A defense attorney moved to remove New York Attorney General Letitia James from the Cornell fraternity rape investigation, arguing her public statements already declared the accused men guilty before any evidence review.
Teny Geragos filed the motion Thursday in Tompkins County court on behalf of one of seven former Chi Phi fraternity members named in a civil lawsuit. The filing demands James step aside as special prosecutor in the related criminal probe, saying her words have already poisoned the process.
Fox News Digital reported the motion argues James prejudged the guilt of men the law still presumes innocent and that the public can have no confidence in any charging decisions she makes.
The lawsuit, filed in September by a former Cornell student identified as Jane Doe, accuses the seven men of drugging and raping her at the Chi Phi house on the night of Oct. 19, 2024, and into the next morning. It claims she arrived already intoxicated and that the men pressured her into taking ketamine and other substances. The fraternity was suspended Nov. 8, 2024, the same day Doe reported the allegations to campus police.
Local prosecutor Matthew Van Houten initially declined to pursue charges. On Sept. 28 he announced he was reopening the case. Van Houten pointed to Doe’s November 2024 sworn statement and described her participation in the drug use and sexual conduct as “voluntary, conscious, and consensual.”
That same day, Sept. 28, James posted on social media about the young woman at the center of the claims. She wrote that what the woman had been forced to endure was “horrific and unacceptable” and that she was holding her “in my heart and in my prayers.” James added, “To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you.”
Days later, Gov. Kathy Hochul selected James’s office as special prosecutor. Geragos’s filing contends Hochul chose James precisely because of those “prejudicial public statements,” expecting a particular outcome. Another of the accused men filed a separate removal request in Albany State Supreme Court days earlier on the same bias grounds.
Geragos, daughter of prominent defense attorney Mark Geragos, put the core objection plainly in the court papers.
"The public cannot, and should not, have any confidence in the investigation or charging decisions of someone who has clearly prejudged the guilt of individuals who the law presumes are innocent. The AG should be removed."
The motion says James believed the seven men were guilty “despite not having examined a shred of evidence” and that her comments have already prejudiced potential grand jurors.
At an Oct. 2 press conference, Hochul brushed aside questions about the social media posts. “I will answer that. I have every confidence in our attorney general to do what she has always done: look at the facts, examine the record and draw the proper conclusions. That’s exactly what’s going to happen in this case,” the governor said. A Hochul spokesperson later pointed reporters back to that answer. James’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The accused men have denied wrongdoing. Some maintain the sexual activity was consensual; others say they did not participate at all. No charges have been filed.
Legal voices outside the case have raised the same fairness alarm. In a related Fox News report, attorney Andrew Miltenberg noted that James’s comments came several days before her appointment and that “it’s fair to look at them and say it appears that the person making those comments [is] biased.” Legal analyst Mehek Cooke added, “Imagine having to defend yourself when you have the lead prosecutor who is saying she ‘stands with’ Jane Doe.”
James has drawn repeated fire for turning the attorney general’s office into a political weapon. An ex-prosecutor previously described how empty investigations stayed alive simply because “what Tish wanted, Tish got.”
Internal critics have also accused her office of political targeting, a pattern that makes the Cornell appointment look less like neutral fact-finding and more like another selective prosecution.
Voters already heard that critique on the campaign trail when a GOP challenger battered James over bail policies and crime enforcement. The same questions of fairness and equal application of the law now sit at the center of this fraternity case.
Even former President Trump has warned that the Cornell suspects will not get a fair shake from James, a concern the latest court filings now put in black and white.
A separate report detailed those doubts about whether any defendant facing James can expect the presumption of innocence to mean anything.
James has also suffered courtroom setbacks of her own. A Biden-appointed judge recently dismissed one of her high-profile challenges, underscoring that her legal theories do not always survive neutral scrutiny.
The men named in the Cornell lawsuit still face a special prosecutor who publicly cast them as villains and the accuser as a survivor before the evidence was ever reviewed. That sequence is exactly why Geragos and the second defendant are asking the courts to take James off the case.
Presumption of innocence is not a slogan for press conferences. When the state’s top lawyer announces she already stands with one side, the investigation stops being independent and starts looking like a foregone conclusion.
