Contains information on:
Campus Advisors
A campus advisor is a member of
the University community (i.e. student,
faculty, or staff)who may present
cases on behalf of complainants and
respondents, or who may assist
in the presentation of a student's case by
serving in a support capacity.
Although any member of the Rutgers community
may act as a campus advisor, there
are a number of students, faculty, and
staff who are trained in this area.
A list of trained advisors may be obtained
at the Office
of Student Judicial Affairs at 3 Bartlett Street.
Prior to the
University Hearing,
Campus Advisors may assist complainants/respondents
with the preparationfor a case.
The complainant and respondent must
decide at the start of the hearing
whether they or their campus advisor
will make opening and closing
statements. While campus
advisors may present cases on behalf of the
complainants and respondents, they
may not testify on their behalf.
Respondents and complainants who
choose to be assisted by a campus advisor
must informthe Vice President of
Student Affairs or designee of their choice
of campus advisor at leastfive
working days before the scheduled hearing.
Failure to do so may lead to the
campus advisor being ineligible to assist the
student at the hearing.
All discussions between either complainant
and campus advisor or respondent
and campus advisor will be treated
as confidential by the University. The
University cannot guarantee that
external authorities will likewise respect
this privilege. Campus Advisors
also may assist complainants/respondents
following a University Hearing
with the appeals process.
The Role of Attorneys in University Hearings
A University Hearing is not a court
of law. Complainants and respondents
have a right to hire, at their
own expense, an attorney to assist and advise
them. Attorneys may attend
hearings as a support person and advise their
clients during the process.
However, they may not speak on behalf of their
clients or otherwise address the
hearing. Their role in the hearing process
is purely advisory to their clients.
Complainants and respondents who
will be assisted by an attorney at the
hearing must notifythe Vice President
for Student Affairs and the Director
of Student Judicial Affairs of
their choice to have an attorney at least five
working days prior to the hearing.
Failure to notify the Vice President for
Student Affairsand the Director
of Student Judicial Affairs may result
in the attorney not being admitted
to the hearing.
Outline of the Hearing Process
1. Prior to the
scheduled start of the hearing, the hearing officer and
hearing board will meet to review the preliminary
review report prepared
by the Dean of Students. At this time, the board
will consider the issues in
contention and outline areas of questioning to pursue
at the hearing.
2. The hearing
opens with the hearing officer addressing all parties. Witnesses
may be present for this address, but are otherwise
sequestered (except
when a witness is also the victim of the alleged offense).
At this time, the
hearing officer describes the purpose of the hearing
process and the steps
to be followed at the hearing. The hearing officer
will also ask the parties
present to introduce themselves and to state their
role in the process.
The hearing officer will inform the participants of the standard of proof
used in these proceedings and will inform the respondent
of his/her right
to remain silent and that no negative inference is to be drawn if a respondent
does not testify. The hearing officer will note
that testimony is not sworn,
but that individuals are expected to be truthful and that failure to be
truthful
may result in disciplinary charges being leveled. The
hearing officer will
repeat this statement before each witness testifies.
The hearing officer will read the charges and note that the respondent
is
presumed to be not responsible, unless, at the conclusion
of the hearing,
the hearing board determines the evidence to be clear
and convincing that
the respondent is responsible for violating the Code
of Student Conduct as
charged.
The hearing officer will also stress the need to treat each participant
with
respect and civility. Individuals who become
abusive or who disrupt the
proceeding may be excluded from the hearing at the
discretion of the hearing
officer.
At this point, the hearing officer will ask if there are any questions or concerns.
3. The Dean of
Students is asked to present the preliminary review. The
preliminary review establishes the issue before the hearing board and
describes what has been learned from interviews with
the complainant, the
respondent, and witnesses. Questions asked of the
Dean should be limited
to the preliminary review information. As
noted earlier, statements made in
the preliminary review by any of the parties are
admissible at the hearing.
4. The complainant
or his/her campus advisor may make an opening statement
outlining whathe/she will seek to establish at the
hearing. The statement is
optional and should bevery brief, usually less than
five minutes. The opening
statement, if any, is followed immediately by the complainant's narrative
of
the events describing the alleged violationof the
Code of Student Conduct.
The complainant's narrative statement can only be
madeby the complainant
and not his/her advisor. If the complainant is not the victim ora
witness to
the events, he/she is not permitted to provide a narrative, but isfree
to
question other witnesses.
5. The complainant's
opening statement and narrative are followed by the
respondent's or his/her campus advisor's opening statement,
if any, and
the respondent's narrative (if not electing to remain
silent). If there are
multiple respondents, their narratives will be taken in the order recommended
by the Dean conducting the preliminary review, subject
to the hearing
officer's approval.
6. The narratives
provide the testimony of the complainant and the respondent
(if not electing to remain silent) concerning the events under consideration
by
the hearing board. After they are concluded,
the hearing officer and hearing
board proceed to ask the complainant any questions they may have.
The
questions of the hearing officer and board
may be followed by additional
questions from the complainant's campus advisor (or
clarifications the
complainant may wish to make, should he/she not have
a campus advisor) and
by the respondent or the respondent's campus advisor.
Follow-up questions
may be asked by any party to clarify any matters left
unsettled as a result
of the initial round of testimony.
7. The sequence
described in number 6 is repeated for the respondent, unless the
respondent has elected not to testify. The one difference in the
questioning
sequence is that the respondent's campus advisor presents
his/her follow-up
questions before the complainant or his/her advisor
presents his/her questions.
Should the respondent opt to remain silent and not testify, the respondent
should have hisor her campus advisor make the opening
statement on his/her
behalf. When a respondentelects to remain silent,
it is particularly important
for him/her to have a campus advisor to
assist at the hearing. A campus
advisor cannot, however, present the narrative for
the respondent. If a
respondent remains silent, no narrative is presented.
8. Each witness for
the complainant is presented and provides his/her narrative in
turn andis questioned by the hearing officer and board,
the complainant or
his/her campus advisor, and the respondent or his/her campus advisor.
Follow
up questions are asked asneeded in the same sequence.
9. Following the
complainant's witness, the respondent's witnesses, if any, are
presented. The hearing officer and hearing board question each witness,
followed by the respondent or respondent's campus
advisor and then the
complainant or complainant'scampus advisor.
Follow-up questions are asked
as needed in the same sequence.
10. Upon conclusion
of testimony, the respondent (or campus advisor) is
permitted to make a brief closing statement summarizing
the case.
Closing statements are ordinarily no longer
than five minutes.
Following the closing statement or the respondent,
the complainant
(or advisor) is permitted to make a closing statement.
11. After closing
statements, if any, the hearing officer will charge the hearing
board. The charge to the hearing board will
describe the standard of proof to
be met and the manner in which deliberations should
be conducted.
12. The hearing
officer recesses the hearing and the hearing board retires to
deliberate in closed session. The hearing board
will elect a spokesperson.
Should the hearing have any questions for the hearing
officer, the hearing will
be reconvened and those questions will be addressed.
The board will then
continue its deliberations in closed session.
No record will be made of the
hearing board's deliberations.
13. The respondent
is presumed to be not responsible unless, using the standard
of clearand convincing, the hearing board determines
otherwise based on the
facts introduced at the hearing. The standard
of "clear and convincing" is
more stringent than that of "preponderance of evidence"
(used in many civil
court cases), but less stringent than "beyond a reasonable
doubt" (used in
criminal court). The hearing board determines whether
the respondent is
responsible or not responsible for each charge, based onlyupon the evidence
and testimony presented at the hearing. If consensus is notachievable,
the
hearing board takes a vote, in which no member may
abstain, and reaches its
decision by majority.
14. The decision
of the hearing board shall be read by the hearing officer in a
reconvened University hearing. The decision
will include a brief written
summary of the reasonsfor the finding. If either
the respondent or
complainant (or both) is not present for the
decision, the hearing officer,
through the Vice President for Student Affairs, will mail
a copy of the
decision to the absent party(s). The decision
and summary of findings will
also be placed in the case file which is available
to the respondent through
the Vice President for Student Affairs.
15. If the hearing
board finds a respondent not responsible for the offense, the
hearing is concluded. If the hearing board finds the respondent responsible
for the offense, a sanctioning hearing takes
place.
1. If the hearing
board finds that a student is responsible for violating the Code,
the hearing officer will immediately (time permitting)
reconvene the hearing to
consider statements and/or evidence concerning an
appropriate sanction. In
opening this portion of the hearing, the hearing officer will describe
the
balance of interests to be served in fashioning a
just sanction, the sanctions
available for the hearing board to consider, and mitigating and aggravating
circumstances which might argue for lesser or greater sanctions.
2. The sanctioning
portion of a University hearing allows, in the following order,
the respondent (or adviser), the victim (if not the
complainant), the
complainant (or adviser),and the dean of students
who conducted the
preliminary review to present sanctionsuggestions
along with any supporting
materials. At this time, the dean will introduce theprior disciplinary
record
(if any) of the respondent. The disciplinary record
may include findings of
guilt under the former student disciplinary hearing procedure
as well as the
current Code.
This portion of the hearing is intended as an opportunity for the hearing
board to hear the perspectives on an appropriate sanction
from the
principle parties involved in the case.
It is not meant to be a drawn-out
process, nor to involve a succession of character
witnesses. Character
witnesses are most appropriately represented by written
statements
which may be submitted to the hearing board for their consideration.
The hearing officer will advise the parties on the
process and rule on
the relevancy and appropriateness of any statement,
witness, or evidence.
3. The hearing
board then retires to closed deliberations to recommend
a sanction. If the board cannot achieve consensus,
a vote is taken, with
no member abstaining, and therecommended sanction
determined by a
majority vote.
4. The hearing
will be reconvened and the sanction recommendation will be
read by the hearing officer.
5. The recommended
sanction, along with the decision of the hearing board, is
transmitted by the Director of Student Judicial Affairs
to the Vice President
for Student Affairs who will see that the
respondent and complainant receive
copies of the hearing board's decision and recommended
sanction.
The hearing process is concluded.
6. Before determining
any sanction, the Vice President for Student Affairs will
give the respondent and complainant five working days
to comment on the
hearing board's recommended sanction.
The Vice President may also solicit
comments from the hearing officer assigned to
the case, and from the dean of
students who conducted the preliminary review.
7. The Vice President
for Student Affairs will mail notice of his/her decision
and the rationale for it to the respondent, complainant,
victim (if not the
complainant), and to the respondent's
dean of students. In accordance with
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the complainant
and the victim will be informed that this
information is confidential. Along
with the sanction decision, the Vice President for Student
Affairs will send
the respondent information on the right to appeal
the decision or sanction
and the timelines for filing an appeal.
For information on appeals,
see the section entitled:
A Walk
Through of the Judicial Process for Separable Cases