Guilty Until Proven Innocent (and then you're still guilty!)
Two Duke University men's lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, have been indicted for various forms of sexual assault against a young women which allegedly occured at some form of house party. Pop quiz! Does anyone notice the name of one young man who is notable absent from the indictment????
That's right, Ryan McFayden. He is the lacrosse team member who has a terrible sense of humor (at best) whom sent an e-mail describing how he intended to kill some strippers or prostitutes. Well, when the subject e-mail came to light the whole world was ready to convict him without any further inquiry. Duke University went into full spin mode and immediately suspended Mr. McFayden for an indefinite period of time. The administration did everything possible to distance the University from Ryan and basically smeared his name to anyone who would bother to ask.
Now, I do not know enough about the facts of the case to make an informed decision. However, I do know that the press clippings are by definition incomplete and motivated as much by the goal to increase circulation as the search for the truth. I also know that in order to gain an indictment the grand jury gets to hear only one side of the case - the prosecution. The defense has no opportunity to provide reasonable doubt. Heck, the standard for obtaining an indictment is not even as high as that required to gain a conviction. In any event, it is a completely one-sided affair.
What's my point? Let's not be in a rush to judgment. I would be the last person to defend someone who actually did commit the crimes which have been alleged. But one young man's life has already been irreversibly stained by the stigma arising from these allegations - perhaps erroneously. Is there any means to cure that kind of injury? Is there any way to remove the lingering suspicion that will follow Mr. McFayden even if he ends up being exonerated? I hardly believe that Duke University will issue a public retraction and fully reinstate Mr. McFayden if there never exists any other evidence even remotely tying him to the alleged crime. No, instead Duke will continue to spin as long as it is necessary to try and remove the stain that this episode has placed on the University's reputation and public standing. Likewise, the press will continue to publish rumor and speculation as a substitute for facts just so that it can compete in the 24/7 news cycle.
Do you have any comments? I welcome a healthy debate on this topic.
That's right, Ryan McFayden. He is the lacrosse team member who has a terrible sense of humor (at best) whom sent an e-mail describing how he intended to kill some strippers or prostitutes. Well, when the subject e-mail came to light the whole world was ready to convict him without any further inquiry. Duke University went into full spin mode and immediately suspended Mr. McFayden for an indefinite period of time. The administration did everything possible to distance the University from Ryan and basically smeared his name to anyone who would bother to ask.
Now, I do not know enough about the facts of the case to make an informed decision. However, I do know that the press clippings are by definition incomplete and motivated as much by the goal to increase circulation as the search for the truth. I also know that in order to gain an indictment the grand jury gets to hear only one side of the case - the prosecution. The defense has no opportunity to provide reasonable doubt. Heck, the standard for obtaining an indictment is not even as high as that required to gain a conviction. In any event, it is a completely one-sided affair.
What's my point? Let's not be in a rush to judgment. I would be the last person to defend someone who actually did commit the crimes which have been alleged. But one young man's life has already been irreversibly stained by the stigma arising from these allegations - perhaps erroneously. Is there any means to cure that kind of injury? Is there any way to remove the lingering suspicion that will follow Mr. McFayden even if he ends up being exonerated? I hardly believe that Duke University will issue a public retraction and fully reinstate Mr. McFayden if there never exists any other evidence even remotely tying him to the alleged crime. No, instead Duke will continue to spin as long as it is necessary to try and remove the stain that this episode has placed on the University's reputation and public standing. Likewise, the press will continue to publish rumor and speculation as a substitute for facts just so that it can compete in the 24/7 news cycle.
Do you have any comments? I welcome a healthy debate on this topic.
posted by Bearister at 12:12 PM
1 Comments:
I've avoided this topic in the Random Thoughts for a very good reason...I'm having a lot of trouble coming to grips with my own sense of what is right and wrong in this case. On one hand, the despicable nature of the e-mail is unforgivable. On the other, I'm not certain that the potential punishment fits the crime (if that ends up being the only thing that he is "guilty" of).
I don't think that Duke has acted differently than any other university would. Further, this type of problem is common with persons who are suspected (and exonorated) of crimes. What's the old saying? Charged on page 1...exonerated on page 43.
Post a Comment
<< Home