Cornell Chi Phi Assault Case

The story so far

As of October 6, 2026

A former Cornell student identified as Jane Doe has sued Cornell University, the Chi Phi fraternity, and seven fraternity members, alleging she was pressured to snort ketamine and then raped over several hours in October 2024 at the chapter house at 107 Edgemoor Lane. Her 101-page complaint names Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris, and Scott Kretzschmar, and includes a screenshot of a 1:42 a.m. Snapchat message to a group called Chi Phi Actives advertising “free” sex upstairs. She reported the incident to Cornell University police on Nov. 8, 2024; the university suspended the chapter the same day and it remains under interim suspension. No one has been charged criminally.

The criminal side has reopened. Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten says he is revisiting the case and intends to present it to a grand jury, the panel that decides whether there is enough evidence to bring charges. What is driving the renewed scrutiny is not only the lawsuit’s detail, but also gaps in what law enforcement received in 2024. The district attorney has said his office did not have a transcript of the woman’s November 2024 police interview in which she stated she was raped, and Cornell’s police issued a statement last week that omitted any mention of a rape allegation. The university has since revised its public FAQ to say campus police shared only the accuser’s account and a Snapchat image with prosecutors, sharpening questions about the original handoff.

The center of gravity is now evidence. The Snapchat post and the drugging allegation are the elements that, if corroborated, could establish incapacitation and show how additional men were drawn into the room, which is why seven people are named. New materials in circulation include a group Snapchat photo of Jane Doe taken that night and text messages exchanged days later that include an apology from a defendant. This also explains the gap between campus discipline and criminal law: a university can sanction on a lower standard of proof, while prosecutors must show a lack of consent beyond a reasonable doubt. Reopening the case tests whether the new material can meet that bar.

The story has also become an institutional crisis. Thousands of students have rallied on campus, and Cornell’s faculty senate has submitted a no-confidence resolution in the administration’s handling of the case. Disciplinary records show two of the seven men were expelled while others received lesser penalties such as training and reflective essays, outcomes that have fueled protests. In response, the president has promised reforms and brought in former acting U.S. attorney general Sally Yates to lead an independent review of how the university handled the allegations. What is at stake now is trust in the system that moves information from campus to prosecutors and the credibility of Cornell’s leadership as that process is reexamined.