Diego Sarabia is among seven former Cornell University students named in a civil lawsuit involving allegations of sexual assault at the university’s Chi Phi fraternity house in October 2024, as prosecutors now reopen the criminal investigation and prepare to take the matter before a grand jury.
The latest developments have also brought renewed attention to Sarabia’s reported employment connection with Wells Fargo. However, claims circulating online that Wells Fargo has already fired him have not been independently confirmed by the bank or by the latest credible reporting reviewed for this article.
The legal case remains unresolved. Sarabia has been named as a defendant in the civil lawsuit, but he has not been criminally charged in connection with the allegations. The allegations in the lawsuit also have not been established as facts in court.
Who Is Diego Sarabia?
Diego Sarabia is a Cornell University alumnus who graduated from the university’s Nolan School of Hotel Administration in 2025. Cornell records cited in recent reporting list him as an alumnus rather than a current student.
Public professional information has linked Sarabia to Wells Fargo. His professional profile identifies experience with the financial institution and describes work connected to commercial real estate and corporate and investment banking.
Recent reports have focused on Sarabia because his name appears in a civil complaint filed in New York involving allegations stemming from an October 2024 incident at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house.
The lawsuit identifies seven individual defendants:
- Matthew Ingalls
- Johnathan Newell
- Winston Lee
- Gillio Lopes
- Diego Sarabia
- Scott Norris
- Scott Kretzschmar
The woman who filed the lawsuit is identified as Jane Doe in court documents to protect her identity.
What Does the Lawsuit Allege?
The civil complaint describes an alleged sexual assault at the Chi Phi fraternity house in Ithaca on the night of October 19, 2024.
According to the lawsuit, Jane Doe had spent the evening at events and establishments in Ithaca before going to the Chi Phi house. The complaint alleges that she was intoxicated and later pressured into taking a substance she was told was ketamine.
The lawsuit claims that several fraternity members then sexually assaulted her while she was incapacitated.
Sarabia is specifically named in the allegations. The complaint claims that he entered the room while the woman attempted to cover herself and that he grabbed her face and kissed her after she tried to push him away.
The lawsuit further alleges that Sarabia was among the men present during the subsequent events described in the complaint.
These statements are allegations contained in a civil lawsuit. They have not been proven in a criminal trial or established by a court as fact.
Why Has the Cornell Investigation Been Reopened?
The major development in the case is the decision by Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten to reopen the criminal investigation.
Authorities had previously reviewed the matter after the woman reported the incident to Cornell University police in November 2024.
At that time, prosecutors did not bring criminal charges.
Van Houten has said the account described in the new civil lawsuit differs significantly from the account contained in the woman’s original police report. The newer lawsuit alleges drugging, lack of consent and prolonged sexual assault.
The district attorney’s office now intends to reconsider the available evidence.
The case is expected to be presented to a Tompkins County grand jury. Prosecutors will determine what charges, if any, are appropriate based on the evidence available to them.
The reopening of an investigation does not mean criminal charges have been filed. It also does not establish that any defendant committed the conduct alleged in the civil complaint.
What Is Known About the Original 2024 Investigation?
The initial investigation began after the woman reported the alleged incident to Cornell University police several weeks after October 19, 2024.
The district attorney has said that the initial report did not include the same allegations of drugging and nonconsensual sexual activity that appear in the later civil complaint.
That difference is central to the decision to revisit the case.
Van Houten has indicated that prosecutors want to determine whether additional evidence now available could change the earlier assessment and support a finding of criminal conduct.
The new civil lawsuit has therefore become an important part of the renewed examination.
The prosecutor’s office has indicated that Jane Doe’s cooperation will be part of the grand jury process.
What Happened at Cornell After the Allegations?
Cornell University conducted its own Title IX process separately from the criminal investigation.
The university has said that a hearing panel reviewed the allegations and issued a range of sanctions, including expulsions and suspensions.
Cornell has not publicly identified the individual sanctions imposed on each defendant because of student privacy restrictions.
The university also said the Chi Phi chapter involved in the matter was closed in 2024 and remains barred from campus.
A dispute has emerged over the characterization of the university’s disciplinary response.
The civil complaint alleges that several students were given an opportunity to mitigate disciplinary consequences by submitting essays.
Cornell has rejected the suggestion that writing essays was the sole consequence imposed on those involved. The university has emphasized that its Title IX process resulted in sanctions that included suspensions and expulsions.
The distinction matters because the university’s disciplinary process and the criminal investigation are separate proceedings with different standards and potential consequences.
What Is the Current Status of Diego Sarabia?
Sarabia is currently a defendant in the civil lawsuit.
He has not been criminally charged in connection with the alleged 2024 incident.
Recent reporting has also identified him as having a professional connection to Wells Fargo. His professional profile has described Wells Fargo employment and commercial real estate work.
However, his current employment status has not been definitively confirmed by Wells Fargo in the latest reporting available.
A report published by Queen City News on September 29 said the outlet contacted Wells Fargo to confirm Sarabia’s employment status but had not received a response.
That makes claims that Sarabia has already been fired by Wells Fargo unverified at the time of publication.
This distinction is important because social-media posts and other online reports have circulated claims about his employment. Without confirmation from Wells Fargo or another authoritative source, those claims should not be treated as established fact.
Did Wells Fargo Fire Diego Sarabia?
There is currently no verified public confirmation that Wells Fargo terminated Sarabia.
Reports have identified him as someone connected to the bank, and his professional profile has listed Wells Fargo experience. But the latest reporting reviewed for this article does not provide a confirmed statement from Wells Fargo announcing his termination.
As a result, the most accurate current status is that Sarabia’s Wells Fargo employment status has not been publicly confirmed by the bank.
This is different from saying that he was fired.
Employment decisions involving an individual can also be private personnel matters. Unless Wells Fargo publicly confirms a termination or a reliable document establishes it, the claim should remain unverified.
What Happens Next in the Criminal Case?
The next significant legal step is the renewed review by Tompkins County prosecutors.
The district attorney has indicated that the matter will be prepared for presentation to a grand jury after prosecutors review the allegations and evidence.
A grand jury process can determine whether sufficient evidence exists to issue an indictment. Until that process occurs, there is no announced criminal charge against Sarabia arising from the allegations.
The renewed investigation could examine evidence referenced in the civil complaint, including accounts of the alleged events and communications described in the lawsuit.
Prosecutors will also have to consider the differences between the woman’s original 2024 report and the allegations made in the later civil proceeding.
That process is separate from the civil lawsuit, which seeks legal remedies against the named defendants and other parties.
What Does the Civil Lawsuit Mean for Sarabia?
Being named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit does not mean that a person has been found liable.
The lawsuit is the plaintiff’s account of what allegedly happened and sets out claims against the individual defendants, Cornell University and other parties.
The seven men named in the complaint have not been convicted of crimes arising from the allegations.
Recent reporting has confirmed that at least some defendants have disputed the allegations. Attorneys representing defendants Scott Kretzschmar and Scott Norris have publicly challenged aspects of the complaint.
Sarabia has not publicly responded to the allegations in the latest reports reviewed for this article.
The absence of a public response from an individual should not be interpreted as an admission or denial.
Why Diego Sarabia’s Name Is Receiving New Attention
Sarabia’s name has received renewed attention because three developments have converged.
First, the civil lawsuit publicly identifies the seven individual defendants and provides detailed allegations concerning the October 2024 incident.
Second, prosecutors have now reopened their criminal investigation and are considering the matter for presentation to a grand jury.
Third, reporting has connected Sarabia to Wells Fargo, creating additional public interest in his current professional status.
The employment issue remains separate from the criminal and civil proceedings.
At this point, the verified information establishes that Sarabia is named in the lawsuit and that prosecutors are revisiting the underlying allegations. It does not establish criminal guilt or confirm that Wells Fargo has terminated him.
Diego Sarabia Case: Key Facts at a Glance
| Issue | Current status |
|---|---|
| Cornell connection | Sarabia is listed as a Cornell alumnus |
| Civil lawsuit | Sarabia is one of seven individual defendants |
| Alleged incident | October 19, 2024, at Cornell’s Chi Phi fraternity house |
| Criminal charges | None announced against Sarabia |
| Criminal investigation | Reopened by the Tompkins County District Attorney |
| Grand jury | Prosecutors intend to present the matter to a grand jury |
| Cornell disciplinary process | University says sanctions included suspensions and expulsions |
| Chi Phi chapter | Closed in 2024 and barred from campus, according to Cornell |
| Wells Fargo connection | Public professional information links Sarabia to Wells Fargo |
| Wells Fargo firing | Not independently confirmed |
| Current legal status | Allegations remain unresolved |
What Is Confirmed as of the Latest Update?
The most important confirmed development is the reopening of the criminal investigation.
Prosecutors are reassessing the case after the allegations in the civil lawsuit presented a substantially different account from the one contained in the initial 2024 police report.
Sarabia remains one of the individuals named in the civil complaint. No criminal conviction has been entered against him, and prosecutors have not announced criminal charges against him.
The Wells Fargo issue remains less certain.
Although multiple sources have connected Sarabia to Wells Fargo, the latest local reporting available as of September 29 says the bank had not confirmed his employment status.
Therefore, reports stating definitively that Wells Fargo fired Sarabia should not be presented as verified news at this stage.
The case is now moving into a new phase as prosecutors evaluate whether the evidence warrants criminal charges. The grand jury process will determine whether the reopened investigation leads to indictments.
What Readers Should Watch Next
The next verified developments are likely to involve the prosecutor’s review, the grand jury process and any formal decision concerning potential criminal charges.
The civil lawsuit will continue separately, meaning additional filings could provide further information about the allegations and the defendants’ responses.
For Sarabia specifically, any official statement from Wells Fargo would clarify his employment status. Until such a statement or other reliable documentation becomes available, claims about his termination should be treated cautiously.
The distinction between an allegation, a civil claim, an investigation and a criminal charge is especially important in this case.
As of the latest available information, Sarabia is a named defendant in a civil lawsuit, while prosecutors have reopened their examination of the underlying allegations. The legal process has not reached a final determination of criminal responsibility.
The latest developments surrounding Diego Sarabia remain closely tied to the reopened Cornell investigation, and further verified updates could clarify both the legal case and his employment status.