{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"DigitalDocument","altText":"Title IX Findings (Redacted)","alternateName":"EF2026_0292_John_Doe_v_Cornell_University_OTHER_COURT_FILED_D_44.pdf","caption":"Title IX Findings (Redacted)","contentUrl":"https://lucycraig.blog/media/485/raw","datePublished":"2026-10-19T11:45:55+00:00","description":"Title IX Findings (Redacted)","encodingFormat":"application/pdf","identifier":"485","isAccessibleForFree":true,"machineReadable":{"json":"https://lucycraig.blog/media/485/index.json","markdown":"https://lucycraig.blog/media/485/index.md"},"name":"Title IX Findings (Redacted)","ocrStatus":"ready","ocrText":"--- Page 1 ---\nTNDEX NO. BF2026~0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index # : EF2026-0292\nCORNELL UNIVERSITY\nCornell Office of Civil Rights \u2014 Hearing Panel Decision (94428)\nAugust 18, 2025\nLI as eemcmnioteamiai En ah\nLL, PR PI eessnnscsicosonivevvncennnceninennnencsininiibnienenmsnatencemnteirncntesavemneisivigenean 9 hie sevieae\nIl. Procedural Over Viel s.csisrcssscsnsercenmmreascienissiontannnaenranaiieaneamusnnnnareniigese 3\nIV. Findings and Responsibility Determinations .............cccccceesesseeseeesse ceee ceeeeeeeeseeseesteeeeee O\nA. Undisputed Relevant Facts \u2014 October 19 and 20, 2024.0... ceeeeeseee ceeeeteseeeteeeeeeeeteeeee O\nB. Complainant\u2019s First Consumption of Ketamine ............cceeceeceeee ceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteetteeeeseees LO\n1. Complaint Charges Against MT ............ Seiniecrnmenteacecanmmmummitaas LE\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence... 1 ceceeeeesesesteeeseeeeeeeeseeeseeeeseeeeseeeetteees L2\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to TD 16\nD. Complainant\u2019s Second Consumption of Ketamine ..0.........ececeeeeeeseeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeseees 19\n1. Complaint Charges Against iii ti pianstnic neste Rebs secapeseassndneevensennsiidines Cease MR\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...........ccceeceessesesseeeseeesseeeeseseseeeeeeeesseeeeeeees 22\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii evnauceuiatnartseinesenaeneeuniisestincese- at\nF, Respondent .... seem sees i a SST rcpt ss nS Aa PANT\n1. Complaint Charges Against Respondent fi ssnsiseiebeinacinsiensisbibesiviiigeseaaniabintsuntannsnsonsssiiiessdiin Ol\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence. ...............esesssesssesseesceesesesceesessseeesseeseeseetsesens OD\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to Respondent fj sidgbewnsantisonnancsssnaniiasnchee neue, OO\ni, I risers eee eee\n1. Complaint Charges Against ii beceesseeessesesseeesaeeeaeceeeseeeeeesecteeeeteeseeeesteee DO\n2 \u2018Party Accounts and Additional Evidence............ccccceessceseeesseeesseeeeeeeseeeseeeseeeesesseeees DO\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect mC saceseaeeseseeesseeesseesssseeseeees 42\nEi, I ieee cer cnacmmnmennmmemmmammnmn\u00aeS\n1. Complaint Charges Against III ccc ccccccccsssssseeeeeeeeesensssses 43\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...........ccccseesseeeseeeeseceseeesseeeeteseseeseeseeeseseseees 44\ni\noor Panel Decision \u201ci mee Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 8.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 1 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 2 ---\nTNDEX NO. BF2026\"0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect Net I scisssceascanssscrsinosnocnes 49\n1. Complaint Charges Against III ccc ccccccesssssssseeeeeeeersnsnes 52\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidenve.....c..esssscscsessssssvsrsdestssccesssecanenssnesssvccesocevaseeuss OME\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii a\nTI eric ninenerrerenemencemmmciancniccmnan nom OM\n1. Complaint anges dh gpl TE corcrscoseceommonesomucersncceeneiscumsnnnsonenns cssvone 248\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...............ccssccssescsssesseccsscscsseeseesssscesssssssssees 4\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii bee seeaee seeessteeeeteessestees OO\nV. Sanctions and Recommendations .............csseeceesseecceeceecceseceeeeess sf cesceece cessceesceseeeeeeeeeeees OD\nEE etre retsesecrreicsecicnmmeriemnteeronerreemnsement anat astcantrmmenmmnnnesencan il\nBh, I vrescccrinccmmcmccmmnmcccsnnnacn usue mimonspnssucimuncasccamnncese tt\nC, Dearne I csasasncrnaniacanasasaasacsimiantatondsia \u2018celasascaiaa disiacee saaninibaionaneadaaihonean AA\nD. WR... ee ec cccssceeeeeeeeeeeeetnen 9\nnnn\nI\nCO, TR cccnnrmcmcnens snicenscmmmmncnmmmmnmnnmansennmaceian Te\nH. Recommendations to the University ...........ccccsecssesesseesseeceseeesseeeeeeesseseseseseeeteseteseteees IO\nVI. Appeal Information... ... ...cccccccssssssossssscsssscsscccsscscsssssssvssssssssssesssessccesssssssssssssssssssseses OT\nii\neer Pane! Decision \u201ci mass Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 2 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 3 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. BF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nCORNELL UNIVERSITY\nCornell Office of Civil Rights \u2014 Hearing Panel Decision (94428)\nAugust 18, 2025\nI. Introduction\nThis matter involves conduct that Cornell University (the \u201cUniversity\u201d) undergraduate student\nBE Complainant\u201d) reported to the Comell Office of Civil Rights (COCR)! regarding\nher experiences on October 19 and 20, 2024, at the Chi Phi Fraternity house located at 107\nEdgemoor Lane in Ithaca, New York (the \u201cChi Phi house\u2019), on the Cornell University (the\n\u201cUniversity\u201d) campus. Complainant met with COCR and provided an initial in erview on\nNovember 14, 2024. The University initiated a Formal Complaint on November 22, 2024,\nalleging that the following University undergraduates and then-members of the Chi Phi\nFraternity (the \u201cfraternity\u201d or \u201cChi Phi\u201d) engaged in prohibited conduct on the night of October\n19 into the early morning hours of October 20, 2024 (the \u201cOctober 19 incidents\u201d):\nee (\nhii). and (\u2018 *; collectively, \u201cRespondents\u201d and\nwith Complainant, the \u201cparties\u201d). The Formal Complaint alleged that Respondents variously\nengaged in conduct constituting sexual assault sexual exploitation, and/or aiding prohibited\nconduct, as prohibited by University Policy 6.4.7\nUniversity Investigator Samantha Freeburn (the \u201cInvestigator\u2019\u2019) investigated the Formal\nComplaint charges pursuant to the University\u2019s Procedures for Resolution of Reports Against\nStudents Under Cornell University Policy 6.4 (the \u201cProcedures\u201d). The Investigator summarized\nthe relevant evidence collected in an Investigative Report (the \u201cIR\u201d) with accompanying\nappendices.*\nA three-member Hearing Panel (the \u201cPanel\u201d) conducted a live hearing (the \u201chearing\u201d) pursuant\nto the Procedures on May 2, 5, 12-15, 20-22, and 27-29, 2025. This Decision outlines the\n\u2018 At the time, COCR was named the Office of Institutional Equity & Title IX (OTETIX).\nAs di cussed further in Section III below, Complainant filed a Formal Complaint with OIETIX on January 16,\n2025, which modified the Formal Complaint initiated by the University on November 22, 2024. That Formal\nCompla nt was further updated on March 13, 2025 (the \u201cFormal Complaint\u201d). All references herein to the Formal\nComplaint are to the March 13 updated Formal Complaint.\n3 Charges specific to each Respondent are included in Sections IV.C, IV.E, IVF, IV.G, IV.H, IV. I, and IV.J below.\n* All citations to materials in this Hearing Panel Decision (the \u201cDecision\u201d) reference the evidentiary record, which\nincludes the appendices accompanying the IR (\u201cApp.\u201d) and hearing transcripts (\u201cTrans.\u201d). All quotations herein are\nexcerpted from such materials and retain their original spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization, unless\notherwise indicated, except that non-material edits in punctuation and capitalization were made to certain quotations\nfor clarity.\nPage 1 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 3 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 3 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 4 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. BF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\ninvestigation and hearing process, summarizes the Panel\u2019s findings, and provides the Panel\u2019s\ndeterminations regarding the Formal Complaint charges and applicable University policy.\nAs discussed further in Section IV below, upon due consideration of all information summarized\nin the Investigative Report and submitted by parties and witnesses in interviews, in writing, and\nat the hearing, the Panel found by a preponderance of the evidence:\n| a\ne Respondent iis responsible for attempted sexual exploitation in violation of the\nPolicy. He is not responsible for sexual assault.\nae\nSanctions imposed by the Panel, as well as recommendations to the University based on its\nfindings, may be found in Section V below.\nIl. Applicable Policy\nIn assessing the Formal Complaint allegations, the Panel applied the definitions of sexual\nexploitation, sexual assault, aiding prohibited conduct, and attempting to commit prohibited\nconduct set forth in Section 3 of the Procedures. The Procedures define sexual exploitation, in\nrelevant part, as:\n[I]ntentionally [. . . o]bserving another person when that person is nude or engaged in\nsexual activity without the knowledge and consent of the person observed [. . .]; [. . .] and\nPage 2 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 4 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 4 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 5 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n[c]ausing another person to become incapacitated with the intent of making that person\nvulnerable to nonconsensual sexual assault or sexual exploitation.\n\nThe Procedures define sexual assault as \u201c(1) sexual intercourse or (2) sexual contact (3) without\naffirmative consent.\u201d The further definitions and provisions related to sexual assault under the\nPolicy are incorporated herein by reference.\n\nRegarding aiding prohibited conduct, the Procedures provide, \u201cA person aids prohibited\nconduct if, with the intent to promote or facilitate such conduct, that person helps another person\ncommit the prohibited conduct.\u201d\n\nRegarding attempting to commit prohibited conduct, the Procedures provide, \u201cA person\nattempts to commit prohibited conduct if, with the intent to commit such conduct, that person\nengages in conduct directly tending toward completion of the prohibited conduct.\u201d\n\nIll. Procedural Overview*\n\nOn November 8, 2024, the Director of the University\u2019s Office of Sorority and Fraternity Life\nfiled an incident report with OIETIX regarding recently-alleged sexual assault and substance use\nat the Chi Phi house. On November 14, Complainant met with the Investigator and University\nTitle [IX Coordinator Lauren Branchini (the \u201cTitle IX Coordinator\u2019\u2019), as well as representatives\nfrom the Cornell University Policy Department (CUPD) and the University\u2019s Office of Student\nConduct and Community Standards (OSCCS). During that meeting, Complainant requested a\nformal complaint under the Policy. She was interviewed by the Investigator and CUPD\nInvestigator Jeff Northrop that same day (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 14 interview\u201d). On\nNovember 15, Complainant was interviewed by the Investigator, Investigator Northrop, and\nOSCCS Investigator Sevyn Hardy (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 15 interview\u201d). Also on that date,\nComplainant reviewed, signed, and submitted to CUPD a written statement regarding the\nOctober 19 incidents (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 15 CUPD statement\u201d).\n\nAfter initial assessment, the Title IX Coordinator initiated a formal complaint and investigation\nregarding the information provided. Complainant was notified of this decision on November 21,\n2024, on which date she informed the Title IX Office that she wished to be a party to the matter.\nOn November 22, the Title LX Coordinator signed a University complaint and notified\nRespondents of the same in writing. The Investigator began collecting information\u2014including\nby way of investigative interviews with parties and witnesses\u2014shortly thereafter. On January 14,\n2025, Complainant submitted an updated, signed version of the Formal Complaint (the \u201cJanuary\n14 Formal Complaint\u201d), by which she joined the matter as a party; Respondents received written\n\n5 This Decision summarizes the procedural background of the matter. Additional details in this regard may be found\nin the Investigative Report and Appendices thereto, as well as within the hearing transcripts and record, which are\nincorporated herein by reference.\n\nPage 3 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {ij 5 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 5 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 6 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnotice of the same, as well as a copy of Complainant\u2019s January 14 Formal Complaint, on January\n16.\n\nOn January 22, 2025, the parties received all information related to the January 14 Formal\nComplaint that had been collected by the Investigator thusfar.\n\nInitial investigative interviews with parties and witnesses in this matter took place as follows:\n\ne December 3, 2024: University undergraduate student | F a: his\n\n\u201cinterview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 6, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 9, 2024: f (his \u201cDecember 9 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 9, 2024: University undergraduate student ii\ne December 9, 2024: University undergraduate student her\n\n\u201cinterview\u201d\u2019)\ne December 10, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 11, 2024: (his \u201cDecember 11 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 13, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 16, 2024: Respondent fii] (his \u201c\u201cDecember 16 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 17, 2024: University undergraduate student J\n\ne December 17, 2024: University undergraduate \u2014\u2014\u2014 her\n\u201cDecember 17 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: Po (his \u201cDecember 18 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: (his \u201cinterview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: University undergraduate ae\n\ne December 19, 2024: National Chi Phi fraternity organization staff member .\n\ne December 19, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 19, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 20, 2024: University undergraduate student J\ne December 23, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 23, 2024: University undergraduate student his\n\n\u201cinterview\u201d)\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student f\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student iii\ne January 7, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 8, 2025: PF (his \u201cJanuary 8 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne January 8, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 9, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 16, 2025:\n\nPage 4 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 6 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 6 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 7 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\ne January 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\ne January 27, 2025: Llony (his \u201cJanuary 27 interview\u201d)\n\nParty follow-up interviews and additional witness interviews then took place as follows:\n\ne February 4, 2025: University undergraduate student __........_ ]\n\ne February 4, 2025: University undergraduate student [|\ne February 7, 2025: Complainant (her \u201cFebruary 7 interview\u2019)\ne February 7, 2025: University undergraduate student i\n\ne February 10, 2025: (his \u201cFebruary 10 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne February 10, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 12, 2025: University undergraduate student i\ne February 13, 2025: Complainant\n\ne February 13, 2025:\ne February 21, 2025: (en\n\ne February 24, 2025: Responden{i\ne February 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 25, 2025: University undergraduate student\ne February 27, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 28, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne March 3, 2025:\n\u00a2 March 5, 2025:\n\nIn total, the Investigator conducted over 50 interviews during the investigation, including with 32\nwitnesses and all parties except who declined to participate in an interview in\nthis matter.\u00b0\n\nOn March 12, 2025, Complainant filed an updated Formal Complaint, which added charges to\nthe January 14 Formal Complaint. Respondents received a copy of the updated Formal\nComplaint on March 13. Consistent with the Procedures, the parties were provided with the\ninvestigative record and notified of the opportunity to respond to the same on March 21.\n\nThe parties were notified of the Hearing Panel members on March 28 and April 4, 2025, and that\nAttorney Meaghan Borys would act as Hearing Chair for the matter on April 2. The Investigative\nReport was issued on April 16, 2025. Consistent with the Procedures, the Panel held the hearing\nvia Zoom videoconference on May 2, 5, 12-15, 20-22, and 27-29. Complainant and all\nRespondents except for i submitted written opening statements, submitted closing\n\n\u00ae Consistent with Procedures Section 21.1, the Panel did not draw any negative inference with respect ~~ =\n\u2019s decision in this regard.\n\nPage 5 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 7 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 7 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 8 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nstatement(s)\u2014orally and/or in writing\u2014and answered questions of the Hearing Chair, Panel\nmembers, their own advisor, and other parties\u2019 advisors during the hearing.\u2019 The following\nwitnesses also appeared at the hearing and answered questions posed by the Hearing Chair, Panel\n\nmembers, and party advisors:\n8\n\nAfter the close of the hearing, the Panel received written closing statements as submitted and\nengaged in deliberations on its findings, determinations, and sanctions on June 2, 5, 16-17, 26\n\n30, and July 7, 2025.?\nIV. Findings and Responsibility Determinations\n\nThe following findings and determinations were made by a majority vote f the Panel based on a\npreponderance of the evidence (\u201cmore-likely-than-not\u201d) standard and resulted from evaluating all\nrelevant information collected by the Investigator and during the hearing process, including both\ninculpatory and exculpatory evidence.'\u00b0 Credibility assessments were not based on an\nindividual\u2019s status as Complainant, Respondent, or witness for any particular allegation(s).\nConsistent with Procedures Section 26.2, the Panel presumed all Respondents not responsible for\nany Policy violation prior to making its final determinations.\n\nA. Undisputed Relevant Facts \u2014 October 19 and 20, 2024\n\nBased on its review of the evidentiary record, the Panel considered the following facts regarding\nthe night of October 19 into October 20, 2024, to be materially undisputed and supported by a\npreponderance of the evidence in the record, which is incorporated herein by reference. The\nPanel included such undisputed facts in its findings and determinations, accordingly.\n\nOn the night of October 19, 2024, Complainant consumed alcohol before arriving at the Chi Phi\nhouse at the invitation of a. The fraternity was hosting a party that night.\n\n7 Per Procedures Sect on 21.1 erent forfeited his opportunity to testify at the hearing in this matter by way\ni\n\nof written opening statement, direct questioning, and closing statement(s) because he declined to participate in an\ninvestigative interview that the Investigator deemed necessary. (IR, 12) was offered the opportunity\n\nto cross-cxamince other partics and witnesses through his advisor and to answer questions of the Hearing Chair,\nPanel, and other parties\u2019 advisors as a witness. He elected to ask questions of other parties and witnesses through his\nadvisor, but not to answer questions or attend the hearing. Consistent with Procedures Sections 21.1 and 21.2, and\nrecogni ing that participation in the process was entirely voluntary for all parties, the Panel did not draw any\nnegative inference from his decisions in this regard.\n\nhearing but declined to participate.\n\n\u00b0 Consistent with the Procedures, the Hearing Chair was present for and participated in deliberations, but did not\nvote with respect to findings of fact, determinations of responsibility, or sanctions.\n\n10 While this section provides various summaries of evidence as relevant to the Panel\u2019s findings and determinations,\nit is not intended to, nor does it, provide a comprehensive review of the entire evidentiary record with respect to all\ncircumstances related to the Complaint and reviewed by the Panel.\n\nPage 6 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 8 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 8 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 9 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nae a sober monitor for the party, and were the\nfraternity\u2019s social chairs at the time. Shortly after Complainant\u2019s arrival, sked\n\nComplainant if she would like to engage in a \u201cthreesome.\u201d Complainant understood this\nsuggestion to be indicative of sexual activity among herself,\nand expressed interest. As of that night, Complainant had strong romantic feelings for and sexual\nnd had for some time. The two then proceeded to a bedroom on the\nsecond floor of the house\u2014belonging to ' a. and University\nundergraduate student known within the fraternity as the \u201calumni\nroom.\u201d The alumni room was located off a balcony area where individuals often gathered and\nwas generally regarded by members of the fratemity as a social room, serving both as a bedroom\nfor , and (Mand as a generally-unlocked space where\nfraternity members (and, in particular, sophomore fraternity members such as hs\nGD ould commonly congregate after parties. The funiture in the room at the time\nconsisted of three beds, one loveseat-style couch, and at least one chair\n\nae .:: present in the alumni room when Complainant and arrived.\"\n\nNo others were present. Complainant and ere friends at the time and had\nengaged in sexual activity together in the past. After Complainant and RE cvtered\nthe alumni room on October 19, the three parties engaged in sexual activity, for which\nComplainant provided consent. Specifically, Complainant engaged in oral sex with\n\nGo or near the couch, while GR en caged in vaginal-penile sex with her from\nbehind (the \u201cthreesome activity\u201d). The parties ended the threesome activity after some minutes.\nAt or around that time, the three consumed liquor and smoked marijuana together. Ketamine was\nintroduced among the group, as well, as discussed further in Section IV.B below. Ketamine was a\nsubstance used by multiple individuals in the Chi Phi house at the time, including i:\nwho had overdosed on or about October 18, 2024.\n\nand a third person\n\ninterest in\n\nAt some point, BE n0ved himself to a bed in the room and fell asleep or was\notherwise unconscious. Complainant and BE enained together on or near the couch.\nAt or around 1:00 a m. on October 20, 2024, Lexy entered the alumni room and\nengaged in sexual activity with Complainant, as discussed further in Section IV.C below. While\n\na 2: present in the alumni room, woke, and LT\n\nparticipated in contemporaneous sexual activity with Complainant for some amount of time, as\ndiscussed further in Section IV.H below. LT} left the room shortly thereafter.\n\n'l The Panel recognized the disputed issue of whether accompanied Complainant and PY\nLz. the alumni room initially (as recalled by or whether he was already in the room when\n\nthey arrived (as recalled by Complainant). The Panel did not consider a finding on the same to, s\ndeterminations and noted that was nonetheless present when Complainant and\nentered the room.\n\nPage 7 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - i 9 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 9 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 10 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAt or just after 2:00 a.m., Pe entered the alumni room. While present in the alumni\nroom, he consumed ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body, as discussed further in Section IV.I below.\nAt or around 2:15 a.m., PF entered the alumni room. While present, he kissed\nComplainant and consumed ketamine off her body, as discussed further in Section IV.E below. At\nor around 2:30 a.m., Respondents entered the alumni room.\n\nAt or around 5:00 a.m.,!\u201d Complainant, nn and P| moved from the\nalumni room to a common space on the fourth floor of the Chi Phi house known within the\nfraternity as the \u201cPentz\u201d\u2014off of which was the bedroom shared \\y iii and i\nafter which they proceeded into a smaller room adjacent to the Pentz called the \u201cfoffice.\u201d\nThe foffice included both storage space and an alcove where had arranged a work\nspace with at least one desk, a computer, and two chairs. While in the foffice, sexual activity\noccurred involving Complainant engaging in oral sex with , as discussed further\nin Section IV.I below, and vaginal-penile sex between as\n\ndiscussed further in Section IV.J below. After that sexual activity ended, Complainant slept in\nPs bed with him before returning to her residence.\n\nBetween 1:42 a.m. and 2:27 a.m. on October 20, 2024, multiple Respondents wrote messages\nand otherwise interacted with a Snapchat group chat titled \u201cChi Phi Actives\u201d (the \u201cActives\ngroup\u201d) that consisted of approximately 40 or more active members of the Chi Phi fraternity.\nThat sequence of activity was captured by a videorecording contained in Appendix C (the\n\u201cSnapchat video\u201d)!? and summarized by the Investigator during the investigation (App. C, 21).\nComplainant had no contemporaneous knowledge of the existence of such messages. The\nSnapchat video showed a message at | 42 a m. that read, \u201cFree pussy in alum pu[.]\u201d (App. C, 21)\nThe Panel found by a preponderance of the evidence\u2014including multiple Respondents\u2019\nstatements\u2014that \u201calum\u201d referred to the alumni room and that \u201cpu\u201d was an abbreviation of the\nphrase \u201cpull up,\u201d which indicated an invitation. The Panel further found that the word \u201cpussy\u201d\nmore likely than not referred to female sexual anatomy, specifically, the vagina.'*\n\nComplainant corr sponded directly vith i i _ by text message after the\n\nnight of October 19, 2024.\n\n2 Based on the preponderance of the evidence in the record\u2014including information submitted y\neo Panel found 8 ci time on appeared in the alumni room at or around 5:00 a.m\nand requested, in some form, that all those present exit the room. The Panel further credited tha ii\nwere vi io at that time.\n\n13 The Snapchat video was submitted anonymously. The recording depicted an unknown individual\u2019s cell phone\nscreen, on which was displayed the Actives group Snapchat messages discussed herein. Based on the preponderance\nof the evidence, the Panel understood that the unknown user whose cell phone was recorded by way of the Snapchat\nvideo necessarily was both a member of the Actives group and the Chi Phi fraternity as of October 20, 2024.\n\n4 Tn addition to the evidentiary record, the Panel considered the reasonable interpretation of the word as commonly\nused\u2014see, e.g., https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pussy, defining \u201cpussy\u201d as \u201cvulva,\u201d \u201csexual\nintercourse,\u201d and \u201cthe female partner in sexual intercourse.\u201d\n\nPage 8 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 10 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 10 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 11 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAs discussed throughout this Decision, numerous parties consumed the controlled substance\nketamine in powdered form on the night of October 19 into the early morning hours of October\n20, 2024. According to the United States Department of Justice (\u201cDOJ\u201d) and Drug Enforcement\nAgency (\u201cDEA\u201d) 2024 Fact Sheet on Ketamine (the \u201cDOJ and DEA fact sheet\u201d) contained in the\nevidentiary record, ketamine is a \u201cdissociative anesthetic that has some hallucinogenic effects.\nKetamine distorts the perception of sight and sound and makes the user feel disconnected and not\nin control. [. . . I]t makes patients feel detached from their pain and environment.\u201d (App. B, 344)\nThe fact sheet continues, \u201cKetamine can induce a state of sedation (feeling calm and relaxed),\nimmobility, relief from pain, and amnesia (no memory of events while under the influence of the\ndrug) and is used for the dissociative sensations and hallucinogenic effects. Ketamine has also\nbeen used to facilitate sexual assault.\u201d (App. B, 344) It also provides, \u201cKetamine comes in a [. . .]\nwhite or off-white powder. Powdered ketamine [. . .] is typically packaged in [. . .] small plastic\nbags [and . . .] is cut into lines known as bumps and snorted. [. . .] The onset of effects is rapid\nand often occurs within a few minutes of taking the drug[. . . It] may cause unwanted side effects\nsuch as: agitation, depression, cognitive difficulties, unconsciousness, and amnesia.\u201d (App. B,\n344-345) The DOJ and DEA fact sheet also indicates that cer ain effects of ketamine may last\n\u201capproximately 30 to 60 minutes[.]\u201d (App. B, 345)\n\nThe scientific paper \u201cKetamine\u201d contained in the evidentiary record (the \u201cKetamine paper\u201d)\nconfirmed that ketamine is a substance approved for use in the medical field \u201cas a general\nanesthetic.\u201d (App. B, 346) The Ketamine paper provided that, in \u201cdoses below a certain\nthreshold, ketamine produces analgesia and sedation. However, [above that threshold], the\ncharacteristic dissociative state abruptly appears,\u201d which \u201cis inconsistent with [. . .] moderate\nsetation or deep sedation[.]\u201d (App. B, 348) The scientific article \u201cKetamine: 50 Years of\nModulating the Mind\u201d contained in the evidentiary record (collectively with the DOJ and DEA\nfact sheet and the Ketamine paper, the \u201cexpert materials\u201d) similarly noted about the use of the\ndrug in a clinical setting, \u201cKetamine produces an unusual state, sometimes referred to as\n\u2018dissociative anesthesia[.]\u2019 [. . .] During this dissociative state, patients might appear awake [. . .]\nbut they are unable to respond to sensory input.\u201d (App. B, 359) It continued, \u201cAt lower\n[\u2018recreational\u2019] doses, stimulant effects predominate, and users experience mild dissociation with\nhallucinations and a distortion of time and space,\u201d with \u201ceffects resolv[ing] approximately 2\nh[ours] after acute ketamine use[.]\u201d (App. B, 362) The Ketamine paper indicated that the \u201cmost\ncommon adverse drug reactions associated with ketamine are nausea, vomiting, dizziness,\ndiplopia, drowsiness, dysphoria, and confusion.\u201d (App. B, 350)\n\nComplainant consumed ketamine in powdered form on the night of October 19, 2024. During the\nhearing on May 2, 2025, Complainant described her experience of the effects of ketamine to\ninclude feeling like her \u201clights were on, but no one was home,\u201d which she indicated was a state\nof \u201cvague consciousness\u201d wherein she \u201cd[id]n\u2019t know what\u2019s going on from thing to thing.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/2; 21, 63, 64) At the hearing on May S, she elaborated on her experience of that effect\nby saying, \u201cYou look like an operating human being. [. . . YJou don\u2019t look dead or asleep\n\nPage 9 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ij 11 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 11 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 12 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnecessarily. So, lights are on, but nobody\u2019s home. Your brain is not functioning at its proper\nlevel.\u201d (Trans. 5/5; 90) The Panel found this \u201clights on, nobody home\u201d description consistent\nwith the known \u201cdissociative\u201d effect of ketamine repeatedly emphasized in the expert materials.\n\nB. Complainant\u2019s First Consumption of Ketamine\n\nComplainant consistently recounted that she consumed ketamine vi iii\n\nclose in time to their threesome activity on October 19, 2024. She referenced it as \u201cthe first time\u201d\nshe did ketamine that night during recorded telephone calls with\nthat took place on or about November 6 and 7. (App. B, 171-173; App. C, 24, 28, 38) In her\nNovember 14 interview, she explained that while she did not have an independent memory of\nconsuming ketamine for the first time that evening, she nonetheless \u201ckn[e]w\u201d it occurred based\non an experience with ketamine later in the night, when she \u201cremember[ed] thinking [it] was\n[her] second time doing it\u201d and that she \u201calready did it once [before]\u201d (App. A; 47, 70)\nComplainant likewise indicated in her November 15 CUPD statement about that experience, \u201c[I]t\nhit me that I had taken [k]etamine on the couch with fd and\nearlier in the night. [. . .] I remember smoking marijuana but he ket mine [. . .] I have zero\nmemory of. All I could remember was the feeling that I had already done [k]etamine once[.]\u201d\nComplainant said at the hearing on May 2, 2025, \u201cI know that it was given to me.\n\nalso did it. It was on the couch[;] it was the three of us had ketamine. [.\n. .] I know it sounds super weird to say. I know it happened, but I don\u2019t remember it.\u201d (Trans.\n5/2; 32)\n\nIn November 7, 2024, recorded call with Complainant (the \u2018November 7\ncall\u201d), he said about himself, Complainant, and in the alumni room that night,\n\u201c[W]e\u2019re on the couch, and it\u2019s star ing. And then after like 10 minutes, we slowed down a bit.\nThen Dy pulled out the [\u2018liquor\u2019], and we drank it. And then we started smoking\nfrom there, maybe another five to 10 minutes afterwards. And then the K''*! started happening.\u201d\n(App. C, ?)/ also submitted a written statement during the investigation dated\nMarch 17, 2025 (his \u201cMarch 17 statement\u201d), regarding what occurred after the threesome\nactivity. He wrote in this regard, \u201cI inquired for ketamine fom i . . ..] He poured\nthe powder on a small key for himself and snorted it, then handed me the key and the bag which\ncontained the ketamine. I poured myself several keys\u2019 worth and inhaled them in rapid\nsuccession.\u201d (App. B, 259) He continued, \u201c[Complainant] did not ingest any ketamine at this\n\npoint However, she shared a sip of Jamaican liquor along with me iii. (App.\nB, 259)\n\nIn TE interview. he said about the threesome activity and thereafter, \u201c[W]e started\nhaving sex in my room, the three of us. [. . .] We stopped, took a break. And that\u2019s when\n\nDi! noticed a bag of ketamine[.. . .| And so, hit offers us, \u2018Hey, do\n\n'S Considering the totality of the circumstances, the Panel understood iy use of the letter \u201cK\u201d in this\nstatement to reference ketamine.\n\nPage 10 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 12 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 12 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 13 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nyou want to do some?\u2019 I said, \u2018Sure.\u2019 [Complainant] declined at that point. So, we didn\u2019t really\npush her past that.\u201d (App. A, 184-185) At the hearing on May 12, 2025, first said\nabout this time of the night, \u201c\u201cWe were all sitting on the couch talking. -\u2014_\u2014%\n\nreaches over, sees [the bag of ketamine], picks it up, asks if we want some.\u201d (Trans. 5/12; 60-61)\nHe also stated, \u201c[Complainant] said no, she\u2019d never done it before. We didn\u2019t ask again.\u201d Later in\n\nthe hearing, when asked about what, if any, substances gave to Complainant\n| said, \u201cI guess, ketamine, alcohol, weed. . . .] Me and did it, we\n\noffered it to her. She chose to take it. We didn\u2019t force her to do anything.\u201d (Trans. 5/12; 149)\n\nIn assessing the totality of the information provided in this regard, the Panel weighed\nComplainant\u2019s description of having ingested ketamine wit against the\n\nlatter two\u2019s account that she did not. The Panel first considered Complainant\u2019s candor regarding\n\nnot having a specific memory of consuming ketamine at that time to be reasonably against her\nself-interest and therefore somewhat indicative of credibility in her account, which the Panel\nnoted was first provided close in time to the October 19 incidents and remained materially\nconsistent thereafter. The Panel also considered Complainant\u2019s lack of ability to remember the\ndetails of this consumption consistent with the typical effects of ketamine described in the expert\nmaterials. Likewise, the Panel noted Complainant\u2019s lack of memory regarding many of her\nsubsequent experiences with iii as discussed in Section IV.C below, and found\nconsumption of ketamine consistent with the same.\n\nBy contrast, the Panel noted tha ii both confirmed that ketamine\n\nconsumption occurred in the alumni room at that time in the night and yet offered materially\ncontrasting memories of how the ketam ne was introduced, which reduced the weight attributed\nto both accounts. In addition, the Panel afforded less weight iii written\nstatement than those made during his recorded call with Complainant, given that his written\nstatement was submitted afte he received notice of the Complaint allegations and therefore after\nhe may have had a general motive to indicate that Complainant did not consume ketamine in his\npresence. Additionally, the Panel noted the apparent discrepancy i iii both stating\nthat Ld alone initiated the use of the ketamine and also using the pronoun \u201cwe\u201d in\nthe same context to indicate that the two ii \u201cdidn\u2019t really push\u201d or \u201cask\u201d Complainant\nabout it. The Panel found that this repeated inconsistency reduced the credibility of his account\nin this regard. The Panel further considered\n\nstatement at the hearing, wherein\nhe grouped ketamine with substances that he and \u201coffered\u201d Complainant and that\n\nshe \u201cchose to take,\u201d to reasonably indicate that she did ingest ketamine with the two of them at\n\nor around the time of the threesome activity.\n\nFinally, the Panel considered the totality of the circumstances presented, including its findings,\ndiscussed in Sections IV.H and IV.J below, that\nComplainant ketamine at later points in the night\n\nboth separately gave\nThe\nPanel therefore considered their provision of ketamine to Complainant at this earlier point of the\n\nPage 11 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 13 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 13 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 14 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCI2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnight to be consistent with a pattern of conduct they each demonstrated later in time. The Panel\nalso considered Complainant\u2019s alcohol consumption prior to her arrival at the Chi Phi house, her\nfriendship wih iii. and her undisputed strong attraction for ii the\nfeeling of which she described in her November [5 interview as a \u201cchokehold,\u201d adding that she\nwould have done \u201canything to please [him]\u201d at the time. (App. A, 35) Understanding a typical\neffect of alcohol to be lowered inhibition in the context of the three parties having engaged in\nsexual activity together and having consumed alcohol and marijuana together, the Panel found\nbased on the preponderance of the evidence that Complainant ingested ketamine with\n\nLi in the alumni room on the night of October 19 close in time to the\n\nthreesome activity.\n\nLe\n\nPage 12 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 14 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 14 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 15 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPage 13 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Hii 15 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 15 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 16 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1I2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 14 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 16 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 16 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 17 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 15 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 17 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 17 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 18 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 16 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 18 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 18 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 19 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 17 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - J 19 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 19 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 20 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nBg\nPage 18 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 20 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 20 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 21 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 19 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision B 21 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 21 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 22 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 20 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 22 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 22 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 23 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 21 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - [ij 23 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 23 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 24 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 22 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 24 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 24 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 25 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 23 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 25 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 25 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 26 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 24 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 26 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 26 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 27 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\neee\n\nPage 25 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 27 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 27 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 28 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 26 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 28 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 28 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 29 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCI2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 27 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 29 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 29 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 30 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 28 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 30 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 30 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 31 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nee\nPage 29 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 31 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 31 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 32 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 30 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 32 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 32 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 33 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nF. Respondent ij\n1. Complaint Charges Against Respondent Ij\n\nAs set forth in the Formal Complaint, Respondent ff was charged with violating the Policy\u2019s\n\nprohibition against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Assault. Specifically, the alleged prohibited\n\nconduct was that he: (a) intentionally viewed Complainant in a state of undress without her\n\nPage 31 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 33 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 33 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 34 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\npermission; and (b) touched his nose to Complainant\u2019s naked body and inhaled a powdered\nsubstance off her body without affirmative consent, including lack of affirmative consent due to\nincapacitation.\n\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence\na. Complainant\n\nIn her November 14 interview, Complainant indicated that, at some point during the night of\nOctober 19, 2024, when she was \u201cnaked\u201d mm ttst~=~S@Y bed, \u201ctwo guys named |\nentered the room. (App. A, 62) She recalled being introduced to them while\n\nwere also in the room. She described them as \u201cstanding\u201d at the foot of the bed,\nadding, \u201cThey felt more like voyeurs than anything in the situation. They didn\u2019t get as\ncomfortable as everybody else did.\u201d Although she was \u201cunsure\u201d of the particular \u201csequence of\nthe[] events,\u201d she then recalled certain interactions vith iii exiting the bed while\nnaked and \u201cflexing,\u201d and being \u201cberated with compliments.\u201d (App. A; 68-70, 72) She also\nindicated tha i asked to ingest ketamine off her body and that she agreed in some\nform. She continued, \u201cI remember lying down and covering my face up. [. . .] And they just\npoured all sorts of stuff all over me and did all sorts of drugs off my body. [. . . S]everal lines\n[were] done by almost everybody.\u201d (App. A, 73) In her November 15 interview, she stated, \u201cI\u2019m\nnot even sure if the two La are in Chi Phi. [. . .] But they all were partaking in the drugs\nbecause they did them off of my body. But I did put my hands over my face at that point.\u201d (App.\nA; 126-127) In her February 7 interview, Complainant said, \u201c[T]he a. as far as I know,\nwere voyeurs. Well, except the times that they did drugs off my body, and who knows if they\ntouched anything while they were doing that[.]\u201d (App. A, 137) Although she did not know what\neither of them looked like after that night, Complainant consistently indicated that either\nRespondent fj or asked if she was okay or otherwise physically supported her\nafter entered the alumni room and told everyone to leave. (See, e.g., App. B, 32)\n\nb. Respondent [\n\nRespondent fi consistently stated in his interviews, documentary submissions, and at the\nhearing that he did not observe Complainant naked at any time nor partake in any drug use while\nin the alumni room on the night of October 19, 2024. At the hearing on May 21, 2025, he\nindicated that he did not know Complainant prior to the night of October 19. During Respondent\nTI December 16 interview, he described being at the party at the Chi Phi house that night, after\nwhich he went iii room. He submitted a record of a ten-second call with\n\nat 2:23 a.m. on October 20. (App. B, 307) In his December 16 interview, he\n\nrecalled inviting I to join him m0 room during that call. He\n\ncontinued, \u201cI was hitting [\u2018a nicotine vape\u2019 | at this point, and it was almost dead[. . . .A]nd by the\n\ntime LDS got there, we sat and talked for about two minutes, and\ngot up and left the room. We didn\u2019t know why[.]\u201d (App. A, 370) About what happened next, he\n\nsaid:\n\nPage 32 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 34 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 34 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 35 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAfter about 10 to 15 minutes with fs still being gone, I checked my phone\nand in [the Actives group] there was a text message [. . .] that said, \u201cFree pussy in\nalumni.\u201d [. . .] I had no idea what the text meant. I was kind of befuddled. So, me and\n\ntalked about it. And the person that sent the text message |\n], he lived in that room, and I knew he had a vape, and my vape had just died. And we\nalso speculated that maybe this is why Daa had got up and left.\n\n(App. A, 370) He added, \u201cSo, my vape had died. I knew lay) had one, and because\nof fs leaving and us not knowing the nature of if this was a joke or what was\n\ngoing on in the [alumni] room, me and decided to go into that room.\u201d (App. A,\n370). During the hearing on May 21, Respondent explained that TE bad actually\n\nleft his room before arrived, without indicating where he was going.\n\nAbout what happened when he and entered the alumni room on October 20,\n\n2024, Respondent SM said during his December 16 interview that he saw Complainant and\nall in or iii bed. He indicated that\n\nComplainant was under bed coverings at the time. He said that he sat on the couch and conversed\nwith iii for some minutes before asking both iii and Complainant if\nthey were \u201call right\u2019\u201d\u2014both of whom responded affirmatively\u2014and exiting the room with\nLoo (App. A, 371) He recalled an interaction with Complainant before exiting in\nwhich she \u201claughed\u201d about both his a first names being mm (App. A,\n372) He estimated that he was in the alumni room for \u201c[n]o more than five minutes\u201d that night.\n(App. A, 380)\n\nAbout his decision to go to the alumni room that night, Respondent fj stated, \u201c[B]y no means\nwere we going there to get free pussy[. . . .] That was not our intentions at all. We were just\nchecking out to see if everything was okay[.]\u201d (App. A, 377) During the hearing on May 21,\n2025, he stated that after seeing the \u201cfree pussy in alumni\u201d message, he \u201cstarted to get kind of\nworried that that\u2019s where LC had went\u201d and that he \u201cbelieve| dy\nwas intoxicated at the time.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 110, 116) He continued, \u201cI was just worried cause\nagain, the text was really out there. I had never seen something like that. [. . .] I just didn\u2019t know\nwhat | sa doing and kind of if something was bad, I wanted to get him out of\nthere.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 110-111) He also said, \u201c[T]he text could have meant anything. There was a\nlot of things going through my head. I didn\u2019t know if there was a lot of girls in there or what was\ngoing on[.. . .] But again, free pussy just seems like someone could have been in danger. It\u2019s just\nfree. What does free mean? Again, I don\u2019t know. That\u2019s why it could have meant anything.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/21; 113) He also said, \u201cIf someone's having sex with someone in the room, they're not\ngonna send that text out. So, again, I just didn't know what was really happening in the room,\u201d\nand, \u201cI just didn\u2019t think it was real.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 111, 114)\n\nRespondent [i further noted that although the alumni room was \u201ca bedroom where a lot of\npeople would go to hang out if they didn\u2019t want to be in their room or if they had nothing to do,\u201d\n\nPage 33 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 35 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 35 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 36 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nhe personally \u201cjust wasn\u2019t really close with the [residents of the room as of October 19, 2024].\nSo, [he]\u2019d go to [his] other friends\u2019 rooms to hang out,\u201d adding, \u201cI was rarely ever in [the alumni\nroom].\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 104)\n\nDuring the investigation, Respondent fi submitted a record of a ketamine test performed by\nOmega Laboratories that indicated that his hair follicles were collected on November 26, 2024,\nand tested for ketamine presence (his \u201cketamine test\u201d). The ketamine test came back \u201c[n]egative\u201d\nfor the drug. (App. B.1; 8) At the hearing on May 21, Respondent Do stated that Omega\nLaboratories personnel told him at the time of collection, \u201c[E]ven if you take [ketamine] one\ntime, it can stay in your hair for up to three to six months.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 168)\n\nc. Additional Evidence\n\nooo er indicated that he \u201ccalled [Respondent [ij] and went to |\n]\u2019s room\u201d at or around 2:23 a.m. on October 20, 2024. (App. B, 272) 1 iii\nDecember 9 interview, he described that he and Respondent fi noted a Snapchat message to the\nActives group that read, \u201cFree pussy in alumni,\u201d after which they went to the alumni room. (App.\nA, 330) He continued, \u201c\u201cWe saw that text and were somewhat concerned but thought it could just\nbe crude humor.\u201d (App. A, 330) He also wrote in his Timeline, \u201c[Respondent fi]\u2019s vape had\ndied, and he wanted to borrow someone else\u2019s. He knew hit had a vape in [the\nalumni] room. [Respondent fj] asked if I wanted to go check it out, and I agreed. [Respondent\nyl also mentioned that he thought was pretty inebriated while they were\nhanging out so we wanted to check on him.\u201d (App. B, 272)\n\nAbout what happened after they entered the alumni room minutes rier, recalled\nseeing Complainant under bed coverings, with all in or on the\nsame bed. He recalled being in the room for \u201c[f]ive minutes, maybe\u201d (App. A, 344) and\nconsistently stated that he both arrived and left with Respondent fi. He likewise consistently\nindicated that he did not observe any drug use or Complainant naked at any time he was present\nin the alumni room that night. On December 9, 2024, signed a document titled\n\u201cAcknowledgement of Understanding of [Respondent = Involvement,\u201d in which he affirmed\nthat Respondent fj \u201cdid not make any physical contact with [Complainant]\u201d and \u201cdid not snort\nor consume drugs on or near |Complainant].\u201d (App. B, 306) At the hearing on May 15, 2025,\nDy indicated that when he inquired about taking a hair follicle test for ketamine, he\n\nwas told by the company Request A Test that the test is accurate for presence of the drug for up\nto \u201c90 days.\u201d (Trans. 5/15; 71)\n\nDuin iii interview, he recalled about after consumed\nketamine off Complainant\u2019s body, \u201ctwo guys walked in, [Respondent fj] and le\n\nThey introduced themselves, started talking, and [Complainant] invited them in.\u201d (App. A, 186)\n\nHe continued, \u201cAnd then, ht | are telling ] about\nhow they did ketamine off of [Complainant\u2019s] chest. [. . .] And then, both\nyl asked her if they could do ketamine off her chest too, because ae |\n\nPage 34 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 36 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 36 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 37 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nhad told them about it. She said yeah, so they did.\u201d (App. A, 187) He did not recall who poured\nthat ketamine or how much they consumed. He also indicated that Complainant \u201cgot up out of\n\nthe bed and started doing like a bodybuilder pose\u201d while iE were in the\n\nalumni room. (App. A, 186)\n\nIn RE | xvary 8 interview, he recalled entering the alumni room in the early\n\nmorning hours of October 20 and talking with Complainant (iii a.\n\nHe continued, \u201cAt some point, then the door opens in the room. I look back and I see\n[Respondent fi] has entered the room. Then, I can\u2019t recall if it was right behind him or a little\nbit later at some point fs walks into the room as well.\u201d In the hearing on May 14,\n2025, RE explained, \u201cI believe sometime shortly before ht asked to\ningest ketamine off of Complainant\u2019s body], I remember actually hearing the door and glancing\nback and seeing them, but I actually don\u2019t recall where they were exactly when he said those\nwords specifically.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 144)\n\nIn his January 27 interview, a :::: that he and i then ingested\n\nketamine off Complainant\u2019s body. In the hearing on May 14, he stated about that time, \u201cI had not\nheard or seen [Respondent fi] since I heard that door open in the moment, but I think I had the\nimpression that they were in the room too somewhere in the background.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 147)\nWhen asked what gave him the impression that Respondent fi was still in the room at that time,\nBE 21swered, \u201cT just didn\u2019t recall hearing the door open again.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 147) In\nhis January 27 interview, he said about what happened next, \u201cI remember at some point,\n[Respondent fi] just comes up to me. I\u2019m not sure what he said, but he just walks up to me\nbecause he\u2019s one of my friends. [. . .] I don\u2019t remember the exact words he said to me, but I just\nremember him coming up to me, and then, going back to talking with, I believe, it was\n\nLa aay (App. A, 428) He recalled that the next thing that happened was Complainant\nexiting the bed and \u201cflexing her muscles to everybody in the room,\u201d after which\n\n\u201cTcame] into the room and basically kick[ed] everyone out[.]\u201d (App. A, 428) He did not\nremember Respondent fj inhaling ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body.\n\neach consistently recalled\u2014both at their respective interviews and at the\nhearing\u2014that they observed Respondent exiting the alumni room at or around 5:00 a.m.\n\nwhen they went to that room with iii and Etisdg\n\nd. The Snapchat Messages\n\nAs discussed in Section IV.A above, the Panel found that the 1:42 a.m. Snapchat message \u201cFree\npussy in alum pu\u201d communicated an invitation for others to go to the alumni room, along with a\nreference to female sexual anatomy. At 2:29 a.m., Respondent fj wrote in the Alumni group,\n\u201cthe alumni shit is not a bit. First hand pov not a bit\u201d (the \u201cnot a bit message\u201d). During the\nhearing on May 21, 2025, Respondent fi said about that message:\n\nPage 35 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 37 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 37 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 38 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nI found out from [someone] passing by as I was walking into the [alumni] room that there\nwas a girl in there. So, I was just saying, I mean, firsthand from somebody else that there\nwas a girl in that room and it\u2019s not a [\u2018joke\u2019], but again, it was an immature and dumb\nkind of just following along with what everybody else was saying in there. I shouldn\u2019t\nhave said it. And it is immature and a stupid text message for sure.\n\n(Trans. 5/21; 152, 153) He indicated that he interacted with that individual and sent the not a bit\n\nmessage while he was outside the alumni room, prior to entering.\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to Respondent fj\n\nProcedures Section 3.6 defines sexual exploitation in relevant part as \u201cintentionally engaging in\n[. .. o]bserving another person when that person is nude or engaged in sexual activity without the\nknowledge and consent of the person observed[.]\u201d Per Procedures Section 3.5, sexual assault is\n\u201c(1) sexual intercourse or (2) sexual contact (3) without affirmative consent.\u201d Sexual contact is\ndefined in relevant part as \u201cintentional sexual touching, however slight, with any object or body\npart\u201d including \u201cintentional touching of another\u2019s body part for the purpose of sexual\ngratification, arousal, humiliation, or degradation.\u201d\n\nRegarding the charges against Respondent fi, the Panel first found the evidentiary record\ninsufficient to show that he observed Complainant nude or engaged in sexual activity without her\nknowledge. Notably, even if Respondent fi] was present when others consumed ketamine off her\nnaked torso and/or when she exited the bed and flexed, the preponderance of the evidence\nshowed that Complainant was aware, by her own account, that she was nude at those times. For\nthis reason, the Panel determined that Respondent fj was not responsible for sexual exploitation\nunder the Policy.\n\nHowever, the Panel considered Procedures Section 3.2, which prohibits attempting to commit\nprohibited conduct, and found that Respondent fj attempted to commit sexual exploitation\nwhen he went into the alumni room in the early morning hours of October 20, 2024. Specifically,\nby Respondent [i's own account, he went to the room, at least in part, because of a Snapchat\nmessage indicating there was \u201cfree pussy in alumni.\u201d Also by Respondent [i's own account, he\nthought \u201csomething [. . .] bad\u201d could be happening in the room, that someone could be \u201cin\ndanger,\u201d and that the situation could involve \u201ca lot of girls.\u201d He also noted that, while he did not\nhave specific knowledge of what was occurring in the room, he thought at the time, \u201cIf\nsomeone's having sex with someone in the room, they're not gonna send that text out.\u201d Taking\nthese statements together, the Panel considered it more likely than not that Respondent fi]\nunderstood that the 1:42 a.m. message indicated some kind of sexual situation involving a\nfemale. The Panel likewise found the objectively reasonable understanding of the message to\nindicate some kind of sexual situation was occurring with a female in the alumni room. In\naddition, although Respondent fj repeatedly indicated that he thought the message was a \u201cjoke\u201d\nor not real, the Panel found such statements unreasonably incompatible with his account that he\nwas sufficiently \u201cworried\u201d about what was happening in the room that he went to check on the\n\nPage 36 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 38 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 38 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 39 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nsituation\u2014particularly when he noted that it was not a social room that he frequented and that he\nwas not close to its residents\u2014and therefore did not credit his account in this regard. The Panel\nfurther considered Respondent f\u2019s not a bit message and his statements acknowledging that, by\nthe time he arrived at the alumni room, he had received confirmation that there was \u201ca girl\u201d\npresent in that space and still chose to enter it. The Panel therefore determined by a\npreponderance of the evidence that Respondent fi] understood that a female was likely nude\nand/or engaged in sexual activity in the alumni room on October 20, 2024, and entered the room\non that basis, intending to observe the same.\u201d*\n\nIt is undisputed that Complainant had no knowledge of the Snapchat messages occurring in the\nActives group that night, had no previous relationship with Respondent \u00a7\u2122M, and did not invite\nhim to the alumni room. Therefore, the Panel determined that te engaged in\nconduct directly tending towards completion of sexual exploitation (i.e., entering the alumni\nroom) with the intent to commit sexual exploitation (i.e., to observe a person nude or engaged in\nsexual activity without their knowledge and consent) and that such conduct thus constituted\n\nattempting to commit prohibited conduct in violation of the Policy.\n\nThe Panel next assessed the charge against Respondent ij regarding ingesting ketamine off\nComplainant\u2019s naked torso in the alumni room on October 20, 2024. The Panel first noted that\nRespondent fj consistently denied consuming any drugs in the alumni room that night. The\nPanel also noted that all accounts indicated that Respondent fj entered the alumni room at or\nabout the same time ss iii and likewise consistently stated that\nRespondent fj did not ingest ketamine while in the room that night. The Panel further\nconsidered that Complainant thought Respondent fi participated in ingesting ketamine off her\nthat night, but did not actually observe him do so. The Panel also noted that, although\n\nrecalled Respondent fj inhaling ketamine off Complainant, neither i\nindicated the same. Finally, the Panel considered the apparent negative\nketamine test and that both ae}: Respondent fj\nindicated that hair follicle tests for ketamine could reveal the drug\u2019s presence for up to three\nmonths, with Respondent Bh having taken the test within six weeks of October 20. Ultimately, in\nits review of the totality of the information collected, the Panel found the evidentiary record\ninsufficient to show that Respondent ingested ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body in the early\nmorning hours of October 20 and therefore determined that he is not responsible for sexual\nassault under the Policy.\n\nresults of Respondent\n\n3 The Panel did not find Beepeciient ag statements regarding his intent to borrow i \u201cvape\u201d or\ncheck on to be material to its analysis in this regard as, even if true, he could have had multiple\nreasons for going to the alumni room that night\u2014including to view someone in a state of undress or involved in\nsexual activity.\n\nPage 37 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision 5B 39 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 39 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 40 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 38 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 40 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 40 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 41 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPage 39 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 41 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 41 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 42 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 40 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Hill 42 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 42 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 43 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 41 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 43 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 43 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 44 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 42 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 44 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 44 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 45 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n24\nI I |\n| t\nPage 43 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 45 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 45 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 46 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n1 |\n\nPage 44 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 46 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 46 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 47 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 45 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision im 47 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6 4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 47 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 48 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 46 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision GB 48 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 48 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 49 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 47 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 49 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 49 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 50 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 48 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 50 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 50 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 51 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 49 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 51 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 51 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 52 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPo\n\nPage 50 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 52 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 52 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 53 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 51 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 53 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 53 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 54 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 52 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 54 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 54 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 55 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 53 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 55 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 55 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 56 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n[\nee |\nee\nee\nee\n4\n\n|\n\nPage 54 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 56 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 56 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 57 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1I2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 55 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 57 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 57 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 58 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\neee eee\n\no\n\na\n\nae,\ni\n\n\u2014\u2014\noo\nctl\n\nage 56 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 58 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 58 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 59 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 57 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 59 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 59 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 60 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nLU\n[Ld\nee\n[\n\u2014\n\nPage 58 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 60 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 60 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 61 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 59 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 61 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 61 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 62 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\naE\n\nPage 60 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - ij 62 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 62 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 63 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 61 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 63 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 63 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 64 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 62 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 64 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 64 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 65 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nas\nPage 63 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 65 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 65 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 66 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 64 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 66 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 66 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 67 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 65 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 67 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 67 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 68 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nSCC\n\nPage 66 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 68 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 68 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 69 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPg\nI\nmerc cect\nPage 67 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision | 69 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 69 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 70 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 68 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 70 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 70 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 71 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 69 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 71 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 71 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 72 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 70 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 72 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 72 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 73 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 71 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 73 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 73 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 74 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 72 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 74 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 74 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 75 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nFn\nps\nPage 73 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - 75 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 75 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 76 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 74 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision GB 76 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 716 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 77 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n\u2014 4%\neee\n\nPage 75 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 77 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 77 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 78 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 76 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 78 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 78 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 79 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 77 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 79 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 79 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 80 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nry, LE, , Fy, |\n|\n\nee eee\n\nPage 78 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 80 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 80 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 81 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nae\noY\n|\n|\nee\n\nPage 79 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 81 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 81 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 82 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 80 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 82 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 82 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 83 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 81 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 83 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 83 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 84 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 82 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 84 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 84 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 85 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 83 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 85 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 85 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 86 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 84 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 86 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 86 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 87 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 85 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 87 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 87 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 88 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nod\nPage 86 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 88 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 88 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 89 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nV. Sanctions and Recommendations\n\nIn determining sanctions and remedies in this matter, the Panel considered the goals of the Policy\nand the Procedures, as well as all factors listed in Procedures Section 26.13, applied to each party\nindividually, as appropriate. The Panel also considered the impact and mitigation statements\nsubmitted.\n\nPage 87 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 89 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 89 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 90 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nPage 88 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 90 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 90 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 91 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\n|\n\nPage 89 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 91 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 91 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 92 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nC. Respondent\n\nIn determining sanctions and remedies with respect to Respondent fi, the Panel reviewed the\nseriousness of the prohibited conduct committed (attempted sexual exploitation), as well as the\nunderlying circumstances. The Panel considered that Respondent fil \u2019s conduct perpetuated for\nComplainant an experience of unwelcome and uninvited exposure. She described those moments\nin the hearing on May 2, 2025, by saying, \u201cI felt like bait. I felt like lions around me. It just was a\ntotally debilitating place to be in.\u201d The Panel also acknowledged Respondent fi \u2019s statement at\nthe hearing on May 21, 2025, \u201cI was sorry that maybe if it wasn\u2019t consensual and she was\nvictimized, I was sorry for not stopping it. And that I\u2019m sorry I couldn\u2019t tell if she was under the\ninfluence [. . .] just sorry that I felt like if something actually bad happened, I didn\u2019t stop it.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/21; 176)\n\nUpon due deliberation, the Panel imposed the following sanction with respect to Respondent\n| Policy violation:\n\ne Imposition of a one-way No Contact Order (NCO) with Complainant, wherein all duties,\nburdens, and obligations of no contact between the parties are carried by Respondent fj\nfor the duration of his enrollment at the University.\n\no Modifications to the NCO may be made consistent with the Procedures only at the\ndiscretion of the Title IX Coordinator. A violation of the NCO may be additional\nprohibited conduct.\n\ne Within ninety (90) days after this Decision becomes final (otherwise subject to\nreasonable extension approved by the Title IX Coordinator), Respondent will\nparticipate in a Directed Study through COCR focused on the issues of social media use\nand sexual harassment, as well as bystander intervention.\n\nfe) Respondent fi] will contact the COCR at (titleix@cornell.edu) to coordinate and\nschedule this study with the Civil Rights Education and Training Specialist. The\nCOCR will monitor compliance with this sanction.\n\ne Within ninety (90) days after this Decision becomes final (otherwise subject to\nreasonable extension approved by the Title IX Coordinator), Respondent fi will submit\nto the Title IX Office a reflection paper that cngages with the specific circumstances for\nwhich he was found responsible and contains a detailed proposal for future University\neducational materials to train undergraduate students around the intersection of social\nmedia use and sexual harassment, as well as bystander intervention. The reflection paper\nmust also include recommendations to the University\u2019s Office of Sorority & Fraternity\nLife with respect to substance use prevention efforts in Greek Life organizations on\ncampus. Use of artificial intelligence tools of any kind in the creation of this reflection\npaper is prohibited.\n\ne The Hearing Panel expects that Respondent fj will take this educational opportunity\nseriously and apply what he learns to help improve the University/Greek Life community.\n\nPage 90 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 92 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 92 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 93 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nTo that end, and to the extent reasonably requested by COCR, Respondent fi will\nengage substantively in creating educational programming for the University community\naround the intersection of social media use and sexual harassment, as well as bystander\nintervention and substance use prevention on campus.\n\nThe Panel imposes this sanction with knowledge of Respondent's lack of non-academic\ndisciplinary record and with the intent that it provide him opportunity for understanding and\nmaturation, as well as to actively contribute to the safety of both Complainant and the University\n\ncommunity as a whole.\n\nPage 91 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 93 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 93 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 94 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 92 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 94 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 94 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 95 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nii\na.\ned\n\n| uu,\n\nPage 93 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision -H 95 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 95 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 96 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\naerrrrC\u201ci;s\n\nPage 94 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 96 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 96 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 97 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 95 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 97 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 97 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 98 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nSavannah Bao\nKelly King-O\u2019Brien\nRob Kotaska\n\nPage 96 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 98 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 98 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 99 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nVI. Appeal Information\n\nParties may appeal this Determination. The Procedures set forth the process applicable to any\nappeal. In sum, appeals may be brought only upon one or more of the following grounds:\n\n1. The sanctions or remedies are not commensurate with the injury/violation or are unjust.\n\n2. A University official or officials, including the Hearing Panel, assigned responsibility for\nperforming specific functions by these procedures, violated the fair application of relevant\nUniversity procedures, and such violation may have had a prejudicial effect upon the\noutcome. This includes conflict of interest or bias.\n\n3. A University official or officials, including the Hearing Panel, assigned responsibility for\nperforming specific functions by these procedures, committed an error in interpreting Policy\n6.4, these procedures, and such error may have had a prejudicial effect upon the outcome.\nThis includes determinations of jurisdiction and determinations of Hearing Process.\n\n4. The Hearing Panel rendered a decision that is clearly erroneous.\n\n5. New evidence was discovered after the Hearing Panel\u2019s decision that could not have\nreadily been discovered before the decision and that would have probably changed the\noutcome.\n\nA party may commence an appeal by submitting a written statement to the Title IX Coordinator\nwithin ten (10) business days of issuance of the Hearing Panel\u2019s decision. The appeal statement\nmust set forth:\n\n* the determination(s) being appealed,\n* the specific ground(s) for the appeal, and\n* the facts supporting the grounds.\n\nThe appeal statement will be limited to 3500 words. Failure to submit an appeal within the ten\n(10) business days or any approved extension constitutes waiver of the right to appeal.\n\nPage 97 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 99 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 99 of 99\n","text":"--- Page 1 ---\nTNDEX NO. BF2026~0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index # : EF2026-0292\nCORNELL UNIVERSITY\nCornell Office of Civil Rights \u2014 Hearing Panel Decision (94428)\nAugust 18, 2025\nLI as eemcmnioteamiai En ah\nLL, PR PI eessnnscsicosonivevvncennnceninennnencsininiibnienenmsnatencemnteirncntesavemneisivigenean 9 hie sevieae\nIl. Procedural Over Viel s.csisrcssscsnsercenmmreascienissiontannnaenranaiieaneamusnnnnareniigese 3\nIV. Findings and Responsibility Determinations .............cccccceesesseeseeesse ceee ceeeeeeeeseeseesteeeeee O\nA. Undisputed Relevant Facts \u2014 October 19 and 20, 2024.0... ceeeeeseee ceeeeteseeeteeeeeeeeteeeee O\nB. Complainant\u2019s First Consumption of Ketamine ............cceeceeceeee ceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeteetteeeeseees LO\n1. Complaint Charges Against MT ............ Seiniecrnmenteacecanmmmummitaas LE\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence... 1 ceceeeeesesesteeeseeeeeeeeseeeseeeeseeeeseeeetteees L2\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to TD 16\nD. Complainant\u2019s Second Consumption of Ketamine ..0.........ececeeeeeeseeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeteeeeeseees 19\n1. Complaint Charges Against iii ti pianstnic neste Rebs secapeseassndneevensennsiidines Cease MR\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...........ccceeceessesesseeeseeesseeeeseseseeeeeeeesseeeeeeees 22\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii evnauceuiatnartseinesenaeneeuniisestincese- at\nF, Respondent .... seem sees i a SST rcpt ss nS Aa PANT\n1. Complaint Charges Against Respondent fi ssnsiseiebeinacinsiensisbibesiviiigeseaaniabintsuntannsnsonsssiiiessdiin Ol\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence. ...............esesssesssesseesceesesesceesessseeesseeseeseetsesens OD\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to Respondent fj sidgbewnsantisonnancsssnaniiasnchee neue, OO\ni, I risers eee eee\n1. Complaint Charges Against ii beceesseeessesesseeesaeeeaeceeeseeeeeesecteeeeteeseeeesteee DO\n2 \u2018Party Accounts and Additional Evidence............ccccceessceseeesseeesseeeeeeeseeeseeeseeeesesseeees DO\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect mC saceseaeeseseeesseeesseesssseeseeees 42\nEi, I ieee cer cnacmmnmennmmemmmammnmn\u00aeS\n1. Complaint Charges Against III ccc ccccccccsssssseeeeeeeeesensssses 43\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...........ccccseesseeeseeeeseceseeesseeeeteseseeseeseeeseseseees 44\ni\noor Panel Decision \u201ci mee Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 8.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 1 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 2 ---\nTNDEX NO. BF2026\"0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect Net I scisssceascanssscrsinosnocnes 49\n1. Complaint Charges Against III ccc ccccccesssssssseeeeeeeersnsnes 52\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidenve.....c..esssscscsessssssvsrsdestssccesssecanenssnesssvccesocevaseeuss OME\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii a\nTI eric ninenerrerenemencemmmciancniccmnan nom OM\n1. Complaint anges dh gpl TE corcrscoseceommonesomucersncceeneiscumsnnnsonenns cssvone 248\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence...............ccssccssescsssesseccsscscsseeseesssscesssssssssees 4\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect iii bee seeaee seeessteeeeteessestees OO\nV. Sanctions and Recommendations .............csseeceesseecceeceecceseceeeeess sf cesceece cessceesceseeeeeeeeeeees OD\nEE etre retsesecrreicsecicnmmeriemnteeronerreemnsement anat astcantrmmenmmnnnesencan il\nBh, I vrescccrinccmmcmccmmnmcccsnnnacn usue mimonspnssucimuncasccamnncese tt\nC, Dearne I csasasncrnaniacanasasaasacsimiantatondsia \u2018celasascaiaa disiacee saaninibaionaneadaaihonean AA\nD. WR... ee ec cccssceeeeeeeeeeeeetnen 9\nnnn\nI\nCO, TR cccnnrmcmcnens snicenscmmmmncnmmmmnmnnmansennmaceian Te\nH. Recommendations to the University ...........ccccsecssesesseesseeceseeesseeeeeeesseseseseseeeteseteseteees IO\nVI. Appeal Information... ... ...cccccccssssssossssscsssscsscccsscscsssssssvssssssssssesssessccesssssssssssssssssssseses OT\nii\neer Pane! Decision \u201ci mass Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 2 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 3 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. BF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nCORNELL UNIVERSITY\nCornell Office of Civil Rights \u2014 Hearing Panel Decision (94428)\nAugust 18, 2025\nI. Introduction\nThis matter involves conduct that Cornell University (the \u201cUniversity\u201d) undergraduate student\nBE Complainant\u201d) reported to the Comell Office of Civil Rights (COCR)! regarding\nher experiences on October 19 and 20, 2024, at the Chi Phi Fraternity house located at 107\nEdgemoor Lane in Ithaca, New York (the \u201cChi Phi house\u2019), on the Cornell University (the\n\u201cUniversity\u201d) campus. Complainant met with COCR and provided an initial in erview on\nNovember 14, 2024. The University initiated a Formal Complaint on November 22, 2024,\nalleging that the following University undergraduates and then-members of the Chi Phi\nFraternity (the \u201cfraternity\u201d or \u201cChi Phi\u201d) engaged in prohibited conduct on the night of October\n19 into the early morning hours of October 20, 2024 (the \u201cOctober 19 incidents\u201d):\nee (\nhii). and (\u2018 *; collectively, \u201cRespondents\u201d and\nwith Complainant, the \u201cparties\u201d). The Formal Complaint alleged that Respondents variously\nengaged in conduct constituting sexual assault sexual exploitation, and/or aiding prohibited\nconduct, as prohibited by University Policy 6.4.7\nUniversity Investigator Samantha Freeburn (the \u201cInvestigator\u2019\u2019) investigated the Formal\nComplaint charges pursuant to the University\u2019s Procedures for Resolution of Reports Against\nStudents Under Cornell University Policy 6.4 (the \u201cProcedures\u201d). The Investigator summarized\nthe relevant evidence collected in an Investigative Report (the \u201cIR\u201d) with accompanying\nappendices.*\nA three-member Hearing Panel (the \u201cPanel\u201d) conducted a live hearing (the \u201chearing\u201d) pursuant\nto the Procedures on May 2, 5, 12-15, 20-22, and 27-29, 2025. This Decision outlines the\n\u2018 At the time, COCR was named the Office of Institutional Equity & Title IX (OTETIX).\nAs di cussed further in Section III below, Complainant filed a Formal Complaint with OIETIX on January 16,\n2025, which modified the Formal Complaint initiated by the University on November 22, 2024. That Formal\nCompla nt was further updated on March 13, 2025 (the \u201cFormal Complaint\u201d). All references herein to the Formal\nComplaint are to the March 13 updated Formal Complaint.\n3 Charges specific to each Respondent are included in Sections IV.C, IV.E, IVF, IV.G, IV.H, IV. I, and IV.J below.\n* All citations to materials in this Hearing Panel Decision (the \u201cDecision\u201d) reference the evidentiary record, which\nincludes the appendices accompanying the IR (\u201cApp.\u201d) and hearing transcripts (\u201cTrans.\u201d). All quotations herein are\nexcerpted from such materials and retain their original spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization, unless\notherwise indicated, except that non-material edits in punctuation and capitalization were made to certain quotations\nfor clarity.\nPage 1 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 3 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 3 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 4 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. BF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\ninvestigation and hearing process, summarizes the Panel\u2019s findings, and provides the Panel\u2019s\ndeterminations regarding the Formal Complaint charges and applicable University policy.\nAs discussed further in Section IV below, upon due consideration of all information summarized\nin the Investigative Report and submitted by parties and witnesses in interviews, in writing, and\nat the hearing, the Panel found by a preponderance of the evidence:\n| a\ne Respondent iis responsible for attempted sexual exploitation in violation of the\nPolicy. He is not responsible for sexual assault.\nae\nSanctions imposed by the Panel, as well as recommendations to the University based on its\nfindings, may be found in Section V below.\nIl. Applicable Policy\nIn assessing the Formal Complaint allegations, the Panel applied the definitions of sexual\nexploitation, sexual assault, aiding prohibited conduct, and attempting to commit prohibited\nconduct set forth in Section 3 of the Procedures. The Procedures define sexual exploitation, in\nrelevant part, as:\n[I]ntentionally [. . . o]bserving another person when that person is nude or engaged in\nsexual activity without the knowledge and consent of the person observed [. . .]; [. . .] and\nPage 2 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 4 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 4 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 5 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n[c]ausing another person to become incapacitated with the intent of making that person\nvulnerable to nonconsensual sexual assault or sexual exploitation.\n\nThe Procedures define sexual assault as \u201c(1) sexual intercourse or (2) sexual contact (3) without\naffirmative consent.\u201d The further definitions and provisions related to sexual assault under the\nPolicy are incorporated herein by reference.\n\nRegarding aiding prohibited conduct, the Procedures provide, \u201cA person aids prohibited\nconduct if, with the intent to promote or facilitate such conduct, that person helps another person\ncommit the prohibited conduct.\u201d\n\nRegarding attempting to commit prohibited conduct, the Procedures provide, \u201cA person\nattempts to commit prohibited conduct if, with the intent to commit such conduct, that person\nengages in conduct directly tending toward completion of the prohibited conduct.\u201d\n\nIll. Procedural Overview*\n\nOn November 8, 2024, the Director of the University\u2019s Office of Sorority and Fraternity Life\nfiled an incident report with OIETIX regarding recently-alleged sexual assault and substance use\nat the Chi Phi house. On November 14, Complainant met with the Investigator and University\nTitle [IX Coordinator Lauren Branchini (the \u201cTitle IX Coordinator\u2019\u2019), as well as representatives\nfrom the Cornell University Policy Department (CUPD) and the University\u2019s Office of Student\nConduct and Community Standards (OSCCS). During that meeting, Complainant requested a\nformal complaint under the Policy. She was interviewed by the Investigator and CUPD\nInvestigator Jeff Northrop that same day (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 14 interview\u201d). On\nNovember 15, Complainant was interviewed by the Investigator, Investigator Northrop, and\nOSCCS Investigator Sevyn Hardy (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 15 interview\u201d). Also on that date,\nComplainant reviewed, signed, and submitted to CUPD a written statement regarding the\nOctober 19 incidents (Complainant\u2019s \u201cNovember 15 CUPD statement\u201d).\n\nAfter initial assessment, the Title IX Coordinator initiated a formal complaint and investigation\nregarding the information provided. Complainant was notified of this decision on November 21,\n2024, on which date she informed the Title IX Office that she wished to be a party to the matter.\nOn November 22, the Title LX Coordinator signed a University complaint and notified\nRespondents of the same in writing. The Investigator began collecting information\u2014including\nby way of investigative interviews with parties and witnesses\u2014shortly thereafter. On January 14,\n2025, Complainant submitted an updated, signed version of the Formal Complaint (the \u201cJanuary\n14 Formal Complaint\u201d), by which she joined the matter as a party; Respondents received written\n\n5 This Decision summarizes the procedural background of the matter. Additional details in this regard may be found\nin the Investigative Report and Appendices thereto, as well as within the hearing transcripts and record, which are\nincorporated herein by reference.\n\nPage 3 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {ij 5 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 5 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 6 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnotice of the same, as well as a copy of Complainant\u2019s January 14 Formal Complaint, on January\n16.\n\nOn January 22, 2025, the parties received all information related to the January 14 Formal\nComplaint that had been collected by the Investigator thusfar.\n\nInitial investigative interviews with parties and witnesses in this matter took place as follows:\n\ne December 3, 2024: University undergraduate student | F a: his\n\n\u201cinterview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 6, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 9, 2024: f (his \u201cDecember 9 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 9, 2024: University undergraduate student ii\ne December 9, 2024: University undergraduate student her\n\n\u201cinterview\u201d\u2019)\ne December 10, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 11, 2024: (his \u201cDecember 11 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne December 13, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 16, 2024: Respondent fii] (his \u201c\u201cDecember 16 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 17, 2024: University undergraduate student J\n\ne December 17, 2024: University undergraduate \u2014\u2014\u2014 her\n\u201cDecember 17 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: Po (his \u201cDecember 18 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: (his \u201cinterview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne December 18, 2024: University undergraduate ae\n\ne December 19, 2024: National Chi Phi fraternity organization staff member .\n\ne December 19, 2024: University undergraduate student i\n\ne December 19, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 20, 2024: University undergraduate student J\ne December 23, 2024: University undergraduate student\n\ne December 23, 2024: University undergraduate student his\n\n\u201cinterview\u201d)\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student f\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 6, 2025: University undergraduate student iii\ne January 7, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 8, 2025: PF (his \u201cJanuary 8 interview\u2019\u2019)\n\ne January 8, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 9, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 16, 2025:\n\nPage 4 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 6 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 6 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 7 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\ne January 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne January 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\ne January 27, 2025: Llony (his \u201cJanuary 27 interview\u201d)\n\nParty follow-up interviews and additional witness interviews then took place as follows:\n\ne February 4, 2025: University undergraduate student __........_ ]\n\ne February 4, 2025: University undergraduate student [|\ne February 7, 2025: Complainant (her \u201cFebruary 7 interview\u2019)\ne February 7, 2025: University undergraduate student i\n\ne February 10, 2025: (his \u201cFebruary 10 interview\u2019\u2019)\ne February 10, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 12, 2025: University undergraduate student i\ne February 13, 2025: Complainant\n\ne February 13, 2025:\ne February 21, 2025: (en\n\ne February 24, 2025: Responden{i\ne February 24, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 25, 2025: University undergraduate student\ne February 27, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne February 28, 2025: University undergraduate student\n\ne March 3, 2025:\n\u00a2 March 5, 2025:\n\nIn total, the Investigator conducted over 50 interviews during the investigation, including with 32\nwitnesses and all parties except who declined to participate in an interview in\nthis matter.\u00b0\n\nOn March 12, 2025, Complainant filed an updated Formal Complaint, which added charges to\nthe January 14 Formal Complaint. Respondents received a copy of the updated Formal\nComplaint on March 13. Consistent with the Procedures, the parties were provided with the\ninvestigative record and notified of the opportunity to respond to the same on March 21.\n\nThe parties were notified of the Hearing Panel members on March 28 and April 4, 2025, and that\nAttorney Meaghan Borys would act as Hearing Chair for the matter on April 2. The Investigative\nReport was issued on April 16, 2025. Consistent with the Procedures, the Panel held the hearing\nvia Zoom videoconference on May 2, 5, 12-15, 20-22, and 27-29. Complainant and all\nRespondents except for i submitted written opening statements, submitted closing\n\n\u00ae Consistent with Procedures Section 21.1, the Panel did not draw any negative inference with respect ~~ =\n\u2019s decision in this regard.\n\nPage 5 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 7 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 7 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 8 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nstatement(s)\u2014orally and/or in writing\u2014and answered questions of the Hearing Chair, Panel\nmembers, their own advisor, and other parties\u2019 advisors during the hearing.\u2019 The following\nwitnesses also appeared at the hearing and answered questions posed by the Hearing Chair, Panel\n\nmembers, and party advisors:\n8\n\nAfter the close of the hearing, the Panel received written closing statements as submitted and\nengaged in deliberations on its findings, determinations, and sanctions on June 2, 5, 16-17, 26\n\n30, and July 7, 2025.?\nIV. Findings and Responsibility Determinations\n\nThe following findings and determinations were made by a majority vote f the Panel based on a\npreponderance of the evidence (\u201cmore-likely-than-not\u201d) standard and resulted from evaluating all\nrelevant information collected by the Investigator and during the hearing process, including both\ninculpatory and exculpatory evidence.'\u00b0 Credibility assessments were not based on an\nindividual\u2019s status as Complainant, Respondent, or witness for any particular allegation(s).\nConsistent with Procedures Section 26.2, the Panel presumed all Respondents not responsible for\nany Policy violation prior to making its final determinations.\n\nA. Undisputed Relevant Facts \u2014 October 19 and 20, 2024\n\nBased on its review of the evidentiary record, the Panel considered the following facts regarding\nthe night of October 19 into October 20, 2024, to be materially undisputed and supported by a\npreponderance of the evidence in the record, which is incorporated herein by reference. The\nPanel included such undisputed facts in its findings and determinations, accordingly.\n\nOn the night of October 19, 2024, Complainant consumed alcohol before arriving at the Chi Phi\nhouse at the invitation of a. The fraternity was hosting a party that night.\n\n7 Per Procedures Sect on 21.1 erent forfeited his opportunity to testify at the hearing in this matter by way\ni\n\nof written opening statement, direct questioning, and closing statement(s) because he declined to participate in an\ninvestigative interview that the Investigator deemed necessary. (IR, 12) was offered the opportunity\n\nto cross-cxamince other partics and witnesses through his advisor and to answer questions of the Hearing Chair,\nPanel, and other parties\u2019 advisors as a witness. He elected to ask questions of other parties and witnesses through his\nadvisor, but not to answer questions or attend the hearing. Consistent with Procedures Sections 21.1 and 21.2, and\nrecogni ing that participation in the process was entirely voluntary for all parties, the Panel did not draw any\nnegative inference from his decisions in this regard.\n\nhearing but declined to participate.\n\n\u00b0 Consistent with the Procedures, the Hearing Chair was present for and participated in deliberations, but did not\nvote with respect to findings of fact, determinations of responsibility, or sanctions.\n\n10 While this section provides various summaries of evidence as relevant to the Panel\u2019s findings and determinations,\nit is not intended to, nor does it, provide a comprehensive review of the entire evidentiary record with respect to all\ncircumstances related to the Complaint and reviewed by the Panel.\n\nPage 6 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 8 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 8 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 9 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nae a sober monitor for the party, and were the\nfraternity\u2019s social chairs at the time. Shortly after Complainant\u2019s arrival, sked\n\nComplainant if she would like to engage in a \u201cthreesome.\u201d Complainant understood this\nsuggestion to be indicative of sexual activity among herself,\nand expressed interest. As of that night, Complainant had strong romantic feelings for and sexual\nnd had for some time. The two then proceeded to a bedroom on the\nsecond floor of the house\u2014belonging to ' a. and University\nundergraduate student known within the fraternity as the \u201calumni\nroom.\u201d The alumni room was located off a balcony area where individuals often gathered and\nwas generally regarded by members of the fratemity as a social room, serving both as a bedroom\nfor , and (Mand as a generally-unlocked space where\nfraternity members (and, in particular, sophomore fraternity members such as hs\nGD ould commonly congregate after parties. The funiture in the room at the time\nconsisted of three beds, one loveseat-style couch, and at least one chair\n\nae .:: present in the alumni room when Complainant and arrived.\"\n\nNo others were present. Complainant and ere friends at the time and had\nengaged in sexual activity together in the past. After Complainant and RE cvtered\nthe alumni room on October 19, the three parties engaged in sexual activity, for which\nComplainant provided consent. Specifically, Complainant engaged in oral sex with\n\nGo or near the couch, while GR en caged in vaginal-penile sex with her from\nbehind (the \u201cthreesome activity\u201d). The parties ended the threesome activity after some minutes.\nAt or around that time, the three consumed liquor and smoked marijuana together. Ketamine was\nintroduced among the group, as well, as discussed further in Section IV.B below. Ketamine was a\nsubstance used by multiple individuals in the Chi Phi house at the time, including i:\nwho had overdosed on or about October 18, 2024.\n\nand a third person\n\ninterest in\n\nAt some point, BE n0ved himself to a bed in the room and fell asleep or was\notherwise unconscious. Complainant and BE enained together on or near the couch.\nAt or around 1:00 a m. on October 20, 2024, Lexy entered the alumni room and\nengaged in sexual activity with Complainant, as discussed further in Section IV.C below. While\n\na 2: present in the alumni room, woke, and LT\n\nparticipated in contemporaneous sexual activity with Complainant for some amount of time, as\ndiscussed further in Section IV.H below. LT} left the room shortly thereafter.\n\n'l The Panel recognized the disputed issue of whether accompanied Complainant and PY\nLz. the alumni room initially (as recalled by or whether he was already in the room when\n\nthey arrived (as recalled by Complainant). The Panel did not consider a finding on the same to, s\ndeterminations and noted that was nonetheless present when Complainant and\nentered the room.\n\nPage 7 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - i 9 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 9 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 10 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAt or just after 2:00 a.m., Pe entered the alumni room. While present in the alumni\nroom, he consumed ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body, as discussed further in Section IV.I below.\nAt or around 2:15 a.m., PF entered the alumni room. While present, he kissed\nComplainant and consumed ketamine off her body, as discussed further in Section IV.E below. At\nor around 2:30 a.m., Respondents entered the alumni room.\n\nAt or around 5:00 a.m.,!\u201d Complainant, nn and P| moved from the\nalumni room to a common space on the fourth floor of the Chi Phi house known within the\nfraternity as the \u201cPentz\u201d\u2014off of which was the bedroom shared \\y iii and i\nafter which they proceeded into a smaller room adjacent to the Pentz called the \u201cfoffice.\u201d\nThe foffice included both storage space and an alcove where had arranged a work\nspace with at least one desk, a computer, and two chairs. While in the foffice, sexual activity\noccurred involving Complainant engaging in oral sex with , as discussed further\nin Section IV.I below, and vaginal-penile sex between as\n\ndiscussed further in Section IV.J below. After that sexual activity ended, Complainant slept in\nPs bed with him before returning to her residence.\n\nBetween 1:42 a.m. and 2:27 a.m. on October 20, 2024, multiple Respondents wrote messages\nand otherwise interacted with a Snapchat group chat titled \u201cChi Phi Actives\u201d (the \u201cActives\ngroup\u201d) that consisted of approximately 40 or more active members of the Chi Phi fraternity.\nThat sequence of activity was captured by a videorecording contained in Appendix C (the\n\u201cSnapchat video\u201d)!? and summarized by the Investigator during the investigation (App. C, 21).\nComplainant had no contemporaneous knowledge of the existence of such messages. The\nSnapchat video showed a message at | 42 a m. that read, \u201cFree pussy in alum pu[.]\u201d (App. C, 21)\nThe Panel found by a preponderance of the evidence\u2014including multiple Respondents\u2019\nstatements\u2014that \u201calum\u201d referred to the alumni room and that \u201cpu\u201d was an abbreviation of the\nphrase \u201cpull up,\u201d which indicated an invitation. The Panel further found that the word \u201cpussy\u201d\nmore likely than not referred to female sexual anatomy, specifically, the vagina.'*\n\nComplainant corr sponded directly vith i i _ by text message after the\n\nnight of October 19, 2024.\n\n2 Based on the preponderance of the evidence in the record\u2014including information submitted y\neo Panel found 8 ci time on appeared in the alumni room at or around 5:00 a.m\nand requested, in some form, that all those present exit the room. The Panel further credited tha ii\nwere vi io at that time.\n\n13 The Snapchat video was submitted anonymously. The recording depicted an unknown individual\u2019s cell phone\nscreen, on which was displayed the Actives group Snapchat messages discussed herein. Based on the preponderance\nof the evidence, the Panel understood that the unknown user whose cell phone was recorded by way of the Snapchat\nvideo necessarily was both a member of the Actives group and the Chi Phi fraternity as of October 20, 2024.\n\n4 Tn addition to the evidentiary record, the Panel considered the reasonable interpretation of the word as commonly\nused\u2014see, e.g., https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pussy, defining \u201cpussy\u201d as \u201cvulva,\u201d \u201csexual\nintercourse,\u201d and \u201cthe female partner in sexual intercourse.\u201d\n\nPage 8 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 10 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 10 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 11 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAs discussed throughout this Decision, numerous parties consumed the controlled substance\nketamine in powdered form on the night of October 19 into the early morning hours of October\n20, 2024. According to the United States Department of Justice (\u201cDOJ\u201d) and Drug Enforcement\nAgency (\u201cDEA\u201d) 2024 Fact Sheet on Ketamine (the \u201cDOJ and DEA fact sheet\u201d) contained in the\nevidentiary record, ketamine is a \u201cdissociative anesthetic that has some hallucinogenic effects.\nKetamine distorts the perception of sight and sound and makes the user feel disconnected and not\nin control. [. . . I]t makes patients feel detached from their pain and environment.\u201d (App. B, 344)\nThe fact sheet continues, \u201cKetamine can induce a state of sedation (feeling calm and relaxed),\nimmobility, relief from pain, and amnesia (no memory of events while under the influence of the\ndrug) and is used for the dissociative sensations and hallucinogenic effects. Ketamine has also\nbeen used to facilitate sexual assault.\u201d (App. B, 344) It also provides, \u201cKetamine comes in a [. . .]\nwhite or off-white powder. Powdered ketamine [. . .] is typically packaged in [. . .] small plastic\nbags [and . . .] is cut into lines known as bumps and snorted. [. . .] The onset of effects is rapid\nand often occurs within a few minutes of taking the drug[. . . It] may cause unwanted side effects\nsuch as: agitation, depression, cognitive difficulties, unconsciousness, and amnesia.\u201d (App. B,\n344-345) The DOJ and DEA fact sheet also indicates that cer ain effects of ketamine may last\n\u201capproximately 30 to 60 minutes[.]\u201d (App. B, 345)\n\nThe scientific paper \u201cKetamine\u201d contained in the evidentiary record (the \u201cKetamine paper\u201d)\nconfirmed that ketamine is a substance approved for use in the medical field \u201cas a general\nanesthetic.\u201d (App. B, 346) The Ketamine paper provided that, in \u201cdoses below a certain\nthreshold, ketamine produces analgesia and sedation. However, [above that threshold], the\ncharacteristic dissociative state abruptly appears,\u201d which \u201cis inconsistent with [. . .] moderate\nsetation or deep sedation[.]\u201d (App. B, 348) The scientific article \u201cKetamine: 50 Years of\nModulating the Mind\u201d contained in the evidentiary record (collectively with the DOJ and DEA\nfact sheet and the Ketamine paper, the \u201cexpert materials\u201d) similarly noted about the use of the\ndrug in a clinical setting, \u201cKetamine produces an unusual state, sometimes referred to as\n\u2018dissociative anesthesia[.]\u2019 [. . .] During this dissociative state, patients might appear awake [. . .]\nbut they are unable to respond to sensory input.\u201d (App. B, 359) It continued, \u201cAt lower\n[\u2018recreational\u2019] doses, stimulant effects predominate, and users experience mild dissociation with\nhallucinations and a distortion of time and space,\u201d with \u201ceffects resolv[ing] approximately 2\nh[ours] after acute ketamine use[.]\u201d (App. B, 362) The Ketamine paper indicated that the \u201cmost\ncommon adverse drug reactions associated with ketamine are nausea, vomiting, dizziness,\ndiplopia, drowsiness, dysphoria, and confusion.\u201d (App. B, 350)\n\nComplainant consumed ketamine in powdered form on the night of October 19, 2024. During the\nhearing on May 2, 2025, Complainant described her experience of the effects of ketamine to\ninclude feeling like her \u201clights were on, but no one was home,\u201d which she indicated was a state\nof \u201cvague consciousness\u201d wherein she \u201cd[id]n\u2019t know what\u2019s going on from thing to thing.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/2; 21, 63, 64) At the hearing on May S, she elaborated on her experience of that effect\nby saying, \u201cYou look like an operating human being. [. . . YJou don\u2019t look dead or asleep\n\nPage 9 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ij 11 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 11 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 12 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnecessarily. So, lights are on, but nobody\u2019s home. Your brain is not functioning at its proper\nlevel.\u201d (Trans. 5/5; 90) The Panel found this \u201clights on, nobody home\u201d description consistent\nwith the known \u201cdissociative\u201d effect of ketamine repeatedly emphasized in the expert materials.\n\nB. Complainant\u2019s First Consumption of Ketamine\n\nComplainant consistently recounted that she consumed ketamine vi iii\n\nclose in time to their threesome activity on October 19, 2024. She referenced it as \u201cthe first time\u201d\nshe did ketamine that night during recorded telephone calls with\nthat took place on or about November 6 and 7. (App. B, 171-173; App. C, 24, 28, 38) In her\nNovember 14 interview, she explained that while she did not have an independent memory of\nconsuming ketamine for the first time that evening, she nonetheless \u201ckn[e]w\u201d it occurred based\non an experience with ketamine later in the night, when she \u201cremember[ed] thinking [it] was\n[her] second time doing it\u201d and that she \u201calready did it once [before]\u201d (App. A; 47, 70)\nComplainant likewise indicated in her November 15 CUPD statement about that experience, \u201c[I]t\nhit me that I had taken [k]etamine on the couch with fd and\nearlier in the night. [. . .] I remember smoking marijuana but he ket mine [. . .] I have zero\nmemory of. All I could remember was the feeling that I had already done [k]etamine once[.]\u201d\nComplainant said at the hearing on May 2, 2025, \u201cI know that it was given to me.\n\nalso did it. It was on the couch[;] it was the three of us had ketamine. [.\n. .] I know it sounds super weird to say. I know it happened, but I don\u2019t remember it.\u201d (Trans.\n5/2; 32)\n\nIn November 7, 2024, recorded call with Complainant (the \u2018November 7\ncall\u201d), he said about himself, Complainant, and in the alumni room that night,\n\u201c[W]e\u2019re on the couch, and it\u2019s star ing. And then after like 10 minutes, we slowed down a bit.\nThen Dy pulled out the [\u2018liquor\u2019], and we drank it. And then we started smoking\nfrom there, maybe another five to 10 minutes afterwards. And then the K''*! started happening.\u201d\n(App. C, ?)/ also submitted a written statement during the investigation dated\nMarch 17, 2025 (his \u201cMarch 17 statement\u201d), regarding what occurred after the threesome\nactivity. He wrote in this regard, \u201cI inquired for ketamine fom i . . ..] He poured\nthe powder on a small key for himself and snorted it, then handed me the key and the bag which\ncontained the ketamine. I poured myself several keys\u2019 worth and inhaled them in rapid\nsuccession.\u201d (App. B, 259) He continued, \u201c[Complainant] did not ingest any ketamine at this\n\npoint However, she shared a sip of Jamaican liquor along with me iii. (App.\nB, 259)\n\nIn TE interview. he said about the threesome activity and thereafter, \u201c[W]e started\nhaving sex in my room, the three of us. [. . .] We stopped, took a break. And that\u2019s when\n\nDi! noticed a bag of ketamine[.. . .| And so, hit offers us, \u2018Hey, do\n\n'S Considering the totality of the circumstances, the Panel understood iy use of the letter \u201cK\u201d in this\nstatement to reference ketamine.\n\nPage 10 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 12 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 12 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 13 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nyou want to do some?\u2019 I said, \u2018Sure.\u2019 [Complainant] declined at that point. So, we didn\u2019t really\npush her past that.\u201d (App. A, 184-185) At the hearing on May 12, 2025, first said\nabout this time of the night, \u201c\u201cWe were all sitting on the couch talking. -\u2014_\u2014%\n\nreaches over, sees [the bag of ketamine], picks it up, asks if we want some.\u201d (Trans. 5/12; 60-61)\nHe also stated, \u201c[Complainant] said no, she\u2019d never done it before. We didn\u2019t ask again.\u201d Later in\n\nthe hearing, when asked about what, if any, substances gave to Complainant\n| said, \u201cI guess, ketamine, alcohol, weed. . . .] Me and did it, we\n\noffered it to her. She chose to take it. We didn\u2019t force her to do anything.\u201d (Trans. 5/12; 149)\n\nIn assessing the totality of the information provided in this regard, the Panel weighed\nComplainant\u2019s description of having ingested ketamine wit against the\n\nlatter two\u2019s account that she did not. The Panel first considered Complainant\u2019s candor regarding\n\nnot having a specific memory of consuming ketamine at that time to be reasonably against her\nself-interest and therefore somewhat indicative of credibility in her account, which the Panel\nnoted was first provided close in time to the October 19 incidents and remained materially\nconsistent thereafter. The Panel also considered Complainant\u2019s lack of ability to remember the\ndetails of this consumption consistent with the typical effects of ketamine described in the expert\nmaterials. Likewise, the Panel noted Complainant\u2019s lack of memory regarding many of her\nsubsequent experiences with iii as discussed in Section IV.C below, and found\nconsumption of ketamine consistent with the same.\n\nBy contrast, the Panel noted tha ii both confirmed that ketamine\n\nconsumption occurred in the alumni room at that time in the night and yet offered materially\ncontrasting memories of how the ketam ne was introduced, which reduced the weight attributed\nto both accounts. In addition, the Panel afforded less weight iii written\nstatement than those made during his recorded call with Complainant, given that his written\nstatement was submitted afte he received notice of the Complaint allegations and therefore after\nhe may have had a general motive to indicate that Complainant did not consume ketamine in his\npresence. Additionally, the Panel noted the apparent discrepancy i iii both stating\nthat Ld alone initiated the use of the ketamine and also using the pronoun \u201cwe\u201d in\nthe same context to indicate that the two ii \u201cdidn\u2019t really push\u201d or \u201cask\u201d Complainant\nabout it. The Panel found that this repeated inconsistency reduced the credibility of his account\nin this regard. The Panel further considered\n\nstatement at the hearing, wherein\nhe grouped ketamine with substances that he and \u201coffered\u201d Complainant and that\n\nshe \u201cchose to take,\u201d to reasonably indicate that she did ingest ketamine with the two of them at\n\nor around the time of the threesome activity.\n\nFinally, the Panel considered the totality of the circumstances presented, including its findings,\ndiscussed in Sections IV.H and IV.J below, that\nComplainant ketamine at later points in the night\n\nboth separately gave\nThe\nPanel therefore considered their provision of ketamine to Complainant at this earlier point of the\n\nPage 11 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision {jj 13 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 13 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 14 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCI2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nnight to be consistent with a pattern of conduct they each demonstrated later in time. The Panel\nalso considered Complainant\u2019s alcohol consumption prior to her arrival at the Chi Phi house, her\nfriendship wih iii. and her undisputed strong attraction for ii the\nfeeling of which she described in her November [5 interview as a \u201cchokehold,\u201d adding that she\nwould have done \u201canything to please [him]\u201d at the time. (App. A, 35) Understanding a typical\neffect of alcohol to be lowered inhibition in the context of the three parties having engaged in\nsexual activity together and having consumed alcohol and marijuana together, the Panel found\nbased on the preponderance of the evidence that Complainant ingested ketamine with\n\nLi in the alumni room on the night of October 19 close in time to the\n\nthreesome activity.\n\nLe\n\nPage 12 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 14 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 14 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 15 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPage 13 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Hii 15 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 15 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 16 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1I2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 14 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 16 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 16 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 17 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 15 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 17 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 17 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 18 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 16 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 18 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 18 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 19 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 17 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - J 19 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 19 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 20 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nBg\nPage 18 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 20 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 20 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 21 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 19 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision B 21 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 21 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 22 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 20 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 22 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 22 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 23 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 21 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - [ij 23 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 23 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 24 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 22 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 24 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 24 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 25 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 23 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 25 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 25 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 26 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 24 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 26 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 26 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 27 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\neee\n\nPage 25 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 27 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 27 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 28 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 26 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 28 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 28 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 29 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCI2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 27 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 29 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 29 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 30 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 28 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 30 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 30 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 31 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nee\nPage 29 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 31 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 31 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 32 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 30 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 32 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 32 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 33 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nF. Respondent ij\n1. Complaint Charges Against Respondent Ij\n\nAs set forth in the Formal Complaint, Respondent ff was charged with violating the Policy\u2019s\n\nprohibition against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Assault. Specifically, the alleged prohibited\n\nconduct was that he: (a) intentionally viewed Complainant in a state of undress without her\n\nPage 31 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 33 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 33 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 34 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\npermission; and (b) touched his nose to Complainant\u2019s naked body and inhaled a powdered\nsubstance off her body without affirmative consent, including lack of affirmative consent due to\nincapacitation.\n\n2. Party Accounts and Additional Evidence\na. Complainant\n\nIn her November 14 interview, Complainant indicated that, at some point during the night of\nOctober 19, 2024, when she was \u201cnaked\u201d mm ttst~=~S@Y bed, \u201ctwo guys named |\nentered the room. (App. A, 62) She recalled being introduced to them while\n\nwere also in the room. She described them as \u201cstanding\u201d at the foot of the bed,\nadding, \u201cThey felt more like voyeurs than anything in the situation. They didn\u2019t get as\ncomfortable as everybody else did.\u201d Although she was \u201cunsure\u201d of the particular \u201csequence of\nthe[] events,\u201d she then recalled certain interactions vith iii exiting the bed while\nnaked and \u201cflexing,\u201d and being \u201cberated with compliments.\u201d (App. A; 68-70, 72) She also\nindicated tha i asked to ingest ketamine off her body and that she agreed in some\nform. She continued, \u201cI remember lying down and covering my face up. [. . .] And they just\npoured all sorts of stuff all over me and did all sorts of drugs off my body. [. . . S]everal lines\n[were] done by almost everybody.\u201d (App. A, 73) In her November 15 interview, she stated, \u201cI\u2019m\nnot even sure if the two La are in Chi Phi. [. . .] But they all were partaking in the drugs\nbecause they did them off of my body. But I did put my hands over my face at that point.\u201d (App.\nA; 126-127) In her February 7 interview, Complainant said, \u201c[T]he a. as far as I know,\nwere voyeurs. Well, except the times that they did drugs off my body, and who knows if they\ntouched anything while they were doing that[.]\u201d (App. A, 137) Although she did not know what\neither of them looked like after that night, Complainant consistently indicated that either\nRespondent fj or asked if she was okay or otherwise physically supported her\nafter entered the alumni room and told everyone to leave. (See, e.g., App. B, 32)\n\nb. Respondent [\n\nRespondent fi consistently stated in his interviews, documentary submissions, and at the\nhearing that he did not observe Complainant naked at any time nor partake in any drug use while\nin the alumni room on the night of October 19, 2024. At the hearing on May 21, 2025, he\nindicated that he did not know Complainant prior to the night of October 19. During Respondent\nTI December 16 interview, he described being at the party at the Chi Phi house that night, after\nwhich he went iii room. He submitted a record of a ten-second call with\n\nat 2:23 a.m. on October 20. (App. B, 307) In his December 16 interview, he\n\nrecalled inviting I to join him m0 room during that call. He\n\ncontinued, \u201cI was hitting [\u2018a nicotine vape\u2019 | at this point, and it was almost dead[. . . .A]nd by the\n\ntime LDS got there, we sat and talked for about two minutes, and\ngot up and left the room. We didn\u2019t know why[.]\u201d (App. A, 370) About what happened next, he\n\nsaid:\n\nPage 32 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 34 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 34 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 35 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nAfter about 10 to 15 minutes with fs still being gone, I checked my phone\nand in [the Actives group] there was a text message [. . .] that said, \u201cFree pussy in\nalumni.\u201d [. . .] I had no idea what the text meant. I was kind of befuddled. So, me and\n\ntalked about it. And the person that sent the text message |\n], he lived in that room, and I knew he had a vape, and my vape had just died. And we\nalso speculated that maybe this is why Daa had got up and left.\n\n(App. A, 370) He added, \u201cSo, my vape had died. I knew lay) had one, and because\nof fs leaving and us not knowing the nature of if this was a joke or what was\n\ngoing on in the [alumni] room, me and decided to go into that room.\u201d (App. A,\n370). During the hearing on May 21, Respondent explained that TE bad actually\n\nleft his room before arrived, without indicating where he was going.\n\nAbout what happened when he and entered the alumni room on October 20,\n\n2024, Respondent SM said during his December 16 interview that he saw Complainant and\nall in or iii bed. He indicated that\n\nComplainant was under bed coverings at the time. He said that he sat on the couch and conversed\nwith iii for some minutes before asking both iii and Complainant if\nthey were \u201call right\u2019\u201d\u2014both of whom responded affirmatively\u2014and exiting the room with\nLoo (App. A, 371) He recalled an interaction with Complainant before exiting in\nwhich she \u201claughed\u201d about both his a first names being mm (App. A,\n372) He estimated that he was in the alumni room for \u201c[n]o more than five minutes\u201d that night.\n(App. A, 380)\n\nAbout his decision to go to the alumni room that night, Respondent fj stated, \u201c[B]y no means\nwere we going there to get free pussy[. . . .] That was not our intentions at all. We were just\nchecking out to see if everything was okay[.]\u201d (App. A, 377) During the hearing on May 21,\n2025, he stated that after seeing the \u201cfree pussy in alumni\u201d message, he \u201cstarted to get kind of\nworried that that\u2019s where LC had went\u201d and that he \u201cbelieve| dy\nwas intoxicated at the time.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 110, 116) He continued, \u201cI was just worried cause\nagain, the text was really out there. I had never seen something like that. [. . .] I just didn\u2019t know\nwhat | sa doing and kind of if something was bad, I wanted to get him out of\nthere.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 110-111) He also said, \u201c[T]he text could have meant anything. There was a\nlot of things going through my head. I didn\u2019t know if there was a lot of girls in there or what was\ngoing on[.. . .] But again, free pussy just seems like someone could have been in danger. It\u2019s just\nfree. What does free mean? Again, I don\u2019t know. That\u2019s why it could have meant anything.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/21; 113) He also said, \u201cIf someone's having sex with someone in the room, they're not\ngonna send that text out. So, again, I just didn't know what was really happening in the room,\u201d\nand, \u201cI just didn\u2019t think it was real.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 111, 114)\n\nRespondent [i further noted that although the alumni room was \u201ca bedroom where a lot of\npeople would go to hang out if they didn\u2019t want to be in their room or if they had nothing to do,\u201d\n\nPage 33 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 35 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 35 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 36 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nhe personally \u201cjust wasn\u2019t really close with the [residents of the room as of October 19, 2024].\nSo, [he]\u2019d go to [his] other friends\u2019 rooms to hang out,\u201d adding, \u201cI was rarely ever in [the alumni\nroom].\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 104)\n\nDuring the investigation, Respondent fi submitted a record of a ketamine test performed by\nOmega Laboratories that indicated that his hair follicles were collected on November 26, 2024,\nand tested for ketamine presence (his \u201cketamine test\u201d). The ketamine test came back \u201c[n]egative\u201d\nfor the drug. (App. B.1; 8) At the hearing on May 21, Respondent Do stated that Omega\nLaboratories personnel told him at the time of collection, \u201c[E]ven if you take [ketamine] one\ntime, it can stay in your hair for up to three to six months.\u201d (Trans. 5/21; 168)\n\nc. Additional Evidence\n\nooo er indicated that he \u201ccalled [Respondent [ij] and went to |\n]\u2019s room\u201d at or around 2:23 a.m. on October 20, 2024. (App. B, 272) 1 iii\nDecember 9 interview, he described that he and Respondent fi noted a Snapchat message to the\nActives group that read, \u201cFree pussy in alumni,\u201d after which they went to the alumni room. (App.\nA, 330) He continued, \u201c\u201cWe saw that text and were somewhat concerned but thought it could just\nbe crude humor.\u201d (App. A, 330) He also wrote in his Timeline, \u201c[Respondent fi]\u2019s vape had\ndied, and he wanted to borrow someone else\u2019s. He knew hit had a vape in [the\nalumni] room. [Respondent fj] asked if I wanted to go check it out, and I agreed. [Respondent\nyl also mentioned that he thought was pretty inebriated while they were\nhanging out so we wanted to check on him.\u201d (App. B, 272)\n\nAbout what happened after they entered the alumni room minutes rier, recalled\nseeing Complainant under bed coverings, with all in or on the\nsame bed. He recalled being in the room for \u201c[f]ive minutes, maybe\u201d (App. A, 344) and\nconsistently stated that he both arrived and left with Respondent fi. He likewise consistently\nindicated that he did not observe any drug use or Complainant naked at any time he was present\nin the alumni room that night. On December 9, 2024, signed a document titled\n\u201cAcknowledgement of Understanding of [Respondent = Involvement,\u201d in which he affirmed\nthat Respondent fj \u201cdid not make any physical contact with [Complainant]\u201d and \u201cdid not snort\nor consume drugs on or near |Complainant].\u201d (App. B, 306) At the hearing on May 15, 2025,\nDy indicated that when he inquired about taking a hair follicle test for ketamine, he\n\nwas told by the company Request A Test that the test is accurate for presence of the drug for up\nto \u201c90 days.\u201d (Trans. 5/15; 71)\n\nDuin iii interview, he recalled about after consumed\nketamine off Complainant\u2019s body, \u201ctwo guys walked in, [Respondent fj] and le\n\nThey introduced themselves, started talking, and [Complainant] invited them in.\u201d (App. A, 186)\n\nHe continued, \u201cAnd then, ht | are telling ] about\nhow they did ketamine off of [Complainant\u2019s] chest. [. . .] And then, both\nyl asked her if they could do ketamine off her chest too, because ae |\n\nPage 34 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 36 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 36 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 37 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nhad told them about it. She said yeah, so they did.\u201d (App. A, 187) He did not recall who poured\nthat ketamine or how much they consumed. He also indicated that Complainant \u201cgot up out of\n\nthe bed and started doing like a bodybuilder pose\u201d while iE were in the\n\nalumni room. (App. A, 186)\n\nIn RE | xvary 8 interview, he recalled entering the alumni room in the early\n\nmorning hours of October 20 and talking with Complainant (iii a.\n\nHe continued, \u201cAt some point, then the door opens in the room. I look back and I see\n[Respondent fi] has entered the room. Then, I can\u2019t recall if it was right behind him or a little\nbit later at some point fs walks into the room as well.\u201d In the hearing on May 14,\n2025, RE explained, \u201cI believe sometime shortly before ht asked to\ningest ketamine off of Complainant\u2019s body], I remember actually hearing the door and glancing\nback and seeing them, but I actually don\u2019t recall where they were exactly when he said those\nwords specifically.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 144)\n\nIn his January 27 interview, a :::: that he and i then ingested\n\nketamine off Complainant\u2019s body. In the hearing on May 14, he stated about that time, \u201cI had not\nheard or seen [Respondent fi] since I heard that door open in the moment, but I think I had the\nimpression that they were in the room too somewhere in the background.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 147)\nWhen asked what gave him the impression that Respondent fi was still in the room at that time,\nBE 21swered, \u201cT just didn\u2019t recall hearing the door open again.\u201d (Trans. 5/14; 147) In\nhis January 27 interview, he said about what happened next, \u201cI remember at some point,\n[Respondent fi] just comes up to me. I\u2019m not sure what he said, but he just walks up to me\nbecause he\u2019s one of my friends. [. . .] I don\u2019t remember the exact words he said to me, but I just\nremember him coming up to me, and then, going back to talking with, I believe, it was\n\nLa aay (App. A, 428) He recalled that the next thing that happened was Complainant\nexiting the bed and \u201cflexing her muscles to everybody in the room,\u201d after which\n\n\u201cTcame] into the room and basically kick[ed] everyone out[.]\u201d (App. A, 428) He did not\nremember Respondent fj inhaling ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body.\n\neach consistently recalled\u2014both at their respective interviews and at the\nhearing\u2014that they observed Respondent exiting the alumni room at or around 5:00 a.m.\n\nwhen they went to that room with iii and Etisdg\n\nd. The Snapchat Messages\n\nAs discussed in Section IV.A above, the Panel found that the 1:42 a.m. Snapchat message \u201cFree\npussy in alum pu\u201d communicated an invitation for others to go to the alumni room, along with a\nreference to female sexual anatomy. At 2:29 a.m., Respondent fj wrote in the Alumni group,\n\u201cthe alumni shit is not a bit. First hand pov not a bit\u201d (the \u201cnot a bit message\u201d). During the\nhearing on May 21, 2025, Respondent fi said about that message:\n\nPage 35 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 37 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 37 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 38 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nI found out from [someone] passing by as I was walking into the [alumni] room that there\nwas a girl in there. So, I was just saying, I mean, firsthand from somebody else that there\nwas a girl in that room and it\u2019s not a [\u2018joke\u2019], but again, it was an immature and dumb\nkind of just following along with what everybody else was saying in there. I shouldn\u2019t\nhave said it. And it is immature and a stupid text message for sure.\n\n(Trans. 5/21; 152, 153) He indicated that he interacted with that individual and sent the not a bit\n\nmessage while he was outside the alumni room, prior to entering.\n3. Findings and Determinations with Respect to Respondent fj\n\nProcedures Section 3.6 defines sexual exploitation in relevant part as \u201cintentionally engaging in\n[. .. o]bserving another person when that person is nude or engaged in sexual activity without the\nknowledge and consent of the person observed[.]\u201d Per Procedures Section 3.5, sexual assault is\n\u201c(1) sexual intercourse or (2) sexual contact (3) without affirmative consent.\u201d Sexual contact is\ndefined in relevant part as \u201cintentional sexual touching, however slight, with any object or body\npart\u201d including \u201cintentional touching of another\u2019s body part for the purpose of sexual\ngratification, arousal, humiliation, or degradation.\u201d\n\nRegarding the charges against Respondent fi, the Panel first found the evidentiary record\ninsufficient to show that he observed Complainant nude or engaged in sexual activity without her\nknowledge. Notably, even if Respondent fi] was present when others consumed ketamine off her\nnaked torso and/or when she exited the bed and flexed, the preponderance of the evidence\nshowed that Complainant was aware, by her own account, that she was nude at those times. For\nthis reason, the Panel determined that Respondent fj was not responsible for sexual exploitation\nunder the Policy.\n\nHowever, the Panel considered Procedures Section 3.2, which prohibits attempting to commit\nprohibited conduct, and found that Respondent fj attempted to commit sexual exploitation\nwhen he went into the alumni room in the early morning hours of October 20, 2024. Specifically,\nby Respondent [i's own account, he went to the room, at least in part, because of a Snapchat\nmessage indicating there was \u201cfree pussy in alumni.\u201d Also by Respondent [i's own account, he\nthought \u201csomething [. . .] bad\u201d could be happening in the room, that someone could be \u201cin\ndanger,\u201d and that the situation could involve \u201ca lot of girls.\u201d He also noted that, while he did not\nhave specific knowledge of what was occurring in the room, he thought at the time, \u201cIf\nsomeone's having sex with someone in the room, they're not gonna send that text out.\u201d Taking\nthese statements together, the Panel considered it more likely than not that Respondent fi]\nunderstood that the 1:42 a.m. message indicated some kind of sexual situation involving a\nfemale. The Panel likewise found the objectively reasonable understanding of the message to\nindicate some kind of sexual situation was occurring with a female in the alumni room. In\naddition, although Respondent fj repeatedly indicated that he thought the message was a \u201cjoke\u201d\nor not real, the Panel found such statements unreasonably incompatible with his account that he\nwas sufficiently \u201cworried\u201d about what was happening in the room that he went to check on the\n\nPage 36 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 38 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 38 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 39 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nsituation\u2014particularly when he noted that it was not a social room that he frequented and that he\nwas not close to its residents\u2014and therefore did not credit his account in this regard. The Panel\nfurther considered Respondent f\u2019s not a bit message and his statements acknowledging that, by\nthe time he arrived at the alumni room, he had received confirmation that there was \u201ca girl\u201d\npresent in that space and still chose to enter it. The Panel therefore determined by a\npreponderance of the evidence that Respondent fi] understood that a female was likely nude\nand/or engaged in sexual activity in the alumni room on October 20, 2024, and entered the room\non that basis, intending to observe the same.\u201d*\n\nIt is undisputed that Complainant had no knowledge of the Snapchat messages occurring in the\nActives group that night, had no previous relationship with Respondent \u00a7\u2122M, and did not invite\nhim to the alumni room. Therefore, the Panel determined that te engaged in\nconduct directly tending towards completion of sexual exploitation (i.e., entering the alumni\nroom) with the intent to commit sexual exploitation (i.e., to observe a person nude or engaged in\nsexual activity without their knowledge and consent) and that such conduct thus constituted\n\nattempting to commit prohibited conduct in violation of the Policy.\n\nThe Panel next assessed the charge against Respondent ij regarding ingesting ketamine off\nComplainant\u2019s naked torso in the alumni room on October 20, 2024. The Panel first noted that\nRespondent fj consistently denied consuming any drugs in the alumni room that night. The\nPanel also noted that all accounts indicated that Respondent fj entered the alumni room at or\nabout the same time ss iii and likewise consistently stated that\nRespondent fj did not ingest ketamine while in the room that night. The Panel further\nconsidered that Complainant thought Respondent fi participated in ingesting ketamine off her\nthat night, but did not actually observe him do so. The Panel also noted that, although\n\nrecalled Respondent fj inhaling ketamine off Complainant, neither i\nindicated the same. Finally, the Panel considered the apparent negative\nketamine test and that both ae}: Respondent fj\nindicated that hair follicle tests for ketamine could reveal the drug\u2019s presence for up to three\nmonths, with Respondent Bh having taken the test within six weeks of October 20. Ultimately, in\nits review of the totality of the information collected, the Panel found the evidentiary record\ninsufficient to show that Respondent ingested ketamine off Complainant\u2019s body in the early\nmorning hours of October 20 and therefore determined that he is not responsible for sexual\nassault under the Policy.\n\nresults of Respondent\n\n3 The Panel did not find Beepeciient ag statements regarding his intent to borrow i \u201cvape\u201d or\ncheck on to be material to its analysis in this regard as, even if true, he could have had multiple\nreasons for going to the alumni room that night\u2014including to view someone in a state of undress or involved in\nsexual activity.\n\nPage 37 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision 5B 39 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 39 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 40 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 38 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 40 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 40 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 41 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPage 39 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 41 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 41 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 42 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 40 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Hill 42 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 42 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 43 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 41 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 43 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 43 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 44 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 42 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 44 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 44 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 45 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n24\nI I |\n| t\nPage 43 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 45 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 45 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 46 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n1 |\n\nPage 44 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 46 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 46 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 47 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC12026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 45 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision im 47 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6 4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 47 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 48 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 46 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision GB 48 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 48 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 49 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 47 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 49 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 49 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 50 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 48 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 50 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 50 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 51 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 49 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 51 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 51 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 52 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPo\n\nPage 50 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a 52 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 52 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 53 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 51 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 53 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 53 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 54 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 52 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 54 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 54 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 55 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 53 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 55 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 55 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 56 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n[\nee |\nee\nee\nee\n4\n\n|\n\nPage 54 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 56 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 56 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 57 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1I2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 55 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 57 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 57 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 58 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\neee eee\n\no\n\na\n\nae,\ni\n\n\u2014\u2014\noo\nctl\n\nage 56 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 58 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 58 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 59 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 57 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 59 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 59 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 60 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nLU\n[Ld\nee\n[\n\u2014\n\nPage 58 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 60 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 60 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 61 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 59 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 61 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 61 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 62 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\naE\n\nPage 60 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - ij 62 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 62 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 63 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 61 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 63 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 63 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 64 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 62 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 64 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 64 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 65 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nas\nPage 63 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 65 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 65 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 66 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 64 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 66 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 66 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 67 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 65 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 67 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 67 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 68 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nSCC\n\nPage 66 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 68 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 68 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 69 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nPg\nI\nmerc cect\nPage 67 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision | 69 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 69 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 70 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 68 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 70 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 70 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 71 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 69 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 71 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 71 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 72 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 70 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 72 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 72 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 73 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 71 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 73 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 73 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 74 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 72 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 74 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 74 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 75 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nFn\nps\nPage 73 of 97\nHearing Panel Decision - 75 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 75 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 76 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 74 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision GB 76 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 716 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 77 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n\u2014 4%\neee\n\nPage 75 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Jj 77 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 77 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 78 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 76 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 78 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 78 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 79 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 77 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 79 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 79 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 80 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nry, LE, , Fy, |\n|\n\nee eee\n\nPage 78 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 80 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 80 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 81 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nae\noY\n|\n|\nee\n\nPage 79 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 81 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 81 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 82 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 80 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 82 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 82 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 83 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 81 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision a | 83 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 83 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 84 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 82 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision Bb 84 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 84 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 85 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 83 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 85 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 85 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 86 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 84 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 86 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 86 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 87 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 85 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 87 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 87 of 99\n\n\n\n--- Page 88 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\nod\nPage 86 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 88 of 99 Private\n\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 88 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 89 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nV. Sanctions and Recommendations\n\nIn determining sanctions and remedies in this matter, the Panel considered the goals of the Policy\nand the Procedures, as well as all factors listed in Procedures Section 26.13, applied to each party\nindividually, as appropriate. The Panel also considered the impact and mitigation statements\nsubmitted.\n\nPage 87 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 89 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 89 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 90 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nPage 88 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 90 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 90 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 91 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\n|\n\nPage 89 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 91 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 91 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 92 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nC. Respondent\n\nIn determining sanctions and remedies with respect to Respondent fi, the Panel reviewed the\nseriousness of the prohibited conduct committed (attempted sexual exploitation), as well as the\nunderlying circumstances. The Panel considered that Respondent fil \u2019s conduct perpetuated for\nComplainant an experience of unwelcome and uninvited exposure. She described those moments\nin the hearing on May 2, 2025, by saying, \u201cI felt like bait. I felt like lions around me. It just was a\ntotally debilitating place to be in.\u201d The Panel also acknowledged Respondent fi \u2019s statement at\nthe hearing on May 21, 2025, \u201cI was sorry that maybe if it wasn\u2019t consensual and she was\nvictimized, I was sorry for not stopping it. And that I\u2019m sorry I couldn\u2019t tell if she was under the\ninfluence [. . .] just sorry that I felt like if something actually bad happened, I didn\u2019t stop it.\u201d\n(Trans. 5/21; 176)\n\nUpon due deliberation, the Panel imposed the following sanction with respect to Respondent\n| Policy violation:\n\ne Imposition of a one-way No Contact Order (NCO) with Complainant, wherein all duties,\nburdens, and obligations of no contact between the parties are carried by Respondent fj\nfor the duration of his enrollment at the University.\n\no Modifications to the NCO may be made consistent with the Procedures only at the\ndiscretion of the Title IX Coordinator. A violation of the NCO may be additional\nprohibited conduct.\n\ne Within ninety (90) days after this Decision becomes final (otherwise subject to\nreasonable extension approved by the Title IX Coordinator), Respondent will\nparticipate in a Directed Study through COCR focused on the issues of social media use\nand sexual harassment, as well as bystander intervention.\n\nfe) Respondent fi] will contact the COCR at (titleix@cornell.edu) to coordinate and\nschedule this study with the Civil Rights Education and Training Specialist. The\nCOCR will monitor compliance with this sanction.\n\ne Within ninety (90) days after this Decision becomes final (otherwise subject to\nreasonable extension approved by the Title IX Coordinator), Respondent fi will submit\nto the Title IX Office a reflection paper that cngages with the specific circumstances for\nwhich he was found responsible and contains a detailed proposal for future University\neducational materials to train undergraduate students around the intersection of social\nmedia use and sexual harassment, as well as bystander intervention. The reflection paper\nmust also include recommendations to the University\u2019s Office of Sorority & Fraternity\nLife with respect to substance use prevention efforts in Greek Life organizations on\ncampus. Use of artificial intelligence tools of any kind in the creation of this reflection\npaper is prohibited.\n\ne The Hearing Panel expects that Respondent fj will take this educational opportunity\nseriously and apply what he learns to help improve the University/Greek Life community.\n\nPage 90 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 92 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 92 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 93 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nTo that end, and to the extent reasonably requested by COCR, Respondent fi will\nengage substantively in creating educational programming for the University community\naround the intersection of social media use and sexual harassment, as well as bystander\nintervention and substance use prevention on campus.\n\nThe Panel imposes this sanction with knowledge of Respondent's lack of non-academic\ndisciplinary record and with the intent that it provide him opportunity for understanding and\nmaturation, as well as to actively contribute to the safety of both Complainant and the University\n\ncommunity as a whole.\n\nPage 91 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 93 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 93 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 94 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 92 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision | 94 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 94 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 95 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\n|\n\nii\na.\ned\n\n| uu,\n\nPage 93 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision -H 95 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 95 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 96 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\ni\naerrrrC\u201ci;s\n\nPage 94 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - 96 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 96 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 97 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 PM INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nPage 95 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision i 97 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 97 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 98 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\n\nCl2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nSavannah Bao\nKelly King-O\u2019Brien\nRob Kotaska\n\nPage 96 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision ae 98 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\nDistributed 08/18/2025 98 of 99\n\n\n--- Page 99 ---\nFILED: TOMPKINS COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2026 04:00 P INDEX NO. EF2026-0292\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 44 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2026\nC1l2026-22098 Index #: EF2026-0292\n\nVI. Appeal Information\n\nParties may appeal this Determination. The Procedures set forth the process applicable to any\nappeal. In sum, appeals may be brought only upon one or more of the following grounds:\n\n1. The sanctions or remedies are not commensurate with the injury/violation or are unjust.\n\n2. A University official or officials, including the Hearing Panel, assigned responsibility for\nperforming specific functions by these procedures, violated the fair application of relevant\nUniversity procedures, and such violation may have had a prejudicial effect upon the\noutcome. This includes conflict of interest or bias.\n\n3. A University official or officials, including the Hearing Panel, assigned responsibility for\nperforming specific functions by these procedures, committed an error in interpreting Policy\n6.4, these procedures, and such error may have had a prejudicial effect upon the outcome.\nThis includes determinations of jurisdiction and determinations of Hearing Process.\n\n4. The Hearing Panel rendered a decision that is clearly erroneous.\n\n5. New evidence was discovered after the Hearing Panel\u2019s decision that could not have\nreadily been discovered before the decision and that would have probably changed the\noutcome.\n\nA party may commence an appeal by submitting a written statement to the Title IX Coordinator\nwithin ten (10) business days of issuance of the Hearing Panel\u2019s decision. The appeal statement\nmust set forth:\n\n* the determination(s) being appealed,\n* the specific ground(s) for the appeal, and\n* the facts supporting the grounds.\n\nThe appeal statement will be limited to 3500 words. Failure to submit an appeal within the ten\n(10) business days or any approved extension constitutes waiver of the right to appeal.\n\nPage 97 of 97\n\nHearing Panel Decision - Jj 99 of 99 Private\n[94428] Distribution Not Permitted, See Policy 6.4\n\nDistributed 08/18/2025 99 of 99\n","thumbnailUrl":"https://lucycraig.blog/media/485/thumb.webp","transcriptStatus":"not_applicable","transcriptText":"","url":"https://lucycraig.blog/media/485"}