The Tompkins County District Attorney’s office has officially reopened a criminal investigation into an alleged sexual assault involving members of the Chi Phi fraternity at Cornell University. District Attorney Matthew Van Houten announced the decision on Monday, September 28, 2026. The move follows a newly filed 101-page civil lawsuit that presents starkly conflicting accounts compared to the initial police inquiry conducted two years prior.
Prosecutors confirmed that a senior prosecutor has been assigned to present the case to a Tompkins County grand jury. The renewed legal scrutiny stems from a civil complaint filed earlier in the month by a former student, identified as Jane Doe. She alleges that seven current and former fraternity members drugged and gang-raped her inside the Chi Phi house on October 19, 2024.
Background of the 2024 Investigation and Initial Decision
The incident initially came to light in November 2024, when the complainant filed a six-page typewritten statement with the Cornell University Police Department. At the time, the Tompkins County District Attorney’s office reviewed the police findings and determined that the evidence did not support filing criminal charges.
District Attorney Van Houten explained that the initial decision was based strictly on the narrative provided in the victim’s original sworn statement. According to Van Houten, that document stated the woman voluntarily consumed drugs and alcohol and engaged in a consensual threesome. He noted that the initial police report did not claim she had been drugged against her will, rendered unconscious, or forced into non-consensual acts.
"The decision made in November of 2024 that the evidence did not support the filing of criminal charges was legally correct," Van Houten said in a statement. "At the same time, I recognize the reality that it can take years of therapy and healing for victims of sexual assaults to fully process and understand what happened to them."
The Civil Lawsuit and Discrepancies in Accounts
The landscape of the case shifted dramatically when Jane Doe’s legal representation filed a comprehensive civil lawsuit in September 2026. The complaint alleges that the student was systematically targeted, drugged with ketamine, and subjected to hours of sexual assault by multiple fraternity members after a solicitation message was broadcast on a Snapchat group chat.
Thomas P. Giuffra, the attorney representing Jane Doe, strongly criticized the initial police investigation. He argued that university police officers lacked specialized training to interview trauma survivors adequately. Giuffra asserted that authorities failed to follow up properly with his client or thoroughly investigate crucial evidence, including the digital group chat records provided to law enforcement.
"My client went to the Cornell University Police because a crime was committed," Giuffra stated. "It was the obligation of the police to investigate the complaints. They were given the group chat inviting the members of the fraternity to rape my client."
Cornell University and Fraternal Responses
In the wake of the 2024 incident, Cornell University barred the Xi chapter of Chi Phi from campus. Following the recent legal developments and the reopening of the criminal inquiry, the university issued updated statements clarifying its internal disciplinary actions.
Cornell officials emphasized that the institution conducted an extensive Title IX investigation independent of criminal proceedings. According to the university, a hearing panel composed of trained faculty and staff evaluated evidence over multiple days. This resulted in strict sanctions, including student expulsions and suspensions. The university explicitly refuted allegations that minor punishments or essay-writing assignments were the sole consequences for the involved individuals.
Attorneys representing individual defendants named in the civil complaint have strongly denied the allegations. Defense counsel for defendant Scott Kretzschmar stated that the alleged incident never occurred and that his client had no physical contact with the plaintiff. Similarly, attorneys representing other named students maintained that their clients did not participate in sexual misconduct or illicit drug use.
Next Steps in the Grand Jury Proceeding
District Attorney Van Houten emphasized that the upcoming grand jury will review Jane Doe’s testimony alongside any new evidence introduced through the civil complaint. If the grand jury votes to return an indictment against any of the individuals involved, the District Attorney’s office intends to prosecute the case.
Authorities have urged community members and media outlets to rely on objective legal processes as the grand jury examines the expanded record.
