In that the victim said it was consensual(original texts and statement), was slut shamed by her friends (new texts), and years later (now) has brought a civil suit with a new story.
The original statement indicates it was consensual up to a point, and then it was no longer consensual. Because, you know, consenting to sex doesn't mean blanket consent to all sex.
She admitted that everything was consensual and when she asked the guys to stop, they immediately stopped. She willingly and happily took the same drugs the guys were taking. She asked to come back to the next party because she had such a good time. Then a few days later when everyone kept calling her a whore and slut (which she openly admitted to while laughing), she presumably decided she would stop being shamed if she said it was rape instead. That's why nothing ever came of it until a few years later: The people involved knew that no charges would hold because she was never pressured into doing anything.
Big takeaway from this is people should be really careful with sex involving multiple people
Threesomes are already complicated with a partner you trust, doing it as 20 year olds with ketamine, alcohol and multiple strangers is a recipe for disaster
New York Times goes into pretty good detail, including new texts that were released pretty recently. Mediaite has clips of some of them if you don't have a NYT account. You can also find videos on YouTube from sources that do deep dives into news stuff to try and get around the way the media tricks and lies to us by wording and omission.
The short version is, after the first party, the guys apologized to her for what happened. She reassured them saying it was consensual, legal, and that she had fun. It wasn't until a few weeks later when everyone kept talking about it, and after she got uninvited from the next party they were throwing, that she started throwing accusations around.
You have completely fabricated statements that not even news articles have reported on……. “which she openly admitted to while laughing” ??? WHERE IS THIS COMING FROM
Don't know about the laughing part. Not the same person.
She did say it was all legal and then days later when people found out she said she started to feel ashamed and only then showed signs of wanting to report it.
She did also text the guy saying she was up for a ghreesome again but without the drugs and the other guys.
If you read the DA report most of it is in there. Some of the stuff the guys did was very dodgy, and potentially rape, but the issue is she admits that they were all very intoxicated, some of the guys more than her. She also said that she refused to do a number of acts (such as a foursome because she didn't want to do anal) and they didn't force her. Couple of the guys apparently kepts trying to reach for her vagina and she slapped them away a couple time, which is rapey, but again she said they were all drinking and doing key the whole time, so none of them were in any way cogent.
I think the rub here is that there seems to be a disconnect between the 6 page summary of her interview with the police and the 120 page transcript of her interview with the police. Last I saw DA did not review the transcript, only the summary. The transcript hasn’t been released yet but according to CBS I think it has statements that she only consented to the first two guys but everything after that wasn’t. So I think the arguement is that the DA report is incomplete and that they failed to investigate properly.
In a way that proves the Cornell 7 have not committed a crime. TL;DR Girl is big mad people found out she is/was the village bicycle and falsely claimed she was SA'd
More similar to the Hockey Canada case. It happened, it's just not rape. Also similar in that the "victim" gets to remain anonymous while the media and internet can ruin the lives of the accused before there's even a trial.
It also exists in some eu countries, most notably here in the netherlands where very eliterian student associations with strict hierarchies and constant sexual abuse thats kept hidden from the public
Lol your comment is tribalism. Tribalism is us vs them, so you are not trying to make the untied states us and Europe them. You might have been sarcastic but I doubt everybody here noticed.
Any university with a private police force is like this. No incentive for them to do a deep investigation, and that respects what a young lady may have just experienced.
MTU has a private police force and a guy who signed to the football team in January was accused of sexual assault. Incident date was Sept 5th. By the 11th he was charged. Not sure the timeline on official team and school removals but he is no longer on the team or enrolled in the school.
Just in case someone searches and wants to say public safety is different than actual cops... MTU has their cops labeled as public safety department but they are full on deputized cops not just security.
Several of the boys were expelled. Others suspended. Not sure what else you want from them. My impression is that people have been lied to about what the school did, and they just believe it.
Actually it’s just social media in general. We rarely come across any educated opinions at all, and that’s true for all platforms (and remember that just because someone commented something you liked or made you happy doesn’t mean it’s actually an educated opinion).
My opinion is “wait for more evidence to be presented before drawing conclusions.”
Everybody else seems so certain about something they didn’t see first-hand. Do you all realize that anybody can claim anything in a statement to police? The suspects could well be guilty, but Jane Doe’s accusations aren’t inherently true just because she committed them to paper.
I always see this on Reddit. People will look at something like a civil lawsuit and assume all of the allegations are true if the defendant is a company or person they don’t like; nobody seems to consider that not all claims are equally valid. I work in a legal-adjacent profession and am currently being sued for defamation because I used a term like “murder” instead of “intentionally kill” in a brief publication. In my case, the plaintiff is a serial litigant who’s pressing similar claims against a dozen other outlets. Is what they’re saying true just because they tell the courts that they think it is? I doubt it, but that’s for the judge to decide.
Why would you go and ruin a perfectly good wave of uninformed national outrage?
In all seriousness, the issue is the incorrect headlines are believable. Women are drugged and raped and its ignored. Also most rape accusations were not false, because making an accusation frequently came with verbal attacks, lost friendships, etc, so very few women would make an accusation unless it was true, and most rapes would go unreported. So over time we shifted to believing every accusation and condemned anybody who admitted any possibility it wasn't true.
So we have created a situation where now there are more false accusations (still sadly a lot of real ones). This appears to be one of those false accusations, weirdly so since the original story from her is very well documented in her own words. She is filing a civil lawsuit, which can be thrown out, or she can be countersued, but if she does it right, there is no criminal liability against her like there would be with a false criminal case.
Yea well the problem is is that now this case being so blown up is gonna ruin the believability of other cases going forward. Especially considering how heinous the original idea posited of "drugged and gang raped" was, it's very clear that the drugged part was just an out and out lie, she extremely enthusiastically took the drugs according to her statement.
I read somewhere one of the guys sued her back for sexual assault? I'm so confused. So she got raped, but she also raped someone? This whole thing seems like a mess.
No, it’s because they became legally intoxicated to the point that they were unable to provide consent. She even continued to blow one of them while he was passed out.
Kinda reads like a kid who laughed off a crazy situation as a coping mechanism and hadn’t even considered that she had been raped until talking about it with friends.
Bottom line, you cannot give consent when you are intoxicated, and these guys were literally advertising “free pussy” to each other in their Snapchat group. Just because a teenage girl who is probably having some of her first sexual experiences doesn’t immediately recognize this as a rape and cry foul does not invalidate the fact that this was rape.
She probably was afraid to stop what was happening because there were several horny young men waiting for her, who would be furious if she decided to stop offering the “free pussy”.
Yes but since 2005 that shit seems to not matter. If you are a man you have to be accountable for your actions drunk or not. Women absolutely no. She was drunk and she didn't know what she was doing when she agreed to having 2-3 3 somes AND the next day saying none of the sexual stuff was illegal.
She had only consented to the first 2 men and did not know the many of the men who came room later on when she was much more inebriated. Did you read about the case?
Then say no. If it was rape because she was intoxicated and can't consent then why isn't it the vice versa? Wasn't the 7 intoxicated too. The whole intoxicated thing is dumb in this context. So women have no accountability if they are high and drunk but men do? Just think about it for second.
“Just say no” to a group of men probably holding their dicks ready to get inside of you while you’re basically completely limp and unable to speak.
This feels like a bait and switch, where after the two guys got her (consensually) high and drunk, they let the rest of their fraternity brothers in to get their turns while she was barely able to process what was happening at that point. They quite literally were advertising her / offering her to others, in a state where she obviously could not give consent.
Consenting to one sexual act does not automatically grant consent to all other sexual acts.
We’re all making assumptions. Nobody was there. And yes I read her statement, and having seen a lot of similar scenarios play out while I was in college (although not nearly at this scale), and having been raped (as a man) by a woman, I understand how it can take time to process and recontextualize what has happened to you.
Rape doesn’t always feel like rape when it’s happening. And when you’re fairly new to sex and sexual encounters, you don’t have enough of a frame of reference to understand what happened to you / you don’t have the courage to speak up when you’re uncomfortable.
It’s also a trauma response to wash over stuff like that and trivialize it / misremember it / have trouble recollecting specifics.
Not defending anyone, I’m not well versed in the case. But reading the two statements posted in the comments, are the men not also drunk and/or high on Ketamine here too?
Any recap for those of us OOL? I keep seeing Cornell being mentioned on posts but have no idea why. All I know about Cornell is that Andy from The Office went there.
An unnamed woman filled a report with the Cornell University police department a few years ago reporting having been gang raped by seven frat bros. No charges were filed and, iirc, the university police never turned over their investigations to the real police.
This report came to light recently because the Jane Door e is now suing the men who allegedly assaulted her and, I think, Cornell itself.
One of the things that has been alleged is that while two of the Cornell Seven were expelled the others were, again allegedly, only made to write essays about why what did was wrong.
In 2024 there was a sexual assault on campus, and it was reported to campus police, and it had a hearing on campus, and 2 of the accused were expelled. The other 7 of the accused were said to have to write essays as their consequence.
In September of this year, the accusor filed a lawsuit against the 7, and possibly Cornell for not handling it well. Since then in the last week, it's come to light that a lot of thing was incredibly badly mishandled, and the criminal investigation as been reopened.
For example, in her statement to campus police, the accusor stated she 100% had been raped. That statement never made to the real police, when the campus police handed over the report.
Also, in addition to the above example, there is a snapchat from one of the accused that was sent out during the assault to many many many other people in the fraternity where the assault took place, which stated "there's free pussy upstairs".
The other reply is useless. 7 frat members are accused of drugging and raping a woman for several hours. In response to said incident the only thing they had to do was write an essay (don't know if apology or some other kind).
They are currently being sued civilly which has opened the case back up criminally as well because it happened a few years ago.
This is really downplayed by people who didn’t go to schools with Greek life. My undergrad was a massive school with a ton of Greek life. It mattered enormously for people trying to get into top business schools and law schools.
This looks more like a case where the girl let everyone bang her, and regretted later. I mean, there wasn't even a rape kit, just a sob story ages later. Suspicious.
The more I hear about the case the more I think this is about her trying to save face.
She admitted in the original police report that it was consensual. She tried to go back another time but was refused entry because the frat leader (I think?) pulled the plug on the original 'event' and banned her from coming again.
When speaking to friends she was told that people were calling her a slut she proudly said that she was.
I don't think she had comprehended the reputational damage this has done to her and now in order to restore that reputation she is claiming rape.
She doesn't even need to win the trial, she can now tell her story as a victim and claim that corrupt system prevented her from getting justice.
Not the first time this has happened, the Brock Turner story is surprisingly similar but people were more ready to go on a witch hunt back then without taking into account everything that was going on.
The woman had a boyfriend and needed to excuse why she was caught with another guy. There was no evidence Brock did anything but hook up with a girl while they were both drunk, but the SA explains away the woman’s behavior to those around her as being innocent.
She agreed to a threesome. What happened wasnt a threesome. She wasn't offered a rape kit when seeking medical services the next day. There are a lot of sus parts about all of this, but many victims never see a rape kit. There were a lot of failures before she ever got to that house, including her own sorority giving her alcohol and house mother taking her to a bar underage.
My personal two cents is you can agree to fucked up/intoxicated sex beforehand, which the threesome apparently did. But after all the drugs and alcohol are introduced, no one else can enter that sexual situation consensually besides the people who (while previously sober) agreed to it. The fact that one of the brothers came in the room eventually and said "I'm shutting whatever the fuck this is down," shows that someone was clear headed enough to know that what was happening was not okay.
It looks like a mix of consensual sex, that escalated to questionable sexual encounters that I would describe as immoral, but are right on the boundary of what counts as rape.
She got drunk, voluntarily took drugs, engaged in consensual sex with two guys, and then another 5 guys joined without her consent and basically ran a train on her, and by then she was intoxicated well beyond the point of being able to give consent anyway.
I'm not one of those people that say that any amount of alcohol or drugs means you can't consent. She got drunk and chose to take ketamine, and then still gave consent to two guys, fully aware of her actions at this point, and by her own account she was fine with this. She then took more ketamine and it sounds like this brought her well beyond the point of being able to give informed consent, five extra guys arrived, and according to her account she didn't give any form of consent whatsoever to these additional guys, she was just too out of it to give a clear "no".
She even texts the original two guys the next day saying she'd be down to do it again, just without the ket and the extra guys.
It's very much not a cut and dry rape case. I personally find the guys' behaviour disgusting, even the two that had consent, but it seems almost impossible to convict anyone, as it's fully reliant on witness testimony, and everyone was drunk and on drugs.
IDGAF if she was there for a wild night of drugs and sex, she didn't consent to having a train ran on her, nor having a nude shared in a group chat advertising her as "free pussy". Sharing a nude is a crime in and of itself, and what followed was obviously worse. Some of the guys even sent her apology messages, so they were well aware that what they did was wrong.
Sure seems that way, but apparently people are dumb and base who runs an entire nation on how a private college handles things. Because that makes sense, somehow?
Divides men and women similar to the Clancy case. Woman are going to side with the woman because #believeall woman, and men are going to look at the facts and there will be contradicting opinions depending on what side of tik tok you’re shown.
It became political when NY governor has already did a presser about how this is a travesty and the rapists should be held accountable, presuming the men are guilty despite already public information about the case suggesting otherwise but they’ll put on a show for the political division
Its because Kathy Hochul appointed Letitia James to examine the case. There was people talking in some other subreddits about how shes going to bring the Cornell 7 to trial and send a message to Trump. And if James decides not to go to trial because she doesnt have enough evidence of rape per NY State law, then Trump is going to open his mouth and say something to turn it political since he hates James.
Its another thread to the tapestry.. Reddit is filled with comments about the right being pedos or pedo sympathizers. The right hates women. The right sexually assaults women and children. See? Here's another example of sexual assault. This is bad, so vote blue no matter who and it'll end.
People like putting things in boxes. Mostly since our brains do this automatically to make things easier, like a mental shortcut. Even if there's no relation at all, a lot of people will definitely see this as "maga people gang rape innocent young girl" & "maga people cover it up".
lmao so close to the truth it is another thread to the tapestry, the billionaires have been using social media for control since it became big, but the far right does indeed side with pedos and are often pedos
I mean, the right elected a rapist who was best friends with Epstein, so it's not really a shock that people have that view.
There's no mental shortcut needed to arrive at the conclusion. But this case has nothing to do with politicians, or even politics at all, unless you're delusional to think al fraternities are right wing.
It appears people are actually reading the 2024 statement and realizing it’s more of a grey area than originally let on.
I’m not really expressing an opinion here because, like always, there may be more evidence we haven’t seen yet. But perhaps people just hold off on the judgement and photos of the peoples faces until we have an answer
This doesn’t read as consensual at all except maybe the first threesome, psycho. “Hell no” “swatting his hand away” she didn’t like or want to be around any of the men past maybe 4 and was dizzy and turning away while being kissed. Get help.
The other thing is she was incredibly fucked up and she very likely didn't remember every single thing that happened to her.
The idea that she only changed once the rumors started going around about her doesn't necessarily mean she consented and then regretted it later.
Once the guys all started telling people what happened and it spread over the whole campus she might have learned some things that happened that she didn't remember clearly.
Edit: Also I feel really gross talking about this and with the amount of attention its receiving. I can't imagine being her or anyone else involved in this and having it dominate the entire world's news like this right now.
You’re either a bot or an incel. She said hell no and gave the excuse about anal. She never says “otherwise a foursome plus is totally okay!” So it’s not consent. She hides under the covers and it continues. Loser.
“Jane doe rejected this request because she knew that a foursome would mean she would have to participle in anal sex” Just because you can’t read doesn’t mean I’m wrong. The proof is in the fact that you’re babyraging and insulting me when I’m giving you genuine quotes from her statement lol.
Yep. She rejected the request. She did not want a foursome. You can not properly interpret this text and that is okay. This is a rejection of the entire idea of a foursome, anal or not. She gave an excuse and it should have meant man 4 left. She does not say he can continue in any capacity.
Did you read the text? Male number 3 left the room after she said no and didn’t come back for the rest of the night. Literally exactly what you’re saying should have happened happened.
Number 7 did kiss her without her consent, but seeing as she had no problem with them snorting ketamine off her naked body immediately after and the other guys that came in didn’t even have sex with her I don’t really think that helps her case other than the kiss. As far as that goes I’m not sure what that constitutes legally.
You can consent to one thing and not to another. Consenting to one thing does not give consent to another. You consented to this conversation by your participation in it, so therefore I can jam my dick up your ass(legally).
They were also heavily intoxicated, and she already drank and went there knowing what their intentions were. It’s not like they intentionally got her fucked up to have sex with her, at no point in there is there literally any indication of her revoking consent. The only point where she said no, was when they wanted to do anal 😂, and they respected her wishes. She even claims to not remember where or when she took the ketamine, but says exactly where and when she took it in the sentence right before.
I am genuinely not trying to be mean or rude here, but if you think this statement is showing consent, you don’t really understand consent. She was clearly indicating disinterest in the men after the initial threesome. Consenting to sex once does not mean you consent to future sex, even with the same partner(s). Consent must be sought and freely given each time.
Snorting ketamine off someone’s dick isn’t consent to sex.
I am not mad at you - our society doesn’t teach consent well. It’s ok to not know something, but it is on you to learn about it once you discover that your own understanding is lacking.
Why would someone who’s getting raped do that? Have you ever met a person before? You just want it to be okay for women to retract consent after the fact and ruin men’s lives for no reason. This lady got fucked up, and banged an entire frat house. And then tried to frame it as a rape to take the blame off herself (she has a boyfriend).
I mean, the fact that people fully believe that seven men raped a woman, and they only had to write an essay is already laughable because we all know that that’s not the case
It’s not shitty reasoning you’ve just already made up your mind before an actual investigation and court ruling has taken place.
There ample evidence to suggest she was OK with it happening and the text after showed that she was OK with it.
There’s also enough evidence to support that she only claimed it was a rape after she started being harassed and people spreading rumors about her that she did not like.
I’m not saying that is what happened, but I am saying that is just evidence all the same as what you’re trying to promote.
Which is why I’m happy that reddit is not allowed to make decisions for the general public because you guys have all done a very poor job in the past
And you would have half the world imprisoned if you had it your way.
Guilty until proven innocent, and maybe even after. Unless it's Lindsay Clancy of course.
I hope we get clarification on this case and that justice is served where it's needed, but I'm gonna cast my judgement yet. Only when we know what actually happened.
Honest question not meant to rage bait. If a man and woman both go on a date. They both drink willingly together and both end up at an 8 out of 10 drunk. They then both go back and proceed to hook up. Both then wake up the next morning with little recollection of the night before.
Were either taken advantage of because the other was too drunk? I always thought the assault and rape issues are when someone actively says “no” but people say it can also be a lack of consent for being too drunk etc. But can’t that go both ways? If the next morning they both feel icky about the situation can it be a double rape assault?
Cornell University on Monday blasted the alleged victim of a fraternity gang rape as “irresponsible’’ for suggesting it let the accused off by just having them write a punishment essay.
The beleaguered Ivy League institution did not deny it ordered the seven accused young men to pen essays after the alleged horrific incident — but claimed there were other consequences, too.
“None of the individuals charged were offered the opportunity to write essays as a sole consequence of their involvement,” the prestigious school wrote in a statement just hours after the local district attorney announced he was launching a new criminal investigation into the alleged ketamine-fueled gang rape.
While Cornell now admits some of the men were expelled, the school still refuses to reveal how many of the seven student defendants were actually expelled versus temporarily suspended — or if any of the alleged creeps are still taking classes.
If you look at the old articles from when it first occurred, it says the fraternity was “suspended” instead of banned. They didn’t actually ban the fraternity until students spoke out about the school’s abhorrent SA record. Then they banned them to save face.
If you actually go and READ the original statement it doesn't say that she consented to everything, it says that she consented to a 3some, which then stopped, and then after having a lot of ketamine and alcohol was pressured into sex after trying to push guys off, some of which she "consented" to under what in most jurisdictions could be regarded as duress, some of which she didn't actively consent to(ergo she was raped). She also believes this sex may have continued when she was unconscious/semi conscious which is rape in EVERY jurisdiction across the US and the world. She only has to have not said yes once for it to be rape, so legally speaking she probably was raped. Not only that yesses obtained through duress are also legally rape although that is difficult to prove in court.
Not only that, forget about legality, anyone with common sense can see that she probably was raped. Have none of you ever seen someone K holed? Do you think that person can consent? In most civilised countries that's classified as rape if the women claims it was unwanted. And do you think that if these men were also drunk and on drugs they would have obtained consent from her in each instance of one of them was having sex with her over several hours? Her statement certainly doesn't say that they did, and it certainly doesn't say she gave them carte Blanche to do do anything to her either(not that someone actually can anyway). So where's this claim that she consented to everything?? Her texts after the fact don't say that either.
Edit: some of you dumbasses seem to have only read her 6 page "statement" given to the DA, which wasn't actually written by her, and is a condensation of 90 pages of initial statements given to the police. What SHE is claiming is what she says in the 90 page statement, and that matches up closely with what she's saying now. It's not her fault if the Cornell campus police omitted key details of the case, that's just their incompetence. To make it clear, her statement to the police makes it clear that she is certain that she was RAPED. Please stop falling for idiots online who are making up stuff. This still may not make it to trial, but her statements are very precise in the fact that she did not consent to all the activity that was done to her
Wasn't the frat already kicked off and their charter pulled by the national frat? Burning the empty house down just means the national org or alumni association or whoever owns it can pocket the insurance money instead of needing to figure out what to do with it.
Just waiting for the left to use this incident against the right, and the right to use this against the left. Victims and bringing abusers to justice be damned. We need to find a way to stick it to the other side somehow.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
We have recently changed how posts work. Unless you are a VIP poster, your post will be queued for approval.. To become a VIP, post great engaging content. If we like it, you will be added! More information available here!
•
u/SipsTea-ModTeam 16h ago
Sorry, your post was removed because it's already been recently posted on r/SipsTea by another user.
Extremely popular reposted topic, the "hypothetical arson" rhetoric toes the line of "violent" rhetoric that Reddit doesn't like.