Cornell Fraternity Rape Case Reopened by Prosecutors
New York prosecutors have reopened the criminal investigation into an alleged 2024 gang rape at Cornell University’s Chi Phi fraternity house, a decision that has reignited national scrutiny of how the Ivy League school handled the case. Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten announced the move on Sept. 28, following a civil lawsuit filed by the alleged victim, referred to as Jane Doe, and after New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called for an independent review of Cornell’s response.
The case centers on allegations that Doe, then 20, was drugged and sexually assaulted by several fraternity members over a period of hours in October 2024, an account the university and local authorities have said was not fully reflected in her initial statement to police.
The Reopening
According to NPR, Van Houten said the case will be presented to a grand jury once his office determines appropriate charges, and that a senior prosecutor with sex-crimes experience has been assigned to prepare it. Van Houten said the allegations in the civil lawsuit differ from Doe’s sworn November 2024 statement, which he described as having characterized her drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary and consensual.
“We want to reexamine whether there’s additional evidence that we were not aware of in November of 2024, that exists now that would change our assessment of the case,” Van Houten told ABC News, as reported by The Cornell Daily Sun.
The district attorney acknowledged that his office had relied on the Cornell University Police Department’s investigation and did not independently investigate, and that it was never provided a Snapchat group chat image included in the lawsuit that allegedly shows an invitation for other chapter members to join the assault.
What the Lawsuit Alleges
The lawsuit, a 101-page complaint filed Sept. 14 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, names Cornell; several Chi Phi fraternity organizations; seven current and former students; several sorority organizations; a local bar; and several unnamed individuals as defendants.
As Al Jazeera reported, Doe alleges she was raped by seven men over roughly seven hours at the fraternity house before blacking out around 5:45 a.m. The lawsuit says she had consumed about 10 standard drinks in three hours, was visibly intoxicated, and that because of her condition she was unable to consent. It further alleges she was pressured to snort ketamine and given marijuana and high-proof liquor.
No criminal charges have ever been filed. The seven named student defendants are Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar.
The University’s Response
Cornell said it supports the district attorney’s decision to let a grand jury hear Doe’s account. In a statement issued Sept. 28, Vice President for University Relations Kyle Kimball said the school “conducted a thorough Title IX investigation” over several months, followed by a multi-day hearing before a panel of trained faculty and staff. He said the panel issued sanctions including expulsions and suspensions, and that the Chi Phi chapter was closed in 2024 and remains barred from campus.
“Any suggestion that the university did not impose consequential punishments for those involved is false,” Kimball said. “A continuation of the false narrative that there were minimal consequences in this case is irresponsible, will make survivors feel less safe and supported, and will perpetuate the underreporting of sexual assault.”
The university specifically disputed claims that students were offered the chance to write essays as their sole consequence, saying none of those charged were offered essays as a sole penalty.
Political Pressure and Calls for Review
As WSKG reported, Hochul described the allegations as “nothing short of horrifying” and called for outside counsel to conduct a transparent, independent review of the university’s response.
“There are also serious questions about Cornell’s campus culture and its systems for prevention, reporting, and response,” Hochul said. “I am calling for outside counsel to conduct a transparent, independent review of the university’s response to determine whether Cornell met every obligation to protect its students and pursue justice.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, speaking at an Ithaca town hall, condemned what she called a “culture of rape” at elite institutions. “Those men posted in a group chat,” she said. “That means it was normal to them. That means it was acceptable to them.” Ithaca Mayor Robert Cantelmo, a Cornell alumnus, called for a moratorium on student event permits until the university reviews its protocols.
Competing Accounts
Doe’s attorney, Thomas P. Giuffra, said his client was never interviewed by anyone with specialized training in abuse-survivor interviews. According to a statement reported by The Cornell Daily Sun, Giuffra argued police were given the group chat “inviting the members of the fraternity to rape my client” but failed to follow up.
Attorneys for the defendants have denied the allegations. Jeremy Saland, representing Kretzschmar, said the Snapchat messages were “ugly, period,” but that “that doesn’t make my client a rapist, and it certainly doesn’t make anyone a sex offender.” Saland said Kretzschmar took a hair follicle test that found no ketamine in his system, and that no charges were filed against him. Andrew Miltenberg, an attorney for Lopes, said his client “unequivocally denies the allegations against him.”
Moonies Bar and Nightclub, one of the defendants, said it “had a contract in place and followed all the terms and conditions set by the sorority” and “did not serve alcohol to any underaged guests.”
Analysis: A Case That Tests Institutional Accountability
The reopening reflects a broader tension at the heart of campus sexual assault cases: the gap between university disciplinary processes and criminal justice. Title IX investigations, as Cornell’s statement notes, are separate from criminal proceedings, and a finding of responsibility under university policy does not require the same standard of proof as a criminal conviction.
That disconnect has become the flashpoint here. The grand jury’s decision will hinge largely on the evidentiary dispute over what Doe told police in 2024 and whether additional evidence—most notably the group chat image—materially changes the picture. Nationally, the case echoes long-running debates over how consistently universities and local law enforcement coordinate on allegations of campus violence.
The scrutiny has already prompted concrete institutional responses. Cornell formed a Presidential Task Force on Campus Sexual Assault, which published a report in March 2026 with recommendations on improving communication and education. A campus climate survey cited by Al Jazeera found that roughly one in four undergraduate women at U.S. universities reported nonconsensual sexual contact by force or inability to consent—context that makes the handling of high-profile cases a bellwether for broader reforms.
What’s Next
The case now moves toward a grand jury, which will determine whether to indict and on what charges. Hochul’s requested independent review of Cornell’s response is pending, as is the city’s moratorium on student events. The civil lawsuit remains ongoing separately.
The central questions that will define the case’s outcome: whether the grand jury finds the evidence sufficient to bring charges, how the competing accounts of the 2024 police statement are resolved, and whether the episode produces lasting changes to how Cornell—and peer institutions—prevent and respond to sexual violence.