Cornell University 2024 Rape Case When I first read the headlines about this case, like most people, I was appalled. Seven men raped a woman for seven hours, and no one was prosecuted? Then I read Jane Doe’s statement, included in attorney Andrew Fleischman’s analysis, and I understood why prosecutors declined to bring charges. Based on that statement, I don’t see how they could have proven rape beyond a reasonable doubt. I want to be clear, I think the actions of these men were reprehensible. Doe obviously liked Male 1 and agreed to a threesome. But to then degrade her and invite other men into the room without her prior consent is unconscionable. The Snapchat messages allegedly telling others they could have sex with her for “free” only make their behavior more repulsive. But reprehensible behavior and criminal rape are not necessarily the same thing. Doe alleges she was pressured into taking ketamine and smoking marijuana while already intoxicated and was then raped by seven men over approximately seven hours before blacking out. Her statement, however, describes a much more complicated sequence. She describes voluntarily participating in sexual activity with multiple men. She cared for Male 2 when he thought he might vomit. She opened the door and let Male 3 into the room herself. When four more men entered, she hid under the covers, which certainly suggests discomfort, but she doesn't describe telling them to leave. She participated in taking ketamine with the group and later allowed them to snort ketamine from her body. Most importantly from a legal standpoint, her statement describes her setting boundaries and those boundaries being respected. When Male 1 proposed a foursome involving anl sex, she said no. It didn't happen. Later, she went with Male 1 and Male 4 to another room, did more ketamine and participated in another threesome. Around 5:45 a.m., she said she was tired and wanted to stop. They stopped. She went to sleep. Fleischman's analysis was that those facts did not establish first, second, or third-degree rape. New York law addresses forcible compulsion, clearly expressed lack of consent, and circumstances in which someone is legally incapable of consenting because of mental incapacitation or physical helplessness. But prosecutors still have to connect those circumstances to the specific sexual conduct occurring at that time. Being heavily intoxicated during the night doesn't automatically establish that every sexual encounter during that night occurred without legally valid consent. And that's where I think the criminal case becomes extremely difficult. Could there have been coercion? Absolutely. Every time she pulled back, more drugs appear to have entered the picture. There are memory gaps. Her intoxication became severe. Those are significant facts. But her statement also describes someone who could communicate, make choices, participate, refuse particular acts and ultimately end the encounter. One statement obviously doesn't tell us everything that happened that night. Other evidence, toxicology, witness accounts or omitted portions of her statement could change the picture. Would Doe have participated in multiple threesomes sober? Maybe not. Looking back sober at something you did while severely intoxicated could be horrifying, especially if it was completely outside your normal behavior. But that's different from proving rape beyond a reasonable doubt. Based solely on the statement Fleischman analyzed, I understand why prosecutors concluded they didn't have a criminal rape case they could prove.