BESIDES THE OBVIOUS REASONS—HERE IS ANOTHER REASON WHY THE CORNELL 7 CASE ENRAGES ME
Renae Townsend| Opinion Editor
Cornell University has been under major scrutiny over the last few weeks. A civil lawsuit was filed last month by a former female Cornell University student alleging that she had been horrifically gang raped at a fraternity house in 2024. And now, not only has the University been heavily criticized for how they handled their investigations, the police apartment and the district attorney of the county have gone under fire as well.
A summary of the case before I move on.
The victim—known only as Jane Doe—arrived at Cornell as a freshman at her dream school. She was in her sophomore when, on the night of the incident, was heavily intoxicated and met the defendants at a bar. She agreed to a threesome with another member of the fraternity—and while the frat house was coerced into taking a substance, they told her was ketamine and gave her more alcohol. The lawsuit claims that Jane Doe was then sexually assaulted while she was “incapable of consent”. Throughout the night, Doe was instructed to snort more Ketamine as the assault continued. Doe soon reported her alleged assault to Title IX.
Twelve hearings later, these reports produced only two expulsions and five response papers to the allegations. The Chi Phi fraternity was also barred from campus. That’s it. No criminal charges—no outrage.
Because this group of men faced no consequences, I want to share a case from many years ago—which has since been turned into a mini-series on Netflix (When They See Us) that I highly recommend—the Central Park Five.
In 1989, five Black and Latino teenagers from a low-income neighborhood in Harlem were convicted of raping Trisha Meili (a white woman) while she was jogging in Central Park. She had been beaten and repeatedly raped and when she woke up from a coma, retained no memory from her brutal attack.
This case, of course, when reported, led to public outcry and the swift arrest of five teenagers—Kevin Richardson, Yusef Salamm, Raymond Santana, Antron McCray and Korey Wise—who are now known as the Central Park Five. Richardson and Santana were initially arrested for “unlawful assembly” before the police had even learned of Meili’s attack. Korey, Salaam, and McCray were soon brought in.
Four of the five teens confessed on videotape. They soon recanted and pleaded not guilty, as their confessions had been forced. They had been denied food, water and sleep for over twenty-four hours. And yet, despite all this, no DNA and nothing linking them to the crime, all five men were found guilty and spent six to thirteen years in prison before the true perpetrator was found. The Central Park Five were soon exonerated.
It’s genuinely concerning how our justice system works—where a multi-hour, multi person assault is swept under the rug and yields a few ‘reflection papers’, and how quickly the police move to condemn low-income Black and Latino boys with zero physical evidence.
Young men of color are routinely criminalized, viewed as dangerous animals, and are constantly denied the benefit of the doubt. In 1989, when the Central Park Five were arrested, our current president Donald Trump took out full-page newspaper ads, demanding that the young boys be executed. Executed. And when they were found out to have been innocent years later, Trump doubled down on his claims and refused to apologize or recant his statement.
Yet, for the Cornell students, accused of the same crime as the boys he wanted to put to death? He claims that these are good men and that he “feels badly” for them. Even with all the overwhelming evidence against these men, Donald Trump supports them. In 1989, Trump didn’t want to wait for facts. He demanded the slaying of five young teenage boys, who turned out to be innocent. Now in 2026, he, Cornell, and the police had the evidence. Jane Doe was a victim of a horrible, alleged crime. And they delayed, and then they looked away.
When we look at how swiftly the state, the media, and the public figures mobilized to condemn the Central Park Five in 1989, how they demanded blood and punishment, even in the absence of physical evidence, it deeply resonates with me. The difference between the “beasts of Harlem” and the precious boys of an esteemed institution who simply “made a mistake” is stark and it sums up the values of the American justice system precisely.
This case has been mainly categorized for justice for women—and of course, I absolutely agree with that. But I believe that this case should also make us reflect on how we handle justice for men, especially men in privileged decisions. Class is a large factor in how the justice system treats somebody. Because these two cases happened in the same country. They produced different results. One group of men were put in prison. One group is protected.The contrast between 1989 and 2026 is the blueprint. In the eyes of the American legal system, guilt and innocence is shielded by privilege and race. How long will we allow elite institutions to shield perpetrators with “reflection papers” while the state weaponizes its full force against vulnerable communities? Jane Doe deserves justice, and so do the countless young men of color who have been smeared by the very system meant to protect them. It is time to stop looking away—time we demand a system that judges and punishes crime by its cruelty and not by the status of the person who committed it.
Comments