bayu-aji
Prosecutors in upstate New York have revived a criminal investigation into allegations that a Cornell University student was drugged and sexually assaulted at a fraternity house in 2024, after the woman at the centre of the case filed a sweeping civil lawsuit accusing the university, the fraternity and law enforcement of failing to hold her alleged attackers accountable.
Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten announced on Monday that he would present the matter to a grand jury, a step that effectively hands the charging decision to a panel of local citizens rather than leaving it with his office alone. The move reverses, at least procedurally, an earlier determination by prosecutors that the evidence gathered from the complainant's initial statement did not clear the legal threshold required to file charges.
Van Houten said that once his office settles on appropriate charges, the case will be pursued "in the most objective and impartial means available" through testimony before the grand jury. The announcement came after the woman, identified in court papers as Jane Doe, filed a 101-page civil complaint on September 16 in which she described being raped by seven men over roughly seven hours at the Chi Phi fraternity house.
According to the lawsuit, Doe, who was 20 at the time, visited a friend at the fraternity house on October 19, 2024, after drinking at an off-campus bar. She claims two members of the house suggested she sleep with both of them and later pressured her into taking ketamine and smoking marijuana. She alleges she was then assaulted by seven men before losing consciousness at about 5:45am.
Doe maintains that her level of intoxication made it impossible for her to give consent. The lawsuit includes screenshots of a Snapchat group chat among fraternity members in which one participant crudely told others they could sleep with the victim for "free." Another message in the thread read, "I f love Chi Phi," according to the filing.
Doe reported the incident to Cornell's police department on November 8, 2024, but no criminal charges followed. Her attorney, Thomas Giuffra, told CBS News that she went to police because she believed she was the victim of a crime, and he criticised the subsequent investigation, saying that apart from her initial contact with campus police she was never approached by investigators from the district attorney's office or by anyone trained in interviewing survivors of sexual assault.
Giuffra also said Cornell expelled two fraternity members after an internal review but imposed lesser sanctions on five others, including suspensions, workshops and essay assignments. "Not one of these guys was arrested. Not one. That I can tell you for a fact," he told CBS New York, adding that Doe withdrew from the university after the episode.
The civil complaint names Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar as the men involved. It also lists Cornell, the Chi Phi fraternity, Doe's sorority Delta Delta Delta, the off-campus bar and the seven men as defendants, accusing them of breach of contract, negligence and violations of state law. Doe is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, though the filing does not specify an amount.
Lawyers for the accused men have pushed back sharply. Jeremy Saland, who represents Kretzschmar, acknowledged that the Snapchat messages were inappropriate but argued they do not amount to evidence of sexual assault. "This is a situation where there was an ugly Snapchat – ugly, period. … But that doesn't make my client a rapist, and it certainly doesn't make anyone a sex offender," Saland said, adding that his client briefly entered the room where Doe was but did not touch her and left quickly.
Saland also said Kretzschmar underwent a hair follicle test that showed no ketamine in his system, and that no one had contacted him about a renewed investigation. "We are available to present exonerating evidence. I just hope the right thing is eventually done, this case is closed and my client can live his life and not be subject to this selfish, repugnant, vile claim by this woman about him," he said. Andrew Miltenberg, an attorney for Lopes, separately told CBS New York that his client "unequivocally denies the allegations against him."
Cornell issued its own statement on Monday welcoming the district attorney's decision to let a grand jury hear Doe's account. The university said it had conducted its own months-long investigation and referred the matter to a hearing where a panel of trained faculty and staff reviewed evidence from both Doe and the accused. That process produced a range of sanctions including expulsions and suspensions, according to the university, which rejected suggestions that the penalties were trivial and stressed that no one was offered essays as the sole consequence of involvement.
The university added that the Chi Phi chapter was closed in 2024 and remains barred from campus. It warned that repeating what it called a false narrative of minimal consequences would make survivors of sexual assault feel less safe and could discourage others from coming forward. The statement reflects a broader tension on US campuses, where universities increasingly handle sexual misconduct allegations through internal disciplinary systems while local prosecutors apply a separate and often more demanding criminal standard premised on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Van Houten's account of the original investigation differs sharply from the version laid out in the lawsuit. According to his statement, Doe's initial November 2024 account did not allege that she was drugged against her will or gang-raped. Instead, he said, her statement described her drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary, conscious and consensual. He noted that his office could not have based its 2024 decision on allegations contained in a civil lawsuit that would not be filed until nearly two years later – a point that underscores how the legal picture has shifted as new details have emerged through civil litigation.
The case has generated significant anger on social media, much of it directed at Cornell and the Tompkins County district attorney's office over how the allegations were handled. For survivors' advocates, the reopened investigation illustrates a persistent difficulty: victims often disclose details gradually, and inconsistencies between an initial police statement and later accounts can be used to question credibility even when trauma, fear or intoxication may explain the gaps.
The grand jury process now becomes the central battleground. Unlike a trial, a grand jury proceeding is closed and does not involve cross-examination by defence counsel in the same manner, though prosecutors must still persuade panel members that there is sufficient evidence to indict. If charges are filed, the case would move into open court, where the competing narratives – Doe's account of an alcohol- and drug-fuelled assault and the defendants' insistence that the encounter was consensual – would be tested before a jury. Whatever the outcome, the lawsuit has already forced a public reckoning over how one of America's most prestigious universities and its local justice system responded when a student said she was attacked.
Comments (0)