BOMBSHELL: Cornell Accuser’s Bombshell Text Messages Surface

Newly obtained text messages are adding another major development to the explosive Cornell University sexual assault case, showing the woman accusing seven fraternity members of rape initially defending the sexual encounter and insisting that nothing illegal had occurred.

TMZ reported Thursday that it obtained an October 21, 2024, text exchange between the accuser, identified publicly as Jane Doe, and Jonathan Newell, one of the men she later named in her civil lawsuit.

The messages were exchanged just two days after the alleged assault at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house. In the conversation, Newell apologized for what happened that night and expressed concern about the public backlash surrounding the encounter.

According to TMZ, Newell told the woman she was an amazing person, apologized repeatedly and explained that he and others had been attempting to stop rumors from spreading. Her response, however, appeared considerably different from the allegations she would eventually make in court.

Doe acknowledged that her memory of the night was clouded and suggested that everyone involved had consumed excessive amounts of alcohol and drugs. She also expressed affection for Newell and another fraternity member, Matthew Ingalls.

In one particularly notable message, Doe defended the encounter against criticism from other students, arguing that outsiders had no business judging their sexual activity.

She then added: “our body our choice asf.”

The exchange also included references to other people being present during the encounter. Doe suggested that additional individuals should have left the room rather than remaining around the participants.

Another message, previously reported by ABC News, showed Doe telling a fraternity member that none of the sexual activity had been illegal. She also said she had enjoyed being with him.

TMZ obtained a text chain between Jonathan Newell and Jane Doe. On the evening of October 21, 2024, Jonathan apologizes to Jane and says, “You’re an amazing person and I genuinely hope ur not catching as much heat from this as we r. We’ve been shutting down any stories we’ve heard but again I’m so so sorry.”

— TMZ (@TMZ) October 8, 2026

Those statements have become a central point of contention as attorneys, investigators and the public examine sharply different accounts of what happened inside the fraternity house. However, subsequent communications painted a different picture.

Nearly two weeks after the incident, Doe told one of the accused men that approximately 90 percent of the encounter had been nonconsensual. She alleged that she had been given ketamine and described feeling objectified during the experience.

The woman eventually filed a civil lawsuit accusing seven Chi Phi fraternity members of drugging and sexually assaulting her during the October 2024 incident. The defendants have denied the allegations.

The case initially resulted in no criminal charges, with Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten citing concerns about the evidence and the woman’s original account.

Van Houten previously characterized the sexual activity as voluntary and consensual. However, a subsequently obtained police interview transcript showed Doe explicitly telling campus investigators that she believed she had been raped.

The discrepancy intensified questions surrounding the original investigation.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has since appointed Attorney General Letitia James to oversee the reopened criminal investigation, replacing the local district attorney. Attorneys representing one of the accused men have challenged James’s appointment, arguing that her previous public comments raise concerns about impartiality.

Meanwhile, Doe’s attorney has reported threats and harassment directed at his client, including a frightening swatting incident involving an emergency police response to her family’s home.

The newly publicized messages may become important evidence as the case moves forward, although the woman’s initial descriptions do not independently establish whether she was capable of consenting throughout the encounter. For now, the competing accounts remain unresolved, and no criminal charges have been announced.