|
|
|
 |
|
|
 RSS Feed
| › Most Recent Postings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Post:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| In Lackey story, an opportunity lost |
|
| Student post |
|
| Thu, April 23, 2009 |
|
It is almost unheard of that an acquittal receives more media attention than the case that predicated it. But this is the case for Dan Lackey, a developmentally disabled man who was wrongly accused and convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in 2003. Lackey spent 3 and a half years in prison before the judge overturned the judgment in the case altogether.
The Syracuse Post-Standard covered the Lackey acquittal extensively. In this article, staff reporter Jim O’Hara gives an in-depth, play-by-play look at the circumstances that led to Lackey’s wrongful conviction.
The story is a heart-wrenching one, to be sure; it’s fit for the big screen, or at least a made-for-TV Lifetime docudrama. All of the classic characters are here: the unwitting idiot duped by a legal system hungrier for a conviction than actual justice, the unbelieving parents who fought in defense long after Lackey was put behind bars, and even the mentally troubled woman who claimed to be assaulted and recanted her testimony years later. O’Hara vividly paints the thoughts and actions of these characters one by one in this long-form piece.
While O’Hara’s attention towards detail is commendable, this particular story lacks one essential element: a focused analysis of the court system itself, or of the underlying flaws that were responsible for Lackey’s wrongful conviction.
O’Hara’s piece does much to incite the ire of the reader -- how, in this day and age, could a person so obviously innocent spend 3 and a half years of his life behind bars -- it fails to even attempt to answer this question, or to examine the larger cultural context that the case operates within.
Lackey’s case is sympathetic enough not to need overly descriptive editorial injected into the plotline. By pandering to the dramatic elements of the case while simultaneously failing to examine the legal underpinnings of the Lackey trial, O’Hara misses a valuable chance to educate an audience that might not otherwise have any interest in the field of wrongful convictions and the lives they often ruin.
-- Brenna Cammeron
|
|
Posted at 02:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are 4 comments to this post:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Steve commented: |
|
|
Sad story, all the way around. McCarthy should be jailed for at least as long as Dan Lackey spent in prison !
~Steve, Croatia
|
|
|
Posted Tue, June 16, 2009 at 06:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| John_Ch commented: |
|
| Agree with Calzro |
|
|
I agree with Calzro opinion that where is justice when we need it?????..........
|
|
|
Posted Tue, June 16, 2009 at 04:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| commented: |
|
| In Lackey story, an opportunity lost |
|
|
Is justice be there when we need? I dont think so, since we all know that some reason money can buy justice it self. But This is nice story.
|
|
|
Posted Sun, June 14, 2009 at 09:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| MarkObbie commented: |
|
| I comment Jim O'Hara |
|
|
With due respect, I find the story to be admirable and compelling. Yes, it might have explained in more detail how the evidence added up at trial, and what systemic problems might have contributed to the conviction. But the essential elements are all in the story, and in highly readable form. Despite lots of uncooperative sources, O'Hara did a fine job of piecing together what happened. We learn about wrongful convictions by seeing how this one occurred. That works for me.
|
|
|
Posted Thu, April 23, 2009 at 03:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
