THE RECORD · THE ARGUMENT · THE RESPONSE

Who Is
Jane Doe
Really?

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

WHY THIS EXISTS

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

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

REPORTING CREDIT

Reporting that helped frame the public questions

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

LATEST

Articles & analysis

PUBLIC RECORD

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

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

Browse library

New docket entries · last 24 hours

Loading recent docket filings…

DISCUSSION

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lucy Craig
What do you feel should happen to women who cry rape?

THE LATEST DISCUSSION

Latest comments

Loading latest comments…

PUBLIC DISCUSSION

Comments & replies

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

Posting anonymously — no login required.
Optional: sign in or create a pseudonymous username to edit/delete your comments later.
@janedoe1
Quick question,
 
What recommendations do you have to update / upgrade our blog?
 
Comments will remain in chronological order with the newest always on top (threads and replies), but maybe a search bar of the comments section of each page would be helpful?
 
What other ideas do you have to enhance our blog and community?
 
I read every comment, but in all honesty, I do so with an eye seeking and looking for bugs, suggestions, ideas, and concepts. I really just want to improve the blog in the best ways possible, so I am particularly attentive to comments that have suggestions and ideas. Now, I am directly asking for your suggestions and ideas.
 
Please leave your ideas and suggestions.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
Mirror sites? And what advice can you give to someone who wants to set up a similar Lucy Craig website/discussion board?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe1
Advice: it is not as easy as plug and play. Everyday it faces a new challenge. I work from home, have a high level of technical skills, so my reaction time is quicker. If you wanted to set up your own, focus on simplicity, not style or optics.
Mirrors: yes, i am incorporating a few mirrors to handle the load. When I started this, I was celebrating 3,000 page views, now we have surpassed 5,000,000 which is totally awesome but also where the simplicity comes in -it is lightweight and can handle the increased internet gangbang that it takes daily. Privacy, do not build in anything that can dox the visitors. There is no value or need for an independent blog to maintain metadata of the visitors. Simply count visitors if you want to see the stats, but do not log them. Ultimately you will face censorship attempts, from reports to every agency and server to subpoenas from attorneys. I've been setting up free speech platforms for years, which allows me to not be concerned about the reports, but take into consideration that reliance on third party services mean you could lose ehat you built in an instance. If you don't have the hardware or experience or thick skin, it will not work effectively.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 3

Anonymous
I hope once Jane Doe is "officially" unmasked, people acknowledge sites like this... there is a very real story here about censorship and intimidation

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
1. Maybe a section set aside just for Lucy Craig memes.
2. A timeline, with clickable links to supporting evidence.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
Legal documents and verified screen shots separate from the memes

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
Consolidate this to here https://lucycraig.blog/discuss
Anonymous
Cornell bans all frat parties.
 
https://apnews.com/article/cornell-rape-investigation-frat-party-ban-686aaca2c81878f8cd771a0e3bdf7fa4
Comment attachment by Anonymous

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
You know there'll be parties where they hand out cigs -- Loosie Parties...

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Should simply burn fraternities and sororities to the ground. They are only there to exclude people, and create power dynamics.
 
You don’t need an exclusive party place in college to party.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Is the reporter trying to be sarcastic.. nobody wants to gang bang that women

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
she be 🙄
Anonymous
Scott Kretzschmar's lawyer claimed that Scott had only been in the room a couple of minutes and did not touch the victim.
 
Well here he is not only posting pictures of him doing exactly that, but also saying "came back for more". How do you people not catch these lies?
Snapchat_photos

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
These arent real, or mainstream media would be cumming in Its pants

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
The blurred out pictures tell us nothing,
The bro talk is just that, bro talk
It unclear who or what is in the pictures
And there is no attribution to who is posting the pic……
So all you are going off is your imagination
Anonymous
The IP address of the admin is 172.67.185.84

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
67

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe1
🤣

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
The 67 means he is a liberal, the 84 means he is uncircumcised and likes long qalks on the beach

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe1 edited
Oh no, you doxxed me: https://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/172.67.185.84
@janedoe1
Lucy Craig's lolwyer may be the absolute dumbest lolwyer.
 
First he doesnt redact the full signature of her affidavit, leading us to discover her name.
Second he doxxed an Active Duty Marine and the Marine's home address, causing the court to abmonish him.
Third, today, he files a document with the full signature redacted for Lucy Craig, but the same PUBLIC RECORD does not redact her apartment address in New York City.
 
Literally cannot make this shit up. The document is taken directly from the court docket website, and is now public record, made public by her LOLWYER. It now remains public on this blog.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
Trash riffle team eta beta pi, please proceed to the target

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
Bring me her panties

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
I read somewhere she left NY and went back to AL.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
Alabanga

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
Could be. This is a motion in opposition to the defendant (Moonies) request for change of venue to Tompkins' County.
But, here is what I think, it is signed in New York (not in AL). If she was not physically present in NY when she signed, it should say "Alabama" and under penalty of perjury under the laws of Alabama...
I highly doubt she will have moved back to Alabama, given that this case will need her present to sign documents, and possibly present at court at any random time at all... but, I could be wrong, of course.
Anonymous
She agreed to a threesome, then acquiesced to a second 3 some, then left the room with 2 guys, and had a 3rd 3some. Her biggest objection were all the gawkers that found there way into the room.
 
The argument that she was raped is based on her “epiphany “ after sustaining 2 weeks of slut shaming, and the public’s personal revulsion. But in that room, on that night, it sounds even from her own police report, that she was all in.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Fyi, ingalls only posted the free pussy thing after/during the second threesome, so male 3 is on her (so to speak). He woke up to a n unplanned threesome and was excited about it - her words
Anonymous
Whose puss is more blown out: Lucy Craig's or Hope Solo's?
Anonymous
ol lucy needs money now that no guy wants a chick with a revolving door in her jeans, moms, raise your daughters better to not have a revolving door in her jeans, and dads, raise your boys better to not want to be a revolving door patron

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Needs it to feed her ketamine habit
Anonymous
If you spam this site, i will doxx you, knoxx you and coxx you
Anonymous
Ultimately, the argument of people calling for the arrest and conviction of the cornell seven is that men need to be responsible to interpret and decide what women want, as womens' statements cannot trusted in the moment. So much for women's liberation.........

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Read her civil case! Men failed her, these boys failed her, chi phi failed her, tridelta failed her, the house mother failed her, cornell failed her. Everyone, men, women and instituitions were supposed to prevent her from making her own decisions... Sounds like she shoukd have been in an asylum not a university

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
Money grab?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
She should sue her fucking parents too while she is at it
@janedoe1
> 4,000,000 page views.
Comment attachment by janedoe1

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

Anonymous
Show unique visitors instead, it's much more telling.
 
Lifetime requests include every single page load. Every single refresh. It could be 100 total page refreshes for every unique user, and then the unique visitor count would only be 40 thou.
 
It also counts bots, crawlers, cURL requests, and all other kinds of user agents.
Anonymous
Let's see if the matriarchal misandrist court system + media apparatus lets Train Doe get away with ruining 7 men's lives for degenerate but consensual sex. Imagine enthusiastically wanting to get dogged down by multiple guys at once and changing your story once your clique of fellow Liliths start giving you "heat" #herbodyherchoice #sexworkisrealwork #nastywhoresdeservedignitytoo
text_messages_2
Text_Messages_1

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Confused. According to her police report she refused a foursome because she dislike anal, but now she wants 4? Did she anal after all

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
She was pissed off that some bros she didnt know well came to the room... You will see in her statements she felt embarressed by so many strangers seeing her poon. You will see from her subsequent texts, she was worried rumours would spread). Then she was univited from thw oarty, then she found out ingalls and newell were spreading the news, and so she started rewriting history

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous
So unethical to spread the gang bang. What happens in Cornell, stays in Cornell.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous
Spread your legs, not the gossip

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous
This is why we can't have nice things

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous
Yip, ruining it for other gangs
Anonymous
Please stop censoring our speech.
Comment attachment by Anonymous

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
You whackadoodle. Dont gang spam our forum

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
God does not give us free speech. The 3rd commandment is pure censorship: Thou shall not use the Lords' name in vain.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe1 edited
We have restored your appropriate comment. Your MANY other comments commingling calls to cancel us, with third party site promotions will remain hidden for the reasons stated below.
And stop fucking spamming. It ruins the experience. Post it once, not 12 times, and be done.
Comment attachment by janedoe1
Comment attachment by janedoe1

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Yeah read the comments of that petition. They either obviously did not at all read the documents independently; or they themselves are accusing others for raping, so the more likely explanation is that they know what’s happening, but they are false accusers themselves.
@janedoe1
Good morning, everyone.
 
Overnight, a whackadoodle decided to flood our comment section with repeated demands to “report” this site, while simultaneously promoting their own website, which appears to offer a decidedly one-sided version of the debate.
 
Let's clear up a couple of things.
 
First, self-promotion.
 
We have absolutely no problem with people sharing their own websites, articles, opinions, or competing platforms. We don't care which side of the argument you're on. If you have something to contribute, contribute it. Promote your website in good faith, and we'll happily leave it alone.
 
But repeatedly posting the same self-promotional nonsense, particularly when it's mixed with demands to silence this platform, crosses the line from participation into spam.
 
Second, cancel culture.
 
Calling for the censorship, suppression, or deplatforming of others is fundamentally opposed to everything this website stands for.
 
We believe cancel culture is a plague on society. It poisons public debate, obstructs the pursuit of truth, and undermines the very freedoms of speech and expression that we exist to defend.
 
Our policy is simple: If you use our comment section to organize or encourage the silencing of other voices, your comment will be removed in its entirety. Zero tolerance. We will not selectively edit your words to make them acceptable.
 
Let me be perfectly clear: Your speech belongs to you. Your opinions belong to you. And neither I nor the other administrators gives a damn whether we agree with them.
 
Criticize this website. Insult the administrators. Challenge our arguments. Defend the plaintiff. Defend the defendants. Call us idiots. Post something unpopular, offensive, or downright ridiculous.
 
We don't care.
 
That is precisely why this platform exists: to provide a place where all sides can speak, particularly when other platforms are busy deciding which opinions the public is permitted to hear.
 
But don't confuse our commitment to free expression with an obligation to host repetitive spam or campaigns designed to silence the very discussion we're protecting.
 
And one final point about moderation:
 
We do not casually remove, edit, or restrict comments. In fact, the decision to remove a comment is deliberately difficult.
 
Every administrator must unanimously agree that removal is justified. If even one administrator dissents, the comment stays. Period.
 
That's how seriously we take the principle of free expression, even when that expression is directed against us personally.
 
We're here to encourage debate, not manufacture consensus. We're here to examine competing claims, not dictate conclusions. And we're certainly not here to let the loudest censorship enthusiast decide who gets to speak.
 
Disagree all you want. Argue passionately. Be offensive. Be ridiculous. Just don't turn our forum into your personal spam campaign or your little cancel-culture crusade.
 
Now, back to our regularly scheduled chaos.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 1

@janedoe1 edited
Also, we are reaching 4,500,000 page views. It would be illogical to think that someone has not tried to report us.
 
According to comments, we have been reported to:
 
  • Canadian Mounties
  • FBI
  • Lucy Craig's legal team
  • The internet police (IC3)
  • Various police departments
  • Various prosecutors
  • Various internet providers (willy nilly with the hopes that something will stick)
  • My mother
  • Someone named "fuck tard" (not entirely sure why)
 
This site is ENTIRELY self hosted in a country where it is ILLEGAL for platforms to censor -for example, if a platform censored this site it would interfere with my life in various ways, such as an example of the quality of my work, and there is no sec 230 where this site is hosted (in my parent's basement).
 
So, continued calls for cancel culture are hidden, but they are clearly ineffective. The person (probably a blue haired weirdo) surely is not the first to cry. If it were that easy, Lucy Craig's own lolwyer would have already had it pulled down by now.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous
What a mob
Anonymous
The petition that I am referring to below does NOT call for the cancellation of anything or anyone, it's strictly a petition to support the potential victim of rape.
 
Change.org: become one of the over 68000 people to sign a petition supporting the victim in this case.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe1 edited
The comments like the ones calling to report the site will remain hidden.
 
We did find that one of the comments that was mixed with the calls for cancel culture did not include calls for cancel culture, so it has been restored.
 
Given the volume of comments (likely) you have made calling for people to report our site, the accidental inclusion of ONE acceptable comment by you for removal is insignificant. We apologize nevertheless.
 
If you want to report this site to the internet police because it offends your sensitivities, while engaging in and using it's audience for self promotion (ironic) do so elsewhere.
 
If you want to use the site for legitimate debate, reference, and even third party resources, do so.
 
If you mix the two, we will not be bothered with editing your comments, we will simply hide them because you are speaking out of both sides of your ass - calling to cancel our site, while also patently using our site to self-promote your own agenda, websites, or whatever.
 
Again, we apologize that ONE of your legitimate, standalone, comments got mixed up in your spam and cancel culture rampage when we had to hide the comments (not "deleted"). We have no way of identifying specific anonymous users, instead we have to do our best to find the offending comments on a individual comment level, and the sheer volume of your spam and cancel culture calls, led us to make ONE mistaken hidden comment. So again we apologize profusely and have restored that particular comment, not your other ones calling for us to be cancelled in the same self-hypocritical promotional paragraph.
 
As such, the comments calling for cancel culture remains hidden, the standalone comment self promoting your change.org petition and another website has been restored with our apologies. Two examples are attached. The comment that calls for our cancel culture that mixes your self promotion, and the standalone self promotion comment, to show the difference. Standalone, fine (but please don't spam it as you continue to do), mix it with calls to cancel our site, and the whole comment will be deleted.
 
We operate with full transparency here, and decisions will be explained, justified, here in the comments section if requested, as you have done.
Comment attachment by janedoe1
Comment attachment by janedoe1
Anonymous
Moderator, How do you decide what comments to keep vs which ons you delete? Because you are clearly deleting comments / replies.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
that would be surprising, because there is a shit-ton of stuff on here supporting her, mocking the operators, etc... maybe you feel in to a k-hole and hallucinated the whole thing?
Anonymous
The site owner is deleting comments mentioning legitimate websites and petitions supporting the victim.
 
In other words he's silencing and censoring Jane Doe supporters, this does not align with the blog owners own expressed goal of a space where all speech is allowed, with total disregard for anyone's feelings. To the contrary it seems like any speech that feels remotely uncomfortable to the owner is silenced, suppressed or in this case straight up censored and deleted.
 
This will likely also be deleted, proving my point.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

@janedoe1 edited
I am deleting your comments that call for cancel culture. Also, if you want to spam some other website, do it on other platforms, this is not a self promotional comment section. Do that on social media, it ruins the experience for everyone.
 
Make whatever reports your simple-minded self must, but you will not promote your censorship on this site.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous
So much for the tolerant Left...

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous
Yes, the only speech should be illegal is the speech that tries to eliminate others’ speech.

↳ Reply to @janedoe1 · Level 2

Anonymous
Blah blah blah

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous
You should only have free speech when you don’t try to cancel others’ free speech.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 4

Anonymous
Ok, so by your logic the site owner should not have free speech, because he's cancelling ours?
 
We dont even call for cancellations or anything, we're here engaging with you guys and your perspective, aren't we?

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 5

Anonymous
Nope, cancelling cancellers is good.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 5

@janedoe1
Would you like me to post your comments, in full? You literally posted calls to report this site to various alleged providers for the purposes of canceling the site.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous
So you support censorship..... sad.
Anonymous
Read her report to Cornell, posted on this site. She clearly states she told these "bros" she didn't want to do some things, and they complied. She never asked to leave and never asked for help (even in her 3:05am text). Some frat bros even threw other guys out of the room that were there gawking. Is she a victim? Yes. Was she raped? Apparently she has come to that conclusion. Are these guys rapists? Doesn't look that way. Sadly, everyone is a victim in this story.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
She enjoyed a gang bang night, hard to say she is a victim. But she is indeed a victim of being judged as a slut by sorority sis.
Anonymous
If you want to support the victim in this case, you can go to cornellseven.com, or directly to change.org, and become one of the currently 69,014 verified signatories in supporting the Cornell vicimg Jane Doe.
 
The petition is titled "Cornell alumni supporting Jane Doe".
Comment attachment by Anonymous

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Your website is citing full of reporters’ interpretations. Is this AI slop? I can’t even find her original police report pdfs.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

@janedoe1 edited
All you have to do is type "police" into the search on the library page...
Or for that matter when you comment click Choose from existing library, and search "police" and it will attach -as i am doing now.
Or, check the direct URL: https://lucycraig.blog/media/261

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
Cornellseven illustrates everything that is wrong in with this story. It publicly sentences 7 (barely) men to a lifetime of ridicule and shame, without a trial, or a conviction. By presenting only one side of the story, and without an exploration of shared guilt and dual victimhood, it has more in common with fascist propaganda than the democratic ideal of free speech and public discourse. Avoid.
Anonymous
If being drunk means you can’t give consent to sex,
Then 2/3rds of college undergrads are rapists,
Regardless of their gender.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
If anything tat says more about how fucked up our society is than it says about this case.
 
That she was drunk isn't even the big problem here, the biggest problem is what the 7 did. It wasn't just another casual sexual encounter, it was a fucking "open shop" for them to just "whip it out" to take advantage of and fuck a woman who was drunk and drugged out of her mind.
 
She wasn't just drunk, she was very drunk and very high. Yes, they were drunk and high too, but they were the ones taking advantage of her, and being drunk and high is not an excuse for that, there is never an excuse for that.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

Anonymous
WDYM taking advantage of her. She sucked so many dicks, did ketamine of others’ dick, banged so many times, and importantly, every time when she says no the boys stopped, such as foursome, anal… She was clearly enjoying

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous
Our bodies our choices

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 3

Anonymous
If Lucy Craig had as many pricks sticking out of her as she's had stuck in her, she'd be a porcupine

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 1

Anonymous
You're only allowed to show men are evil oppressors and women are innocent victims. Delete this.

↳ Reply to Anonymous · Level 2

C @cornellseven.com
Nobody is saying this. You're arguing against a straw-man opponent that you made up in your own mind.
 
We're simply arguing that she was taken advantage of based on the evidence that we have seen. Just calling us feminists or misandrists is not a counter argument, if anything it shows shows how wrong you guys are because you're unable to make actual arguments to support your claims.

↳ Reply to @cornellseven.com · Level 3

Anonymous
Read her report to Cornell, posted on this site. She clearly states she told these "bros" she didn't want to do some things, and they complied. She never asked to leave and never asked for help (even in her 3:05am text). Some frat bros even threw guys out of the room that were there gawking. Is she a victim? Yes. Was she raped? Apparently whe has come to that conclusion. Are these guys rapists? Doesn't look that way.