Publisher drops Central Park Five prosecutor Linda Fairstein

[SummerMadness]

Publisher drops Central Park Five prosecutor Linda Fairstein

Linda Fairstein, a former US prosecutor turned crime novelist, has been dropped by her publisher amid renewed outcry over her role in the wrongful conviction of five teenagers for the brutal rape of a female jogger in 1989.

The black and Hispanic teenagers, known as the Central Park Five, were exonerated in 2002.

New Netflix mini-series When They See Us has returned attention to the case.

It has inspired a #CancelLindaFairstein movement on social media.

Better late than never.

 

[Cis.jd]

Good. But I hope she goes to jail.

I did watch When They See Us on Netflix and it was hard to watch.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Publisher drops Central Park Five prosecutor Linda Fairstein


Better late than never.

What do you do with the African-American gun toting Bible loving freedom espousing men who fly the confederate flag on the handlebar of their bikes? You generalize so much you have only a strawman.

Sure, you can find examples of such idiots as you describe. But you don't know the heart of man. You don't even know your own heart.

 

[rambot]

What do you do with the African-American gun toting Bible loving freedom espousing men who fly the confederate flag on the handlebar of their bikes? You generalize so much you have only a strawman.

Sure, you can find examples of such idiots as you describe. But you don't know the heart of man. You don't even know your own heart.

Sure you know what she DID but you don't know what was in her heart while she was doing it...

 

[SummerMadness]

Sure you know what she DID but you don't know what was in her heart while she was doing it...

Methinks the reply has nothing to with the thread and is more to do with being unable to differentiate a post from a signature.

After watching the film, I think we can give Felicity Huffman some time served/off for revealing a true evil in our criminal justice system.

 

[variant]

Sure you know what she DID but you don't know what was in her heart while she was doing it...

Who cares? What she did was bad enough, and she did it in the guise of being a public servant.

Ruining peoples lives isn't something we should take lightly.

 

[rambot]

Who cares? What she did was bad enough, and she did it in the guise of being a public servant.

Ruining peoples lives isn't something we should take lightly.

Tongue in cheek. Sorry

 

[Cis.jd]

Methinks the reply has nothing to with the thread and is more to do with being unable to differentiate a post from a signature.

After watching the film, I think we can give Felicity Huffman some time served/off for revealing a true evil in our criminal justice system.

I have to say though, this evil justice system isn't just in the USA (but i guess that doesn't matter).


I think Linda Fairstein should go to jail, as well the police/detectives in the investigation room who coheres (and beaten) these kids into falsely admitting to a crime they didn't commit. Other than a violation of human rights, shouldn't this also be child abuse?

 

[SummerMadness]

I think what's worse is she is still trying to argue that these kids did the crime, it's now pure obtuseness motivating her.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I am unfamiliar with the case. so I can't comment rationally about it or whether firing the novelist because of what she did prior to becoming a novelist makes sense in this particular circumstance. I am also unfamiliar with the miniseries that was mentioned but as I don't think basing one's opinion of a case based upon what is portrayed in a miniseries makes good sense, I wouldn't find being familiar with a mini series as useful in ferreting out actual facts. I sincerely hope people are expressing their opinions based on factual information from sources other than a mini series.

 

[Cis.jd]

I am unfamiliar with the case. so I can't comment rationally about it or whether firing the novelist because of what she did prior to becoming a novelist makes sense in this particular circumstance. I am also unfamiliar with the miniseries that was mentioned but as I don't think basing one's opinion of a case based upon what is portrayed in a miniseries makes good sense, I wouldn't find being familiar with a mini series as useful in ferreting out actual facts. I sincerely hope people are expressing their opinions based on factual information from sources other than a mini series.

I suggest you watch it and then do a bit of research, then come back. But yes, it is very hard to watch.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I suggest you watch it and then do a bit of research, then come back. But yes, it is very hard to watch.

I don't see how watching the miniseries would be useful. The research certainly would be educational and I could give an educated opinion if I did so but by the time I were to become sufficiently knowledgeable on the topic this thread will have long been forgotten. My opinion on the subject is hardly necessary as there are a number of people already engaged that have knowledge of the case.

 

[Sistrin]

Sure you know what she DID but you don't know what was in her heart while she was doing it...

And what did she do, exactly?

 

[Sistrin]

Good. But I hope she goes to jail.

For what? Having an opinion?

I did watch When They See Us on Netflix and it was hard to watch.

You saw it on television, therefore it must be true. Well, propaganda is designed to influence the masses.

This subject has been discussed on these forums a number of times before. All that is going on here is another segment of the continuing effort to retry the case of the central park five in the court of public opinion. For example, this line from the cited article, quote:

"...were arrested and interrogated for hours without access to lawyers or their parents."

is a flat out lie. According to the case files and NYPD records the parents were present during questioning. But never let the truth interfere with virtue signaling.

 

[Cis.jd]

For what? Having an opinion?

An "opinion" that stole the youth of a bunch of kids?

You saw it on television, therefore it must be true. Well, propaganda is designed to influence the masses.

This subject has been discussed on these forums a number of times before. All that is going on here is another segment of the continuing effort to retry the case of the central park five in the court of public opinion. For example, this line from the cited article, quote:

"...were arrested and interrogated for hours without access to lawyers or their parents."

is a flat out lie. According to the case files and NYPD records the parents were present during questioning. But never let the truth interfere with virtue signaling.

This is a completely silly reply you made. You think this Netflix series is the only source of info i'm talking? The movie and the documentary by Ken Burns shows the parents present during that, the fact is they where not present through out the entirety of it. Please don't make silly replies like this on me again. I'd appreciate it.

 

[Cis.jd]

I don't see how watching the miniseries would be useful. The research certainly would be educational and I could give an educated opinion if I did so but by the time I were to become sufficiently knowledgeable on the topic this thread will have long been forgotten. My opinion on the subject is hardly necessary as there are a number of people already engaged that have knowledge of the case.

Try it out anyway. I don't understand how anyone sane can't understand how a woman who prosecuted and successfully stole a number of years off a bunch of kids is bad.

 

[Sistrin]

An "opinion" that stole the youth of a bunch of kids?

Her opinion did not convict the Central Park Five in a court of law. The evidence did that.

You think this Netflix series is the only source of info i'm talking?

Yeah, I do. Kinda obvious.

The movie and the documentary by Ken Burns shows the parents present during that, the fact is they where not present through out the entirety of it.

And you know this how? You saw it on television?

Please don't make silly replies like this on me again. I'd appreciate it.

You don't play the victim very well either.

 

[Cis.jd]

Her opinion did not convict the Central Park Five in a court of law. The evidence did that.

Evidence that was manufactured.

And you know this how? You saw it on television?

Isn't this ironic for you to ask, since you here are trying to make claims if this whole thing being false as if you have actual knowledge that isn't sourced by whatever bs you've read?

You don't play the victim very well either.

Not playing victim at all. The fact that you randomly interpreted that shows that you really not someone to be taken seriously here.

 

[variant]

I am unfamiliar with the case. so I can't comment rationally about it or whether firing the novelist because of what she did prior to becoming a novelist makes sense in this particular circumstance. I am also unfamiliar with the miniseries that was mentioned but as I don't think basing one's opinion of a case based upon what is portrayed in a miniseries makes good sense, I wouldn't find being familiar with a mini series as useful in ferreting out actual facts. I sincerely hope people are expressing their opinions based on factual information from sources other than a mini series.

The publisher gets to decide who they work with so it's not really your call.

The mini series just shined a light on what happened recently, the facts of the case have not changed since the central park five were exonerated.

 

[SummerMadness]

I don't see how watching the miniseries would be useful. The research certainly would be educational and I could give an educated opinion if I did so but by the time I were to become sufficiently knowledgeable on the topic this thread will have long been forgotten. My opinion on the subject is hardly necessary as there are a number of people already engaged that have knowledge of the case.

Arguing about a subject you claim you have no knowledge of is not a good look. "I don't know the story, but I want to say what happened to the person that perpetuated a racist system is wrong," is a completely ignorant reply in the truest sense of the word; you know nothing of the case, but are leaning toward the perpetrators being wronged.