Black Man convicted of raping author Alice Sebold is exonerated 39 years later (See Staff Post)(Up: Sebold Apologizes)

[BringBackSonics]

1. Her actual rapist.
2. The innocent man on the street she identified as her rapist.
3. The wrong guy she identified in a police line up.

ALL 3 of them looked completely identical to her? Wow.

Then this quote about the man she wrongly identified in the lineup "the expression in his eyes told me that if we were alone, if there were no wall between us, he would call me by name and then kill me."

Wow.

I feel terribly sorry that she was raped, and not only that, but I also feel terrible for her because her actual rapist escaped justice. But honestly after the lineup misidentification the prosecutor should have thrown out the case and realized she was an unreliable witness.

I hope she is also able to look within and deal with the biases she has that have lead to this misidentification.

It seems tragic that after her misidentification prosecutors still went along with the case. And she later became a wealthy successful author while an innocent man she misidentified had his life ruined.

Click to shrink...

the article clearly states the prosecutors manipulated her, and that their only physical evidence was based on junk science.

I think everyone agrees this should have never moved forward in the court room, but Prosecutors are so intent to solve crimes like this, they would send a innocent black man to jail

 

[nelsonroyale]

I am glad he is finally released, and disgusted at his travesty of justice. The author needs to give him a sincere appology, and the state needs to appologise and compensate him considerably. Nothing can account for the years he has lost, but he needs justice now.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Hold on. I haven't read her book but did she drop the line about the prosecution coaching her because she thought it was a fine and totally cool thing that happened or because she herself thought something was fucked up? It just seems so weird a thing to disclose to people unless it's followed up by "I now realize with time that we did a huge injustice" but if there's no reflection and just dropped as a matter of fact that's pretty fucked up.

I do think a kid maybe should have the expectation that if she makes an accusation that they would do a proper investigation and prevent a false conviction if there was no evidence but at the same time I assume the book was written by her later as an adult and I really don't see how to approach the events from her current life experience which should have made a lot of what she said and did look a lot more suspect to her in hindsight.

So without knowing anything about the woman I think it's still totally fair to criticize her because she revisited her experience later to write a book then later again to shop it out as a movie and through all that time she was never like "wait, this doesn't seem ok here..." that's terrible. I mean, I could kinda see going easier on her if she never revisited that experience and just buried it deep down somewhere, it'd still be a fuck up she made but at least it never would have been something she's reevaluated as an adult but she has reevaluated the events as an adult and presumably still stood by what happened so I don't think she can hide behind the shield of being a child at the time anymore.

Of course if the book's all negative about her experience and full of doubts about what transpired then I guess you could make the argument that she had been trying to publicly bring light to the conviction possibly being wrong....

But, then, one would assume the article would have been written differently if that was the case.

 

[Gavalanche]

holy cow, Tim Mucciante is a hero. He wasnt a lawyer or a cop or anything, he was the frigging producer and was like, "well, this is suss." I feel like the vast majority of people would either not have noticed or not have bothered.

 

[Joni]

1. Her actual rapist.
2. The innocent man on the street she identified as her rapist.
3. The wrong guy she identified in a police line up.

Click to shrink...

The man who she saw on the street, might have been her actual rapist. She never said it was Broadwater!

"He was smiling as he approached. He recognized me. It was a stroll in the park to him; he had met an acquaintance on the street," wrote Sebold, who is white. "'Hey, girl,' he said. 'Don't I know you from somewhere?'" She said she didn't respond: "I looked directly at him. Knew his face had been the face over me in the tunnel."

Click to shrink...

Sebold went to police, but she didn't know the man's name and an initial sweep of the area failed to locate him. An officer suggested the man in the street must have been Broadwater, who had supposedly been seen in the area. Sebold gave Broadwater the pseudonym Gregory Madison in her book.

Click to shrink...

So she saw someone who she thought was her rapist, police told her it was Broadwater, she didn't identify Broadwater in the line-up, and they pushed her to say it was Broadwater.

 

[dude]

Everything about this is terrible, I hope he gets compensated. What a horrible case.

But people in here hoping he'll sue a rape victim who thought she found her attacker? What the hell is wrong with you? What failed here, for everyone involved - Is the system.

 

[mbpm]

That's insane that the whole case was reopened on basically a producer wanting some more detail on the source material before he did an adaptation.

Not from the justice system, but from artistic impulse

 

[CharlesAznable]

Holy shit, that producer is a fucking saint.

 

[Joni]

Reading the summary of the book makes stuff even more WTF

• When Sebold reported the crime to the police, they remarked that a young woman had once been murdered and dismembered in the same location. Thus, the police told Sebold, she was "lucky".

 

[JasonV]

I think you don't understand trauma

Click to shrink...

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

 

[Joni]

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

Click to shrink...

She didn't actually pick a random person on the street

"He was smiling as he approached. He recognized me. It was a stroll in the park to him; he had met an acquaintance on the street," wrote Sebold, who is white. "'Hey, girl,' he said. 'Don't I know you from somewhere?'" She said she didn't respond: "I looked directly at him. Knew his face had been the face over me in the tunnel."

Click to shrink...

Sebold went to police, but she didn't know the man's name and an initial sweep of the area failed to locate him. An officer suggested the man in the street must have been Broadwater, who had supposedly been seen in the area. Sebold gave Broadwater the pseudonym Gregory Madison in her book.

Click to shrink...

 

[Glasgow Mega-Snake]

The man who she saw on the street, might have been her actual rapist. She never said it was Broadwater!

So she saw someone who she thought was her rapist, police told her it was Broadwater, she didn't identify Broadwater in the line-up, and they pushed her to say it was Broadwater.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, possibly it was 4 different people

Her actual rapist
The man who talked to her on the street (maybe her rapist, maybe not)
Broadwater (who the police brought into this)
The man she identified in the lineup

I feel sorry for her, but unfortunately it seems she wasn't a reliable witness

But the police look worst in this, seems like they were set on convicting Broadwater when even Sebold didn't think it was him

 

[Joni]

I feel sorry for her, but unfortunately it seems she wasn't a reliable witness

Click to shrink...

Indeed. But her being an unreliable witness is not her fault, a witness being coached is the fault of the police / the prosecutor, especially if the witness is the victim of a traumatic crime.

 

[Big Boy]

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

Click to shrink...

You need to read the article. She identified a man on the street. This man wasn't necessarily Broadwater. Police decided that it was and used her trauma to convince her it was him.

It's been well documented that victims of violent assault see their attacker in others. The potential to actually run into your attacker again cauuses severe pcychological strain. Add to that, the also documented issues with identification lineups and a clear case of cops and lawyers desperate to convict, using any means necessary to coerce and manipulate the victim into a testimony that suits that end, and you have this result.

There are two victims here and neither is at fault for what happened to the other.

The fault lies solely with the people in the legal system.

 

[caffe misto]

Jesus Christ. I read this book a few years back. Had no idea.

 

[pswii60]

Goodness, it reminds me of Just Mercy, that was a harrowing watch.

The US justice system is a mess.

I think she picked a innocent black man off the streets and destroyed his life.

Trauma is not an excuse.

Click to shrink...

You don't understand PTSD at all. And clearly nor did the state.

It was the state that destroyed his life, not her. They're both victims.

 

[jaekeem]

They're both victims and there is no need to relitigate the decisions of a teenage victim of rape. She is in a position of security and power now. Her actions in the days to come will be telling and I think it's more than fair to criticize her if she stays mum for likely CYA legal reasons after a man's life was effectively destroyed over a concocted lie.

 

[Grenchel]

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

Click to shrink...

Trauma can absolutely cause false memories. It's like a huge characteristic of significant trauma.

 

[jayu26]

Okay people who read the book, we need this cleared up. All of the stuff about her identifying a person on the street as rapist (who was possiblynot Boardwater), then identifying another person in the line up, and police training her to pick Boardwater in courtroom. Any of this shit in the book or even hinted at? Has she talked about being coached before?

 

[kradical]

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

Click to shrink...

It absolutely does.

 

[Odesu]

Trauma doesn't concoct memories or compel a victim to wield the power of the state to destroy a random person on the street.

Click to shrink...

Nice of you to state once again that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Praetorpwj]

Good lord this is sooooo fucked up. Sue the shit out of her.

Click to shrink...

Fucking unreal attitude. She was a traumatised teenage rape victim manipulated by prosecutors. Get to fucking Gaf.

 

[papermoon]

Okay people who read the book, we need this cleared up. All of the stuff about her identifying a person on the street as rapist (who was possiblynot Boardwater), then identifying another person in the line up, and police training her to pick Boardwater in courtroom. Any of this shit in the book or even hinted at? Has she talked about being coached before?

Click to shrink...

The CNN article says this:

In "Lucky," Sebold wrote that "a detective and a prosecutor told her after the lineup that she picked out the wrong man and how the prosecutor deliberately coached her into rehabilitating her misidentification," according to the affirmation.

Click to shrink...

I didn't read the book, but if the affirmation exonerating Broadwater is correct, Sebold expressly describes her misidentification and her following the prosecutors' instructions on how to "rehabilitate" that mistaken ID.

When someone falls victim to a horrific crime, as happened to Sebold, that does NOT give the victim license to perpetrate further serious wrongs under cover of victimhood. Maybe their actions can be seen through a filter of compassion, but it doesn't exonerate them of the wrongs they commit subsequent to the initial crime they suffered. And what Sebold did to Broadwater was a most grievous, atrocious wrong.

I can imagine Sebold wanted someone to pay for that rape. That's understandable. But the way she was tagging multiple Black men as the target for her vengeance, seems she leaned too askew into that ol' lynching spiritual: Anyone Black Will Do. And when the prosecutors conspired to nullify her misidentification, she was complicit. She deserves criticism for that - at the very least.

Maybe Broadwater has no interest in anything but an apology from Sebold, but I hope he does sue her for civil damages, and I hope he wins. She destroyed his life and robbed years, parenthood, and peace of mind from him.

Wholeheartedly agree with all of this:

1. Her actual rapist.
2. The innocent man on the street she identified as her rapist.
3. The wrong guy she identified in a police line up.

ALL 3 of them looked completely identical to her? Wow.

Then this quote about the man she wrongly identified in the lineup "the expression in his eyes told me that if we were alone, if there were no wall between us, he would call me by name and then kill me."

Wow.

I feel terribly sorry that she was raped, and not only that, but I also feel terrible for her because her actual rapist escaped justice. But honestly after the lineup misidentification the prosecutor should have thrown out the case and realized she was an unreliable witness.

I hope she is also able to look within and deal with the biases she has that have lead to this misidentification.

It seems tragic that after her misidentification prosecutors still went along with the case. And she later became a wealthy successful author while an innocent man she misidentified had his life ruined.

Click to shrink...

 

[JDSN]

Tim GOAT Hollywood suit

 

[Joni]

Okay people who read the book, we need this cleared up. All of the stuff about her identifying a person on the street as rapist (who was possiblynot Boardwater), then identifying another person in the line up, and police training her to pick Boardwater in courtroom. Any of this shit in the book or even hinted at? Has she talked about being coached before?

Click to shrink...

The Daily Fail has part of the memoir on the line-up. I'm not going to link because they even posted the picture of the line-up. Like how do you get that?

'I moved on to number five. His build was right, his height. And he was looking at me, looking right at me, as if he knew I was there. Knew who I was. The expression in his eyes told me that if we were alone, if there were no wall between us, he would call me by name and then kill me.... I approached the clipboard... I placed my X in the number five box. I had marked the wrong one,' she wrote.

After the lineup, she was told by a Sergeant Lorenz, that she picked out the wrong person.

'Alice, it's my duty to inform you that you failed to pick out the suspect,' she quoted him saying.

'He did not tell me which one was the suspect. He couldn't. But I knew. I stated for the record that in my opinion, the men in positions four and five were almost identical.'

She then described how the then Assistant District Attorney Gail Uebelhoer came into the room and said: 'Well, we got the hair out of the bastard,' referring to Broadwater.

In Lucky, Sebold wrote that she believed she had made a mistake in the police lineup. She went on to identify him in court and he was jailed.

Click to shrink...

 

[Sparkedglory2]

Everybody involved in this farce needs to face some harsh consequences. Sebold included.

Click to shrink...

This 100%. This man lost decades of his life for a crime he didn't commit. This shit is so frustrating.

 

[astro]

Infuriating that this happened, incredibly glad he was exonerated. I hope he gets the most compensation possible, it will never get back the life they took but it is the fucking least they can do.

I don:t care if the author was coached, she should have done more here.

 

[jayu26]

The Daily Fail has part of the memoir on the line-up. I'm not going to link because they even posted the picture of the line-up. Like how do you get that?

Click to shrink...

'He did not tell me which one was the suspect. He couldn't. But I knew. I stated for the record that in my opinion, the men in positions four and five were almost identical.'

Click to shrink...

"He did not tell me which one was the suspect. He couldn't. But I knew."

"But I knew."

!!!

No you didn't. What the fuck is this? And she wrote this after she was a little older and perhaps had a little perspective. Does she later in the book think that maybe she didn't know and jumped the gun?

I am sorry guys, but this quote from the book makes me think she has no remorse for what she did. People saying that she can't be blamed for what happened at the trail because she young and traumatized and was coached by the prosecutor, you are right. But she is still looking to profit of of this tragedy and I am not sure she realize that her rape is not the only tragedy here.

 

[TrashyPanda]

Yeah that college girl who was raped should be sued for being wrong about her rapist! Don't think people here really understand what the hell they are talking about and continue to spout ignorance with every fucking post. This was a failure from everyone involved, quit going after a victim.

 

[Messofanego]

Kudos to the producer for investigating. Broadwater is so strong for going through 5 sets of lawyers and to keeping fighting the good fight.

His wife wanted children, but "I wouldn't bring children in the world because of this. And now, we're past days, we can't have children," Broadwater told reporters after the court hearing.​

😥

Whoever this author is needs to make amends with him. Poor dude, didn't deserve that unconscious racial bias.

 

[Jade1962]

Basically a game of pin the tail on the black man being played.

I understand making a mistake at the time but after writing her book and going over her story constantly after 40 years and never reflecting on if the wrong man went to prison is pretty damming.

The cynic in me tells me though she probably did think about it years down the line but "innocent man behind bars" doesn't help keep her book selling once it took off.

Ultimately though while she played a part the criminal justice system is failure point here like it always is.

 

[CrankyJay]

Holy crap at that Mucciante part. He's a hero as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Joni]

Some reporting as well that Mucciante was actually fired from the Netflix movie because he was opposed to them wanting to whitewash the casting... Like that is not a good look on Netflix either.

 

[rsfour]

When disgusting things like this happen, I wish there was some sort of process where previous cases that were worked by crooked, incompetent, racist judges, lawyers, cops would be reviewed.
There is no way these are some one time "mistakes" by those involved.

 

[Z-Beat]

Is the statute of limitations up on disbarring the prosecutors for effectively falsifying evidence?

Good job to the executive producer.

 

[Keuja]

The justice and the accuser should repay him 39 years worth of money plus interest plus a huge additional compensation for ruining his life. These mofos need to face some consequences

 

[Wiseblood]

In "Lucky," Sebold wrote that "a detective and a prosecutor told her after the lineup that she picked out the wrong man and how the prosecutor deliberately coached her into rehabilitating her misidentification," according to the affirmation.

Click to shrink...

This didn't set off any red flags when the book came out?

 

[Venture]

Compare that to the rich white young man that assaulted multiple girls and got parole. The system sucks.

Click to shrink...

Or the one that got elected to the Supreme Court.

 

[Cosmo Kramer]

Holy shit this is so fucked up. That producer deserves massive kudos.

Click to shrink...

Seems like he got himself a much better movie to produce now

 

[DiipuSurotu]

Seems like he got himself a much better movie to produce now

Click to shrink...

Nope, he was fired by Netflix due to "disagreement over casting"

 

[rjinaz]

You need to read the article. She identified a man on the street. This man wasn't necessarily Broadwater. Police decided that it was and used her trauma to convince her it was him.

It's been well documented that victims of violent assault see their attacker in others. The potential to actually run into your attacker again cauuses severe pcychological strain. Add to that, the also documented issues with identification lineups and a clear case of cops and lawyers desperate to convict, using any means necessary to coerce and manipulate the victim into a testimony that suits that end, and you have this result.

There are two victims here and neither is at fault for what happened to the other.

The fault lies solely with the people in the legal system.

Click to shrink...

The question then becomes why hasnt she had any reflection about the events since then? Wjy hasnt she come to realize she was manipulated. This was such an obvious mistake the dang director was like "oh hell no this isnt right?"

So is she still telling the same account after all these years?

Nobody is saying this woman isnt a victim. She was raped. But she also made a victim of this man and then decades later after his life was ruined was now apparently attempting to profit off of it? I guess

 

[Cosmo Kramer]

Nope, he was fired by Netflix due to "disagreement over casting"

Click to shrink...

I mean he can now make a movie based on this story instead

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

I'm not sure how you could argue Broadwater doesn't have ground for suing Sebold. What happened to her was awful but going to prison and having your life ruined over something you know you didn't so is also traumatic. Now, he may choose to simply sue the state instead but if he chose to sue his accuser as well, i'm not really sure what I can say about that. He is a victim just as much as she is.

 

[krazen]

Sebold wrote in "Lucky" that when she was informed that she'd picked someone other than the man she'd previously identified as her rapist, she said the two men looked "almost identical." She wrote that she realized the defense would be that: "A panicked white girl saw a black man on the street. He spoke familiarly to her and in her mind she connected this to her rape. She was accusing the wrong man."

Click to shrink...

And the defense would have been 100% right; I would like to have seen the other men in this lineup, gonna take a wild guess and say its two black dudes that don't look alike (edit; its in the newsclip, and they don't, not even the same height , eyes look completely diffferent, only think is the same basic shade of skin color and since its a black and white photo with shitty flash that might not even be the case).

And honestly this is still giving her some benefit of doubt in the situation; at least Liam Neeson admited wanting to fuck up the first black man he saw after his friend got attacked. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where he overstepped bounds (that street harassment) and she wanted to nail someone to the wall that 'fits the description'.

Her being traumatized does not mean she's immune to her own fucked up views that might have pre-existed before said trauma, or negate the victim here

 

[entremet]

The question then becomes why hasnt she had any reflection about the events since then? Wjy hasnt she come to realize she was manipulated. This was such an obvious mistake the dang director was like "oh hell no this isnt right?"

So is she still telling the same account after all these years?

Nobody is saying this woman isnt a victim. She was raped. But she also made a victim of this man and then decades later after his life was ruined was now apparently attempting to profit off of it? I guess

Click to shrink...

From a PR perspective, as she is a public person, why would she admit this?

It's obviously cowardly, but I wouldn't expect the Seybold to admit this, especially since she already has the memoir that details this.

 

[808s & Villainy]

I mean you had one person call her a racist

Click to shrink...

I understand that rape is a traumatic event, but when you're saying about a random black dude in a lineup

After Broadwater was arrested, though, Sebold failed to identify him in a police lineup, picking a different man as her attacker because "the expression in his eyes told me that if we were alone, if there were no wall between us, he would call me by name and then kill me."

Click to shrink...

It makes me wonder. Not to mention the two other random black dudes she was sure of (guy on the street and Broadwater)

Something needs to be done about the prosecutor though, but this is America so I already know nothing will happen

 

[Deleted member 69501]

I cried cause this man looks like my dad...

 

[Deleted member 69501]

can imagine Sebold wanted someone to pay for that rape. That's understandable. But the way she was tagging multiple Black men as the target for her vengeance, seems she leaned too askew into that ol' lynching spiritual: Anyone Black Will Do. And when the prosecutors conspired to nullify her misidentification, she was complicit. She deserves criticism for that - at the very least.

Click to shrink...

Is her admitting to this not proof that she purjered herself on the stand?

 

[IneptEMP]

Like others in this thread have said, you can acknowledge that Sebold is a victim while also acknowledging her complicity in ruining a man's life. She knew (or was given a very strong suggestion) that she sent an innocent man to jail and the most she did about it was shop a movie to Netflix.

A civil lawsuit against her should have happened yesterday, but of course that is Broadwater's call.

 

[Big Boy]

The question then becomes why hasnt she had any reflection about the events since then? Wjy hasnt she come to realize she was manipulated. This was such an obvious mistake the dang director was like "oh hell no this isnt right?"

So is she still telling the same account after all these years?

Nobody is saying this woman isnt a victim. She was raped. But she also made a victim of this man and then decades later after his life was ruined was now apparently attempting to profit off of it? I guess

Click to shrink...

Because they convinced her he was the man that assaulted her. Her resolution of the incident in her own mind could very well be tied to that belief. It's no small thing, psychologically speaking, to expect a victim of a violent sexual assault to open that can of worms on their own trauma and admit that actually he might not be the guy, and her attacker is still out there. It's one of the ways the mind can protect itself. To just expect that kind of reflection shows just how little people really understand PTSD.

She will be forced now to open that locked door, and to do it publicly too. It is going to have severe repercussions on her mental health, and going by some of the reactions in this thread, there unfortunately will not be much empathy for that. People lack far too much in their understanding of PTSD.

Broadwater himself seems to realise it, hence why he doesn't want retribution. I'm not sure why so many in this thread are blind to it.

The system is entirely to blame. The amount of sexual assaults that go unpunished due to lack of evidence, and a victims desperation to feel safe from her attacker made her an easy mark for a legal system structured almost entirely to incarcerate minorities.

I'll say it again, there are two victims in this and neither should be blamed. There is plenty of blame to attribute to others involved in this.