Section 1: The City/ The Crime
In the 1980s, New York City was bedeviled with numerous societal issues. These societal issues spanned from wealth disparity, social differences and rising unemployment. The main issues at the time were racial violence and crime. The violence was propagated mainly against the black community who were all assumed to be criminals. This stereotype had developed in spite of the fact that the negative effects of crime were felt mostly by minorities. Crime had become so commonplace in the city such that muggings were synonymous with the city. Most people’s lives centered on getting home in one piece. The area/ streets around their residences were their safe places. Anywhere else apart from this such as the subway was dangerous territory.
Their lives before the incident were typical childhood stories; filled with parental love and lots of dreams and aspirations. They talked about the warm home environments that was a safe space from all the ills associated with New York City. Their childhood tales hardly consisted of any descriptions of violence. This implies that they were sheltered from the harsh external environment, the New York scene which was chockful of social ills. Their guardians acted as a buffer to all these evils. Their parents were working class who strived to support them. This corresponds to the general New York environment where everyone was fending for themselves.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The problems in New York are attributed to the economic crises that beset it during the time. At the time, companies were winding up. The result was the loss of jobs by a significant number of working class citizens. The effects, mainly increased crime, were shrugged off and normalized. This normalization was due to the perceived triviality of the crimes. Most of the crimes committed were muggings on the streets and the trains. However, crime evolved with the entry of crack cocaine. A cycle of violent crimes ensued as gangs sought to demarcate and protect their territories. The Black community suffered upon the entry of crack cocaine. They suffered both from the gangsters and the police. Violence against them by the police, often fatal, was normalized as the fight against drugs.
The main cause of crime in the city is the disproportionate economic empowerment that leans heavily towards racial lines. Reforms should focus on empowering minorities and their protection against racial violence. Changing this structure is a difficult and lengthy process that may fall out of the city officials’ purview. For instance, if the job losses arose from the relocation of a company due to federal taxes, the state will fail to reverse this decision. Another reason was the neglect of the minority communities at the time. Interventions were aimed at mainly assisting white people. The blacks felt they were under attack and being neglected. Most of the crime was in their neighborhoods. It was only logical to improve their neighborhoods for a safer city.
The kids went that night to hang out at Central Park. They seem to be a distance away from the group, watching as the violence is ongoing. Their non-participation is evidenced by their corroborating stories and the fact that they all had come from different places before they met at the park. The attack on park users appears to be organized. Their involvement is unlikely since they hardly knew each other previously. Their innocence can also be explained by their staying in the park after the attack on the homeless man. Finally, Corey Wise was picked up by the police without any reason. No one had reported him or implicated him in the incident.
Section 2: Public Reaction, Media Frenzy, and False Confessions
At the time, the drug violence had been depicted as a crime committed mainly by minorities. Hence, violence became a stereotype associated with the minorities. The black and Latino races had been depicted as dangerous. This had been aided by the illegal trade of crack cocaine in minority neighborhoods. The police narrative was thus easily swallowed up by the general New York population. It was easier for the public to believe that a group of black and Latino teenagers had committed the crime. Being black or Latino was falsely synonymous with a violent and feral nature. The five teenagers thus confirmed the false presuppositions of most New Yorkers.
New York City was crumbling under the weight of crime. The police were largely considered ineffective as the number and gravity of the crimes increased. Previously there had been muggings. The city had now degenerated into a site of gang violence. This deterioration had led to a huge dent in the public’s confidence in the men in blue. This case was a chance for the criminal justice system to show its tough position on crime and gain the resultant public approval. The victim in question was a white career woman who identified with most of New York residents. Successful prosecution of the case would show the criminal justice department’s commitment to keeping the streets safe.
The police had found suspects that could admit to being within the vicinity of the incident. The teenagers had also been found at the scene of the attacks on park users. They had all run upon the arrival of the police. It was thus easier to believe they could be the perpetrators of sexual violence. The suspects were also malleable and naïve. Thus, they could be easily convinced to admit to anything the detectives wanted them to say. The police’s confidence in their accusations was also driven by the New York stereotype on minorities. It was easier for them to be convinced of the guilt of the teenagers since they were black/ Latino.
The comparison is fair since all these incidents are driven by racial prejudice. Injustice is meted out the minorities due to their perceived weakness to social ills. The responses to the causative events are disproportionate and racially nuanced. In all the cases, the suspects were assumed to automatically guilty despite evidence to the contrary. The public opinion was mainly founded from the fact that they were black or Latino. This was easier to believe despite their young ages. These cases were also prosecuted unfairly and founded on false statements. Due process was not afforded to the accused due to the inherent prejudicial nature of most New Yorkers.
The headlines represent an example of irresponsible journalism. These statements vilify the teenagers in the public eyes even before their trial is complete. The headlines reinforce the community’s false opinion of the violent nature of minorities. These sensational headlines are used although the accused are barely out of their childhood. This served only to increase public anger and prevent objective prosecution of the crime. The suspects are considered guilty even before their trial is complete. The results of these headlines can be shown by the full-page advertisement paid for by Donald Trump. The media has stirred up so much hate in the public such that he calls for the death penalty for the young boys.
The police suspected the boys were involved due to their presence at the park. The police were well within their jurisdiction to question the teenagers. The teenagers had been present at the park during the time of the rape incident. It was prudent to question them if they had observed any unusual events. The police went out of line when they violated their rights to an attorney and forced them to make false written statements. They further violated the teenagers’ rights when they failed to inform them of their right to remain silent. They also lied to the teenagers, convincing them to incriminate themselves.
The teenagers were naïve and unaware of their rights. Their guardians were also unaware of their children rights while in custody. This situation was further aggravated by the police’s failure to be responsible and inform the accused of their rights. The teenagers were hardly aware of their rights as they wrote false statements that were only self-incriminating. People in interrogation have the right to counsel. The attorneys aid them in avoiding self-incrimination and making informed decisions. They also have the right to basic amenities such as food and water. Their attorneys should be present and inform them of the right to remain silent.
The police tactics were unethical as they forced the teenagers to write statements coached by the police. The teenagers were set against each other despite having no previous relationships prior to the incident. Such aggressive tactics should not have been used on teenagers due to their weaker mental strength. The detectives lied to the teenagers. They made them make false statements without affording them the presence of a lawyer. In consideration of these factors, the teenagers were interrogated unfairly.
Their rights were not honored as these rights should have been stated on their arrest or before the interrogation. Their rights to counsel or silence were never mentioned by the detectives. The reading of these rights at the videotaping stage did not matter because they had already written statements. The interviews were obtained under false pretense as the teenagers believed they would be freed. The obtaining of the evidence for the case was through the violation of rights and an abuse of justice by the system.
