The alleged Cornell gang rape case could face difficulties finding an impartial jury, amid intense debate on social media, a journalism professor has warned.
Jeffrey Blevins, of the University of Cincinnati, said the online reaction risked shaping public views before jurors had heard evidence in court.
He said traditional media generally focused on legal questions, including New York law, intoxication and consent. Social media, by contrast, had made the discussion more personal and emotional.
The case has also prompted online harassment involving people connected to the lawsuit. Blevins said some of the men accused, along with their parents, had been doxxed, while others were attempting to identify the woman referred to as Jane Doe.
Social media debate echoes Depp-Heard trial
Blevins compared the situation with the defamation trial involving Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, in which social media became a major part of the public conversation.
He said the Cornell case could develop along a similar path, with people assessing the allegations through their own experiences and reaching conclusions before a jury considered the evidence.
The Depp-Heard trial lasted six weeks and was decided by a seven-person jury in Virginia. The jury found that Heard had defamed Depp and awarded him more than 10 million dollars in damages.
It also awarded Heard 2 million dollars after finding that one of Depp’s lawyers had defamed her.
Blevins said the intense online focus surrounding the Cornell allegations could make proceedings in a real courtroom more complicated, particularly if potential jurors had already formed strong opinions.
