Sunny Hostin, a co-host of ABCs The View, is facing serious questions after claiming on-air that she was the lone juror who spared a notorious New York cannibal killer from prison more than three decades agoan assertion flatly contradicted by contemporaneous reporting.
As reported by The Post Millennial, Hostin told viewers she had served as the decisive holdout in the 1991 trial of Daniel Rakowitz, the so?called Butcher of Tompkins Square Park, who butchered his roommate in 1989 and boiled her head. According to the New York Daily News coverage from that period, however, the juror who blocked a murder conviction was described as an unemployed man, not a young female law student, as Hostin would have been at the time.
Hostins disputed claim surfaced during a panel discussion about the Lindsay Clancy case, in which a Massachusetts mother was accused of killing her children and whose trial ended in a mistrial after a single juror refused to accept an insanity defense. The hosts were debating the role of that lone juror when Hostin pivoted to her own supposed experience, drawing a direct parallel between herself and the Clancy holdout.
While discussing Clancy, Hostin invoked the Rakowitz case, in which the defendant slaughtered his roommate and allegedly cooked and served parts of her body to the homeless. Rakowitz was ultimately found not guilty by reason of insanity, a verdict Hostin now claims she personally engineered from inside the jury room.
The insanity defense has been around in Massachusetts for 182 years, so I think its well-established. And I thought absolutely that she was not criminally responsible by reason of insanity, Hostin said of the Clancy case. And the reason I felt that I feel so strongly about this holdout juror is because I was a holdout juror in a case; in the Daniel Rakowitz case. I dont know if people remember it, The Butcher of Tompkins Square. It was in 1991."
Her co-host Joy Behar immediately sought clarification, asking, The guy who ate the victims? Hostin replied simply, "Yes."
The rest of the panel appeared stunned as Hostin pressed on, reading aloud from a New York Times article about the Rakowitz trial to bolster her story. She quoted the piece as stating, Several jurors questioned afterwards said one holdout juror was principally responsible for preventing them from returning a guilty verdict, before dramatically inserting herself into the narrative.
That was me, and it was because I saw clearly that he was psychotic, he was in psychosis, he did not mean to kill her and once he killed her he panicked. He chopped up her body parts, yes, boiled her body parts, tried to commit the perfect crime," Hostin told the audience. Her account portrayed herself as a lone voice of reason, insisting on an insanity verdict in the face of an angry majority.
Fellow host Alyssa Farah Griffin reacted with disbelief, asking, And you got this guy off? Hostin doubled down, responding, Thats how much I believe in the insanity defense, and he fed her body parts to the unhoused, and then elaborated on the alleged drama inside the jury room.
All that being said, it was so clear to me in the jury room. And we were sequestered for nine days, one juror threw a chair at me. They were so angry with me but one by one I picked them off and said, What about this? What about that? and we ended up, all 12, unanimously voting that he was not criminally responsible by reason of insanity. But he is still in a mental institution being treated," she claimed. The story cast Hostin as both moral arbiter and strategic persuader, shaping the fate of a confessed killer.
Yet the historical record does not match Hostins televised recollection. According to the New York Daily News, the lone juror who initially refused to convict Rakowitz was identified as an unemployed man, not a woman, and the outlet reported that Hostinthen known as Asuncin Cummingshad actually remarked of Rakowitz, "He knew what he was doing." That reported comment undercuts her current insistence that she alone recognized his supposed psychosis and fought to have him declared not criminally responsible.
Rakowitz, who had boiled his victims body parts and claimed to have used them in soup he served to the homeless, became a symbol of the dangers posed when violent offenders are shielded by expansive insanity defenses. Hostins attempt to retroactively insert herself as the pivotal juror in that case raises broader concerns about credibility, media accountability, and a progressive legal culture that often appears more focused on excusing criminals than delivering justice for victims.
Login