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
[–] 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

Failing to review transcripts is substandard practice: serious fault in the DA there. However, unless significant allegations in the transcript are absent from the statement, it's unlikely to resolve the statement's contradiction of a crime.

A confident claim is not a conclusive legal determination drawn from alleged facts. According to the reported transcript, she was confident about the statement, too:

On the second day of the interview, Jane Doe reviewed the revised six-page statement. The transcript shows her adviser asked if she wanted her and another adviser to review the statement.

Before signing, the transcript shows Jane Doe said, "I'm very confident about this."

When the only allegation recommending a criminal charge alleges facts that not only fail to support that conclusion but negate key statutory elements of the crime, that eliminates every prosecutable theory and legal basis for an investigation. Such a contradiction is not resolvable through further investigation. At least some plausible basis for a crime needs to be articulated for an investigation to justifiably proceed.

The DA gave the complainant notice of his determination and an opportunity to review it together. That was another chance to raise any allegations the DA could have missed & explain how they arrived to their conclusion when alleged facts reviewed so far didn't support it. The complainant apparently waived the opportunity.

The "multiple things indicating lack of consent" are worse than you wrote, yet they don't satisfy the element of the crime. A feeling lacking clear expression is not a fact supporting the legal standard; she had the liberty to reject, exercised it, and was met with compliance

According to the statement, each time Jane Doe asked to stop the sexual conduct, the sexual conduct stopped.

Shutting down events and distasteful language in snapchat obviously don't qualify.

Much that you mention or that comes up in these stories is already in the statement, too. Some allegation that actually meets the legal standards is needed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Just so I understand, are you saying that it doesnt matter that:

    1. The transcript confirms she said "I can say with 100% confidence I was raped" stating she did not consent
    2. She can't remember large chunks of time, during which she may have been unconscious
    3. Several things she did indicated lack of consent
    4. Other people attempting to stop the incident may mean they were concerned
    5. She was offered out in the Snapchat, and there's no suggestion she agreed to this

    And you don't feel the DA should have shown professional curiosity regarding any of this for example asking for the rest of the chat thread or asking for the account of the person that intervened? Just want to clarify

    I don't feel her waiving speaking to the DA indicates anything, she may just not have been able to cope. "I'm very confident about this" could mean she's confident she was raped.

  • source
  • parent