|
A DEATH IN BELMONT Leah Goldberg, who lost her mother in a murder described in Sebastian Junger's new book, A Death in Belmont, suffered a devastating loss decades ago. The author and publisher recognize Ms. Goldberg's grief as well as her right to an opinion about the book and the trial on which it is based. Various news organizations and online sites have published comments by Ms. Goldberg about Mr. Junger's book, and it is therefore necessary for us to make available the following statements and rebuttal. Statement by Sebastian Junger: Leah Goldberg suffered a terrible tragedy decades ago, and my heart goes out to her. As a journalist, however, I am compelled to point out that my book is the product of three years of research and consultation with legal experts. To ensure absolute objectivity, I asked a sitting Massachusetts judge, a Boston appellate attorney and a well-known and respected homicide prosecutor to read thousands of pages of trial testimony and then explain to me the most salient points of both the defense and the prosecution. The resulting manuscript was then vetted and edited by these experts, and I made corrections they suggested. The manuscript then went to the original defense and prosecution attorneys in the case and was similarly amended. Finally, the entire book was rigorously fact-checked by an independent, professional fact checker. There were no omissions deemed legally consequential by the experts I consulted, including the original defense and prosecution attorneys. Statement from W. W. Norton & Company: Sebastian Junger is recognized internationally as an award-winning journalist. His new book, A Death in Belmont, reflects that well-earned reputation. The manuscript was read for accuracy by six Massachusetts legal experts, including the original prosecutor and defense attorney in the Roy Smith murder case; the full case file was read by a sitting judge, a Boston homicide prosecutor, and a top appellate attorney, who then read the whole manuscript, and the manuscript was checked by an independent, professional fact-checker. Recommendations from all of these professionals were incorporated into the text. Sebastian Junger is sensitive to the fact that his book discusses events that had a devastating, lifelong impact on the victims' families, and he recognizes their profound grief. Response to Leah Goldberg's online posting on barnesandnoble.com and other sites: Leah Goldberg, who lost her mother in a murder described in Sebastian Junger's book, A Death in Belmont, suffered a terrible loss decades ago. The author and publisher recognize Ms. Goldberg's grief as well as her right to an opinion about the book and the trial on which it is based. In the interest of accuracy, however, it must be stated that A Death in Belmont is the product of three years of research and expert consultation. The manuscript was read by six Massachusetts legal experts, including the original prosecutor and defense attorney in the Roy Smith murder case; thousands of pages of trial testimony were read by a sitting judge, a Boston homicide prosecutor, and a top appellate attorney, who then read the whole manuscript for error or omissions, and the manuscript was checked by an independent, professional fact-checker. Recommendations by all of these professionals were incorporated into the text. Nowhere in the book does the author draw any conclusion about Roy Smith's innocence or guilt. Ms. Goldberg's online posting asserts that the book fails to mention that Smith gave the incorrect time for his arrival at her mother's home; in fact, reference to Smith's error appears on p. 91; his departure time is noted on pp 15, 51, and 247. The matter of how long Roy Smith spent at the Goldberg house and when he arrived and/or left is discussed on pp. 15, 51, 123, 240-241, and 255-256. The posting asserts that the book fails to mention that the furniture in the living room was found in disarray, but that fact that is mentioned on pp.15 and 101. Ms. Goldberg asserts that Smith's statements to the police "are entirely consistent with a guilty man"; the book discusses why this is not the case on pp. 51 and 256. Ms. Goldberg claims the book fails sufficiently to address the fact that Smith spent more money than he was paid; the book discusses this on pp. 120-121. The posting suggests that the book "explains away" Smith's reluctance to confront the police officers waiting for him at his apartment; the book discusses Smith's avoidance of the police on pp 110-111, 121-122 and 256. Ms. Goldberg asserts that at no time did the police believe her mother was killed by the Boston Strangler. When Roy Smith was convicted of the murder, police investigators continued to probe the possibility that someone else may have committed the murder. There are no omissions in the book that were deemed legally consequential by the experts the author consulted, including the original defense and prosecution attorneys in the case. Nowhere in the book is it suggested that racism was solely responsible for Smith’s conviction; the book makes it clear that Smith was found guilty because he was an excellent candidate for the murder. He was an alcoholic and petty criminal who couldn’t keep his story straight during a twelve hour interrogation with police. However, we now know—because of the spate of DNA exonerations that we read about almost weekly in newspapers—that even people who look extremely guilty occasionally are, in fact, innocent. That is the heart of the "reasonable doubt" standard that every jury must struggle with when its members decide whether or not to sentence someone to death or to prison. |