Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

In Letter, Jane Doe Felt "Unsupported And Disbelieved" By Cornell President; Trump Announces $8B Farm Relief Plan As Fuel, Fertilizer Costs Bite; Official Tells CNN: Shooter's Gun Was Gift From His Mother. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired October 20, 2026 - 14:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[14:30:00]

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The Cornell's Faculty Senate is considering, Brianna, this vote of no confidence, and so they're listening to people, a lot of people at the university, as you know, who have been very critical of Cornell's president. Well, Jane Doe, also critical of Cornell's president in this letter, apparently saying that he said something during a meeting that she really took issue with, and she wants the rest of the faculty to consider her words.

Now, in the letter, Jane Doe, that we've looked at the letter, it refers to a second-hand account of a meeting that Cornell's president had with the head of her sorority shortly after she made the allegations that she had been raped by Chi Phi members back in 2024. And apparently, Brianna, during this meeting, he may have said something like, why did she take so long to report it? Again, the alleged assault took place on August 19th, and she went to Cornell police on November 8th, about three weeks later.

Now, Jane Doe says in her letter, "I felt unsupported and disbelieved by President Kotlikoff. It diminished my confidence in the administration's ability to approach my experience with the understanding, sensitivity and fairness I had hoped for and expected from what had been my dream school."

Now, Cornell disputes this claim by Doe that he made this type of comment, why did you wait so long? She says that the president's words were not directed at her. According to the spokesperson, I want you to hear what Cornell is saying here. The second-hand account of the question asked by President Kotlikoff in a January 2025 meeting in the letter is incorrect.

Based on a documented first-hand account, the question of why did it take so long for the assault to be reported was directed at bystanders, who did not use Cornell's anonymous tip line. It was not questioning Jane Doe's reporting. Again, Jane Doe wants her letter read to the faculty at large. It was addressed to two members there of the faculty. Again, the faculty could be taking this no-confidence vote. It could come by the end of the month. There has been a lot of criticism directed not only at Cornell's president, but the administration as well. We'll have to see what happens when they take that vote at the end of the month. Brianna?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: All right, we'll be looking for that. Jason, thank you.

Still to come, President Trump ruling out billions more in aid for farmers facing soaring diesel and fertilizer costs. Why the timing matters ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:37:11]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: I should let you know that we are monitoring remarks from President Trump right now inside the Oval Office as he's taking reporters' questions during an event in which the White House is announcing a fund to help prevent fraud.

We're going to keep an eye on what the President is saying and bring you his remarks. Meantime, the White House also announcing major relief for American farmers, an $8 billion aid package, and they need it as fertilizer and fuel prices continue to take a big bite out of budgets. Diesel, which is a critical fuel for farm operations, has doubled in cost from levels before the war with Iran started, spurred on by oil prices.

Today, Brent Crude, the global oil benchmark, has been trading at one point today above $111 a barrel, a spike that hasn't been seen in months. Let's talk about this with Nick Levendofsky. He's the executive director of the Kansas Farmers Union. Nick, thank you so much for being with us. How far do you think this $8 billion go for farmers that are right now in the middle of a harvest?

NICK LEVENDOFSKY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KANSAS FARMERS UNION: Well, I don't think it's going to go very far, Boris, because farmers have lost a lot of money since the Trump administration came into office with the start of the trade war and then here with the war with Iran. You know, the closing of the Strait of Hormuz has driven up fertilizer and fuel prices exponentially.

It is truly another Band-Aid on a bullet wound, which is what we've seen out of this administration from the beginning. So it's not going to go far enough, frankly.

SANCHEZ: To that point about a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, this is the second one-time aid package for farmers in less than a year from the White House. The first was a $12 billion aid package to cover losses tied to the tariffs. I wonder what your message is to President Trump as he puts out these packages, but according to you, it's not making a huge difference for farmers.

LEVENDOFSKY: It's not. And frankly, the payment is going to be going to the biggest producers, the biggest farmers out there, because it's based on proportional loss. So, you know, when you turn in these acres and the losses, that's what it's covering. So your larger farmers are going to get the bigger payouts.

I would like to know where the accountability is with programs like this and the transparency. Furthermore, there aren't a lot of details to this program. They're just kind of throwing things out to see what sticks. Well, it's not sticking. Farmers are struggling right now, but really everybody in America is struggling.

So I think the bigger question is not only what we're doing to relieve farmers for the fertilizer and fuel prices that have gone up, but what about American citizens that are struggling to pay for the fuel that they need to get up and down the road? What about the citizens that need groceries? The prices of groceries lowered. What about the truck drivers that are moving product up and down the highways?

[14:40:05]

These are the questions that need to be asked, and it's -- they need to be very serious about this, and I worry that that's not the case right now.

BORIS: So President Trump announced this farm relief plan in your state last night. I wonder how your members are feeling about the midterm elections, especially because the President was there to boost Senator Roger Marshall, who's now locked into this very tight Senate race. What are you hearing from members about the election?

LEVENDOFSKY: Well, I talked to our members a lot about this, and frankly, the relief should have been coming a lot sooner because we've been paying these high fertilizer and fuel prices for some time now through planting season in the spring and now during harvest, and then we're going to start planting winter wheat here soon. So it's hitting us from all directions.

And a lot of our farmers are out there, you know, wondering where to go and where we're headed, not only just in the next two years with a new Congress, but beyond that, what does their future look like? And I talked to a lot of people about how they're going to vote, whether they're going to vote at all. And I think that's the big question is they haven't decided how they're going to vote yet. They may not decide until they go to the polls. They may not vote at all.

I would hope that most people will educate themselves and vote, but I'm hearing from both sides that there's a lot of uncertainty around this election.

BORIS: Nick Levendofsky, we appreciate you sharing your perspective. Thanks for joining us.

LEVENDOFSKY: Thank you.

BORIS: And again, we are monitoring the President's remarks in the Oval Office. Also this, the gun used by the 16-year-old in last week's deadly Oregon school shooting was purchased by his mom. So could she be charged in the killings? We'll discuss next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [14:46:18]

KEILAR: Investigators are digging deeper into last week's school shooting in Oregon where a 16-year-old opened fire at an elementary school. One key question, could his parents face charges? Griffin J. John II killed three children and a teacher at Silver Rail Elementary before he was fatally shot by a student's parent. A senior law enforcement official tells CNN the gun that Griffin used was purchased by his mother.

Investigators are trying to determine how he gained access and what his parents knew before the attack. In Oregon, it's illegal for a juvenile to possess a firearm with very few exceptions. We've seen recent high-profile cases in Georgia and Michigan where parents of school shooters were held criminally liable for the killings. Some legal experts say the Oregon investigation could follow a similar path.

Let's bring in Criminal Defense Attorney Elyse Hershon to talk a little bit about this. Elyse, the thing that may be different in Oregon is that there's a bit of an exception here, right? There are gun laws that allow parents to give rifles and shotguns to minors, so they can't buy them, but they can possess them. So what is that going to mean when it comes to potential liability on the part of the parent?

ELYSE HERSHON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think this shows exactly what it shows in a lot of these other states, such as Michigan with the Crumbley case, where the parents were held responsible even though minors are allowed access to guns under certain circumstances, and along with the Colin Gray trial, the school shooting in Virginia, in Georgia. What's happening is the legislation is behind what is happening.

So although the actual ownership by the parents or purchase of the firearms by the parents are legal per se, and it's legal for a minor to access those in certain circumstances, how do we end up with so many situations where a child is bringing a gun to school, and how can legislation potentially change to make it safer?

KEILAR: Do you see any differences? I mean, we're seeing similarities, but do you see any differences between this case potentially and others where the parents have been implicated?

HERSHON: So we have where it started in the Crumbley case. The parents were charged and convicted of manslaughter, which is not malice or a malintent. It's more of a negligence or recklessness should have foreseen this coming. Then it moved -- that was 2021. Then we moved to 2024 in Georgia, Colin Gray, the father of the son who accessed a gun that he legally was allowed to access under those laws, and the father was convicted of murder.

So we're seeing the responsibility of parents expand here. But in this case, the difference here in Bend, Oregon is the child who was alleged to have been the shooter did not survive. And in the other cases, the juvenile survived and they were held responsible or able to be held responsible in both those situations, life without parole. Without someone responsible in a horrific case like this, in a horrific event, people want someone to be responsible and the parents or parents could be facing serious charges here.

KEILAR: This issue of criminal negligence, because prosecutors had argued in Michigan and Georgia that the parents' actions represented that, and juries did agree. How high of a bar is that? And when might it not reach the bar?

HERSHON: This has to do with reasonable foreseeability. This has to do with, in sort of colloquial terms, warning signs. So mental illness in and of itself is not a disqualifier for someone having access to a gun. Special needs is not in and of itself a disqualifier for someone having access to a gun. Certainly criminal history, yes, that could be a disqualifier. So we don't know enough to do a full analysis here, but essentially, how was that gun stored and secured? Did the parent have the gun stored correctly and safely, legally in Oregon?

[14:50:21]

If not, there could be liability there in terms of negligence. Was the gun firearm transferred or given to John II, the alleged shooter who's now deceased in Oregon. And was there documented mental health issues in terms of actual commitment through the Department of Mental Health? All of those things could increase the potential liability of the parent, but also, you know, special needs, mental illness, based on the legislation in the majority of the states in the U.S., that is not enough to disqualify someone from access to a gun. So I think that also needs to be looked at on a state-by-state basis.

KEILAR: All right, Elyse, thank you so much. It's such an important conversation as these cases have been coming up.

We do have to leave the conversation there. Let's go now to the White House. This is from just moments ago where President Trump was asked about these talks with Ukraine. His envoy has been there meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Here's that moment.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sir, after today's talks in Oslo, do you believe the peace process is back on track? And what are your expectations when your special envoy, Steve Witkoff, heads to Russia tomorrow?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I think what's happening is that Russia would like to get it done. I think that -- and, you know, Russia is a big machine. They just keep grinding forward, and that's what they've done. They've taken a very large piece of land. And, you know, you can say that Ukraine is doing well or poorly, but the land gets bigger and bigger all the time. Week by week, it's just -- they march forward. They just keep marching forward. They have an unlimited supply of people, whereas Ukraine, as you know, is -- there's a woman who's, I guess, not exactly a very beautiful woman, nice woman. And she was on television recently talking about the fact that our men are gone. She's a Ukrainian woman. Our men are gone. They're lost. They're dead. They're in mental institutions. They're walking around. They have no arms. They have no legs, in many cases. They've been hurt so badly, they've been just decimated. And it was very poignant. When I heard this, I said, boy, that's some statement. And she said, Russia is a very big country. They can lose a lot of people in a war, and they have lost a lot of people. They lost 50 million people in the Second World War. They lose a lot of people, but they're very big.

And she said they have to settle this war. Look, Ukraine has lost a lot of people. Russia has lost a lot of people. Russia, though, is a giant nation. Ukraine is not. I can tell you this. We've been helping through Joe Biden originally, and he made a mistake because he should have done it through the European Union. He should have been paid. The European Union has quite a bit of money, although I have to tell you they're getting tired of spending it.

But we gave $350 billion to Ukraine. And, you know, I insisted on getting something for that money. And we got a very big chunk of land and rare earth and other things, if anybody remembers. Let's see what that amounts to. But Ukraine has to want to settle this war. Zelenskyy has to want to settle this war.

And if he doesn't, I think it's going to be a very bad thing. Look, we have given tremendous amounts to Ukraine. We've got nothing back other than high diesel. We have given probably possibly more money to Ukraine than almost anybody over the years, hundreds of billions of dollars. We've got nothing back.

And the American taxpayers are tired of it. We want Zelenskyy to make a deal. He can make a deal. He could have made a deal two years ago when we had our little chat in the Oval Office. We had a now quite well-remembered chat with J.D., myself, some others, Zelenskyy. Could have made a good deal then. Could have made a much better deal then probably, possibly, than he can make now. But he's going to have to want to make a deal because I don't think his people are going to stand for it any longer.

They've been fighting a war. So, last month, they lost 32,000 people between the both of them. They're mostly soldiers, mostly young soldiers, some people in a town that got hit or whatever, but mostly young soldiers. It doesn't affect us much. It doesn't affect us in theory at all. We're not involved. What it affects me is to see that many souls lost so needlessly.

[14:55:09]

So, what I'd like to see is I'd like to make a deal. I'd like to see if they can make a deal. I thought, you know, I settled eight wars. I thought that would be the easiest one. The hatred between President Putin and President Zelenskyy is tremendous.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: All right, we're listening to President Trump there. He's saying the U.S. wants Volodymyr Zelenskyy to make a deal. And he said they've invested so much money in Ukraine and haven't gotten anything back. And he blamed Ukraine for high diesel prices. Of course, we do know that those high diesel prices of late, those high gas prices of late, have been from Iran.

The next hour of CNN News Central continues after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)