-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- KEI SHIMIZU on Voices from Director Sarah Burns and one victim Raymond Santana
- sw132300 on What a journalist should NOT do? Watch Movie “Absence of Malice”
- sw132300 on WNYC-Central Park Five-WGY
- mk139232 on Central Park Five–WNYC
- lj126793 on What a journalist should NOT do? Watch Movie “Absence of Malice”
Archives
Categories
Meta
Author Archives: ne136016
Posts: 2 (archived below)
Comments: 0
Absence of Malice
The movie gives insights about the aftermaths of unlimited freedom of press. If reporters are not accountable for what they write or nobody can sue them about the allegations in the story, more people can get harm with the false stories.
The reporters should have freedom about absolute information. But if a reporter will print something that can be false, “the absence of malice” will make the reporter to think about the consequences of the story.
In the movie, Megan Carter makes some major faults as a reporter. First, she does not give Michael Gallagher a chance to talk about the story before the publication. If Gallagher had knowledge about the story, he could defend himself or tell his side of the story.
The other fault is that she does not consider the consequences of the stories she writes. She is irrelevant to her sources’ concerns. Even Carter has an opportunity not to reveal the names of the resources; she publishes the name of the woman, who tries to prove that Gallagher was not involved in the crime. The woman commits suicide after the publication of the story about her abortion. Gallagher loses his workers and shuts down his business due to the story.
She also does not confirm the information she gets with other sources. She never questioned the reason of the leakage about a hidden investigation before publication. She always publishes the information she gets with a rush.
Posted in Uncategorized
6 Comments
The Central Park Crime
The documentary covers how an innocent man can suddenly be the prime suspect and then the offender of a crime. It also perfectly represents the failure of the police, media, public and justice system in the investigation process of the Central Park crime.
In 1980s, the NYC was a crime city with six murders a day. Every day there was news about mugs, rapes, cracks, or gangs and the young black men were perceived to be the most dangerous. But the Central Park case got more public attention than any other crime occurred in those years and called as “the crime of the century”.
One reason is that it was occurred in the Central Park, where was thought to be a secure area and exempt from violent crimes. The rapes in Brooklyn and Harlem occurred weeks before the Central Park crime were not considered as important.
The case also had an aspect of race and economic situation. The woman who was beaten and assaulted was a white well-educated person, while the young men who attacked the woman were low-income black and Hispanic teenagers.
The high number of the serial rape cases and the sexual assaults was scaring people in those years. The police were deeply criticized for not investigating the sex crimes rigorously. And the Central Park case was a great opportunity to voice their concerns.
In these circumstances, the police was under tremendous pressure to solve the crime quickly.
After the police announcement about the confessions of the five juveniles, everyone accepted that they were guilty except a few. Despite the discrepancies among the confessions, timeline disparities and lack of physical evidence, the jury, the media or the police were not suspicious about the case.
The recantation of the confessions and the statements about coerced confessions were not effective to change the public’s belief. The teenagers were defined as a “wolf pack” and accused of involving in “wilding”, referring to attacking people just for fun and sport. The public was so outraged that some called even death penalty.
All five teenagers were convicted and served prison from 6 to 13 years. After 13 years, a serial rapist confessed that he had committed the Central Park crime and the DNA evidence confirmed this testimony. Based on new evidences, the convictions of five men were vacated in 2002. However, the police department still maintains to believe that the five men were “most likely” the accomplices of the real rapist. Neither police department nor the justice department accepted their fault.
These five man lost several years in prison and became mature more quickly. Even though they get compensation for wrongly conviction, now it is impossible for them to take their life back, and no money can compensate this.
Posted in Central Park 5
Comments Off on The Central Park Crime
