Below is my column in the New York Post on the Cornell rape case and the appointment of Attorney General Letitia James to investigate the allegations. With Democratic politicians and pundits already pronouncing guilt before any charges, let alone a trial, the appointment of James follows an all-too-familiar pattern in high-profile criminal cases. James previously pronounced the guilt of the students before she was appointed by New York Gov. Hochul as the special prosecutor. James declared that the accuser had “been forced to endure” an assault that was “horrific and unacceptable.” She added that, with “all survivors,” that “we stand with you.” It is a signature of James’s notorious approach to prosecutorial ethics.
Here is the column:
“Seven men drugged and gang raped a 20-year-old woman.” That verdict in the alleged Cornell rape case was delivered by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has joined a chorus of others in pronouncing the guilt of Cornell students accused of raping a fellow student.
Mind you, not a single witness has testified under oath publicly and not a single charge has been brought. However, guilt is now being collectively declared from the usual figures and outlets who have never been late to mob justice.
Ocasio-Cortez declared, “I want to be clear that the culture of rape, sexual assault, and pedophilia is protected in elite institutions across the United States and including Cornell University in this instance. It has got to stop.”
We have been here before. Twenty years ago, Duke students were accused of gang raping a stripper at a campus party. The media quickly lionized Durham District Attorney Michael B. Nifong as he pandered to the media in portraying the students as personifying a racist rape culture in the United States.
The problem is that, from the start, the facts did not fit the allegations and there was a total lack of forensic evidence to support the claim. Crystal Mangum later admitted that she had lied.
Nifong was disbarred and Mangum, who was still not prosecuted for lying about these students, later went to jail for murder.
All the politicians and pundits who declared the Duke students guilty simply shrugged and moved on to the next scandal, demanding instant, uninformed judgments.
Conflicts in testimony, as are evident in the Cornell case, does not mean that there was no rape. Indeed, this is a stronger case than Duke in my view. However, there is ample reason to withhold judgment until more is known.
Much of what we know comes from a 101-page civil complaint filed by Doe against Cornell, fraternity-related entities, seven individual defendants and other defendants.
The alleged rape occurred on the night of Oct. 19, 2024. Doe admits that she drank heavily at a sorority house and then, despite being underage, drank more at a couple of bars before, around 11 pm, going to the Chi Phi fraternity house to meet a friend. It was there that she claims to have been drugged and gang raped.
The Snapchat messages sent after 1 am from the fraternity brothers are disgusting and horrifying. Frat brothers announce that there was “free” sex with a woman upstairs, and one later asked, “Shop still open?”
Yet the case also includes countervailing statements from the alleged victim herself, including suggestions that the sex with the first couple of men was consensual.
Friends recounted that Doe later laughed about the incident and said, “Oh my goodness, isn’t that crazy?” (Notably, some also added that they believed Doe was still traumatized by the experience and had not fully processed it).
She also later told her sorority “big sister” that “You may hear some rumors about me, and unfortunately they are true.”
On October 22 and 23, Doe exchanged messages with one of the men who expressed regret about “how things went down.” Both said that their memory of what occurred was cloudy because they were intoxicated.
However, she told him “non(e) of the sexual stuff was illegal.” She reportedly added that she liked being with him and another man and wanted to come over and smoke more “but like leave out the extra 5 billion men and ketamine.”
On Oct. 22, Doe did go to Cornell Health and was diagnosed with a urinary tract infection and tested positive for sexually transmitted diseases.
On October 28, Doe reportedly wanted to go to the fraternity’s Halloween party, and her frat friend said she was welcome because “chi phi is your house and you are welcome here.” She responded with “thank u i really appreciate … i’ll bring my cigs tomorrow.”
Later, the president of the fraternity contacted her to rescind the invitation and she responded angrily to her friend that “I knew this was going to happen. The woman will always get the short end of the stick. Yall aren’t my friends. Yall are covering your asses.”
On Nov. 7, Doe did seek a rape kit test (which was not useful after the passage of so much time). The next day, she reported the alleged rape to the Cornell University Police Department.
Cornell then moved quickly that day to suspend the Xi Chapter of Chi Phi and temporarily suspended the seven men later named in her civil lawsuit.
In her later accounts, Doe admitted to heavy drinking and drug use. She also reportedly told investigators that she was okay with the initial sex, adding, “Yeah, as much as I can be because, again, I was super drunk when I got there … But I was pretty OK with all of this.” However, she also said “I can say with 100% confidence I was raped.”
Legally, the extreme intoxication and drug use undermine claims of consent. While she admits that her memory was “super clouded,” it is hard to imagine anyone believing that a student in her condition was capable of giving knowing consent.
However, there are obvious problems with the case, which likely contributed to the decision not to bring criminal charges or make a criminal referral.
In New York, one threshold issue will focus on her voluntarily drinking to excess. Like other states, a mentally incapacitated individual cannot legally consent to sex but there is an exception for those who voluntarily consumed alcohol to the point that they became incapacitated.
Roughly 20 states have the same exception — where an accuser must show that her incapacity by intoxication was involuntary due to being drugged or brought to intoxication without knowledge or consent.
Faced with a prosecutor who had previously declined charges (but was reopening the case), Gov. Hochul condemned the university and played to her base. She promised her own prosecutor.
She then picked the one prosecutor who surpasses Nifong in the Duke case in her reputation for putting politics ahead of prosecutorial integrity: Attorney General Letitia James.
James was elected on a pledge to weaponize the legal system against President Donald Trump, promising that she would prosecute Trump without specifying any crime. She is known as one of the most political prosecutors in the country, using her office to pursue groups and individuals on the right. Former staffers recently condemned her for converting them into “Tish’s personal attorneys … targeting her political enemies.”
Hochul’s appointment of James maximizes the chances of a criminal charge in the case. James has always followed the policy of the Queen of Hearts in “Alice in Wonderland”: “Sentence first, verdict afterward.”
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
This is my personal opinion only, but based on professional experience and observation. I am a white cisgender female.
1.) Women (mostly white females) tend to blame men, irrespective of their own immature, ill-advised, and dubious contribution to events. I am in no way defending or excusing macho males intent on overpowering women in some situations, including sexual.
2) Women’s limbic response mechanisms seem to prevail over logic.
3) A single, non-sexual example: the recent FlyDubai incident involving co-pilot attacking pilot: Women hysterically screaming. Out of control screaming. Top-of-lungs non-stop screaming.
(I once was on a plane when this happened. We were going to the Pentagon for a training class; I was a mere clerk-in-training. The plane landed safely after the receiving airport* lined the runway with white foam. Sorry, *don’t know the correct terms.) Since that day, I have regarded screaming women with disdain.
4) My advice to ALL women. If you are not contributing to the solution, just Sit Down and Shut UP until you have something to CONTRIBUTE in resolving the crisis. Please STOP ALL THAT SCREAMING.
5) My distant perception of Letitia James is that her initial response to cases is limbic, whether political or criminal in nature. She then later structures the logic elements to a case and her response is more controlled, professional, -although one can feel the bias still leaking through the seams.
0.) (What happened to dorm mothers or sorority house contacts? When I went to school, they went looking for you when you were not back when you were supposed to be.)
I expect my comment here will alienate some. I accept that.
Blind justice, essential to trust, requires requires self-control, integrity, and character on the part of the players. The bar appears to be set too low damn near everywhere.
There is no rape. She felt embarrassed after and now wants to get rich off of it. She is a hoe plain and simple. Leave those dudes alone. She is trying to ruin lives on a lie
If I were her, I’d do the same thing.
Maybe the boys should counterclaim? Just thinking.
Do you admit you would lie. Women are just vile.
It is taught at college orientation, and is commonly known, that alcohol and many “recreational” drugs will impair one’s judgement. So if someone chooses to drink alcohol or use drugs that one knows, or should have known, in advance will be likely to impair that person’s judgement and may cause a person to do something they will later regret when sober and lucid, short of verifiable assault and/or battery, why should that person not bear much of responsibility for his or her actions? If one chooses to drink and use drugs that are known to likely impair one’s ability to consent, shouldn’t one be responsible for one’s actions that may result from one’s choice to be so impaired?
You give the s_lut too much credit, she chose to be gang f-ed. She used drugs to release her inhibitions. She wanted it!
Most readers are focusing on the sex scandal side of this case, but there’s an eight-hundred-pound gorilla here that folks are ignoring. In her statement and text messages, Jane Doe alludes to “cigs” and ketamine. The cigs likely refer to marijuana, which, in NY State, is legal for recreational use only if you’re over the age of 21. Jane Doe was 20 when this episode at the frat house occurred.
Ketamine, on the other hand, is a very serious controlled substance and regulated as a Schedule III drug by both NY and federal laws. TV star Matthew Perry died from a ketamine OD, and his supplier was sentenced to 15 years in prison. His doctor and assistants are under investigation and may go to the slammer, as well.
So, for the moment, let’s forget about the sexual stuff; it’s a she-said, he-said deal at most, and the legal issues right now do not favor a prosecution because of all the contradictions.
The easiest way to get to the bottom of all this is through the drug-related evidence. OK, Jane Doe, where did you obtain the marijuana, from whom, when, and how much? What else do you know about underage marijuana use at Cornell?
OK, frat boys, who brought the ketamine to the party? Jane Doe says the drug was “on” the private part of so and so. OK, so and so, what can you tell us about this drug? Where did you obtain it, from whom, for how much, and how much did you buy? What more can you tell us about ketamine use at Cornell by students?
None of these people, including Jane Doe, is a hardened criminal likely to clam up and hide behind their lawyer. They are at Cornell because they are smart, ambitious, and the family can pay $75-$90 thousand a year in tuition for a first-rate education that guarantees success in life, not time in the slammer. This episode could ruin that plan. It could also land one or more frat boys in the slammer.
So, line up, everybody; it’s true confession time. Cornell’s new motto for the occasion is mus esto aut musem patere (Latin for Rat or be Ratted). Oh, and Tish likes deep pockets, so Cornell, you’d better hide that $12 billion endowment fund, or you’ll be trumped over by another Latin expression: In loco parentis – the legal doctrine defining the responsibility of a school to protect its students from nightmarish situations like this.
Those boys are screwed as far as justice.
The whole point is that NY has announced that there will be no justice for any male involved.
I once had sex with a woman I never would have consented to had I not been drunk. Am I a victim? hey Tish!!!
For the record, if a fraternity member receives a group text advertising “free pussy,” what is the correct response? According to Turley, ” it is hard to imagine anyone believing that a student in her condition was capable of giving knowing consent.” He obviously doesn’t know the commenters on his column.
Is any one here commenting today at that party in 2024?
And let’s keep in mind that 2 of the Cornell Seven are black, 1 hispanic and 1 asian. How nice, a plurality finally. What more could liberals ask for?
Out of curiosity, how did you determine the race of the participants. Among the seven, I could see a couple names might believe are Hispanic. Kretzschmar has a German origin which may mean nothing after generations. No media source I’ve seen indicates ethnic backgrounds. Chi Phi doesn’t have a reputation for the diversity you suggest, especially with Black members. What is your source?
You being an expert on all things black, how is it when black culture (used loosely of course) uses the “Ho” degradation characterization in films, music etc. , that you have no issue with that, but when an unknown boy sends one text about a girl willingly to participate in a gangbang, you finally have an issue with it? Rumor has it one of the black kids sent the text. Comment please.