E. Process for Social Code of Conduct Policies

The student conduct process and all applicable timelines commence with notice to an administrator of a potential violation of the code of conduct.  If the incident occurs in a residence hall area or Greek house and involves potential violations for which suspension is not a likely outcome, the incident report is usually referred to a Residence Life or Greek Life professional staff member for investigation and adjudication.

Violations that involve the following are normally referred to staff in the Office of Student Conduct:

• All violations for which suspension is a possible outcome, including incidents where multiple violations have occurred and the composite recommended sanction would be suspension;
• Incidents involving the use, possession or sale of drugs and/or drug paraphernalia;
• Setting fires or tampering with fire and/or life safety equipment;
• Cases dealing with firearms or weapons on campus;
• Incidents that do not occur in a residence area, including study abroad or study away courses/experiences;
• Hazing violations;
• Incidents involving student organizations;
• Sexual offenses;
• Cases which involve civil or criminal action against a student;
• Incidents involving students charged with violations that would be considered by the civil/criminal system to be a felony; or
• Cases referred by the Residence Life staff or any other administrative hearing officer.

Reported violations of social policies occurring within ten or less days before Reading Day each semester may be postponed until after final exams.

STEP 1: Preliminary Inquiry

The process begins with a preliminary inquiry into the nature of the incident or report, the evidence available, and the parties involved. The investigator(s) take the following steps which typically take one to seven (1-7) business days to complete:

• Initiate any necessary interim remedial actions on behalf of any victim;
  • Conduct a preliminary investigation to identify the nature and severity of the complaint, identify an initial list of all policies that may have been violated, understand the context of the incident(s), and identify potential patterns. 

 The preliminary inquiry may lead to:

• A determination that there is insufficient evidence to pursue the investigation, because the behavior alleged, even if proven, would not violate the code of conduct;
• Referral for an alternative resolution (i.e. educational conversation or mediation); or
• Moving forward with the formal process by identifying possible code of conduct violations and sending notification to the student(s) to meet for a student conduct conference.

STEP 2: Student Conduct Conference

After the incident report is reviewed and potential code of conduct violations are identified, the student is sent a notice indicating the potential charges.  The notice lists the deadline by which a student must schedule their conference with the hearing officer or lists the date, time and location of the scheduled conference.   If the student does not respond by the assigned date to schedule a conference or attend the scheduled meeting, then a hearing/investigation team’s decision is scheduled and the student notified of the date, time and location.   

In some situations the notice gives the student an opportunity to accept responsibility for the potential charges and the recommended sanctions without a formal meeting.  In these situations, an educational requirement is one of the sanctions assigned, which still gives students the opportunity to reflect on and learn from their experience.

At the student conduct conference, the investigator or administrative hearing officer reviews the potential charges and sanctions, then answers student questions regarding the student conduct process. The student is given an opportunity to respond to the potential charges and provide information necessary to determine if and what policy violations may have occurred. 

At the conclusion of the conference the appropriate course of action will be determined.   The outcome of this conference may include:

• A decision that there is insufficient evidence to pursue the case (for example, charges may be dropped if the student was misidentified in the report);
• Postponing setting charges and conducting a hearing until additional information has been gathered;
• Setting charges and engaging in a more comprehensive investigation before scheduling a hearing;
• Setting charges and conducting a hearing at that time (if the student waives the 3-day option to prepare for a hearing);
• Setting charges and scheduling an administrative hearing (usually within two weeks of the conference); or
• Referring the case to another hearing officer or board.

NOTE:  When more information must be gathered, the hearing officer or investigator will work to identify a witness list, talk with those witnesses, gather additional evidence from police or others, and speak further with the respondent and, when applicable, the complainant. When warranted, the information gathered in an investigation will be shared with the respondent (and complainant as allowed by federal regulations) and presented to or used by the hearing officer/panel when making decisions related to responsibility and sanctioning.  This type of investigation usually takes one to three weeks to complete, but may take longer with complex cases or when criminal investigations are running concurrently.

STEP 3: Formal Hearing

Most hearings are conducted administratively with a hearing officer and the responding student(s), complainant(s) (if applicable), advisor(s), and any witnesses.  (See section 6.F. for information on this process when the incident involves potential sexual misconduct violations.) During the process, the hearing officer asks questions regarding the incident and the responding student’s behavior related to the charges and considers all credible information. If necessary, the hearing officer may postpone the conclusion of the hearing for a reasonable amount of time in order to conduct additional investigation or gather more information/evidence. The hearing will conclude with the rendering of a “Responsible” or “Not Responsible” decision for each potential violation based on the preponderance of the evidence and appropriate sanctions will be assigned if warranted.  Most administrative hearings are completed within 30-45 days of the incident.

All hearings are restricted to those directly involved with the incident and those requested to be present by the institution. Respondents and complainants may bring an advisor from the Elon University community (currently enrolled student, faculty or staff member) to the hearing. Family members, attorneys or other legal counsel may not attend or serve as advisors in campus student conduct proceedings.  (See section 6.F. for information related to incidents involving potential sexual misconduct; in these investigations, students may have an advisor of their choice.)  Advisors may only counsel the student and may not actively participate in the hearings.  The advisor may not make a presentation or represent the student during the hearing. They may confer quietly with their advisee, exchange notes, and suggest questions to their advisee.

Students may submit up to three written character references for consideration by the officer(s) or board. The character references are considered during sanctioning deliberations if the student is found responsible for the violation(s).

Notice of the time, date, location of the hearing, and name(s) of the hearing officer/board members will be in writing (unless waived by the student) and may be delivered by email, mailed to the student’s campus box or permanent address, or hand delivered.  If a student cannot attend the hearing, it is that student’s responsibility to notify the hearing officer or Office of Student Conduct no less than two (2) days prior to the scheduled hearing to arrange for another date, time and location. Except in cases of grave or unforeseen circumstances, if the responding student fails to give the requisite minimum two (2) day notice, or if the responding student fails to appear, the hearing will proceed as scheduled.

If the responding student (or complainant when applicable) does not attend the scheduled hearing, the case is heard without the student present, and a decision is reached based on the information available.

The student is notified of the outcome, any sanctions, and, when appropriate, the information related to the appeal process.

Referral to and Procedures for Honor Board Hearing

When determined that a board should be used for a hearing, an Honor Board hearing is conducted with the appropriate panel members, the responding student, complainant(s) if applicable, advisors, and any witnesses.  (See Section 3.D. for a more detailed description of the board and when it is used in lieu of an administrative hearing.) The director of Student Conduct (or designee) will ensure that the hearing information and any other available written documentation is shared with the parties at least two  (2) business days before any scheduled hearing. Should any party object to any panelist, that party must raise all objections, in writing, to the assistant dean of students for student health & wellness and honor code immediately. Panel members will only be replaced if the assistant dean or assistant provost for communications and operations  (or designees) concludes that their bias precludes an impartial hearing of the complaint. Additionally, any panelist who feels they cannot make an objective determination must recuse themselves from the proceedings.

The convener will be present and available as a resource during all hearing procedures (including deliberations).  All procedural questions are subject to the decision of the convener.

A typical Honor Board hearing procedure follows this basic outline:

• The charged student(s) (respondents), individual(s) bringing charges (complainants), witnesses, advisor(s), and the board members meet.
• The convener of the board stresses the requirement of maintaining privacy and/or confidentiality to all participants.
• Witnesses leave the room and the charge(s) are read to the student(s). The student responds to the charges and states “responsible” or “not responsible” to each charge.
• When appropriate, the professor, complainant, or University investigator presents a written and/or oral statement to provide a context for the charges, the student(s) are given an opportunity to address the board, and board members pose questions to either party.
• Those witnesses who can substantiate or refute the charge(s) are requested to make statements and respond to questions. (Unduly repetitive witnesses can be limited at the discretion of the chair or convener.)
• Both the respondent and complainant respond to questions and offer any further information or statement(s).
• Students and advisor(s) leave the hearing room. The board members deliberate and determine, by majority vote, whether it is more likely than not that the responding student has violated the code of conduct policies.
• The respondent and advisor(s) return to the hearing room and the decision is shared. (The decision will be shared with a complainant as allowed by federal guidelines.)

When students are found responsible for social policy violation(s):

• The respondent and complainant (when appropriate) are given the opportunity to make a closing statement, submit up to three written character statements, and offer any comments for consideration in the imposition of sanctions before leaving the hearing room.
• Board members are given information concerning any prior code of conduct violations and sanctions for the respondent. The board members may consider prior offenses and sanctions for the purposes of determining the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.  
• The board will discuss all information available and determine appropriate sanctions.
• The respondent, complainant (when appropriate), and advisor(s) may be asked to return to the hearing room, and the sanctioning decision is shared (as appropriate or allowed by federal regulations). If the decision is not shared in person it will be sent to the respondent, and if allowed by law, to the complainant.
• The convener or chair will provide an explanation of the appeals procedure as outlined in this handbook.