# FoxNewsVideo

Source: https://lucycraig.blog/media/698
File: FoxNewsVideo.mp4
Format: video/mp4
Description: Full Fox Interview With Thomas Giuffra
Alt text: Full Fox Interview With Thomas Giuffra

## OCR / extracted text



## Transcript

[00:00] Sally Yates is leading the independent review into how Cornell University handled the Jane Doe case and the sexual assaults in general.
[00:07] Has Jane Doe been interviewed yet and how far along is that review?
[00:12] She's not been interviewed yet. It's very early days. In fact, I was just contacted by Sally Yates earlier this week to speak with her.
[00:20] I think it's going to be a very good process as far as no stone is going to be left unturned and hopefully we'll get to the bottom of things.
[00:29] Do you think Jane Doe will be interviewed for that process?
[00:31] She absolutely will be.
[00:32] And I suspect her family will be as well because part of the issue with Cornell is their response
[00:37] to the rapes and what they did after the rapes and I think that's important and her parents
[00:42] had a lot of involvement with that.
[00:44] Any sense how long this review will take?
[00:46] Well, I think they'll do a much better job than the district attorney of Tompkins
[00:51] County.
[00:52] I would imagine it's a matter of months and I think she will do an excellent
[00:56] job.
[00:57] Now Cornell's faculty senate voted yesterday to go ahead with a no confidence vote.
[01:00] We were actually listening in on that call against Cornell president Kotlikoff and the administration.
[01:07] They decided to do this rather than wait for Sally Yates's review to be finished.
[01:12] So this vote is going to happen over the next week virtually by the faculty senate.
[01:17] Does Jane Doe have confidence in Michael Kotlikoff to lead Cornell?
[01:21] I think she has some concerns.
[01:23] I think following the assaults, the president of our sorority reached out to him and his
[01:28] response was, well why didn't she go to the police sooner?
[01:32] I mean we were talking about two weeks after the rape, she went to the police.
[01:35] And that is the one issue she really had and she didn't feel that there was a great response
[01:40] or great support from the university following the assault.
[01:44] You know on this call there was a lot of debate among the faculty about what they
[01:48] should do.
[01:49] Do you think I mean Jane Doe has an opportunity here to help inform this vote of no confidence
[01:55] Is she willing to support a no confidence vote? I think her position is she wasn't happy with how things happen
[02:02] But her experience with Cornell has moved on
[02:05] I mean the train has left the station for if they can make some improvements
[02:09] And that's the goal of our lawsuit to make some improvements going forward
[02:13] but I think she has a lot on her plate that
[02:16] Far exceed what's going on in Ithaca, New York
[02:19] So Cornell actually disputes the second hand account.
[02:23] I'm sure you know this.
[02:24] They say that Kotlakov was questioning why bystanders didn't report the incident sooner, not necessarily specifically Jane Doe.
[02:32] What's your response to that?
[02:33] Well, I think that's convenient.
[02:34] I think the interpretation of the person who was there makes more sense than in the context of the conversation than what they're trying to say now.
[02:43] Now, as for the Cornell Police investigation, there was a lot of talk about that six-page sworn statement.
[02:48] statement by Jane Doe that did not include her assertion that she was quote 100% raped.
[02:55] Why was that statement left out given that she made changes to her statement and ultimately
[03:00] signed off on it?
[03:01] Well, she gave a statements that were 100 pages and transcribed.
[03:07] Her understanding at the time was that that 100 page interview was going to be going
[03:12] along with the statement.
[03:13] It's not just six pages, and this is it.
[03:16] And in that, it included the violence.
[03:18] It included the force.
[03:19] It included 100% certain she was raped.
[03:22] Now, you have to ask yourself, why
[03:24] was that six-page report sanitized?
[03:26] Why did it not include these important points that actually
[03:29] lay out the elements of a crime?
[03:31] But she was not the police officer.
[03:33] She was not the investigator.
[03:34] She cooperated.
[03:35] She gave this evidence.
[03:36] And apparently, it wasn't forwarded on,
[03:39] depending on who you believe.
[03:40] And you have to ask yourself, why
[03:42] was it not included in the six page report so even though Jane Joe made edits
[03:45] to that six page report it was her belief that that was not going to be the
[03:48] only document that was sent over to police why would she I mean just
[03:52] logically I mean you have to wonder why that six page report was the only thing
[03:57] that was done why was it written in the fashion it was she didn't she wasn't
[04:00] the author of it but she gave a hundred pages of testimony about what
[04:04] it occurred that included all the elements of a crime and then you a
[04:07] sanitized report is prepared which eliminated all the elements of the crime.
[04:12] You have to wonder.
[04:13] Do you think this was a cover-up by Cornell University?
[04:17] I think there was a cover-up and I'm not somebody who says that lightly.
[04:20] I certainly am not.
[04:22] And I think there was a cover-up.
[04:23] I think there was a desire to protect the institution.
[04:26] I think that went forward with up in Tompkins County because look, it's the single biggest
[04:33] employer.
[04:34] It's the source of all the revenue in the county.
[04:35] you get outside of Cornell in Tompkins County,
[04:37] you have cows, you have farms, that's it.
[04:40] So you have to wonder why all of this information
[04:43] was not included, why were the interviews not included
[04:46] to the police, why were all the statements that supported
[04:50] a crime not forward and onto the district attorney.
[04:53] But here's the bigger question.
[04:54] The district attorney is the person
[04:55] who's in charge of doing the prosecution.
[04:58] Why didn't they request all the investigation materials?
[05:01] And here's the thing that I think is very important.
[05:03] Why are they being leaked?
[05:05] Because I don't get investigation materials as an attorney in a civil case.
[05:09] They go to the defense lawyer in a criminal case, they're called Brady materials.
[05:14] So who's releasing these materials?
[05:16] Who's leaking them to the press?
[05:17] I think what happened was the people who did the investigation thought there was
[05:20] a crime.
[05:22] And I think they're not happy that they have egg on their face and being portrayed
[05:26] as inept, because that's what I thought.
[05:29] And now they're showing, look, we did our job, but the people in charge, the
[05:32] the bosses didn't follow up on it.
[05:35] So you have been accused of leaking this information.
[05:38] In fact, in court, one of the attorneys for the accused
[05:40] says that you are attempting to poison the jury pool
[05:44] by going out there and leaking this information.
[05:46] Do you deny that you're leaking anything to the press,
[05:49] the text messages, anything?
[05:51] I sent a letter to the court.
[05:54] I offered to give the court a review of my emails
[05:57] and my text where I said I can't give them to you
[06:01] because these are confidential.
[06:02] I was the only one who did that.
[06:04] All the defense lawyers, the people who said
[06:05] I was the leaker, didn't take up the offer.
[06:09] They didn't say, you can look at my text,
[06:11] you can look at my emails, what does that tell you?
[06:13] And here's the thing, the things that have been leaked,
[06:16] of course, the findings, they haven't been leaked
[06:18] because they're favorable to me.
[06:19] After a month long hearing,
[06:21] everybody who I sued was found guilty of something.
[06:24] I'm not gonna tell you what,
[06:26] but why are they not leaking that?
[06:28] Ask yourself that.
[06:29] So who is leaking this, you think?
[06:30] I have no idea, but I know it's not me.
[06:35] I wanted to ask you, so you have suggested
[06:41] that this two-year delay may have resulted
[06:43] in critical evidence in this case being destroyed.
[06:46] Do you have any evidence at all
[06:48] that critical evidence has been destroyed in this case?
[06:50] What I have is my experience as a lawyer
[06:52] looking at cases, evaluating cases for over 30 years.
[06:55] The best time to get evidence
[06:56] is close in time to the event.
[06:58] The longer a time goes by, evidence gets lost,
[07:02] gets, things go, happen to it,
[07:04] and you don't have the opportunity to develop your case.
[07:07] That's why when I get involved in a case,
[07:09] I wanna get into it early so I can collect the evidence.
[07:11] That's the delay.
[07:13] Time is the delay,
[07:15] and time prevents you from building a solid case.
[07:18] But why throw out the assertion
[07:20] that critical evidence could be destroyed?
[07:22] I mean, at a time when we don't know that.
[07:24] Well, I know enough about Instagram,
[07:26] The whole idea about Instagram as it's there, it's gone.
[07:29] If the group chat, which invited people
[07:31] to participate in the rape,
[07:33] if that hadn't been given to Jane Doe within two days,
[07:37] knowing what I know about Instagram,
[07:39] it would have disappeared.
[07:40] So logically, people are on Instagram, it disappears.
[07:44] People are on Telegram, it disappears.
[07:47] What I can tell you is I logically know
[07:50] that the best time to get evidence
[07:51] in close and proximity to the event.
[07:54] Has Jane Doe sat with Attorney General Letitia James' team yet,
[07:57] and has she given a sworn statement?
[07:59] She has not.
[08:02] Do you have any idea where we stand on that investigation
[08:04] right now?
[08:05] It's early days.
[08:06] No conversation, no sworn statement, nothing.
[08:09] So there's an effort today in Monticello, New York.
[08:12] I had no idea why it's happening there.
[08:13] But a New York judge is hearing arguments
[08:15] between one of the accused attorneys and Letitia James
[08:18] and Governor Kathy Huckle.
[08:20] Letitia James is being accused of being
[08:22] biased against the accused man and pre-judging this case by posting on X about Jane Doe quote
[08:28] we stand with you this was three days before she was chosen to be the special prosecutor.
[08:33] Do you think A.G.
[08:34] James should be replaced as special prosecutor to remove even the appearance that an independent
[08:39] investigation is biased?
[08:41] Well I think look I'm not a judge I don't rule on that but what I can say is this
[08:47] Leticia James, I disagreed with her during the Weinstein litigation.
[08:52] I mean, I'm on record as the person who blew up the class action settled with me
[08:57] and two other lawyers because I didn't think it was fair.
[08:59] So, look, Leticia James, I didn't think she was right that time.
[09:02] She could be right this time.
[09:03] However, the basic point is this, the New York State Attorney General's office
[09:07] is not equipped to do criminal investigations.
[09:10] She's going to appoint somebody who's outside, who's an experienced prosecutor.
[09:13] She's not going to be in charge of it.
[09:15] It's much ado about nothing.
[09:16] I think because they'll be bringing in a professional either somebody, a very experienced
[09:21] prosecutor from one of the offices down in Manhattan or Brooklyn who deal with sex crimes
[09:25] all the time.
[09:27] And that's who's going to be doing the investigation.
[09:29] Tish James is not doing any investigation.
[09:31] But ultimately it's in her office and she's given the title of special prosecutor.
[09:35] So why go through this if it doesn't matter?
[09:38] Well, why go through this is this is how government works.
[09:41] She's the leading law officer in the state of New York.
[09:44] Logically she gets the appointment because she's the leading law officer in the state
[09:48] I mean you're not going to appoint somebody who doesn't fall into the bureaucratic hierarchy of our government
[09:54] That's how government works
[09:55] Would you have preferred somebody who wasn't so political to be in charge of this thing? Well look candidly
[10:01] the appointment of Letitia James has brought out people who I think are kooks and it caused
[10:08] Trouble for me personally it caused trouble for my client personally because of
[10:13] people get she's a polarizing figure now you know that's I could have done
[10:18] without that yeah you know just overall what does Jane Doe want as a result of
[10:28] these investigations which she wants first and foremost is she wants there
[10:33] to be change at Cornell how they educate students to prevent rape let
[10:40] them know there's consequences if there is sexual abuse and that there's
[10:44] appropriate support if something happens. Now that didn't happen in her case across the board so
[10:50] look people have tried to say look this is all about money it's yes it is about money but it's
[10:54] also about change because any resolution with this case is going to have strings attached that
[10:58] require them to take steps to educate their incoming freshmen look when I went to college 40
[11:03] years ago it was made very clear to me at orientation what's appropriate what's not what are
[11:07] the consequences it's not going to be a joke for example we know we know within 48 hours
[11:13] before this, this, this rapes occurred, could get arrested for drugs, ketamine, overdose,
[11:20] ketamine.
[11:21] Within 48 hours, there shouldn't have been a party that night.
[11:24] That should be, and their rules say there shouldn't have been a sanctioned party, but
[11:27] it went ahead.
[11:28] That kind of stuff shouldn't have happened, and it should stop going forward.
[11:31] And then what happened with the ketamine?
[11:33] Why is there so much ketamine there?
[11:34] I'll ask you about the ketamine in a minute, but I want to ask you about whether, so
[11:40] You talk about the monetary, I guess, the compensation that you're looking for with
[11:45] your civil lawsuit.
[11:47] Would Jane Doe be willing to settle, to make all of this go away with a monetary settlement
[11:52] that you found sufficient?
[11:54] No.
[11:55] It's going to come with strengths, because her goal is also to make a change.
[11:58] Her goal is to make sure that going forward, there are no more Jane Does.
[12:02] It's not just about money.
[12:03] It's about change at that institution, how they deal with sex abuse, how they
[12:07] deal with rapes and how they support women and men if this happens.
[12:12] I mean, look, 35% of the people at their institution, and that's 5,000 people, 5,000 have, according
[12:21] to their own, their own, let me do that again.
[12:24] Yeah, go ahead.
[12:25] Let me do that again.
[12:26] Do I want to ask a question?
[12:27] Ask me the question.
[12:28] Yeah, so would Jane Doe be willing to settle for any kind of monetary settlement in
[12:33] this case?
[12:34] This is different than other cases.
[12:35] This is going to have strings attached.
[12:37] This is going to require Cornell to take steps to prevent sex abuse on campus and to give
[12:43] support to people who are survivors of sex abuse on campus, none of which happened in
[12:47] this case.
[12:48] I mean, here's the thing, 35% of all students at that institution that's reported were
[12:56] subjected to unwanted sexual conduct, sexual assault.
[13:00] That's an incredible number.
[13:01] Now, translate what that 35% is.
[13:04] I looked up, there's 16,000 people who go to Cornell,
[13:07] that's about 5,000 people.
[13:09] That's an incredible amount, actually more.
[13:10] I'm wrong about that, let me change that again.
[13:15] I'll start again.
[13:16] I won't use a PGA on the math, don't worry about that.
[13:18] What?
[13:19] The math part, don't worry about that.
[13:19] Yeah, you're good, you're good.
[13:20] The rest of it was great, yeah, same with us,
[13:22] math ain't great.
[13:23] Math ain't not good, that's us
[13:24] with the liberal arts degree, so that's a good math.
[13:28] So, hypothetically here, a settlement is reached
[13:32] with strings and money.
[13:33] Would Jane Doe be willing to drop all criminal proceedings
[13:36] or investigations?
[13:38] No, no, they need to be accountable.
[13:41] They need to be accountable.
[13:42] These boys raped her,
[13:43] and they should be accountable under the law.
[13:47] Wow, so there's no way out of this criminal.
[13:49] Well, we don't make the decision
[13:50] who's gonna prosecute her, who's not.
[13:52] She wouldn't drop the charges
[13:54] or she wouldn't dismiss the charges
[13:56] on her own right with a settlement.
[13:58] No, no way, no way.
[14:00] They should be accountable.
[14:03] So a judge recently ruled that Jane Doe can continue to use her pseudo name and does not
[14:09] need to be publicly identified.
[14:12] Is Jane Doe continuing to receive threats and what are those threats like?
[14:16] The threats have tapered off because people who make threats are cowards.
[14:20] And once I was out there explaining that the people who did the swatting and the
[14:25] people who were making threats against my wife and against Jane Doe, they seemed
[14:28] to have crawled back into their hole.
[14:30] So the threats have decreased tremendously because cowards don't want to deal with the
[14:35] FBI.
[14:36] They don't want to get hauled into jail.
[14:38] And so they've gone down dramatically.
[14:40] And I think there's been an out backlash about what was going on and the people who were
[14:45] doing this.
[14:46] And that's a good thing.
[14:47] It shows that we're Americans, we're good people, and we don't do things like that.
[14:51] The attorneys for the accused man agreed that Jane Doe should have her anonymity
[14:55] given the threats that she's facing.
[14:58] However, in your civil lawsuit, you named all seven accused men.
[15:01] Yep.
[15:02] Why did you do that?
[15:03] Well, because, A, the law doesn't provide them with the right to anonymity.
[15:07] It does provide to somebody who's a survivor of sex abuse.
[15:11] The fact is, by identifying them, my experience has been,
[15:14] I don't know if these guys, is that there's usually information that comes out
[15:20] when defendants' names are public.
[15:22] For example, I had a case where I sued somebody publicly and I received three calls for other
[15:33] victims of this person.
[15:34] In fact, I had one on another case this morning that I got for somebody with a doctor who
[15:39] was abusing a patient and I received an email just this morning from somebody who identified
[15:44] as a survivor and a victim of what had happened.
[15:46] What about threats towards them and their rights to at least have all the facts
[15:51] out there before they're being accused of rape?
[15:54] Well, I do have the facts, and the fact is, what they did was wrong.
[16:00] That group chat is devastating.
[16:03] There's no way to go hide that.
[16:04] You can spin it whatever way you want, but it's an invitation to rape somebody.
[16:10] Plain and simple.
[16:11] So you have no concern about the fact that their names are out there before all of
[16:14] this has been adjudicated?
[16:16] No, because I think they did what they did.
[16:19] They should be accountable.
[16:20] They're sitting there, some of them are still going to Cornell.
[16:22] My client got into Cornell.
[16:24] They thought she was somebody from some Nowhere'sville and there wasn't going to be consequences,
[16:28] but they're going to get their Ivy League degree.
[16:29] She's not getting her Ivy League degree.
[16:31] That's not right.
[16:32] And you see Jane Doe as a completely different, I guess some people might say there's
[16:39] a hypocrisy in wanting Jane Doe to keep her anonymity, but not these men.
[16:44] There's no hypocrisy.
[16:45] The law is the law.
[16:47] It's written to, you know, in a fashion that protects survivors of sex abuse.
[16:54] It's not written in a fashion to protect perpetrators of sex abuse.
[16:58] That's the law.
[16:59] That's what our politicians up in Albany came up with, and that's the law in the state
[17:03] of New York.
[17:04] It's not my law.
[17:05] It's not Jane Doe's law.
[17:06] It's the law of the state of New York.
[17:07] Last few questions here.
[17:08] You were asked, one of the accused asked a judge to issue a gag order to bar you
[17:14] from talking to the press.
[17:15] talked about this, arguing that you were poisoning the jury pool. A judge denied that
[17:19] request. There's a Netflix documentary that's coming out today. Are you getting paid for
[17:26] that documentary? Why choose to continue to go out there?
[17:29] Well, part of the reason I'm continuing to go out there is the following. There's
[17:33] been a backlash against Jane Doe. There's been leaking of documents to kind of try
[17:37] to control the narrative by the other side. And I've seen it before. I saw it in
[17:43] the Sean Combs case, and I knew it was gonna happen in this case, and sure enough it did.
[17:48] And so I'm basically being the voice for Jane Doe, because Jane Doe can't speak.
[17:51] I mean, look, the defense lawyers are out there talking, and they're trying to spin
[17:55] their story.
[17:56] For example, you know, this whole idea that obviously they have no idea of how rape
[18:01] trauma works, and they don't like the fact that I can explain how rape trauma
[18:04] works, because guess what?
[18:05] I've represented people for years and years, and I've read hundreds of studies,
[18:09] so I understand it, but they tried to silence it.
[18:12] I think you just referred to this, but I want to ask you about the TMZ text messages that
[18:15] were leaked.
[18:16] And those messages Jane Doe refers to the alleged assault as a quote, gang bang, saying,
[18:21] I don't think we should feel any shame for that part.
[18:25] Our body, our choice.
[18:27] The friendly texts are the two of the seven men she's accused of rape.
[18:30] What's your response to these texts?
[18:32] My response to these texts, and this is why they're being leaked in this selective
[18:36] fashion, is they're the typical reaction of somebody following a rape, particularly
[18:40] involving close friends.
[18:42] are rape survivors and this is not me saying this you can look at there's many
[18:46] many studies and there's no studies out there that say the contrary rape
[18:50] survivors don't want to be identified as a victim there's denial first step of
[18:54] any rape survivors processing then there's shame what could I have done
[18:57] differently and then there's finally acceptance so you know what that's what
[19:01] science said it's not what I say and that's why the defense tried to
[19:05] silence me because I can explain the science and they don't want the
[19:08] science out there. Yeah, there's also a text message at 3 0 5 in the morning to
[19:12] Jane Doe's roommate in which she asked if she was coming home that night and Jane
[19:16] answers IDK. I don't know. The text exchange occurred somewhere between a
[19:21] half hour an hour after she says multiple men were snorting ketamine off
[19:24] her body and that she was quote out of it. You say in your civil lawsuit
[19:28] that she was totally incapacitated. The defense says this is proof that
[19:33] she was not incapacitated that she was not out of it. Well, I think the
[19:37] The people who said they were snorting ketamine offer, don't dispute they were snorting ketamine
[19:40] offer.
[19:41] The people who had sexual relations with her don't deny that they had sexual relations
[19:45] with her.
[19:46] I think taking one select text out of 500 pages of evidence in the Title IX hearing
[19:53] and is really selective, because I could cherry pick anything I want to.
[19:58] But you know, that's what's going on.
[20:00] And finally, sources with direct knowledge are telling TMZ that DEA is working with local law enforcement to hunt down the source of the ketamine drug from that night.
[20:09] Has the DEA contacted you or Jane Doe about ketamine or that investigation?
[20:14] No, obviously there's a problem. One of the things I believe we mentioned in the lawsuit is one of the men said that the ketamine came from Cornell Labs.
[20:23] And if they're investigating it, they should.
[20:25] I mean, logically, why was the Cornell police not investigating why the Kai-Fi house was
[20:31] overrun with ketamine?
[20:32] It's a date rape drug.
[20:34] Everybody knows that.
[20:35] And so, why, logically, are you in Ithaca, New York, why would you not want to investigate
[20:40] why there's so much ketamine?
[20:41] I mean, look, they had a drug overdose, they had a drug bust.
[20:44] And then they have this incident all in a short period of time.
[20:47] Doesn't that show a problem?
[20:48] Doesn't that show why is there so much ketamine up in Ithaca, New York in
[20:52] in this one frat house.
[20:53] Would Jane Doe be willing to participate
[20:55] in a drug investigation?
[20:56] Well, I don't think she knows anything
[20:58] about the origins of the drugs.
[20:59] That I can say for sure.
[21:01] But I think if they're looking into it,
[21:03] they should have looked into it two years ago,
[21:04] and it makes logical sense
[21:06] that they're looking into it now.
[21:08] And finally, overall, there just seems to be this idea
[21:12] that when people read these text messages
[21:13] in the narrative that's been out there,
[21:15] there is a sense from reading the text messages
[21:18] that Jane Doe at least wanted to have sex
[21:20] with two of those men.
[21:22] Your civil lawsuit is unequivocal that she was raped
[21:25] by all of the men, that she was totally incapacitated,
[21:28] forced to do this, even though there are text messages
[21:31] and part documents out there that show that Jane Doe
[21:35] was interested in having sex with at least two of the men
[21:37] and there are friendly texts before and after.
[21:40] Why go so far in your civil lawsuit
[21:44] to accuse all seven of forced rape
[21:48] And not just at least, you know, isn't there a plausibility here that she wanted to have sex with two of the seven men and that it was raped by the other men at some point in that night?
[22:00] It wasn't consensual?
[22:02] What I want to be clear on, and I've said this many times and the complaint says this, I'm not saying every single one of these men committed rape.
[22:08] I'm certainly not saying that.
[22:10] What I am saying is the evidence that shows, and again people look in little slivers and cherry-picked to try to present to a narrative,
[22:17] If she was intoxicated from the time she left her sorority house, she should have never
[22:22] left that sorority house.
[22:24] Never, never, never.
[22:25] And she went out into the world, she served alcohol at two different bars, and then she
[22:29] shows up there.
[22:30] She had no ability to consent.
[22:31] Period.
[22:32] Okay.
[22:36] I think we've covered everything.
[22:38] Do you know anything you want to say?
[22:40] Anything that we may not have covered?
[22:41] No, no, no.
[22:42] Where'd you hear about the DEA thing?
[22:44] TMZ.
[22:45] That's why I quoted them.
[22:47] We don't have it ourselves.
[22:48] I think you have one more question.
[22:51] Sure.
[22:53] Just look at me once you respond.
[22:54] Yeah.
[22:55] You alluded to this that she wants to see changes at Cornell.
[22:58] Yeah.
[23:00] Does Jane Doe, or do you have actual concrete ideas
[23:05] as to how this kind of culture can change, not only at Cornell
[23:09] but university campuses across the country?
[23:11] Yeah, I think the one thing why this is resonated
[23:15] is because it's so prevalent,
[23:18] and it's not just a Cornell problem.
[23:19] I think it's university-wide,
[23:22] I think it's society-wide, frankly,
[23:24] and there are steps that universities can take
[23:28] to decrease the risk of the incidents.
[23:31] For example, I did do looking at some of the statistics
[23:34] from other schools, and there were other schools
[23:36] that had kind of high numbers, like 35%,
[23:39] and they instituted programs to kind of address this,
[23:42] and their numbers dropped down to 20.
[23:45] So that's a big jump.
[23:46] So if you take the affirmative steps, the incidences go down
[23:52] and people get educated.
[23:53] I mean, look, where I went to school, it's very low.
[23:55] Relatively, it's only 7%.
[23:57] But I know where I went to school 40 years ago,
[23:59] it was very clear to me that if you did something inappropriate
[24:02] like this, it's no ifs, buts, or maybes, you're out.
[24:05] And you treat women in a certain way.
[24:07] And if you don't, there are going to be consequences.
[24:09] Cornell doesn't seem like they have consequences
[24:12] in a lot of ways.
[24:12] And that's a problem and that leads to a culture where you end up with 5,000 people out of
[24:19] the total population of the undergraduate school being subjected to unwanted sexual
[24:24] conduct, some kind of assault or rape.

## Machine-readable JSON

https://lucycraig.blog/media/698/index.json