MONTICELLO, NY — A hearing regarding Attorney General Letitia James’s role as special counsel in the Cornell sexual assault case has been extended to November 5, after Sullivan County Judge James Farrell raised concerns regarding the participation of the other defendants. 

Background

The case was filed on behalf of former Cornell University student “Jane Doe” in September and alleges that seven Cornell fraternity brothers were responsible for sexually assaulting her for several hours on October 19 and October 20, 2024.

Doe’s lawsuit alleges that Gillio Lopes, one of the fraternity brothers, participated in gang-rape with other defendants and non-consensually snorted ketamine off of her body.

The Monticello hearing was not held to determine guilt of any parties, but rather to determine who has authority to oversee the case.

The hearing on Thursday, October 29 was a result of an October 7 petition filed by attorney Andrew Miltenberg, who is representing Lopes in the Cornell case. The petition states that James (who was appointed as special counsel by Governor Kathy Hochul on October 1) should be removed from the case, as her social media activity prior to being appointed demonstrated a “bias and presumption of guilt against the defendants.”

The social media activity the defense refers to is a post by James on the attorney general’s X account three days before Hochul’s appointment of special counsel. 

“What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I’m holding her in my heart and in my prayers. To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you,” the post reads.

Defense’s perspective

Defendant Gillio Lopes attorney, Andrew Miltenberg, exits the courthouse after Judge James Farrell gave him a week to add the six other defendants onto the petition.

Lopes's attorneys Bernstein and Miltenberg said they had not been asked to participate in the Netflix documentary, and felt it may be one-sided because of that.

Previous Next

During Thursday’s hearing, Lopes attorney Stuart Bernstein clarified that the defense was not asking Farrell to supervise the investigation, and was not challenging Hochul’s authority to appoint special counsel, but rather challenging the decision of James as prosecution.

Bernstein claimed that part of the reason James was appointed as special counsel was because the public had lost faith in the Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten after he declined to pursue charges. However, the public also had some distrust in James because of her social media activity, Bernstein stated.

Comments under the post included remarks like: “So much for presumption of innocence lol” 

Farrell later pressed Hochul and James’s attorney, Kaitlin Vigars, about James’s statement. He questioned Bernstein why the other six defendants were not part of the petition.

“I don’t know who their attorneys are,” Bernstein responded. “No one has put in that they oppose it.”

Farrell said that the determination of who prosecutes the case should apply to all defendants, not just Lopes. He added that the "joinder" issue—the legal term for consolidating multiple claims or parties into one case—would be grounds to dismiss the petition. 

“You can’t have seven different proceedings,” he said. “That’s not fair to anyone.”

Bernstein replied that the issue should be addressed regardless of who brings it up, and it does not apply to one singular defendant.

“The court system should not support chaos; we should be the antithesis of that,” Farrell continued.

Prosecution’s perspective

Assistant attorney general Vigars stated that it was the petitioner's responsibility to prove the appointment would harm the defendant. The petition, according to Vigars, does not accomplish that, as it is based on speculation as opposed to actionable wrongdoings.

Vigars said that there have been no criminal proceedings yet, and there are more appropriate ways to challenge James’s appointment such as pretrial motions, post-trial motions and appeals. 

Farrell questioned whether James was standing next to Hochul as Hochul gave a statement about protecting and fighting for students that experience sexual assault during an October 2 press conference.

Vigars remarked it was a joint press conference, so both James and Hochul were present.

Farrell also asked Vigars whether Hochul was aware of James’s statement when appointing her as special counsel.

Vigars responded that she was, but appointed James despite that.

“You would agree with me that the prosecution should not make those statements," Farrell said about James’s post.

“I don’t think public statements are an impediment to the investigation,” Vigars replied.

What’s next?

Netflix documentary

On October 29, Netflix released a documentary series about the Doe lawsuit.

“I can tell you confidently that no one in my office or any of the other defendant’s offices has been asked to participate,” Miltenberg said. “I expect the documentary will be one sided, salacious. I am sure we’ll all watch it, but I also know that won’t be the whole truth,”

The Netflix documentary includes interviews with editors from The Cornell Daily Sun, Hochul, Doe’s attorney, a former Cornell fraternity president and a former Brown University Title IX program officer.

Lopes’s attorneys requested an additional week to refile the petition with the other defendants.

The request was granted, and the hearing will be revisited in the Sullivan County Courthouse on November 5. 

Miltenberg told reporters outside the courthouse that he is “confident the other six will join” and that those that may not want to join the petition will likely be forced to appear by Farrell.

Defendant Winston Lee’s attorneys (who have previously represented Sean “Diddy” Combs and Harvey Weinstein) also filed a similar motion to remove James from the case on October 8.