Author Alice Sebold apologises to man wrongly jailed for raping her

'You've never experienced this, therefore you don't deserve an opinion'... gimme a break. Really, that's just ridiculous. That's like saying 'You've never murdered someone, so you can't say murder is wrong'.

She told quite a few lies, including allegations that he'd hired someone to hurt a friend. That was completely of her own doing. Again, I genuinely believe she was raped. That's not in question. No doubt in my mind.

But she admitted, in her own book, to lying under oath. She didn't believe it was him, even picking the wrong person initially, and having doubts.

As for bringing up her sexual past... by her own account, there wasn't any sexual partners. Her first sexual encounter was a rape. That's a horrifying thing to think of, but that's sadly what happened.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/alice-sebold-rape-and-redemption-107713.html

There's an Oscar winning documentary called 'Murder on a Sunday morning'. It concerns a black teenager falsely accused of a robbery and murder. The police are pushing for a conviction, even bullying( nay torturing) the young guy into giving and signing a false confession. Lawyers fight to prevent his conviction. The police officers (diverse, including one black officer, who, by all accounts, was the worst. Literally punched the kid in the gut and said ''N-words' like you give us all a bad name') were out to get a conviction, despite him not looking anything like the accused (the correct person is finally tracked down and arrested. He makes an appearance at the end of the doc.)

Even the husband of the victim is pushing for this teen to be the person-he's angry, wants someone to pay, despite him being innocent and not matching his own description that was given to the police. (For example, the clothing of the accused is a blank, tee-shirt. Whilst the person he claims shot his wife was wearing a very colourful, graffiti-like font tee-shirt.)

The reason I bring up this documentary is because, frankly, two wrongs do not make a right. Ms Sebold was clearly wronged. But sending the wrong man to prison was not making it right (especially when she doubted he was the right person). And he still would be labelled as a sexual predator if not for someone doing the incredibly decent thing of looking into the case after finding discrepancies. They put their own money forward. They weren't going to profit from this (in fact, they lost money by doing this.). If they had gotten back the same result (as in he was guilty, as more evidence was unearthed) I'd be saying the same thing. Very decent of him to do-in that he now confirmed it was true, and thus Sebold was left with no doubts.

Instead the case has gone cold. We know this guy is innocent, now. And all evidence relating to the case (including the rape kit) has been destroyed. As have the records. The real rapist, potentially, remains at large. Or, he may have raped other women, and served time for this. We don't know.

And contrary to your opinion, I do genuinely pity her too. She never got justice. The man who violated her walked free. For all she knows she walked past him every day for the rest of her time in Syracuse. That's a horrifying thing to imagine.

Do we know she made this stuff up, and it wasn't misinformation fed to her to encourage the prosecution?

For some reason I thought you mind actually be in favour of giving people the benefit of the doubt :)

She may have been wrong in court but noone is suggesting it was deliberate attempt to deceive. No idea if she has made any statement since he was exonerated

That's what police do - worldwide.

they can never ever admit to a mistake unless they are absolutely forced to do so.

A report out a couple of years ago here said that if gardai simply made an apology when they got things wrong, most of the high court cases that are taken by people wrongly arrested / maliciously prosecuted would not be taken here.

That would save a few million every year.

Same everywhere. - Police will never admit when they are wrong and would prefer to see innocent people jailed rather than admit a mistake

Regarding the trial, it's not too much of a stretch for me to imagine the prosecution telling her they were certain even if she wasn't, they had some matching hair, there's no doubt he was the guy, and she was convinced and went along with it. They lied to her as well as everybody else. There's plenty of 'wrong' to go round in the trial, and some should be directed her way alright. But I'd be looking mainly at a prosecution who wanted a conviction more than the truth.

Some of what she published in the memoir (apparently, i haven't read it) is worse in a way, if true.

She barred a lot of responsibility in fairness, including knowingly lying about the case. Perjury is a crime is it not?

"Ms Sebold, did you identify my client as part of a lineout?" - reasonable doubt right there.

Look, I am not saying she has no responsibility. She absolutely has. And she took her time 'struggling' with her conscience before admitting she lied on the stand however there are posters here who seem to wish to present this appalling miscarriage of justice as all the fault of Sebold. It is not. The fault for the finding of a guilty verdict when there was enough evidence to cause reasonable doubt already available lies with justice system - prosecution, defence, and the supposed to be impartial judge. That is what I am responding to.