They are guilty - The Central Park Five (2014) Discussion

[–] movie_fan59 12 years ago

Proves?

She proved nothing. She conveniently ignores the fact that these "confessions" were extracted from the four suspects (Salaam never confessed on video) only after long hours of interrogation and trickery on the part of the interrogators.

The detectives told each of the five that the others had implicated them in the crime. "Tell us what happened and you can go home."

The DNA evidence proves that Mattias Reyes committed the rape. He said he acted alone. The physical evidence doesn't indicate a multi-person attack.

Coulter proved nothing.

Jules Winnfield: "I'm sorry, did I break your concentration?"

reply

[–] jimmyberluti1 12 years ago

And the Wichita Massacre never happen.

reply

[–] movie_fan59 12 years ago

The Wichita Massacre happening or not happening has nothing to do with the fact Ann Coulter's rant didn't prove sh!t.

Vader: I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Tarkin: Enough of this! Vader, release him!

reply

[–] dimestore12 12 years ago

People have a hard time understanding that someone may confess to a crime they didn't commit after long hours of intense interrogation, the dilemma of constantly being pressured by one of your weaker buddies cracking and implicating you, and the "deals" and outright lies police officers will use to get what they want from you. With our justice system, you are taking the chance on how many years you will be incarcerated if you plead not-guilty and lose, and few lawyers would have you try to fight the false confessions of your weak-minded friends who have already plead guilty.

However, it has happened many times, and after decades in jail DNA evidence is just about the only thing that frees these people.

I suggest anyone interested read-up on the Norfolk Four, as well.

reply

[–] marbleann 12 years ago

My father was a NYPD Homicide Detective. He had told me and I am sure if any of you people know people in law enforcement will tell you that it is fairly easy to get young people to confess. Heck a lot of them are scared and just want to go home and if they are told they probably can go home if they tell what happened after a while they will. Cops know the tactics to get to young people.

Oh and if anybody thinks it is not possible for a person to confess they are guilty of a crime they did not commit all one has to do is read about the Charles Stewart case in Boston. The one a guy claimed a black man had shot him and his wife on the way to Lamaze class. The cops went into the black area of town and the cops eventually found a man to confess. Well it turns out that the husband killed his wife, his brother admitted he had helped him. Stewart committed suicide by jumping off a bridge. The woman who was killed family was so outraged how the police had rounded up black men and ogt one to confess that they actually started a fund in their daughters name to help inner city kids in Boston.

Anybody who does not think these guys are innocent of this crime is living in a alternate universe, the one that the Extremists that Mitty appealed to live in. Those folks are practically foaming in the mouth and to give them any credence by even acknowledging any of that mumbo jumbo they spew, stop. Lunatics do not listen. They sound nutty I have to hope they must be pulling our leg.

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

Oh and if anybody thinks it is not possible for a person to confess they are guilty of a crime they did not commit all one has to do is read about the Charles Stewart case in Boston. The one a guy claimed a black man had shot him and his wife on the way to Lamaze class. The cops went into the black area of town and the cops eventually found a man to confess.

This is like shooting fish in a barrel. Here's a tip: Everyone here has the internet, so you can't just pull facts out of your ass.

The case you are talking about is the Carol Stuart murder. She was shot and killed by her husband Charles Stuart, who then shot himself in the abdomen and told the police they had been shot by a black man in an attempted carjacking.

The man the police took in for questioning was Willie Bennet, a man who had already served 13 years in prison for various crimes, including shooting a police officer. He never confessed to anything. He was never charged with the murder of Carol Stuart, even though Charles Stuart identified him as the killer in a police lineup. The only person who confessed in this case was Charles' brother Matthew, who 16 days after the murder told police that Charles had killed his wife. Before the police could get to Charles he killed himself by jumping off the Tobin Bridge in Chelsea.

So no, the police didn't force an innocent black man to confess to a crime he didn't commit in the Carol Stuart murder, and your garbled story proves nothing.

And yes, the Central Park Five are still guilty.

reply

[–] marbleann 12 years ago

I do not engage in any type of dialogue with people who live in a Alternate Universe. Take a pill and get some help. Perhaps we will allow you back on the planet Earth if you try really, really hard. Ignore.

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

I do not engage in any type of dialogue with people who live in a Alternate Universe. Take a pill and get some help. Perhaps we will allow you back on the planet Earth if you try really, really hard. Ignore.

So in other words, you can't refute anything I wrote so you started babbling incoherent gibberish about alternate universes. It's like your mind just snapped when faced with the cold hard shock of reality.

reply

[–] daimposter 12 years ago

The CP5 are still guilty? Go f*#% yourself.

Look up the West Memphis Three. Look up the Norfolk Four. These are cases where false confessions occured. In the Norfolk Four case, they got one guy to confess and name another person, that person then confessed and named another, who then confessed and named another. None of them were involved at all, no evidence at all, and the evidence only suggested one criminal and not four!.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norfolk_Four

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three

How about you just google 'false confession cases". It happens all the time. In fact, one study of 250 people that had their cases overturned from DNA evidence, 40 of them had falsely confessed.

http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/11/why-innocent-men-make-false-confessions/

reply

[–] kute_lokita 10 years ago

Vampyrebat66.. how are the central park five still guilty? They are guilty of harassing people that night but not of rape and attempted murder.

Since you love to read articles online, read about Michael Crowe.. he too was FORCED into confessions, so yes it happens, the police know many tactics to convince young people to confess to crimes they did not commit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc

reply

[–] kute_lokita 10 years ago

dimestore12... Agreed! Watch this video. I remember watching this on television, 14 year old boy confessed to killing his sister, however, it was coerced into confession... hmmmm.. sounds quite similar to this case:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc

reply

[–] ciocio-2 12 years ago

If you're using Ann Coulter as your source, you're setting yourself up as a fool, and one with bad taste, to boot.

Multiplex: 100+ shows a day, NONE worth watching. John Sayles' latest: NO distribution. SAD.

reply

[–] jimmyberluti1 12 years ago

Your a fool to ignore the proof right under your nose.

reply

[–] movie_fan59 12 years ago

There was no proof in Coulter's rant.

And the real fool is someone who doesn't know the difference between "Your" and "You're"

Vader: I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Tarkin: Enough of this! Vader, release him!

reply

[–] !!!deleted!!! (23224857) 12 years ago

"Your" a fool...

Moron.

Time Machine For Sale! Call two weeks ago for details

reply

[–] the_la_baker 10 years ago

Coulter
Understands
Nothing,
Twit.

reply

[–] lovece7 12 years ago

The man who actually committed the crime came forward in 2002 and confessed. All you had to do was Google the case to find out. Not that difficult. Unfortunately, you're too blinded by hate.

reply

[–] jazinegrrrl 12 years ago

Exactly, lovece7! None of these people want to admit they were wrong. This case brought out some of the worst in human nature, and to me, a lot of closet white racists showed their true colors. I remember the blood hungry frenzy when this case first came to light. People were losing their mind with blood lust.

It is amazing how under the radar the acquittal of these men in comparison to the media blitz that was occurring during their conviction.

reply

[–] jimmyberluti1 12 years ago

They are guilty of hate crimes.

reply

[–] Stan_Kubricks_Mentor 12 years ago

YOU'RE guilty of being a rightwing reactionary sheet-for-brains.

_________________________________________

"If you really want something in life you have to work for it. Now quiet, they're about to announce the lottery numbers."
Homer Simpson

reply

[–] activista 12 years ago

You do know that NOBODY takes ANYTHING Ann Coulter says seriously, right? Hell, even right-wingers have kind of pushed her away because she's too extreme (and f**ing insane) even for them. Get real--she hasn't proved jack,otherwise they never would have gotten out of prison to begin with, because they didn't commit the crime.

reply

[–] jimmyberluti1 12 years ago

can you say O.J?

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

Ann Coulter is nuts, but even a broken clock is right twice in a 24 hour period. These scumbags were guilty in 1989 and they're still guilty today. All five of them confessed. Four of the confessions were videotaped. Three of them confessed with their adult relatives present, and all of them implicated the others. They knew the location of the crime and were able to describe the jogger's outfit. Who cares if Matias Reyes is now claiming he acted alone? He's a serial rapist and murderer serving a life-sentence in prison. Are you thinking "Oh sure, he raped some women and killed a 24 year-old mother he had just raped while her three little kids were in the same apartment, but I'm sure he'd never tell a lie."

reply

[–] lastmidnite2 12 years ago

Then how do you explain that the only dna evidence was Reyes's?

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

Then how do you explain that the only dna evidence was Reyes's?

The police don't have magical powers, it is entirely possible that they missed DNA evidence. You don't need DNA evidence for a conviction, in this case the incriminating testimony of the defendants themselves was enough for the jury to find them guilty.

reply

[–] Stan_Kubricks_Mentor 12 years ago

Face it: you're living in your lividness from 1989. I was around when this occurred and I said burn them...... THE DIFFERENCE being I ran across this case in 2003 AGAIN and I was utterly amazed when I read about the whole thing FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AWAY FROM THE RAGE OF 1989 and I realized that the 5 teens had been badly burned by law enforcement and the judicial system...... yeah they should have gone to juvenile lockup for being a bunch of azzhole teens in Central Park that night but what happened to them so far as the Central Park Jogger case is an affront to the United States Constitution. AND, if YOU bother to (do yourself the favor of actually) reading up about the WHOLE sordid case then you would then find out that the actual perpetrator "matias reyes" had left a trail of evidence showing that there was a serial rapist running amok in the East Side but the NYPD detectives didn't bother to check to see if the "Central Park Rape" crime might have something to do with previous rapes in the East Side BECAUSE THEY WERE CERTAIN OF THE CRIMINALITY OF THE FIVE "animals"...... AS A RESULT MATIAS REYES WENT ON TO COMMIT SEVERAL MORE HEINOUS RAPES.

YOU should try to get over YOUR BUILT IN HATRED and face up to facts and reality....

_________________________________________

"If you really want something in life you have to work for it. Now quiet, they're about to announce the lottery numbers."
Homer Simpson

reply

[–] lastmidnite2 12 years ago

Thanks. You said exactly what I was thinking. People just don't want to admit they could have been wrong, and persist in their hatred. They actually revel in it. Bizarre. And sad.

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

YOU should try to get over YOUR BUILT IN HATRED and face up to facts and reality....

My built in hatred? Are you playing the racist card already? Maybe you should try to get over your love affair with the caps-lock on your keyboard. It makes you look like a hysterical idiot.

Here is a little quote from an article from the New York Daily News back in September 11, 2002.

An ex-detective who investigated the Central Park jogger case says talk of clearing the five defendants convicted of the crime is "ridiculous."

Mike Sheehan, now a TV correspondent for Fox Channel 5, defended the original probe yesterday despite DNA evidence that links the rape to another man not among those charged with the crime 13 years ago.

Sheehan also denied that the youths' confessions were coerced or obtained by trickery.

They confessed "to a lady prosecutor . . . on videotape in detail" in front of their parents and guardians, he said. "Where's the coercion?"

And here is a quote from Mark Goldblatt's excellent article in the National Review from December 2002.

On the night of April 19, 1989, just after 9 o'clock, it is certain, absolutely certain, that Kevin Richardson, 14, Raymond Santana, 14, Yusef Salaam, 15, Antron McCray, 15, and Kharey Wise, 16, ran amok for a half hour across a quarter-mile stretch of Central Park — chasing after bicyclists, assaulting pedestrians, and (in two separate incidents) pummeling two men into unconsciousness with a metal pipe, stones, punches, and kicks to the head. The teens later confessed on videotape to these attacks — which they couldn't have known about unless they had participated. As recently as this year, Richardson and Santana again acknowledged their roles in these crimes.

It is certain that within that same half-hour, in that same quarter-mile stretch, a woman later known as the Central Park Jogger was struck over the head with a metal pipe or tree branch, stomped, kicked and cut up, and dragged 225 feet across the grass to a ravine — where she was raped and left for dead. (She was actually pronounced dead four hours later, her skull fractured and two-thirds of her blood puddling on the ground.) It's now also certain that Matias Reyes, 19, was present at the scene; Reyes, currently imprisoned for serial rape and murder, has recently confessed to the crime, and his semen has been identified on the jogger's sock.

It is certain that cops, responding to reports of multiple assaults, picked up the five teens — who had split up following their adventures — and that the teens began to implicate one another immediately. At 10:30, riding in a squad car, Richardson blurted out: "Antron did it." The cops didn't know what he was talking about because the jogger's body had not yet been found. When they asked Richardson what he meant, he replied, "The murder." Meanwhile, in another squad car, when a cop scolded Santana that he ought to be at home with his girlfriend rather than in the park terrorizing people, Santana snickered, "I already had mine." Afterwards, in their holding cells, the teens launched into a raucous rendition of Tone Loc's sexually charged hip-hop anthem, "Wild Thing." It was this phrase, misheard by a police reporter as "wilding," which is the genesis of the now-infamous verb.

The fact is I have read quite extensively about this case. Certain people (the makers of this film, for instance) make a great deal of money by turning these five thugs into their cause célèbre. It's not important to the filmmakers whether the "Central Park Five" are guilty or not. What's important to them is making a successful film by portraying these vile scum as the innocent victims of a racist society. Of course if you point out that the facts don't back up their story they conveniently claim that you must be a racist to not agree with their politically-correct fantasy version of events.

But seriously, they're still guilty.

reply

[–] bluesy 12 years ago

So a FOX Correspondent and National Review are your sources for objectivity on this? Two extremely rightwing sources which dont hide their disdain for minorities and blacks as such (both viciously anti-Obama). Yes, that surely makes them credible. Why didnt you just quote some Ku Klux Klan members saying these black men were guilty? It would have just as much "credibility" LOL

So NO, they're most certainly NOT guilty, DNA evidence trumps any testimonies (you can be scared into saying anything even with parents along, the police methods of obtaining such testimonies have an ugly and long history in USA, especially when the accused are black, native american or some other minority. And i'm a white person saying this, but at least i can see the truth unlike you. The same reason why the West Memphis 3 were freed. DNA. Get it?

"Cinema is the most beautiful fraud in the world."

reply

[–] vampyrebat666 12 years ago

Why didnt you just quote some Ku Klux Klan members saying these black men were guilty? It would have just as much "credibility" LOL

So not supporting Obama now equals Ku Klux Klan? That's the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long, long time. You do realize there are African Americans in the Republican party, don't you?

But then your next sentence gets even more idiotic, when you say "DNA evidence trumps any testimonies". Obviously, you don't understand the concept of evidence. Just because they found evidence that Matias Reyes was at the crime scene does not prove that the five others were not at the crime scene. The fact that all five suspects testified against each other (while simultaneously trying to downplay their own involvement), coupled with the fact that they were able to provide details about the crime scene, details they couldn't have known if they weren't there, that is the evidence they were guilty.

If you think police could get all five of the suspects to make a detailed confession to a rape and brutal assault that they didn't commit, in front of their parents and while being videotaped, then you are delusional. Unfortunately this seems to be a popular delusion, at least among white liberals such as yourself.

Interestingly enough, Ken Burns is now fighting the lawyers for New York City, who have subpoenaed him to provide them with outtakes from his film. Here's a link to the story in the Hollywood Reporter. (But then again, the Hollywood Reporter is probably a far-right source that is no more credible than the Ku Klux Klan, right?)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/ken-burns-refuses-hand-centra l-389470

The lawyers for NYC want to use those outtakes as evidence against the Central Park Five, who are suing the city for 50 million dollars. Now why do you suppose the lawyers from City Hall want those outtakes, and why do you suppose Ken Burns is fighting so hard not to let them have this footage? If they're as innocent as he portrays them in his film, then all the information should help their case, right? Well, maybe not.

When you make a movie where you have five guys who are obviously guilty of a truly monstrous crime, and you're trying to make them seem like poor, innocent victims, then you're going to have to do an awful lot of tricky editing. You're going to have to throw away a lot of the things that you film, because a lot of it is going to make these guys look like what they are, which is guilty. Ken Burns probably doesn't care who wins the lawsuit, but if that kind of footage got out it might damage his reputation as a crusader for justice, and expose him as an opportunistic charlatan.

So yeah, they're still guilty, and I don't care if you call me names. I don't care if you think I'm a right-wing psycho who goes to tea-party rallies and watches Fox News, and I don't care how long you hold your breath either. Facts are facts, these scumbags were guilty in 1989, they'll always be guilty, and this movie is a lie that panders to the most revolting politically-correct paranoid delusions.

reply

[–] kute_lokita 10 years ago

What Mike Sheehan forgot to mention was his interrogation with the teens in the precinct for nearly 24 hours WITHOUT adults.. Way to cover your ass... Keep getting that pension, but I guess the five will be millionaires thanks to this stupid mistake.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kute_lokita 10 years ago

Vampyrebat666.. actually they didn't know the location of the crime. They didn't have any DNA. There was so much blood from the victim yet, all five teens were clean of blood, no spatter on clothes, shoes, hands, finger nails. The detectives couldn't match the weapon to any of the confessions.

And they were only video taped AFTER being interrogated WITHOUT AN ADULT PRESENT by corrupt detectives who just wanted to close a case (looks better on their records). They interrogated these teens for over 24 hours and noted that if they point to one of the guys they get to walk out of there. It happened in 1989, in New York City where it was filled with crack corners, hookers, robberies, crimes, murders. The serial East Side rapist was on the loose (oh wait wasn't that who did the crime?) And if you're familiar with how corrupt and reckless NYC was during that time, I can only imagine the number of people who are currently serving life in prison for crimes they didn't commit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLHXKHb1Vc

reply

[–] rindercella 12 years ago

Ann C is the biggest b on the planet, and anyone that would believe ANYTHING conspiracy theorists on Faux Noise is plain ol' stupid.

Proven by the last election how dumb they are.

They are innocent.

reply

[–] MurderInc2014 12 years ago

A guy already confessed to this thing, WTF is the controversy here?

People are f@cking morons....Ann Coulter for christsakes?lol.....my god these f@kin Faux News bubble idiots, where do they grow 'em?

reply

[–] Maglir 12 years ago

Anyone who still thinks these five people are guilty of this crime in spite of the undeniable facts is morally no better and just as ignorant as a Holocaust denier.
I'm a New Yorker who lived through those times back in '89. I thought they were guilty, and I was screaming for blood. But now, being a human being with the ability to reason, I have changed my mind. People like Ann Coulter and the OP make me sick.

reply

[–] daimposter 12 years ago

You are a terrible and racist person. Not just because you think the CP5 are guilty but because you follow and take advise from Ann Coulter.

reply

[–] jimmyberluti1 12 years ago

You are a racist. This was a hateful hatecrime. Apparently you don't care if these savages raped that white woman.

reply

[–] daimposter 12 years ago

Terrible terrible person you are. And way to use a strawman argument.

reply