I don't think there's serious doubt at this point that the five of them were innocent. Five men cannot rape someone and leave no DNA trail behind while a sixth man, uncharged at the time, did leave DNA evidence behind. The only evidence against the five came from confessions which we now know were extracted under circumstances that negate any confidence in their reliability. They were presumed guilty by the police and the DA and abusively questioned until they agreed they were guilty. (I know a lawyer for one of the defendants, and I remember at the time that he seemed sincerely under the impression that his client was innocent).
|