New York Attorney General Letitia James is facing a formal request to withdraw from the investigation into an alleged sexual assault at Cornell University. The attorney for one of the accused students has raised questions about whether James publicly endorsed the allegations before her office assumed control of the case.
Andrew Miltenberg, who represents one of seven former fraternity members named in a civil lawsuit, stated that James’s earlier remarks in support of the accuser created an “avoidable question about the appearance of impartiality.”
Governor Kathy Hochul recently appointed the Attorney General’s office as a special prosecutor on Thursday. This decision replaced Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten in the ongoing inquiry into an alleged sexual assault that occurred in October 2024 at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house.
Background of the Allegations and Investigation
The woman, identified in legal documents as Jane Doe, has alleged that seven former fraternity members drugged and sexually assaulted her. The men involved have denied any wrongdoing, with some asserting that any sexual activity was consensual, while others deny their participation altogether. As of now, no criminal charges have been filed against the seven individuals.
Miltenberg’s objection specifically targets comments made by Attorney General James before her office was designated to lead the criminal investigation. She had publicly characterized what the woman had “been forced to endure” as “horrific and unacceptable,” and conveyed to her, along with “all survivors,” that “we stand with you.”
During a news conference on Friday, when questioned about her objectivity given the Facebook post, James responded, “I will not comment on a Facebook post.”
James has publicly affirmed that the investigation will be guided by “the facts and the law.”
“It should be fair. It should be impartial. And it should not be from someone who’s already made a public statement on Facebook about it,” said attorney Sara F. Rotunno regarding the reopened investigation.
Concerns Over Impartiality
Miltenberg emphasized that his concerns were not politically motivated and did not diminish the gravity of sexual assault allegations.
“There is nothing improper about expressing compassion for someone who reports a sexual assault,” he explained. “But there is an important difference between supporting a person who makes an allegation and appearing to accept the factual premise of that allegation before conducting an investigation.”
He urged James to personally recuse herself from the case, while still allowing senior prosecutors within her office, who have not publicly commented on the allegations’ merits, to manage the investigation.
“That would not weaken the investigation. It would strengthen it,” Miltenberg asserted.
He contended that the same principles of independence and public confidence that necessitated the appointment of a special prosecutor should equally apply to the individual overseeing the replacement investigation.
“I am not suggesting that Attorney General James does not believe she can be fair,” he added.
Previous Handling of the Case
The case garnered renewed attention after Doe filed a civil lawsuit on September 16, nearly two years following the alleged incident. The complaint also names Cornell University, various fraternity entities, Doe’s sorority, and a local bar, among others, alleging failures to adequately protect her.
Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten initially opted not to pursue criminal charges, stating that the signed statement his office received from Cornell University Police did not establish a crime under New York law. He clarified that prosecutors assumed Doe’s account was true and that her credibility was “never in question.”
However, Van Houten later reopened the investigation after the civil lawsuit came to light.
Questions regarding the initial investigation intensified when CBS News presented Van Houten with a more complete transcript of Doe’s police interviews, which he stated his office had never received.
“That wasn’t information that I had,” Van Houten commented, adding that its existence “changes the landscape for me.”
Attorney Sara F. Rotunno also questioned why prosecutors had not sought the complete investigative record before deciding against charges.
“The real question is, why didn’t the DA ask for every piece of information that the campus police gathered?” she asked during an interview.
She cautioned against allowing public sentiment to dictate the direction of the case.
“We are watching the court of public opinion take over here when we don’t know the facts,” Rotunno stated.
University's Internal Review
Separately, Cornell University has agreed to an independent review of its handling of the allegations. University President Michael Kotlikoff indicated that its disciplinary process led to two expulsions and two suspensions of at least two semesters. One student had graduated before disciplinary action could be imposed, and two others were found not responsible for sexual misconduct. These university proceedings are distinct from the criminal investigation.
Call for Recusal Reiterated
Miltenberg reiterated that any decision regarding criminal charges should originate from prosecutors whose impartiality the public can unequivocally trust.
“The simplest way to remove that question is for her personally to recuse herself and allow an uncommitted prosecutor within her office to lead the investigation,” he concluded.
