722
submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Ronnie Long was convicted by an all-white jury in North Carolina on Oct. 1, 1976, after he was accused of raping a white woman in Concord.

A Black North Carolina man who spent 44 years in prison after he was wrongfully convicted of raping a prominent white woman has been awarded a historic $25 million settlement more than three years after he was exonerated.

Ronnie Long, 68, settled his civil lawsuit with the city of Concord, about 25 miles northeast of Charlotte, for $22 million, the city said in a news release Tuesday. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation had previously settled for $3 million, according to Duke Law School’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic.

The clinic, which represented Long, said the settlement is the second largest wrongful conviction settlement recorded.

"It’s, obviously, a celebratory day today knowing that Ronnie’s going to have his means met for the rest of his life with this settlement. It’s been a long road to get to this point so that’s a great outcome," clinical professor Jamie Lau, Long's criminal attorney, said in a phone interview Tuesday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Wiggums@lemmy.world 60 points 2 years ago
[-] jwt@programming.dev 30 points 2 years ago

Honestly, I don't think increasing the amount would make a difference. He won't be able to buy back the years of life they took from him with it. He can use that 25M to spend the years he has left living as rich of a life as he wants, and by all means he deserves it.

[-] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

I hope he doesn't end up like those lottery winners who go broke within a year because everyone steals from them and then someone murders ☹️

[-] rab@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

I don't think that's why lotto winners go broke, it's because the average person is simply bad with money

I also think that being rich requires a certain narcissistic mindset and that the average person is generous and would naturally share if gifted excess wealth

[-] Ignisnex@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

So, I get where you're coming from here, but $25 million is still an enormous amount of money objectively. Obviously there isn't really a way to convert 44 years of incarceration into an equivalent financial denomination, but if we think about earnings that could be had in that time, $25 million by far covers it.

If this guy were to have a job paying $100k a year for his whole life, he'd be making well in excess of the average, and still only have about $6 million total earnings by the time they retire. Let's double it and assume he was making $200k a year for his entire working life, that's still only half the amount he was awarded. So this amount paid could be said to cover a lifetime of high pay, plus an equivalent amount in damages, plus a little extra on top for good measure.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It's proportionally correct. I bet lots of people would agree to a year in prison for half a million, but there's simply no amount that would compensate for half your life in prison. At least this is enough for him to spend the rest of his life doing whatever he wants.

[-] lordmauve@programming.dev 9 points 2 years ago

Maybe I'd take the first year in prison for a half a million* but ask me again 1 year later, do you want to do a second year? No, I want 600k. Next year, 700k. 44 years? Honey, you can't afford it.

* I wouldn't, my number is higher than that.

[-] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I would agree to it with the caveat that it wouldn't be on my record. Otherwise, it would likely affect potential future earnings.

It's true, this is quite a lot of money for him to retire with now. Nothing makes up for the lost time but all he can do now is make the best of this and try to enjoy his remaining life.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

In this comparison it wouldn't be on your record since this guy was innocent and exonerated so matching the situation you'd be clean too

[-] dwalin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Its the oportunity cost. All of the oportunities to have a normal life

[-] Ignisnex@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Of course, hence why I said that it's not possible to convert incarceration time into money. Removing agency is to remove possibility to proceed however one sees fit. Likely he would have been financially poorer off, but life isn't a measure of worth by dollars. Only the most degenerate among us think that bigger numbers in various accounts equates to a good life.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 years ago

How so? The original trial was wrong but you can't fix that by making the victim crazy rich.

With $25 Million dollars you could buy a fleet of Yachts

this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
722 points (98.9% liked)

News

36270 readers
2799 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS