THE RECORD · THE ARGUMENT · THE RESPONSE

Who Is
Jane Doe
Really?

Evidence. Due process. Competing narratives. The record deserves scrutiny.

Open the evidence library Read the argument Join the discussion

WHY THIS EXISTS

Controversial cases still require evidence, process, and room for dissent.

This site is built to present opposition, documentary material, competing interpretations, and public discussion without treating allegations as adjudicated facts. Court records, attributed reporting, editorial argument, and reader comments are labeled as different kinds of material.

REPORTING CREDIT

Reporting that helped frame the public questions

The links below are credited to Richard Luthmann / NY News Press. Linking or discussing them does not convert their assertions into findings of fact.

Richard Luthmann — Cornell Seven: Evidence Before Election Theater Psy-Op ↗Richard Luthmann — BREAKING: Cornell Seven Accuser Unmasked ↗NY News Press — Cornell Seven Accuser Unmasked ↗NY News Press — Cornell Seven Evidence ↗

LATEST

Articles & analysis

Rice Purity Quiz

Take the Rice Purity Quiz As If You Were Lucy Craig

We’ve recreated the 100-question Rice Purity Test, allowing you to explore it through the lens of the publicly available records, police reports, court...

2026-11-10

Analysis

Rice Purity, Mom Lore, and Lucy Craig

One of the most revealing messages in the Cornell Seven controversy is also one of the most casually written. Understanding two pieces of Gen Z slang helps...

2026-11-08

ARTICLE

Reproduction of Key Text Messages

Read the text exchanges reproduced here.

2026-11-08

ARTICLE

The 20-Year Loophole?

Two recent court decisions, an expired ordinary filing deadline, questionable reliance on criminal statutes, and a conspicuously missing fifth cause of...

2026-11-05

Legal Commentary

Lucy Craig Wants Another 60 Days. The Court Should Say No.

Nearly two years after the alleged events, Lucile H. Craig's attorneys want to delay Diego Sarabia's motion to dismiss—while defending a complaint that...

2026-11-05

Opinion

BREAKING: Jacqueline Kelly, the Cornell Graduate Who Must Now Prove She Can Investigate Cornell

Letitia James has hired an outside lawyer to lead the Cornell 7 investigation. Her selection raises a rather inconvenient question: when does independence...

2026-11-04

PUBLIC RECORD

Documents should be inspectable, searchable, and quotable in context.

Every public Library item gets a dedicated page. PDFs are rendered responsively, OCR is searchable, video/audio transcripts are timestamped, and clicking a transcript segment jumps the media to that point.

Browse library

New docket entries · last 24 hours

Loading recent docket filings…

DISCUSSION

Topics controlled by the administrators; comments controlled by their authors.

A Place For Memes
This discussion forums is for all your Lucy Craig, Cornell 7, memes. We want to have the definitive collection of meme art about Lucy Craig.

Big Tish James
Should Big Tish James be involved in the investigation and prosecution of the Cornell 7?

Can a woman consent to sex if she is voluntarily intoxicated?
Lucy Craig engaged in voluntary consumption of alcohol and illegal substances. Is she capable of consent? And if not, are the men, who were also drinking and consuming illegal substances, according to public reporting, capable of consent? Can they claim that they were raped by Lucy Craig?

Did Lucy Craig Rape Those Drunken Boys?
Her texts say she was not drunk. The bar says she was not drunk. The boys were drunk. Did Lucy Craig (AKA "JANE DOE") rape those boys? Leave a comment with your opinion.

Discuss: Should Lucy Craig Sue Thomas Guiffra?
Thomas Guiffra's famefag attention seeking, publicity stunts have backfired. It is now known that he was leaking records related to the case (the poorly redacted afformation in support of proceeding as Jame Doe was only in possession of the person who filed it). He named a U.S. Active Service Marine, lied about a swat event, filed a fake DMCA in bad faith to this blog, named an incorrect person as a defendant, misrepresents New York's dram shop liability laws against Moonies, and named an entity that doesn't actually exists on paper. His hope was, similar to the Comb's cases, to throw shit against the wall, leak favorable documents, cancel anyone who speaks against his client, and sway the public sympathy. That backfired, with help from LucyCraog.blog. As her case becomes a comedy of errors, we ask you, should Lucile H. Craig sue Thomas Guiffra and his firm for malpractice?

Freedom of Speech
We do not care about your feelings, we do care about freedom of speech. Share and post any legal speech you want. Send us your images, videos, text messages, voice recordings or any other related material for immediate publication without censorship.

THE LATEST DISCUSSION

Latest comments

Loading latest comments…

PUBLIC DISCUSSION

Comments & replies

No account is required. Comment anonymously, or sign in with a pseudonymous account if you want to manage your comments later. Comments are user speech, not editorial findings.

Anonymous2026-11-01 22:09 UTC #4723

There are so many high-profile rape hoaxes where a website like this would have balanced the scales...

1. Emma Sulkowicz (Mattress Girl)

2. Crystal Mangum (Duke Lacrosse)

3. "Jackie" (UVa Rolling Stone)

4. Chessy Prout (St John's)

etc etc etc

I hope this site sticks around even after the Lucy Craig case gets flushed. It's open season on innocent bros--a site like this is a necessary defense in the court of public opinion.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-02 08:02 UTC #4728

Can we keep building this list? I think its interesting that there have been high-profile cases but the media is still 100% about bashing the accussed.

5) Amber Heard

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-02 13:20 UTC #4734

Some ppl actually are supporting Heard now yet again, and its just like this case. They have vague things to say about misogyny but 0 to say about the evidence which I think proved she was the actual abuser, just like how ppl who support Jane have 0 to say about having sex with men who are passing out, but a lot to say otherwise about intoxication and consent.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-11-04 04:45 UTC #4789

Even Aiden Scott wouldnt date a chick who shits on the bed

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe12026-11-01 22:41 UTC #4724

With the success of LucyCraig.blog we have decided that moving forward when a case or situation appears to be single sided (whichever position) and extremely public, we will open a new free speech LucyCraig.blog inspired site to level the public debate playing field to allow all sides to debate.

No more censorship, no more screaming louder over the next. We will balance the scales of public conversation.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-02 09:03 UTC #4730

Well done to you and your team, this is really impressive! Its one thing to want to speak out and try establish a blog, but to have the technical connections and skill to build it to this standard, and keep it going despite the backlash is actually hardcore.

Anonymous2026-11-01 19:02 UTC #4718

Aidan Scott:

@aidan_scott8 (Instagram, Threads, TikTok)

@aidenscott27 (TikTok - shares with Train Hoe).

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-06 17:29 UTC #4823

imo this man's a victim though but not via rape, but as lhc's bf

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 21:53 UTC #4721

He's gonna spend the rest of his life wondering why job-interviewers are chortling at his cuck ass 😆

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-02 07:55 UTC #4726

I would say he has about a month or two left to ditch her and save himself from a life of snickers! Surely he is seeing what is going on and looking for a way out wihtout being branded unsupportive and shallow

Anonymous2026-11-01 15:58 UTC #4714

I juat read the cornell decision again (i think the one i read before was incomplete or more redacted). Right throughout, it says she gave consent. It sounds like she was a bit fucked near the end (so to speak), but she was "talking nonsense", so still awake and looking and feeling happy. So same facts as her statement. But what i noticed is, cornell says there was no consent due to incapacitation! Thats bullshit! Intoxication and incapacitation are very different things. At no point did she not know that she was being offered an illegal drug, or being asked to suck and fuck. If you know what the fuck you are doing and the implications, the consent is 100% valid. A bit grey at the end, where she says she tried to avoid a third bang by saying she was tired, etc... But never an out right no. Legally this seems to be greyer, if the guys keep asking. But then 1) she was happy, chatty and eventually "presented" her pussy while sucking a dudes cock, so the boys woukd not have known there was a problem (allowing for them being oretty fucking high too) with consent so not rape and, ultimately, she was voluntarily intoxicated, so the consent question gets far more murky. Her best chance of claiming assault is threesome 3, but that involved Matt, the guy she declares she was obsessed about. He didnt make her obssessed with him, thats on her. Fucking bitch, i get worried i will see something that makes me doubt my take that she was not raped, but everything lines up. Even cornell said the first threesome was 100% consensual, but now she claims that was rape too. Bitch! I fucking hate this creature

Anonymous2026-11-01 15:18 UTC #4713

This makes sense.

QUOTED COMMENTAnonymous2026-11-01 07:29

Can't forget her massive unconventional muscles which she flexes and worked oh so hard for.

View original comment

Anonymous2026-11-01 15:05 UTC #4711

Not sure if all of these are in the library.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 15:17 UTC #4712

Only a Lucy Craig wpuld be mocked for possibly being transgender.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-01 16:01 UTC #4715

Its not jiat her man arms, its in her personality and attitude... There is a gracelessness about her that gives male vibes.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-11-02 13:25 UTC #4736

She thinks she's one of the guys and even in her pics, she doesn't understand how to present herself in a feminine way even when she wears makeup.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-11-02 13:25 UTC #4735

She thinks she's one of the guys and even in her pics, she doesn't understand how to present herself in a feminine way even when she wears makeup.

Anonymous2026-11-01 07:14 UTC #4693

Coming back to this case, she honestly seems like a very disgusting and reprehensible woman. Of course the case is still unraveling so everything I say is alleged, but the toxicity I'm seeing is annoying and I wouldn't be shocked if she was doing the gang bangs just cuz that's the only type of attention she could get, which is the attention many other girls get without giving everything away, but Jane can't afford to be selective, and was shocked to find out guys don't actually like the girl who belongs to the streets.

Seriously, who thinks it's not a boundary violation to do it with a guy who can barely stay awake, but says herself they should have stopped when she slurred her words? She later says in messages the other guys should have left since these two were so gone. How much self awareness must she lack to be a professional victim slurring her words, but she thinks her actions were appropriate? Not only does it seem like being in her vicinity makes you at risk of your life being ruined by false allegations, but you may have your sexual boundaries violated yourself.

But then based on the evidence, she...

-Is always told by her friends all the time how pretty she is and they ask her how.

-Shows off her cankles because they make her different, they are beautiful and a part of her. She has a condition and dramatic music to play along with clips of herself being so quirky.

-Is a progressive member of the LGBT community, and giggles at the idea of her guy friends being the same.

-Has a condition that makes her dizzy, did she mention she had a condition? She has a condition.

-Is so open minded and ahead of the times taking part in an 8 person gang bang, the most jaw dropping moment being when she snorted K off an intoxicated guys dick and he doesn't even remember.

-Wonders why her alleged rapists don't ask or care about her cuts, or why a gang bang doesn't treat her with respect.

-Pre-plans to pass out to charge these men with rape, even tho they listen to a no.

-Insists her body her choice, an oh so powerful slogan, none of it was illegal and she liked it.

-Is so shocked and bewildered that everyone hates her and is calling her a slut, but at least the guys have her back.

-The guys didn't have her back or pick her, women always get the short end of the stick! She has no friends and seems to feel violated, alone and needs to save face.

-Seems to exaggerate the gang bang, she's 100% sure she was raped, other victims with far more nightmarish testimonies come off far less cocky.

-Gets told by the DA no crime was committed and it was all consensual.

-Comes back years later, naming them, accusing them, and expecting money.

Even outside the case she seems like an insufferable person who's never been told no. She may be histrionic or maybe she has some maturing to do, but this will likely follow her forever. Worse, bc of this case actual victims will be looked at with more skepticism and not be taken as seriously, but sure feminists, this outrage is totally a good thing and yet another Duke Lacrosse.

Before the angry feminists complain at me, like I said supporting the girl who in her own words did it with a guy passing out perpetuates rape culture more than reasonable skepticism ever will. Don't tell me as a victim you give a shit, you are evil.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 07:29 UTC #4696

Can't forget her massive unconventional muscles which she flexes and worked oh so hard for.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-02 08:31 UTC #4729

In her statement she said she flexed to "scare off" the crowd of boys, in these Cornell decision, everyone agreed she flexed, and I think that would be a sign that she is loving it, but also, apparently she was saying how she is stronger than one of the guys as well (probably male 1, 2, or 3)

Anonymous2026-11-01 06:49 UTC #4692

Gosh, I want new evidence to read more than Lucy wants cock!

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:19 UTC #4667

Is it just me or have the Jane Supporters gone mostly quiet?

I don't blame them. How do you accuse everyone else of perpetuating rape culture when you act like having sex with a guy passing out is perfectly normal?

I'd be covering my drink around these tiktok brains if that's what they really think...

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:29 UTC #4670

They are running out of steam - most are just putting on a show (and like every good rape case, people want a little moral outrage, but then they want to get back to their lives without having to volunteer at places of safety, or give talks on consent, or give actual donations, etc) , now we are probably down to the real bull dykes looking to acquire influence and make a name for themselves, and the ones looking to lash out at men generally (they will also get bored soon)

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:36 UTC #4674

Run out of steam and brush the fact you supported sleeping with passing out and intoxicated guys under the rug. All the ppl who doubled down after knowing that fact need to be called out, they wanna call everyone else out over perpetuating rape culture? They wanna get angry and morally outraged? They are the first who should be held to their own standard. They do more rape apologia than those questioning Jane Doe.

Anonymous2026-11-01 03:18 UTC #4659

She absolutely should be slutshamed. She's a whore that regretted her actions and now ruined 7 dudes lives

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:12 UTC #4665

Even if she was abused (and it's not looking like she was) she agreed to the first threesome and barely knew anyone. One guy passing out and the other guy heaving, yeah special not promiscuous at all.....

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:31 UTC #4672

If she was being raped, that would have been an ideal time to call it a night... But if she was getting impatient with these giys because she hadnt even come yet... She might want someone else to join in to finish the job

@janedoe12026-11-01 00:45 UTC edited #4658

The admins are praying for safety, wisdom, and a happy Halloween to everyone.

We have taken our boss / editor treat-o-treating.

Here is our boss:

She is a strawberry.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Anonymous2026-10-31 21:17 UTC #4656

Who tf cares about this whore? She looks ugly as hell

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 05:12 UTC #4680

If she was a victim some rapists are opportunists rather than those who act on lustful desire.

I don't think she was a victim tho. It's entirely possible she belonged to the streets bc she felt insecure and needed the attention, unlike girls who get it without giving away the goods...

@janedoe12026-10-31 14:47 UTC #4649

Full FOX interview with Lucy Craig's lolwyer Thomas Giuffra.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

FoxNewsVideo.mp4

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-31 16:11 UTC #4650

Is there a way to add polls? Here's one:

Who's the bigger attention-whore: Lucy Craig or Thomas Giuffra?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-01 11:43 UTC #4702

I think she is a "local" scale whore and attention whore, giuffra is global scale

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe12026-10-31 17:20 UTC #4651

We thought about adding polls, and still might do so.

Why we have not: online polls, or any polls, are not a representation of the zeitgeist in any given debate. The reliance on polls is typically a manipulative way for people to "win" a debate.

Secondly, we have no way to limit the participants to x amount of participation. For all we know, every single comment on this page is created by a single person.

LucyCraig.blog is purposely designed to withstand legal attempts to identify the commenters, by purposely not preserving that data, even for us admins.

If we limit poll participation to anonymous comment accounts only, it would be lopsided and not very predictive of the mood.

However, we have not dismissed the idea of adding polls, we juat want to reflect an accurate result, with all variables possible taken into consideration.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Anonymous2026-10-30 18:44 UTC #4621

Lucy Craig's lawyer says defendants get vigilante justice because he alone has adjudacated them guilty.

QRFIAw7CWGbK5VAc.mp4

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-11-01 04:15 UTC #4666

"There is no way to spin it"

Lucy saying no to the new guys and them respecting it.

"Nothing illegal our bodies our choice"

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-31 21:18 UTC #4657

He's sleeping with her

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-11-06 13:07 UTC #4821

lmao

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-31 08:10 UTC #4638

Damn! I thought you were exaggerating, but thats literally what he says (not verbatim) , but identical meaning. This guy is the real rapist

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-30 23:58 UTC #4626

Meanwhile, his client Lucy Craig is outed as a k-covered cock-snorter.

Works for me! 🍆👃

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-31 03:14 UTC #4632

This guy is a psychopath.... Like a pathological liar, who found a home in the law because it gave him a way to trample other people. This guy needs to be trafficked and wake up on day in a rubbish dump, infected, crippled and dying

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-31 02:03 UTC #4629

Her lawyer's agenda / plan was to maintain Lucy Craig's anonymity, dox the boys, file take down demands for everywhere her name appears and keep a single sided narrative.

He was not counting on this blog to appear.

Bless the admins for refusing censorship of any type, for providing free speech as a tenant of their dedication, and going a step further and sharing every demand and being transparent about every decision they have made. They even forced search engines to list the site, high in the rankings. All in real time, adjusting to circumstances as it happens, providing legitimate analysis that is not one sided when they share new articles and updates and always providing source material with their coverage... Mainstream Legacy Media almost never provides this level of coverage, access, and neutrality in conversation.

All for free. No ads. No sponsors. No requests for donations. No bitcoin addresses. No solicitations. No subscription paywalls. No mandatory accounts. No doxxing. No comment moderation (transparent to the fullest). They listen to the feedback and incorporate ideas, in real time, within a few hours they have updates and new features.

I was here from the beginning. When the comment section was pastel colors and off kilter.

The narrative fell apart entirely because of this site not only provided a space for the full conversation, but also they have provided a hub for all things related to this case, a one stop site for every court document, meme, interview, and relevent content and material.

Can we do an appreciation thread for whomever the admin(s) are? This level of skill, in real time, is unheard of. The first i have seen.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-31 13:30 UTC #4648

💯% this!

Happily, while Lucy Craig's scummy lawyer is in the 20th century, this blog is in the 21st.

Anonymous2026-10-30 16:16 UTC #4619

Lucy H Craig

Kristin Knouse

Repeat, remember, and post their names everywhere.

The internet never forgets.

What they both deserve cannot be expressed.

@janedoe12026-10-30 13:28 UTC #4610

We exported the live anonymous comments and asked AI to generate a detailed report on trends, pro / anti Jane Doe / Lucy Craig, and to compare against live events (court filings, protests, announcements, the Netflix documentary, etc) to see how the comments section is going.

Because we believe in transparency, we are publishing the report here.

One thing to note is the live published comment count is 3,286 while the actual comment count (live + hidden / deleted) is 4,595. This is because in the beginning of the site's existence we had someone post over a thousand very long paragraphs of identical comment content which we had to delete in bulk (all but one). This was done in an attempt to overwhelm the site's comment and actually did so with several people reaching out through the Legal Submission form to ask us to remove the duplicative comments. Aside from those, we have removed exactly 5 comments from the public viewing.

What are your thoughts on the report?

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

Comment attachment by janedoe1

QUOTED COMMENTAnonymous2026-10-30 05:02

That is a pretty standard tool for shit journalists, say they didnt respond for comment. How many views did this shit get? Admins, could you put the comments through AI and show the trends in pro-Lucy, neutral, And anti lucy? I feel like there are far fewer lately, like peopl…

Expand quoted comment

View original comment

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-30 14:08 UTC #4615

Thank you for this. I did get the feeling the disapproves were down, i think the topic has cooled a little now that there is less new evidence, so i think the performative side is down a bit. , then your articles have spun most of the readers on to related topics rather than just clear cut approve or disapprove of Lucy, so probably less triggering to pro lucy readers. When you look at what has been debated and discussed though, its pretty broad! I do think youve keep free speech as a key theme, and we are seeing a side of it we never knew existed (dmcas and deleteme).

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-31 18:04 UTC #4652

> we are seeing a side of it we never knew existed (dmcas and deleteme).

Exactly!

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-31 18:20 UTC #4653

I did some googling. 20 years ago, there was a company called Reputation Defender which used DMCAs to try to squelch speech about a couple of their affluent clients: Yale law students named Heide Iravani and Brittan Heller. When the DMCA route failed, they tried to sue posters on a free-speech discussion board called AutoAdmit. The LOLsuit made national news. Then AutoAdmit countersued for Abuse of Process (inter alia)

It's only tangentially related to the Lucy Craig story, but the free-speech issues are relevant.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous2026-10-31 18:38 UTC #4654

DMCA is a powerful tool, to protect copyrighted material. When it is used maliciously or to censor, in violation of fair use and free speech, it is also powerful to the person who posted (allegedly stole) the material.

Compliance requires sworn statements, identification, and a form or method to make the submission -which is why, I suppose, this site has the form -without it, there would be no administrative resolution attempt, with it, the owner of the content, not their representative, would have to claim the ownership... the dmca attempt to Lucy's lolwyer met none of the requirements and thus could be safely ignored. The admins clearly know rhe law and have designed a truely free speech platform around the loopholes that lolwyers might have available.

@janedoe12026-10-29 20:23 UTC #4573

Press conference after oral arguements to remove Tish James from Special Prosecutor in the case against Cornell 7.

Adding to the library.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

g6_7iXvRtpzVHlOV.mp4

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

@janedoe12026-10-29 20:30 UTC edited #4574

Cornell 7 attorneys contradict Netflix statement and state that NONE of the Cornell 7 individuals or their counsel were even contacted to be a part of the Netflix documentary.

Watch the video bootleg for free here: https://lucycraig.blog/article/watch-netflix-releases-jane-doe-v-cornell-documentary-today

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-30 05:02 UTC #4589

And anti lucy? I feel like there are far fewer lately, like people have run out of performative energy

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous2026-10-30 07:48 UTC #4594

On Facebook, it's just the septum nose-ring bitches now. Normal people know Lucy Craig is a lying skank. (But it would be nice to get solid statistics)

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous2026-10-29 21:06 UTC #4581

The Cornell 7 should sue. Not even bothering to ask them for comment is definitely "reckless disregard for the truth."

Bury that ginger cunt in subpoenas!

Anonymous2026-10-29 20:16 UTC #4572

Someone please put this into an AI animation skit.

QUOTED COMMENTAnonymous2026-10-29 12:56

Expand quoted comment

The Craig family strat sesh: * Dad: Lucy, you have disgraced this family, I want you out tomorrow, good luck on the street corner. I will refer you business for a small commission. * Lucy: But Dad, I won the spiritual award in school! And I know all the dykes... I mean my community will see that I'm the victimmmm-mah! * Dad: How are you the victim? I read your statement! I still can’t look at cocaine without imagining a brown circumsized… * Mom: Oh darling, I can't bear the idea of our little girl walking the street! What if Marge from the book club sees her? * Lucy: My roommate said it was rape, and I managed to get two of them expelled, even though I admitted I was gagging for it! * Dad: Too little too late! Even the DA thought you were a... oh wait, what's it say here *riffles through papers*... a "skanky hoe-bag". * Mom: Darling please, I was speaking to Ghislaine Maxwell, she said there is a really good lawyer... * Dad: Good lawyer - thats an oxymoron! * Mom: He was on Weinstein! He said he can get a “conviction in the court of public opinion”. * Dad: GEEZUZ, woman, you want the world to know that Lucy conducts trains? * Lucy: D-a-a-a-a-d! * Mom: He was on the P-Diddy case! You hate P-Diddy! * Dad: Diddy? Yes he did! That was good work... damn blacks taking our women...and we still don’t know if he fingered the Bieb! * Lucy: D-a-a-a-a-d! Don't be racissssst-tah! * Dad: Lucille Hariett Craig! I've told you I dont want you having orgies with ... Those people...thats exactly why we’re are in this mess. I told you white boys only! And Cocaine! I didn’t go to medical school so my child could take ketamine like a homeless person. * Mom: Darling! P-Diddy! He is a prison wife now! * Dad: The P stands for Paedophile…Oh heck, I don’t understand the court of public opinion… do you really think we could trend? Who is this guy? * Mom: *gives Lucy a wink* I have a surprise for you… Oh Mr Guiffra! * T.P. Guiffra: *jumps out from behind the grand piano* Hey hey! I just flew in from Epstein Island, and BOY are those girls tired! A cha-cha-cha! Hey, Folks, how ya doing? Thomas P. Guiffra here! Call me T.P. I’m gonna win you millions! I take 30%. * Dad: Wow, like Sinatra! This guys got class! * T.P: I got class coming out my ass! Hey, Mr Craig! What if I told ya, the world is RIPE for a high profile rape case? You heard of #MeToo right? It’s a time bomb! A powder keg, I tells ya! * Dad: #MeToo? * T.P: Of course, you’re a powder keg! You forked out da dough for some Ivy school and dees hoodlums abused y’daughta! Dats not right! And Mr Craig, y’daughta was drunk! She was under 21, Hello? * Dad: But the DA said… whats it now…”Just because she was drunk, doesn’t mean she isn’t a skanky hoe bag” * T.P: Good gawd! These small town hicks – all think they are on Da Bachelor er something! “Check me out with my edjacation and ethics”. Mr C, I can getcha a real ringer like Big Tish ta reopen the case! * Dad: Big Tish? Sounds scary? * T.P: She’s Frikken ‘UGE! Real mean streak, hates men, gets em convicted like all de time! Bada-bing. You want shit taken care of? You need T.P, baby! * Dad and Lucy: Wow! * Mom: I told you, honey, Mr Guiffra is the best! *winks at T.P* *T.P: I’ll moytalise ‘em! I will get these guys faces on da nooz! I got my guy at CBS, I’ll slip him the details – all the choice cuts if you get my meaning! They will be ruined! * Dad: Mr Guiffra, you are a god send! Maybe my donations to the church are paying off? *T.P: I’m thinking 5 millions dollars! I take 30%! We sue da school, da boys, da bar – we sue everyone and their lil’ dawgs too! If you wanna catch a whale, you gotta break a few eggs! * Dad: But I don’t care about that, I’m Mr Money-Bags. I want these boys to go to jail! Then the chaps at the country club will have to give me back my 7 iron. * T.P.: Yeah yeah, that too, but criminal charges are a crap-shoot, but we can get them on the civil side! I take 30% *Dad: But that won’t save my reputation? * T.P: Oh-ho, you’re a good man, Mr Craig, I can tell, real innocent in the ways of the world! Remember O.J.? * Dad: Yes, black man, killed his wife. “ T.P: Did he? Hey hey now! No criminal conviction! But paid big time in the Civil so he is guilty where it counts! *taps his temple* Criminal is tricky, what if theres dumocrats in the jury? Civil? Balance of probabilities! I got your probabilities right here! *grabs crotch, winks at Lucy* Slam-dunk, thanks for coming! I take 30%. * Mom: We can do this, darling! *rubs his arm* We NEED Mr Guiffra to join us... on the case... * Lucy: Please can we, daddy? * Dad: Well, Fam! Sounds like I can still save this situation! Let us pray! * Lucy: Ohh, lets get on our knees! * T.P: …I take 30%...

View original comment

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-31 08:29 UTC #4642

If you can tell me how to get this done for free or on a basic chatgpt subscription, i will do it, i had to force myself to post it because i just kept adding. There are other key scenes id like to explore as well

Anonymous2026-10-29 12:56 UTC #4551

The Craig family strat sesh:

Dad: Lucy, you have disgraced this family, I want you out tomorrow, good luck on the street corner. I will refer you business for a small commission.
Lucy: But Dad, I won the spiritual award in school! And I know all the dykes... I mean my community will see that I'm the victimmmm-mah!
Dad: How are you the victim? I read your statement! I still can’t look at cocaine without imagining a brown circumsized…
Mom: Oh darling, I can't bear the idea of our little girl walking the street! What if Marge from the book club sees her?
Lucy: My roommate said it was rape, and I managed to get two of them expelled, even though I admitted I was gagging for it!
Dad: Too little too late! Even the DA thought you were a... oh wait, what's it say here riffles through papers... a "skanky hoe-bag".
Mom: Darling please, I was speaking to Ghislaine Maxwell, she said there is a really good lawyer...
Dad: Good lawyer - thats an oxymoron!
Mom: He was on Weinstein! He said he can get a “conviction in the court of public opinion”.
Dad: GEEZUZ, woman, you want the world to know that Lucy conducts trains?
Lucy: D-a-a-a-a-d!
Mom: He was on the P-Diddy case! You hate P-Diddy!
Dad: Diddy? Yes he did! That was good work... damn blacks taking our women...and we still don’t know if he fingered the Bieb!
Lucy: D-a-a-a-a-d! Don't be racissssst-tah!
Dad: Lucille Hariett Craig! I've told you I dont want you having orgies with ... Those people...thats exactly why we’re are in this mess. I told you white boys only! And Cocaine! I didn’t go to medical school so my child could take ketamine like a homeless person.
Mom: Darling! P-Diddy! He is a prison wife now!
Dad: The P stands for Paedophile…Oh heck, I don’t understand the court of public opinion… do you really think we could trend? Who is this guy?
Mom: gives Lucy a wink I have a surprise for you… Oh Mr Guiffra!
T.P. Guiffra: jumps out from behind the grand piano Hey hey! I just flew in from Epstein Island, and BOY are those girls tired! A cha-cha-cha! Hey, Folks, how ya doing? Thomas P. Guiffra here! Call me T.P. I’m gonna win you millions! I take 30%.
Dad: Wow, like Sinatra! This guys got class!
T.P: I got class coming out my ass! Hey, Mr Craig! What if I told ya, the world is RIPE for a high profile rape case? You heard of #MeToo right? It’s a time bomb! A powder keg, I tells ya!
Dad: #MeToo?
T.P: Of course, you’re a powder keg! You forked out da dough for some Ivy school and dees hoodlums abused y’daughta! Dats not right! And Mr Craig, y’daughta was drunk! She was under 21, Hello?
Dad: But the DA said… whats it now…”Just because she was drunk, doesn’t mean she isn’t a skanky hoe bag”
T.P: Good gawd! These small town hicks – all think they are on Da Bachelor er something! “Check me out with my edjacation and ethics”. Mr C, I can getcha a real ringer like Big Tish ta reopen the case!
Dad: Big Tish? Sounds scary?
T.P: She’s Frikken ‘UGE! Real mean streak, hates men, gets em convicted like all de time! Bada-bing. You want shit taken care of? You need T.P, baby!
Dad and Lucy: Wow!
Mom: I told you, honey, Mr Guiffra is the best! winks at T.P

*T.P: I’ll moytalise ‘em! I will get these guys faces on da nooz! I got my guy at CBS, I’ll slip him the details – all the choice cuts if you get my meaning! They will be ruined!

Dad: Mr Guiffra, you are a god send! Maybe my donations to the church are paying off?

*T.P: I’m thinking 5 millions dollars! I take 30%! We sue da school, da boys, da bar – we sue everyone and their lil’ dawgs too! If you wanna catch a whale, you gotta break a few eggs!

Dad: But I don’t care about that, I’m Mr Money-Bags. I want these boys to go to jail! Then the chaps at the country club will have to give me back my 7 iron.
T.P.: Yeah yeah, that too, but criminal charges are a crap-shoot, but we can get them on the civil side! I take 30%

*Dad: But that won’t save my reputation?

T.P: Oh-ho, you’re a good man, Mr Craig, I can tell, real innocent in the ways of the world! Remember O.J.?
Dad: Yes, black man, killed his wife.

“ T.P: Did he? Hey hey now! No criminal conviction! But paid big time in the Civil so he is guilty where it counts! taps his temple Criminal is tricky, what if theres dumocrats in the jury? Civil? Balance of probabilities! I got your probabilities right here! grabs crotch, winks at Lucy Slam-dunk, thanks for coming! I take 30%.

Mom: We can do this, darling! rubs his arm We NEED Mr Guiffra to join us... on the case...
Lucy: Please can we, daddy?
Dad: Well, Fam! Sounds like I can still save this situation! Let us pray!
Lucy: Ohh, lets get on our knees!
T.P: …I take 30%...

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-29 21:03 UTC #4580

An AI version of this would go viral. Title? "I Love Loosely"?

@janedoe12026-10-29 02:43 UTC edited #4545

I asked AI if Hotel Administration was just a easy way for wealthy students to obtain a "prestigious" degree from an Ivy League school for legacy family prestige as opposed to actual qualifying skills.

Ironically most of the students who graduate from Hotel Administration do not enter the hotel (hospitality) industry. They tend to end up randomly in a somewhat predictable career as seen.

The school even permits students to use their family businesses and their work as practical part of their degree. So, if Lucy Craig worked for her PhD mommy doing rich folks consultations, she would get credit towards her Hotel Administration degree.

The entire ivy league school racket is built for rich kids to fake their way through an education, party, do drugs, drink, snort ket off penises, and have multiple orgies. When college is over, and they have their prestigious Cornell degree they go to work for daddy at his financial firm.

AI response...

Your theory has merits:

1. The Ivy League credential. A graduate receives a Cornell University bachelor's degree, regardless of whether the student's eventual career directly involves hotel management.

2. Family business succession. Someone whose parents own hotels, real estate, investment companies, or other businesses may already have a career opportunity waiting. The Cornell degree can reinforce their credibility as a future executive.

3. Networking among affluent families. A prestigious business school provides access to potential investors, executives, future business partners, and influential alumni. Those relationships may have value beyond the education itself.

4. Different financial pressures. Someone with substantial family wealth may not need to obtain a competitive job immediately after graduation. A student without those resources may depend on securing employment to repay educational expenses and build financial independence.

5. The school explicitly accommodates family-business experience. Cornell allows students to petition to count qualifying work in a family-owned business toward the degree's practical experience requirement, subject to advance approval and verification.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-29 18:30 UTC #4568

I tried to get ai to make a ruling based on her statement and it woukdnt commit

@janedoe12026-10-28 18:17 UTC #4531

We will be bootlegging the netflix Jane Doe v. Cornell (marketing stunt) that streams tomorrow.

From our home projector. We will fix the sound issue.

*fair use, educational, criticism, controversy, altered (not original) and created by admins themselves (the video of a video is far different than the screen recording of a video).

Anyways, we don't care, we will publish it, in full, tomorrow, so that you don't have to pay for it.

“The fact that society may find speech offensive is not a sufficient reason for suppressing it.”
-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, majority opinion, 485 U.S. at 55.

wDMnORJbAmYx43AF.mp4

20261028_130120.mp4

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous2026-10-28 20:34 UTC #4535

The Cornell 7 should sue for this hit-piece, it shrieks "reckless disregard for the truth"

Who IsJane DoeReally?

Controversial cases still require evidence, process, and room for dissent.

Reporting that helped frame the public questions

Articles & analysis

Take the Rice Purity Quiz As If You Were Lucy Craig

Rice Purity, Mom Lore, and Lucy Craig

Reproduction of Key Text Messages

The 20-Year Loophole?

Lucy Craig Wants Another 60 Days. The Court Should Say No.

BREAKING: Jacqueline Kelly, the Cornell Graduate Who Must Now Prove She Can Investigate Cornell

Documents should be inspectable, searchable, and quotable in context.

New docket entries · last 24 hours

Topics controlled by the administrators; comments controlled by their authors.

Latest comments

Comments & replies

Who Is
Jane Doe
Really?