/Institutions/University-of-Jamestown/json/2023-2024/University-Student-Handbook-local.json

/Institutions/University-of-Jamestown/json/2023-2024/University-Student-Handbook.json

XVIII. Live Hearing for the Title IX Grievance Process

In order to promote a fair and expeditious hearing, each party and their advisor will attend a pre-hearing conference with the decision-maker and the Title IX Coordinator. The pre-hearing conference assures that the parties and their advisors understand the hearing process and allows for significant issues to be addressed in advance of the hearing.

As part of the Title IX formal grievance process, there is a live hearing where the decisionmaker(s) will ask relevant questions of both parties and witnesses, and will allow for each party’s advisor to ask the other party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those that challenge credibility. While the hearing is not intended to be a repeat of the investigation, the parties will be provided with an equal opportunity for their advisors to conduct cross-examination of the other party and of relevant witnesses. A typical hearing may include: brief opening remarks by the decision-maker; questions posed by the decision-maker to one or both of the parties; cross-examination by each party’s advisor of the other party and relevant witnesses; and questions posed by the decision-maker(s)s to any relevant witnesses.

Only relevant cross-examination and other questions may be asked of a party or witness. Cross-examination must be conducted directly, orally, and in real time by the party’s advisor and never by the party personally. If a party does not have an advisor present at the live hearing, the University will provide without fee or charge to that party, an advisor of the University’s choice to conduct cross-examination on behalf of that party. The role of the advisor at the live hearing is solely to conduct cross-examination on behalf of a party. The advisor is not to represent a party, but only to relay the party’s cross-examination questions that the party wishes to have asked of the other party and witnesses. Advisors may not raise objections or make statements or arguments during the live hearing. Before a Complainant, Respondent, or witness answers a cross-examination or other question, the decision-maker(s) must first determine whether the question is relevant and explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant.

At the request of either party, the University must provide for the live hearing to occur with the parties located in separate rooms with technology enabling the decision-maker(s) and parties to simultaneously see and hear the party or the witness answering the question. Hearings may be conducted with all parties physically present in the same geographic location, or at the University’s discretion, any or all parties, witnesses, and other participants may appear at the live hearing virtually, with technology enabling participants simultaneously to see and hear each other.

The decision-maker(s) will discuss measures available to protect the well-being of parties and witnesses at the hearing. These may include, for example, use of lived names and pronouns during the hearing, including names appearing on a screen; a hearing participant’s ability to request a break during the hearing, except when a question is pending; and a pause in the cross-examination process each time before a party or witness answers a cross-examination question in order for the decision-maker(s) to determine if the question is relevant and to ensure that the pace of cross-examination does not place undue pressure on a party or witness to answer immediately.

Questions and evidence about the Complainant’s sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant, unless such questions and evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior are provided to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed the alleged conduct; or the questions and evidence concern specific incidents of the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior with respect to the Respondent and are offered to prove consent.

The decision-maker(s) cannot draw an inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a party’s or witness’s absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer cross-examination or other questions.

Any evidence that the decision-maker(s) determines is relevant may be considered. The parties are encouraged to make known all witnesses and evidence during the investigation stage. Any witness scheduled to participate in the hearing must have been first interviewed by the investigator(s), unless all parties and the decisionmaker(s) assent to the witness’s participation in the hearing. The same holds for any evidence that is first offered at the hearing. If the parties and decision-maker(s) do not assent to the admission of evidence newly offered at the hearing, the decision-maker(s) may delay the hearing and instruct that the investigation needs to be reopened to consider that evidence. If the decisionmaker does allow for a new witness or evidence, it may impact the weight in which the information is assigned in making the determination. The University will make all evidence gathered available to the parties during the hearing to give each party equal opportunity to refer to such evidence during the hearing, including for purposes of cross-examination.

Courtroom rules of evidence and procedure will not apply. The decision-maker will generally consider, that is rely on, all evidence that they determine to be relevant and reliable. Throughout the hearing, the decision-maker will:

1. Exclude evidence including witness testimony that is, for example, irrelevant in light of the policy violation(s) charged, relevant only to issues not in dispute, or unduly repetitive;
2. Disallow or require rephrasing of questions that violate the rules of conduct;
3. Decide any procedural issues for the hearing; and/or
4. Make any other determinations necessary to promote an orderly, productive, and fair hearing that complies with the rules of conduct.

The parties and witnesses will address only the decision-maker, and not each other. Only the decision-maker and the parties’ advisors may question witnesses and parties. The live hearing is a closed proceeding and not open to the public. The Complainant and Respondent may be accompanied by or may otherwise be in contact with their advisor at all times. Witnesses will attend the hearing separately and only for their own testimony. The order in which witnesses appear will be determined by the decisionmaker. All participants involved in a hearing are expected to respect the seriousness of the matter and the privacy of the individuals involved. The University’s expectation of privacy during the hearing process should not be understood to limit any legal rights of the parties during or after the resolution. The University may not, by federal law, prohibit the Complainant from disclosing the final outcome of a formal complaint process (after any appeals are concluded). All other conditions for disclosure of hearing records and outcomes are governed by the University’s obligations under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), any other applicable laws, and professional ethical standards.

The University will ensure that individuals with disabilities have an equal opportunity to participate in, and benefit from the University’s Title IX grievance process, consistent with the requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The University will also ensure that English learner students can participate meaningfully and equally in the University’s Title IX grievance process, as required by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974. Any individual requesting accommodations due to disability or language assistance should contact the Title IX Coordinator.

The University will require all parties, advisors, and witnesses to maintain appropriate decorum throughout the live hearing. Participants at the live hearing are expected to abide by the decisionmaker’s directions and determinations, maintain civility, and avoid disruptions and raised voices. Though this list is not exhaustive, the following are some rules of hearing decorum:

• duplicative or repetitive questions are irrelevant;
• advisors may not question parties or witnesses in an abusive, intimidating, or disrespectful manner;
• relevant questions must be asked in a respectful non-abusive manner;
• parties are expected not to spend time on undisputed facts or evidence that would be duplicative.

Repeated violations of appropriate decorum may result in a break in the live hearing, the length of which will be determined by the decision-maker chair. The decision-maker chair reserves the right to appoint a different advisor to conduct cross-examination on behalf of a party after an advisor’s repeated violations of appropriate decorum or other rules related to the conduct of the live hearing.

The University (including any official acting on behalf of the University such as an investigator or decision-maker) has the right at all times to determine what constitutes appropriate behavior on the part of an advisor and to take appropriate steps to ensure compliance with this Policy.