“She never says that she was drugged without her knowledge.
asserted
she → say → knowledge
She admits to taking drugs and alcohol voluntarily and with knowledge.
asserted
She → admit → knowledge
She does not allege that she was forced to engage in any acts.
asserted
she → allege → acts
She does not say that she was physically helpless or unconscious or incapacitated at any point during the time at the fraternity house.”
asserted
she → say → house
Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten didn’t directly refer to New York’s voluntary intoxication loophole in his statement confirming this week that his office is taking a fresh look at rape allegations at Cornell after declining to do so in 2024.
asserted
office → refer → 2024
But the controversial law—which many say requires an extraordinarily high bar for victims of rape who willingly became intoxicated to prove that they were unable to consent to sex—seems to animate nearly every turn of his remarks.
asserted
they → say → remarks
Specifically, that the victim in the incident, identified as Jane Doe, “admits to taking drugs and alcohol voluntarily and with knowledge,” and that she does “not say that she was physically helpless.”
asserted
she → identify → knowledge
Take a look, and much of the same language appears in the state’s laws on rape.
asserted
much → take → rape
If that strikes you as victim-blaming, you’re not alone; advocates of sexual assault victims and a majority of New York’s State Assembly members have long condemned the law for exactly the same.
asserted
advocates → strike → same
Now, amid national outrage over the allegations, questions have emerged about whether the statutes may have deterred prosecutors from pursuing the case.
uncertain
statutes → emerge → case
I talked to Jane Manning, director of Women’s Equal Justice, about the laws’ likely role in tanking the Cornell case back in 2024, the history behind the statutes and the movement to reform them—and the person standing in the way of change.
asserted
I → talk → change
Let’s give a brief overview of the rape laws surrounding the Cornell allegations.
asserted
’s → let → allegations
First-degree rape requires that the victim either be the victim of forcible compulsion, meaning that extreme violence took place, or that the victim be “physically helpless.”
asserted
victim → require → place
Rape in the second degree applies when a victim is involuntarily drugged, such as a drink being spiked.
asserted
drink → apply → degree
Rape in the third degree applies where none of the above statutes apply, but the victim gives an express verbal declaration of non-consent.
asserted
victim → apply → consent
Those laws also include other provisions, including age-related provisions.
asserted
laws → include → provisions
But these are the statutes that mainly apply in a situation like the Cornell case where a person is intoxicated.
asserted
person → apply → case
How does the law determine “physical helplessness?
asserted
law → determine → helplessness
Under New York State law, being physically helpless is defined as being unconscious or physically unable to communicate a lack of consent.
asserted
being → define → consent
That word “physically unable” is really important because what that means is that it’s not enough if the person is severely mentally disoriented or confused.
asserted
person → mean → what
They have to be physically unable to speak, and case law basically says that means unconscious.
asserted
that → have → ?
That language excludes somebody who is severely intoxicated to the point where they are falling down, or when they are so disoriented that they don’t know where they are, or when their speech is slurred.
asserted
speech → exclude → point
None of those things is enough to deem a person incapable of consent if they are voluntarily intoxicated.
asserted
they → deem → consent
The suggestion that an accuser who became voluntarily intoxicated and engaged in sex cannot be raped feels extremely antiquated.
asserted
who → become → sex
But where does it come from?
asserted
it → come → where
What’s the history behind this exception?
asserted
history → ’ → exception
Our rape statutes were written decades ago, at a time when women were gravely underrepresented in the legislature, and when we understood far less about rape than we understand now.
asserted
we → write → rape
Most survivors of rape were in the shadows because of a culture that silenced them, and so many of our statutes do not reflect a modern understanding or a survivor-centered understanding of the realities of rape and sexual assault.
asserted
many → silence → rape
Can you give me an example of what other rape laws were like decades ago?
asserted
laws → give → what
There were special corroboration requirements that applied only to rape and not to any other crime.
asserted
that → be → crime
It had an earnest resistance requirement, saying that if you didn’t fight back, it wasn’t rape.
asserted
it → have → requirement
That no matter how the person threatened you or frightened you or overpowered you, if you didn’t fight back, it wasn’t rape.
asserted
it → threaten → you
New York didn’t have a rape shield law in the 1950s, either.
asserted
York → have → 1950s
So if a rape victim did, by some miracle, make it onto the witness stand, it was perfectly legal for the cross-examination to start with the question, “Were you a virgin before this happened?” and to spend hours cross-examining the victim about her unrelated sexual history.
asserted
this → make → history
This routinely happened.
asserted
This → happen → ?
How did these laws change?
asserted
laws → change → ?
All those laws that I just mentioned to you have been reformed.
asserted
I → mention → you
But they did not reform themselves.
asserted
they → reform → themselves
They were reformed because of survivors and feminists who banded together and demanded changes in the law.
asserted
who → reform → law
Over the years, including recently, others have been reformed.
asserted
others → include → years
…and 55 more, not listed.
The Aporia
