What Primetime and the Cornell 7 say about the limits of "justice"

There is a moment a little after the halfway mark of Lance Oppenheim's Primetime where Chris Hansen has just confronted a pedophile. He is stumbling through his familiar dialogue, uttering the well know phrase, "You see how this looks, right?". In response, the pedophile points a finger in his face and asks, "What gives you the right?" 

During this scene, the movie switches the cinematography. We are removed from the fake kitchen where Chris Hansen has repeatedly asked the man to sit down, and instead transported to a void. The camera presses up close to both actors; they look vibrant against a now pitch-black background, glowing under a dramatic spotlight.  

I believe this is one of the scenes that made some moviegoers decide that Primetime was demonizing Chris Hansen. But I think it is actually asking (for just one second) a more nuanced question: "Why does Chris Hansen have the power to do this? Who gave him the right to deliver judgment on these men?" 

Around the same time I watched Primetime, news about the Cornell 7 started flooding my instagram. And something that took me several days to learn is that this wasn't a recent event. One of the reasons details about this crime (which happened in 2024) and the ensuing criminal case against Cornell University and the Cornell 7 is everywhere* is because on September 26th, 2026, student journalists published the names of the seven rapists. I read that The Cornell Daily Sun has been following this incident and the legal case since the beginning, and has published many many articles about it over the last two years.  Who gave them the right? 

The title of this post is misleading; you must forgive me, I've been reading too many online articles and watching too many cultural news youtube videos lately.  Primetime isn't particularly interested in justice. And it's hard to imagine any real justice for the woman assaulted by the Cornell 7. But my brain can not stop weaving these two stories around each other. 

A contingent of viewers left their showings of Primetime feeling that it was sympathetic to pedophiles and a hit piece on Chris Hansen. This is a very poor-faith interpretation. But it is true that the film isn't presenting a strong moral judgment. The only time it really bothers with ethics is to question the morality of reality TV and profiting off of these men (the pedophiles) destroying their own lives. Except, are they destroying their lives? The movie also negates to mention that many of the men Chris Hansen caught on How to Catch a Predator didn't face jail time; not all of them even went to court. In the first season, it was pretty common for the men to be confronted, have cameras shoved in their face, and then be set free back out on the street. While they surely experienced some blowback from being exposed on national TV, I feel hard-pressed to say that Chris Hansen delivered much "justice". **, ***

But Chris Hansen and Perverted Justice**** did pull off these sting operations, in part, because they felt there was a lack of justice in this world. They came from a place of wanting to protect people, but probably, at least in Chris Hansen's case, also wanting fame. Wanting recognition. The students working at The Cornell Daily Sun likely published the names of all seven rapists because they also felt there was a lack of justice, and wanted, or were compelled, to make some sort of change. When systems fail, something else must take their place. 

I've tried to just learn the basics about the Cornell 7, and avoid details*****. But the details are all over instagram. Facts about this crime are woven into my daily life alongside videos of people making coffee and nonsensical AI slop. There is a lot of dissonance for me here. A desire to be informed and angry is at odds with a desire to give Jane Doe her privacy. We shouldn't have to know how bad it was to know it was wrong. We shouldn't have to know specifics to stand with victims.

Jia Tolentino talks about this in her essay We Come From Old Virginia, in which she explores how modern feminism has increased awareness of sexual assault on college campuses, but colleges are still abysmal at preventing or responding to sexual assaults. Near the end of the essay Tolentino writes, "The best-case scenario for a rape victim in terms of adjudication is the worst-case scenario in terms of experience: for people to believe you deserve justice, you have to be destroyed." 

I do believe that there is some measure of progress being made. It's true that the Cornell 7 are all over the news because their actions were cruel and disgusting. But Cornell's handling of the case and handling of punishment/justice was also terrible. And I do think that is part of why there is so much outrage. The aftermath of sexual assault can be handled better, and people know this, so people are demanding it. 

Primetime knows this too. The most enticing story is also the most horrific. And people want a catharsis that the justice system can't or won't deliver.  I'm not sure I think this is right. Like I said earlier, I don't really think there is a blanket sentence that can bring about justice for those who have experienced rape and sexual assault. If there is, that's for the person who was hurt to decide. 

Between starting and finishing this blog post, I read that the Jane Doe from the Cornell 7 case had her house SWATed. I can't imagine what justice would look like for her, but it seems unlikely that it will be delivered by a judge. I hope instead her name remains a mystery, and that she is healing. 

*At least for me and the online spaces I occupy.

**The movie, from a narrative perspective, seems to also say that profiting off of exposing pedophiles is good! As, at the end of the movie, the very likable foil to Chris Hansen, Decoy Danny, achieves his goal of getting a Screen Actors Guild card. 

***I think what I have been writing might make it sound like I didn't like Primetime. This isn't true at all, I kind of LOVED Primetime. It was the most visually interesting movie I've seen in a while and it had some truly incredible acting from Robert Pattinson, Merritt Wever (who is good in everything) and Skyler Gisondo (Boun Natale Jimmy!). I like that this movie doesn't spend much time thinking about ethics and is instead really interested in exploring the motivations of the people making How to Catch a Predator. But this movie is on my mind and the Cornell 7 case is on my mind and so I am talking about both of these while forming no clear stance on justice or morality. 

****an anti-pedophile vigilante group who were invovled with How to Catch a Predator

*****so if something I've written is wrong my bad.