By Mrs. Eileen Hunter — about the author.
Rubin “Hurricane” Carter was convicted of a New Jersey triple murder — twice — on the word of witnesses with criminal exposure and shifting stories, while material bearing on their credibility went undisclosed. His convictions survived years of appeals before a federal judge found the prosecution had been “predicated upon an appeal to racism rather than reason, and concealment rather than disclosure” and set them aside in 1985. (Carter v. Rafferty, 621 F. Supp. 533 (D.N.J. 1985).)
Tony Hunter’s case rhymes without being identical: a Black man, a triple murder, incentivized witnesses whose accounts contradict each other, documented disclosure claims — and decades of denials without an evidentiary hearing. The honest differences matter too: Carter’s witnesses were not jailhouse informants, and Carter got the federal review Mr. Hunter’s time-barred petition never received. The full comparison, including where the cases differ, is on the Carter page.
The lesson that transfers: Carter’s case moved when journalists and the public forced sustained scrutiny. Courts respond to records; records get built when people are watching. (How to help accurately.)
Leave a Reply