I spent years investigating and prosecuting sexual assault cases. That experience makes this decision almost unfathomable to me. According to the transcript, this young woman swatted away one man’s hand because she was uncomfortable. She told another “no” multiple times or that she was too tired. She described what happened as coercion and said she was “completely and totally incapacitated.” Then there are the group-chat messages. At 1:42 a.m., a message suggested a woman was available for sex. Later, someone asked: “Shop still open?” The response: “Yea.” And yet the District Attorney concluded there wasn’t enough evidence to even seek an indictment, let alone attempt to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. That is simply staggering. I understand the evidentiary challenges of prosecuting sexual assault. I lived them. But if these facts aren’t even enough to put the case before a grand jury, we have to ask survivors what exactly we expect them to do to be believed and protected by our criminal justice system. This is also why civil sexual assault cases matter so deeply. When the criminal system fails to provide accountability, the civil justice system can give survivors another path to seek it, not only from those who harmed them, but from the institutions whose actions or failures may have enabled that harm. cbsnews.com/newyork/news/cor…