@drkathynickerson: So why did the DA choose not to charge the Cornell Seven? There is what he said, and what I think is really going on. Let’s talk about it. DA Matthew Van Houten has said that the evidence presented to his office did not establish the legal requirements necessary to bring criminal charges. New York’s laws surrounding intoxication, incapacity, and consent certainly complicated this case. But here is what troubles me: we now know his office made that decision without reviewing all of the evidence Cornell police had collected, including witness statements. Van Houten has also said he never saw the transcript in which Jane Doe reportedly told investigators, “I can say with 100% confidence I was raped.” So my question is: Why would you make such an enormously consequential decision without examining every piece of available evidence? And I think we also have to acknowledge the environment in which this decision was being made. Cornell is an extraordinarily powerful institution in a relatively small community. A prosecution involving seven Cornell students and allegations of a group assault at a fraternity could have enormous consequences for the university, the accused students and their families, Greek life, donors, alumni, and the broader community. Does that mean Cornell, wealthy families, donors, or political figures pressured the DA not to prosecute? We currently have no evidence establishing that, and I don’t think it would be responsible to claim that they did. But institutional pressure doesn’t always require someone making a phone call and saying, “Don’t charge this person.” Sometimes the more important question is whether powerful institutions receive greater deference, whether decision-makers become unusually cautious because the stakes are so high, or whether an investigation stops sooner than it otherwise would. And that is what I want to understand here. Governor Kathy Hochul has now removed the case from Van Houten and appointed the New York Attorney General as special prosecutor. Hopefully this independent review will answer some of these questions. Until then, I think the question remains: Why wasn’t every available piece of evidence examined before deciding there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute? #CornellSeven #CourtTV #TrueCrime #LegalAnalysis #CornellUniversity

Dr Kathy Nickerson
Dr Kathy Nickerson
Open In TikTok:
Region: US
Sunday 04 October 2026 22:26:25 GMT
2794
64
5
2

Music

Download

Comments

jannatheviking
Janna Theviking :
the answer is ..MONEY...the end.
2026-10-05 01:46:57
2
barbaraw4444
Barbara White862 :
So money and power talks and the victim walks.
2026-10-04 22:47:54
4
campycrystal
Campy Crystal :
100 % greed , power and money
2026-10-05 14:25:28
0
kodi2pt
kodi :
Because there no proff to take it to court looking at the evidence she will lose
2026-10-05 03:51:06
0
To see more videos from user @drkathynickerson, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos


About