两年前,一名女性指控在康奈尔大学遭到轮奸。如今,此案重新受到关注,而据称施害者所受的有限后果,引发了人们的疑问:高等教育对在校园内遭遇性侵的学生负有什么责任,以及在纽约州法律下,同意与醉酒状态应如何理解。
Two years after a woman alleged a gang rape at Cornell University, renewed attention to the case and the limited consequences faced by the alleged perpetrators has raised questions about what higher education owes students who experience sexual assault on campus as well as how consent and intoxication are understood under New York law.
一名被称为“简·多伊”的女性于9月16日提起民事诉讼,称她在2024年10月19日晚遭到七名Chi Phi兄弟会成员的性侵、轮奸,并被施压吸毒和饮酒。该诉讼针对该兄弟会、多伊所在的姐妹会分会以及康奈尔大学提起;并将马修·英格尔斯、乔纳森·纽厄尔、温斯顿·李、吉利奥·洛佩斯、迭戈·萨拉维亚、斯科特·诺里斯和斯科特·克雷奇马尔列为被告。检方本周表示,在最初决定不起诉后,他们正在重新对此案展开刑事调查。
A woman identified as Jane Doe filed a civil lawsuit on Sept. 16, alleging that she was sexually assaulted, gang-raped, and pressured to take drugs and drink alcohol by seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity on the night of Oct. 19, 2024. The lawsuit is filed against the fraternity, Doe’s sorority chapter, and Cornell University; it names Matthew Ingalls, Johnathan Newell, Winston Lee, Gillio Lopes, Diego Sarabia, Scott Norris, and Scott Kretzschmar as defendants. Prosecutors said this week they were reopening a criminal investigation into the case after declining to press charges originally.
克雷奇马尔和洛佩斯的各自律师在向ABC发表的声明中否认了这些指控,而诺里斯通过律师否认参与性行为或吸毒,但承认他发送了诉状中包含的一条信息。
Separate attorneys for Kretzschmar and Lopes denied the allegations in statements to ABC, while Norris, via an attorney, denied engaging in sexual activity or drug use but acknowledged that he sent a message included in the complaint.
当此类性侵指控发生在校园内时,可以通过三种不同方式处理:学校纪律程序、刑事程序和民事诉讼。
When sexual assault allegations of this kind occur on campus, they can be addressed in three distinct ways: through school disciplinary proceedings, criminal proceedings, and civil lawsuits.
多伊的民事诉讼称,康奈尔大学未能保护她。她的律师还另行批评了当局对刑事调查的处理,不过观察人士表示,州法律中所谓的“自愿醉酒漏洞”可能会限制检方能够提出的指控。
Doe’s civil lawsuit alleges that Cornell failed to protect her. Her attorney has separately criticized authorities’ handling of the criminal investigation, although observers say what’s known as the “voluntary intoxication loophole” in state law could limit what prosecutors are able to charge.
以下是关于此案此前如何由康奈尔大学和刑事司法系统处理,以及接下来可能发生什么,需要了解的内容。康奈尔大学在接到涉嫌性侵报告后作何反应Doe于2024年11月向校园警方报告了这起涉嫌性侵事件。根据她的起诉书,康奈尔大学于2025年1月14日启动了第九条(Title IX)调查。
Here’s what to know about how the case was handled—by Cornell and the criminal justice system—before, and what could happen next. How Cornell responded when the alleged assault was reported Doe reported the alleged assault to campus police in November 2024. According to her complaint, Cornell began its Title IX investigation on Jan. 14, 2025.
第九条是一项可追溯至1972年的法律,其目的之一是确保高校在校园内发生性侵事件时进行调查。这一前提的核心在于,第九条旨在确保性暴力不会阻碍学生接受教育的权利。
Title IX is a law dating back to 1972 that is meant to, among other things, ensure that a college investigates when there is sexual assault on campus. Central to this premise is that Title IX is meant to ensure that sexual violence does not impede a student’s access to education.
Doe的代理律师表示,康奈尔大学已将七名被指控学生中的两人开除。康奈尔大学已证实,其纪律处分程序导致了开除和停学处分,但未透露个人的处理结果。该诉讼指控校方疏忽、违约以及违反纽约州法律。
Doe’s attorney has said that Cornell expelled two of the seven accused students. Cornell has confirmed that its disciplinary process resulted in expulsions and suspensions, but has not disclosed individual outcomes. The lawsuit alleges negligence, breach of contract, and violations of New York law.
康奈尔大学在上周的一份声明中回应称,由于学生隐私法,校方无法确认个人的纪律处分结果。不过,该大学于周一澄清称,“没有被指控的个人仅因参与其中而被给予写文章作为唯一惩罚的机会。”
Cornell responded in a statement last week, saying that it could not confirm the individual disciplinary outcomes due to student privacy laws. However, the university clarified on Monday that “none of the individuals charged were offered the opportunity to write essays as a sole consequence of their involvement.”
“我们极其严肃地对待性暴力,”9月21日的声明中写道。“校园性侵问题总统特别工作组在该事件发生后不久成立,并于2026年3月发布了一份报告。”康奈尔大学负责大学关系副校长凯尔·金博尔(Kyle Kimball)在周一的一份声明中表示,康奈尔大学的Chi Phi分会在2024年关闭,该兄弟会目前仍被禁止进入校园。
“We take sexual violence extremely seriously,” the Sept. 21 statement said. “The Presidential Task Force on Campus Sexual Assault was launched shortly after this incident and issued a REPORT in March 2026.”In a statement Monday, Kyle Kimball, Cornell’s vice president for university relations, said Chi Phi’s Cornell chapter closed in 2024 and the fraternity remains barred from campus.
然而,女性权益倡导者认为,校方在调查该事件以及对涉事人员采取适当行动时,可能并未完全履行其法律义务。第九条对大学处理性侵事件有哪些要求?
But women’s rights advocates believe that the school might not have fulfilled its legal obligations in investigating the incident and taking appropriate actions toward those involved. What does Title IX require universities to do about sexual assault?
第九条是一项联邦民权法,旨在禁止在任何接受联邦财政援助的教育计划或活动中存在基于性别的歧视。
Title IX is a federal civil rights law meant to prohibit sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
自《教育修正案第九条》(Title IX)出台以来,法院裁定该法律要求各大院校确保性暴力不会阻碍学生接受教育。
Since Title IX was introduced, courts have found that the law requires institutions to ensure that sexual violence does not impede a student’s access to education.
全国妇女法律中心(National Women's Law Center)的《第九条》专家希瓦利·帕特尔(Shiwali Patel)对《时代》周刊表示:“《第九条》之所以将性骚扰(包括性侵犯)纳入管辖,是因为这确实对学生获取教育的能力产生了切实的影响。”
“The reason why Title IX addresses sexual harassment, including sexual assault, is because of the very real impact that has on students’ ability to access education,” Shiwali Patel, a Title IX expert with the National Women’s Law Center, tells TIME.
根据“强奸、虐待与乱伦全国网络”(RAINN)的数据,遭受过性侵犯的学生在学校获得较低GPA的可能性更高,并且更有可能彻底辍学。
According to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN), students who experience sexual assault are more likely to earn lower GPAs in school and are more likely to drop out of school altogether.
帕特尔提到了涉事学生(化名简·多伊)的律师对她据称遭遇性侵后试图离开康奈尔大学的描述。简·多伊的律师托马斯·朱夫拉(Thomas Giuffra)在9月28日接受CNN采访时表示,康奈尔大学拒绝了她家属退还学费的请求,导致她不得不硬着头皮在校园里多度过了一个学期。
Patel points to Doe’s attorney’s account of her efforts to leave Cornell after the alleged assault. In a Sept. 28 interview with CNN, Thomas Giuffra—Jane Doe’s lawyer—said Cornell refused her family’s tuition-refund request, leaving her to spend another semester on campus.
帕特尔说:“她当时正试图离开这所学校;她根本不想待在那里。”
“She was trying to leave the institution; she didn’t want to be there,” Patel says.
康奈尔大学向《人物》杂志表示,校方会与寻求请假或退学的学生进行沟通,并且“如果学生不再注册就读,通常会退还相关费用”。朱夫拉还向CNN透露,截至2026年,多伊已经不再读大学了。
Cornell told People that it works with students seeking to take leave or withdraw and “regularly refunds payments if students are no longer enrolled.”Giuffra also told CNN that Doe is no longer in college as of 2026.
无论是否有正式投诉或是否被认定负有责任,大学都有义务提供支持。这些支持措施可以包括心理咨询、学业调整以及住宿或课程安排的变动。帕特尔表示,目前尚不清楚康奈尔大学是否完全履行了其《第九条》规定的义务,因为该校向多伊提供的支持性措施并未公开。
Universities also have obligations to offer support regardless of a formal complaint or a finding of culpability. These can include counseling, academic adjustments, and housing or schedule changes. Patel says it remains unclear whether Cornell fully complied with its Title IX obligations because the supportive measures it provided Doe are not publicly known.
无论如何,这种情况都引发了关于学校还能为学生做些什么的疑问。帕特尔(Patel)举了一些例子,说明大学在类似事件发生后可能会提出哪些问题:“她是否需要考试延期?她是否需要休息时间?如果她所在的兄弟会宿舍和姐妹会宿舍距离很近,她是否需要更换住宿地点?她是否需要心理辅导?学校是否已经发出了禁止她接近相关人员的命令?学校提供了哪些支持措施,以确保她不会因为再次遇到那些人而受到伤害或再次受到心理创伤?”
Regardless, the situation raises questions about what more schools can do for students, Patel says, providing some examples of the types of questions that a university might ask in the aftermath of this kind of incident: “Does she need extensions on exams? Does she need some time off, some leave? Does she need a housing shift if the fraternity house and her sorority house are close together? Does she need counseling? Did they provide a stay away order? What kind of support were they giving her to make sure she wouldn’t have to be retriggered and traumatized by running into them?”
《第九条》(Title IX)还要求学校通过一个可靠、公正的程序来调查这些指控——这一程序独立于刑事司法系统,并且采用较低的举证标准来判断学生是否违反了校园规定。
Title IX also requires schools to investigate allegations through a reliable, impartial process—independently of criminal court systems, and using a lower burden of proof to determine if a student violated campus policy.
根据诉讼内容,康奈尔大学于2024年11月8日正式宣布正在调查这起指控,这一天也正是受害者(Doe)向警方报案的时间。该校向学生发布了关于一起发生在兄弟会宿舍内的性侵犯及强迫他人吸毒事件的警报,并立即暂停了涉事兄弟会的活动。
Cornell University publicly disclosed that it was investigating the allegation on Nov. 8, 2024, the same day Doe went to the police, according to the lawsuit. The university sent an alert to students regarding a report of sexual assault and coercion into taking drugs at a fraternity house.
在回应《TIME》杂志的询问时,康奈尔大学表示:“该校的民权办公室(Office of Civil Rights)以及学生行为与社区标准办公室(Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards)依据学校政策和《第九条》的规定,对相关个人及兄弟会的指控进行了调查。”
The same day, Cornell suspended the Chi Phi fraternity. In response to an inquiry from TIME, Cornell said that its “Office of Civil Rights and the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards investigated the allegations against the individuals and the fraternity consistent with university policies and Title IX.”
该校的声明还进一步说明:“学校的《第九条》调查持续了数月时间,期间由一组受过培训的教职员工组成的小组在多个工作日里听取了证据。投诉人和被调查者都有机会在调查过程中出庭作证并提交证据。”那么,特朗普究竟是如何修改《第九条》规定的呢?
“The university’s Title IX investigation was conducted over several months and included hearings where a panel of trained faculty and staff heard evidence over multiple days,” the university’s statement continued. “The complainant and respondents had the opportunity to testify and present evidence in the university’s investigation.”How did Trump change Title IX rules?
康奈尔大学对该案的处理过程,正值校园性不端行为的相关联邦规则发生变化之际。根据原告多伊(Doe)的起诉书,一家法院于2025年1月9日废除了拜登政府的《教育法修正案第九条》(Title IX)规则——此时距离康奈尔大学启动正式调查仅过去五天。该大学于当年5月举行了听证会,这使得其适用的规则成为评估其应对措施的一个关键问题。
Cornell’s handling of the case unfolded amid shifting federal rules on campus sexual misconduct. A court vacated the Biden Administration’s Title IX rule on Jan. 9, 2025—five days before Cornell began its formal investigation, according to Doe’s complaint. The university held hearings that May, making the rules it applied a key question in assessing its response.
拜登政府曾于2024年4月扩大了《教育法修正案第九条》的规章范围(于2024年8月生效),扩大了性骚扰的定义并扩展了联邦保护范围。
The Biden Administration had expanded Title IX regulations in April 2024—taking effect in August 2024—broadening the definition of sexual harassment and extending federal protections.
然而,在2025年1月9日,一家联邦地区法院做出裁决,在全国范围内废除了2024年的拜登规则。本周,特朗普政府正式将2020年的《教育法修正案第九条》规章恢复至《联邦法规汇编》。这些在唐纳德·特朗普总统第一任期内出台的规则,自2025年1月以来实际上已开始执行。
On Jan. 9, 2025, however, a federal district court issued a decision vacating the 2024 Biden rule nationwide. This week, the Trump Administration formally restored the 2020 Title IX regulations to the Code of Federal Regulations. Those rules, introduced during President Donald Trump’s first term, had already been enforced since January 2025.
帕特尔(Patel)在谈到拜登时期与特朗普时期《教育法修正案第九条》规则的区别时表示:“特朗普规则本质上缩小了性骚扰的定义,使得投诉人要真正投诉一件符合定义的事情变得更加困难。”
“The Trump rule essentially narrowed the definition of sexual harassment to make it more burdensome for a complainant to actually complain of something that meets a definition,” Patel says of the differences between the Biden-era and Trump-era Title IX rules.
2020年的规则要求敌意环境下的性骚扰必须达到“严重、普遍且客观上有攻击性”的程度,这一标准比拜登时期的规则更为严格。不过,性侵犯则是被单独涵盖的,无需达到该门槛——并且,最近的修订与康奈尔大学案件之间的直接联系尚未得到证实。
The 2020 rule requires hostile-environment sexual harassment to be “severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive,” a narrower standard than the Biden-era rule. Sexual assault, however, is covered separately and does not have to meet that threshold—and a direct link between recent revisions and the Cornell case has not been established.
她补充道:“该规定还根据袭击、骚扰发生的地点以及投诉人的身份,对学校在《第九条》下可以应对的范围设定了限制。这是巨大的倒退,因为它允许学校在面对性侵犯时做得更少。”2020年和2024年规则的另一个不同之处在于,后者要求学校主动监测教育项目中的性别歧视,识别并解决举报障碍,并采取迅速有效的措施防止歧视再次发生。
“It also sets limits on what schools can respond to under Title IX based on the location of the assault, harassment, and based on the complainant’s status,” she adds. “This is going a huge step backwards because it is allowing schools to do less in the face of sexual assault.”Another difference between the 2020 and 2024 rules was that the latter required schools to proactively monitor educational programs for sex discrimination, identify and address barriers to reporting, and take prompt, effective steps to prevent discrimination from recurring.
帕特尔认为,大学预防和应对性侵犯的能力受到这种“基于执政政府的《第九条》保护政策来回摇摆”的阻碍。
Patel argues that a university’s ability to prevent and respond to sexual assault is hindered by this “ping-ponging of Title IX protections based on the administration that’s in power.”
她主张:“我们需要通过立法来解决这个问题。需要通过立法提供明确的规范,防止这类情况发生。”
“We need to have a legislative fix,” she argues. “There needs to be some clarity through legislation to prevent this type of thing from happening.”
韦恩州立大学法学院助理教授南希·坎塔卢波表示,这类案件凸显了政府自身内部的问题——她将其描述为“现任政府和某些前任政府以及以美国最高法院为首的法院,未能以符合《第九条》宗旨的方式来解释和执行《第九条》”。也就是说,她指出,这涉及防止教育中的性别歧视。《第九条》调查与刑事案件有何不同?
Nancy Cantalupo, an assistant professor at Wayne State University Law School, says that this type of case highlights issues within the government itself—what she describes as “failures of those in the current administration and certain previous administrations, as well as the courts—led by the U.S. Supreme Court—to interpret and enforce Title IX in a manner that is consistent with Title IX’s purposes.”Namely, she says, that involves preventing gender discrimination in education. How do Title IX investigations differ from criminal cases?
《Survivor》节目的支持者们将《第九条》(Title IX)视为一种替代刑事司法系统的救济途径,强调该法律在应对性暴力带来的其他危害(包括性暴力对受教育权的影响)方面的作用。在2014年参议院关于《第九条》的圆桌讨论中,受害者权利法律中心(Victim Rights Law Center)表示:“《第九条》是一种保障受害者公民权利的机制,而非刑事司法系统的工具。”该中心指出:虽然检察官的职责是追究被告的责任并维护社会利益,但《第九条》的核心目的是保障受害者平等的受教育权。
Survivor advocates describe Title IX as an alternative form of recourse to the criminal legal system, emphasizing its capacity to address other harms of sexual violence, including its impact on educational access. In written testimony to a Senate roundtable discussion of Title IX in 2014, the Victim Rights Law Center said the law “is a mechanism to enforce a victim’s civil rights and not a tool of the criminal justice system.”Where prosecutors are tasked with focusing on the accused’s accountability and the community’s interests, the Victim Rights Law Center said Title IX is meant to address victims’ equal educational rights.
这两种法律程序适用不同的证据标准;有时,由于证据不足以支持刑事定罪,检察官会选择不起诉。
The two processes also apply different standards of proof, at times leading a prosecutor to decline charges because they do not believe the evidence can support a criminal conviction.
《The View》节目的联合主持人桑尼·霍斯廷(Sunny Hostin)曾从事性犯罪案件的起诉工作长达十年,她为最初决定不起诉这一决定进行了辩护。在该节目周二播出的节目中,这位前美国检察官表示:“根据纽约州法律,仅导致判断力下降的自愿性饮酒或吸毒行为,并不构成无法同意进行性行为的法律依据。”她补充说:“根据[ Doe ]在2024年的陈述,任何检察官都不会选择提起诉讼。”那么,纽约州法律对饮酒或吸毒行为与性同意问题究竟有何规定呢?
“The View” co-host Sunny Hostin, who said she prosecuted sex crimes for a decade, defended the initial decision not to prosecute. On the show’s Tuesday episode, the former assistant U.S. attorney said, “under New York law, voluntary intoxication or drug use that merely impairs judgment does not legally constitute an inability to consent to sexual activity.”“There is no way,” she added, “according to [Doe’s] statement in 2024, that any prosecutor would have brought charges.”What does New York law say about intoxication and consent?
根据该州的强奸法,是否构成强奸行为可以通过以下几种情况来判断:使用暴力、对方明确拒绝发生性关系、受害者处于身体上无助的状态(如昏迷),或者受害者因精神原因而无法做出清醒的判断。不过,法律将“精神无助”定义为“并非由自愿摄入药物或酒精所导致的情况”,这一规定被立法者和权益倡导者称为“自愿醉酒的漏洞”。
Under the state’s rape laws, lack of consent can be established through force, an explicit refusal of sex, physical helplessness such as unconsciousness, or mental incapacitation. The definition of mental incapacitation excludes incapacity caused by voluntarily consuming drugs or alcohol, leading to a restriction that lawmakers and advocates call the “voluntary intoxication loophole.”
“现行法律将情况简单化地划分为两种极端:要么完全清醒,要么完全处于昏迷状态,”代表性骚扰及就业歧视受害者的律师安·奥利瓦里乌斯(Ann Olivarius)说道,“但现实并非如此,尤其是在大学环境中。我们都知道,药物和酒精会轻易影响人的判断力。”
“The current law sees it in black and white: Either you’re stone cold sober or you’re totally comatose,” says Ann Olivarius, an attorney who represents victims of sexual misconduct and discrimination in employment. “Life is not like that, and certainly not in college. We all know how easily our faculties are undermined by drugs and alcohol.”
奥利瓦里乌斯指出,即使根据法律规定某人因醉酒而无法操作重型机械或承担照顾儿童的责任,但如果此人说话含糊不清、步履蹒跚或明显处于意识不清的状态,法律仍认为其具备同意发生性关系的能力。这种法律的局限性成为争论的焦点——人们一直在讨论检察官是否应该、或者是否有权利在2024年对涉案人员提出指控。
Even if, under the law, you’re too impaired to operate heavy machinery or be responsible for children, Olivarius says, “if you’re slurring, stumbling, or visibly disoriented, you are still considered capable of giving consent for sex.”The law’s limitations have been a focal point of the debate over whether the prosecutor should, or could, have brought charges in 2024.
汤普金斯县地方检察官马修·范·豪滕(Matthew Van Houten)重新启动了调查,并表示该案件将提交大陪审团审议。不过他在周一的声明中为自己最初决定不起诉涉案人员的决定进行了辩护,理由是纽约州的相关法律对“醉酒状态”和“同意权”有明确的规定。
Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten reopened the investigation and said the case would be presented to a grand jury for their consideration. But he defended his initial decision not to charge the alleged perpetrators in a statement on Monday, citing New York state laws on intoxication and consent.
据范·豪滕称,受害者简·多伊(Jane Doe)在2024年11月所作的宣誓陈述中并未声称自己是在被下药的情况下遭到性侵犯的,也没有提到自己是被团伙强奸的;相反,她的陈述表明她参与吸毒和性行为是自愿的、处于清醒状态,并且是双方自愿同意的。然而,民事诉讼文件指出,她在兄弟会成员实施性侵犯时处于精神无助的状态,因此不具备同意的能力。诉讼文件还声称她当时受到了胁迫,被强迫服用了药物,某些行为是在她不知情的情况下发生的,甚至有些行为是被迫进行的。
According to Van Houten, Doe’s sworn statement in November 2024 “did not allege that she was drugged against her will or gang raped. On the contrary, Jane Doe’s statement described her participation in drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary, conscious, and consensual.”The civil lawsuit, however, states that she was incapacitated when frat members sexually assaulted her and thus incapable of consenting. It also claims that she was “pressured” and “plied” with drugs, and that certain acts were done “without her consent” as well as some “forced” on her.
奥利瓦里乌斯曾在近半个世纪前参与了具有里程碑意义的“亚历山大诉耶鲁案”的原告指控,该案确立了性骚扰属于《教育修正案第IX条》所禁止的性别歧视。她对《时代》周刊表示,法律的性质也可能导致将矛头指向受害者的质问:“他们对她说:‘你喝醉了吗?你为什么要喝酒?’……所有的责任都推到了她身上。”
Olivarius, who was also a plaintiff in the landmark Alexander v. Yale case nearly half a century ago that established sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination under Title IX, tells TIME that the nature of the law can also lead to victim-blaming questions: “They say to her, ‘Were you drunk? Why did you drink?’ … It’s all on her.
《纽约时报》今年5月报道称,自愿饮酒或吸毒的人在追究强奸罪责时面临着极高的门槛。
The New York Times reported in May that people who voluntarily drank or took drugs faced a high burden when pursuing rape charges.
多年来,法律倡导者一直认为,该法律的局限性凸显了进行改革的必要性,尤其是随着维权努力日益聚焦于酒精如何削弱一个人对性行为的同意能力。是否有过修改该法律的努力?
Legal advocates have for years argued that the law’s limitations underscore the need for reform, especially as advocacy efforts have increasingly spotlighted how intoxication can impair a person’s ability to consent to sex. Have there been efforts to change the law?
民主党籍纽约州众议院议长卡尔·希斯蒂于周三宣布,鉴于这起民事诉讼,纽约州众议院正在成立一个工作组,以审查该州的强奸法。该工作组由14名民主党籍众议员组成,预计将在年底前向希斯蒂和众议院民主党多数派会议报告其调查结果和立法建议。
The New York State Assembly is forming a working group to review the state’s rape laws in light of the civil lawsuit, State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, a Democrat, announced on Wednesday. The group, composed of 14 Democratic Assembly members, will be expected to report its findings and legislative recommendations to Heastie and the Assembly Democratic majority conference by the end of the year.
一项旨在解决自愿 intoxication(饮酒/吸毒)排除条款的法案于6月在州参议院获得全票通过,但目前仍搁置在众议院。此前的版本曾于2020年、2021年、2023年、2024年和2025年在参议院获得通过,但均未能在众议院过关。修改该法律的提议最早可追溯至时任民主党籍州参议员亚历山德拉·比亚吉于2019年提出的立法。
A bill addressing the voluntary intoxication exclusion passed the state Senate unanimously in June, but remains stalled in the Assembly. Earlier versions passed the Senate in 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024, and 2025, but none passed the Assembly. The proposals to change the law date back to legislation introduced by then-Sen. Alessandra Biaggi, a Democrat, in 2019.
根据美联社的研究以及发表在《美国精神病学与法律学会期刊》上的一份报告,纽约是全美19个将 intoxication 认定为精神无能力(仅限不知情或非自愿情况下导致)的州之一。
New York is one of 19 states whose rape or sexual assault laws recognize intoxication as mental incapacitation only when the person became intoxicated without their knowledge or consent, according to research by the Associated Press and a report published in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.
近年来,数个州已修改其法律,以保护因自愿饮酒而丧失行为能力受害者。
Several states have changed their laws in recent years to also protect victims incapacitated by voluntary intoxication.
2021年,在该州最高法院按照较为狭窄的定义推翻一起性侵案的有罪裁决后,明尼苏达州立法者扩大了“精神无行为能力”的定义,将自愿醉酒也纳入其中。
In 2021, lawmakers in Minnesota expanded the definition of mental incapacitation to include voluntary intoxication, after the state Supreme Court overturned a sexual assault conviction under the narrower definition.
密歇根州也在2023年修订法律,扩大了“精神无行为能力”的定义。去年,得克萨斯州扩大了相关法律的适用范围,涵盖行为人明知对方因醉酒而无力同意时实施的性行为,无论对方是如何陷入醉酒状态的。
Michigan also revised its laws in 2023 to broaden its definition of mental incapacitation. Last year, Texas expanded its law to cover sexual acts committed when the perpetrator knows the other person is too impaired to consent, regardless of how that person became intoxicated.
2016年,在斯坦福大学学生布罗克·特纳卷入的性侵案之后,加利福尼亚州也收紧了量刑法律。对于某些涉及因醉酒而无法表示同意的受害人的性犯罪,该州禁止判处缓刑或暂缓监禁刑。接下来,康奈尔大学性侵案将如何发展?这起案件可能沿三种路径推进。
California also tightened its sentencing laws in 2016 following the sexual assault case involving Stanford student Brock Turner. The state barred probation and suspended sentences for certain sexual offenses involving victims who were incapable of consenting because of intoxication. What happens next in the Cornell sexual assault case? There are three possible ways that this case may move forward.
范·豪滕表示,他的办公室计划将刑事案件提交大陪审团,由其裁定是否有理由提起指控。豪滕在周一声明中表示:“寻求正义有时要求我们在获得新证据后,重新审视或重新调查案件。”他告诉美国广播公司(ABC),其办公室希望确定当时未被考虑的新证据是否会改变此前的判断。这些证据可能包括民事诉状中附带的一张截图,据称该截图来自兄弟会成员之间的一条 Snapchat 消息,消息中将 Doe 称为“免费的骚货”。
Van Houten said his office plans to present the criminal case to a grand jury, which would determine whether an indictment is warranted. “Seeking justice sometimes requires us to reconsider or reopen cases when we are provided with additional evidence,” Van Houten said in his Monday statement. He told ABC that his office wanted to determine whether additional evidence, not considered at the time, would change its assessment, potentially including a screenshot included in the civil complaint of an alleged Snapchat message between the fraternity members that referred to Doe as “free p-ssy.”
据报道,这名女子最初向警方报案后,一周后又告诉警方,她“完全、彻底地失去了行为能力”,并表示“我可以百分之百确信地说,我遭到了强奸”。美国哥伦比亚广播公司(CBS)获得的一份警方于2024年11月14日和15日进行问询的文字记录显示,这名女子称自己“遭到了非常、非常猛烈的击打”,并将事件描述为“胁迫”。豪滕告诉 CBS,他当时没有看到这份问询文字记录,其办公室在决定不予起诉时依据的是那份宣誓证词。
After the woman’s initial police report, she reportedly told police a week later that she was “completely and totally incapacitated,” and could “say with 100% confidence I was raped.”A transcript obtained by CBS of a police interview on Nov. 14 and 15, 2024, showed that the woman described being “physically hit very, very hard,” and describing the incident as “coercion.”Van Houten told CBS that he had not seen the transcript of the interview, and that his office had relied on the sworn statement when it declined to bring charges.
另外,Doe 提起的民事诉讼要求包括上述七名男子及康奈尔大学在内的其他被告赔偿经济损失。法院尚未确定开庭日期。
Separately, Doe’s civil lawsuit seeks monetary damages from the seven men and other defendants, including Cornell University. A court date has not been set.
纽约州州长凯茜·霍克尔周二也呼吁开展独立调查,调查康奈尔大学在相关指控于2024年出现时如何处理了这些指控。
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul on Tuesday also called for an independent investigation into how Cornell University handled the allegations when they arose in 2024.
“本案中的指控实在令人震惊。任何学生在经历了这样的事件后还能站出来发声,都需要极大的勇气。任何学生都不应该再怀疑那些本应保护他们的机构是否会倾听他们的诉求并采取行动,”州长在声明中表示。“因此,我呼吁聘请外部专家对这所大学的应对措施进行透明、独立的调查,以确定康奈尔大学是否履行了保护学生的所有义务,并是否采取了应有的法律行动。”目前,负责这项调查的具体人员尚未确定;不过,调查结果可能会对纽约州内外的大学在处理性侵案件时的做法产生重要影响。
“这个案例,”奥利瓦里乌斯在接受《TIME》杂志采访时说,“可能会改变人们对此类问题的讨论方式。”
“The allegations in this case are nothing short of horrifying. For any student to come forward after an experience like this takes extraordinary courage. No student should ever be left wondering whether the institutions meant to protect them will listen and act,” the governor’s statement said. “That is why I am calling for outside counsel to conduct a transparent, independent review of the university’s response to determine whether Cornell met every obligation to protect its students and pursue justice.”The individuals who might be tasked with such an investigation have yet to be named; however, the outcomes could help shape how similar investigations into sexual assault cases are handled on campuses both in and beyond New York. “This case,” Olivarius tells TIME, “ may change the conversation.”