How did Cornell University internally punish the seven men accused of sexual assault? - report
The lawsuit filed by Jane Doe added fuel to the fire online when it stated that the accused were “afforded the opportunity to mitigate their conduct by submitting essays to Cornell.”
Cornell University has been under scrutiny for its handling of the 2024 sexual assault case involving seven men from the Chi Phi fraternity. According to details from the New York Times, the university conducted a closed disciplinary investigation, which included an examination of 1,000 pages of interview transcripts, police reports, and other records.
The investigation led to varied punishments for the accused, with the lightest being "reflection papers" and sexual misconduct trainings, while the most severe was expulsion from Cornell.
However, Jane Doe, the alleged victim, has stated that she was severely intoxicated during the incident and could not give consent. She described the men's actions as leading to further sexual assaults without her consent. Both initial accused Matthew Ingalls and Jonathan Newell were expelled and found responsible for sexual assault. Ingalls was found to have manipulated and endangered Jane Doe, while Newell was accused of drugging her with ketamine and causing physical harm.
Other accused members received suspensions and disciplinary actions. Winston Lee and Gillio Lopes were suspended and placed on disciplinary probation, while Diego Sarabia was banned from campus for three years for kissing Jane Doe without her consent. Jane Doe's lawyer criticized the university's punishments, stating that they did not reflect the severity of the charges and that the seven accused men would be able to graduate with a Cornell diploma.
Written by urgent.news from Jerusalem Post's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
