Seven men affiliated with Cornell University’s Chi Phi fraternity have faced a range of disciplinary actions following allegations of sexual assault made by a woman who has identified herself as Jane Doe. The university’s response, revealed through detailed discipline summaries obtained in 2025, shows punishments ranging from reflection papers and educational training to expulsion and campus bans. The case has drawn national attention and sparked debate over campus sexual misconduct policies and the adequacy of university sanctions.
The allegations date to October 19, 2024, when Jane Doe visited the Chi Phi fraternity house in Ithaca, New York. According to her account, she arrived intoxicated after drinking at a bar and was subjected to sexual acts by multiple fraternity members while incapacitated. Jane Doe’s lawsuit, filed in September 2024, claimed she was unable to consent due to her intoxication and accused seven men of sexual assault. The seven individuals have denied wrongdoing, and no criminal charges have been filed; the Tompkins County District Attorney’s office declined to prosecute that year.
Following an extensive internal Title IX investigation, which included over 1,000 pages of evidence such as interview transcripts and police reports, a three-member disciplinary panel convened remotely over 12 days in May 2025. The panel determined varying levels of responsibility among the accused. Two men, Matthew Ingalls and Jonathan Newell, were expelled. Mr. Ingalls was found responsible for sexual assault and accused of manipulating and exploiting Jane Doe for his own gain. Mr. Newell was also found responsible for sexual assault, with allegations including physical harm and administering ketamine to Jane Doe.
Additional punishments included suspensions and probation for Winston Lee and Gillio Lopes. Mr. Lee was suspended for two years and placed on disciplinary probation thereafter; he was accused of non-consensual oral sex and drug use. Mr. Lopes received a three-semester suspension and disciplinary probation, implicated for sexual activity without consent. Both were ordered to avoid contact with Jane Doe and complete sexual harassment education and reflection essays.
Diego Sarabia, who had graduated before the panel’s decision, was banned from campus for three years due to accusations of forcibly kissing Jane Doe. Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar, accused of lesser involvement based on participation after a Snapchat message inviting others to enter a bedroom, were assigned educational sanctions and directed not to contact Jane Doe. Cornell did not find Mr. Kretzschmar responsible for sexual assault but did find he committed a lesser offense of attempted sexual exploitation. His attorney highlighted that he was never accused or found responsible for rape.
Jane Doe’s attorney criticized the punishments as insufficient given the severity of the allegations, noting that except for the two expelled men, the others would likely continue their education with Cornell degrees, while Jane Doe’s life has been significantly affected. Meanwhile, some critics have expressed concern about a presumption of guilt, emphasizing the importance of due process.
The case has drawn the attention of state officials. New York Governor Kathy Hochul ordered an independent review of Cornell’s handling of the matter, and the state attorney general, Letitia James, was appointed as a special prosecutor with authority to pursue criminal charges.
Cornell University declined detailed comment on the case, citing student privacy laws. The fraternity involved, Chi Phi, has been banned from campus. The matter underscores ongoing debates over addressing sexual misconduct allegations in higher education institutions and the balance between protecting victims and ensuring fair processes for the accused.