The Central Park Jogger — No Justice But Money
        January 13, 2014 
        No case in New York City  has fanned racial tensions more than that of the Central Park Jogger, in which  five non-white teenagers [four black and one Hispanic] were falsely convicted  of raping a white woman and literally beating her within an inch of her life. 
         Like “Stop and Frisk,” no  case better fits the tale-of-two-cities racial rhetoric of the city’s newly  elected mayor Bill de Blasio. 
         Former mayor Michael  Bloomberg refused to pay one dime to The Central Park Five, as the teenagers  are now called, who are seeking $250 million for the years they served in prison. 
         De Blasio has promised to  settle the case. The question is how much money the city will pay them. 
         That the case continues  to rile emotions 25 years after it began suggests the breadth of the racial  divide over the police and the criminal justice system. 
         A documentary by the  filmmaker Ken Burns and his daughter Sarah, which has gained widespread  attention, is guaranteed to further enflame passions. 
         Here’s a nutshell summary  of what occurred on the night of April 19, 1989. Some 40 teenagers, roaming  through Central Park, assaulted a homeless man, a male jogger, a male teacher,  and a couple on a tandem bike. That was the night the term “wilding” was born. 
         Then, at 1:30 A.M., a  jogger, Trisha Meili, a 28-year-old investment banker, was found in the park  unconscious and barely alive. She had been beaten so badly she had no memory of  the attack. 
         Because she was a rape  victim, her name was not reported in the mainstream media, although it did  appear in the Amsterdam News. Instead, she was referred to as  “The Jogger.” 
         Five teenagers were  picked up for questioning not far from where she was found. No physical  evidence linked them to her attack. 
         While none of them  admitted raping her, their videotaped statements to police implicated each  other — not just in Meili’s rape and beating, but as part of a larger group  that carried out the other assaults in the park that night. 
         Anton McCray, 15, said he  had held Meili and faked raping her. Raymond Santana, 14, said he had touched her  breasts. Kevin Richardson said he had merely watched and tried to stop the  attack. Kharey Wise, 16, said he had fondled her legs while others held her  down. 
         This reporter watched those  confessions in the living room of a Newsday reporter who covered the Manhattan District Attorney’s office. Their accounts  seemed chillingly believable and frighteningly convincing. 
         They were so convincing that a  jury convicted them. They were given maximum sentences of between five and  15 years. 
         Turns out the jurors, like me,  were dead wrong. The key part of the teenagers’ confessions was false. None of  them had raped the jogger. 
         In 2002, 13 years  after the attack, Mathias Reyes, a serial rapist and murderer who was serving a  life sentence, confessed that he alone had raped and assaulted the jogger. His  DNA matched that found at the scene of the crime. 
         Manhattan District  Attorney Robert Morgenthau, after reconstructing that night’s events, concluded  that the five teenagers could not have gang-raped the jogger because they were  then assaulting others in the park. 
         As for their confessions, the  teenagers and their supporters maintained that they had implicated their  friends in the rape under police duress. They pointed out that the police did not videotape the prior questioning of  the teenagers, implying that the police had intimidated them into their  videotaped admissions. 
         At Morgenthau’s  recommendation, Judge Charles Tejada vacated their convictions, not only to  Meili’s rape and assault, but also to the other attacks. 
         By then the five  teenagers had completed their jail terms. Wise had served 11 ½ years; Santana  eight; Richardson, McCray and Yousef Salaam six. 
         Meanwhile, the police  department reacted with scorn and skepticism to the case’s reinvestigation — specifically to Reyes's claim that he had acted alone. They criticized  Assistant  District Attorney Nancy Ryan, who led the reinvestigation, saying she had  prevented detectives from fully questioning Reyes. They suggested she had a  personal agenda:  a rivalry with  former Assistant District Attorney Linda Fairstein, whose unit had prosecuted  the teenagers.