Cornell Rape Case: Get the Facts and Law Straight Before a Moral Panic

Moral panics are not always bad. Sometimes, they represent an overdue societal correction against some entrenched injustice. But they are always dangerous, and we should always have a clear head about the fact that we are in one. So it is with the “Cornell Seven” case. Righteous anger can be a good thing when it flows from the evidence, but it should never be a tool for shouting down the evidence or ignoring the law. Both our moral sensibilities and the value of due process matter more, rather than less, when people are worked up to a fever pitch on social media.

“Jane Doe,” the thus-far anonymous alleged victim, now says that she was raped on October 19–20, 2024, by seven members of the same fraternity at Cornell, where she was a 20-year-old junior. The central issue in every rape case has to be this one: Did he do it? The surrounding facts may show aggravating or mitigating factors; they may or may not tell us bad things about the victim or other possible accomplices or bystanders. But the essential question has to come first: Did he rape her? If so, he’s a violent criminal and should be treated by the law and society like any other predatory felon. If not, we’re not dealing with a rape.

About the Author

Dan McLaughlin

Dan McLaughlin is a senior writer at National Review Online and a fellow at National Review Institute.

Featured Tags

Moral panics are not always bad. Sometimes, they represent an overdue societal correction against some entrenched injustice. But they are always dangerous, and we should always have a clear head about the fact that we are in one. So it is with the “Cornell Seven” case. Righteous anger can be a good thing when it flows from the evidence, but it should never be a tool for shouting down the evidence or ignoring the law. Both our moral sensibilities and the value of due process matter more, rather than less, when people are worked up to a fever pitch on social media.

“Jane Doe,” the thus-far anonymous alleged victim, now says that she was raped on October 19–20, 2024, by seven members of the same fraternity at Cornell, where she was a 20-year-old junior. The central issue in every rape case has to be this one: Did he do it? The surrounding facts may show aggravating or mitigating factors; they may or may not tell us bad things about the victim or other possible accomplices or bystanders. But the essential question has to come first: Did he rape her? If so, he’s a violent criminal and should be treated by the law and society like any other predatory felon. If not, we’re not dealing with a rape.