Cornell fraternity assault case intensifies as accused man seeks press silence
Seven Cornell University fraternity brothers, including Matthew Ingalls, face civil allegations of gang-raping a female student known as Jane Doe at a Chi Phi house party on 19 October 2024 when she was allegedly incapacitated. All have denied wrongdoing and no criminal charges have been filed. The case has escalated with one accused man, Diego Sarabia, seeking court orders to prevent Jane Doe's lawyer from speaking to the press, arguing his media appearances could prejudice a jury.
The alleged victim attended a Hawaiian-themed fraternity party where she claims she was sexually assaulted by Ingalls, Jonathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar. Text messages revealed Ingalls later complained to his fraternity brothers about their perceived disloyalty following the allegations. Cornell's investigation resulted in the expulsion of Ingalls and Newell, suspension of Lee and Lopes, with others facing disciplinary measures. Jane Doe's lawyer, Thomas Giuffra, has appeared on numerous major news outlets including CBS, CNN and NBC, where he has argued his client demonstrates "classic symptoms of delayed recognition" about the incident.
- Seven Cornell fraternity brothers accused of gang-rape; none face criminal charges
- Accuser's lawyer fights court order to stop discussing case in media
- University expelled two students; others suspended pending civil litigation
New here? Start with this
In October 2024, a female Cornell University student attended a party at the Chi Phi fraternity house where she alleges she was gang-raped by seven fraternity brothers when she was incapacitated. The men accused are Matthew Ingalls, Jonathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar, all of whom have denied any wrongdoing. The incident has prompted a civil lawsuit against the accused men.
Cornell University has conducted its own investigation into the allegations. Two of the accused students, Ingalls and Newell, have been expelled, whilst Lee and Lopes have been suspended, and the remaining individuals face disciplinary measures. No criminal charges have been filed against any of the accused men. The case has attracted significant media attention, particularly through statements made by the alleged victim's lawyer, Thomas Giuffra, who has appeared on major news outlets discussing the claims.
The case raises broader questions about campus sexual assault, institutional responsibility and the role of media coverage in high-profile allegations. One of the accused men has sought court orders to prevent the alleged victim's lawyer from speaking to the press, arguing that media appearances could prejudice a jury. This dispute highlights tensions between the right to speak publicly about such allegations and concerns about fair legal proceedings.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The alleged victim's attorney exercises fundamental free speech rights in publicly advocating for his client. Restricting the plaintiff's counsel's speech whilst the defence remains free to communicate entrenches the historical power imbalance that keeps victims quiet and allows allegations of serious misconduct to remain hidden. Courts possess mechanisms to manage jury prejudice, and suppressing the victim's voice sets a troubling precedent for victim advocacy in high-profile cases.
The case against
Fair trial principles require juries to decide cases on courtroom evidence, not on pretrial publicity carefully curated by one side's advocate. Attorneys bear professional ethical obligations to avoid statements likely to prejudice potential jurors, and the plaintiff's counsel's extensive media appearances risk tainting the jury pool with emotionally charged narratives. Protecting the defendants' constitutional right to a fair trial justifies measured restrictions on prejudicial advocacy, which do not prevent broader public discourse about the allegations.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “Cornell 7 accused Matthew Ingalls sent furious text blasting fraternity brothers’ disloyalty in wake of Jane Doe incident, as lawyer for second man asks judge to silence her”.