Yes...the Central Park 5 were guilty....but they are now left wing saints...

[Coyote]

Did you read the article.....they were not interrogated for hours without a lawyer, you dope.

They told the police what they did on the way, in the interrogation room and juries, hearing the actual evidence, convicted them.

Again, this is according to the police.... who have already been caught lying about this case.

Another guy did it. He confessed to it, and his DNA was found in the rape kit.

But because you Trump Cultists can't believe your Man-God is wrong about something, you come up with these fanciful theories.

The other guy, as shown in the article, sat on the information until most of the 5 had served their too short sentences, and then, as it was revealed, only admitted to it to protect himself from one of the 5s gang. The guy who confessed was a convicted serial rapist, who raped and murdered a pregnant woman.......

Another left wing Saint....right?


In 2002, a convicted serial rapist named Matias Reyes — who was already serving a 33-years-to-life sentence for other felonies but had never been investigated as a suspect in the Central Park jogger case — suddenly confessed to having perpetrated Trisha Meili's April 19, 1989 rape. Authorities quickly confirmed his claim by matching his DNA with the DNA from the semen which had been collected during the original investigation thirteen years earlier. Reyes's confession had no bearing on the prison time that he was already serving, as the statute of limitations regarding the Trisha Meili case had expired.

Reyes was a violent psychopath with a long history of forcing his way into women's apartments and attacking them. In one of those cases, he had raped a then-pregnant woman named Lourdes Gonzalez before stabbing her nine times while her young children were in the next room, listening to their mother suffer and die. And yet now, not only was Reyes confessing to a crime for which he had never even been charged, but he was claiming (falsely) to have acted alone in attacking Trisha Meili in Central Park. Why?

Reyes said he felt guilty that five innocent men had been punished for a crime that he committed. But those punishments were basically over by the time Reyes made his confession. Four members of the Central Park Five were already out of prison, and the fifth, Kharey Wise, was scheduled to be released very soon. It is simply not believable that a lifelong remorseless monster like Matias Reyes would suddenly have been motivated by a pang of guilt.

A much more plausible explanation rests with the well-substantiated fact that Reyes, who had recentlybeen moved to Kharey Wise's prison cellblock, feared Wise's gang and desperately wanted to be transferred to a more secure and hospitable prison location. And sure enough, after he confessed to the rape of Miss Meili, he quickly received the transfer that he wanted.

Who is calling him a saint? Or any of them? No. But the facts are this guy said he did it AND the evidence supports his claim. The others were railroaded.

 

[JoeB131]

Was luminol used on each criminals hands? How long does blood show up for? Not easy? So it can be done? What does it take? Would pouring half a can of malt liquor over the hands and wiping them on a paper towel do the trick?

Blood tends to get into clothes, shoes, etc. If they had this woman bleed all over them, blood would have been found.

 

[Correll]

Saints no, but for some reason, the Left isn't into punishing PROVEN innocent people like CRC trumpanzees relish.

They were arrested, tried and convicted by a jury of their peers.


That you libs shit canned that, on the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, shows that you are allied with the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.

Yes, innocent people, especially those who are poor minorities who are given shitty representation by over-worked, under-funded, public defenders are never wrongly found guilty in a court of law... especially when someone takes out a full page ad announcing that they are not only guilty but that they should be put to death for a non capital offense.

Holy smokes, you've gone to a brand new low of posting and intelligence.

I made a point about how your position is based on trusting the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, and how that shows that you are on the side of the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.


YOu replied to that post, but did not address my point.


You instead tried to go back to just restating your initial position, without any further or new information.



That is the logical fallacy of Proof by Assertion and, really, at it's most basic level, it is an admission that you know you cannot make your argument, because you know you are wrong.



You do inadvertently reveal what this is all about though.


You liberals like to believe that, as you say, "poor minorities" are always "innocent" and victimized by the evil system, even when it is YOUR system, ie NYC, and you are the brave heroes of the story, standing up to the evil villains.


And to make believe that this story is true, you choose to accept with blind trust, the word of a murderer and rapist.

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

 

[Lewdog]

Saints no, but for some reason, the Left isn't into punishing PROVEN innocent people like CRC trumpanzees relish.

They were arrested, tried and convicted by a jury of their peers.


That you libs shit canned that, on the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, shows that you are allied with the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.

Yes, innocent people, especially those who are poor minorities who are given shitty representation by over-worked, under-funded, public defenders are never wrongly found guilty in a court of law... especially when someone takes out a full page ad announcing that they are not only guilty but that they should be put to death for a non capital offense.

Holy smokes, you've gone to a brand new low of posting and intelligence.

I made a point about how your position is based on trusting the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, and how that shows that you are on the side of the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.


YOu replied to that post, but did not address my point.


You instead tried to go back to just restating your initial position, without any further or new information.



That is the logical fallacy of Proof by Assertion and, really, at it's most basic level, it is an admission that you know you cannot make your argument, because you know you are wrong.



You do inadvertently reveal what this is all about though.


You liberals like to believe that, as you say, "poor minorities" are always "innocent" and victimized by the evil system, even when it is YOUR system, ie NYC, and you are the brave heroes of the story, standing up to the evil villains.


And to make believe that this story is true, you choose to accept with blind trust, the word of a murderer and rapist.

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.

Let me ask you a simple question. Would you be ok if you were arrested for a DUI despite you not being impaired, simply because you had broken several traffic laws during your lifetime, including times you may have actually been impaired while driving, that you had not ever received a ticket for or been arrested for?

 

[Correll]

They were arrested, tried and convicted by a jury of their peers.


That you libs shit canned that, on the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, shows that you are allied with the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.

Yes, innocent people, especially those who are poor minorities who are given shitty representation by over-worked, under-funded, public defenders are never wrongly found guilty in a court of law... especially when someone takes out a full page ad announcing that they are not only guilty but that they should be put to death for a non capital offense.

Holy smokes, you've gone to a brand new low of posting and intelligence.

I made a point about how your position is based on trusting the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, and how that shows that you are on the side of the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.


YOu replied to that post, but did not address my point.


You instead tried to go back to just restating your initial position, without any further or new information.



That is the logical fallacy of Proof by Assertion and, really, at it's most basic level, it is an admission that you know you cannot make your argument, because you know you are wrong.



You do inadvertently reveal what this is all about though.


You liberals like to believe that, as you say, "poor minorities" are always "innocent" and victimized by the evil system, even when it is YOUR system, ie NYC, and you are the brave heroes of the story, standing up to the evil villains.


And to make believe that this story is true, you choose to accept with blind trust, the word of a murderer and rapist.

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

 

[Lewdog]

Yes, innocent people, especially those who are poor minorities who are given shitty representation by over-worked, under-funded, public defenders are never wrongly found guilty in a court of law... especially when someone takes out a full page ad announcing that they are not only guilty but that they should be put to death for a non capital offense.

Holy smokes, you've gone to a brand new low of posting and intelligence.

I made a point about how your position is based on trusting the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, and how that shows that you are on the side of the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.


YOu replied to that post, but did not address my point.


You instead tried to go back to just restating your initial position, without any further or new information.



That is the logical fallacy of Proof by Assertion and, really, at it's most basic level, it is an admission that you know you cannot make your argument, because you know you are wrong.



You do inadvertently reveal what this is all about though.


You liberals like to believe that, as you say, "poor minorities" are always "innocent" and victimized by the evil system, even when it is YOUR system, ie NYC, and you are the brave heroes of the story, standing up to the evil villains.


And to make believe that this story is true, you choose to accept with blind trust, the word of a murderer and rapist.

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

 

[katsteve2012]

Reyes' DNA was found to match the semen samples taken from the victim. No other DNA was found. He even provided other evidence. Whatever gang was marauding that night in the park, they also attacked black and latino victims.

Central Park jogger case - Wikipedia

Trying to connect anyone to a crime when there is no connecting evidence is idiocy.

REal life is not CIS.

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

 

[Correll]

I made a point about how your position is based on trusting the word of a convicted rapist and murderer, and how that shows that you are on the side of the criminals and feral animals of the world, against innocent people.


YOu replied to that post, but did not address my point.


You instead tried to go back to just restating your initial position, without any further or new information.



That is the logical fallacy of Proof by Assertion and, really, at it's most basic level, it is an admission that you know you cannot make your argument, because you know you are wrong.



You do inadvertently reveal what this is all about though.


You liberals like to believe that, as you say, "poor minorities" are always "innocent" and victimized by the evil system, even when it is YOUR system, ie NYC, and you are the brave heroes of the story, standing up to the evil villains.


And to make believe that this story is true, you choose to accept with blind trust, the word of a murderer and rapist.

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

And that in no way, supports the claim that he acted alone.


YOu just chose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to race bait.

 

[Correll]

REal life is not CIS.

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

!ww

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

The responses to you in this thread reveal YOU to be the real asshole here.

You are not a "good person" by any definition. No need to have an "excuse" to point out the truth.

Fuck You.

The responses in this thread show that liberals get off on calling people "racist".


And nothing more.


My desire to see rapists punished and not given tax payer money for bullshit reasons, make me the good person here.

 

[katsteve2012]

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

!ww

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

The responses to you in this thread reveal YOU to be the real asshole here.

You are not a "good person" by any definition. No need to have an "excuse" to point out the truth.

Fuck You.

The responses in this thread show that liberals get off on calling people "racist".


And nothing more.


My desire to see rapists punished and not given tax payer money for bullshit reasons, make me the good person here.

Your obvious agenda makes you a far cry from being a good person.

The very fact that YOU have to "trumpet"
(no pun intended)to everyone here that you're a "good person" over a case that was settled years ago shows that even you are not really sure if you are.

 

[Lewdog]

The Founding Fathers were rapist and murderers? Cause THAT is who's word and who's side I'm on. I'm also most definitely not a liberal as much as you want to build that strawman argument.

Poor minorities are NOT always innocent, however through statistics, YES statistics, they are more often convicted and punished or given harsher punishments, than a white person in court. Those are FACTS. All you have are emotions.

Just curious, how many arrests do you think go to court?

You are the one that doesn't believe in the Constitution and civil rights. What political party do you affiliate yourself with? Communist? Anarchist?

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

And that in no way, supports the claim that he acted alone.


YOu just chose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to race bait.

Wrong. If he had not acted alone, at least one of the others that supposedly beat her so bad she had no memory of the instance would have also left DNA behind.

Are you going to answer my question to you or not? Of course you won't because you know what I said is right.

 

[Correll]

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

!ww

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

The responses to you in this thread reveal YOU to be the real asshole here.

You are not a "good person" by any definition. No need to have an "excuse" to point out the truth.

Fuck You.

The responses in this thread show that liberals get off on calling people "racist".


And nothing more.


My desire to see rapists punished and not given tax payer money for bullshit reasons, make me the good person here.

Your obvious agenda makes you a far cry from being a good person.

The very fact that YOU have to "trumpet"
(no pun intended)to everyone here that you're a "good person" over a case that was settled years ago shows that even you are not really sure if you are.

The miscarriage of justice in this case, as I have repeatedly explained, and the fact that the people that did the miscarriage, ie you lefties, are still out there, doing the same shit,


makes this a valid issue.


Your pretense otherwise, is just you lying, to justify what an asshole you are being.

 

[Correll]

Correct, "poor minorities" are not always innocent. EVEN if your claim of systemic racism was true, that would not mean that this case was flawed.


The primary basis for reversing the convictions was the word of a rapist/murderer.


DNA did not clear the Central Park 5. That you libs claim it did, shows that you are not concerned about Justice.

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

And that in no way, supports the claim that he acted alone.


YOu just chose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to race bait.

Wrong. If he had not acted alone, at least one of the others that supposedly beat her so bad she had no memory of the instance would have also left DNA behind.

Are you going to answer my question to you or not? Of course you won't because you know what I said is right.

The DNA he left behind was his semen. YOu claiming that the act of beating someone or holding their arm down, or fondling a breast would "also left DNA behind",


is absurd.


Answering a question from you, when you are being that delusional or dishonest, especially an hypothetical question, is not constructive.


You are being utterly absurd.

 

[Lewdog]

If true? I can't discuss this topic with someone that ignores facts. The basis for reversing the convictions was DNA evidence. The guy that admitted to the crime was the only DNA that matched what was found on the victim. At the time the Central Park 5 was convicted, not only was DNA in its infancy, they were prosecuted without the testing and NY would not test the DNA on appeal until the real criminal came forward. These guys were railroaded for a crime they did not commit.
.....

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

And that in no way, supports the claim that he acted alone.


YOu just chose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to race bait.

Wrong. If he had not acted alone, at least one of the others that supposedly beat her so bad she had no memory of the instance would have also left DNA behind.

Are you going to answer my question to you or not? Of course you won't because you know what I said is right.

The DNA he left behind was his semen. YOu claiming that the act of beating someone or holding their arm down, or fondling a breast would "also left DNA behind",


is absurd.


Answering a question from you, when you are being that delusional or dishonest, especially an hypothetical question, is not constructive.


You are being utterly absurd.

Man you really are pretty ignorant. Yes if they were beating her as hard as it would take to render her unconscious and unable to remember it, they would have very likely have had blood transfer or left hairs at the scene, and possibly even saliva. DNA is in a lot more things than just seaman. You really should learn more about a subject before posting. It makes you look like a total idiot.

Of course you won't answer my question because it proves just how fucking stupid your argument is.

 

[Coyote]

REal life is not CIS.

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

Isn't it just as "racist" to insist that those 5 are still guilty despite being cleared? Or are ALL people cleared of a crime really guilty? Are these people still guilty in your eyes because they're happen to be less then stellar citizens in your opinion?

 

[katsteve2012]

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

!ww

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

The responses to you in this thread reveal YOU to be the real asshole here.

You are not a "good person" by any definition. No need to have an "excuse" to point out the truth.

Fuck You.

The responses in this thread show that liberals get off on calling people "racist".


And nothing more.


My desire to see rapists punished and not given tax payer money for bullshit reasons, make me the good person here.

Your obvious agenda makes you a far cry from being a good person.

The very fact that YOU have to "trumpet"
(no pun intended)to everyone here that you're a "good person" over a case that was settled years ago shows that even you are not really sure if you are.

The miscarriage of justice in this case, as I have repeatedly explained, and the fact that the people that did the miscarriage, ie you lefties, are still out there, doing the same shit,


makes this a valid issue.


Your pretense otherwise, is just you lying, to justify what an asshole you are being.

Again, the responses to your absurdity in this thread prove YOU to be the asshole here.

And as usual, as with every inane argument that engage in, you are attempting to turn this into a political issue.


It is not. There are other, far more intelligent conservatives than you here in this thread who disagree with your warped reasoning. Or are you too thick headed to notice?


The suspects who were initially charged, paid an undeserved debt to society, and the guilty party was punished.

You need to find another subject to be a whiny little bitch about.

This case is closed......and that, is NOT a lie.

Deal with it.

 

[Correll]

We always knew that the rapist who left DNA was not caught. His being caught, changed nothing in the case against the 5.


You are the one ignoring that central fact.


You choose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to push your theory that America is terribly racist.

Chose to believe him? His fucking DNA proved he was guilty. Do you not trust DNA?

How come you didn't answer my question to you?

And that in no way, supports the claim that he acted alone.


YOu just chose to believe him, because it gives you an excuse to race bait.

Wrong. If he had not acted alone, at least one of the others that supposedly beat her so bad she had no memory of the instance would have also left DNA behind.

Are you going to answer my question to you or not? Of course you won't because you know what I said is right.

The DNA he left behind was his semen. YOu claiming that the act of beating someone or holding their arm down, or fondling a breast would "also left DNA behind",


is absurd.


Answering a question from you, when you are being that delusional or dishonest, especially an hypothetical question, is not constructive.


You are being utterly absurd.

Man you really are pretty ignorant. Yes if they were beating her as hard as it would take to render her unconscious and unable to remember it, they would have very likely have had blood transfer or left hairs at the scene, and possibly even saliva. DNA is in a lot more things than just seaman. You really should learn more about a subject before posting. It makes you look like a total idiot.

Of course you won't answer my question because it proves just how fucking stupid your argument is.

Your argument is based on being vague and jumping all over the place.


Holding someone's legs down, would not likely leave behind DNA. Hitting someone with a brick, would not likely leave behind DNA.

YOU are the one conflating semen with, well, just about everything, not me.


This is you.

 

[Correll]

I don't watch CIS. The only crime shows I watch are true-crime shows like Forensic Files and the occasional rerun of Criminal Minds because of an interest in psychological profiling that began with reading books by John Douglas, who was one of the people involved in founding the FBI unit at Quantico, and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz.

Incidentally, blood is not easy to wipe away. Even if such an attempt is made, the blood still shows up with Luminol.

Why are you so interested in maintaining that these guys were guilty regardless of what was found and what wasn't?

It is obvious "why".

Agreed. My reflexive siding with victims and society against violent criminals, is very obvious.

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

Isn't it just as "racist" to insist that those 5 are still guilty despite being cleared? ....

Explain why the one rapist being there, means that his word that he acted alone should be trusted,


or admit that you are the racist here, not me.

 

[EvMetro]

The Central Park 5 were part of a pack of monsters who attacked and beat a woman into a coma......now they are left wing saints....they even have a left wing fake documentary hiding their crimes........

The Central Park 5 Were Murderous Thugs

Why did the violent, murdering rapist who eventually confessed to the actual rape, confess to the rape when he didn't have to?

Reyes said he felt guilty that five innocent men had been punished for a crime that he committed. But those punishments were basically over by the time Reyes made his confession. Four members of the Central Park Five were already out of prison, and the fifth, Kharey Wise, was scheduled to be released very soon. It is simply not believable that a lifelong remorseless monster like Matias Reyes would suddenly have been motivated by a pang of guilt.

A much more plausible explanation rests with the well-substantiated fact that Reyes, who had recentlybeen moved to Kharey Wise's prison cellblock, feared Wise's gang and desperately wanted to be transferred to a more secure and hospitable prison location. And sure enough, after he confessed to the rape of Miss Meili, he quickly received the transfer that he wanted.

It was the socialist mayor who allowed the settlement with these monsters...

Reyes's confession prompted New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau to vacate the convictions against the Central Park Five. This, in turn, set the stage for the Five to bring a $250 million lawsuit against the City of New York in 2003, for malicious prosecution, racial discrimination, and emotional distress. For the next eleven years, city attorneys refused to settle the suit and repeatedly vowed that they would fight it out in court.

But when Bill de Blasio took over as Mayor of New York in 2014, his administration quickly reached a $41 million settlement with the plaintiffs. This decision to settle the case was a reflection of de Blasio's deep-seated belief that the American criminal-justice system is infested with racism, and, by logical extension, that the Central Park Five were among its many unfortunate victims. De Blasio articulated this theme with utmost clarity later that same year:
---

Eric Reynolds, a black NYPD officer who first arrested a number of the suspects in the Central Park jogger case in April 1989, was disgusted by the de Blasio administration's deal with Miss Meili's five assailants. “If we had gone to trial in their lawsuit … all the facts would have come out,” said Reynolds. “It would have been clear they [the Central Park Five] participated, and [Matias] Reyes didn’t act alone. The evidence supported it. They did not want to go to trial. They just wanted to get paid.”

Significantly, Reynolds notes that he himself had never been named as a defendant in the Central Park Five's lawsuit against New York City — most likely, he believes, because including a black officer as a target of such a suit would have contradicted the narrative of a white racist system abusing minority youngsters.
------

As for allegations that the suspects' confessions had been coerced by police, Reynolds says: “[Trisha Meili] was in a coma. If we’re railroading [the suspects], how do we know when she comes out of the coma what story she’s going to tell? If you are trying to pin it on someone, why would you risk that she would say something different?” Mike Sheehan, one of the detectives who investigated the attack against Miss Meili, concurs: “All of this stuff about coercion really pisses me off. Do you honestly think that we — detectives with more than 20 years in, family men with pensions — would risk all of that so we could put words in the mouth of a 15 year-old kid? Absolutely not.”

If the title of this thread is true, your entire thread would be loaded with lefty replies that defend the cp5 thugs.

 

[Correll]

The victims circumstances were horrific. The guilty person confessed and was prosecuted

But your so called "reflexive siding is likely selective based on what the exonerated men look like. .

That is what is most obvious.

!ww

And that is what this is about to people like you. It gives you an excuse to smear good people as racist.



YOu are a fucking asshole.

The responses to you in this thread reveal YOU to be the real asshole here.

You are not a "good person" by any definition. No need to have an "excuse" to point out the truth.

Fuck You.

The responses in this thread show that liberals get off on calling people "racist".


And nothing more.


My desire to see rapists punished and not given tax payer money for bullshit reasons, make me the good person here.

Your obvious agenda makes you a far cry from being a good person.

The very fact that YOU have to "trumpet"
(no pun intended)to everyone here that you're a "good person" over a case that was settled years ago shows that even you are not really sure if you are.

The miscarriage of justice in this case, as I have repeatedly explained, and the fact that the people that did the miscarriage, ie you lefties, are still out there, doing the same shit,


makes this a valid issue.


Your pretense otherwise, is just you lying, to justify what an asshole you are being.

Again, the responses to your absurdity in this thread prove YOU to be the asshole here.

And as usual, as with every inane argument that engage in, you are attempting to turn this into a political issue.


It is not. There are other, far more intelligent conservatives than you here in this thread who disagree with your warped reasoning. Or are you too thick headed to notice?


The suspects who were initially charged, paid an undeserved debt to society, and the guilty party was punished.

You need to find another subject to be a whiny little bitch about.

This case is closed......and that, is NOT a lie.

Deal with it.

Citing responses from other people is not a supporting argument.


Citing the fact that the case is closed, is not a supporting argument.


You DON'T have a supporting argument, just various logical fallacies and personal attacks.


You are just an asshole that likes the idea of using this case to smear people you don't like, as "Racist".