2023 ANNUAL SECURITY REPORT 45 The University may determine that multiple sessions or a continuance (i.e., a pause on the continuation of the hearing until a later date or time) is needed to complete a hearing. If so, the University will notify all participants and endeavor to accommodate all participants’ schedules and complete the hearing as promptly as practicable. HEARING PARTICIPANTS Hearings are not public, and the only individuals permitted to participate in the hearing are: 1) the Decision Maker(s), including the Hearing Chair; 2) the Investigator; 3) IT personnel; 4) the Parties; 5) The Advisor of choice or Advisor provided by the University for each Party; 6) Witnesses; and 7) any individuals necessary to provide interpretation or other support services associated with reasonable accommodations to facilitate participation in the hearing. The Decision Maker(s), including the Hearing Chair, will not have a conflict of interest or bias in favor of or against Complainants or Respondents generally, or in favor or against the Parties to the particular case. The Parties may raise any objections regarding a Decision Maker’s actual or perceived conflicts of interest or bias at the beginning of the hearing, if not raised previously. HEARING PROCEDURES The Hearing Chair establishes rules and expectations at the start of the hearing. Once established, the Parties are each given the opportunity to provide opening statements, hear a summary of the final Investigation Report offered by the Investigator, and question the Investigator through their Advisors. Once the Investigator has presented the report, the Hearing Chair and Decision Maker(s) may ask questions of the Parties and Witnesses. Each Party then has the opportunity for cross-examination through their Advisors. DECISIONS While Kutztown University requires the opportunity for cross-examination in all hearings, determinations regarding responsibility of the Respondent may be based in part, or entirely, on documentary, audiovisual, and digital evidence, as warranted in the reasoned judgment of the Decision Maker(s). Hearsay evidence may not be used to establish a fact necessary to establish responsibility consistent with the requirements under Chapter 505 of Title 22 of the Pennsylvania Code concerning Student Personnel. Decision Maker(s) do not draw inferences regarding a Party or Witness’ credibility based on the Party or Witness’ status as a Complainant, Respondent, or Witness, nor do they base their judgments in stereotypes about how a Party or Witness would or should act under the circumstances. Generally, credibility judgments rest on the demeanor of the Party or Witness, the plausibility of their testimony, the consistency of their testimony, and its reliability in light of corroborating or conflicting testimony or evidence. They will not rest on whether a Party or Witness’ testimony is non-linear or incomplete, or if the Party or Witness is displaying stress or anxiety. The Decision Maker(s) will decide responsibility and make a sanction recommendation to the Dean of Students. If there are no extenuating circumstances, the determination regarding responsibility will be issued by the University within 10 days of the completion of the hearing. EVIDENTIARY STANDARD In campus hearings, legal terms like “guilt” and “innocence” are not applicable, but the university never assumes a student is in violation of university policy. KU will consider the concerns and rights of both the Complainant and the Respondent. Campus hearings are conducted to consider the totality of all evidence available, from all relevant sources. The university reserves the right to take whatever measures it deems necessary in response to an allegation of sexual misconduct in order to protect students’ rights and personal safety. Allegations against a student for sexual misconduct are addressed through the established student conduct process consistent with the KU Sexual Misconduct Policy (http://app.kutztown.edu/policyregister/ Policy/DIV-007). Consistent with requirements set forth in the Pennsylvania Code pertaining to student disciplinary due process requirements, the University will use the preponderance of the evidence standard in investigations of Formal Complaints alleging sexual misconduct violations under the Sexual Misconduct Policy. This means that the individual(s)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NzcxOTE=