How can someone possibly be an “exonerated rapist”?
No one’s ever going to believe this guy was innocent, no matter what the DNA says. Even the press still calls him a rapist.
Edited to add: I sent the Times this letter:
I don’t know whether this is your headline or the AP’s, but either way, how can Charles Chatman possibly be an exonerated rapist? Is he a rapist or has he been exonerated of those charges? The headline still names him a rapist no matter what his legal status is, so it seems the headline writer’s opinion is clear.
Brooklyn, New York
And a couple of hours later, the Times changes the headline:
Texas Man Freed After 26 Years in Prison
Boy, I’d love to believe that my email helped prompt the Times to rethink the headline, but I know that’s pretty arrogant. Regardless, I’m glad the Times changed the head.