In a despicable column for the conspiracy-peddling WorldNetDaily,
professional troll Ann Coulter discussed the case of the Central Park 5, and exploited both rape and racism in order to smear her favorite target: those damn liberals. The Central Park 5 is a group of black and Hispanic males who were falsely convicted of raping a white jogger in 1989. Eventually, through DNA evidence and a confession from serial rapist and murderer Matias Reyes, the men were exonerated, though they had already served several years in prison by this point.
A Ken Burns documentary on the subject purports to show the racism at the heart of the case, with members of the NYPD and prosecutors who wished to close the case quickly and the fact that the accused were black and Hispanic while the victim was a white woman. Ann Coulter apparently believes this sciencey stuff about DNA is a bunch of hogwash, and that the Central Park 5’s release was part of a concerted effort by liberals who love criminals:
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is demanding a quick settlement of the lawsuit brought by the five men convicted of one of the most sickening crimes in the city’s history: the attack on the Central Park jogger in 1989.
The plaintiffs are demanding $50 million apiece – for going to prison for a rape that they committed, as detailed in Chapter 13 of “Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Destroying America.” Abner Louima got $5.8 million for a shockingly brutal police assault on him, and he was just an innocent bystander.
Well at least she had the decency to plug her book in a column about rapists.
In 2002, the ancient Robert Morgenthau, Manhattan district attorney, issued a report recommending that the convictions in the Central Park rape case be vacated. Justice Charles Tejada (Fordham Law 2009 Hispanic Heritage Award winner!) granted his request.
Liberals are opposed to rape in the abstract, but when it comes to actual rapists, they’re all for them.
The D.A.’s report was based solely on the confession of Matias Reyes, career criminal, serial rapist and murderer. Reyes had absolutely nothing to lose by confessing to the rape – the statute of limitations had run – and much to gain by claiming he acted alone: He got a favorable prison transfer and the admiration of his fellow inmates for smearing the police.
While dumping on the police for screwing up the investigation, Morgenthau wouldn’t let the cops interview Reyes themselves, even though his “confession” was the sole evidence that he raped and brutalized the jogger by himself.
Yes, it isn’t that liberals are opposed to railroading young black men because of a racist and incompetant criminal justice system. We just love criminals. Including rapists. And what about the fact that Reyes’ DNA matched semen found on the victim’s sock?
The media proclaim those five rapists innocent based on their own over-excited reports that the DNA found on the jogger matched that of Reyes, but none of the others!
Yeah, we knew that. It was always known that semen on the jogger did not match any of the defendants. (“DNA Expert: No Semen Links to Defendants,” Associated Press, July 14, 1990.)
Hallmark should have a greeting card: “Guess whose semen wasn’t found anywhere on the rape victim?” (Open card) “I’m so proud of you, son!”
Prosecutor Elizabeth Lederer expressly reminded the jurors of the missing rapist in her summation to the jury: “Others who were not caught raped her and got away.” Now we know who “got away.”
Well, that was horrible. Anything else?
DNA wasn’t the evidence that convicted the “Central Park Five.” It’s hard to believe now, but in 1989 DNA was rarely used to convict anyone, so it wouldn’t have been carefully collected by police investigators. DNA identifications had only been invented a few years earlier and were not even permitted in New York courts until six months before the Central Park wilding.
This case was solved with old-fashioned police work. After the first 911 calls came in, the police arrested some of the thugs in the park that very night. Then they arrested those named as part of the wolf pack by the first detainees.
. . . .
When Raymond Santana was being driven to the precinct the night of the wilding, he blurted out: “I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel the woman’s t–s.” Wait! Who said anything about rape? The cops had not asked him about any rape.
Oh yes. Wilding. Many of you might not be old enough to remember this one, but back before the White Right got itself worked up over the bogus “knockout game,” there was a phony phenomenon which the media dubbed “wilding,” whereby young black men and boys would travel in groups and wantonly assault white folk. The stereotype of the “black brute” can be traced back at least to the era of slavery in the antebellum South, and was used to dehumanize African slaves and black men in general. Supposedly black males, whose intellect was far lower than that of white people, were extremely violent and hypersexualized.
The “Negro brain,” it was hypothesized, was simply inferior to that of men of European descent. It’s a reason why many in that time period argued that slavery was actually a kindness — they needed to be chained up and domesticated like livestock, otherwise they would be a danger to the white majority, especially white women. To this day the media loves to utilize this narrative of criminal black men. Following the attack on the Central Park jogger newspapers compared the accused men to a pack of wolves, a metaphor which Ann Coulter similarly employed.
But now de Blasio wants to hold down our legs while the “Central Park Five” rape us, again.
If there’s a story about a brutal rape, you can certainly expect vultures like Ann Coulter to exploit the hell out of it. Coulter, as you can imagine, cares nothing for women or black men. Her target is “demonic” liberals. Women and people of color are merely a means to that end.