老司机传媒

Investigation and Hearing

Notice of Investigation and Allegations

The Title IX Deputy Coordinator will provide written notice of the investigation and allegations (the "NOIA") to the respondent upon commencement of the administrative or hearing resolution process. Once mailed, emailed and/or received in person, the notification will be presumptively delivered. This facilitates the respondent's ability to prepare for the interview and to identify and choose an advisor/support person to accompany them. The NOIA may be amended with any additional or dismissed allegations.

Investigation of Complaints

• The respondent will be presumed to be not responsible for the alleged conduct unless and until a finding of responsibility is made at the conclusion of the administrative or hearing resolution process.
• The assistant vice president of Campus Safety is generally appointed to lead the investigation and is usually assisted by another Title IX Investigator or the appropriate Title IX Deputy Coordinator.
• According to established practices, the investigation is a neutral fact-gathering process and will follow the trail of evidence regarding the alleged sex or gender-based harassment/discrimination.
• The investigator(s) will meet in separate settings with the complainant and the respondent, as well as with other witnesses, to conduct an interview and review texts, emails, communications and other documentary evidence to gather facts.
• Both the complainant and the respondent have the right to the same opportunities to present their account of events, identify witnesses who may have relevant information and provide other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.
• Faculty or staff of 老司机传媒 are expected to cooperate with and participate in the University's Title IX administrative or hearing resolution process. Student witnesses and witnesses from outside the University's community cannot be required to participate but are encouraged to cooperate with the investigation.
• Interviews are typically conducted either in person, via online video platforms (e.g., Zoom), or in limited circumstances by telephone. The investigator(s) may ask parties and witnesses to respond to written questions if deemed appropriate.
• It is standard practice for investigators to record all interviews as part of the administrative or hearing resolution process. The parties may review copies of their own interviews upon request. Parties are not permitted to make any recording of any kind (i.e., audio or video recording).
• Follow-up interviews with the parties and witnesses may be warranted to respond to new information or to allow the investigator(s) to resolve inconsistencies or questions.
• Both parties have an equal opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is relevant to the allegations raised in the complaint. 
• Before completing the investigative report, the appropriate Title IX Deputy Coordinator will send to each party and the party's advisor (if any) such relevant evidence in an electronic format or a hard copy, and the parties will be given at least seven (7) calendar days to submit a written response (the "Evidence Response Period"). 
• The Title IX Coordinator will take reasonable steps to prevent and address the parties' and their advisors' unauthorized disclosure of information and evidence. 
• The investigator(s) will consider both party's responses before completing the final investigative summary report. 
• Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, the University cannot access, consider, disclose or otherwise use any party's record that is protected by a legally recognized privilege (e.g., attorney-client, physician-patient, psychologist-patient, clergy-parishioner, etc.) unless that party (or that minor party's parent) has voluntarily provided written consent to do so.
• After the Evidence Response Period has passed, an investigative summary report describing the relevant evidence will be completed. The investigative summary report does not include any investigator(s) recommendations or conclusions.
• The final investigative summary report, relevant evidence and any written responses from both parties will be provided to the Title IX Coordinator, who will review and confirm that the report is complete or deem it necessary to request further fact-gathering from the investigator(s).
• If deemed complete, the Title IX Coordinator will authorize the final investigative summary report to be sent to both parties and their advisor/support persons in an electronic format. The parties will be given at least seven (7) days before the hearing in which to prepare their written responses (the "Investigative Summary Response Period").
• While the final investigative summary report seeks to provide a fair and accurate summary of the most relevant testimony from the relevant evidence, the investigative summary report should not be treated by the parties or the Decision-Maker Panel as a substitute for reading and reviewing for themselves the written submissions and interview transcripts. If there are discrepancies between (1) the written submissions and interview transcripts and (2) the final investigative summary report's content, the Decision-Maker Panel must rely on the written submissions and transcripts in determining the facts.
• If a finding of responsibility is determined, each party will be allowed to present a written impact/mitigation statement. These statements are to be given to the Title IX official, who will present them to the Decision-Maker Panel for consideration at the sanction stage.
• If the respondent accepts responsibility for the specific allegations, they may prepare a written acceptance of the facts of the allegation for the Panel. This would also waive all rights to appeal for the respondent. In such cases where the respondent accepts responsibility, the Title IX Coordinator may direct the Panel to convene solely to determine appropriate corrective disciplinary action.

University Hearing

• To resolve complaints involving University students or employees, a hearing to determine responsibility (streamed via Zoom) will be held after the Investigative Summary Response Period has ended. At the University's discretion, complaints involving K–12 students may, but need not, be resolved through a hearing process. 
• Prior to the hearing, a Notice of Hearing will be sent to both parties with hearing instructions.
• Participants may include the complainant and complainant's advisor support person, the respondent and the respondent's advisor/support person, witnesses (if called), the investigator(s) (if called), the Decision-Maker Panel and the Title IX official designee, who is non-voting and serves to facilitate the hearing process.
• A three-person panel, called the Decision-Maker Panel, will be convened for hearings to serve as the decision-makers in determining the question of responsibility for sex or gender-based harassment/discrimination as well as determining any corrective action. A fourth person will be assigned to chair the Panel and will be non-voting.
• The makeup of the Decision-Maker Panel will vary depending on whether the respondent is a student or a University employee.
  • If the respondent is a student, the Panel will be selected from the members of the Student Life Conduct Council. 
  • If the respondent is a University staff or faculty member, a Panel will be selected from a pool of trained faculty, staff or administrators. 
  • The parties will be notified of the make-up and names of the Panel no less than five days prior to the hearing. Any concerns regarding bias or a potential conflict of interest of a Decision-Maker Panel member must be submitted in writing to the Title IX Coordinator at least three days prior to the hearing.
• The Decision-Maker Panel will presume the respondent is not responsible for the alleged conduct unless and until a finding of responsibility is made at the conclusion of the administrative or hearing resolution process.
• The Decision-Maker Panel will be instructed that the burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination regarding responsibility rests on the University and not on the parties.
• The Panel will objectively review the investigative summary report, all relevant evidence—both inculpatory and exculpatory—developed during the investigation, and the parties' written responses. Credibility determinations must not be based on a person's status as complainant, respondent or witness. Evidence is relevant when it may aid in determining whether the alleged sex discrimination occurred.
• The Panel will also provide a hearing for the parties before deliberating and making any determination regarding responsibility or corrective disciplinary actions.
• Both the complainant and the respondent will have the same opportunity to participate in the hearing with the Panel.
• All parties and witnesses will have the opportunity to appear at the hearing virtually.
• The hearing will be a modified live hearing. The parties will meet before the Panel separately. There will be no contact or interaction between the parties. However, the parties will view the other party's hearing in real-time via a live stream. 
• The hearing portion of the process will be recorded by the Title IX official. No other recordings will be permitted. 
• Prior to the hearing, the Title IX official will ask each of the parties to provide a proposed list of questions to ask the other party and any witnesses. The investigator will review the proposed questions with the Panel chair to determine relevance and permissibility.
• During the hearing, the Panel chair will pose relevant and permissible questions received from the parties. Both parties will have an equal opportunity to have their questions posed by the Panel chair. The Panel may also choose to pose their own additional questions upon reviewing the relevant evidence. After the hearing, the Panel will take a short recess, during which the Title IX official will provide a final opportunity for the parties to submit additional questions. If questions are received, separate hearings will resume for the asking of these final additional questions.
• The Panel may choose to place less or no weight upon statements by a party or witness who refuses to respond to questions deemed relevant and not impermissible. The decisionmaker must not draw an inference about whether sex-based harassment occurred based solely on a party's or witness's refusal to respond to such questions.
• A party may have the assistance/support of an advisor/support person of their choosing at the hearing or can request that the University appoint a trained advisor/support person for them. Neither party's advisor/support person is permitted to speak during a University proceeding.   
• If a party or witness does not attend or submit to questions at the hearing, the Decision-Maker Panel cannot draw an inference of responsibility or lack of responsibility based solely on a party's or witness's absence from the hearing or unwillingness to answer questions. 
• The decision-maker(s) may rely on whatever relevant evidence is available through the investigation and hearing to make the ultimate determination of responsibility.

Determination and Outcome ⇒