正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Two years after a former Cornell student says she was drugged, assaulted and gang-raped by 7 fraternity members, prosecutors are taking another look at the case. Jane Doe makes the allegations against seven members of Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity in a new civil lawsuit. The Tompkins County District Attorney...

133,704 次观看 • 1 天前 •via X (Twitter)

9 条评论

Christopher Chichester 的头像
Christopher Chichester1 天前

Two years ago? 730 days ago? Jesus H. Christ that's just like DUH yesterday. A statue of limitations doesn't matter. Is it statue or statute? I wish I graduated a smart lawyer school with a J.B. like at smart Cornell University that's Cornell Law School. "Prosecutors are taking another look at the case" is definitely not a DUH psychopath prosecutor in a desperate search for media attention. Like totally Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. That never DUH happens here in New York. If psychopath prosecutors have new evidence they manufactured - POOF! - out of thin air that fanaticism is behavior Alexander Jefferson and Thomas Hamilton expected when they wrote the smart U.S. Constitution thing. WHATEVER. Where are these 7 fraternity members? I'll look at them. I can tell they're guilty by looking at them. Fucking A.

Kris Cal 的头像
Kris Cal1 天前

Obviously, taking the heat off his client 🫤🙄.Really not surprising after the texts. YOUR CLIENT IS STILL GROSS!

Christian Fed Revival 的头像
Christian Fed Revival1 天前

Correct the heading. Two years after a student said she wasn’t raped she now says she was as she puts forward a civil case.

Razaq khan Musakhail 的头像
Razaq khan Musakhail1 天前

Justice must be served! 🙏⚖️ Hope the truth comes out and victim gets justice! 💔

Gayla Craig 的头像
Gayla Craig1 天前

Correct the heading. Two years after a student said she wasn’t raped she now says she was as she puts forward a civil case.

Kevin Sorbo 的头像
Kevin Sorbo1 天前

Justice shouldn't have an expiration date. If the evidence was botched two years ago, hand it over to a grand jury and let the truth come out once and for all.

TATIANA SCHLOSSBERG 的头像
TATIANA SCHLOSSBERG1 天前

2 years is too long to wait for answers. If there's evidence, let a grand jury see it. Justice shouldn't have an expiration date.

Crazy Crab 的头像
Crazy Crab1 天前

They all need to be locked up.

JasonM Sirois 的头像
JasonM Sirois1 天前

Making it the schools fault is the dumbest sh I’ve heard in the last hour. But I’m still scrolling,and the amount of dumb sh in the world is endless.

相关视频

The Cornell 7 case is getting a lot of attention on social media. Before I dive in, I want to make clear that I wasn’t there. I don’t know what happened. But I will say that posting “free pussy” in a group chat and having group sex with an inebriated girl is disgusting even if she did consent. Here are my early thoughts on what will happen with the case: I’m a former prosecutor who now represents victims, including filing civil lawsuits on behalf of rape victims. I believe them, and I understand the psychology of sexual assault and why such a small percentage of perpetrators are ever brought to justice. But when a District Attorney issues a public and detailed statement explaining why your own client’s statement shows she consented to the sexual activity, that’s bad for your case. Now why the DA would take a dump on a civil lawsuit to defend his office is a different question altogether, but maybe he felt there was too much pressure not to explain why he didn’t file charges. The DA saying the victim consented is a problem because unless you’re a minor or otherwise incapacitated (more on this below), consent is always a defense to sexual activity no matter how gross it is (like in the Diddy trial). So here, Jane Doe’s lawyer needs to argue that her previous statement or the DA’s interpretation thereof was wrong, which will be difficult. The better approach is to argue that Jane Doe was incapable of giving consent because she was in a k-hole or otherwise under the influence of alcohol and ketamine. Ketamine is a tranquilizer and dissociative after all. The defense, of course, will argue that this is regret, not rape, and a money grab. That’s what they always do. Based on the very limited evidence that has been made public so far, including the civil complaint, Snapchat screenshot, and DA summary of Jane Doe’s statement, I do not think the grand jury indicts, and I do not think we see criminal charges in this case. In fact, I think the DA is presenting the case to the grand jury so they return a no bill and give him political cover for not prosecuting the case. Think Nolan Wells and how the pressure subsided when the grand jury didn’t indict. With respect to the civil case, I think Cornell has a number of substantive defenses regarding foreseeability, superseding criminal acts, and comparative negligence, but I still think they settle this case quickly, confidentially, and for good money to make the public relations nightmare go away. It’s no secret that drug and alcohol use is rampant at fraternities and sororities, and sexual assault is a huge problem at universities. The last thing Cornell wants is discovery into the steps it takes to protect young women on campus and for talking heads like me to open cable news shows discussing the allegations that one of their former students was gang raped. Once the deep-pocket university settles, the remaining individual and entity defendants will resolve as well. If this is TLDR, I spoke to CNN about the legal strategy in the case by Jane Doe’s lawyer, the defense, and the prosecution.

Neama Rahmani

146,011 次观看 • 1 天前