have raped that woman because they were busy assaulting people elsewhere in Central Park at the time.
In other words, they exposed the defendants to sentences of 10 years or more because they didn't want to effectively plead guilty to lesser offenses.
The "legal theory" may be proper. If justice has no meaning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.