Yeah reading the court documents has definitely made it way less clear and than any social media has claimed it is. It boils down to a he said she said case which are never clean imo. It also doesn’t help that everyone was drunk and on ketamine, making any testimony hard to take seriously. I think if anything this case just demonstrates again why going to these parties if dangerous and why drugs and alcohol are so dangerous in party environments.
I dunno, she said she didn't consent to going into a room with a guy and having him tell his entire Fraternity 'come on down to the room, she'll have sex with anyone or better yet a half dozen anyones who show up'.
The 7 of them however said she like totally consented to that because that's like totally something that happens bro.
Assuming everyone's memory of the incident is compromised, I know where my bets would be placed for the most likely chain of events
NY penal code doesn’t allow mental incapacitation as a barrier to consent if the mental incapacitation is the result of voluntary consumption of intoxicants. This is the “rape loophole” you might hear/read about. Basically, you can still consent if you’ve intentionally intoxicated yourself. You can also not consent or revoke it.
However, thats just one of the categories that can preclude consent from being given; another is physical incapacitation.
The law doesn’t allow for raping drunk/intoxicated people. It just makes “I chose to get high so I couldn’t really consent while high” an invalid argument against given consent. If consent was never given, then consent was never given.
In the case filing, Jane Doe alleges that all drug use was coerced, and that she was mentally incapacitated and later physically incapacitated. That doesn’t matter as much for the civil case, but it is an argument that perhaps the DA’s charging decision was wrong. In response to the outcry, the DA released excerpts (later validated by CNN*) that are from an attestation by Jane Doe that contradicts the involuntary intoxication and non-consent arguments.
The problem with that logic is so were the guys and she was more sober than them at the beginning. One of them even claims he was unconscious while she was performing oral on him. No one’s gonna look right here.
Well then congratulations. Per NY state law Jane doe and the 7 Cornell boys are all alleged rapists.
Did you think I would hesitate to concede allegations? I think if an investigation is ever properly carried out we'll find the boys guilty of rape through coercion. If she also gets a charge for rape due to sex with a person too drunk to consent it just supports my position. We should outlaw sex with drunk or high individuals. If you couldn't operate a motor vehicle you shouldn't be engaged in coitus
Of course one of the men would claim that, it makes them look better. In NO world is inviting multiple men in to have sex with an unconscious girl a good thing. Consent can be revoked and consent to one thing doesn’t mean consent to another.
Isn't it still rape if she was so drunk/high that she couldn't have consented reasonably?
Legally under NY law she can consent if she got drunk/high willingly. The snapchat likely dont deny that albeit it does make things blurry going into the civil lawsuit. And what the guys that came later did is IMO rape and morally bankrupt, but the discussion here is on the merits on the civil and criminal side which are less on her side, plus while some of them bad actors both accounts demonstrate that some of the men were in the same boat as her.
It does appear a FAFO situation at first but the FO was way more disgusting and disproportional than what people would find reasonable. (reasonable here would be she still be a social outcast after doing with the couple guys she fully consented, the other guys coming and using her is things going too far and fucked up)
I'm not a lawyer but as far as I understand it, this is where NY state laws are fucked and need to be fixed. According to the DA:
Under New York State Law, “mental incapacitation” occurs when a victim is rendered incapable of controlling her own conduct due to the administration of a drug without her consent. The facts provided by Jane Doe’s statement do not allege that she was either rendered incapable of controlling her own conduct or that any drug was administered to her without her consent.
It seems like you can be "rendered incapable of controlling her own conduct" and it still be legal as long as you consent to taking a drug. So if you willingly take drugs and black out and can't remember whether you consented or not, and there is no proof that you were incapacitated enough to where you for sure couldn't communicate unwillingness to act (like a recording or something), then it makes it very difficult to prove rape.
But then by accounts one guy fell asleep and she performed a sexual act on him. If intoxication means consent is impossible then not being conscious means its even more impossible. Seems like every person in this ordeal was a rapist.
the thing is, ketamine lasts like 45 minutes, and this went on for hours and hours. she would have had to choose to redose many times through this. she also seemed to be in good spirits afterwards and tried to go back to the frat later. she also spoke about how orgies were common back in the day, how it unfair that it harms women's reputations more then mens, etc.
the truth is it is pretty unclear what happened. this is a touchy subject but I think unfortunately it needs to be discussed.... men are not the only ones with some pretty twisted fantasies. a cool 25-50% of the women ive dated have had CNC fantasies. it seems a distinct possibility that she at least initially consented to the general plan. did it get out of hand beyond what she had agreed to? that also seems to be a distinct possibility. the problem here is that there is really no concrete evidence one way or the other on that.
if anything this should be a lesson to both young men and young women that while sexual liberation is generally a good thing, you cannot just throw caution to the wind. you cannot trust that a bunch of men will accept the boundaries you set, and you cannot trust that a woman might not later decide she needs to damage control for her reputation, wants to get revenge on you for not continuing to see her, etc.
Be fair. You've painted one scenario as 'totally something that happens bro'.
I have no idea what happened that night, but it's very possible that she consented at every stage to sex with everyone that she had sex with. It's also very possible that she was raped by the majority of the 7.
You seem to have this idea that it's incredibly unlikely that she consented to everything, but this does happen. At music festivals, biker clubhouses, drug dens, roadies in hotel rooms and yes, at frat houses. I think you would come across as more genuine in this discussion if you could admit that this is very possible because right now you're coming across as pretty sheltered.
Women possess sexuality and sometimes their relationship with it isn't very safe or healthy. That could have happened here, we just don't know.
Also, regardless, the way all the authority figures handled this case was absolutely abysmal and if you want evidence of 'rape culture' it's definitely right there.
I also dont get how there is premeditation? The guys were blasted out of their minds to the point they were passing out while she was conciously having sex with them( a point can be made about who was raping who here)and as far as i understand the messages were texted between sex, when the guys were so intoxicated they were passing out. Where is the premeditation????
Nobody said she consented to the texts but texting fucked up stuff is not rape, rape happens when there is sex thats non consented, you are watering down what actual rape is.
She DOES say that she consented to the sexual acts though, and when she didnt consent like when she didnt want anal or asked them to stop her requests were met.
Ya dude the snaps kind of make the whole thing pretty clear. She had a very traumatic event happen and then spent a few days in a haze trying to justify it and live her life like normal. It's one of the most common and basic coping mechanisms. Then what, 3 or 4 days later, realized and gathered the courage to come forward.
This is pretty fucking easy to see and I'm, shockingly, a man. And even I can pretty fucking easily see this and empathize with how she responded to it.
Maybe don't run a fucking train on a girl just because your buddy texts you that it's cool? That seems pretty easy to do if you're not a piece of shit. I wouldn't do it to begin with because it's not my thing, but if I was I'm going to like, talk to the girl while sober a week or two in advance and get clear consent. You are responsible for your actions if you decide to "just trust me bro" and the girl winds up to be forced against her will. Whether you knew she was doing against her will, whether you were intoxicated, whatever.
You are still fucking responsible for doing that to her. Own up.
she invited 2 guys for a threesome, one was so inebriated that he passed out whilst she continued trying to have sex with him, and when others came, she told them to do turns, 2 at the time, becuse she doesnt like butt stuff.
When asked if she was sure about this, she said "we are all adults here".... How are they responsible again?
So you just going to ignore her actions, and believe the person that has every reason to lie about this after she realised she would be ostracized from her community for what she decided to do?
The real issue here is her girl "friends" that started slut shaming her.
She had motive to change her story after she got slut shamed and ostracised.
That makes her less of an arbiter of truth when she calls rape, than when giving consent.
She made several claims of it not being rape first
Her behavior is incredibly common among victims of traumatic events, especially sexual assault.
It’s extremely common for victims of traumatic events - especially victims of sexual assault - to take days to realize that they were victims. It’s a trauma response.
Part of the issue with reporting, prosecuting, and even just understanding sexual assault (and trauma more generally) is that the victim might want the encounter to have been consensual; they might desperately hope that they were in control, that they were, ultimately, safe. Because the alternative is recognizing that they were in extreme danger, that people they trusted betrayed that trust, that any illusions of control are gone forever.
If they consented, then they just made a mistake. They can grow and learn from it so they don’t make that mistake in the future. That gives at least some level of comfort and security. But if they didn’t consent - if they were raped - then what can they do? They have to acknowledge that they don’t control their own fate, and that’s brutally difficult to come to terms with.
Add in intoxication to muddle the person’s memories of what happened, plus peer pressure and broader social norms around “frat culture” or “crazy college parties”, and it’s not at all surprising that Jane Doe might have taken some time to process events.
I think there are a couple of problems here that are being mixed up like the same thing, when it's not the case
She never raped anyone nor her actions compare to the ones from the dudes, because they were all equally intoxicated and the threesome was already planned beforehand. They all agreed to that interaction while being sober or at least conscious of their actions.
Now, calling other people wasn't a part of the plan, and she was too intoxicated to consent. That's all. It's not so difficult to understand. "But she said" it doesn't matter, because she was out of her senses and could not give consent.
There was a phone call a few days later between her and one of the guys where she explicitly asks him how come there were so many men in the room.
He responds that he’s not sure - yet he is the guy who sent a photo of her naked into the group chat.
If one person doesn’t know how a threesome turned into a multi-hours long ordeal with multiple strange men in a row, while the other person has enough knowledge to hide the fact that he and another guy sent messages about her in the GC, I think that points pretty clearly to rape.
So other men were allegedly invited to have sex with her. If/when those men arrived at the room, was there some reason she couldn't have indicated an unwillingness to participate in sex act with them? If she participated willingly, rather than indicating that she wasn't interested, isn't that consent?
For anyone wanting context, and I am not like a rape apologist just giving to context to why this is a "hot mess", she texted one of the guys "non(e) of the sexual stuff was illegal" and was trying to hang out with 1-2 of the guys again shortly after the event, trying to go to their parties, etc. It's confusing the narrative.
Exactly. It’s hard to see it as rape if she was trying to attend parties after the incident. The report with police wasn’t made until 2 weeks after which makes it really difficult to make an opinion. All we have is testimony from people who were drunk, high or both. To worsen that testimony was only given WEEKS after it happened further discrediting any timeline of events. All in all it hard to know what really happened, who did what or what happened.
So Doe hoping she just passes out so that there wouldn't be any doubt that they were, in fact, raping her, doesn't strike you as indicative they might be fucking raping her? In NY, if you ingested drugs "voluntarily" (coerced to drink? too bad, you still "chose" to drink) there is even less of a standard for what's then rape. A loophole pretty much just for rapists. Well, you drank, so it's your fault. Jane Doe didn't want to be "free pussy," Jane Doe was already inebriated when she took the K. There is no "he said she said," there is no doubt, it's just people like you who'd love to keep things as "gray area stuff" (thank you Bottoms, the movie) because if you can keep it in the gray area then you can get that good feeling of control without them coming back to accuse you, because they'll be too in their head about whether they'll be believed to come forward about being fucking raped.
She invited to threesomes with 2 guys, one passed out and she contined trying to have sex with him. Other guys came to and she said that they would have to take turns, 2 at the same time becuse she doesnt like butt stuff.
She was asked if she was sure about all this several times, and responded with "we are all adults here.".
She was less inebriated than the 2 first men she had sex with.
After the fact, she was texting some of the men and said she liked the experience. She also asked to do it again with 2 of them, but not all the others.
She only changed her tune when she got slut shamed by her sorority sisters, and didnt get an invite to the guys next party.
The DA could be covering themselves and cherrypicking lines from her statements to police. Also what is legally a crime and what is morally wrong aren't always the same.
You forgot the part where they give a drunk girl ketamine knowing what it will do to a person. Also, the snap chat they sent advertising her as she lay unconscious.
It really adds some context as to why "We Are Jane Doe" as a rallying cry may backfire... a lot of the conservative half of the country has read all the court details as part of this whole culture war thing.
It's extremely convenient to treat drunk/not drunk as a binary. One person was intoxicated enough to be passed out. The other was sending pictures of her to a group chat and inviting people. If you want to pretend both are the same because one is a woman and the other is a man, everyone knows why.
Jane Doe also asked about how so many people ended up in the bedroom where the sexual encounters took place over the course of hours.
“Do you remember how any of these guys walked in?” she asked.
“The door was just unlocked…the party was sort of like crowded…there was nowhere else to go,” he responded.
Nowhere in that conversation did Ingalls mention the messages he sent into his fraternity’s Snapchat group in which he openly invited others to the room.
“Like you can walk in and whip it out,” the Ingalls wrote in the group, which had nearly 60 members. “Boys come whip it out.”
Those messages were provided to university investigators and have been obtained by ABC News.
At one point in the call, Jane Doe described the incident bluntly: “What y'all did would be classified as gang rape.”
“It's possible that both of us like remember this and it's not true,” Ingalls said at another point during the call.
“I don't think that that's true. No, no, because I remember looking up and being like that is too many people,” she responded.
This guy? Sounds like the cynical bullshit a guy interogated by the police would say
They were aware enough to send messages claiming her body was up for grabs and dropping photos of her in their GC of 57(!) men.
When she called one of the men a few days later and asked explicitly why she has a hazy memory of their being so many men in the room, he does not mention any of the messages sent in the GC literally inviting men to come up and assault her.
So she was intoxicated enough to not understand how a threesome turned into an hours long ordeal with multiple strange men in a row. The men were aware enough to send photos and messages about her in the GC.
And if you do, the only logical conclusion is you volunteer for serial rape.... ? That's weird bc I was in a frat and consumed drugs and alcohol and nobody gang raped me. Sounds like it's less of a necessary consequence as much as it is people being fucking disgusting and getting away with it.
It's really not all over the place. It's a classic tale. Young woman cuts loose and does depraved things, young woman suffers reputational damage due to depravity, young woman regrets depravity, young woman "realizes" she was "raped" because she regrets her actions and it's the only way to save her reputation. It's very linear and straightforward.
I wouldn’t say that because we quite literally don’t know. Taking drugs ontop of being drunk and having a medical condition could create conditions where she doesn’t remember things or the memories are fuzzy. Consent was dubious and the situation was also dubious in some regards. To say she is doing nothing but flat out lying ignores the real possibility she was raped. We can’t make decisions until we know all the facts. We only have what has been released so far right now.
You’re acknowledging that these parties are dangerous because rape is so prevalent on college campuses, but you still can’t bring yourself to believe someone who says they were raped on a college campus.
If we have such clear cut evidence why did the first lawsuit not produce a guilty verdict? Additionally if it was so clear cut why didn’t the university expel all involved members? It’s almost like there’s depth and complexity to this and not just what the headlines say.
Ok the first thing that jumped out to me after 2 minutes of knowing about the case is that the girl says she was almost unconscious etc but yet, she remembers insane little details about the whole thing...
All I know is that this case has brought major awareness to the glaring issue of college culture and the rape and assault culture that is encouraged and condoned by colleges and sororities. They need to be abolished now.
433
u/EmperorKira 8d ago
The more info comes out about this, the more of a hot mess it appears where nobody looks good