Documentary filmmaker Ken Burns has filed court papers asking a federal judge to torpedo the city’s demand to get the outtakes from his soon-to-open “The Central Park Five.”
The documentary tells the story of the five teens who were convicted of beating and raping a jogger named Trisha Meili in Central Park in 1989 during a “wilding” spree.
Their convictions were vacated in 2002 after a convicted rapist named Matias Reyes confessed that he was the one who had attacked Meili. The claim was backed up by DNA evidence.
The five — Antron McCray, Yusef Salaam, Korey Wise, Raymond Santana and Kevin Richardson — later filed a $250 million lawsuit against the city.
The men were interviewed by Burns and his daughter, Sarah, for their film — and city lawyers want to see what was left on the cutting-room floor, contending it could help in the city’s defense.
They also want to see leftover material from anybody with “direct knowledge” of the case, interviews with the men’s lawyers and legal experts.
The PBS TV icon’s lawyer called the city’s request “overbroad,” and maintained the outtakes are protected by reporter privilege. The city contends the filmmakers aren’t reporters — they’re activists who’ve said publicly that they believe the men were wronged and the city should settle the case.
But the “Civil War” director said, “We follow the facts wherever they lead, and I believe we have earned a reputation for doing so. ‘The Central Park Five’ follows in this tradition.”
“This point of view publicly expressed pursuant to our First Amendment rights as citizens did not determine the content of our film; just the opposite. it was our reporting for the film that led us to the feeling that these individuals have suffered enough and that their claims for damages should be settled,” Burns said in his court filing.
He also noted the documentary, which premieres next week, “barely mentions this civil suit at all.”
“It was made completely independently of any concerns about this case,” and “the lawyers for the plaintiffs in this case had no role in the production of the film,” Burns said.
Burns’ lawyers said the subpoena should be quashed because the city is on a fishing expedition and not looking for anything in particular, and “hope and speculation” is not a reason to grant their request.
A lawyer for the city, Celeste Koeleveld, maintained that the movie is not journalism and shouldn’t be protected by reporter privilege.
“The filmmakers’ actions clearly demonstrate that this project is advocacy, not objective journalism. The outtakes go to the heart of the plaintiffs’ multimillion-dollar legal case against the city, and should be a part of that case,” she said.“We will respond to their motion to quash and await the court’s ruling.””
Burns called the city’s stance “deeply disturbing for documentarians and reporters – and the public at large.”