Crazy online investigators are doxxing, menacing, and harassing the seven fraternity members accused—and they are also targeting people with no connection to the case at all.
The New York Times has revealed fresh particulars regarding a 2024 allegation of gang sexual assault at Cornell University, details that appear to reinforce District Attorney Matthew Van Houten’s stance that there wasn’t a solid legal basis to press charges against seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity.
You are reading Free Media from Robby Soave and Reason. Get more of Robby’s on-the-media, disinformation, and free speech coverage.
But tell that to the online mob, which is going to ridiculous lengths to identify and ruin the seven men, who now face a civil suit from the alleged victim, known only as Jane Doe. They were named in the suit, and their photos have circulated widely in the press. Several sites have been created with the explicit aim of exposing and shaming them, and The Cornell Daily Sun’s editorial about the allegations opens by listing the accused.
It isn’t merely a handful of fringe voices on social media, of course. And it isn’t only the accused who are facing a rush to judgment. A startling report in The Free Press notes that the process server delivering papers to the named parties accidentally handed documents to the wrong person: a man who happens to share the same name. The family of this wrongly implicated person—an active-duty Marine—has endured relentless online harassment by so-called internet sleuths who wrongly believe they have pinpointed the residence and contact details of an accused rapist.
“My family has been terrorized, threatened, and harassed,” the mother of this misidentified individual told The Free Press. “I am simply astonished by the behavior of some people.”
Obviously, it is reprehensible to threaten and doxx people with no involvement in the case. Yet it is equally improper to attempt to destroy the lives of the actual accused before any formal inquiry, civil proceedings, or trial—and note that the only evidence cited against them stems from the accuser’s evolving account.
To be clear, this does not automatically mean she is lying or mistaken. It seems what happened to her was genuinely traumatic, and the moral outrage and stigma she faced from others was disgraceful. It is natural to feel remorse for what she endured and to seek accountability if a crime occurred. But true justice cannot be achieved by an online mob showing up at the residence of someone who is not the right target.
This Week on Free Media
I offer a tirade defending libertarian principles against the charge that our advocacy focuses solely on a narrow band of vices.
Worth Watching
If you were to pick just one video about the Cornell case, I’d strongly recommend this exchange between Batya Ungar Sargon and myself.
