A 2024 sexual assault allegation at Cornell University has suddenly become an international story after a former student filed a civil lawsuit accusing seven fraternity members of sexually assaulting her, while the Tompkins County District Attorney’s Office in New York has reopened its criminal investigation into the case.
The woman, identified in court documents as Jane Doe, was 20 when the alleged incident took place at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house in October 2024. She alleges that she was heavily intoxicated, was given alcohol and ketamine and was raped by multiple men over several hours. The seven men named in the lawsuit have denied the allegations or disputed their involvement through their attorneys. No criminal charges were filed after the original investigation in 2024.
Now, nearly two years after the alleged incident, the case is back in the legal spotlight. Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten has said his office will reassess the evidence and present the case to a Tompkins County grand jury, which will consider whether criminal charges should be brought. The reopening follows Doe’s 101-page civil complaint, which prosecutors say contains allegations that differ significantly from what she told Cornell police in 2024.
What Does Jane Doe Say Happened?
According to the civil lawsuit, Jane Doe went to the Chi Phi fraternity house on October 19, 2024, while intoxicated and looking for a friend. She alleges that she had already consumed alcohol and was given more alcohol and drugs (against her will), after arriving at the house. The lawsuit says that what began as an encounter (in which had refused to participate in) involving two men eventually involved several others. Jane Doe alleges that she became too intoxicated to consent and that seven fraternity members sexually assaulted her over the course of several hours. She reported the incident to Cornell University Police on November 8, 2024.
The details of that original report are now central to the reopened investigation. Van Houten has said Doe’s sworn statement to Cornell police in November 2024 did not describe the incident in the same terms as her later lawsuit. According to the DA, the original statement described her participation in drug use and sexual activity as voluntary and consensual and did not allege that she had been drugged against her will or gang raped.
Jane Doe’s attorney, Thomas Giuffra, has challenged that characterisation of the original investigation. A transcript of Jane Doe’s interview with Cornell police, obtained by CBS News, shows her distinguishing between what she described as consensual activity earlier in the night and what she later described as rape. Her attorney has also argued that she was traumatised after the incident and that investigators did not conduct the kind of follow-up investigation he would have expected in a serious sexual assault case.
The Snapchat Group Chat Is Now A Major Part Of The Story
Then there are the messages.
One of the most talked-about pieces of evidence is a Snapchat group chat involving members of Chi Phi on the night of the alleged incident. According to screenshots and video obtained by CBS News, messages were exchanged while Doe was inside the fraternity house, with one message crudely suggesting that a woman was available upstairs. Another member later asked whether the opportunity was still available, receiving a response indicating that it was.
Those messages have become particularly important because they could potentially help investigators establish what different people knew and when they knew it. The Tompkins County DA has said the messages were not part of the evidence used when prosecutors decided not to bring charges in 2024, although Cornell says its police department did provide a screenshot from Snapchat to the DA at the time. Van Houten has indicated that the messages will now be considered as part of the reopened investigation and could be presented to the grand jury.
There are also text messages reportedly exchanged between Jane Doe and one of the defendants shortly after the alleged incident. In those messages, the man appears to apologise for how the night unfolded and says his memory is unclear because of intoxication. Jane Doe responds that her own memory was also clouded and refers to the presence of multiple men and ketamine. Her attorney says she was traumatised and was trying to understand what had happened. The messages have become part of the public debate around the case, but their meaning and context will ultimately have to be assessed as part of the legal process.
Why Was There No Criminal Case In 2024?
This is where the story gets complicated.
After Doe reported the incident to Cornell police in November 2024, the Tompkins County District Attorney’s Office did not bring criminal charges. Van Houten has defended that decision by saying prosecutors were working from Doe’s sworn statement at the time and that the evidence available then did not meet the legal threshold for charges. His office now says the civil lawsuit contains significantly different allegations, including claims that Doe was drugged and unable to consent. That difference is the reason the DA says the investigation is being reconsidered.
Jane Doe’s attorney, however, has questioned why investigators did not conduct more extensive follow-up work at the time. He has said Doe was not contacted by investigators from the DA’s office after making her initial report to Cornell police. Van Houten has responded that the officer who took her statement was an experienced investigator trained in trauma-informed sexual assault investigations.
The reopened investigation therefore has two questions running alongside each other: what actually happened at the fraternity house, and whether the original investigation gathered and assessed all the evidence that could have been available.
What Happened To The Seven Men?
The seven men named in Doe’s lawsuit are Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar.
Their individual positions differ. Attorneys for some of the men have denied the allegations, while others have disputed their involvement. One attorney said his client made an immature Snapchat comment but did not participate in sexual activity or touch Doe. The allegations against all seven remain unproven in criminal court.
Cornell also conducted its own disciplinary proceedings following the 2024 report. The university says a panel of trained faculty and staff reviewed the case and imposed sanctions that included expulsions and suspensions. Cornell has specifically rejected claims that the men were simply asked to write essays as their only punishment. The university has said two students were expelled, others received suspensions or other sanctions, and the Chi Phi chapter was closed and remains barred from campus.
Doe’s lawsuit presents a different account of Cornell’s response and alleges that the university failed to adequately protect her or punish those involved. Those claims are now part of the separate civil case.
Cornell Is Facing Questions Too
The controversy has moved beyond the seven men and the criminal investigation. Cornell University itself is now facing questions about how it handled the allegations and how much students were told about the case. Cornell says it conducted a Title IX investigation and that the matter went before a hearing panel. The university has defended its response and said it supports the Tompkins County DA’s decision to reopen the criminal investigation. The Chi Phi chapter remains banned from campus.
But students and advocates have questioned the lack of transparency surrounding the case. The Cornell Daily Sun has called for an independent review, while New York Governor Kathy Hochul has asked for an outside review of Cornell’s handling of the allegations. Ithaca officials have also raised concerns about campus safety and the university’s response.
The debate has also brought Title IX back into the conversation. Title IX governs how federally funded educational institutions handle sex discrimination and sexual misconduct complaints, and the Cornell case has renewed questions about how university disciplinary systems should balance the safety and rights of complainants with due process for students accused of misconduct.
So, What Happens Now?
For the moment, the biggest development is that the Tompkins County District Attorney’s Office has reopened the criminal investigation. Van Houten has said he hopes to move the case to a grand jury relatively quickly, where prosecutors can present evidence and ask jurors to determine whether charges should be brought.
That means investigators will now have to look at the evidence from 2024 alongside the allegations in the new civil lawsuit. That includes Doe’s original statement, the later allegations, the Snapchat group chat, the subsequent text messages, Cornell’s records and any other evidence that may now be available. Prosecutors have also indicated they intend to speak with Doe and her attorneys about what has changed since the original investigation. The civil lawsuit is moving separately, with an initial court hearing scheduled for October 23 in Manhattan. The criminal investigation, meanwhile, is only at the reopening stage — no new criminal charges have been announced.
And that distinction matters. The allegations against the seven men have not been proven in criminal court, while the claims made by Doe, the decisions made by Cornell and the handling of the original investigation are all now being examined through different legal and institutional processes.
For a case that remained largely out of the public eye for almost two years, there are suddenly a lot of questions — and the answers will now have to come from evidence rather than social media.
Sources: BBC, The Guardian, CNN, News Nation Now,
