New York Attorney General Letitia James is under pressure to step back from the investigation into alleged sexual assault at Cornell University. This follows remarks from an attorney for one of the accused students, who questioned James’ ability to be impartial since she had publicly supported the accuser before taking on the case.
Andrew Miltenberg, who represents one of the seven former fraternity members named in a civil lawsuit, expressed concerns about James’ statements, which he described as creating “an avoidable question about the appearance of impartiality.” He pointed out that public confidence in the investigation could be undermined if it appears that facts have already been predetermined.
Governor Kathy Hochul appointed James’ office as a special prosecutor, taking over the inquiry from Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten. The investigation is linked to a reported sexual assault that occurred in October 2024 at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house.
In court documents, the woman—referred to as Jane Doe—alleges that she was drugged and assaulted by the fraternity members. The accused men have denied any wrongdoing, claiming that the sexual activity was consensual or that they weren’t involved. So far, no criminal charges have been filed against them.
Miltenberg highlighted the issue surrounding James’ comments made before her office was appointed to investigate. He cited her public condemnation of the alleged actions as “horrific and unacceptable,” which, he argues, casts doubt on her neutrality. When asked about her earlier remarks, James declined to comment directly, stating she wouldn’t address a Facebook post.
Another voice questioning the process was criminal defense lawyer Donna Rotunno, who suggested on Fox News that an impartial investigation should not start from a position already colored by public statements about the case.
James has asserted that her investigation will rely strictly on “the facts and the law.” Miltenberg wanted to clarify that his concerns weren’t politically motivated and emphasized the importance of addressing sexual assault seriously.
“There’s nothing wrong with showing compassion for someone who reports a sexual assault,” he said, underscoring that the distinction between supporting an accuser and accepting the validity of the allegations prematurely is crucial.
He urged that James should personally recuse herself but allow her seasoned prosecutors who haven’t commented publicly to continue with the investigation. Miltenberg believed that doing so would not weaken but rather strengthen the inquiry, noting that the same standards of impartiality applied to the initially appointed special prosecutor should extend to the current investigation leadership.
The case garnered renewed attention after Jane Doe filed a civil lawsuit in September, naming not only the accused but also various entities including Cornell University and a local bar for failing to protect her. Initially, Van Houten chose not to pursue charges, stating that the information at hand didn’t constitute a crime under New York law. He indicated that although Doe’s account was taken seriously, her credibility was not in question.
This decision changed after the civil lawsuit surfaced, prompting a re-examination of the case. The investigation faced further scrutiny when CBS News uncovered additional evidence that Van Houten claimed his office hadn’t received before, emphasizing how it altered the perception of the case.
Rotunno raised additional questions about the thoroughness of the earlier investigation and criticized prosecutors for not seeking comprehensive evidence before choosing not to file charges. She cautioned against letting public sentiment dictate proceedings while the facts remained uncertain.
Cornell University has acknowledged its commitment to an independent review of how it managed the allegations, with results leading to disciplinary actions against some students. The university stated its support for the special prosecutor’s appointment and promised a comprehensive external assessment of the situation.
Miltenberg concluded that the process moving ahead should be conducted by prosecutors whom the public can trust to remain unbiased, suggesting that if James stepped aside, an impartial prosecutor could take over the investigation.
