This Law Paper Investigates All Aspects of the Rubin Carter Case

Interestingly enough, the two key witnesses later denied their statements that placed Artis and Carter at the crime scene. On December 10, 1975 Judge Larner denied an appeal 'on the grounds that the recantations by two former witnesses had 'lacked the ring of truth'", even though the two key witnesses had recanted their allegations. The judge had denied a new trial because he felt they were lying. During the second trial, the judge denied an appeal, because he was also involved in the first trial, and did not want to over-rule the conclusions he had come to in the first trial. When a lawyer stated, "You had a predisposition to disbelieve them", the judge replied by saying he 'had to' deny a new trial 'to preserve the integrity of our jury system'" Furthermore, the juries of the first trial was made up of all whites, while the second jury consisted of all but two whites, in addition the same judge tried the first two hearings. The entire case against Carter and Artis is weak, and faulty at best. It provided no conclusive evidence in solving the Layfeete murders, and as a result two guilty men run free, while the accused suffered torment and shame to pay a debt they did not owe.
Reflection
As previously stated this case is weak and faulty at best. It is another unfortunate result of racism, discrimination and legal corruption. It only goes to prove the lengths legal officials will go to pin the blame on a minority, so they can look like heroes for capturing the "bad guy".
…