Following an investigation by the New York Times, the Brooklyn DA's office is currently reviewing 50 cases in which retired NYPD Detective Louis Scarcella may have botched lineups, forced confessions, or used unreliable witnesses—such as a crack addict who apparently witnessed six different murders. Today the Post gives Scarcella a sympathetic forum to defend himself from allegations of being an awful detective and a person who ruined the lives of innocent people: “I’m standing up for myself because it’s the truthful thing to do."
This sudden concern for the truth would come as a surprise to David Ranta, the man who was released in March after serving 23 years in prison for a murder he didn't commit. An investigation by the DA's office showed that Scarcella coached a witness to finger Ranta and that the detectives mishandled the entire case.
The Post gives that witness, identified as Max Lieberman, a single, infuriatingly vague quote in their story: "I did not say this detective."
Scarcella: “David is guilty of felony murder. He is not this innocent guy." Well, now that that's settled, what about Scarcella's propensity to use the same "witness" in multiple homicides?
Scarcella’s reliance on Teresa Gomez, a drug-addicted hooker, has also raised concerns. She testified in five murder cases, Scarcella said, including two involving drug dealer Robert Hill.
How could one person see so much death?
“It’s weird, but it’s the truth,” Scarcella said. “She roamed the streets.”
“The notion that a crackhead could witness more than one murder might seem ridiculous,” said Joel Cohen, a prosecutor who worked with Scarcella. “But she was polygraphed three times, and passed every time.”
Nothing bolsters unreliable testimony like unreliable tests.
