Central Park jogger's assailants exonerated.

A name from the past- the so-called "Central Park Jogger" case- came bubbling up from the past when it was reported that the four men convicted of the 1989 New York "Central Park jogger"' rape and attempted murder were not only had their convictions quashed but are due to receive multi-million dollar compesnation payouts for their years of unjust imprisonment.

Given that the five men- all juveniles at the time of their arrest and convictions- were either African American or Hispanic and that the so-called "jogger"( who has since revealed herself to be Patricia "Trisha" Meili, a Pittsburgh born investment banker and now motivational speaker) was white, the racist overtones of this case were and are obvious( esp the references to "wilding" as if the five youths were a pack of ravening beasts in the media)- although I am NOT imputing any racist prejudice to Ms,. Meili herself, only to journalists and

pundits.

Much like celebrated case of miscarriages of justice in my own country, "Birmingham Six" "Guildford Four" " Maguire Seven", there are no heroes in this sad story- only degrees of victims- one woman and five boys-whose lives have been indelibly marked by this case.

Anybody else think as I do?

Terry

I see no problem calling someone you believe is a rapist a ravening beast. Color doesn't/shouldn't matter. The only problem is the innocent until proven guilty thing and when it comes to something like sexual assault/rape/ harassment then most people behave like it's guilty until proven innocent regardless of color.

Given the fact that five men(four black and one Hispanic) were accused of the rape of a white woman were referred to as "wilding" her( behaving like ravening beasts) seems pretty much racist to me(when was the last time a white attacker was accused of acting like an animal- pack of animals)). Remember the "Scottsboro Boys" case in 1931 and all the cases of black boys/men lynched(and not just in the Deep South) after being accused of raping white women?

Terry

When was the last time. A few months ago in another rape case or how about the Duke Rape case. IIRC they were called a whole bunch of things. Even if it were true about some double standard which it's not. The question isn't why are these black rapists being called something but why are these white rapists not being called something. There is a big difference two questions. In a case like this it's the action that matter color shouldn't come into play by commentators. So if you're a rapist ya you deserve to be called whatever.

This is old news is it not?

The Central Park Five by Sarah burns is a fascinating account of what happened.

If it was old news, then it wouldn;t be reported full stop( many stories in newspapers deal with past topics). As for the Duke university footballers who were falsely accused of raping a (black girl), they were never convicted and hence did no jail time for a crime they never committed-unlike the four young men!

Terry

In this way you're comparison between the Jogger case and Duke case runs false in the fact that there were glaring warning signs to doubt the Duke accuser herself and her testimony. Still the Duke students were vilified by anyone before it finally came out and there was much resistance to believe that evidence that got them off. I'm saying this is true but it's feeling your jumping through hoops to prove your point. Which is odd because I only commented on one minor point you made and not the whole OP.

Great book and worth the read. Plus, the time frame of when this happened had a lot to do with how things turned out. Media sure can be scary.