A key campus police interview that local prosecutors say they never received in full before initially declining to bring charges in the Cornell University alleged rape case could face fresh scrutiny as former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates reviews the Ivy League school's handling of the allegations.Yates, who served as deputy attorney general in the Obama administration, has been tapped by Cornell's trustees to conduct a sweeping independent review of the October 2024 allegations involving members of its Chi Phi fraternity, after the university's own investigation resulted in expulsions and suspensions.The woman, identified in court papers by the pseudonym Jane Doe, told Cornell University Police during a November 2024 interview, "I can say with 100% confidence I was raped," according to a transcript obtained by CBS News. She also described later sexual activity as coercive and said she had been "completely and totally incapacitated."Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten, however, said his office reviewed a six-page sworn statement that described Doe's participation in the sexual activity and drug use as voluntary and consensual.Van Houten said his office did not initially receive the complete interview and told CBS News last week that the information in the fuller interview "changes the landscape for me."INSIDE EXPLOSIVE CORNELL RAPE ALLEGATIONS: 7 MEN ACCUSED, CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS AND A POLITICAL FIRESTORMScott Iseman, a New York attorney who has represented students accused of campus sexual misconduct, said Yates could review Doe's full police interview and compare it with her sworn statement, later testimony and other evidence gathered during Cornell's investigation."Those full recorded interviews, I can tell you from experience, have a treasure trove of information that are really, really important to exactly what happened," Iseman said."It wouldn't surprise me if there was additional information in there that would have changed the trajectory of this case because that happens all the time," he added.The apparent differences between Doe's full interview and her shorter sworn statement could be particularly significant, Iseman said."Law enforcement is supposed to make sure that all salient facts are included in that sworn statement," he said.Cornell said its police department provided prosecutors with Doe's sworn statement and a Snapchat screenshot in 2024, describing the evidence-sharing process as standard protocol when a possible crime has occurred.Iseman cautioned that he had not reviewed the complete interview, which has not been made publicly available, and could not determine whether any omitted information was material. It remains unclear why the full interview was not initially provided to Van Houten's office. Fox News Digital reached out to Cornell University Police and the Tompkins County District Attorney's Office for clarification.Cornell said Yates and her team will have access to relevant records, case files, university personnel and leadership as they review the school's response, under its original Title IX investigation, which determines whether students violated university sexual misconduct policies rather than criminal law.Beyond the police interview, Iseman said Yates could identify witnesses who were never questioned, overlooked text messages or social media evidence, and other information that did not emerge during Cornell's original investigation."There's a lot that potentially she could uncover," Iseman said.But he cautioned against assuming Cornell mishandled the allegations."It may have all been done very appropriately by Cornell. We don't know yet."CORNELL PICKS FORMER DEPUTY US ATTORNEY GENERAL TO REVIEW SEX ASSAULT RESPONSECornell has defended its handling of the allegations, pointing to an extensive investigation that included more than 50 interviews and 12 days of disciplinary hearings.University President Michael Kotlikoff said two of the seven accused students were expelled, two were suspended for at least two semesters, one had graduated before discipline could be imposed and two were found not responsible for sexual misconduct.Cornell said both the accuser and accused students had opportunities to review evidence, testify and challenge the findings through an appeals process.Yates was brought in after the case erupted into a national firestorm following Doe's Sept. 16 lawsuit, which laid out graphic allegations that seven Chi Phi fraternity members drugged and sexually assaulted her during a night involving alcohol, drugs and group sex at their fraternity house in October 2024. The allegations have since sparked protests on campus while New York Attorney General Letitia James' office is conducting a separate criminal investigation.The men have denied wrongdoing, with some maintaining the sexual activity was consensual and others denying they participated. No criminal charges have been filed against the seven men.Yates' investigation extends beyond the Chi Phi case to examine how Cornell handles sexual misconduct allegations across campus, including its oversight of fraternities, sororities and other student organizations.Her team at law firm King & Spalding will also assess Cornell's practices against federal and state laws and examine whether the university followed its own procedures in responding to the Chi Phi allegations.Any new or previously overlooked evidence identified during the review could potentially be shared with James' office, Iseman said, though Yates herself has no authority to bring charges.BAR NAMED IN CORNELL RAPE LAWSUIT DISPUTES ACCUSER'S ACCOUNT, SAYS SHE WAS NEVER SERVED ALCOHOL WHILE UNDERAGEHer findings could also lead to recommendations for improving Cornell's procedures, even if the university is found to have followed its existing rules. Cornell said Yates will report her findings and recommendations to a special committee of its Board of Trustees, which intends to share the results with the university community.Yates has tackled explosive misconduct allegations before.Her 2022 investigation into women's professional soccer exposed widespread sexual harassment, coercion and abuse by coaches, along with failures by league officials to act on complaints.What began as an investigation into individual coaches exposed much wider problems across women's soccer, prompting a series of recommendations for sweeping reforms that U.S. Soccer subsequently pledged to implement.The Cornell case also highlights a wider debate over the legal protections available to students accused of serious sexual misconduct, even as universities have the power to expel them.John R. Grasso, a Rhode Island criminal defense attorney and former police officer who has represented accused students for two decades, argued that campus disciplinary proceedings can carry life-altering consequences without offering the same legal protections available in criminal court."When I defend a student on campus, we don't have any right to discovery. We can't compel the production of anything," Grasso said.He said those limitations can make it difficult for attorneys to obtain potentially important text messages, photographs and other evidence that might support an accused student's defense.Grasso also described the difficult choice students can face when university disciplinary proceedings and criminal investigations overlap: participating in campus proceedings and potentially making statements that could affect a criminal case, or remaining silent and risking disciplinary consequences."I have a right to remain silent, but if I don't participate, I'm getting found responsible," he said, describing the dilemma he has encountered representing students.Grasso said the consequences of campus sexual misconduct allegations can extend far beyond disciplinary hearings, describing students whose education, reputations and emotional well-being have suffered even when they were ultimately cleared."Bad things happen to the accused the minute a complaint is filed against them on campus. Really bad things," he said.With the allegations now under renewed scrutiny, Iseman stressed the importance of keeping an open mind about what actually happened."Just because the allegations are salacious or dramatic does not mean that's what happened," Iseman said. "So people need to keep an open mind."