Formal Process

1. Administrative Hearings (Students Only)

   Jurisdiction
   Violations involving an individual student or students and are identified by the Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative to be a minor matter in accordance with the Code of Student Conduct

   Heard By
   Student Conduct Officer

   Sanctions
   The Student Conduct Officer may recommend any sanction consistent with the Code, except suspension, expulsion, or revocation of admission and/or degree
    

2. Student Hearing Panel (Organizations Only)

   Jurisdiction
   Violations involving a student organization and are identified by the Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative to be a minor matter in accordance with the Code of Student Conduct

   Heard By
   Five students, including one identified as chairperson

   Sanctions
   The Student Hearing Panel may recommend any sanction consistent with the Code. At the discretion of the Vice President of Student Affairs, and with consent from the accused student and complainant, cases that could result in suspension, expulsion, or revocation of admission and/or degree may be heard through an Administrative Hearing.
    

3. Investigations

   Jurisdiction
   Violations when the Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative determines it as a major matter in accordance with the Code of Student Conduct

   Heard By
   Student Conduct Investigator

   Sanctions
   The Investigator may recommend any sanction consistent with the Code. In cases involving students, the Investigator's finding and sanctions complete the process; however, in cases involving organizations, the Investigator's sanctions are referred to the Student Hearing Panel for review before a final determination is made by the Assistant Vice President of Campus Life. In cases involving gender-based violence as outlined in the Code of Student Conduct, the conduct official(s) will receive additional training on issues unique to these case types.

All hearings will be closed. Attendance will be limited to the accused student or group and his/her/its advisor, the complainant and his/her/its advisor, the Hearing Board Members or Conduct Officer, the Investigator, the Hearing Board Chair, and necessary security personnel if required. A witness will attend the Hearing for his/her testimony only and will be excused after his/her testimony is complete. If the accused student and complainant consent, a Conduct Officer may observe a hearing for purposes of training.

To be found responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct, the evidence must establish that the violation was committed by the charged student or group by a preponderance of the evidence (not beyond a reasonable doubt or by clear and convincing evidence). In other words, the evidence must establish that it was more likely than not that the student committed the alleged violation.

Formal rules of evidence shall not be applicable. Irrelevant evidence will be excluded. In cases concerning gender-based personal violence, a complainant's prior sexual history (with anyone other than the respondent) may not be offered by anyone other than the complainant, unless it is offered to prove that someone other than the respondent was the source of physical evidence or if introduced to counter something the complainant has placed in controversy.

A student or organization who fails to appear for meetings of their conduct process, after proper written notice, will be deemed to have waived their right to present a defense to the charges. As such, the conduce process will proceed in absentia.

The Student Conduct Officer will review the complaint with the respondent and, when applicable, the complainant. The respondent and complainant will have the opportunity to respond to or supplement the complaint, as well as have an opportunity to present witnesses and evidence. The conduce officer will determine whether the respondent is responsible and, if responsible, issue an appropriate sanction. The results of the Administrative Hearing may be appealed to the Appeals Board pursuant to the Code of Student Conduct. During the Administrative Hearing, if the conduct officer receives information not previously known to the Student Conduct Administrator that may warrant expulsion, suspension, or revocation of admission and/or degree, the conduct officer will refer the case back to the Student Conduct Administrator.

Procedural Review. The accused organization is advised, but not required, to attend a Procedural Review with the Student Conduct Administrator or designee. In a Procedural Review, the Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative reviews the charges with the organization and informs them of the hearing process and their rights throughout that process.

Impartial Board. In Student Panel hearings, the complainant and respondent may challenge panel members on the ground of personal bias. Panel members should also disqualify themselves on these grounds. The Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative has final authority to resolve any questions of personal bias. If the organization consents to the panel members, they waive the right to challenge any findings on the basis of any personal bias of which they were aware at the time of consent.

Order of Hearing. The chair shall exercise control over the hearing to avoid needless consumption of time and/or to prevent the harassment or intimidation of witnesses.

• Any person who disrupts a hearing may be excluded from the proceedings.
• All parties and witnesses shall be excluded from the hearing during Panel deliberations. Panel deliberations will not be recorded.

Advisor. Advisors may not participate in the proceedings except to advise the complainant or charged organization.

Investigator. The Investigator participates when the Student Conduct Administrator or designee determines the allegations are a major matter. The Investigator serves as a specially-trained, neutral party. When involved, the Investigator will decide responsibility and recommend sanctions. The Student Hearing Panel will receive a summary of the investigation, including the Investigator's findings and recommended sanctions. The Panel reviews the recommended sanctions and may accept or amend them. The reviewed sanctions are submitted to the Assistant Vice President of Student Life for final approval.

Witnesses and Testimony. The charged organization and the complainant shall be offered the opportunity to identify their own witnesses and to question one another's witnesses through the Investigator and at the Chair's discretion.

• All members of the University community with knowledge of facts pertinent to the case are expected to cooperate fully in conduct proceedings and investigations. A witness's unreasonable failure to cooperate in conduct proceedings may result in conduct action.
• All persons who provide testimony shall be asked to affirm that their testimony is truthful. Furnishing false information to the University may result in the filing of conduct charges against students.
• With the approval of the Student Conduct Administrator, a complainant, witness, or victim may give testimony in a campus hearing by means other than being in the same room with the charged organization(s).
• Prospective witnesses shall be excluded from the hearing during the testimony of other witnesses.

Determinations. Final decision of the Panel shall be by the majority vote of all members present and voting. The final decision may be accompanied by a brief written statement.

Sanction Proceeding. In a Panel hearing, a determination that the violation was committed by the charged organization shall be followed by a proceeding in which the complainant, the charged organization, and appropriate University official(s) may submit information or make statements concerning the appropriate sanction to be imposed. In the Student Conduct Administrator or Chair's discretion, the accused student may submit a limited number of character witnesses, and the complainant may submit a limited number of impact witnesses. The Panel will consider the conduct history of the charged organization in the sanction proceeding, but it shall not become part of the conduct file or shared with a student complainant.

Review of Sanctions. Unless the Code of Student Conduct provides otherwise, decisions concerning sanctions are recommendations to the Vice President for Student Affairs or designated representative. Recommended sanctions may be approved, altered, deferred or withheld at the discretion of the responsible University official. If no action is taken on the recommendation within five working days or such longer period as the responsible official designates in writing to the affected parties, the recommended sanction shall be final.

Timeline. The investigation and hearing process generally will take no more than 60 business days from the date the Student Conduct Administrator learns of the incident, although nothing with the Code guarantees a resolution within a specific time frame. The 60 day timeline may be extended due to reasonable delays, including but not limited to the following reasons: a victim's reluctance to participate in the investigation or request for other scheduling accommodations; the Investigator's inability to fully investigate due to matters beyond their control, including the unavailability of witnesses; University closures; in cases other than gender-based personal violence, the accused organization has requested a deferral of the conduct process pending a resolution of criminal proceedings; or the accused organization or complainant's academic schedules would be unduly compromised (for example, during final exam period).

Procedural Meeting. The Student Conduct Administrator or designee will meet with the respondent and complainant to provide a written statement outlining their rights and details of the investigation process.

Impartial Investigator. The Investigator should be fair and impartial. The Investigator shall disqualify themselves on grounds of personal bias. The Student Conduct Administrator or designated representative has final authority to resolve any questions of personal bias.

Investigation. During the investigation, the Investigator will provide the individuals a fair and equal opportunity to be heard, opportunities to submit information, and to identify witnesses who may have relevant information. The Investigator will speak separately with individuals who are willing to participate and have information relevant to the determination of responsibility. As part of the investigation, the Investigator may gather or receive information that is relevant to the determination of appropriate consequences, including information about any impacts on any member of the Tulane community. The investigator will also gather available physical or documentary evidence, including prior statements, any relevant communications, e-mail messages, social media materials, text messages, and other records as appropriate and available.

The Investigator will prepare a written report that summarizes the information gathered, synthesizes the areas of agreement and disagreement among or between individuals and/or organizations with any supporting information or accounts, and includes an investigative finding regarding whether any rule has been violated. However, before the report is finalized, necessary individuals and/or organizations will be given the opportunity to review a draft of the investigation report, which may be presented in redacted format to protect the privacy rights of individuals involved in the investigation.

Upon receipt of any additional information from individuals and/or organizations involved in the process, or after the five (5) business day comment period has lapsed without comment, the Investigator will make a final investigative determination, by a preponderance of the evidence, regarding whether a rule transgression has occurred and will recommend consequences, if any. In reaching these determinations, the investigator may consult with the Office of Institutional Equity, the Title IX Coordinator, and any designated administrator who has information relevant to the investigation. The investigator may also seek information from the Office of Student Conduct regarding prior disciplinary history and Tulane University Police Department regarding prior criminal history.

Advisor. Advisors may not participate in the proceedings except to advise the complainant or respondent.

Investigator. The Investigator participates when the Student Conduct Administrator or designee determines the allegations are a major matter. The Investigator serves as a specially-trained, neutral party. When involved, the Investigator will decide responsibility and recommend sanctions. The Student Hearing Panel will receive a summary of the investigation, including the Investigator's findings and recommended sanctions. The Panel reviews the recommended sanctions and may accept or amend them. The reviewed sanctions are submitted to the Assistant Vice President of Student Life for final approval.

Witnesses and Testimony. The respondent and complainant shall be offered the opportunity to identify their own witnesses and to question one another's witnesses through the Investigator. The Investigator has the discretion to determine the relevance of any witness or other evidence to the finding of responsibility, and may exclude information in preparing the investigation report if the information is irrelevant, immaterial, or more prejudicial than informative. The Investigator may also exclude statements of personal opinion by witnesses and statements as to general reputation for any character trait, including honesty. Under this Code, “character evidence” is defined as: information that does not directly relate to the facts at issue, but instead reflects upon the reputation, personality, qualities, or habits of an individual. Generally, information regarding character is not relevant to the determination of whether there has been a violation of this Code.

• All members of the University community with knowledge of facts pertinent to the case are expected to cooperate fully in conduct proceedings and investigations. A witness's unreasonable failure to cooperate in conduct proceedings may result in conduct action.
   
• All persons who provide testimony shall be asked to affirm that their testimony is truthful. Furnishing false information to the University may result in the filing of conduct charges against students.

Impact Statement. The complainant and respondent will be provided the opportunity to submit a written Impact Statement. These written Impact Statements will not be considered in the determination of responsibility, but will be provided to the Investigator, and at the appropriate stage of the process, to the disciplinary authority or Hearing Panel for consideration in the determination of the sanction and remedy. The Impact Statement may be submitted at any time in the process, provided that it is received no later than five (5) days after the parties have been given notice of the opportunity to review the draft Investigative Report. The Investigator may also consider a community Impact Statement as appropriate based on the nature and facts of the circumstances and the extent to which the conduct at issue was directed at and created a hostile environment for community members beyond the Reporting Party. The investigator may limit the submission or use of community Impact Statements. Individuals will be notified of the final Investigative determination and in writing at the same time, via e-mail. The final investigative determination may be redacted in light of privacy rights of impacted individuals.

Determination. In investigations of major matters with organizational respondents, the Investigator will submit their findings to the Student Hearing Panel. After reviewing the Investigator’s findings and rationale, the panel will recommend consequences for the organization. The chairperson will then forward the Investigator’s findings, along with the panel’s recommendations and a brief description of the proceedings to the Assistant Vice President for Campus Life or designee, who may choose to accept or reject the recommendations regarding transgressions and consequences. The Assistant Vice President for Campus Life or designee reviews the recommendations and consequences from the student hearing panel, and may adjust them before they become final, subject to an organization’s right to appeal.

In investigations of major matters with student respondents, the Investigator determines a finding and corresponding consequences. In determining the appropriate consequences, the investigator shall consider the following factors:

• the nature of any behavior, including violence;
• the impact of behavior on other individuals or groups;
• the impact or implications of the behavior on the community or the University;
• prior transgressions, both at the University or elsewhere, including criminal convictions;
• whether a student or student organization has accepted responsibility for the conduct;
• maintenance of a safe and respectful environment conducive to learning;
• protection of the University community;
• any applicable professional standards of behavior;
• and any other mitigating, aggravating, or compelling circumstances to reach a just and appropriate resolution in each matter.

Timeline. In general In general Tulane University will seek to conclude the investigation within sixty (60) business days from the issuance of the notice of investigation, although special circumstances may extend this time frame. The time frame for completion of the investigation, or any designated time frames of steps in the investigation, may be extended for good cause as necessary to ensure the integrity and completeness of the investigation, to comply with a request by external law enforcement, to accommodate the availability of witnesses, to account for Tulane University breaks or vacations, to account for complexities of a case (including the number of witnesses and volume of information provided by the parties), or to address other legitimate reasons as defined by the investigator. Any extension of the timeframe, and the reason for the extension, will be shared with the impacted individuals in writing. Best efforts will be made to complete the process in a timely manner by balancing principles of thoroughness and fundamental fairness with promptness.