A case that has been described online as a seven-hour gang rape at an Ivy League fraternity—and that fueled outrage from politicians and celebrities alike—does not match the account the accuser herself gave to police, according to the Tompkins County district attorney. Now that same prosecutor says he is reopening the investigation and plans to present it to a grand jury.
The renewed attention stems from a civil lawsuit the accuser, identified as Jane Doe, has filed against Cornell University and seven former students, according to The Daily Wire. The suit seeks damages that could result in a significant payout if she prevails. But District Attorney Matthew Van Houten says the lawsuit tells a dramatically different story than the six-page sworn statement the woman gave to Cornell University police in November 2024.
What the sworn statement said
In that statement, Van Houten says, Jane Doe “did not allege that she was drugged against her will or gang raped. On the contrary, Jane Doe’s statement described her participation in drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary, conscious, and consensual.” The DA added that the woman’s attorneys never contacted his office to say the original statement was inaccurate or to ask him to reconsider the decision not to prosecute. Instead, he said, he reached out to them after the lawsuit was filed, seeking to understand the discrepancy between the two accounts.
According to Van Houten’s description of the statement, the night began at the Chi Phi fraternity house with heavy drinking and an agreement to a sexual encounter involving two fraternity members. She said she “agreed due to how attracted [she] was” to one of the men, along with what she called her “drunken curiousness.” She recalled being “excited” at the prospect of a threesome, and described her intoxication at that point as a 5 or 6 out of 10, saying she was “pretty ok with having this threesome.”
The activity ended when she noticed one of the men appeared sleepy and was no longer fully erect; she told the other man they needed to stop so she could make sure the first was alright, and he did.
Later, the men told her how “pretty” she was and asked to do drugs off her body. She said, “Sure.” When she felt dizzy—something she attributed to a pre-existing medical condition combined with ketamine use—the men stopped, and one encouraged her to stay seated as long as she needed.
Sexual activity resumed afterward and ended again around 5:45 a.m. when she said she was tired and needed to turn in. She described her intoxication level at that stage as an 8 out of 10. According to the DA’s account, both men stopped.
The civil suit itself also describes a text message she sent one of the men afterward, in which she said she wanted to meet up again, enjoyed being with him sexually, and that “none of the sexual stuff was illegal.”
A former sex crimes prosecutor weighs in
The gap between the sworn statement and the public narrative has been acknowledged even by figures not typically aligned with the men accused. Sunny Hostin, a former sex crimes prosecutor and co-host of ABC’s “The View,” said on air that there was “no way that any prosecutor” would have filed charges based on the statement, and she criticized media outlets and public figures for doxxing the young men, none of whom have been charged with a crime.
Hostin argued that under New York law the woman consented, and said the media was “reporting this story inaccurately” and “unfairly.”
The case reopens
Despite the 2024 determination that there was insufficient evidence of criminal conduct under New York law—and despite the DA’s own account of the accuser’s original statement—Van Houten has agreed to reopen the case. His office says it plans to present the matter to a grand jury once prosecutors determine the appropriate charges.
The decision follows mounting pressure, including renewed scrutiny from politicians and public figures after the Cornell Sun published the names of the accused men. New York Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul has called for an outside review of how Cornell handled the allegations.
What happens next rests largely with the grand jury. For now, the public record contains two versions of the same night—one contained in a sworn police statement from 2024, the other laid out in a 2026 civil complaint—and a prosecutor who says he is still trying to reconcile them.
Source: www.dailywire.com — https://www.dailywire.com/news/youre-being-lied-to-about-the-cornell-7-rape-case