Showing as a visitor on the newest episode of PBS’s reboot of Firing Line, MSNBC host Al Sharpton let it’s identified that he has not backed down from his notorious claims from 1987 {that a} teenage black lady was raped by a number of NYPD cops, which was finally discovered to be a hoax by a grand jury.
As the 2 mentioned the documentary Loudmouth, which was produced concerning the liberal race provocateur, host Margaret Hoover recalled the case after which posed:
You served as an advisor to her household, and, all through the grand jury investigation — which finally discovered her story to be a hoax — within the latest movie, you say to the digital camera that your place within the case has been distorted. How so?
The liberal activist complained as a result of the discredited case was not prosecuted in court docket:
My place was that there was this allegation from this younger girl that was actually questionable conduct by some that she accused. She deserved to have her day in court docket — allow us to carry the case to court docket. And this prosecutor wouldn’t do this.
He quickly admitted that he has not modified his thoughts concerning the rape accusations that had been rejected by a grand jury:
HOOVER: Thirty-five years later, how do you perceive what occurred to Tawana Brawley?
SHARPTON: I haven’t got any totally different understanding as a result of a grand jury isn’t a trial.
He then complained that the prosecutor put him on trial as a substitute:
And there is a well-known saying by a decide in New York: You possibly can indict a ham sandwich if you wish to. That very same prosecutor charged me with taking cash from my youth group, and we beat him in court docket. So why would I consider him with what he did with the grand jury after I noticed what he did to me?
The 2 then went again forth:
HOOVER: You imply nothing has modified in 35 years?
SHARPTON: Completely not.
HOOVER: Do you assume that you just had been misled within the case of Tawana Brawley?
SHARPTON: I’ve no proof that I used to be misled.
HOOVER: However do you assume she instructed you the reality?
SHARPTON: Her attorneys is who I talked to, I’ve by no means requested a 15-year-old lady all the small print that you just stated, I’ve no purpose to really feel she misled the attorneys.
After Sharpton recalled that he had believed Brawley’s lawyer however had by no means spoken concerning the particulars instantly with the 15-year-old, Hoover requested her liberal visitor about his reluctance to creating apologies.
Hoover did not get round to asking about Sharpton’s historical past of anti-Semitic rhetoric that occurred round proper earlier than a lethal arson assault occurred towards a Jewish-owned enterprise.
This episode of Firing Line was funded partially by the Fairweather Basis and the Asness Household Basis.
Transcript follows:
PBS’s Firing Line
January 15, 2023
MARGARET HOOVER: Of all of the instances that you’ve got been entrance and heart in, there’s one that you just write, in your personal phrases, that you just’re “indelibly” linked to. After all, that case is the case of Tawana Brawley. After all, she was a, on the time, a 15-year-old lady who alleged that she was kidnapped and repeatedly raped by six white males, together with by legislation enforcement officers.
REVEREND AL SHARPTON (from 1987): We aren’t going to let this lady be the scapegoat of a corrupt system!
HOOVER: You served as an advisor to her household, and, all through the grand jury investigation — which finally discovered her story to be a hoax — within the latest movie, you say to the digital camera that your place within the case has been distorted. How so?
SHARPTON: My place was that there was this allegation from this younger girl that was actually questionable conduct by some that she accused. She deserved to have her day in court docket — allow us to carry the case to court docket. And this prosecutor wouldn’t do this.
HOOVER: Thirty-five years later, how do you perceive what occurred to Tawana Brawley?
SHARPTON: I haven’t got any totally different understanding as a result of a grand jury isn’t a trial. And there is a well-known saying by a decide in New York: You possibly can indict a ham sandwich if you wish to. That very same prosecutor charged me with taking cash from my youth group, and we beat him in court docket. So why would I consider him with what he did with the grand jury after I noticed what he did to me?
HOOVER: You imply nothing has modified in 35 years?
SHARPTON: Completely not.
HOOVER: Do you assume that you just had been misled within the case of Tawana Brawley?
SHARPTON: I’ve no proof that I used to be misled.
HOOVER: However do you assume she instructed you the reality?
SHARPTON: Her attorneys is who I talked to, I’ve by no means requested a 15-year-old lady all the small print that you just stated, I’ve no purpose to really feel she misled the attorneys.
HOOVER: In case you consider nothing has modified 35 years after Tawana Brawley, why would not you be agitating for justice?
SHARPTON: I might — I consider that it by no means went to court docket, and due to this fact we have no idea what proof was introduced that backed up what he introduced to a grand jury?
HOOVER: However the justice course of decided that her accusations had been a lie.
SHARPTON: That isn’t the justice — the justice system has a grand jury that claims that they both consider or disbelieve what the prosecutor presents.
HOOVER: There is a sense that — properly, this case, in your phrases, is “indelibly” linked to you, that one of the best posture for you, and that you’ve got determined, is only for you to not apologize. You stated: “As soon as you start bending, it is, ‘Did you bend at this time?’ or, ‘I missed the apology, say it once more.’ When you begin compromising, you lose respect for your self.” That is a quote from you. Inform me extra about that.
SHARPTON: Nicely, I feel it’s important to characterize what I used to be saying in the proper context. First, what am I apologizing for? Believing two attorneys that had simply helped to win the case in Howard Seashore? So I ought to apologize? I should not consider them? Ought to I apologize for believing the Central Park 5, who was exonerated? So what — inform me what an apology would sound like.
HOOVER: Thirty-five years later, nothing has modified for you?
SHARPTON: I feel I’ve answered that.
