Content warning: This article contains allegations of sexual assault, including drugging and multiple alleged perpetrators.
The horrific allegations included in a civil complaint accusing members of a Cornell University fraternity of drugging and gang raping a 20-year-old female student in 2024 have led to those involved being harshly judged by the court of public opinion. After an angry public backlash and a new lawsuit, the Tompkins County District Attorney decided to reopen the investigation to determine whether the allegations should also be decided in criminal court.
In a civil lawsuit filed in New York County Supreme Court on September 16, the plaintiff Jane Doe accused seven members of the Cornell University XI chapter of Chi Phi Fraternity of drugging her with ketamine and gang-raping her for hours in their fraternity house. Doe filed a report with the Cornell University Police Department (CUPD). After CUPD referred Doe’s 2024 sworn statement for prosecutorial review, the DA’s office concluded that the facts described in that statement did not support criminal charges. Cornell handled the accusations administratively, issuing temporary suspensions to all and expulsions to some, and closing and banning the Chi Phi chapter.
In addition to the seven alleged rapists, their fraternity, its executive board president, and Cornell, the suit names Doe’s sorority, an Ithaca bar that served her alcohol, and the school’s faculty, alumni, and executive board for counts ranging from negligence and breach of contract to intentional infliction of emotional damage and sexual assault and battery. Whether reopening the case will lead to criminal charges remains unknown, but District Attorney Matthew van Houten has promised to seek a grand jury review when and if charges are determined. Meanwhile, many people are wondering why that step wasn’t taken in 2024.
(Big) Red in the Face
According to Doe’s complaint, her arrival on campus as a first-year student included the touting of the school’s Greek system of fraternities and sororities, which she embraced. However, she contends that Cornell failed to alert her and other new arrivals to a so-called “culture of rape” that was endemic on campus.
Doe claims that on the night of October 19, 2024, she consumed several alcoholic beverages at her sorority house before heading to a pair of off-campus bars, one of which served her a drink despite her obvious intoxication and having marked her as underage. From there, she visited the Chi Phi house. After Ingalls gave her a beer, he asked her if she’d be interested in a threesome with one of his frat brothers. The suit states that Doe was not capable of giving informed consent to sexual activity and that she was further plied with marijuana, liquor, and ketamine.
The suit maintains that until 5:45 a.m. on October 20, six of Ingall’s frat brothers joined in the gang raping of Doe and forced her to take more ketamine. It contains a picture of a phone with a message in the Chi Phi Snapchat group chat of “free p***y” in one of the house’s rooms at 1:41 a.m.
Supported by friends, Doe reported the alleged attacks to campus police on or about November 8, 2024. Soon after, the XI chapter and the seven brothers were put on temporary suspension while the allegations were investigated (the lawsuit claims that Cornell offered the students a chance to mitigate their conduct by submitting essays, but this was denied by the school and hasn’t been conclusively proved or disproved at the time of this writing). This led to a Title IX investigation, which conducted at least a dozen hearings on Doe’s accusations in May 2025. While some of the frat brothers involved were expelled, others were allowed to return to campus.
A Controversial Decision From the Start
As noted, the D.A. office declined to file charges against the seven men. According to Doe’s complaint, no investigators contacted Doe or arranged a meeting. The DA disputes this allegation. Regardless, as news of the lawsuit spread, ire was directed at the decision not to press charges against any of the accused.
In announcing that his office was reopening an investigation as a result of new evidence presented in the lawsuit, D.A. van Houten issued a release on September 28, 2026, claiming that in her 2024 statement, Jane Doe “described her participation in drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary, conscious, and consensual.” Doe’s attorney has since criticized his decision to summarize her account rather than reprint it verbatim.
The lawsuit alleges violations of the Dram Shop Act and the New York State Human Rights Law, demands a jury trial, and seeks compensatory and punitive damages, along with attorneys’ fees. Doe left Cornell before graduating, but the repercussions of what she allegedly suffered may help others, as the school formed a task force on campus sexual assault to address the concerns raised. In Cornell’s 2025 survey, 35% of undergraduate women respondents reported experiencing nonconsensual sexual contact since entering Cornell, with a participation rate of 15%.
Whether the renewed review results in criminal charges remains unclear, but the lawsuit has intensified scrutiny of how Cornell and local authorities responded to Doe’s allegations in 2024.
