A New York judge has ordered several documents sealed in a civil rape case against Cornell University fraternity members, citing a dangerous doxing campaign that ensnared an unrelated military family.
Judge Phaedra F. Perry-Bond directed the County Clerk’s Office to seal certain case files and requested that redacted versions of the documents be filed to prevent further exposure of private information.
The case was brought by a woman, identified in court documents as Jane Doe, who alleges she was gang raped at a Chi Phi fraternity house at Cornell University in October 2024.
Seven Cornell University Chi Phi fraternity members are named as defendants in the civil lawsuit, which has attracted significant public attention and online scrutiny since it was filed.
Jane Doe has herself been subjected to threats and attempts to reveal her identity, according to her attorney, making the online harassment a two-sided problem for the court.
The sealing order also addressed a particularly troubling case of mistaken identity, in which online vigilantes used an incorrect address linked to a defendant’s name to target a completely unrelated man.
That man, a former Marine and active-duty sergeant in the Marine Corps, shares a name with one of the accused, and his family has faced relentless harassment from internet users who wrongly believed they had identified an accused rapist.
The court’s own process of serving legal papers to named parties in the lawsuit reportedly contributed to the mix-up, as papers were mistakenly delivered to the wrong individual with the same name.
Judge Perry-Bond condemned the behavior in forceful terms, writing that the court “strongly condemns the reported acts of threats and doxing, which can only be characterized as brash, reckless, and ultimately dangerous internet vigilantism.”
The judge characterized the targeting of Doe as “dangerous internet vigilantism” and called on all parties to exercise greater responsibility in how information from the case is shared publicly.
In a direct appeal to those following the case, Judge Perry-Bond urged that “everyone involved, be it the public, parties, or their attorneys, needs to do their part in bringing the temperature down before someone gets hurt.”
The case continues to draw scrutiny as courts and legal experts grapple with how to balance public access to court documents against the very real risks posed by online harassment campaigns.
