Central Park Five Case Records (Manhattan District Attorney's Office)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the New York Freedom of Information Law, I hereby request the following records:

I am requesting access to and copies of records related to the Central Park Five case. This case is of great public interest as it involved the wrongful convictions of five teenagers - Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, and Korey Wise - for the assault and rape of Trisha Meili, a female jogger, in Central Park on the night of April 19, 1989. The case garnered significant media attention and raised serious concerns about the criminal justice system, police tactics, and racial bias. The convictions were later vacated in 2002, and a settlement was reached with the City of New York in 2014.

Specifically, I am seeking the following records:

All internal memos, emails, and communications related to the investigation of the Central Park Five case.
All documents and records pertaining to the investigation, arrest, and prosecution of Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, and Korey Wise, including but not limited to police reports, witness statements, interrogation records, and forensic evidence.
All records of any internal investigations, disciplinary actions, or reviews related to the handling of the Central Park Five case, including any assessments or evaluations of the tactics employed during the investigation and interrogation process.
Any documents or records that detail the settlement and/or restitution process for Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, and Korey Wise.
All documents and records pertaining to the investigation and prosecution of Matias Reyes, whose confession and DNA evidence ultimately led to the exoneration of the Central Park Five.
Any other relevant documents, records, or files that pertain to the Central Park Five case.
I request that you provide these records without redaction or withholding, as the requested documents are of significant public interest and concern. If any information is withheld or redacted, please provide a written explanation for the denial, citing the specific exemption(s) under FOIL that justify the withholding or redaction. As established in numerous FOIL cases, including Matter of Gould v. New York City Police Department (89 N.Y.2d 267) and Matter of Fink v. Lefkowitz (47 N.Y.2d 567), the burden of proof for denying access to requested documents falls on the agency.

Please be aware that I intend to exhaust all administrative remedies and may seek judicial review under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules if access to the requested documents is denied or if there is an unreasonable delay in providing the requested documents.

If you have any questions or need clarification regarding this request, please feel free to reach out for clarfication

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Jordan Lassiter