Back
Home
Email Me
About Me
Read Guestbook
Guestbook Archives
Sign Guestbook
Where Are They?
What's New
Find It
Need It
Links
Books
Your Old Photos
1920's Map
Current Map
Back | Cont'd
The Kitty Genovese Murder Scene
Click to enlarge.
This is the Austin Street side of the 2 story Tudor building. At Moseley's trial, the Queens County District Attorney said that the first attack occurred behind the street light in the foreground. I think it probably occurred just to the left of the tree which is where trial witness, Irene Frost, placed it.
The men behind the story
The March 27, 1964 New York Times article that first broke the story of the 38 witnesses was the work of two journalists.
The first was A.M. Rosenthal who, at the time, was the paper's Metropolitan Editor. It was he who first heard the story from New York City Police Commissioner Michael Murphy at a lunch ten days after Kitty's death, and it was he who assigned a reporter to pursue it. Rosenthal was a 1960 Pulitzer Prize winner who went on to become the Times' Managing Editor and later its Executive Editor. In 1964, several months after Kitty's death, he wrote his well known book about the case called Thirty-eight Witnesses. [Footnote C-7.]
The second man was the Times reporter, Martin Gansberg. In his 1964 book on the case, A.M. Rosenthal explained how he came to choose Gansberg:
"Gansberg is an old hand at The Times but new at reporting; he had been a copy editor and wanted to try his hand at something different. For weeks afterward, a variety of reporters asked me - more in anger than sorrow - why I had chosen somebody so new and not experienced reporters such as themselves, for instance.
The reasons were: (a) Gansberg has a sense of enthusiasm, and I knew I wouldn't have to sell him on the story; (b) he is new enough not to resent dogged difficult work that might turn to nothing, as this story might have turned out; and (c) he was within my line of vision."
[Footnote C-8.]
His article won Martin Gansberg a plaque for excellence from the Newspaper Reporters Association of New York, and a citation from The Silurians, a society of journalists, for best news article of the year. [Footnote C-9.]
Times Article Analyzed
Click here to read the March 27, 1964 New York Times article that first broke the story, along with a paragraph by paragraph analysis of why I think the Times got the story wrong.
Disclaimer
Throughout this page, I will cite to various media accounts of the case. I do so only for the factual statements they contain and not because the authors of those accounts agree with the opinions I express here.
In the Public Domain
My thoughts, comments and opinions about this case along with all images created by or for me are dedicated to the public domain. They may be copied and used without credit or compensation to me. I claim no rights in the trial transcript and briefs included here.
This page was created on January 14 2004 and revised on September 6, 2004 by adding a sound file.
The Murder of Kitty Genovese:
There were not 38 eye
witnesses
The headline and lead paragraph of the March 27, 1964 New York Times story say that there were 38 eye witnesses to Kitty's murder, [Footnote C-1], and that is the number everyone remembers today. However, that number turns out to have been incorrect. Charles Skoller was one of the Assistant District Attorneys who prosecuted Moseley. He told the February 8, 2004 New York Times:
"I don't think 38 people witnessed it. I don't know where that came from, the 38. I didn't count 38. We only found half a dozen that saw what was going on, that we could use."
[Footnote C-2.] In fact, Times' reports going as far back as 1964 also say that only some of the 38 witnesses saw anything (the precise number was never given or estimated). The rest only heard something. [Footnote C-3.] Several months after Kitty's death, A.M. Rosenthal, then Metropolitan Editor of the Times, wrote his famous book about the case in which he, too, said that not all of the 38 were eye witnesses. Rosenthal wrote:
"Of the thirty-eight [witnesses], about eighteen had witnessed or heard each of the attacks; the other twenty had heard or seen one - enough to make them witnesses in court."
[Bracketed text is mine.] [Footnote C-4.] Rosenthal gives no breakdown of the number of eye witnesses versus the number of ear witnesses. In fact, the way it is worded, Rosenthal's statement would be true even if there had been only 2 eye witnesses. [Footnote C-5.] At a Kitty Genovese Forum held at Fordham University on March 9, 2004, A.M. Rosenthal denied that he or any other reporter at his paper had ever said there were 38 eye witnesses.
Click here to hear a WMA file [11KB] of Rosenthal's statement.
Click here to hear an MP3 file [82KB] of Rosenthal's statement.
In a brief submitted to the New York State Court of Appeals, Queens District Attorney Thomas Mackel mentioned only 3 eye witnesses. [Footnote C-6.]
Whatever the precise number, merely being "witnesses" does not necessarily mean that the 38 saw, heard or understood what was happening. For example, if a man were only half awakened by Kitty's screams and then immediately drifted back off to sleep not to remember that fact until the next morning, he would still be a "witness" although he heard little and saw or understood nothing. So the real questions are, what did the 38 witnesses see or hear that night, and what did they think it meant?
Click here to read a detailed analysis of the March 27, 1964 New York Times article that broke the story.
| Footnotes |
Footnote C-1: Martin Gansberg, "37 Who Saw Murder Didn�t Call the Police", The New York Times, p. 1 (March 27, 1964) ("For more than half an hour thirty-eight respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens.")
Footnote C-2: Jim Rasenberger, "Kitty, 40 Years Later", The New York Times, (Final Ed.) Sect. 14 , p. 1 , col. 2 (Feb. 8, 2004). Click here to read a copy of the article on the Middlesex County College web site. Close out the window to return here.
Footnote C-3:
- David Anderson, "Trial Begins in Queens Slaying," The New York Times, p. 41, col. 6 (June 9, 1964) ("... 38 persons had seen or heard the attack ... .")
- David Anderson, "4 Kew Gardens Residents Testify To Seeing Woman Slain on Street", The New York Times, p. 50, col. 3 (June 10, 1964) ("In all, 38 persons in the respectable neighborhood had told the police later that they had seen or heard some part of the fatal attack ... .") (Notwithstanding the headline, nothing in the Times article suggested that anyone saw Kitty killed on the street.)
- John P. Shanley, "Moseley Hears Death Sentence, But Execution May be Put Off", The New York Times, p. 40, col. 3 (July 7, 1964) ("... 38 neighbors had seen or heard the assault")
- Ronald Maiorana, "Genovese Slayer Wins Life Sentence in Appeal", The New York Times, p. 37, col. 1 (June 2, 1967) "... 38 of her neighbors had seen or heard the assault ... .")
- Joseph P. Fried, "Following Up - No Sympathy for Killer Of Kitty Genovese", The New York Times, p. 39, col. 1 (November 11, 2001) ("38 witnesses had heard her screams or seen the attacker ... .")
Footnote C-4: A. M. Rosenthal, Thirty-Eight Witnesses: The Kitty Genovese Case., Part 2, p. 62 (Berkeley : Univ. of Calif. Press 1999). Click here and scroll down to p. 62 to read this book on another web site. Close out window to return here.
Footnote C-5: In fact, as you will read further on, only 2 people have ever been publicly identified as having seen either of the two attacks on Kitty in progress. [Click here.] As far as we know, the other eye witnesses only saw Moseley running away and/or Kitty getting up off the ground and leaving the scene of the first attack.
Footnote C-6: Brief of the Queens District Attorney to the New York State Court of Appeals, p. 3. [HTML] [PDF - 368 KB]
Footnote C-7: A. M. Rosenthal, Thirty-Eight Witnesses: The Kitty Genovese Case. (Berkeley : Univ. of Calif. Press 1999). Click here to read this book on another web site. Close out window to return here.
Footnote C-8: A. M. Rosenthal, Thirty-Eight Witnesses: The Kitty Genovese Case., Part 1, p. 15 (Berkeley : Univ. of Calif. Press 1999). Click here and scroll down to p. 15 to read this book on another web site. Close out window to return here.
Footnote C-9:
- "Silurians To Give Reporting Awards", The New York Times, p. 26, col. 3 (April 15, 1965).
- "Reporters Group Announces Awards", The New York Times, p. 27, col. 1 (March 24, 1965).
