How accurate is Linda Fairstein's Op-Ed calling When They See Us an "outright fabrication"?

The New York Times

The former prosecutor who led the case against the so-called Central Park Five wrote in The Wall Street Journal that one of the Netflix series' "most egregious falsehoods" was the teenagers' allegation that they were held without food and their parents were not allowed to be present during questioning. “If that had been true, surely they would have brought those issues up and prevailed in pretrial hearings on the voluntariness of their statements, as well as in their lawsuit against the city,” Ms. Fairstein wrote. “They didn’t, because it never happened.” In fact, as The New York Times' Elizabeth A. Harris reports, "according to a 2003 report on the investigation commissioned by the New York Police Department, the defendants did raise these issues in a pretrial hearing, though they did not prevail." The Times also noted other discrepancies in her Op-Ed, especially in her saying the five teens deserved to be in prison for other crimes committed in Central Park that night. "But the Police Department report said that there was 'no new evidence or reason to review the old evidence regarding those crimes' and noted that two of the men had admitted their involvement in those crimes during parole hearings," Harris reports.

ALSO:

• Linda Fairstein is trapped in a dilemma: "If the men known as #CentralPark5 are innocent, then the police may have coerced them to 'confess.' She refuses to accept the latter, so she’s stuck insisting that these men are guilty of something."
• Ava DuVernay reacts to Linda Fairstein's Op-Ed: "Expected and typical"
• Fairstein jumps into a Authors Guild message board debate about her
• Former attorney four four of the five men says a reinvestigation proved Fairstein's claims wrong