Cornell DA Reopens Chi Phi Case as New Chat Evidence Emerges

Key points

• Tompkins County DA Matthew Van Houten announced the reopening of the criminal case, stating the victim’s November 2024 sworn statement described the events as voluntary and consensual, unlike the new lawsuit’s allegations of drugging and gang rape.
• CBS News obtained video of the fraternity’s group Snapchat chat from the night of the incident, showing a message at 1:42 a.m. asking if a 'shop' was still open, to which a member replied 'Yea.'
• Attorney Jeremy Saland, representing defendant Scott Kretzschmar, claims a hair follicle test proves his client did not use ketamine, contradicting the lawsuit’s specific claim that he snorted the drug on the victim.
• Attorney Thomas Giuffra, representing Jane Doe, argues that investigators failed to fully follow up on evidence, including the group chat, and that the victim was in 'self preservation mode' during the initial police report.
• Cornell University stated that its Title IX investigation resulted in expulsions and suspensions, and that the Chi Phi chapter was closed in 2024 and remains barred from campus, rejecting claims that sanctions were limited to essay writing.

Background

In November 2024, a former Cornell student filed a lawsuit alleging she was drugged and gang-raped by members of the Chi Phi fraternity in October 2024. The case gained renewed national attention in September 2026 after a new civil lawsuit was filed and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned a 'culture of rape' at elite institutions during a town hall in Ithaca. The Tompkins County DA had previously declined to prosecute due to insufficient evidence, but the new allegations prompted a review.

How outlets are covering it

CBS News highlights the newly obtained Snapchat video as evidence of the fraternity’s mindset, while defense attorneys emphasize forensic evidence like hair follicle tests to refute specific claims. The DA focuses on the discrepancy between the victim’s original sworn statement and the new lawsuit, whereas Cornell University stresses the severity of its disciplinary actions, including expulsions, to counter claims of minimal consequences. The defense argues that the case should resolve without charges, while the victim’s attorney insists that investigators failed to pursue all available evidence.

Why it matters

The reopening of the case could lead to criminal charges if the grand jury finds sufficient evidence, potentially setting a precedent for how universities and law enforcement handle discrepancies between initial reports and later lawsuits. It also highlights ongoing debates about the adequacy of university disciplinary processes and the role of digital evidence in sexual assault cases.

What to watch

A senior prosecutor with experience in sex crimes is preparing the case for the grand jury. The DA has stated that Jane Doe can testify and new evidence can be considered. The outcome will depend on whether the grand jury finds sufficient evidence to bring charges, and whether the discrepancies between the original statement and the new lawsuit are resolved.