HONOR COMMITTEE BY-LAWS:
2006-2007*
Effective dates April 1-December 2, 2006
|
Note: New by-laws are in italics followed by a parenthetical notation stating the date on which they were passed. The by-laws in use at the time a case is reported are the same by-laws to be used throughout the Honor process. A. Honor Committee B. Executive Committee C. Support Officers D. Code of Ethics; Standards Panel III. CONSCIENTIOUS RETRACTIONS A. Report B. Investigation C. Investigative Panel D. Psychological Hearings E. Trial F. Trial Panels G. Pre-trial conference H. Trial Hearing I. Effect of a guilty trial verdict J. Post-trial K. Division of Continuing Education L. Registration Blocks and Transcript Holds M. Community Relations Committee Procedures on Bad Checks and Honor Debts HONOR COMMITTEE BY-LAWS The purpose of the by-laws of the Honor Committee is to describe generally the powers of the Honor Committee and its associated support officers, as well as the procedures of the Honor System. While the by-laws contain many specific provisions, they are not meant to be an exhaustive list of enumerated powers, responsibilities, and procedures that extend to every imaginable contingency. Instead they are a general framework from which the Committee, using sound judgment and reason, can deduce the extent of its power and responsibility, and the procedural limitations on the Honor System.
Purpose: The Honor System at the University of Virginia exists to foster a cohesive bond of trust among all members of the University community and to instill in all students a mutual reverence for the ideal of honorable behavior. Honor, of course, is a complex and multidimensional principle -- a moral aspiration that defies simple characterizations. At the University of Virginia, however, the Honor System rests on a particular conception of that ideal. The cardinal injunction of our system is that students must refrain from lying, cheating, and stealing in all their forms or face permanent dismissal from the University, and, where applicable, revocation of their University degree. A. In more technical terms, a violation against the community of trust is defined as a serious and intentional act of lying, cheating, or stealing by a University student in Charlottesville, Albemarle County, any of the University of Virginia's regional centers, or anywhere that a student represents himself or herself as a student of the University. B. The Honor System, and the procedures set forth in these by-laws, apply to any person who was registered as a University student at the time an alleged Honor offense was committed. Students who leave or have left the University for any reason (including, without limitation, transfer, withdrawal, leave of absence, graduation or other failure to return to the University for any reason), at any time, whether prior to case reporting and official accusation or thereafter, are subject to these procedures so long as a case is properly reported under Section IV.A, below. References in these by-laws to a "student" or to "students" include all persons described in the foregoing [previous] sentences (except that in the context of jury panelists, "students" must be registered at the time of the relevant trial, and in the context of performing the roles of Committee members or support officers, "students" must be registered when elected or appointed and throughout the time they are performing those roles).
A. The Honor Committee Purpose: The Committee is the body responsible for the administration of the Honor System. In discharging this function, the Committee's principal purpose is to maintain the community of trust on which the Honor System rests within a framework of fundamental fairness to students undergoing honor proceedings. 1. The Honor Committee shall uphold the principles established in the Honor Committee Constitution. 2. The Honor Committee shall consist of three representatives from the College of Arts and Sciences and two representatives from each of the other Schools of the University. 3. Each Honor Committee member shall: a. be registered in the school that he or she represents at the time of the election, b. be a student enrolled in a degree program in the school he or she represents, c. be subject to a recall election if he or she fails to conform to these guidelines at any time during his or her tenure, and d. not serve in any capacity as a support officer during his or her tenure in office. 4. Pursuant to Article 3, Section 7 of the Honor Constitution, each Committee shall adopt a meeting procedure in accordance with a. the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order, or b. another specified format to be ratified by 2/3 of the Committee. B. The Executive Committee Purpose: While the Committee as a whole retains ultimate authority over the administration of the Honor System, the Executive Committee shall be responsible for dealing with the Committee's routine business. Additionally, the Executive Committee may fulfill any other duties that the full Honor Committee may specifically delegate. Under all circumstances, The Executive Committee should keep the full Committee apprised of its actions and should never assume that it may act on behalf of the full Committee without the full Committee's explicit consent and authorization. 1. The Executive Committee shall be composed of five officers elected by the full Honor Committee from among the Honor Committee membership. 2. These five officers shall be the Chair, the Vice Chair for Investigations, the Vice Chair for Trials, the Vice Chair for Education, and the Vice Chair for Services. Each Vice Chair shall oversee one of the four support officer pools and shall represent his or her constituents' concerns to the Honor Committee. a. The Chair shall preside over all Honor Committee meetings and all Executive Committee meetings and shall be ultimately responsible for the administration of the Honor System. b. The Vice Chair for Investigations shall be ultimately responsible for the administration of all honor violation reports, investigations, Investigative Panels, and other procedures regarding a student under investigation for an honor offense by the Committee. c. The Vice Chair for Trials shall be ultimately responsible for the administration of all trials, appeals, and other procedures regarding an accused, or dismissed student. These responsibilities include proper notification of all relevant parties regarding the disposition of the proceedings against a student, and immediate supervision of and responsibility for proceedings concerning students in the School of Continuing Education. d. The Vice Chair for Education shall be ultimately responsible for the administration of all efforts by the Committee to educate the study body, including the Division of Continuing Education, on the importance of the Honor System and its significant principles and practices. e. The Vice Chair for Services shall head the Community Relations Committee and shall ensure that students receive other privileges to which the Honor System entitles them. 3. Three votes are required for all decisions of the Executive Committee. C. Support Officers Purpose: The support officers help the Committee with the proper and fair administration of the Honor System. There are four pools of support officers: advisors, counsel, educators, and Community Relations Committee members. All support officers shall be assigned to only one pool and must be University of Virginia students. Investigation Coordinators, chosen from members of the counsel or advisor pools and approved by the Committee, will help the Vice Chair for Investigations assign cases and monitor the progression of cases through the System. 1. Advisor Pool Purpose: Going through the honor system can be a difficult and trying process. The advisors are there to help alleviate some of the pressures and anxieties that accompany that process. Advisor's responsibilities are twofold: a. to provide individuals going through the Honor System, including reporting witnesses, confidential and emotional support, and b. to provide the parties to which they are assigned with neutral and impartial information about the process they will be experiencing. 2. Counsel Pool Purpose: In a system premised on the principle of honor, all the procedures of the Committee should be guided by the concept of the pursuit of truth. The counsel play a crucial role in maintaining this ideal. a. Counsels' responsibilities are twofold: i. to investigate thoroughly and impartially a possible honor offense, and ii. to ensure a fair and balanced representation of both the accused and the dismissed student's interests and the community's interests during the entire process. b. A Senior Counsel chosen from members of the counsel pool and approved by the Committee shall help the Vice Chair for Trials train and supervise the Counsel and Pre-Hearing Coordinators. He or She may also serve, along with those specifically approved for the job by the Committee, as a Pre-Hearing Coordinator. c. Pre-Hearing Coordinators, chosen from members of the counsel pool and approved by the Committee, will make all necessary rulings at pre-trial and pre-appeal conferences in consultation with the selected Hearing Chair and Observer. 3. Educator Pool Purpose: The primary responsibility of the educators is to assist the Honor Committee in educational and orientation programs for the student body. A Senior Educator chosen by the Vice Chair for Education and approved by the Honor Committee shall assist the Vice Chair for Education. 4. Community Relations Committee Purpose: The Community Relations Committee ensures that all University students receive certain privileges, including but not limited to check-writing privileges, to which the Honor System entitles them in the broader Charlottesville community. The Honor Committee shall select a Community Relations Coordinator from members of the Community Relations Committee to assist the Vice Chair for Services. 5. Honor System Technical Staff Purpose: The Honor System Technical Staff will be composed of volunteer students who wish to support the technical efforts of the Committee and its support officers. The responsibilities of the Honor System Technical Staff may include, but are not limited to; web site development, general e-mail distribution list maintenance, and general computer maintenance. 6. Division of Continuing Education Coordinators The Dean of the Division of Continuing Education shall nominate, and the Honor Committee shall approve, at least one administrative coordinator from each regional center for a term of one year. Each coordinator shall be responsible for the administration of the Honor System and for maintaining the community of trust at each center. D. Code of Ethics; Standards Panel Purpose: Because the Honor Committee bears such a
weighty responsibility, the Committee and its support officers must hold
themselves to the most exacting standards of ethical conduct. Guidelines
for such conduct are set forth in the Committee's Code of Ethics (the
"Code of Ethics"), copies of which are available at the offices
of the Honor Committee. Purpose: The Honor System permits a student to atone for his or her mistakes by filing a "Conscientious Retraction" (a "CR"). A valid and complete CR involves the admission of a possible honor offense and can be used as a full, exonerating defense against Honor charges. The CR is an opportunity and not a right, and it must meet certain conditions in order to immunize a student from Honor Committee proceedings. A. A CR must be valid-it must be submitted before a student
has reason to believe that the relevant act has come under suspicion by
anyone. IV. PROCEDURES: HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS Purpose: When processing honor cases, the Honor Committee and its support officers act on behalf of the community of trust to protect its interest in maintaining the ideal of honorable behavior. The Committee must balance its commitment to the community with its responsibility to ensure that all of its actions are fair to those students whose conduct is in question. The Honor Committee's procedures help the Committee achieve this important balance. The Honor System process is divided into four stages: report, investigation, trial, and post-trial. The entire process should be conducted in a timely manner. For that reason, timelines have been built into the System which regulate various procedures. In general, however, the Honor Committee suspends all procedures during non-school days. School days are days when the College of Arts & Sciences is officially in session during the Fall and Spring semesters, but not during summer session. School days include weekends between class days but do not include any registration or examination periods, breaks or holidays. Notwithstanding the general suspension of Honor Committee procedures during non-school days, where a case is reported toward the end of a semester and case investigators have not had an opportunity to interview the investigated student prior to the end of such semester, the advisor for the investigated student will attempt to notify such student of the nature of the investigation as soon as reasonably possible following the end of such semester.This attempt at early notification will occur only for investigations that span recesses in order to allow for the opportunity to preserve pertinent evidence whenever possible. The entire process will be conducted in accordance with the most recent by-laws as of the date of a report. A. REPORT Purpose: The Honor Committee does not exist to police
the student body. Instead, it adjudicates allegations that members of
the community bring to its attention. The act of bringing a possible honor
offense to the attention of the Honor Committee is called a 1. Any person may report honor proceedings against any other person who meets the criteria set forth in Subsection IV.A.2., below. To do so, the reporting witness should contact either an Honor advisor or a Committee member. 2. All reports must conform to the following guidelines: a. the person whose conduct is in question must have been registered as a student at the University of Virginia at the time of the alleged incident, and b. the report must occur within two years of the alleged incident. If those criteria are not satisfied, the Vice-Chair for Investigations should drop the case. 3. Students cannot be re-investigated for an offense if a trial panel has previously acquitted them. Cases dropped by the Investigative Panel may be reinvestigated if: a. a new report is filed, b. the Executive Committee determines, prior to an accusation, that either this new report entails new evidence, or that the previous investigation was conducted in bad faith, and c. the Executive Committee determines that the new evidence or bad faith investigation could have affected the outcome of the original Investigative Panel. 4. Throughout the entire Honor System process, the reporting witness and the investigated student will each be assigned one advisor by the Vice Chair for Investigations. 5. Within a reasonable amount of time after the report of a case, two counsel will be assigned to the case by the Vice Chair for Investigations. B. INVESTIGATION Purpose: The purpose of the investigation is to collect information in order to determine if an honor offense has occurred. 1. During the report and the investigation stages, the suspected student will be called the "investigated student." 2. Every investigated student will receive a list of his or her enumerated rights under the Honor System. 3. The investigation shall be jointly and impartially conducted by two counsel. The counsel will speak with the reporting witness, the investigated student, and all relevant witnesses and will collect all other pertinent evidence. 4. The advisor must be present when the two counsel interview the investigated student. 5. If both investigative counsel request that a case be dropped at any time prior to the Investigative Panel, the Executive Committee will determine whether the case should continue or be dropped. C. INVESTIGATIVE PANEL Purpose: The Investigative Panel, comprised of three rotating Honor Committee members, reviews the findings of the investigation and decides whether formally to accuse the investigated student of committing an honor offense. 1. The Investigative Panel should convene within one week of the completion of the investigation unless the Vice Chair for Investigations determines that circumstances exist which warrant a delay. 2. If the panel members believe that they are unable to make a proper decision because the investigation was incomplete, the panel may instruct the counsel to investigate the matter further. 3. The panel should accuse the student if it seems "more likely than not" that: a. the investigated student committed the act, b. the student committed the act with dishonest intent, and c. the act was serious. 4. The panel should not accuse the investigated student if he or she is able to prove "more likely than not" that he or she submitted a conscientious retraction. If the retraction is written, the panel need only assess its validity. If the retraction is unwritten, the panel must assess both validity and completeness. 5. The procedure for the investigative panel is as follows: a. The two counsel investigating the case will have fifteen minutes to present their findings. b. The reporting witness will then be given ten minutes to state the reasons for reporting the case, if he or she so desires. c. The investigated student will then be given ten minutes to make a statement to the panel, if he or she so desires. The panel has the opportunity to question everyone presenting information before it. However, the investigated student can not be compelled to testify. 6. Accusation of an investigated student requires a two-thirds vote by the panel. When the panel issues an accusation against the investigated student, the student's status then changes to that of an "accused student." 7. The Vice Chair for Investigations must ensure that students are informed of an accusation against them in a timely fashion. 8. When a student is formally accused of an Honor offense by an Investigative Panel, he may either (a) proceed with an Honor trial, in which case he must request such a trial, in writing, within ten (10) days following the Investigative Panel, or (b) fail to request an Honor trial, in writing, within such ten (10) day period, in which case he will be deemed to have waived his right to a trial and to have admitted guilt, whether or not such an admission is expressly made (such admission of guilt is referred to as "leaving admitting guilt" or a "LAG"). In each case in which a student is deemed to have admitted guilt, as described above, (i) the student is immediately dismissed and forfeits all of his rights under the Honor system, except for the right to appeal , if applicable, in accordance with Article IV.J of these by-laws; (ii) the Committee will so notify the Registrar; (iii) the Committee will request that the Registrar remove the student from active class rolls and forever bar his readmission to the University; (iv) the Committee will request that the Registrar place a notation on the transcript of the student reading "Enrollment Discontinued"; and (v) in the case of students who have already graduated from the University, the Committee will initiate degree revocation proceedings with the General Faculty. For students electing to proceed with an Honor trial, the trial process, the post-trial process, and the consequences flowing from a guilty verdict are described, in detail, in Sections IV E, F, G, H, I, and J, below. D. PSYCHOLOGICAL HEARINGS ON HONOR OFFENSES Purpose: The Honor Committee recognizes that a student (or a former student) may be afflicted by a mental disease or disorder or mental condition which (a) significantly contributed to the commission of an alleged Honor offense, and/or (b) renders such student substantially unable to understand the relevant Honor charges or to assist in his or her own defense. As more fully described below, certain separate procedures and a separate forum exist for the consideration of such claims. 1. Definitions. For purposes hereof, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: a. "Contributory Mental Disorder" or "CMD"
shall mean a mental disease or disorder or medical condition which significantly
contributed to the commission of an alleged Honor offense, causing the
student (i) to be unable to intend or control his or her actions giving
rise to such alleged Honor offense, or (ii) to have been so impaired at
the time of the commission of the alleged Honor offense as to lack the
specific intent to commit such alleged offense; 2. Claims of CMD. a. Requesting a Hearing on CMD. Any student who believes
that he or she may have a claim of CMD should consult with his or her
Honor advisor, request a copy of the Procedures, and carefully review
the Procedures in their entirety. Requests for a Hearing on CMD may be
made only in conformity with the deadlines and other requirements set
forth in the Procedures. A form for requesting a Hearing on CMD is attached
to the Procedures and may also be obtained from the Honor Committee. The
criteria applied in evaluating any request for a Hearing on CMD are set
forth in the Procedures. Where such a request is not timely filed, fails
to satisfy the relevant criteria, or otherwise fails to conform to the
requirements set forth in the Procedures, such a request will be denied
and the Honor Committee will proceed on the underlying Honor Charges.
Claims of CMD may not be made in an Honor trial. E. TRIAL Purpose: Like the Investigative Panel, the trial exists to determine if the student committed the alleged honor offense. The structure of the trial differs, however, from that of the Investigative Panel. 1. Students have a right to be assisted by counsel at trial. They may choose one of the two counsel involved in the initial investigation, or they may choose someone else to fulfill that role. Only University of Virginia students may serve in this capacity. 2. Students must notify the Vice Chair for Trials of the name(s) of their chosen counsel within seven days of their request for trial. Should they fail to do so, counsel will be assigned from the Honor Committee counsel pool. 3. If the accused student chooses one of the investigating counsel, the other investigating counsel is assigned to serve the interests of the Honor System. 4. The accused student may choose one of three panel types: a. a mixed panel of Honor Committee members and randomly selected students, b. a panel of only Honor Committee members, or c. a panel of only randomly selected students. 5. The accused student has the right to choose a trial that is either open or closed to the public. 6. When requesting a trial, accused students must inform the Vice Chair for Trials about which type of trial panel they want, their choice of counsel, whether they want their trial open or closed to the public and if they choose to have at least four members of the panel selected from either the undergraduate (if the accused is an undergraduate student) or graduate (if the accused is a graduate student) schools. 7. Unless the pre-trial conference determines that extraordinary circumstances exist, the trial must convene at the next available trial date subsequent to the request for trial by the accused student. F. TRIAL PANELS Purpose: The duty of the trial panel, or jury, is to determine whether an honor offense has occurred. 1. The Vice Chair for Trials shall be responsible for randomly selecting the students for panels consisting of student jurors. 2. If the accused student so chooses, a. Panels adjudicating the accusation of a graduate student should contain at least four jurors drawn from the graduate and professional programs. b. Panels adjudicating the accusation of an undergraduate student should contain at least four jurors from the undergraduate programs. The accused student must indicate his or her selection of the trial panel composition in his or her written request for trial. 3. Failure of a selected student to comply with the duties of a juror will be considered a breach of the University Standards of Conduct enforced by the University Judiciary Committee. G. PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE Purpose: The purpose of the pre-trial conference is to determine the witnesses who will testify at trial, the nature and scope of the evidence and testimony to be presented during the trial, and any other measures to ensure a fair and efficient trial. 1. The Vice Chair for Trials will assign Committee members to serve as the Chair and Observer for trial. 2. The Trial Chair, the Trial Observer, the Pre-Hearing Coordinator, and the counsel will convene a pre-trial conference before the trial. Except as provided in Section IV. G. 6. below, the Trial Chair, the Trial Observer and the Pre-Hearing Coordinator will make all necessary rulings at the pre-trial conference, in each case by a vote of at least two-thirds. 3. The conference will determine the list of witnesses who will testify during the trial. If possible, both sides will mutually agree to a list of witnesses and the order in which they will appear at the trial. Witnesses for the accusation shall testify first, followed by witnesses for the accused. If no agreement can be reached, the Trial Chair, the Trial Observer, and Pre-Hearing Coordinator shall intervene and establish the list and order of witnesses. 4. The conference will also determine the nature and scope of the evidence to be presented at trial. All relevant evidence necessary to a fair and thorough adjudication should be admitted, unless the evidence is either: a. unnecessarily cumulative or b. its probative value is far outweighed by its potentially prejudicial effect on the panel. Relevant evidence is any evidence having the tendency to make the existence of any material fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Even if relevant, the following may not be presented as evidence at honor proceedings: any polygraph, character, Psychological Evidence (as hereinafter defined), or information contained on any Honor Committee post-trial evaluation form or juror notes. Hearsay evidence may be admitted at the discretion of the Chair, Observer, and the Pre-Hearing Coordinator. For purposes of these Bylaws, "Psychological Evidence" shall mean any evidence relating to the mental state of the accused in relation to the commission of the alleged Honor offense, including any testimony, reports, written analyses or diagnoses on psychological or psychiatric matters, whether offered by the accused, any other fact witness, or any psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist, counselor or other, similar expert, and any evidence relating to medication prescribed for and/or taken by the accused for any alleged psychological condition. Psychological Evidence will be considered only at a Hearing on CMD (as defined in Section IV.D, above), and students wishing to present Psychological Evidence may wish to consider whether to pursue a Hearing on CMD. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the accused may testify about his or her general life circumstances at the time of the alleged Honor offense, so long as such testimony does not incorporate or refer to any Psychological Evidence and so long as such testimony is relevant and admissible at trial. 5. The conference will also determine the content of the Trial Chair's opening statement at trial, what observers will be allowed in closed trials, if the trial should be delayed and whether the accusations against the accused student(s) should be heard in multiple trials. Generally, in cases where multiple alleged acts of one or more students are linked to the same factually related event(s) or in cases where multiple alleged acts of one student are substantially similar, all charges may be heard in the same trial. 6. Motion to Dismiss: The pre-trial conference will also consider whether a case should proceed to trial when substantial issues of fundamental fairness or timeliness are raised by the accused student. If the Trial Chair and the Trial Observer decide, by a unanimous vote, that proceeding with the trial would, under the circumstances, be fundamentally unfair to the accused student, the case will be dropped. H. TRIAL HEARING Purpose: The fundamental purpose of the trial hearing is to pursue the truth about the alleged honor offense. 1. If the student, having been properly notified, fails to appear at trial, the student shall be deemed to have waived his right to an Honor trial and to have admitted guilt (leaving admitting guilt is referred to as a "LAG"), whether or not such an admission is expressly made. In each such case, (a) the student is immediately dismissed and forfeits all of his rights under the Honor system, except for the right to appeal, if applicable, in accordance with Article IV.J of these by-laws; (b) the Committee will so notify the Registrar; (c) the Committee will request that the Registrar remove the student from active class rolls and forever bar his readmission to the University; (d) the Committee will request that the Registrar place a notation on the transcript of the student reading "Enrollment Discontinued"; and (e) in the case of students who have already graduated from the University, the Committee will initiate degree revocation proceedings with the General Faculty. For students electing to attend their Honor trial, the post-trial process and the consequences flowing from a guilty verdict are described, in detail, in Sections IV.I and J, below. 2. The Trial Chair will begin the proceedings with an opening statement, drafted and approved at the pre-trial conference. In the opening statement, the Chair will announce the charges and the parties involved, and will list the witnesses who will testify at trial, along with a brief description of the nature of their testimony. 3. After the opening statement, the panel will hear the witnesses. The panel will hear from witnesses for the accusation followed by witnesses for the accused student in the order determined at the pre-trial conference. 4. The format for hearing the testimony of individual witnesses will be as follows: a. The Trial Chair will ask each witness to state the nature of his or her involvement in the case. b. The panel will then be allowed to ask questions of the witness. The Trial Chair or the counsel can object to the panel's questions. With the goal of maintaining a fair trial for the accused, the Trial Chair shall rule on those objections. c. The counsel for the party calling the witness can ask the witness any questions that were not asked and sufficiently answered during previous testimony. d. Then opposing counsel can ask the witness any questions that were not asked and sufficiently answered during previous testimony. e. When counsel are questioning a witness, the Trial Chair will rule on whether the questions have already been asked by the panel or counsel and answered by the witness. 5. The accused student reserves the right to appear as the last witness, even if the accused student has already testified in the trial. 6. After the panel has heard from all the witnesses, the panel will recess to formulate additional questions. Any witnesses recalled by the panel are subject to questioning from counsel as well. Only the panel may recall witnesses. 7. Once the panel is satisfied with the testimony, the Trial Chair will then remind the panel of the charges brought against the accused student and the standards for evaluating guilt and innocence. 8. After these instructions to the panel, the counsel for each party are allotted five minutes or more - at the Trial Chair's discretion - to give closing statements. Counsel for the community gives his or her statement, followed by counsel for the accused student. Counsel for the community may then make a brief rebuttal, provided he or she is given no more total time than counsel for the accused student was given. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon approval by the Honor Committee. 9. The trial chair and the panel then convene privately to deliberate. The panel must determine if the evidence against the accused student demonstrates, beyond a reasonable doubt: a. that the accused student committed the act; b. that the accused student committed the act with dishonest intent; and c. that the act was serious. 10. When relying on a conscientious retraction as a defense at trial, the accused student has the burden of demonstrating the validity of the retraction (and, in the case of an unwritten retraction, the completeness of the retraction as well). The standard of proof for a retraction's validity and completeness is "more likely than not." 11. When considering the issue of the existence of a retraction, the trial panel shall vote first on the retraction only, and afterwards, if necessary, on the issue of guilt. Affirming the existence of a retraction requires a simple majority vote of the panel. 12. When voting on guilt, the panel first votes on act and intent. If four-fifths of the panel votes guilty, then a second vote will be taken on triviality. If a simple majority of the panel votes that the offense was serious, then a guilty verdict is rendered. If four-fifths of the panel does not find act and intent or if a majority of the panel does not find the offense serious, then a verdict of not guilty is rendered. 13. In trials with multiple charges of lying, cheating, or stealing against one or more students, the jury panel will vote separately on each charge. 14. If at any time during the trial, the Trial Chair believes that the fundamental fairness of the trial is imperiled, the Chair may declare a mistrial. 15. Notwithstanding subsections (10) and (13), above, in cases where a student has requested a Hearing on CMD (as defined in Section IV.D, above), and such request has been denied, or such request has been granted but the Hearing on CMD did not result in a finding of CMD, the jury panel will be informed of the student's admission of the "act" relating to the underlying Honor charges, such student will be precluded from denying that he or she committed such act, and the jury panel's vote will reflect that the "act" element of the Honor offense in question has been satisfied. I. EFFECT OF GUILTY VERDICTS 1. If a guilty verdict is rendered, the student's status becomes that of a "dismissed student," immediately upon the rendering of such verdict, and the Committee will notify the Registrar of the guilty verdict. In all cases (including cases in which an Expedited Appeal is filed), the date of dismissal shall be the date on which the guilty verdict was rendered. In addition: a. Upon conviction, the Committee will request that the Registrar or that office's designee place a notation on the transcript of the dismissed student reading "Enrollment Contingent Upon Appeal of Honor Conviction," which notation will remain until the expiration of the period provided for requesting an Expedited Appeal (see Section J.1.d, below). Immediately upon the expiration of such period, unless the dismissed student has elected to file an Expedited Appeal, the Committee will take the following steps to enforce the sanction of permanent expulsion: i. request that the Registrar remove the dismissed student from active class rolls and forever bar his readmission to the University; and ii. request that the Registrar place a notation on the transcript of the dismissed student reading "Enrollment Discontinued"; and iii. if applicable, initiate degree revocation proceedings with the General Faculty. b. If the dismissed student elects to file an Expedited Appeal , the notation reading "Enrollment Contingent Upon Appeal of Honor Conviction" will remain on such student's transcript until the conclusion of the Expedited Appeal process. At the time of such conclusion, unless the Expedited Appeal results in the granting of a new trial or the dismissal of the honor charges, the Committee will take the steps described in clauses a.i, a.ii, and a.iii, above. If the dismissed student electing to file an Expedited Appeal is a degree candidate (i.e., the student is in the middle of his or her last semester prior to graduation from the University), and if such Expedited Appeal has not been concluded at the time of graduation, the Committee will request that the Registrar hold such student's degree until the conclusion of the Expedited Appeal process. 2. Whether or not the dismissed student elects to file an Expedited Appeal, if (i) a new trial is granted, or (ii) the honor charges are dismissed, the Committee will request that the Registrar remove the transcript notations referred to in Subparagraphs (a)(i) and (a)(ii), above, from the student's transcript in their entirety. J. POST-TRIAL 1. Appeals
2. Action by the Executive Committee
3. Appeal Commission
K. School of Continuing and Professional Studies Purpose: The procedures governing Honor cases reported
against students in the School of Continuing and Professional Studies
(for purposes of this Section K only, such cases shall be referred to
as "SCPS Cases" and such students as "SCPS Students")
are intended, generally, to mirror the procedures governing other Honor
cases. In order to reflect the sometimes unique administrative requirements
in applying the Honor System to SCPS Cases, however, certain procedures
have been modified slightly, as indicated below. Except as expressly set
forth below, SCPS Cases shall be treated like other Honor cases, and SCPS
Students shall have the same rights and responsibilities as other students
with respect to the Honor System. The Committee may elect to apply some or all of its standard,
unmodified, procedures, to certain SCPS Cases originating in Charlottesville. 1. Report. Any person wishing to report an honor case against
an SCPS Student should contact an Honor advisor, a Committee member, or
the Administrative Coordinator at the applicable regional center. 2. Investigation. Cases reported against SCPS Students
shall be investigated by the applicable Administrative Coordinator. 3. Investigative Assessment. The Administrative Coordinator
shall submit all relevant case materials to the Investigative Assessment
Panel. The Investigative Assessment Panel consists of three Committee
members and, in contrast to the Investigative Panel, described elsewhere
in these Bylaws, the Investigative Assessment Panel convenes informally,
without the parties or counsel present, to consider whether or not to
accuse the SCPS Student in question. 4. Trial Scheduling. Trial scheduling for SCPS Cases generally
shall be handled in the same manner as for other Honor cases. Because
of the off-site locations and difficulty of coordination between the respective
regional centers and the Committee, however, the Committee may require
additional time and flexibility in the scheduling of SCPS Case trials. 5. Trial Panels. If an SCPS Student elects a panel of randomly
selected students, 6. Reporting. The respective Administrative Coordinators
shall L. REGISTRATION BLOCKS AND TRANSCRIPT HOLDS It is the Committee's and the University's expectation that, following a report of honor charges, each affected student will cooperate with the Committee in order that his or her case may be processed in accordance with the rules set forth in these Bylaws and brought to a timely conclusion. Among other things, affected students are expected to communicate with the Committee in a reasonably timely fashion and to cooperate in the scheduling of, and to make best efforts to attend, relevant meetings and hearings with Committee members and support officers. In the event that such a student fails to cooperate, in the judgment of the Committee, in the timely processing of his or her case, the Committee may, at its discretion, request (1) that the Registrar or that office's designee implement (1) a "Registration Block", and/or (2) a "Transcript Hold" relating to such student's registration and records. When a "Registration Block" is in effect, any attempt by the affected student to register for additional classes at the University will initiate a referral by the Registrar back to the Committee, and registration will be blocked unless and until matters with the Committee have been resolved. When a "Transcript Block" is in effect, any request for transcripts (by the student or third parties) will be deferred until the affected student has provided a completed and signed Notice Affidavit (entitled "Understanding and Instructions Regarding Honor Committee Notices") to the Committee. This provision is effective with respect to all individuals who are the subject of honor charges, regardless of when such charges were reported. M. COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE PROCEDURE ON BAD CHECKS AND HONOR DEBTS Purpose: The purpose of these procedures is to enable
the Community Relations Committee (the "CRC") to investigate
allegations relating to bad checks and Honor Debts (as hereinafter defined)
so as to preserve the relationship of trust between the University community
and merchants in the Charlottesville area. 1. When the Honor Committee or the Office of the Dean of
Students (the "ODOS") is notified that a student has or may
have written a bad check or incurred an Honor Debt, the CRC (or the ODOS,
acting on behalf of the CRC) shall notify the student, in writing, that
such allegation has been made. Such notice shall indicate the name(s)
of the affected merchant(s), and the date(s) and amount(s) of the bad
check(s) and/or Honor Debt(s) in question. The student then shall have
14 calendar days in which to resolve such bad check(s) and/or Honor Debt(s)
and to satisfy the CRC that payment in full has been made. For purposes
of these procedures, the term "Honor Debt" shall mean an extension
of credit by a local merchant for the purchase of goods or services (but
not for the payment of rent) by University students, where (a) the merchant
in question extended credit in reliance on the obligations of students
under the Honor System, and (b) such debt has remained unpaid after the
date on which it was due. 3. If, following notification, the student claims that the allegations are in error (i.e., that the student either did not write a bad check or incur an Honor Debt or that the facts and circumstances are otherwise exonerating), the Vice Chair for Services may conduct an investigation in order to determine whether or not the alleged bad check(s) and/or Honor Debt(s) in fact exist. For this purpose, the Vice Chair for Services may interview the student, the merchant and other relevant parties and may review such physical evidence as may be useful in determining whether or not the alleged bad check(s) and/or Honor Debt(s) in fact exist. The Honor Committee ensures the confidentiality of all its proceedings. An accused, investigated, or dismissed student may waive his or her right to confidentiality at any time however, only when he or she does so are all other participants released from their responsibility to maintain confidentiality with respect to that student. The Honor Committee will enforce confidentiality through the University Standards of Conduct, administered by the University Judiciary Committee. Purpose: To provide greater clarity of the core definitions of the Honor System. A. Cheating: A violation of any standards, conditions, or rules for which a student may receive benefit, credit, or acknowledgment, academic or otherwise. Cheating includes, but is not limited to, performing any of the following acts, or abetting a fellow student in the performance of any of the following acts: using unauthorized materials in the completion of work, copying from a fellow student, plagiarism, multiple submission, false citation, false data submission, or unauthorized acquisition of advance knowledge of the contents of an exam or assignment. B. Lying: The misrepresentation of one or more facts in order to gain a benefit, harm another person, or where the actor knows or should know that the misrepresentation will be relied upon by another person. C. Stealing: The taking, keeping, or appropriation of the property of another without the owner's permission or approval. Stealing also includes the planning of or participation in the taking, keeping, or appropriation of the property of another without the owner's permission or approval. D. Act: Any specific event. E. Dishonest Intent: A person acts with dishonest intent when, at the time of the act, he or she knew, or should have known, that the act was or could have been considered lying, cheating, or stealing. Ignorance of the scope of the Honor System shall not be considered a defense. F. Triviality: An act is considered to be non-trivial if open tolerance thereof would be inconsistent with the community of trust. G. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: This standard is met when no hypothesis exists that is at the same time: reasonable, consistent with the evidence, and does not itself satisfy the criteria of an Honor Offense.
A. Faculty Advisory Committee
|
|