Trump questions fairness of inquiry into seven Cornell fraternity members
Donald Trump said he felt “badly” for seven Cornell fraternity members under investigation in an alleged gang rape case, arguing that they would not receive a fair hearing. He criticised New York Governor Kathy Hochul for appointing state Attorney General Letitia James as special prosecutor after the local district attorney’s office declined to bring charges.
Hochul said she had lost confidence in the local investigation, citing new information, including a transcript in which the woman said she was “100 per cent” confident she had been assaulted. The district attorney said he had not previously seen the transcript and would seek a copy and follow up with Cornell police. Cornell said it had provided its investigation findings to prosecutors and agreed to an independent review of its handling of the matter.
- Trump says the Cornell 7 may not get a fair hearing.
- Hochul appointed Letitia James to oversee the case.
- A newly released transcript prompted renewed scrutiny.
New here? Start with this
Seven Cornell University students who are members of a fraternity are under investigation following an allegation of gang rape. The local prosecutor initially declined to bring criminal charges, but New York's Governor has now appointed the state Attorney General as special prosecutor to review the case.
Governor Hochul said she had lost confidence in the local investigation and appointed Attorney General Letitia James after new information emerged, including a transcript in which the alleged victim said she was 100 per cent confident she had been assaulted. The local prosecutor said he had not previously seen this transcript.
The case has drawn comments from former President Donald Trump, who argued that the seven students would not receive fair treatment given the appointment of a special prosecutor. Cornell University has said it will cooperate with prosecutors and undergo an independent review of how it handled the matter.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The appointment of a special prosecutor after the local district attorney declined to bring charges raises legitimate due process concerns. When an elected prosecutor who conducted the investigation determines charges aren't warranted, overriding that decision through a special appointment risks becoming an end-run around proper legal judgment, potentially driven by political pressure rather than prosecutorial merit. This could create a chilling precedent where defendants face re-prosecution through successive prosecutors until one agrees to charge, undermining the integrity of the justice system and fair trial protections.
The case against
The emergence of new evidence, including a transcript of the accuser stating she was "100 per cent" confident in her account, which the original DA acknowledged never having seen, provides a legitimate basis for a special prosecutor review. Governors possess constitutional authority to appoint special prosecutors when there are grounds to believe local investigations may be inadequate, particularly when new evidence surfaces after an initial declination. Ensuring thorough investigation of alleged serious crimes, especially when potential procedural gaps emerge, reflects a commitment to both the accused's fair trial rights and the accuser's right to proper justice.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Trump says he feels ‘badly’ for Cornell 7 as he slams investigator Letitia James with ‘racist’ nickname”.