Prosecutors in central New York are reopening the investigation into an alleged gang rape at a Cornell University fraternity in 2024. The decision comes after a civil lawsuit filed earlier this month brought renewed attention and outrage to the incident.

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten stated that his office is examining whether criminal charges are warranted. The reopening aims to re-evaluate the case in light of new information and a different account of events presented in the civil complaint, which differs from the initial police statement made by the accuser.

"It's our intention to present the case to the Tompkins County grand jury with Jane Doe's cooperation," Van Houten told ABC News. He added that the office wants to "reexamine whether there's additional evidence that we were not aware of in November of 2024, that exists now that would change our assessment of the case." The district attorney noted that the allegations in the civil complaint are "dramatically different" from the woman’s original statement to police.

The reopening follows a civil lawsuit filed by a former Cornell student less than two weeks ago. The lawsuit alleges she was drugged and sexually assaulted by seven members of the university's Chi Phi fraternity chapter. Cornell's Chi Phi chapter was suspended from campus following the alleged incident, but no criminal charges were filed against the individuals involved at the time.

Van Houten explained that charges were not pursued in 2024 because the accuser's statement to authorities did not explicitly allege she was drugged or that she did not consent to sexual activities. "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," Van Houten said.

Thomas P. Giuffra, the attorney for the accuser, identified as Jane Doe, disputed the district attorney's characterization of her initial statement. He criticized the authorities for not following up with his client using specialized investigative skills. "An average University Police officer would not have these skills. It would be the role of a specially trained detective or district attorney. However, Ms. Doe was never contacted by anybody with those skills," Giuffra stated.

In an interview, Van Houten acknowledged that his office had relied on the Cornell Police investigation and did not conduct an independent inquiry, a practice he described as common in many upstate New York counties. He also mentioned that a group chat, cited in the lawsuit as containing discussions among fraternity members about the alleged incident, had not been provided to his office.

Giuffra countered that these messages are a "critical piece of evidence" that were indeed provided to authorities in 2024. He asserted that his client reported the incident to Cornell University Police because a crime had been committed, and it was the obligation of the authorities to investigate thoroughly.