Legal Expert Reverses Stance in Notorious Rape Case After Initial Criticism of Prosecution Misconduct

Legal expert Bennett Gershman has made a surprising about-face in his stance regarding the prosecution of Anthony Broadwater for the rape of bestselling author Alice Sebold. Initially, Gershman was highly critical of the case, describing it as an egregious example of prosecutorial misconduct that bordered on tyranny. However, he recently filed a report asserting that Syracuse’s prosecutors did not engage in misconduct during the trial.

The case dates back to 1981 when Sebold, then a freshman at Syracuse University, was raped in a park near campus. Despite initial disbelief from law enforcement and a lineup misidentification where she picked someone else as her attacker, Broadwater was arrested five months later after Sebold believed she recognized him on the street.

District Attorney William Fitzpatrick of Onondaga County has since criticized the original prosecution for continuing despite clear evidence that Sebold had identified the wrong person during the lineup. However, Gershman’s recent report contradicts his earlier stance and supports the city's legal position in defending the case against a lawsuit filed by Broadwater seeking financial damages.

Gershman told ProPublica last year that prosecutors had "manufactured a case" against Broadwater, calling it an egregious violation of due process. But after further investigation, he now claims the facts are more complex and nuanced than initially understood. This reversal has raised eyebrows among legal experts who view such changes in opinion as potentially damaging to credibility.

Stephen Gillers, an emeritus professor at New York University School of Law specializing in ethics, noted that while it is not unethical for an expert to change their mind, Gershman’s dramatic shift could undermine his future testimony. Rebecca Roiphe from the New York Law School echoed similar concerns, suggesting that commentators should approach cases with neutrality and that taking a partisan stance as an expert can be problematic.

The case highlights broader issues within the criminal justice system in Syracuse during the 1980s, where lapses in prosecution allowed serial rapists to continue their crimes for years. ProPublica’s recent investigation detailed multiple failures by law enforcement and prosecutors, leading to wrongful convictions like that of Broadwater who served nearly two decades under a false accusation.

Broadwater's case has garnered significant attention due to Sebold’s widely read memoir "Lucky," which described her experience and the aftermath of her rape. The differing accounts in her book and recent deposition testimony have added layers of complexity to the legal proceedings, further complicating Gershman’s role as an expert witness for the city.

As the lawsuit progresses, questions remain about how a jury will perceive Gershman's credibility given his initial public criticism followed by his current support of the prosecution. The case underscores the importance of thorough investigation and adherence to due process in criminal cases, especially those involving eyewitness testimony that can be unreliable or influenced by external factors.