How A Conspiracy Theory Almost Killed Justice
Normally, as I compile the December 17th list, I tend to focus on the stories of sex workers who have passed away, but sometimes adjacent news catches my eye. This happened to me this week. I’d been following the murder of Andrew Sorensen for 3 years, and noticed the case was coming to a close earlier this month.
The story involves a murder, a lie, and reliance on the general public believing tropes about sex trafficking. It began 4 years ago, near Seattle, Washington. In November of 2020, 19-year-old Andrew Sorensen went missing. It wasn’t until almost a year later, in October of 2021, that he was found. Sorensen had been murdered- beaten, stabbed, and left in the trunk of an abandoned car. It appeared his body had been in the trunk since the day he disappeared.
Police tracked the car to 55 year old Brenda Kross, who claimed it had been stolen the year prior. Upon further investigation, police began to suspect that 61 year old John Eisenman, Kross’ fiancé had murdered Sorenson and that Kross was an accomplice. Eventually, Eisenman admitted to the crime, but claimed he had a good reason. He said that Sorensen had sold one of his daughters to a sex trafficking ring in Seattle for $1,000. Eisenman claimed he had rescued his daughter from the traffickers and then he kidnapped Sorensen, tied him up, beat him with a cinder block and eventually stabbed the teenager to death.
Once the story made waves, people across the country proclaimed their support of Eisenman in comment sections across social media platforms. People called for Eisenman’s release, and for potential jurors to engage in jury nullification- when the jury gives a verdict of not guilty even though they think a defendant has broken the law.
Kross, Eisenman’s fiancée, gave local interviews where she boasted about how brave he was, saying "It was something that a lot of men say they would do for their daughter. He is the best father I could have ever had for my children. she said. "I'm very proud of John.”
Eisenman’s family was even able to start various crowdfunding campaigns to pay for his defense costs and raise over $70,000 across platforms. His now deleted gofundme read “This father did the unthinkable for some of us to save his little girl from an unspeakable life that causes long term scars and years of emotional damage. He does not belong in jail”
Eisenman was a hero.
There was only one problem.
There was absolutely no evidence that Andrew Sorensen was involved with any type of human trafficking. In an affidavit, investigators said Sorensen and Eisenman’s daughter traveled to Renton together in October 2020. According to Spokane Police Officer Randy Lesser, they smoked meth several times that night. Sorensen eventually dropped Eisenman’s daughter and two others off at a 7-11 and never returned because his car was stolen. The Spokane police department has since added that they are “not involved with any investigation involving Mr. Sorensen.”
Sorensen’s parents also fought back, telling NBC News that Eisenman was demonizing a developmentally disabled young man who was born with autism and cerebral palsy and who had no ties to sex traffickers.
“He was a disabled kid,” Sorensen’s father said. “He didn’t have the capability to sex traffic anybody.”
Last Thursday, the judge read Kross' guilty statement, which explicitly stated “And I further acknowledge that there was no corroborating evidence that [the teen] sex trafficked [my daughter].” Adding even more doubt to the claims about trafficking, police allege Eisenman told investigators he was high on methamphetamine when he killed Sorensen, and had been using the drug on a daily basis at the time.
Eisenman has since pleaded guilty to first degree murder and Kross has pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The pair will be sentenced in January. Prosecutors will recommend a sentence of 22 years for Eisenman, and eight years for Kross.
But some damage cannot be undone. Even now, Eisenman is still lauded as a hero, and many have begun using Qanon style conspiracy theories to prop up their worldview. The large accounts that shared the story never shared follow ups or corrections suggesting the victim had never trafficked anyone. Smaller accounts instantly began engaging conspiracy theories. Maybe the police were covering it up? Maybe the news media was in on it? Maybe someone was bribed to push this new story? Maybe this was a big government cracking down on vigilantes trying to protect girls from being raped?
Many of Eisenman’s supporters were left accusing the criminal justice system of being so corrupt that traffickers went free, while loving fathers were being railroaded. Some speculated that vigilante justice is going to become the norm because we can no longer trust police and other institutions to protect girls from the sex traffickers lurking in the shadows.
By simply accusing Andrew Sorensen of being a sex trafficker, people across the country were ready to allow John Eisenman and Brenda Kross to brutally murder a teenager and leave his body in a trunk and call it justice.
But overall, what does this case say about our society? What does that say about how we perceive justice and due process? What does it say about how we consume news and truth? Why did so many news outlets uncritically repeat the lie that Sorensen was a human trafficker?
Despite developments showing trafficking was not the motive, many still view the couple as heroes for “killing a trafficker” because they don’t want to ruin their narrative about vigilante heroes.
But vigilantism easily leads to abuses of power. Without oversight, individuals may take matters into their own hands for reasons other than justice- such as personal vendettas or misunderstandings. When justice is determined by individuals and sketchy headlines, there are risks.
While there certainly are flaws within our criminal justice system, we don’t need to succumb to conspiracy theory style thinking about it. We need to look at the facts before resorting to murder. Because what if we are wrong? What would have happened if the jury was willing to decide based on headlines and conspiracy theories instead of facts? What happens next time?
