• Departments & Offices
• Dean of Students Office
• Departments
• Community Values & Restorative Practices
• Student Handbook
• Administration of the Student Code of Conduct
• Section VI. Student Conduct Procedures

Section VI. Student Conduct Procedures

A. Alleged Violations and Resolution of Allegations
1. Any student, member of the faculty, administration, support staff, visitor or guest to the campus community may file reports alleging possible student misconduct (www.wm.edu/report). The Director or designee will review all reports and determine the appropriate course of action to be taken. Actions can include forwarding the report for resolution via the Student Code of Conduct resolution procedures, referring the matter for alternative resolution, or requesting informal action by appropriate staff members.

2. Amnesty for Victims/Student Reporting Parties. The university encourages the reporting of Code violations and crimes by victims. Sometimes, victims might be hesitant to report to university officials because they fear that they may personally face sanctions due to policy violations involving underage drinking or drug use at the time of the incident. It is in the best interests of this community that as many victims as possible choose to report violations. To encourage reporting, the university provides such victims amnesty from policy violations involving underage drinking or drug use at the time of the incident.

3. Any alleged violation should be submitted as soon as possible after the event takes place. If an alleged violation is not reported within four months of the time it becomes known by the Reporting Party, it will be considered untimely unless the Director/designee concludes that there has been good cause for the delay and that it is still feasible to hold a fair proceeding.

4. The person filing a report need not be the actual victim/recipient of the conduct.

5. Upon receipt of a written report of misconduct, the Director or designee will determine if the alleged misconduct is unfounded or frivolous, and if so, he or she shall dismiss the report. The Director/designee also will make a determination of the potential level of seriousness of a particular report.
a.  Levels of Seriousness
i.  "Warning" cases are those in which the student faces a primary sanction no greater than a Warning (The Case Administrator may assign secondary sanctions as appropriate).
ii.  "Less Serious" cases are those cases in which the alleged violation might result in a sanction between a Warning and Disciplinary Probation.
iii.  "More Serious" cases are those cases in which the alleged violation would likely result in a removal from the university’s residence halls, Deferred Disciplinary Suspension, Disciplinary Suspension, or Permanent Dismissal from the university.

B. Information Session
1. If the Director does not dismiss the allegation, the student or official representative of the student organization will receive written notice of the information session with a Case Administrator. This session is an opportunity for the student to receive information about the conduct process, including options for resolution, and to discuss the report with the Case Administrator and respond on the student’s own behalf, or on behalf of a student organization, although the student is not required to make a statement.
2. After the information session and any appropriate investigation, the Case Administrator will dismiss the report if unfounded.
3. If a student fails to appear at the information session after proper notification, the Case Administrator may investigate further and dismiss the report if unfounded, place a hold on the student’s records (which prevents a student from registering or engaging in other transactions with the university), or prepare written allegations and notify the student or representative of the student organization (hereafter referred to as the “respondent”) that the matter has been scheduled for a conference or panel.

C. Permanent Resignation
Within 72 hours of notification of a pending conduct case, a student may choose to resign permanently from the university if the Dean of Students approves this option. If approved, the Director will direct that the student’s official records, including the transcript, will carry the following designation “Resigned under suspicion of a serious violation of the Code of Conduct. Ineligible to return.” The student must certify, via a form letter provided by CVRP, that the student understands that the student cannot seek or receive admission into any William & Mary program in the future. The student will not be able to be present on campus and will leave the university not in good standing.

D.  Resolution Options
1. If the Case Administrator does not dismiss the report after the information session, the student or organization may elect to resolve the case through one of the following three options:

a. Informal Resolution: If the Respondent and the Case Administrator agree to a written summary of facts, and the Respondent waives a conference/panel in writing, the Respondent can resolve the matter informally with the Case Administrator. The Case Administrator will assess sanctions/educational measures and inform the student in writing.
i.  If the Case Administrator determines that a case cannot be resolved through an informal process, the administrator can refer the matter for a conference or panel. The type of resolution method will still be the choice of the student or organization.
ii.  For “Warning” cases, the student can resolve the matter via Informal Resolution or Administrative Conference, but not via a panel.

b. Administrative Conference: The Respondent can elect to resolve the case through a conference with the Case Administrator.

c. Panels: The Respondent can elect to resolve the case through the appropriate panel.

d. Alternative Resolution: If the Director determines Alternative Resolution is appropriate, the student can opt to resolve the incident via Alternative Resolution. In these cases, the student must take full responsibility for their actions. The case administrator will then share options that are available, including restoration circles, mediation, facilitated dialogue, etc. Ultimately, the case administrator will decide which process to use. The process will result in formal educational measures for the Respondent, and the Respondent will be accountable to complete these measures by deadlines established by CVRP. If the Respondent does not complete these educational outcomes, the Director can pursue the charge of Failure to Comply with Directions. When a respondent successfully completes the Alternative Resolution process, CVRP will not record the matter as a conduct violation in their record. ^[FN20]

2. Timeline. The respondent will have two full working days to decide upon a resolution option unless the Case Administrator grants an extension for good cause. Once made, this election is irreversible. If the respondent does not inform the Case Administrator of his or her election within two working days after the Information Session, the Case Administrator can deem the lack of notification as a waiver of the party’s right to dispute the report and can resolve the report based on the information available without the need for a formal proceeding.   

3. Appeal. The Respondent retains the right to appeal regardless of the resolution method selected. Depending upon the resolution method, grounds for appeal may be limited. (See “Appeals of Disciplinary Actions,” Section VIII.)

E. General Resolution Procedures
1. Credibility and Relevance. Case Administrators (or Chairs) will determine the relevance and admissibility of any information presented. Case Administrators and panelists will determine the credibility of participants. Reasonable deference will be made to these discretionary determinations on any appeal.

2. Rules of evidence and "second hand" information. University proceedings do not follow the rules of evidence employed by courts of law. The Chair or Case Administrator can consider information that does not come from a first-hand source if deemed to be reliable, although a finding of responsibility may not be premised solely on such information. Results of Lie detector/polygraph tests are not permissible.

3. Remote Participation. Any party, including the Respondent, Reporting Party or any witness, may participate in a proceeding remotely by way of telephone, videoconferencing, or other appropriate means provided all other guidelines and procedures described in this Code are followed.

4. Separation of witnesses. In order to preserve the independence of each witness’s participation, the Chair may separate the witnesses during the course of the proceeding. If separated, no witness who has already participated in the proceeding may have contact with any witness due to participate.

5. Support for Respondent
a.  Student or Administrative Advisor. The Respondent may elect to be assisted by a currently enrolled student of their choosing. In “more serious” cases the student may request that the Director (or designee) appoint an administrator to serve in place of student advisor. An advisor may not give testimony during the proceeding.

b.  Silent Supporter. The Respondent may elect to have one silent supporter present. Silent supporters shall not participate in the proceedings or serve as witnesses.

c.  Presence of Legal Counsel. Legal counsel may serve as a student’s silent supporter provided the student has informed the Case Administrator in writing at least two working days prior to the proceeding. Legal counsel shall not participate in the proceeding unless the Chair or administrator considering the matter determines, when requested by the respondent, that the proceeding exposes the student to potential criminal action outside the university’s conduct process. The determination regarding the participation of legal counsel is final, and legal counsel will participate only to the extent authorized. Under no circumstances will the attorney be permitted to question witnesses or other parties to the proceeding, or to serve as a witness. The university may have its own legal counsel or advisor present if a student opts to have legal counsel present.

F. Procedures for Panels and Administrative Conferences
1. Allegations. If the Respondent chooses to resolve a case via a panel, the Case Administrator will prepare formal written allegations of violation and notify the student.

2. Timeline. Alleged violations normally will be heard within ten working days of notification to the respondent except in unusual cases where 1) the Dean of Students grants a postponement to the Case Administrator, or 2) the party responsible for the proceeding grants the Respondent a postponement, or 3) when a university break makes a proceeding impractical. A matter cannot be heard in fewer than four working days unless the student waives in writing the four-working-day time period.

3. Panel Procedures
a.  Types of Panels
i.  A Student Panel resolves "less serious" cases (as defined in Section VI.A.5.) when a student requests a panel.
ii.  A Community Panel resolves "more serious" cases (as defined in Section VI.A.5.) when a student has requested a panel.

4. Procedures for Student Panels
a.  Procedures.  Normally, the university uses informal procedures in deciding “less serious” allegations. However, the student will be provided:
i.  Written notice of the alleged violations and the date and location of the alleged violations;
ii.  Upon timely request, a summary of the principal facts underlying the alleged violations to the knowledge of the Case Administrator
iii. The opportunity to review all information to be presented to the panel
iv. The opportunity to respond on the student’s own behalf
v.  The opportunity to suggest relevant witnesses (the Chair may limit witness statements that are repetitive irrelevant), and
vi.  Written findings of the outcome of the proceeding.

b.  Panel Composition. Normally three student members of the Student Conduct Council, at least two from the school in which the Respondent is enrolled, will consider each case. Each three-member panel will select one of its members from the Respondent’s school as Chair. A fourth member, who may not vote or participate in any way in the proceeding or deliberations of the Panel other than as record-keeper, will be designated as recorder.

c.  Authority of the Panel. The Panel may determine whether the respondent is responsible for the alleged violations and assess sanctions/educational measures if it finds the student responsible. The panel will require a majority vote to reach decisions.

d.  Witnesses. Witnesses are regarded as persons who have personal knowledge of the incident under review. Witnesses can have no other role in the proceeding, such as advisor, and will appear in the proceeding only during their opportunity to provide information and answer questions.

The Chair will require that each party provide a list of witnesses they wish to participate in the proceeding and a summary of what information or perspective each proposed witness would offer. The parties must provide this list no later than three working days in advance of the scheduled proceeding. The Chair will decide in advance of the proceeding which witnesses are necessary for the panel to make a fully informed decision on the matters in dispute. The Chair will reject witnesses whose statements are irrelevant or unnecessarily duplicative of other witnesses.

Generally, the panel members will ask questions of witnesses; however, the Chair can permit the Respondent and Case Administrator to ask the witness questions. The Chair also can require questions be submitted to the Chair, who will decide which of the questions to ask. If the Respondent notifies the Director or designee in a timely fashion that a critical witness, one whose testimony will not be duplicative, is refusing to appear at the scheduled proceeding, the Director/designee will examine the matter and assist as appropriate. The Respondent may request that the university pursue conduct action for any student witness who refuses to appear or to cooperate so long as timely, appropriate, and verifiable notice was provided the witness. The university considers this action “Abusing the Student Conduct System.” The Director/designee will ensure notification to all available witnesses required to appear of the date, time, and place of the proceeding.

e.  Determination of Responsibility and Burden of Proof.  The Panel will meet in closed session to determine whether the Respondent has violated the Code as alleged. At least two of the three Panel members must conclude that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that a violation has occurred.

f.  Determination of Sanctions/Educational Measures.
i.  If the Panel finds the Respondent responsible for one or more violations, the Case Administrator will brief the Panel regarding any previous violations of the Code by the Respondent, any precedent for similar situations, any additional relevant information concerning the Respondent’s prior history, and any recommendations concerning sanctioning. The Respondent can make a statement concerning sanctioning, and if desired, call character witnesses. The Chair can limit the number of character witnesses (usually to one). The Panel then meets in closed session to determine an appropriate sanction.
ii.  At least two of the three members of the Panel must agree to the sanctions/educational measures issued. Any sanctions are not final until CVRP issues a written decision to the Respondent and any appeal is complete.

g.  Records of the Proceeding. The Recorder and the Chair will summarize the information presented and the Panel’s findings, including the reasons for the finding and sanctions/educational measures if the Panel finds the student responsible. Normally, the Chair will submit the summary to CVRP within two working days of the proceeding.

h.  Case Review and Notification. The Director or designee will review the panel decision promptly and can return for reconsideration any finding and/or sanction that is inconsistent with university policy or practice. The Director/designee can modify any sanctions/educational measures not authorized by the Code of Conduct. Normally, the Director/designee will notify the student in writing of the Panel’s decision within two working days after the Panel submits its summary.

i.  Appeal. The Director/designee will review appeals of Student Panel decisions in accordance with the principles outlined under “Appeals of Student Conduct Actions” (Section VIII).

5. Procedures for Community Panels
a.  Composition. Five Student Conduct Council members will comprise a Community Panel: two students from the Respondent’s academic unit, one other student member of the Council, one faculty member from the Respondent’s academic unit, and one administrator. The Director or designee will designate one of the three students as Chair of the panel. If the Respondent is a graduate or professional student enrolled in a degree program in two different schools, the Director/designee will appoint student members to the Panel from both schools if possible. The Chair will designate a sixth member of the Conduct Council, who may not vote or participate in any way in the proceeding or deliberations of the Panel other than as record-keeper, to serve as recorder.

b.  Recording.  Panel proceedings will be recorded via digital media.

c.  Notification and Preliminary Conference. CVRP will schedule a Community Panel and inform the Respondent in writing at least five working days in advance of the Panel of the date, time, and location of the panel, the date and location of the alleged violations and the relevant conduct code violations the Panel will consider. CVRP also will schedule a Preliminary Conference in which the Panel Chair will meet with the Respondent, the Respondent’s Advisor (if any), and the Case Administrator at least five working days prior to the scheduled Panel. The Case Administrator will provide the Respondent a copy of the documentary information to be provided to the Panel and the names of any witnesses the Case Administrator proposes to present (unless a witness has been granted anonymity). The Chair will provide the Respondent a sample script of the proceeding.

The Respondent must inform the Chair in writing by the end of the next working day which documents the Respondent plans to challenge in the proceeding and with the names, phone numbers, and emails of any proposed witnesses, along with a summary of each witness’s expected statements. By the end of the following working day, the Chair will inform the Case Administrator and Respondent what witnesses will be called based on what information is in dispute or needs further investigation by the Panel. The Chair’s determination regarding the necessity of witnesses is final, but the Respondent may challenge this decision in any subsequent appeal.

i. If a Respondent fails to appear for the Preliminary Conference without advance notice and without the Director/designee granting a postponement for good cause, such failure will not be considered good cause for any requests for delay of the Panel.

d.  Witnesses.  The Chair will notify witnesses required at the proceeding of the date, time, and location of the proceeding and of the necessity of their participation. If the Chair notifies the Director/designee in a timely fashion that a critical witness, one whose testimony will not be duplicative, is refusing to appear at the scheduled proceeding, the Director/designee will examine the matter and assist if appropriate. The Director may report any student witness who refuses to appear or cooperate so long as the witness was provided timely, appropriate, and verifiable notice. The university considers this action “Abusing the Student Conduct System.”

e.  Postponement. The Respondent may request one postponement of the proceeding, citing the reasons for the request in a written statement to the Director/designee at least two working days in advance of the panel, if possible. The Respondent should provide supporting documentation where appropriate. The Director/designee can grant a postponement for good cause.

f.  Conduct of the Panel.  The Chair is responsible for the conduct of the proceeding as follows:
i. The Chair introduces the members of the Panel and summarizes any special situations pertinent to the matter or the proceeding.
ii. The Respondent enters a response to each alleged violation under review (either "responsible" or "not responsible").
iii. The Case Administrator provides a brief summary of the alleged violations and the nature of the information to be presented.
iv. The Respondent may present brief opening remarks and perspective as to the basis of the Respondent’s response to each alleged violation.
v. The Chair and panel ask questions of the Case Administrator and Respondent as necessary.
vi. The Chair informs the parties as to which witnesses are necessary to be called in light of what information is in dispute. The Chair determines the order of witnesses to be called and whether any witnesses are no longer necessary in light of the matters in dispute and the information those witnesses can provide
vii. The Panel, Case Administrator, and Respondent asks relevant questions to each witness called.
viii. Following witness participation, the Panel asks questions of any party.
ix. The Chair provides the Case Administrator and Respondent the opportunity for them to ask relevant questions of each other.
x. The Panel asks the Respondent or Case Administrator any remaining questions.
xi. The case administrator and the Respondent have the opportunity to present brief summary remarks to the panel.
xii. The panel convenes in closed session to deliberate regarding a judgment as to responsibility for each alleged violation.

g.  Determination of Responsibility and Burden of Proof. The Panel will meet in closed session to determine whether the Respondent has violated the Code. At least four of the five Panel members must conclude that a preponderance of the evidence exists to prove each alleged violation.  

h.  Determination of Sanctions.
i.  If the Panel finds the student responsible for one or more violations, the Case Administrator will brief the Panel regarding any previous violations of the Code by the Respondent, any precedent for similar situations, any additional relevant information concerning the student’s prior history, and any recommendations concerning sanctions. The Respondent may make a statement concerning sanctions, and if desired, call character witnesses. The Chair can limit the number of character witnesses (usually to one). The Panel and Case Administrator can ask the Respondent questions relevant to determining sanctions. The Panel then meets in closed session to determine appropriate sanctions/educational measures.
ii.  At least four of five Panel members must agree to the sanctions/measures imposed. Sanctions/measures are not final until the Director of CVRP/designee issues a written decision to the Respondent and any appeal procedure is complete.^[FN21]

i.  Proceeding Records. The Recorder and the Chair will summarize the proceeding, the information presented, and the Panel’s reasoning for the judgment and any sanctions/ measures assigned (the “rationale” document).

j.  Filing with Director. The Chair normally will submit the summary, the recording, and all evidence within two working days with the Director.

k.  Case Review and Notification. The Director/designee will review the case documents and decision promptly and will return for reconsideration to the Panel any finding and/or sanction that is inconsistent with university policy or practice. The Director/designee may modify any sanction(s) imposed that are not authorized by the Code of Conduct. Normally, the Director/designee will notify the Respondent in writing of the Panel’s findings and sanctions within two working days after the Panel submits its summary.

l.  Written decisions and findings. CVRP will notify the Respondent in writing of the judgment and sanctions and the Respondent’s option to appeal the decision. The notification will include a copy of the Panel’s written rationale.

m.  Appeal. Normally within two working days after written confirmation of the results of the Panel are provided, the Director /designee will be available to the Respondent to discuss the impact of the decision and to provide information about the appeal process. See Appeals of Student Conduct Actions (Section VIII.)

6. Procedures for Administrative Conferences. If the Respondent elects to have the alleged violations resolved via an Administrative Conference, the procedures outlined under “Procedures for Student Panels” or “Procedures for Community Panels” above will be followed with appropriate allowances for the differences in structure.
7.  Modified Procedures for Alleged Violations of the Hazing Policy or Alleged Crimes of Violence: If a case of alleged crime(s) of violence ^[FN22] or hazing is not resolved via Informal Resolution, the reporting party will be granted the following additional rights:
a.  The Reporting Party may have present at the proceeding a silent supporter of their choosing. The support person will not participate in the proceeding and will be bound by the rules of confidentiality governing the proceeding.
b.  The Reporting Party may choose to be physically separated from the respondent during the proceedings.
c.  The Director/designee will provide the Reporting Party written notification of the final outcome of the proceeding and any sanction(s) imposed as permitted by law.
d.  The Reporting Party has the right to appeal (see Section VIII).

_______________________________________________________________________________________
^{[20] See the CVRP website for more information regarding Alternative Resolution.
[21] For students receiving Disciplinary Suspension or Permanent Dismissal, the university will limit the respondent to academic participation only during the appeal period.
[22] As defined in Title 18 of the U.S. Code Section 16.}