Seven Chi Phi members drug Cornell survivor, she fights for secrecy

A woman who is suing seven members of Cornell University’s Chi Phi fraternity has asked a New York court to keep her identity confidential, . , the alleged drugging and gang‑rape took place in October 2024 inside the fraternity house, after which she stopped attending school.

She claims the assault drove her out of Cornell and has left her battling extreme anxiety, depression, and sleepless nights.

The lawsuit names Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris and Scott Kretzschmar as the alleged attackers.

She alleges the men gave her ketamine and that one of them invited others to join in the assault by messaging that there was “free p***y.” The accuser says the defendants showed no regard for her safety during the incident.

The alleged assault took place inside the Chi Phi fraternity house in Ithaca during October 2024. The incident occurred on the fraternity’s premises, .

She stopped attending Cornell after the alleged assault in October 2024, and her decision to withdraw followed her fear that exposure could harm her future prospects. This withdrawal disrupted her academic trajectory.

She says exposing her identity could damage the life she has worked to rebuild, including her career and personal relationships. The fear of retaliation has caused her extreme anxiety, depression and sleepless nights.

In a sworn statement filed with the court, she asked that sensitive information such as her home address, phone number, email, date of birth and Social Security number be kept under an “attorneys’ eyes only” designation. This measure would restrict disclosure of her personal data to anyone outside the legal teams.

She also requests that no third party be able to obtain her personal information without court authorization. This move is intended to protect her from potential public backlash.

The Tompkins County District Attorney has reopened the criminal investigation and plans to present the case to a grand jury with the woman’s cooperation. The investigation will examine evidence presented by the prosecutor, including forensic reports of drug usage.

She claims the men showed no regard for her safety when they allegedly plied her with copious amounts of drugs. She says this disregard contributed to her decision to withdraw from campus.

The court’s decision on anonymity will influence how the case proceeds and whether evidence can be shared with the public. The judge will consider the balance between privacy and the public interest.

The court will decide whether to grant her request for anonymity, while prosecutors prepare to examine the alleged assault in a grand jury proceeding. The ruling will determine if her identity can remain confidential as the legal process continues. The outcome will be watched closely by campus safety advocates.