206
Exclusive video obtained of Cornell fraternity's text chain in alleged gang rape investigation (www.cbsnews.com)
submitted 3 days ago* by to c/news@lemmy.world
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The excerpts below are from the following sources

https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/cornell-university-rape-allegation-chi-phi-snapchat-conversation/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/29/cornell-texts-rape-investigation

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-cornell-university-gang-rape-lawsuit/

https://people.com/cornell-student-says-frat-group-chat-critical-evidence-da-did-not-see-until-recently-12146190

The woman, identified only by a pseudonym in the lawsuit, filed the complaint Sept. 16, saying she was sexually assaulted at the Chi Phi fraternity house on the Ivy League campus in October 2024 after being pressured into snorting ketamine, smoking marijuana and drinking alcohol. She became completely incapacitated while frat members were sexually assaulting her, the lawsuit alleges.

Two of the alleged perpetrators were subsequently expelled after an internal investigation by Cornell – while the other five were allowed to resume their studies at the Ivy League institution after writing an essay, attending a workshop, or serving a short suspension.

None were ever arrested or charged, and outrage over the treatment of the alleged offenders grew when the woman’s lawsuit was made public.

CBS, meanwhile, also claimed to have a video of Snapchat messages exchanged on the night of the alleged assault by numerous members of a group called Chi Phi Actives. One of the messages, sent while the woman was in the since-closed fraternity house, allegedly stated there was “free pussy upstairs”.

According to CBS, a later message sent by a group member asked: “Shop still open?” The response was, “Yea”.

Attorney Thomas Giuffra, who represents the woman, confirmed to CBS that his client – named Jane Doe in court documents – exchanged text messages with one defendant after the alleged assault. But Giuffra said he could not be certain the screenshots that CBS News saw were authentic.

The woman’s lawyer says Cornell University Police had the fraternity messages in 2024, but prosecutors say they didn’t see them until she filed a lawsuit recently

Over the weekend, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned what she called a “culture of rape” that is protected at elite institutions.

“When I read what happened at Cornell, those men posted in a group chat. That means it was normal to them. That means it was acceptable to them. This is a culture,” she said Sunday at a forum packed with young people near Cornell’s campus.

“And what we must do is understand that we cannot protect those spaces any more.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 days ago

Under New York State Law, “mental incapacitation” occurs when a victim is rendered incapable of controlling her own conduct due to the administration of a drug without her consent. The facts provided by Jane Doe’s statement do not allege that she was either rendered incapable of controlling her own conduct or that any drug was administered to her without her consent.

She alleged cognitive capacity (understood what she's doing), volition (willing choices), not incapacity to control her conduct, compulsion, inability to communicate willingness, expression of nonconsent, etc. Throughout the recollection, she was understanding, rejecting & accepting requests, choosing offers, conducting choices. She exercised autonomy.

The legal standard of "mental incapacitation" isn't an incapacity to recall, it's an incapacity to control one's own actions (with conditions). Memory‑formation failure is not a loss of volitional control. People are still responsive to stimuli, can have full on conversations, can conduct willful choices. Their failure to recall it later is retrospective. That does not mean people weren't cognizant at the time and making willful choices. The law doesn't say black-out drunks lack a choice when they commit a crime. Dumber, less inhibited choices aren't a lack of willing choice.

I doubt the structure of the law & its standards would support your suggested interpretation of "mental incapacitation". It explicitly rejects voluntary intoxication, and she alleges legally significant capacity to understand & choose her conduct. New York already rejects intoxication as a defense for criminal liability. Consistency with that is unlikely to support constructions for consensual intoxication as a substantial incapacity to understand and control one's own conduct (which would excuse liability).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent