Reopened Investigation into 2024 Cornell University Rape Case

In Ithaca, New York, prosecutors have announced the reopening of an investigation into an alleged rape case involving Cornell University students. This development follows a recent lawsuit filed by the alleged victim, known as Jane Doe, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The lawsuit claims that Jane Doe was drugged and raped by multiple men for over four hours at a Cornell fraternity house in October 2024.

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten has stated that efforts are underway to reexamine the case. The office is preparing to present the case to a grand jury once appropriate charges are determined. A senior prosecutor with experience in handling sex crimes has been assigned to the case preparations.

Cornell University has released a statement supporting the prosecutors’ decision to revisit the case. The university defended its actions from two years ago. Kyle Kimball, vice president for university relations at Cornell, emphasized that a comprehensive Title IX investigation was conducted over several months. Although no criminal charges were filed, a hearing took place where trained faculty and staff reviewed evidence from all involved parties. Resulting actions included expulsions and suspensions, although specific details were not disclosed in the statement.

The fraternity involved, the Xi chapter of Chi Phi, was banned from the campus two years ago. Jane Doe is suing seven individuals, the fraternity, Cornell University, and others involved. Her attorneys did not comment before publication.

The case has attracted significant attention on social media since the filing of Doe’s lawsuit. Van Houten acknowledged the public’s anger, noting that his office has received calls for answers and also derogatory messages. He pointed out differences between the civil lawsuit’s claims and Jane Doe’s earlier sworn statement from November 2024. According to Van Houten, the original statement described a consensual and voluntary involvement in drug use and sexual conduct.

Van Houten explained that his office based its 2024 decision on the victim’s statement at the time, not on the claims made in a civil lawsuit filed years later. Additionally, he stated that Jane Doe’s attorneys had not contacted his office to amend the original statement or request a reconsideration of the decision. Van Houten has reached out to Doe’s attorneys to resolve the discrepancy.