# Central Park jogger case-- Two questions. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 21, 2002, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230 "2002-10-21T14:16:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/61 "2002-12-09T19:07:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Biggirl \* > \*\* > I think Scylla is still scarred by his run-in at the amusment park last summer. \*\* I think if you want to call me a racist, you should just do so. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/62 "2002-12-09T19:09:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SuaSponte \* > [B, if there had been no DNA (or other) evidence, both in logic and in law, the boys’ confusion would have trumped. > > Sua \*\* 😕 Ok, I’m guessing that confusion =confession, but I’m still not quite clear on what you’re saying. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/63 "2002-12-09T19:10:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by xenophon41 \* > \*\*Does the fact that the Manhattan D.A. has [officially agreed](http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/crim/nywiseetal120502aff.pdf) with the defense’s motion to vacate not constitute ‘a leg to stand on’? \*\* In my mind, yes. Reyes’ statement doesn’t mesh exactly with the facts either. I’m sure he raped her. I think the others were involved. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/64 "2002-12-09T19:16:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > \*\*. > > do you **ever** accept that wrongful convictions occur? \*\* No Wring. My belief that the five attacked the jogger in spite of Reyes’ coming forward is clearly indicative that I believe false convictions are always impossible, and that they never happen. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/65 "2002-12-09T19:18:05Z")
how were they involved? They left no physical trace on her, nor did they have any trace of her on them or their clothing. their stories didn’t match each other, nor the physical evidence. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/66 "2002-12-09T19:21:07Z")
**Scylla** spare me - I’m asking specifically - what exactly would it take for you to believe that they weren’t involved. my statement that you quoted doesn’t claim that you never would accept that false confessions occur. However, it does ask (but you don’t answer) under what circumstances you’d accept one as having happened. all of the stuff you posted about 'the jury evaluated the evidence, the judge allowed it blah blah blah ’ _is also true in all cases where a wrongful conviction occured_ so my question to you is still unanswered : under what circumstances would you accept that a wrongful conviction did occur (generally) and specifically in this case? ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/67 "2002-12-09T19:23:44Z")
**wring,** let me give you a scenario in tune with your life. Your son is 10. You come home to find a lamp smashed in your living room. You question your son, who denies it and says his friend did it. Your son’s friend (who you cannot punish) says, “uh, yeah, I did it.” Same scenario. This time your son tearfully confesses to you that he did it. For even the slightest moment would you doubt your son’s confession that he broke the lamp? OTOH, in the other scenario, would it occur to you, even in passing, that your son’s friend is covering for your son? Sua ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/68 "2002-12-09T19:30:17Z")
**Sua** , well, if the confession that my son gave was after several hours long interrogation, and after I corrected several specific miscues (no, it wasn’t the living room lamp, it was the one in the dining room), then, no I wouldn’t accept the confession. You work w/in the system, surely you know that false confessions occur, yes, even when they were made ‘against penal interest’ (as they always would be). So, no, the fact that some one else later confessed wouldn’t automatically mean the other didn’t do it, but when coupled with the fact that the 5 confessions weren’t consistent w/the physical evidence, nor with each other, that the one who did confess generally acted alone, and not in consort w/others, that the crime of the jogger **fit** his profile (only it wasn’t looked at before 'cause “They had the guys who did the jogger”), **and** the lack of physical evidence on the 5, but was there for the last guy, well, all of that combined seem to me to add up to: 5 false confessions, one guilty party got away with it. Seriously -given the extent of the damage to the jogger - how on earth was there **no** physical evidence linking her to them? (the hairs that had been linked originally have now been classified as ‘not theirs’). ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/69 "2002-12-09T19:32:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > \*\*how were they involved? They left no physical trace on her, You mean she wasn’t beaten into a bloody pulp and left for dead? > [@](#): > > nor did they have any trace of her on them or their clothing. Salaam’s underwear were dirty and grass stained with Semen in them, consistent with his claim to have dry humped her. The others simply fondled her, and hit her with various objects. > [@](#): > > \*\*their stories didn’t match each other, nor the physical evidence. \*\* No they don’t match exactly. Neither does Reyes’. He claims he took her velcro key holder. They were on a ring. He also claims she ran from him **after** he raped her. In fact he insists on it. This is an impossibility from the physical evidence. What I believe is that a gang of kids beat and assaulted this jogger, as well as attacking several other people that night, and that Reyes alone achieved penetration. I beleive that the kids were all lying to minimize their involvement, and that Reyes coming clean and saying that he acted alone when it is no longer punishable is not credible. He does potentially have something to gain admitting all this. He is guilty of many crimes. Taking responsibility for them and others that he was not convicted of would help him generate credibility for the premise that he is truly penitent and worthy of leniency, special treatment, or possibly parole. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/70 "2002-12-09T19:35:29Z")
**Sua** , how about a scenario closer to the facts of the case? You come home to find a street light smashed in front of your house. You find muddy tennis shoe tracks leading away from the scene, with blood mixed in to the right foot. You and your neighbors round up a group of 5 kids you’ve seen throwing rocks at neighborhood pets and running through backyard gardens. You separate them and question each individually without their parents present, giving them precise descriptions of how the streetlight must have been broken. After hours of questioning, each child confesses that they broke the streetlight as a gang activity. Although their stories don’t match in all details, none of their shoeprints match those at the scene, and none of them have a cut on their right foot, they are all punished based on their confessions. Two days later, a kid from the neighborhood down the block is found smashing streetlights. He has a healing cut on his right foot and his sneaker prints match those you found in front of your house. After he’s been punished, he tells his parents that he smashed your street light by himself two days ago. Who do you believe? ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/71 "2002-12-09T19:39:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > \*\* > so my question to you is still unanswered : under what circumstances would you accept that a wrongful conviction did occur (generally) and specifically in this case? \*\* Something more than simply finding the missing party that belonged to the semen. The juries **knew** that there was another party out there that had gotten away at the time they convicted these scum. They knew that the semen didn’t belong to any of those five. Reyes’ has nothing to lose, and things to gain by his confession. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/72 "2002-12-09T19:45:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*You mean she wasn’t beaten into a bloody pulp and left for dead? \*\* which was widely publicized. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > Salaam’s underwear were dirty and grass stained with Semen in them, consistent with his claim to have dry humped her. > > The others simply fondled her, and hit her with various objects. \*\* and left **zero** hairs on her? picked up **zero blood** on themselves? what about the (false) claim that she’d been stabbed w/scissors? the dirty underwear/grass stained is also consistent w/her being raped in the park. semen consistent only with Reyes. Physical evidence is not linked to the 5, is linked to Reyes. > [@](#): > > \*\* > No they don’t match exactly. Neither does Reyes’. > > He claims he took her velcro key holder. They were on a ring. He also claims she ran from him **after** he raped her. In fact he insists on it. This is an impossibility from the physical evidence. \*\* - well, of course the really big difference is that their ‘confession’ was from a few days after the event, and yet missed in major ways, getting right stuff that was widely reported. His confession, many years later included (apparently ) things that weren’t publicized, and yea, he missed a few details (given that he was a serial rapist/killer, and talking about something many years after the fact, it’s not unusual that he’d miss a detail. and of course, there’s that pesky physical evidence that does link him) > [@](#): > > \*\* > What I believe is that a gang of kids beat and assaulted this jogger, as well as attacking several other people that night, and that Reyes alone achieved penetration. I beleive that the kids were all lying to minimize their involvement, and that Reyes coming clean and saying that he acted alone when it is no longer punishable is not credible. > He does potentially have something to gain admitting all this. He is guilty of many crimes. Taking responsibility for them and others that he was not convicted of would help him generate credibility for the premise that he is truly penitent and worthy of leniency, special treatment, or possibly parole. \*\* Reyes acted alone in his other crimes. Why would he change his methodology on this one? Do you have any other evidence other than the confessions that link them to the assault? As far as Reyes’ potential gain from this - do you have evidence that he his sentence includes a possability of parole? And how does adding additional crimes to his record give him the appearance of being ‘worthy of leniency’? he’d let those other kids stay in prison all those years. From some one inside the system, I’d find it doubtful that sort of information would be used to add ‘leniency’ to anything happening to him now. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/73 "2002-12-09T19:54:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*Something more than simply finding the missing party that belonged to the semen. > > The juries **knew** that there was another party out there that had gotten away at the time they convicted these scum. > > They knew that the semen didn’t belong to any of those five. > > Reyes’ has nothing to lose, and things to gain by his confession. \*\* yes, but the juries did **not know** that the one whose semen was linked said “I acted alone” The **did** believe (wrongfully) that hairs found on the victim were linked to the 5. This has been disproven. IOW, there was evidence that was missed (Reyes involvement and his pattern and statement that he acted alone) and evidence that was wrong (the hairs). and again, you missed the other part of the question. you keep on insisting that the jury got it right, that the judge allowed the confessions in etc. but don’t answer the question : when there is a confession. when there is evidence after the fact that another person is linked physically to the crime **and** says they acted alone, what would it take to convince you? (you kept on insisting that the juries heard all the evidence and the judge oversaw the process, but that’s **true in all trials** - so what does it take to convince you that a jury/judge/prosecutor has made a mistake? ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/74 "2002-12-09T20:05:23Z")
God almighty people, I’m not advocating here. I’m really sorry I posted at all. All I’m trying to say is that, **all things being equal,** a statement that harms the speaker is considered more likely to be truthful than a statement that doesn’t harm the speaker. That truism is not asserted by me in order to support one side or another in this debate, which is why my analogy wasn’t “closer to the facts of this case,” **xenophon1.** The analogy was presented because **wring** was uncertain what I was saying, and I thought it would help. Why **wring** assumed I was taking sides, after I explicitly said that I wasn’t, remains a mystery. Stuff like this is really irritating. Stuff like this makes it impossible for a neutral party to step into a debate and add a tidbit that may help the debaters or to correct a misstatement. Just because something I wrote may be construed as helpful to one side or the other doesn’t mean you are on that side. ::sigh:: Sua ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/75 "2002-12-09T20:07:21Z")
**Sua** calm, please. I didn’t assume you were ‘taking sides’, I was, I thought, answering your analogy. my confusion, request for clarification wasn’t helped by your analogy by the way. I really was just looking for a restating of what you were trying to say in that other post. friends still? (smooch) ---
**Author:** ![Demise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@Demise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Demise)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/76 "2002-12-09T20:10:27Z")
So, **Scylla** , I’m curious what you think about [this story](http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/17/ochoa/), which is an extremely similar scenario. You know, cops coerce confession, confession recanted, jury convicts based on confession, actual murderer and rapist later confesses. Too bad one of the men convicted died while in prison. Was it improper to free the survivor in this case as well? After all, he was convicted by a jury. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/77 "2002-12-09T20:10:27Z")
Wring: I’d hardly consider Reyes’ claim of her getting up and running away **after** he raped her and beaten her into a coma to be a detail. I’d consider it a pretty huge error. It would suggest that he was still lying and covering things up. it would suggest that he wasn’t familiar with where she was initially attacked, that he would make such a large and egregious errors. And, in fact, he may have been acting alone and beaten and raped her some after Yusef and his gang of boy scouts were done, as was suggested in Biggirls’ original cite. Don’t ask me what would constitute a false conviction. I’m not interested in discussing hypotheticals. This gang of kids attacked and beat two other people that night. They admitted to attacking and sexually assaulting the jogger as well. Where they’re story gets confused is about who raped her. They all say they beat her some say they fondled her, all claimed they didn’t rape her. They blamed each other because she had been raped. Now we know who did it. That’s all. The rest of the story about the beating and the sexual assault still fits. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/78 "2002-12-09T20:12:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Demise \* > \*\*So, **Scylla** , I’m curious what you think about [this story](http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/01/17/ochoa/), which is an extremely similar scenario. \*\* No thanks. I’ll stick to the current debate. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/79 "2002-12-09T20:13:00Z")
**Sua Sponte** : I apologize. Yes, I misapprehended your intent, despite your earlier statement that you weren’t taking a position. _And_ your point regarding “harm to the speaker” is a good one. Now quick; say something I can disagree with. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230/80 "2002-12-09T20:13:32Z")
where did you get that detail (cite?) thanks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/central-park-jogger-case-two-questions/133230.md?page=5)