The Judicial Process
The judicial system outlines the steps involved in examining and adjudicating reports of honor code violations. The topics covered in this section are listed below. Detailed descriptions of them follow.
Introduction and Philosophy
Elon University views its role in the administration of institutional policy as one of both ensuring fairness and providing an educational opportunity for the student. This approach protects the campus community by providing a system of sanctions that are educational and hold students accountable for violating university policies. Sanctions are assigned to encourage the growth and development of students and support the practice of responsible behavior in a community. The educational approach infers a need for understanding and self discipline on the part of the student as well as a respect for the rights and privileges of others.
The basic philosophy and principles which guide the Judicial System at Elon University are:
- The judicial process is necessary and effective when it furthers the learning experience of a student and/or provides protections for the community of which s/he is a member.
- When campus judicial action becomes necessary, that action should be handled expeditiously and thoroughly.
- The education of students concerning the policies of the university, emphasizing the need to live by those policies in a community of people, is promoted in residence hall meetings, judicial hearings and during any other contact made with individuals charged with violating university policy(ies).
- In judicial conferences involving students who are accused of violating university policies, consideration will be given to all information relevant to the case. This is to ensure that a fair process and appropriate consideration are extended to all students.
Elon University hearings, unlike proceedings of a court of law, do not require conclusive proof. Instead, the greater weight of the evidence is sufficient to make a decision of responsible. The student has the right to appeal a hearing decision to either the assistant dean of students or the University Appeals Board, as presented below, depending on the situation.
Victims will be notified of the outcome of campus judicial hearings as permitted by the Student-Right-to-Know and Campus Security Act of 1990 (amended 1998).
Academic Policy Cases
If the student is charged and admits responsibility, s/he will meet with the course professor to discuss the charges and the professor will assign "course related" sanctions. The professor will then submit information on the situation to the Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs to determine if "university related" sanctions are appropriate. If the charged student denies any misconduct, the case will automatically be referred to the Elon Honor Board and the assistant vice president for academic affairs will convene the hearing.
An illustration of the judicial process for academic honor code incidents is available here.
Charges reported as allegedly occurring within ten or less days before Reading Day each semester may have to be heard by the board after final exams or during the subsequent semester.
Social Policy Cases
Most social policy violation proceedings are initiated when an Elon Incident Report, Campus Safety and Police report, or Elon Town Police report is received by the Office of Judicial Affairs. Based on the preliminary screening of the report, potential charges are determined. If the incident occurs in a residence hall area or Greek house and involves any of the charges listed below, the incident report is usually referred to a residence life or Greek life professional staff member for investigation and adjudication. Cases that are usually referred to the residence life or Greek life staff for adjudication include:
- Alcohol policy (first and second offenses);
- Behavior which endangers the health and safety of self and/or others;
- Disorderly conduct;
- Failure to comply with a lawful directive of a university official;
- Fighting;
- Gambling;
- Harassment;
- Lying;
- Possession of lost or stolen property;
- Stealing; or
- Swimming, wading or skating in restricted areas.
Violations which involve the following are normally referred to the coordinator of Judicial Affairs or the assistant dean of students:
- All violations for which suspension is the minimum recommended sanction, 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 official study abroad courses/experiences;
- Possession of a keg or other multi-serving (common) containers;
- Hazing violations;
- Fraud;
- 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.
After the incident report is assigned, the designated administrative hearing officer will send the student a “Notice of Judicial Conference” letter. This letter will indicate the potential charges, list the deadline by which a student must schedule his/her conference with the hearing officer. If the student does not respond by the assigned date to schedule a judicial conference or attend the scheduled meeting, then a hearing will be scheduled and the student notified of the date, time and location. If the student does not attend the scheduled hearing, the case will be heard without the student present, a decision will be reached and the student will be notified of the outcome.
In some situations the student may be allowed to accept responsibility for the potential charges and the recommended sanctions without a formal meeting. If given that option, then s/he should contact the administrative hearing officer whose name appears on the letter.
Reported violations of social policies alleged as occurring within ten or less days before Reading Day each semester may be postponed until after final exams.
Judicial Conference
At the judicial conference, the administrative hearing officer will review the potential charges and sanctions then answer student questions regarding the judicial process. The student is given an opportunity to respond to the charges and provide information necessary to determine if and what charges may be appropriate.
At the conclusion of the judicial conference the appropriate course of action will be determined. The outcome of this conference will be to: discontinue judicial action (no charges); postpone a conclusion until additional information has been gathered; set charges and conduct a judicial hearing at that time (if the student waives the 3-day option to prepare for a hearing); set charges and schedule an administrative judicial hearing (usually within three days of the conference); or refer the case to another hearing level.
Based on the information gathered about the incident, the administrative hearing officer may choose to refer the case to the coordinator of Judicial Affairs or assistant dean of students for adjudication. The coordinator of Judicial Affairs or the assistant dean of students may choose to refer the case to the Honor Board. Cases that will be considered for referral to the Elon Honor Board are cases which involve gross violation(s) of community standards or personal violations (fighting, other acts of violence, weapons, drug charges, etc.).
After the charges are set, the student respondent may then choose to accept responsibility for the identified charges, have his/her administrative hearing immediately, or schedule a hearing at a future reasonable date, usually within three days.
Administrative Hearing
During the administrative hearing, the hearing officer will ask questions regarding the incident and the responding student’s behavior related to the charges. The hearing officer will consider all information the student shares and is available to him/her. If necessary, either the hearing officer or the respondent may postpone the conclusion of the hearing (for a reasonable amount of time) in order to conduct additional investigation. The hearing will conclude with the rendering of a “Responsible” or “Not Responsible” decision and appropriate sanctions if warranted.
Family members, attorneys or other legal counsel may not attend or serve as advisors in campus judicial proceedings. The charged student may bring an advisor from the Elon University community (currently enrolled student, faculty or staff member), but advisors may only counsel the student and may not actively participate in the process. In cases alleging assault by one student against another (including sexual offenses), the alleged victim may also bring an advisor from the Elon community to the hearing.
Appeal of Decision
If a student wishes to appeal the decision of a hearing officer, s/he must submit a letter of appeal to the Assistant Dean of Students by 5:00 pm on the second working day following the rendering of a decision. The guidelines for making an appeal are outlined in the “Appeal Procedures” section.
Elon Honor Board
The Honor Board hears all academic policy violation cases for which the student denies responsibility. It also hears social policy cases referred by the Office of Judicial Affairs which involve gross violation(s) of community standards or personal violations (fighting, other acts of violence, weapons, drugs, etc.). Due to the number of individuals involved in the process, the timeline for scheduling the hearing may be longer than for an administrative hearing, but will still be within a reasonable amount of time.
The Elon Honor Board consists of 12 students (six elected by the student body and six appointed by the SGA President), three of which must be present at the hearing; six faculty (two elected by the Academic Council and four appointed by the provost/vice president for academic affairs), of which two must be present at the hearing; and two Student Life administrators (appointed by the vice president of student life), one of which must be present at the hearing. The assistant vice president for academic affairs and assistant dean of students are non-voting members of the Elon Honor Board and act as conveners of the board for academic policy hearings and social policy hearings.
Honor Board Procedures
The Elon University judicial system is designed to provide fairness and appropriate consideration for those students charged with violating the policies of the university and/or the wider society. Honor boards will adhere to the following to ensure fairness:
- Hearings are restricted to those directly involved with the incident and those requested to be present by the institution.
- The responding student may bring an advisor from the Elon University community (currently enrolled student, faculty or staff member) to the hearing. Advisors may only counsel the student and may not actively participate in the hearings.
- Family members, attorneys or other legal counsel may not attend or serve as advisors in campus judicial proceedings.
- In cases alleging assault by one student against another, the alleged victim may also bring an advisor from the Elon community (currently enrolled student, faculty or staff member) to the hearing.
- The student respondent may submit up to three written character references for consideration by the board. The character references will be considered during sanctioning deliberations if the accused student is found responsible for the violation(s).
A typical hearing board procedure follows this basic outline:
- All witnesses, the responding student, his/her advisor, and the hearing board members will meet.
- The assistant dean of students, assistant vice president for Academic Affairs, or his/her designee, serve as conveners of the board, and will stress confidentiality to all participants.
- The witnesses will leave the room and the charge(s) will be read to the student. The student will respond to the charges and state "responsible" or "not responsible" to each charge.
- The accused student will be allowed to make a statement.
- Those witnesses who substantiate the charge(s) will be requested to make statements and respond to questions from board members.
- Those witnesses who can refute the charge(s) will be asked to make statements and respond to questions from board members.
- The charged student will respond to questions from board members and offer any further information or statement(s) on his/her behalf.
- The charged student and his/her advisor will leave the hearing room, and the hearing board members will deliberate and vote "responsible" or "not responsible" on each charge. A majority vote (which shall be by secret ballot) of the voting members of the hearing board is required for a decision.
- Should the decision be responsible, the board members will be given information concerning any prior offenses and written character references (if presented by the charged student). The board may consider prior offenses and sanctions solely for the purposes of determining the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.
- The charged student and his/her advisor will return to the hearing room, and the decision will be shared.
- For cases involving social policy violations, students found responsible will be allowed to make a closing statement or offer any comments for consideration in the imposition of sanctions.
- The board will discuss all information available and determine appropriate sanctions.
- For social cases, the charged student and his/her advisor will return to the hearing room, and the sanctioning decision will be shared.
- The board or convener will provide an explanation of the appeals procedure as outlined in this handbook.
All board hearings will be audio-recorded. Audiotapes will be erased if there is no appeal of the hearing board decision or within six days of the conclusion of the appeals process. Audiotapes will remain the property of Elon University. Elon University board hearings, unlike proceedings of a court of law, do not require conclusive proof. Instead, the greater weight of the evidence is sufficient to make a decision of responsible. The student has the right to appeal the decision of the Elon University Honor Board to the University Appeals Board.
Involuntary Withdrawal
The president, provost/vice president for academic affairs, vice president for business, finance and technology, vice president for student life, or persons functioning under their direct authority, may carry out immediate, involuntary withdrawals concerning the conduct of a student. In extreme cases, prompt and decisive action may be required before there is an opportunity to conduct a hearing, as in cases in which a student's continued presence on campus substantially impedes the orderly functioning of the university or constitutes an immediate threat to the well-being or property of members of the university community or if the student requires more supervision than the university staff can reasonably provide. Students withdrawn involuntarily shall have a prompt meeting with the vice president for student life or his designee to review the behavior which forms the basis for the student's withdrawal. In some cases the student may be required to reside off campus and/or be given restricted access to the campus without being involuntarily withdrawn pending the outcome of the hearing.
Withdrawal in Lieu of a Hearing
Under certain conditions, the vice president for student life may agree that a student charged with violating an Honor Code policy may withdraw from the university rather than face a judicial hearing. A student must request such an option in writing and must stipulate that the petition is voluntary. Students approved to withdraw in lieu of a hearing may neither be physically present on the Elon campus, nor participate in Elon University sponsored activities, programs or events either on or off the campus, without the explicit approval of the Vice President, Assistant Vice President, or Assistant Dean for Student Life.
Students approved to withdraw in lieu of a hearing may not be eligible to re-apply to Elon University in the future. A student withdrawing in lieu of facing a judicial hearing must have the clearance of the vice president for student life before s/he may apply for readmission to the university. Re-admitted students will be on preliminary suspension upon return and may be required to meet other conditions to continue enrollment.
Judicial Cases Involving Student Organizations
Judicial cases involving student organizations will be adjudicated by the assistant vice president for student life. The assistant vice president for student life may consider recommendations for determination of responsibility/non-responsibility and sanctions from judiciaries such as the Interfraternity Council Honor Board, the Panhellenic Council Honor Board, Sports Club Council, etc. The assistant vice president for student life will make the final decision.
An organization may request to appeal the decision of the assistant vice president for student life to the vice president and dean of students on the grounds of: the discovery of new and substantial information relevant to the outcome of the decision, excessiveness of sanction and/or substantial violation of procedures to ensure a fair representation of the case by the student organization. The written request for an appeal must be received in the Office of the Vice President and Dean of Students by 5 p.m. on the second working day after the initial decision is rendered.
Sanctions for student groups may be made known to the campus and public.
NOTE: This university judicial system may be subject to change without notice in cases involving civil or criminal prosecution.