Intoxication & Consent in the Cornell Rape Investigation (with Mimi Rocah)
Summary
Preet Bharara and Joyce Vance discuss the Cornell 7 Jane Doe case with former DA Mimi Rocha. They analyze New York law regarding consent, clarifying that voluntary intoxication does not automatically preclude prosecution but complicates proving lack of consent. Rocha criticizes the DA for failing to conduct a thorough investigation before dismissing the case. The segment also addresses how the subsequent civil lawsuit and media attention created an information void filled by conflicting narratives, complicating both legal proceedings.
Topics discussed
Introduction to Mimi Rocha and the Cornell 7 case
Listener question on drugs, alcohol, and consent
New York law on involuntary drugging and consent
Legal distinction for voluntary intoxication
Investigating lack of consent despite intoxication
Critique of DA's decision not to pursue charges
The role of witnesses and digital evidence
Proposed legal changes for incapacitation standards
Complex fact patterns and conflicting statements
Why further investigation was necessary
Impact of civil suit and public information void
Cultural context and Take Back the Night movement
Listen ad-free on Castria