FEATURED
Jane Doe’s sworn statement to DA in 2024 does not match claims in new lawsuit
When both parties are heavily intoxicated, can either truly give consent? A high-profile lawsuit involving Cornell University and an alleged frat house gang-rape has pushed that question to center stage.
All eyes are on the Ivy League institution amid a lawsuit filed by a former student alleging she was drugged and gang raped at a Chi Phi fraternity house in 2024.
The student, dubbed “Jane Doe,” alleges she was plied with ketamine and sexually assaulted by seven members of Chi Phi fraternity for about four hours, according to the 101-page civil complaint.
Professor John Banzhaf, a retired law professor at George Washington University and civil rights expert, told The College Fix, “Most allegations of rape or sexual assault at colleges involve a female accuser and a male accused. Both agree that sex occurred; the only serious issue is whether or not she consented.”
Doe’s initial statement to Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten does not match the alleged victim’s new civil lawsuit.
“She admits to taking drugs and acting voluntarily and with knowledge,” Houten told the Cornell University Police Department two years ago. “She does not allege that she was forced to engage in any acts.”
Under New York law, a person who voluntarily becomes intoxicated and maintains physical and mental capacities is capable of consent, a standard that some legal experts argue make rape charges difficult to prove.
Emily Jashinski, a popular political and cultural pundit and host of the After Party podcast, said to The College Fix: “Under pressure, the DA is now expressing frustration with the police’s alleged decision not to include Jane Doe’s claim she felt she was ‘raped’ in the sworn statement he received at the time that informed his decision not to bring charges.”
“The DA was correct that charges would never stick in this case, and that’s in large part because of her own testimony. … There is just not nearly enough evidence to actually convict anyone of rape.”
Released Snapchat screenshots from a group chat containing multiple members of Chi Phi fraternity said that there was “free p—- upstairs,” as well as newer screenshots showing correspondence after the alleged event between Doe and one of the defendants now accused of rape.
He apologized for “how things went down,” writing his memory was “kinda fuzzy.”
Doe responded by texting her memory was “super clouded too,” and that “none of the sexual stuff was illegal” and that everyone was “all too f-ing drunk and high.” She proceeded to call it a gangbang, adding: “our body, our choice.”
Inez Feltscher Stepman, a senior policy and legal analyst for Independent Women and Independent Women’s Law Center, has pointed out that “no one can be certain about anyone’s mental state that evening.”
“[E]veryone, including the men, acted as institutional liberals have said we should behave in our sex lives. The men checked in for consent multiple times like good little boys despite the hours of debauchery. The woman was clearly exploring her own liberations as taught. And when obvious sexual realities surfaced (this behavior did not actually endear Jane to the boys she liked, her reputation suffered more than theirs), the promised benefits of sexual ‘liberation’ seemed more like betrayals in the following weeks,” Stepman posted on X on Oct. 6.
Banzhaf argued that 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.” Based on what has so far been reported, “the female student was conscious and able to converse during the entire episode, and may have even initiated some of the sexual activity.”
Statements from accused fraternity members, according to the New York Times, show one said he felt like “a victim of sexual misconduct” because the woman had given him oral sex when he was “too incapacitated to consent,” and that “Jan Doe initiated sexual activity without asking.”
Herein lies the paradox of consent laws, Banzhaf argues: “If her consent is invalid because of intoxication, he would be guilty of criminal sexual assault. But by exactly the same reasoning, she would be guilty of sexual assault on him because his consent to the sex is equally (and for exactly the same reason) invalid.”
He added it “would be difficult to prove all of the elements of rape beyond a reasonable doubt, especially under New York’s current restrictive law.”
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has said the lawsuit has an exposed a “gap in state law,” and has mobilized an effort to change what qualifies as rape, regardless of whether drug and alcohol use was voluntary.
Hochul also appointed New York Attorney General Letitia James as a special prosecutor to lead the investigation of Doe’s case.
James, prior to her involvement in the case, released many public statements supporting Doe. One of the defendant’s lawyers, Andrew Miltenberg, has called for the voluntary recusal of James from the case, highlighting James’ perceived bias toward the plaintiff.
“There is nothing wrong with expressing compassion toward someone alleging sexual assault,” Miltenberg reportedly said. “The concern is that James’ words could reasonably be understood as expressing a view about what occurred before she became responsible for independently evaluating the evidence and determining whether criminal charges are supported.”
James’ office did not respond to The College Fix’s request for comment.
Doe’s lawsuit also alleges that the “house mother” of Doe’s sorority failed to supervise Doe throughout the night preceding the events at the fraternity house.
Doe and other members of the sorority went to Moonies Bar and Nightclub, and Doe claimed she had obvious signs of increasing intoxication before going to the fraternity house.
The lawsuit names the fraternity brothers, Chi Phi fraternity and Tri Delta sorority, of which Doe was a member at the time of the incident, and Cornell University as defendants. Moonies Bar is also named as a defendant.
“Tri Delta does not comment on pending litigation,” Tri Delta told The College Fix on behalf of the Alpha Beta Chapter at Cornell. “As an organization, we are committed to supporting women and victims of sexual violence.”
Cornell University’s media relations division directed The College Fix to their public statements on the incident and declined to comment further.
In the FAQ section, the university denied the popular belief that “the individuals charged were offered the opportunity to write essays as a sole consequence of their involvement.”
Depending on the defendants’ involvement in the matter, Cornell penalized them with suspension or expulsion, as well as closing and barring the Xi chapter of Chi Phi fraternity from Cornell in 2024.
Cornell has refused to give a statement as to why only some of the students involved were expelled, noting that “Federal privacy law prohibits disclosure of specific information regarding individual students and disciplinary outcomes.”
“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,” wrote Kyle Kimball, vice president for the Cornell University media relations department.
President Michael Kotlikoff in early October 2026 released a video stating that “what happened to Jane Doe in 2024 is deeply disturbing and will weigh heavily on our community for years to come.”
