The Cornell Rape

“She never says that she was drugged without her knowledge. She admits to taking drugs and alcohol voluntarily and with knowledge. She does not allege that she was forced to engage in any acts. She does not say that she was physically helpless or unconscious or incapacitated at any point during the time at the fraternity house. “I am grateful to Mother Jones Newspaper for information on the New York State Rape Laws

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten didn’t directly refer to New York’s voluntary intoxication loophole in his statement confirming this week that his office is taking a fresh look at rape allegations at Cornell after declining to do so in 2024. But the controversial law—which many say requires an extraordinarily high bar for victims of rape who willingly became intoxicated to prove that they were unable to consent to sex—seems to animate nearly every turn of his remarks. Specifically, that the victim in the incident, identified as Jane Doe, “admits to taking drugs and alcohol voluntarily and with knowledge,” and that she does “not say that she was physically helpless.” Take a look, and much of the same language appears in the state’s laws on rape.

If that strikes you as victim-blaming, you’re not alone; advocates of sexual assault victims and a majority of New York’s State Assembly members have long condemned the law for the same. Now, amid national outrage over the allegations, questions have emerged about whether the statutes may have deterred prosecutors from pursuing the case.

Jane Manning, director of Women’s Equal Justice, about the laws’ likely role in tanking the Cornell case back in 2024, the history behind the statutes and the movement to reform them—and the person standing in the way of change.

“There are several different rape statutes at play here. First-degree rape requires that the victim either face forcible compulsion, meaning that extreme violence took place, or be “physically helpless.” Rape in the second degree applies when a victim is involuntarily drugged, such as a drink being spiked. Rape in the third degree applies where none of the above statutes apply, but the victim gives an express verbal declaration of nonconsent. Those laws also include other provisions, including age-related ones. But these are the statutes that mainly apply in a situation like the Cornell case where a person is intoxicated.”

“Under New York State law, being physically helpless is defined as being unconscious or physically unable to communicate a lack of consent. That word “physically unable” is important because what that means is that it’s not enough if the person is severely mentally disoriented or confused. They have to be physically unable to speak, and case law basically says that means unconscious. That language excludes somebody who is severely intoxicated to the point where they are falling, or when they are so disoriented that they don’t know where they are, or when their speech is slurred. None of those things is enough to deem a person incapable of consent if they are voluntarily intoxicated.”

The history of the rape laws has had crazy notions as rape is defined if you can prove that you had fought back. The voluntary intoxication law has made it difficult for the victim. This law still exists on the books in the state of New York.

All of this above led the appointed attorney general to refuse to start an investigation. There is drunk sex where two people have sex and the next morning, they feel that it is a mistake. That is not what the women’s rights groups are focused on as much as sex where the male is a predator. They would like the law that focuses on the woman being out of control in the situation. For those of you who watch court cases on TV, you know that it is the attorney general who must prove criminal behavior beyond all reasonable doubt. There is one man who has upheld any changes in the rape laws. His name is Assembly speaker Carl Heastie.

The powers to be who could have brought a third issue to light regarding the victim of rape didn’t follow up with a more thorough investigation. The Cornell police were not trained in how to proceed further with the victim’s fights.

Coupled with this was the changing of the story of the victim as well as the time that it took for the victim to bring this up much sooner. Research indicates that it takes a while for rape to be processed.

There are important ethical attitudes and actions when the New York State Assembly should guide their deliberations. First, there is no neutral ethical action. Not to do something like stopping the rape of the Cornell student calls for action. Not to act is to act.

The other ethical domain to keep in mind is the reasonable person standard. Would 10 people as well as the entire student body have protested what they don’t think is right clearly the context for change. The current antiquated laws will be attempting to function as it collides with the above ethical guidelines. I can’t think of a more terrible situation than what the victim went through so it demanded some type of investigation keeping in mind that New York State has a high bar for an event being called rape.

They should focus on the spirit of the law balanced with the stated law that is in existence today seems to be the best way forward. That is what makes this an example so difficult to resolve. However, the civil rights movement had the same dilemma and from that people rallied for the movement to a more just society. That should be the model.