Jurors in NYPD Rape Trial Say They Believe Officers Were Guilty

notherposterrapecop.jpg
The rape trial of two NYPD cops continues to make news despite the officers having been acquitted of rape charges. According to DNA Info, jury members have confessed that they believed the cops -- who have since lost their jobs for official misconduct -- to be guilty but had to acquit based on lack of DNA evidence. One juror said "In my heart of hearts, I believe her that the officers did it," while another said of Kenneth Moreno, "He raped her. There is no doubt in my mind."

Believing something, of course, is not "evidence." According to another juror,

"We were strictly bound by the judge's instruction that there must be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict the defendants of the major charges of the case," said juror John Finck, 57.

While perhaps it's odd for the jury to be saying this publicly now, keep in mind that Moreno's wife recently emerged to call her husband's accuser a liar and gold digger who can go to hell. And Park Slopers who believe the officers guilty have been plastering neighborhood streets with signs identifying Moreno as a "POLICE RAPIST," and also giving his address. All bets are off with this case, which has clearly tapped into a lot of people's feelings, rational or otherwise.

But back to the legal aspects of the case, Moreno and Mata have been cleared of rape -- but could face jail time on their official misconduct charges. Meanwhile, the accuser still has a $57 million civil suit against the city. Still, according to a statement she released, "public opinion will be the ultimate verdict."

Jurors Believed Cops Were Guilty of Rape, But Lack of DNA Forced Acquittal [DNA Info]


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
9 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Raymond Pistachio
Raymond Pistachio

WTF???   A jury, who was there, in the courtroom, listening to the case, returns a verdict of "not guilty", and everyone is up in arms?  THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO return a "not guilty" verdict if the prosecution can't prove that the accused is guilty!  So what if they think he probably did it? It's better to let someone who's probably guilty go free, than it is to convict someone who's possibly innocent!  DNA is the gold standard of proof, but it's a double-edged sword that cuts both ways:  If you are going to ask a jury to convict upon the discovery of a speck of DNA, then yes, you also have to expect them to aquit in the utter absense of DNA. Is it possible to rape someone without leaving a trace of DNA, hair, fiber, or fingerprint evidence?  Maybe.  But it's REASONABLE to DOUBT it.Better to let 100 guilty men go free than to convict one innocent.

Epac
Epac

If there should be any shame / blame, it should be directed at the prosecuters, who obviously put together a very flimsy case.

William Herndon, Esq.
William Herndon, Esq.

Jen-- your hilarious when you in over your head, which is apparently most of time when you pretend to be a real journalist. You want to read something? 

Try "Weinstein's Evidence Manual," look it up on Amazon or elsewhere-- I recommend that sincerely, because otherwise you consistently look foolish, and about 1/1000th as "clever" (yuck yuck) as you seem to think you are.

Not dumb mind you, just very tiresome-- you could actually do something useful with your energy and instead we get insipidness on both ends of the spectrum. Why? 

rj falcioni jr
rj falcioni jr

oh and one last point, this is a typical ny jury - no dna evidence = shes a lying tramp who wanted it and now wants to get paid. gotta love new yorkers - no love for anyone but their own and then if something does happen they are up in arms about the failure of the justice system. we lie to get outta jury duty and wonder why we get results that everyone knows are wrong and everyone is outraged by. this is america - take it outta the hands of the few and put it back in the hands of the people

rj falcioni jr
rj falcioni jr

they used to hang men in the south on 1/10 the evidence we had here 50 years ago. im not saying it was right or that we havent progressed or didnt need to progress but sometimes you need to throw a rope over an oak tree and make a point. how many millions of new yorkers dont feel safe in their own city because of PIGS like these two. the people of park slope are doing the right thing, drive the bums out, take back new york for new yorkers. this city and this country needs to be shaken out of its slumber, bc locally and in washington we are get F##K'd everyday 

bl1y
bl1y

If the evidence of rape was so overwhelming, why aren't the protesters publicly shaming the jurors?

Jen Doll
Jen Doll

at one point some people were. also, the jurors are acknowledging they didn't have the  "evidence" needed to convict.

bl1y
bl1y

So, if the jurors say there wasn't enough evidence to convict, why was all the previous coverage so certain that there was more than enough evidence to convict?

Jen Doll
Jen Doll

I don't think I've ever said there was "more than enough evidence to convict." However, I've read a lot about the trial and I don't think anyone who's done so would disagree that some shady shit went down on the night of the alleged rape.

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...