Ole Miss Racism Scandal Takes Stunning Turn as Fundraiser Tops $30,000 for Woman Who Allegedly Refused to Apologize — Three Black Students Reveal What Happened After Viral Video

A 13-second Ring camera video sparked national outrage when two young white women were recorded making monkey-like noises and gestures outside an apartment shared by three Black University of Mississippi students. One participant, 18-year-old Alaina Kunes, publicly apologized and withdrew from college. But the controversy has now taken an unexpected turn. An online fundraiser was launched for the second woman, with supporters arguing she did nothing wrong and should refuse to apologize. Within hours, thousands of dollars poured in. By Wednesday afternoon, donations reportedly exceeded $30,000. Meanwhile, the three women who lived behind that apartment door have revealed what happened after they confronted the group — including an allegation that one participant continued the offensive behavior even after her friend apologized.

OXFORD, MISSISSIPPI — November 12, 2026 — A controversial online fundraiser supporting a woman seen in a viral University of Mississippi video has collected more than $30,000, intensifying an already heated national discussion about racism, public accountability and social media backlash.

The campaign was created on GiveSendGo by Tom Hennessey, an online personality who described himself as an independent journalist.

It was established for the blonde woman appearing in footage recorded outside an apartment shared by three Black Ole Miss students on November 6.

In the recording, two white women appear to make monkey-like sounds and gestures while passing the residents’ Ring doorbell camera.

A third woman walks past without visibly participating in those gestures.

The footage quickly spread across TikTok, attracting more than 13 million views within several days.

One participant, Alaina Kunes, has publicly identified herself, apologized and voluntarily withdrawn from the University of Mississippi.

But the second woman has not independently confirmed her identity through a verified public statement.

Despite that uncertainty, supporters have donated tens of thousands of dollars through a campaign portraying her as the victim of excessive public criticism.

The fundraising effort has generated a new wave of controversy.

A Fundraiser That Became a National Story

The GiveSendGo campaign was launched late Tuesday, November 10.

Its title was reported as Stand With Lauren.

The organizer said the money was intended to help the woman featured in the video manage potential financial and professional consequences.

He argued that she should not lose opportunities because of an incident he characterized as a harmless prank.

By Wednesday morning, TMZ reported that the campaign had collected more than $15,000.

Later that day, the New York Post reported approximately $20,000 toward a $50,000 target.

Associated Press subsequently reported that donations exceeded $30,000.

The figures reflect different reporting times rather than necessarily conflicting accounts.

Online fundraising totals can change quickly as contributions arrive.

The exact amount eventually paid to any intended recipient remains unconfirmed.

Neither the organizer nor the recipient has publicly established that a transfer has been completed.

The Organizer’s Unusual Demand

What has attracted particular criticism is not simply the fundraising campaign’s existence.

It is the message attached to it.

Hennessey argued that the woman should not apologize for her behavior.

He described the incident as an example of excessive punishment through social media.

The campaign suggested that its intended recipient had not broken any law and should not face lasting professional consequences.

It also characterized the backlash as disproportionate.

According to TMZ, the organizer suggested he might cancel the fundraiser if the woman publicly apologized or rejected his support.

That condition made the campaign unusual.

Rather than helping someone who had acknowledged causing harm, it appeared designed to encourage the recipient to resist public pressure to express remorse.

The approach drew criticism from people who believed it rewarded behavior widely recognized as racially offensive.

Others defended the fundraising effort as a response to online harassment.

The Woman at the Center of the Campaign

The fundraiser identified its intended beneficiary as Lauren Mayfield.

Some social media users also circulated information claiming to identify her.

But the New York Post stated that it could not independently verify the blonde woman’s identity.

Associated Press likewise reported that the second woman had not publicly identified herself.

That distinction is important.

A name appearing on an independently created fundraising page does not establish that the person depicted in the video has confirmed that identity.

It also does not prove that the intended recipient approved the campaign.

Hennessey declined to confirm whether he had spoken directly with the woman.

There was no verified public statement from her accepting the funds.

The situation therefore remains partly unresolved.

The fundraising campaign exists, and substantial donations have been reported.

But its relationship to the intended beneficiary has not been fully established.

The Video That Started the Controversy

The original incident occurred Friday, November 6, at an apartment complex in Oxford.

Three Black freshmen at the University of Mississippi lived together in the apartment.

A Ring doorbell camera recorded three white women passing their front door.

One woman made monkey-like noises while beating her chest.

Another appeared to imitate similar animal sounds and movements.

The third walked past.

The footage lasted approximately 13 seconds.

Jakiyra Metcalf, one of the apartment’s residents, later shared the recording on TikTok.

She asked the university to address the behavior.

The recording spread rapidly.

Within four days, it had been viewed more than 13 million times.

Thousands of commenters condemned the gestures because of their historical association with racist stereotypes portraying Black people as animals.

The Three Women Behind the Apartment Door

The apartment was shared by Jakiyra Metcalf, Kaiyden Caldwell and Victoria Johnson.

All three are students at Ole Miss.

On Wednesday, November 11, they appeared on CBS Mornings to discuss what happened.

Their interview provided details that were not visible in the original recording.

According to the students, they reviewed the footage and decided to confront the women.

They wanted an explanation.

The residents said Alaina Kunes apologized during that encounter.

Kunes reportedly claimed that the group had made similar noises outside several apartments.

But the students questioned that explanation.

They said the recorded behavior was offensive regardless of whether the participants knew who lived behind the door.

They also described a troubling difference between the responses of the two women who had made the gestures.

“She Continued to Make the Gestures”

Victoria Johnson told CBS Mornings that one woman apologized while the other allegedly continued the behavior.

The residents said Kunes acknowledged that the actions were inappropriate.

But according to Johnson, the second woman continued making the same gestures.

“It was like a slap in the face,” Johnson said.

The alleged continuation was not captured in the widely circulated 13-second Ring video.

It comes from the residents’ account of their subsequent confrontation.

That distinction matters.

The video establishes what occurred in front of the camera.

The students’ interview describes additional behavior they say happened afterward.

Their account has contributed to the controversy surrounding the fundraiser.

Critics have questioned why donations were being raised for someone whom the residents said had continued the offensive conduct after being challenged.

Alaina Kunes Chose a Different Response

While the second woman became the subject of the fundraiser, Alaina Kunes made a different decision.

On Tuesday, November 10, the 18-year-old released a public apology through a law firm.

Kunes acknowledged appearing in the video.

She described her actions as insensitive, inappropriate and deeply harmful.

She said she had never met the apartment’s residents before the encounter.

She also claimed she had not known they were Black.

Kunes maintained that she had not intended to direct racist behavior toward anyone.

However, she recognized that her actions caused pain.

She asked the residents for forgiveness and promised to cooperate with the university’s investigation.

Her statement did not erase the incident.

But it established that she was publicly accepting responsibility for participating.

The College Withdrawal

Shortly after Kunes issued her apology, the University of Mississippi confirmed that she was no longer enrolled.

Her representatives later clarified that she had voluntarily withdrawn.

They said she had not been expelled or suspended by the university.

Kunes also reported receiving threats and harassment alongside her family.

Her attorneys said the apology was subsequently removed from their website because of continuing harassment.

The circumstances illustrate how a viral incident can produce several different consequences at once.

A person may face justified criticism for offensive behavior.

At the same time, threats and intimidation against that person or their family remain unacceptable.

Kunes’ voluntary withdrawal should not be confused with a formal university disciplinary finding.

The university has not publicly announced a completed investigation or a final disciplinary outcome concerning everyone involved.

How the Students Reacted to the Apology

The three women interviewed by CBS expressed complicated feelings about forgiveness.

Metcalf said she remained uncertain.

Caldwell acknowledged the apology but emphasized that it did not undo the hurt caused by the incident.

Johnson described the second woman’s alleged behavior during the confrontation as especially upsetting.

The residents did not present themselves as seeking to ruin anyone’s future.

They wanted their experience to be taken seriously.

They also wanted students to understand why the gestures were offensive.

For the women, the issue was not limited to a short recording.

It involved their sense of security in the place where they lived.

They had expected their apartment to be a private, comfortable environment.

Instead, their doorbell camera captured behavior they experienced as humiliating.

A Mother Expresses Unexpected Sympathy

Another development emerged when Tasha Bolton, the mother of one of the affected students, spoke publicly.

Bolton criticized the original behavior.

But she also expressed sadness about Kunes leaving the university.

She questioned whether an 18-year-old should lose her educational future because of one incident.

Her response demonstrated that condemnation of offensive behavior does not necessarily require support for every consequence that follows.

Bolton wanted young people to think before acting.

She also recognized that students can make mistakes with long-lasting consequences.

Her comments added nuance to a debate that had often been divided into opposing online camps.

The mother of a student affected by the video could recognize the harm and still express concern about another young woman’s future.

That perspective contrasts with the more confrontational language appearing on some social media accounts.

The Debate Over Financial Support

The fundraiser has prompted disagreement about whether people should donate to individuals who become the subject of viral condemnation.

Supporters argue that losing educational or employment opportunities over offensive behavior can be disproportionate.

They believe private individuals should be able to offer financial help.

Critics respond that donating money specifically because someone refuses to apologize can reward harmful behavior.

The organizer’s language has intensified that criticism.

His campaign was not framed merely as help with legal or educational expenses.

It also appeared to encourage the recipient to reject public accountability.

That message has become central to the backlash.

The question is not whether private fundraising is automatically improper.

It is what the campaign represents and what behavior its supporters are choosing to encourage.

Concerns About the Fundraiser’s Organizer

Tom Hennessey’s social media history has also attracted scrutiny.

The New York Post reported that he had shared posts supporting segregation and mocking a Black Ole Miss student.

Those posts became part of the discussion surrounding his fundraising campaign.

According to the Associated Press, Hennessey argued that the backlash reflected a double standard in how racial incidents receive public attention.

He declined to confirm whether he had contacted the woman who was supposed to receive the money.

These details help explain why some observers see the fundraiser as part of a broader ideological dispute rather than simply an effort to help a student facing public criticism.

However, the views expressed by the organizer should not automatically be attributed to the intended beneficiary.

There is no verified public statement establishing that she shares every position taken by Hennessey.

Ole Miss Continues Its Investigation

The University of Mississippi condemned the conduct shown in the video.

Administrators described the behavior as offensive, hurtful and inconsistent with university values.

The school said it was investigating.

It also contacted the three affected students to offer support and resources.

University officials have emphasized their commitment to maintaining a safe and welcoming environment.

But the school has not publicly released a final investigative report.

Federal student privacy protections may limit the details it can disclose.

The fact that Kunes voluntarily withdrew does not establish what disciplinary action, if any, might have occurred had she remained enrolled.

The status of the second woman is also not fully established through official public records.

The investigation remains an important unresolved part of the story.

A Painful History at the University of Mississippi

The incident has drawn attention partly because of the university’s history.

In 1962, James Meredith became the first Black student to enroll at Ole Miss following a landmark legal battle.

His admission was met with violent resistance.

Federal intervention was required.

The event became a defining moment in the American civil rights movement.

In more recent years, the university has faced additional controversies involving racist behavior.

In 2024, a campus demonstration drew national attention after a white counterprotester was filmed making monkey-like gestures toward a Black woman.

The resemblance to the November 2026 recording has intensified concern.

For some students, the latest incident is not an isolated embarrassment.

It raises questions about whether lessons from the university’s history are being fully understood.

The Difference Between Criticism and Harassment

The case has also highlighted an important distinction between accountability and intimidation.

People have the right to condemn racist behavior.

Students can request investigations.

Universities can enforce conduct policies.

Journalists can report verified facts.

But threats against students or their families are not an appropriate response.

Kunes has reported receiving threats and harassment.

Her legal representatives said those concerns affected how her apology was published.

At the same time, the three Black residents have described feeling unsafe and deeply hurt by the original incident.

Both sets of concerns deserve to be addressed without treating them as equivalent experiences.

Public accountability should be grounded in facts and proportionate responses.

It should not become an excuse for intimidation.

More Than $30,000 — But Who Will Receive It?

As of Wednesday afternoon, Associated Press reported that the fundraiser had collected more than $30,000.

That represented a substantial sum raised over a short period.

But several questions remain.

Has the intended recipient agreed to accept the money?

Has the organizer established direct contact with her?

What fees or administrative expenses might apply?

And will the contributions ultimately be transferred?

The available reporting does not provide verified answers to all those questions.

A fundraising total reflects money pledged or collected through the platform.

It does not necessarily prove that a beneficiary has received or spent the funds.

There are also separate fundraising pages associated with other participants in the controversy.

Those campaigns should not be confused with the GiveSendGo effort organized by Hennessey for the unidentified second woman.

One Video, Two Very Different Reactions

The contrast between the two women has become one of the most discussed aspects of the story.

Alaina Kunes publicly acknowledged her actions.

She apologized.

She said she had not intended to hurt anyone.

And she voluntarily left the university.

The second woman has not issued a verified public statement acknowledging her participation.

According to the apartment’s residents, she continued making offensive gestures after they confronted her.

Now, an online campaign associated with her has attracted more than $30,000.

The organizer has urged her not to apologize.

That contrast has fueled arguments about remorse, consequences and whether public controversy can sometimes become financially rewarding.

But it is important not to assume the second woman personally organized or approved the fundraiser.

Her involvement with the campaign remains unconfirmed.

The Students Say They Are Staying at Ole Miss

Despite the controversy, the three residents have indicated that they plan to remain at the University of Mississippi.

Metcalf, Caldwell and Johnson want to continue their education.

They also hope their decision to speak publicly encourages others to report incidents of discrimination.

Their perspective offers an important counterpoint to the fundraising headlines.

While much of the internet is debating donations and apologies, the women who lived behind the door are trying to move forward.

They have expressed uncertainty about forgiveness.

They have described feeling hurt.

But they have also made clear that they do not intend to abandon their studies.

For them, the university remains a place where they want to learn, build friendships and pursue their futures.

The Question That Remains After the Donations

On November 6, a Ring camera recorded a brief encounter outside an Ole Miss apartment.

The recording spread across the country.

One woman apologized and withdrew from college.

The residents described what happened when they confronted the group.

And another woman became the subject of a fundraising campaign that attracted tens of thousands of dollars.

In less than a week, a 13-second video developed into a national discussion about racism, forgiveness, social media punishment and whether financial support should be used to discourage an apology.

The donations have become a headline of their own.

But the amount raised does not determine whether the original behavior was acceptable.

Nor does public outrage establish an appropriate disciplinary outcome.

Those judgments require careful attention to the facts, the experiences of the students and the university’s procedures.

A Controversy That Money Cannot Resolve

The Ole Miss incident has now produced several distinct stories.

There is the original recording.

There is the apology from Alaina Kunes.

There is her withdrawal from the university.

There are the statements from three Black students who say they were deeply hurt.

And there is the fundraising campaign supporting a second woman who has not publicly identified herself.

Each development has generated new arguments.

But the central concern remains the same.

Three students encountered behavior outside their apartment that they recognized as a racist stereotype.

They asked for accountability.

Their university condemned the conduct and began an investigation.

The fundraiser may continue attracting donations, but it cannot determine what happened after the video stopped recording — or how the three women who lived behind that door should feel about it.

For now, the campaign’s ultimate beneficiary remains unconfirmed.

The university’s investigation remains open.

And the women whose apartment was at the center of the controversy say they are continuing their education.

The story is no longer simply about a viral video.

It is about the consequences that followed — and the very different ways people have chosen to respond.

ng.