| |
 |
V. Judicial Policy: Social Violations
-
Judicial Authorities for Social Violations
- The Dean of Student Development or his/her designee is
responsible for investigating and coordinating a response to violations of social conduct.
He/She may also bring a complaint on behalf of the College. Further, he/she may require
a student to leave campus and be denied access to all College programs, facilities and
services before consideration of formal charges. This will happen when the allegations
are viewed as threatening or injurious to the well being of self, members of the
community or the orderly functioning of the College.
The Judicial Advisor is an Associate Dean who is responsible for investigating possible
violations of College social policies, bringing charges against alleged offending students, and
coordinating the judicial response. He/She may offer a student methods for resolving an issue without
resort to College Judicial Council (CJC) or Student Judicial Council (SJC) Hearings, but may not require
a student to accept these alternatives. He/She determines whether a case is heard by College Judicial
Council or Student Judicial Council and/or whether a student is acting as a representative
of the College.
This individual or his/her designee will also function as the “College’s
voice” in hearings where a charge
is being brought against an individual or group by the College rather than another
individual, and/or when specific information or evidence is required. -
Student Judicial Councils (SJC) (one or more groups
depending upon the volume of charges) composed of four students and two alternates
each, selected by the Student Nominating Committee from a pool of qualified students
nominated by their dorms or groups of houses. The students must be at least in their
second semester at the College, in good academic standing, and not subject to any
judicial sanction in the semester for which they are nominated. Students may serve
up to two one-year terms. The selection process should aim for gender, race, class
and national diversity in both the pool and the panels.
Potential panel choices should recuse themselves if they may have personal feelings for or connections
to the accused, the complainant, or the case which may bias the outcome of deliberations.
Each panel has an SJC Hearing officer and alternate.
The SJC hears cases of alleged social violations assigned to them by the Judicial Advisor.
They determine responsibility for such violations and assign sanctions appropriate to the circumstances.
This body has jurisdiction over all violations where the sanctions would not likely include suspension
from the College, dismissal from the non-academic life of the College, or expulsion from the College.
If one of these cases emerges as something more serious than it at first appears, SJC, in consultation
with the Judicial Advisor, will refer it to College Judicial Council for consideration.
The SJC Hearing Officers are chosen by the Dean of Students, in a number
equal to the number of SJC panels plus one, from the Residential Staff. Typically they will
serve a two-year term. They are assigned to an SJC panel by the Judicial Advisor after
he/she has determined the Hearing Officer is not otherwise involved in the case.
The SJC Hearing Officer will schedule and facilitate meetings, serve as a procedural resource for
the accuser and the accused, and coordinate evidence and witnesses. He/She will be present as a facilitator
at SJC deliberations and may offer information, particularly about appropriate and historically consistent
sanctions, but will not participate in SJC consensus. He/She is responsible for preparing all written
reports and sanctions.
The CJC Faculty Pool is a group of three faculty members not otherwise affiliated
with Student Development and selected by the Faculty Nominating Committee for three-year,
overlapping terms. Members of this pool function as Hearing Officers and faculty representatives
on CJC and the Appeals Board as outlined below. College Judicial Council (CJC) is made up of one faculty member, assigned
in rotation from the CJC Faculty Pool, and two students and two student alternates selected
by the Student Nominating Committee. If possible, the students should be selected from a pool
of current and former SJC members and in all cases have at least sophomore status, for up to
two one-year terms. A student may not serve on CJC and SJC concurrently. A non-consensing
Hearing Officer (see below) is also part of the group.
CJC hears cases of alleged social violations assigned to them by the Judicial Advisor.
It determines responsibility for such violations and assigns sanctions appropriate to the circumstances.
This body has jurisdiction over all very serious violations, where the sanctions would likely include
suspension from the non-academic life of the College, suspension from the College or expulsion from the College.
It is also hears appeals rising out of SJC decisions.
The CJC Hearing Officer for social violations is a Student Development
professional staff member designated by the Dean of Student Development for at least a two-year
term. The Hearing Officer is not involved with any previous processing of a specific case. These
two Hearing Officers serve as each other’s alternate. In the case of a conflict of interest,
the Dean of Student Development will designate a Hearing Officer subject to the restriction above.
The Hearing Officer oversees all matters germane to the CJC hearing portion of the judicial process.
He/She meets with and serves as a procedural resource for the accuser and the accused. With substantive
administrative support from the Student Development clerical staff, the Hearing officer monitors the coordination
of evidence and witnesses, and the scheduling of the hearing. He/She conducts the hearing and is present as a
facilitator at CJC deliberations. The Hearing Officer may offer information, particularly about appropriate and
historically consistent sanctions, but is not a member of a CJC consensus decision. He/She is responsible
for preparing and submitting a written minute re: case disposition to the Judicial Advisor who disseminates
that information (see VII below) and enforces any sanctions.
The Appeals Board (AB), which considers the merit of an appeal, is composed of the alternate,
one faculty member and one alternate student member all of whom are assigned from their respective pools
and who did not participate in the original CJC process. All AB members, including the Hearing Officer,
participate in consensus and all decisions of the Appeals Board are final.
The CJC for Appeals is convened when the Appeals Board has found merit in
an appeal and is made up of the AB Hearing Officer, one CJC faculty member and one alternate
CJC student member who have not yet been involved with the case. This group follows the
procedures of CJC. All members, including the Hearing Officer, participate in consensus
decision making, and this council’s decision is final.
A Personal Advisor, not a “Judicial Authority” but important to judicial procedures,
may accompany the accused and the complainant to Hearing Officer interviews and judicial hearings
with SJC or CJC.
The role of the Personal Advisor is to advise the student about preparing for the hearing, review the
judicial processes, and offer consultation during the hearing. The Hearing Officer, at his/her discretion may
permit the Personal Advisor to speak for and/or on behalf of the student.
A Personal Advisor may be any member of the college community: student, staff or faculty, other than
counselors, Security or Residence Life staff; he/she may not be an attorney at law. An exception might be
made by the hearing officer if the student wishes to have his/her Resident Assistant (RA) as an advisor. An Advocate for Sexual Assault may be brought by the accuser or accused to any hearing concerning sexual assault.
-
Judicial Procedures for Social Violations
Filing a Complaint: any member of the College community may
bring a complaint against a student or student group within the community. A student may
report him/herself for committing a social violation.
In the case of an alleged Social Violation, the complaint is made to the
Dean of Student Development, usually in the person of the Associate Dean for Student Conduct
who serves as the Judicial Advisor. A complainant should schedule a consultation with the
Judicial Advisor and this meeting may result in a written statement of complaint.
Disposition of Social Violation Complaints
Once a complaint has been made, the Judicial Advisor conducts an investigation.
Generally this investigation will include, but is not limited to, meeting with the accused and
the complainant separately and consulting with reporting officers and/or Residence Life personnel.
If it appears that a complaint has merit, and
depending upon the seriousness of the offense, the Judicial
Advisor may officially charge the accused student and/or may
offer the parties more than one judicial option. In extraordinary
circumstances a student may be immediately removed from campus
before a charge is made.
If a victim withdraws a complaint during the course of an
investigation and/or a disciplinary proceeding, the College
reserves the right to continue with a charge on the basis
of evidence other than the testimony of the victim.
An offer to pursue a judicial matter outside of the SJC
or CJC process is entirely up to the Judicial Advisor and
is not a matter of due process for all students or offenses.
An accused student may always refuse an alternative offer
in favor of a CJC or SJC (depending upon the charge) Hearing.
The student may consult his/her Personal Advisor or anyone
else of the student’s choosing before accepting or refusing
the offer. The decision must be made within 24 hours of the
offer. Mediation between the complainant and the accused may
be offered with the understanding that it is entirely voluntary
on both their parts and ends in a mutually acceptable agreement
that may not be appealed and will be enforced. The agreement
might include some form of community service by the accused
or an educational component agreed upon by both parties. If
an agreement cannot be reached, the matter will be referred
to the appropriate Judicial Council. Any breach of the agreement
is also a violation subject to judicial response. If the accused agrees Administration Options may be invoked
or applied, including fines, restitution, community service,
standard sanctions for standard violations, agreements that
include required counseling for a designated period of time
or a student’s voluntary withdrawal from Earlham for
some set period. Agreements reached through Administrative
Options are final and may not be appealed. A record of all
results will be placed in the CJC files. An official written charge will identify the offense and
the date of its occurrence, and will assign it to either SJC
or CJC.
Matters assigned to CJC by the Judicial Advisor are usually
those considered very serious and for which an accused person,
if found responsible, is likely to be subject to severe sanctions.
These sanctions could include suspension from the non-academic
life of the College, suspension from the College and expulsion
from the College. Matters assigned to SJC by the Judicial Advisor are those
considered less serious and not subject to suspension from
the academic life of the College, nor suspension from the
College, nor expulsion from the College.
When more than one person is accused of a social violation,
the Judicial Advisor may choose to charge the students together
or separately, and if the students are found responsible,
different sanctions may be applied to the different parties. If necessary the College in the person of the Judicial
Advisor, the Dean of Student Development or the President
may require a student to leave campus and be denied access
to all College programs, facilities and services, before consideration
of formal charges. This will happen when the alleged infractions
are viewed as a threatening or injurious to the well being
of self, members of the community, or the orderly functioning
of the College.
Upon determining which judicial council (SJC or CJC) will consider
the case, the Judicial Advisor will forward a copy of the charge to the appropriate
Hearing Officer.
The CJC Hearing Procedure for Social Violations
The hearing process and initial meetings with the Hearing
Officer begin with the presumption that the accused is innocent until found to be otherwise. In response to receiving a charge and in the advance of the hearing, the Hearing Officer
meets with all parties to the case to assure that procedures have been followed and that
the judicial process is clear to everyone.
He/She determines what witnesses and Personal Advisors will be present at the hearing. He/She provides written information about the formalities of the hearing and participant rights. He/She determines the case information to be presented at the hearing. All witnesses’ names and a list of the evidence that will be presented (and/or
the evidence itself) must be given by the parties to the Hearing Officer (or his/her clerical support)
no later than two school days before a scheduled hearing.
The Accused and Complainant will be told which members of CJC will be hearing
the case and may challenge the participation of any Council member that he/she believes may
not be impartial. The Hearing Officer will determine if the person should be replaced.
The Hearing Officer (or his/her clerical support) schedules a CJC hearing, which
will usually occur not less than three but no longer than 10 days after the student is sent
a statement of charges, and when all parties are free from class obligations. Co-curricular
involvement is not a barrier to scheduling a hearing.
Both parties may, on just one occasion, request the Hearing Officer to
reschedule a hearing. The request must be made in writing at least one class day before the
scheduled hearing.
A CJC Hearing is not a court of law and need not adhere to rules of procedure or
evidence followed in a state or federal courtroom. Still, the accused is considered innocent
of the charges unless a preponderance of information presented at the hearing (and not
personalities nor rumors about participants) leads to a different conclusion. A CJC Hearing,
however, does not take as its standard the “beyond a reasonable doubt” criteria of a courtroom.
A CJC determination shall be made on the basis of a preponderance of information: whether
it is “more likely than not” that the accused student violated the judicial policy. A CJC Hearing is a private proceeding. The hearing itself, and the waiting area
used by witnesses, parties to the case and friends and family, will (usually) not be located
in a busy office area. Adjacent classrooms or a suite of offices will be used to maintain
a reasonable amount of confidentiality for all concerned. Care will be taken so that when
series of hearings occur, participant groups will not generally see one another. Persons who must be present for a CJC Hearing include the members of the council:
two students and one faculty member, the Hearing Officer, the accused, the complainant(s)
(note below for special circumstances), and the Judicial Advisor. Also welcome are an optional
Personal Advisor for the Accused and an optional Personal Advisor for the Complainant. In a case
involving sexual assault each party may have an Advocate present.
The judicial process puts an emphasis on the value of people confronting one another in person and directly.
However, at the discretion of the Hearing Officer, and only in an extreme circumstance (perhaps in the case of
alleged sexual assault, for example) the complainant and/or the accused may request and be granted a multi-room,
tele-conferencing hearing. In such circumstances the witnesses and friends of the complainant and the accused
will wait in separate rooms.
Since this is a College Judicial Hearing and not a court of law, attorneys for any
of the parties are not permitted.
When the accused cannot be compelled to be present, the hearing will proceed, and
decisions will be reached in his/her absence. A Personal Advisor may be any member of the Earlham community, other than counselors
or Residence Life staff, whom the accused may choose and who is willing to serve. This person
is allowed to speak in the hearing for or on behalf of the individual
accompanied, but the degree and amount of his/her involvement is left to the discretion of the Hearing Officer.
Witnesses will be present only at times when they offer evidence. A hearing is closed to the community.
An audio recording will be made of the hearing and results of the hearing,
but not of the CJC deliberations. In the event of an appeal this recording will be available
to the accused, the complainant, any Appeals Board and to the president of the College.
The recording will remain in the possession of the College at all times and will be retained
with other records of the judicial action for one semester after the accused student graduates
or leaves the College. The Hearing Officer convenes and conducts the hearing. He/She has the authority
to exclude/remove disruptive persons from the proceedings. He/She is present as the facilitator
of subsequent deliberations about assigning responsibility and sanctions; he/she, however,
only offers information at the request of the CJC members and is not a consensing member
in CJC decisions. He/She may also, and consulting with the CJC panel, limit the length
of hearings and deliberations. After introductions of persons present, the hearing begins with the Hearing
Officer’s reading of the charges. The complainant, accused and the Judicial Advisor or Academic Dean may make
reasonably brief opening statements. The accused may now, or at any time, choose not to speak. Witnesses and evidence may be presented, first by the complainant
and then by the accused. The complainant, accused, Hearing Officer, Academic Dean
or Judicial Advisor, all members of CJC and, if permitted, the Personal Advisors,
may question the witnesses and the complainant and the accused.
All relevant evidence will be admissible. The hearing body in consultation
with the Hearing Officer determines relevancy and must state in the hearing any evidence
that will be inadmissible. In a case addressing alleged sexual assault, complainant and accused have
the right not to have irrelevant past sexual history presented or discussed during the
hearing.
The complainant and the accused may make final personal statements. CJC and the Hearing Officer will retire to consider, first, whether the accused
is guilty. If the accused is found responsible, then CJC engages in a penalty phase of deliberations
to determine what sanction(s) is appropriate.
To encourage the application of similar sanctions for similar violations,
the Hearing Officer will explain what sanctions are usually applied to an offense, and the
Judicial Advisor may also be consulted. A student’s judicial history will be taken into consideration during the
penalty phase of a hearing. CJC may choose one of, or several among, all available sanctions and may
also design a particular penalty for a particular violation.
In most cases these decisions will be made reasonably quickly and the Hearing
Officer will bring together the parties to the case (and their Personal Advisors) to hear
an oral decision.
On occasion more than a usual amount of deliberation may be required.
These decisions should be rendered as soon as reasonably possible, but in no more than
five school days from the hearing time.
Parties to the case will receive a written statement of the decision, including
information about the appeals process, within three class days of the oral decision and via Registered Mail.
Students will also be notified by e-mail and telephone that the letter has been sent and that they need to
accept it.
Appeals Process for CJC Hearings of Social Violations
A written appeal petition from either the complainant or the accused
must be given to the Judicial Advisor within five class days from the day CJC’s decision was sent
or within a calendar week should the decision occur at the end of a semester or before an academic
break period. Acceptable grounds for appeal are only these: a lapse of process that might
have made a difference in the outcome, persuasive new evidence, or an inappropriate penalty.
The written petition for an appeal should address one or more of these three grounds in detail. The Hearing Officer of the Appeals Board (AB) receives the written petition
and with the board members considers the merit of the appeal. This may require a review
of the file of the proceeding and listening to the recording of the hearing.
The Hearing Officer for appeals is the alternate Hearing Officer who did
not participate in the original CJC process. The Appeals Board (AB) includes one alternate faculty member and one alternate
student who did not participate in the original CJC process. All decisions of the Appeals Board are final. The Appeals Board’s decision is rendered in writing to the Judicial Advisor
(or Academic Dean) and he/she sends it to the concerned parties within five class days
of the appeal.
If the Appeals Board agrees that an appeal has merit, it refers the appeal to CJC
for Appeals (CJC-A) which is made up of the Appeal Board’s Hearing Officer, one CJC alternate
faculty member and one CJC alternate student member who have not yet been involved with the case.
This group follows the procedure of CJC as outlined in this document in Section V:C. A decision rendered by CJC-A is final.
SJC Hearing Procedures for Social Violations
The SJC hearing procedure is identical in form to the CJC procedure
with the following adjustments:
The Hearing Officer for SJC is a Resident Director or Area Director
(who is not a party to the case), selected by the Dean of Student Development and assigned
by the Judicial Advisor. For SJC procedures the Judicial Advisor may assign a designee to fulfill his/her role. SJC is made up entirely of students. SJC may refer a case to CJC if they feel it requires further attention or is more
serious than initially thought. SJC may apply all of the available sanctions except: suspension from all but
the academic life of the College, suspension from the College, expulsion from the College.
When SJC decisions are reached they will be communicated not only to the complainant
and the accused but also to the Judicial Advisor. These documents will be included in CJC files
and in the responsible student’s temporary file.
Appeals Process for SJC Hearings of Social Violations
A written appeal petition from either the complainant or the accused must
be given to the Judicial Advisor within five class days from the receipt of SJC’s decision.
Acceptable grounds for appeal are only these: a lapse of process that might
have made a difference in the outcome, persuasive new evidence, or an inappropriate penalty.
The written petition for an appeal should address one or more of these three grounds in detail.
A CJC Hearing Officer, one CJC faculty member and one CJC student member
constitute the Appeals Board for SJC.
If the Appeals Board grants an appeal, the case will be taken up by regular
CJC procedures and with a Hearing Officer and members other than those on the Appeals
Board.
Judicial Sanctions for Social Violations
Repeat Violations: In the case of repeated violations or
violation in deliberate disregard of a specific warning, a student will
be subject to more serious sanctions than would otherwise be the case.
A Prior Disciplinary Record is never relevant in determining student
accountability, but once a student’s responsibility for an act is determined, it will
be relevant in determining the appropriate sanction.
Social Violation Sanctions include but are not limited
to, the following items. These are not necessarily listed in any order
or hierarchy. They may be used alone or in combination with others
and need not be employed in sequence.
A letter of warning. Monetary fines (see the Student Handbook Planner “Residence Life Policies”).
Limitations on participation in College activities. Mandated counseling/psychological/psychiatric assessment. Loss of residence hall or house room or room house/hall change. Educational workshops such as those for alcohol or drug misconduct. Community service assigned on or off campus as appropriate. Restitution for damages and losses. Probationary Reporting: a student may be required to report
to a Dean or designee on a regularly scheduled basis for a specified period
of time. Disciplinary Probation: continued enrollment of a student
may be conditioned upon adherence to rules, policies and regulations and
the restriction of a student’s privileges for a period of time.
This may include, for example, denial of the right
to represent the College in any way, denial of use of facilities,
denial of parking privileges, denial of the privilege of participation
in extracurricular activities. Any conduct in violation of College rules, policies
and regulations while on probationary status may result in the imposition
of a more serious disciplinary sanction.
Suspension from non-academic College life. Suspension from the College. Withholding of Degree. Expulsion.
Recommended MINIMUM Responses for Specific Social Violations Acts of emotional or physical harm. For a first offense,
the response is disciplinary probation or suspension from the College;
for the second offense, suspension for the remainder of the semester,
or for the remainder of the semester and the following semester; for
a third offense, expulsion from the College. Disorderly behavior or violation of other
College rules while possessing or consuming alcohol and other
drugs. For a first offense, the response is disciplinary probation;
for a second offense, chemical dependency therapy and/or one
semester’s suspension from the College; for a third offense,
one year’s suspension from the College (which may also
include chemical dependency therapy).
Possession and/or consumption of illegal drugs or
drug paraphernalia. For a first offense, the response is disciplinary probation; for a second
offense, counseling and/or one semester’s suspension from the College;
for a third offense, one year’s suspension from the College. Selling and/or providing (sharing) illegal drugs or
drug paraphernalia. Penalties up to and including expulsion from the College. Arson. Expulsion from the College.
<< Previous | Continue >>
 |
|
