While We Can Still Say It—the Central Park Five Committed a Gang Rape, and Linda Fairstein Proved It in Court!!!
By John Derbyshire
Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, available exclusively on VDARE.com
George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984 famously contained the aphorism: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
Apparently, he was right. It waxes stronger by the day.
This is most particularly true in anything to do with race. The very simplest, plainest facts about race are treated by the guardians of our culture—the media, the schools, the corporations—as radioactive, to be shielded from public view.
Here is a tiny instance, of the kind that is so commonplace, we hardly notice it anymore.
I get a daily delivery of the New York Post paper edition. Here was a short filler item from last Monday, June 3rd. I'll read you the item in its entirety, as printed. Headline: Woman, 78, raped. Story:I don't need to belabor my point here; you know what I'm getting at. Quote from my neighbors re Long Island Railroad gunman Colin Ferguson, as reported in Chapter Six of We Are Doomed: "It must be a black guy. If it was a white guy, they would have told us."
A creep forced his way into a Queens home Sunday morning and raped a 78-year-old woman, police said.
The sexual assault was reported just after 6 a.m. in a house on 148th Street near 241st Street in the Brookville neighborhood.
The man had broken into the house before attacking, police said.
No arrests have been made, but cops described the suspect as a man in his 30s, about 5-foot-9, weighing around 165 pounds.
The woman was treated at the North Shore University Hospital.
That quote is from 26 years ago, so there is nothing the least bit new here....
Read the whole thing at VDARE.
Also on this Subject
“Remembering the Central Park Jogger”
“Race Hustlers Re-Run Central Park Jogger Case”
“The Central Park Jogger Case: A Letter to the New York Times”
“The Rape of Lady Justice: Patrician DA and the Central Park Jogger Case”
“Justice Vacated in Central Park Jogger Case”
Why is Breitbart Promoting the Central Park Five Hoax?
“‘It Was Fun’—Robert K. Tanenbaum vs. The Central Park Five, 25 Years Later”
“Ken Burns’ The Central Park Five: The New To Kill a Mockingbird—Fiction Designed to Induce White Guilt”
“What the Media Won't Tell You About the ‘Central Park Five’” (Ann Coulter)
“Legal Legend Michael Armstrong Demolishes Lies of the Central Park Five Hoax”
“The Report That Ken Burns Doesn’t Want You to Read: The Armstrong Report on the Central Park Five’s Many Violent Crimes, and Matias Reyes”
“Manhattan DA’s Motion in Central Park Jogger Case”
“What the Media Won't Tell You About the “Central Park Five (Ann Coulter).”
“Embattled Central Park Five Prosecutor Linda Fairstein Doubles Down.”
“While We Can Still Say It, Without being Imprisoned—the Central Park Five Committed a Gang Rape and Linda Fairstein Proved It in Court! (John Derbyshire).”
“Beasts in the Park: The Central Park Five Rapist-Rioters.” (Peter Brimelow)
5 comments:
Guilty of rape even if they did not rape the woman in that they facilitated rape.
I've read most of your CP5 stuff, and it's been very helpful in figuring the case out. I was wondering if you would be able to clear up one aspect of the case, however. There's really not a lot of good information I'm seeing on the "drag marks," which is a point that Sarah and Ken Burns incessantly cling to. I tried looking around for the document pertaining to Honeyman, but I couldn't find it among the NY Daily News documents dump. I was always under the impression from most of the literature that she was dragged from the first scene to the second scene (around 200-300 feet), but this passage, if correct, suggests otherwise, and possibly strengthens the claim of Trisha Meili running after a minor attack, similar to Reyes' description of her running. The following quotes are from chapter 6 of Sarah Burns' book. Honestly, most of her points in defense of the CP5 are pretty weak, but this argument has kind of left me stumped since I don't have access to the original documents that pertain to the drag marks.
I suppose it's also possible that there was a difference in the terrain, which resulted in visible drag marks in some areas and other areas the drag marks were too slight to be recognized.
“The narrow drag marks in the grass, which contradicted the NYPD report’s theory that the teenagers had attacked Meili before Reyes did, were ignored. When asked about the drag marks by a reporter after the report was released, Michael Armstrong commented that “we focused on that at one point, and then we didn’t follow it up. If it’s wide enough for one person to drag a body, and the others followed behind, so what? We didn’t bother to address it, because it didn’t seem to be a major point.” The report tried to indicate that the many footprints visible around the drag marks were significant, but a detective had explained in his testimony at trial that those had all been created by the detectives who examined the crime scene.”
“The report accused Reyes of being wrong when he said that after he raped the jogger, she broke free and ran, half-naked, to a second location, where he caught up and eventually beat her within an inch of her life. The report cited Detective Honeyman, who had testified at the trials, as saying that there were drag marks found between the locations of the first and second assault. If this were the case, then Reyes had incorrectly described his victim as running, when, in fact, he had dragged her several hundred feet. But the authors of the report had misread the detective’s testimony. The truth is that the only drag marks Honeyman found led from the road to the location of the first part of the attack. From there to the second site, there was no evidence of drag marks, and Reyes’s description of dragging the jogger off the road and then her running from him exactly fit the crime-scene evidence.”
CTC,
I’m very impressed with your research, but I’m afraid I can’t help you right now. I’m finishing a book completely unrelated to the CP Jogger Case, and also have a bunch of unrelated articles to knock off.
Thus, I just don’t have time to research this aspect of the case. After reading your comment, I did, however, google “Honeyman” and “Central Park Five,” but got nothing of value.
I also re-read the passage in Sarah Burns’ book that you referred to, using Google Books.
(I had meant to devote an article to Burns’ book, but never got around to it. I’ll have to do that… down the road. Short take: She writes well, but deeply dishonestly, and takes historical detours, e.g., re black supremacist propagandist Ida B. Wells, that hurt her case, but were enormously helpful to me, since I now have yet another face for my rogues’ gallery of black supremacist frauds.)
Here’s what I generally remember about Reyes’ statement years later: To the degree that it was reliable, it was based on newspaper reports, which he’d lied about having read. Otherwise, it was completely unreliable. For example, he had no idea where the attack had taken place, while two of the other attackers knew exactly where it had taken place.
Short answer: Reyes has zero credibility, re the Jogger attack. To the degree that Sarah Burns vouches for Reyes, she’s a liar, too.
I have no idea if Det. Honeyman’s statement was in the Daily News’ document dump, because it is allegedly from his courtroom testimony. Were the trial transcripts part of the document dump? That would be extraordinary.
Unless and until I have the time to order or find the transcripts from the two trials, in order to examine Det. Honeyman’s testimony, I will not give Matias Reyes or Sarah Burns the benefit of the doubt. As “convicted” liars, the burden of proof on them is heavy, whether they are discussing the Central Park Jogger Case, or the time of day.
With that said, I would greatly appreciate if you would send me your findings, which I will scrupulously cite. Down the road, I hope to re-publish updated (and if necessary, corrected) versions of my CPJ reports in book form.
Thanks for the response!
Daily News has some of the trial transcripts, but they're missing stuff. Honeyman's testimony is not in the Daily News' document dump.
There is, however, another document dump which has it.
http://www.nyc-cpj.org/home/subcategory?ContainerName=original-investigation-and-prosecution
I haven't done a thorough comparison, but it seems to be far more complete.
I haven't looked through the transcripts heavily (it's mostly repeated information for the two different trials), but according to Honeyman, the drag marks are about 78 feet in length. The grassy part is around 40 feet, and the the dirt part is around 30 feet
If you would like to see what he says for yourself:
https://nyccpjstorage.blob.core.windows.net/original-investigation-and-prosecution/Pre-Trial%20and%20Trial%20Transcripts/NYCLD_019568_Transcript%20Re%20Testimony%20of%20Det.%20Robert%20Honeyman%20from%20the%20Trial%20of%20Antron%20McCray,%20Yusef%20Salaam%20and%20Raymond%20Santana,%20Jr.%20(7-9-1990).PDF
The measurements for the drag mark can be found on pages 7 and 28-29 in the document above. In the trial and pre-trial transcript section there are 4-5 Honeyman trial docs. They're all pretty similar.
https://nyccpjstorage.blob.core.windows.net/original-investigation-and-prosecution/Police%20Reports%20and%20DD5/NYCLD_008869_Crime%20Scene%20Unit%20Supplementary%20Report%20Re%20Fingerprints,%20Serology,%20and%20Evidence,%20by%20Det.%20Robert%20Honeyman%20(4-20-1989).PDF
Here is a key for all the "H-1" evidence stuff. The only thing I haven't been able to find so far are the sketches Honeyman is referring to in his evidence sheet. There are sketches in one section but none of them belong to Honeyman, and I looked at all of them, as well as his photos. So I'm not sure about that.
Yes, my impression of Burns' book is similar. Well-written, informative, etc, but extremely biased. She conveniently omits a lot of details that suggest their culpability, and this is in no way an oversight on her part.
By the way, did you ever hear about Richard Siracusa's (Reyes' defense attorney) book? The e-book appeared on Amazon, and I don't think it's gotten much attention. It's called Your Eyes or Your Life. The first half focuses entirely on Matias Reyes, including the crimes unrelated to CPJ. The second half goes over most of the stuff you'd expect to see in a book on the topic, but his focus is Reyes. He believes the CP5 had something to do with the attack on Trisha Meili, and proposed a theory that Steven Lopez may have known Matias Reyes. Going through some of his old case material and/or transcripts, there is an account where Reyes mentions an accomplice named Steve during one of his crimes. And while Reyes will often say he's always acted alone, he admits in plenty of his transcripts that he actually has robbed people with other kids when he was younger, and also engaged in "demos," which I'm not sure if that's a common slang term, but it's basically the equivalent of groups robbing people or "wilding." Perhaps a bit speculative, but it seems a very odd coincidence and Reyes lies about most things. There might be something there. Lopez is also the guy pretty much everyone named as being involved in the rape who confessed to taking part in or witnessing it, even Lamont McCall.
Siracusa also has a pretty amusing bit in his book about Sarah Burns stopping by to look through his files.
Here are the sketches of the crime scene that Honeyman created. They're very useful, and I had actually considered making my own map before I found them.
http://www.nyc-cpj.org/Home/folder?container=new-york-city-police-department-reinvestigation&name=https://nyccpjstorage.blob.core.windows.net/new-york-city-police-department-reinvestigation/Police%20Reports%20and%20DD5/
There are several Honeyman-related files here as well. Most of the sketches seemed to be copies.
Well, I think that about does it for Honeyman and the drag marks (as far as the acquisition of primary documents go, anyway), so that'll be my last comment on the subject unless there is a response to be made. I'm not going to spam the comments section. :P
Post a Comment