by Joel VanDixhorn | Let the wheels of justice turn by themselves.
The news saturated the media and shocked the nation. All of a sudden, 2006 felt like 1850 as racial tensions flared in a North Carolina town. This scene is due to the alleged rape of a black stripper by members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team, which is predominantly white. Unfortunately, while there has been no formal trial, it seems that Duke University, and most of the country, has prematurely convicted the players before they’ve had a chance to defend themselves.
The state of race relations in our country, to this day, remains a work in progress. The racial implications certainly ignited the scandal. However, a bigger issue may be the affluence that so many of the players enjoy, compared to the lifestyle that the accuser lives. The fact that the dancer is a single mother further exacerbates the emotional aspect of this case. The idea of each player driving to court in his Mercedes while the accuser shows up with her child is frustrating to members of the Duke community. Despite this, people should not be quick to judge just because the players are privileged, just as one would not assume guilt based on skin color.
Even though the United States operates under the ideal of “innocent until proven guilty,” the administration at Duke has already cancelled the rest of the lacrosse season. This would be an appropriate action had the players received a guilty verdict, but to take such decisive action before anyone had been charged, let alone convicted, was a blatant misuse of power. Duke President Richard H. Brodhead is pandering to the desires of activist students without considering the ramifications of his actions. Even if the players are cleared of all charges, the stigma attached to them will effectively ruin their lives at Duke and affect their career opportunities in the future. Had the University been impartial from the beginning, some semblance of normality would have been possible for the players if they are absolved. However, any hope of such an outcome is now shattered by Brodhead overstepping his bounds. After two players were charged, the University suspended them, even though there is a substantial amount of evidence to suggest their innocence. When members of the Duke community questioned this, Brodhead replied, “If these students are guilty of what they’ve been charged with, they’re guilty of something abhorrent. If they’re innocent of what they’ve been charged with, then it is abhorrent that they should have been held guilty for it in the press.” Perhaps he should heed his own concerns.
While the general public is quick to condemn the players, the evidence has offered a glimmer of hope for the accused. As soon as two of the players were charged, the defense team released a statement in an attempt to show that one of the players could not have participated in the alleged rape during the presented timetable. Despite this, Duke refuses to lift his suspension. Initially, the police described the accuser as “just passed-out drunk,” yet this woman’s word is the prosecution’s strongest piece of evidence. Even the DNA evidence was not able to link any of the players to the rape. Furthermore, a second dancer altered her account of the night and is most likely using this case for her own personal gain. Lastly, and perhaps most damning, the DA is basing his whole case on a self-serving witness and an accuser who has a history of unsubstantiated rape claims.
Unfortunately, Duke is not the only university that is quick to condemn, even when short on facts. Last year, a Tufts student, William Toner, was condemned and eventually pressured to transfer, when he was accused of committing a bias incident. Allegedly, this student and an Arab-American exchanged words and proceeded to fight outside of a fraternity house while both were inebriated. Instead of treating both students equally and punishing them equally, the University was quick to rush to the defense of the foreign student, launching an immediate investigation. While Tufts never formally charged either student, Mr. Toner felt that he could not continue at Tufts due to hostility from various student organizations. In this case, the Tufts Community never bothered to learn the truth and instead were content to jump to conclusions. Unfortunately, the same mistake is being repeated at Duke.
While members of the Duke lacrosse team may have committed a huge lapse in judgment by having the party in the first place, it does not give the University an opportunity to bypass the judicial system. If the players are found guilty in a court of law, they should be punished accordingly, but not before the verdict. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution, regardless of the circumstances of the case. The racial and economic undertones must be eliminated before the evidence can be evaluated in an objective manner.
Mr. VanDixhorn is a freshman who has not yet declared a major.
Comments