... and that was ponderous to me considering some of the evidence. First, the brutality of the crime - a young woman gang raped and nearly beaten to death with a pipe to the point where even today she has some cognitive problems - grabbed headlines nationwide.
The five young men charged with the crime all confessed. It seemed so open and shut. But there were problems. All five confessions told different accounts of the crime. The crime scene itself showed that there was not enough room for five suspects. And most concerning, the DNA evidence from the crime matched none of the suspects. The prosecution's explanation -there must be a sixth rapist that they didn't catch. The victim herself could not help with any ID because she had been unconscious throughout the attack.
What was not clear to me is how much of this the jury that convicted the five got to hear. Back in 1990, DNA was new, and not really understood by the public like it is today. All five were convicted on all counts and got fairly short sentences considering the brutality of the crime - 5 to 10 years - mainly because all but one was a minor.
In 2002, the actual rapist crossed paths with one of the Central Park Five in prison - they had a short conversation - and the actual rapist began to talk to other cellmates about how these other people were doing time for a rape he had done. It was only then that investigators interviewed him, found his DNA matched that at the crime scene, and that his confession matched every detail of the crime and cleared up some details of the crime that the police had never been able to figure out. Very quickly thereafter the Central Park Five had their convictions vacated. Yes, they could go back to their lives, but they had lost half their teens and all of their 20's. As you get older you realize the worst thing you can waste or be robbed of is time.
There were a few eyebrow raising moments besides the obvious ones. For one, the alibi of the Central Park Five was that they had been beating up and harassing people in another part of Central Park at the time the rape was committed, so these kids were hardly Sunday school teachers. The second eyebrow raising moment was when one African American journalist said that the black community turned against the five because many had been "harassed, raped, pushed around, and pocket book snatched" by young black males. I'm sorry, but what crime does not belong in this list? As long as a community does not see rape as the ultimate violation of a human being, just shy of murder, then any conversation about crime and punishment is probably going to have a disconnect. Then there was Donald Trump (yes THAT Trump) putting full page ads wanting the death penalty. I mean - Really? the woman was not dead, the suspects were minors.
I'd recommend this documentary. It just lets the participants and the facts speak for themselves, like Ken Burns' documentaries usually do. Definitely worth looking at if you remember the crime but only faintly remember the exoneration.
The five young men charged with the crime all confessed. It seemed so open and shut. But there were problems. All five confessions told different accounts of the crime. The crime scene itself showed that there was not enough room for five suspects. And most concerning, the DNA evidence from the crime matched none of the suspects. The prosecution's explanation -there must be a sixth rapist that they didn't catch. The victim herself could not help with any ID because she had been unconscious throughout the attack.
What was not clear to me is how much of this the jury that convicted the five got to hear. Back in 1990, DNA was new, and not really understood by the public like it is today. All five were convicted on all counts and got fairly short sentences considering the brutality of the crime - 5 to 10 years - mainly because all but one was a minor.
In 2002, the actual rapist crossed paths with one of the Central Park Five in prison - they had a short conversation - and the actual rapist began to talk to other cellmates about how these other people were doing time for a rape he had done. It was only then that investigators interviewed him, found his DNA matched that at the crime scene, and that his confession matched every detail of the crime and cleared up some details of the crime that the police had never been able to figure out. Very quickly thereafter the Central Park Five had their convictions vacated. Yes, they could go back to their lives, but they had lost half their teens and all of their 20's. As you get older you realize the worst thing you can waste or be robbed of is time.
There were a few eyebrow raising moments besides the obvious ones. For one, the alibi of the Central Park Five was that they had been beating up and harassing people in another part of Central Park at the time the rape was committed, so these kids were hardly Sunday school teachers. The second eyebrow raising moment was when one African American journalist said that the black community turned against the five because many had been "harassed, raped, pushed around, and pocket book snatched" by young black males. I'm sorry, but what crime does not belong in this list? As long as a community does not see rape as the ultimate violation of a human being, just shy of murder, then any conversation about crime and punishment is probably going to have a disconnect. Then there was Donald Trump (yes THAT Trump) putting full page ads wanting the death penalty. I mean - Really? the woman was not dead, the suspects were minors.
I'd recommend this documentary. It just lets the participants and the facts speak for themselves, like Ken Burns' documentaries usually do. Definitely worth looking at if you remember the crime but only faintly remember the exoneration.