Cornell Fraternity Case Reopens as DA Prepares Grand Jury Review of 2024 Assault Allegations

Key points

• Jane Doe, a 20-year-old former student, alleges she was forced to take ketamine and sexually assaulted by seven Chi Phi members between 1:42 a.m. and 5:45 a.m. in October 2024.
• Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten confirmed the reopening of the criminal investigation, citing community pressure and discrepancies between the 2024 sworn statement and the 2026 civil complaint.
• Van Houten aims to present the case to a grand jury within 45 days, noting that the 2024 statement described the events as voluntary, whereas the lawsuit alleges non-consensual assault.
• Cornell University states its Title IX investigation resulted in expulsions and suspensions for the accused, and the Chi Phi chapter was closed in 2024.
• The plaintiff's attorney, Thomas Giuffra, claims investigators never followed up with the victim, while the DA asserts the initial officer was trained in trauma-informed interviewing.

Background

This case gained national attention in September 2026 after the civil lawsuit was filed, highlighting a gap between university disciplinary actions and criminal prosecution. Previous coverage noted that the DA had declined charges in 2024 due to insufficient evidence, a decision now being revisited. The case has also drawn scrutiny regarding the treatment of sexual assault survivors on elite campuses and the adequacy of institutional responses.

How outlets are covering it

The plaintiff's attorney, Thomas Giuffra, argues that the DA failed to conduct a thorough investigation because the victim was never contacted by criminal investigators, only by campus police. He views the reopening as a late but necessary step. Conversely, DA Matthew Van Houten maintains that the 2024 decision was based on the victim's sworn statement, which described the events as consensual, and that he was not notified of the new allegations until the lawsuit was filed. Cornell University firmly disputes the claim that sanctions were minimal, stating that expulsions and suspensions were issued and that the fraternity was closed. Defendants, including Scott Kretzchmar and Gillio Lopes, deny the allegations, with Kretzchmar's attorney citing a hair follicle test showing no ketamine use and claiming the university found him not responsible for the alleged assault.

Why it matters

The reopening of this case highlights the complex interplay between university disciplinary processes and criminal justice systems in handling sexual assault allegations. It raises questions about the adequacy of initial investigations, the impact of delayed reporting on criminal charges, and the accountability of institutions in protecting students. The outcome could set precedents for how similar cases are handled in the future.

What to watch

The Tompkins County District Attorney plans to present the case to a grand jury within 45 days. The grand jury will consider the victim's testimony and new evidence from the civil complaint. If the grand jury votes to indict, the DA will prosecute the charges. The civil lawsuit will also proceed, with the plaintiff seeking monetary damages for breach of contract, negligence, and violations of state law.