Rubin Carter

Paul Castellano

April 18, 2006

Theology Period 7

Many people know of Rubin “Hurricane” Carter and the events of his life, however, most do not know the reality, and most important, the morality of his story.  Rubin Carter, along with John Artis, was arrested for the triple-homicide at the Lafayette Bar and Grill in Paterson, New Jersey in 1966.  They were convicted of the crime in May of 1967 and sentenced to life-in-prison.  They were granted a new trial because an appeal court ruled the prosecution had withheld evidence from the defending attorneys.  In December of 1976, they were convicted again.  A petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was issued and a U.S. District Court Judge H. Lee Sarokin ruled in favor of Carter and Artis on November 7, 1985.  They were released from prison and the legal case was closed forever.  The debate over the reality of what happened that night, however, continues still today.

On June 17, 1966 at about 2:30 AM, two black gunman, armed with a .32 caliber revolver and 12 gauge pump shotgun, rushed into the Lafayette Bar and Grill.  Jim Oliver, the bar owner, was killed by a shotgun blast to his back.  The gunman shot Fred "Bob" Nauyoks in the head then turned and shot William Marins in the head above his eye, who was sitting two stools to the left of Mr. Nauyoks.  On their way out of the bar, they spotted Mrs. Hazel Tanis sitting in the corner of the bar and shot her once with the shotgun and four times with the revolver.  Oliver and Nauyoks died instantly, Tanis died a month later in the hospital, and Marins survived from the shooting.[i]

The gunman left the bar and walked towards their car.  Next door, Alfred Bello and his friend, Arthur Bradley, were trying to break into a factory.  Bello was keeping watch as Bradley tried to get into the factory.  Bello approached the men thinking they were police officers, then realized who they were, and hid in an alley. The gunmen started to chase Bello, but stopped and drove away in a white car.  Bello then went into the bar where he saw Patricia Valentine walking down the stairs.  Patricia Valentine lived above the bar and saw the men drive away in the car from her upstairs window.  Patricia Valentine called the police.[ii]

The police arrived and notified all of the patrolman in the area of the shooting.  After interviewing Bello and Valentine, they told the police to watch out for a white car with two black occupants.  At 2:34, Sgt. Capter viewed a white car speeding in the distance, but was unable to apprehend it.  At 2:40, Capter pulled over Carter, Artis, and another man named John “Bucks” Royster who was in the passenger seat.  After checking Artis’ license and the car registration, the patrolman let the car go.  Capter’s reason for letting them go is that there were three men in the car, not two.  Capter returns to the Lafayette Grill and talks to Bello and Valentine, who defines the description of the car by describing the butterfly-like headlights and the out of state plates.  Capter leaves and pulls over Carter and Artis’ car a second time.  Bucks Royster wasn’t there.  Carter and Artis are escorted to the grill where they are questioned about their night.[iii]

The first trial took place in May of 1967.  The prosecution’s case was strong enough to convict Carter and Artis of the crime.  Bello and Valentine identified Carter’s car as the car they saw leave the Lafayette Grill.  A live shotgun shell and a pistol round were found in Carter’s car and the ammunition matched the murder weapons.  Bello and Bradley identified Carter as the man with the shotgun and Artis as the other man.  The jury did not believe Carter’s alibi witnesses.  Carter was seen less than a mile away from the bar that night, and hours before the murder, he was seen searching for his guns that had been missing for about a year.  One of these guns included a 12-guage shotgun.  The prosecution suggested the motive for the murder was racial-revenge.  Earlier that night, a white man killed a black bar owner who was the stepfather of Carter's friend Eddie Rawls.  The murder angered the black community and there was talk of revenge.  Eddie Rawls and Carter were seen together at the Nite Spot bar earlier that night and were overheard talking about the murder of his friends stepfather.  The Nite Spot is just 1,320 feet away from the Lafayette Grill.  The owner of the Lafayette Grill, Jim Oliver, was known to refuse to serve blacks.  Jim Oliver was the first to die that night.  The argument by the prosecution of racial revenge led the jury to convict Carter and Artis to a sentence of life-in-prison. [iv]

Before the retrial in 1976, some important events took place.  Carter’s biography, The 16^th Round, was published in 1974.  Carter claimed in this book that he was framed by the corrupt white officers.  These claims were not based in evidence and no court accusations were ever brought up.[v]  It was also during this time that Carter’s support base grew.  Famous celebrities such as Bob Dylan and Muhammad Ali flocked to the cause.  Dylan wrote his famous song “Hurricane” about the alleged events that occurred to Rubin Carter.  Although the song was extremely inaccurate to the actual facts of the case, it brought attention to the cause.  It wasn’t until April 29, 1976 when Carter lost all of his celebrity support.  Carter assaulted a woman named Carolyn Kelley in a hotel room.  The two of them and some other people were there to watch a Muhammad Ali fight on TV when the attack occurred.  Carter tried to prevent her from talking about the incident but she pressed charges later on.  The charges were dropped due to lack of prosecution, but Carter’s bail ruling was changed.[vi]

In 1976, Carter and Artis were granted a new trial based on a police recording of Alfred Bello that the defense lawyers were not told about.  This was a technicality in the prosecution.  During this new trial Carter’s alibi witness, Catherine McGuire, admitted she lied about being with Carter on the night of the murders in the first trial.[vii]  Alfred Bello took back his previous testimony saying Carter and Artis were the killers, however, his recantation was not believed because of two separate polygraph tests he took.  Also, Carter’s defense lawyers claimed the police planted the live ammunition in Carter’s car.  This too, however, was not believed by the jury.  Carter and Artis were sent back to prison.[viii]

The issue of Bello’s credibility was the major subject of the 1976 trial.  Bello gave a statement in 1966 to Det. DeSimone saying Carter was one of the killers.  However, two years before the 1976 trial, Bello and Bradley made statements saying Carter and Artis were not the gunman.  Bello’s story kept shifting around saying Carter and Artis were not the shooters and the he was inside the bar during the time of the shootings hiding behind Hazel Tanis.  Bello later said he was offered money to recant his first testimony about seeing Carter.[ix]  Bello’s words helped to spark the retrial in 1976.  During the time of the trial, however, he reverted back to his original statement.  Bello had made the first statement after talking with Det. DeSimone.  On tape, DeSimone is recorded offering to protect Bello from Carter and to help him out with his parole trouble.[x]  After his favors with the police department ran out, Bello’s new stories started to come out.[xi]  The defense claims DeSimone bribed Bello to lie.  Bello took two polygraph tests to prove to the court that his original version of the murders was the correct one.  Another thing that attacked Bello’s credibility was the fact that he was in the process of robbing a nearby factory at the time and that he stole $62 from the Lafayette Grill cash register before the police arrived.

The polygraph was a controversial piece of evidence that eventually led to the petition to release Carter from prison.  Although Bello passed the first test normally, the second test given by Professor Leonard Harrelson turned out badly.  Prof. Harrelson’s test concluded Bello was standing inside the bar when the shootings happened.  According to the prosecution, this was impossible.  Bello’s vantage point during the shootings was established as being outside the bar during the 1967 trial according to testimony and police statements.  Prof. Harrelson misunderstood that Bello had testified to being outside on the street in the 1967 trial, so he wrote a summary saying Bello’s lie test matched his statement in the first trial.  Although the prosecution knew there was a discrepancy, the defense lawyers were never told.[xii]

Nine Canadians read Carter’s biography, The 16^th Round, and sympathized with Carter.  Some of them moved to New Jersey to try to assist Carter’s defense lawyers in getting Carter freed.  Carter’s lawyers filed for a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1983.  This was Carter’s last chance to get released from prison.  A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is issued to a federal court that claims a trial violated the U.S. Constitution.  Three Canadians were helping Carter’s lawyers research Carter’s case for two years in order to help set up the petition.  The petition claimed Bello had lied in his testimony claiming Carter and Artis were the murderers.  It also points out the prosecution withheld evidence about the polygraph evidence brought up in the second trial.[xiii]  After reviewing the case, U.S. District Court Judge H. Lee Sarokin ruled in favor of Carter and Artis on November 7, 1985 and Carter was released from prison (Artis was already on parole).  Sarokin went through the entire case and concluded that Bello is untrustworthy because of the number of times he changed his statement about the events of the murder.  He also concluded that the racial revenge motive was too far-fetched and was not based on enough evidence.  Another thing Sarokin concluded was the prosecution violated Due Process by not giving the defense a copy of Bello’s polygraph test.  When taking all of this into consideration while reviewing the facts of the case, Sarokin believed the two juries were mistaken in convicting Carter and Artis.[xiv]  On February 19, 1988, the prosecutor filed a motion to dismiss the original indictments brought against Carter and Artis in 1966.  However, the prosecution still maintained the guilt of Rubin Carter and John Artis and felt the petition of Writ of Habeas Corpus was in error.[xv]  An appeal to the Supreme Court to overturn the Petition of Writ of Habeas Corpus failed.  Finally, the prosecution decided that because so many years had passed since the crimes occurred, because some witnesses had died, because Artis had already been paroled, and because Carter had served virtually a life term anyway, that they would dismiss the charges, rather than hold a third trial.[xvi]  After a 22-year process, the charges were dropped.[xvii]  After two separate juries found Rubin Carter and John Artis guilty of murder, one judge overturned the case and let the men go free after twenty years in prison.