Judicial Report and Case Summary 2008-2009

September 1, 2009

To: The University Community

From: The Student Judicial Board

Fall, 2009 Judicial Report 

 

This report summarizes information pertaining to cases adjudicated by the Student Judicial Board (SJB) and The Residential Life Area Coordinator Staff during the 2008-2009 academic year.

Judicial Cases and Violation Data

During this reporting period, there were 438 cases or incidents referred to the SJB.  These cases involved 972 students and 1446 alleged violations of the Code of Non-Academic Conduct (CNAC).  When compared with the same period last year, the data indicates a 13.25% decrease in the number of reported violations and a 7.5% decrease in the number of students involved.  The decrease in the number of reported cases may be attributed to the Residential Life Student Staff taking a more active role in confronting unwarranted behavior, by being more visible in residence areas, and responding to incidents to gain more perspective on the situation.  This has been a consistent effort over the past two reporting periods (and beyond) and appears to be positively impacting behavior in the residence halls.  There continues to be significant collaboration between the Residential Life Student Staff and the Office of Public Safety.  Resident Advisors and House Managers are communicating their versions of student behavior through Communication Reports rather than relying solely on the Public Safety Officers to document incidents.  There were 32 cases that resulted from Public Safety incident reports which were supplemented by a Communication Report from a Student Staff member.  This is a significant increase (320%) from the previous reporting period.  These reports do not include communication reports submitted by professional staff members to supplement the reports generated from room safety inspections conducted throughout the year.  The SJB found the additional reports to be very helpful in these cases as they were able to corroborate one version of events.  There is anecdotal evidence that suggests that Residential Life Student staff members were involved in confronting other incidents but did not write communication reports to supplement the Public Safety documentation.  The SJB will stress to the incoming staff how important those reports are during hearings in an effort to continue to bolster the student staff role in policy enforcement in the residence halls. 

 

During the current reporting period, 33% of the student population was processed through the judicial system as a result of alleged policy violations.  Of those students that were processed during the current reporting period, 385 were “repeat offenders”, defined as having at least one prior violation or two separate violations of policy during the current reporting period.  During the reporting period, 29% of the violations reported fell under the category of “privacy and tranquility”, 25% were alcohol or drug violations, and 17% were violations of “departmental regulations”.  Less than 10% of the cases involved “property” violations and 11% for “failure to comply” violations.  There are approximately 6 cases that warranted the initiation of judicial follow-up that were not adjudicated before the end of the academic year.  All of these cases involve students that are likely to return to Wesleyan in the fall semester and will either be adjudicated during the summer or the students will receive notification regarding the pending judicial action upon their return in the fall.

 

Student Judicial Board Cases

2008-2009 Academic Year

 

 

The SJB experienced a 14.5% decrease in the number of cases that were adjudicated during the current reporting period.  The number of alleged violations decreased proportionally (13.5%) from the previous reporting period.  These two factors provide sufficient explanation as to the 7.5% decrease in the number of students that were processed through the judicial system.  The number of repeat offenders decreased proportionally with the total number of students that were processed through the judicial system; however, the volume of students who have multiple violations is still too high and should continue to be a focus of the SJB.  This issue can be addressed through sanctioning as well as more efficient communication between the SJB and the Residential Life Professional Staff that will prevent students with prior violations from having the option of an alternative judicial process.  The SJB will also have to re-examine their approach to dealing with students appearing before them with prior violations that are not reflected in the current case and the time-frame in which prior violations are considered.

 

The SJB has also asked Public Safety Officers to attend hearings where it is clear that the student accused of violating the CNAC will present a different version of events than what is presented in the report submitted by the officers.  The scheduling of such cases may extend adjudication times, but will help to reduce false information from being considered during a hearing.  The SJB has also asked the Director of Public Safety to attend weekly scheduling meetings to present additional information about cases that may help to present a clearer picture of the event(s) in question.

 

Most Common Violations

2008-2009 Academic Year

 

 

The number of “privacy and tranquility” violations decreased by 29% during the current reporting period.  In large part these cases were referred to the Area Coordinators for adjudication through a Judicial Conference.  In examining where recidivism rates were highest, privacy and tranquility violations were among the most common.  This may be due to complaints filed against residences with multiple occupants, regardless of their actual involvement in the incident leading to the complaint.  This is also the most common violation for students to call Public Safety to address with other students.  One area that may help to continue to decrease these calls is working with student staff to help their residents understand that the concern is more effectively addressed through a personal request rather than a call to Public Safety.

 

Alcohol and drug violations increased significantly when compared to the previous reporting periods.  There was a 41% increase from the previous reporting period and each subsection showed an increase over the prior reporting period.  There were 379 documented cases of alcohol policy violations and 77 distribution cases.  Alcohol or drug use was a factor in 41% of the alleged violations documented during the current reporting period.  The number of students that required medical attention for intoxication rose to 57 during the current reporting period.  This number seems to indicate an increasing willingness of students, especially residential staff to seek help for those students that demonstrate that need.  It is clear that there is a need to address the underlying issues of alcohol use and abuse and the SJB may also want to consider how it handles cases where students are transported directly from social events.  There is a tenuous balance between pursuing judicial charges against hosts and maintaining the stated policy that there will be no judicial follow-up for incidents of intoxication resulting in the need for medical assistance.  This issue will be addressed through outreach that is planned by the SJB in the next academic year.  This outreach will be targeted in the wood frame area and the larger residential program houses that often host social events. 

 

There was a decrease in the number of departmental regulation violations.  Most of the violations were the result of social gatherings exceeding the limits established in the party registration policy. The SJB and the Residential Life professional staff altered the approach to adjudicating common social event registration violations in the current reporting period.  In all cases, unless a student could document their presence off campus or significantly engaged on campus, all of the residents were charged with the violation and were held responsible for the event collectively.  This approach eliminated the ability of students to pass hosting responsibility between residents throughout the school year.  A change in the language to regulation 13c makes it more clear to residents hosting registered or unregistered social events that they are responsible for the presence of alcohol at those events and can be found in violation if it is not clear that appropriate measures had been taken to prevent underage students from consuming alcohol at the event.

 

The Area Coordinator Staff continued to play a significant role in the adjudication of minor CNAC violations.  The SJB has been clear as to the type of cases that should be adjudicated through a Judicial Conference with an Area Coordinator.  First offense party registration policy violations, noise complaints, and simple alcohol violations have all been passed from the SJB to the Area Coordinator Staff for adjudication.  Adjudication times for violations resolved through Judicial Conferences remained consistent with the previous reporting period.  This allowed minor violations to be processed quickly while still providing a learning opportunity for students that were going through the judicial process.  A change made during the current reporting period helped ease confusion when students from different areas of campus were documented in an incident report and charged with violations.  All students documented in a report will continue to meet with the Area Coordinator in the area where the alleged violation(s) occurred.

 

Adjudication Methods

2008-2009 Academic Year

 

 

 

The average adjudication time for cases originating in the current reporting period was significantly reduced in comparison to previous reporting periods.  The reduction can be attributed to a concerted effort on the part of the SJB to hear cases more frequently during the periods of the semester that resulted in a higher volume of violations.  Another contributing factor was the efforts of the Area Coordinator Staff to communicate with their residents in a timely manner and return case files to the Clerk upon completion.  The median time, in days, for cases adjudicated by each of the five members of the Area Coordinator Staff was 10, 9, 21, 10, and 97 days respectively.  The median for all cases adjudicated through Judicial Conferences was 10 days.  Cases resolved through simplified hearings were adjudicated in 26 days on average.  The median adjudication time for those cases was 18 days.  Cases resolved through full hearings were adjudicated in 40 days on average.  The median adjudication time for those cases was 26 days.  This was an area that needed to be improved upon and both the average and the median adjudication time for full hearings decreased significantly even though there was a marked increase in the number of full hearings when compared to the previous reporting period.  This is also a direct cause of the increase in the number of cases that were adjudicated through alternate procedures such as judicial conferences with the dean of student’s office and interim administrative boards.  For all hearings, the average adjudication time was 28 days with a median of 18 days.  When all cases are considered the average is 21 days and the median is 14 days.  Both are consistent with the previous reporting period.  During the current reporting period, the SJB experienced some difficulty in scheduling a larger amount of cases than the previous reporting period.  The difficulty was due in large part to self-reported conflicts of interest.  These cases were either resolved through an alternate hearing process, such as an interim administrative board, or through a judicial conference with a member of the dean of student’s office.

 

Sexual Misconduct/Assault Administrative Panel

 

On January 1, 2009 the proposed changes to the Sexual Misconduct Policy (former name) were implemented.  The changes did not significantly alter the policy statement, though the title of the policy was changed to reflect the concerns presented by the review committee.  The title of the policy was changed to the Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Assault Policy.  The structure of the policy was changed so that all of the information that a student reporting a violation would need is at the front of the policy included in the main section; previously some information was included in addendums to the policy.  All preventative information that had been included in the policy was retained but was restructured and included in the addendums to the policy statement.

 

There were two major additions to the policy.  The first was the creation of the Sexual Assault Response Team (SART).  SART members went through a two day training that oriented them to assisting students that would seek them out, or be referred to them, either before or after reporting an alleged violation.  The focus of the SART members is to support the survivor and ensure that he or she is aware and has access to all of the services and support that are available.  The SART members are separated into two groups that are defined by their protection under HIPAA and mandated reporting requirements.  The second addition was the development of the Administrative Panel (AP) to adjudicate alleged violations of the policy.  The AP was developed to remove a reported barrier that students had identified as a reason why some incidents were not reported.  Students reported that they were not comfortable with reporting sexual misconduct or assault allegations to a body that included their peers.  The AP consists of four panelists, two men and two women, and would be selected from a group of people that are well versed in the University’s judicial system.  The panel will usually consist of at least one member of the dean of student’s office and one of the two faculty advisors to the Student Judicial Board.  Other members would be selected from a pool of identified personnel that will have participated in at least one training each year.

 

The number of reported sexual misconduct and sexual assault at Wesleyan remains low when compared to national data that indicates the rate of occurrence of such incidents.  However, with the new structures in place, students that experience such events will hopefully be more comfortable reporting the alleged assailant knowing that their privacy will be protected and there are trained individuals that will provide support throughout the process.

 

Judicial Sanction Data

 

In response to the violations outlined above, the SJB has continued to employ a range of sanctions.  During the current reporting period the SJB has moved away from educational sanctions, preferring to allow the Area Coordinator Staff to adjudicate the cases that would likely result in an educational sanction such as a research paper or informational display.  The SJB fully employed the use of University Service for the first time during the current reporting period.  The SJB utilized such service as a sanction when they determined that there was a connection between the violation(s) and harm to the campus community.  The Board was able to assign service house in the Usdan University Center, with Physical Plant and Building and Grounds.  Students were also assigned service hours in WesWell for violations that may have had a negative impact on the health or safety of themselves or another student.  The SJB continued to utilize service opportunities in the Middletown area as well. 

 

Judicial Sanction Data

2008-2009 Academic Year

 

 

A focus of the next training for SJB members will be the recidivism of students or groups that have received multiple warnings for similar violations.  In cases where a warning has already been issued and the Board has determined the student or group to be responsible, the Board will be urged to more carefully consider a period of probation.  This will bring sanctioning more closely in line with the policies outlined in the CNAC and should reduce the number of students that appear before the Board for multiple violations of the same or similar offences.

 

Of the 972 individuals charged with alleged violations, 39% (385) had been processed through the judicial system at least once before.  This percentage is consistent with the previous reporting period.  However, SJB training during the fall will focus on the use of sanctioning to deter repeat offences and reduce the number of students that are processed through the judicial system more than once.

 

At the conclusion of the reporting period there were 6 cases that were not adjudicated.  The cases that remain will either be scheduled for simplified hearings or resolved through Judicial Conferences during the summer.

 

No changes were made to the CNAC at the conclusion of the year.  However, many changes were proposed by the Student Affairs Committee of the WSA.  Those changes represented a full review and major restructuring of the Code and were tabled until the fall when the appropriate amount of time and attention can be focused on such a review.  The members of the SJB and the SAC also developed a new mechanism to more efficiently and effectively communicate with one another.  The Student Judicial Process Committee will begin meeting at the start of the fall semester improve communication between the WSA and the SJB.

 

The SJB also trained new student process advisors during the current reporting period and those advisors assisted students in two cases.  One issue that surfaced with regard to student process advisors was the need to clarify the identification of one advisor and not have a group of students serving in that role.  The SJB will continue to train students as the need or requests dictate.

 

Case Summaries: 2008-2009

 

Regulation 1: Privacy and Tranquility-the intentional infringement upon the right to privacy of any member of the community is prohibited.  The persistent interruption of a reasonable level of peace and quiet is also a violation.  Students should be aware that repeated violation of this regulation could result in administrative reassignment to another residential unit or area.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II, Regulations 1, 13b, 13c, 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students possessed and distributed alcohol to underage students at an unregistered event. The Board found that the students were indeed in violation because they were in possession of a keg that they did not monitor and they also did not monitor the noise or the number of people at the party. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning and 10 hours of university service. 

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a house had violated Sec. II, Reg. 1, 2, 10, 13c. The Board found that the house was in violation of Reg. 1, 10, 13c. The Board recommended as a sanction that the house be placed on disciplinary probation through to the end of Thanksgiving of 2009, university service for 75 hours by end of this semester.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 1 and 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was sleeping in someone else’s room and was very intoxicated. The Board found that the student had not violated the CNAC as he was simply experiencing early symptoms of mono which he is now diagnosed with.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student organization had violated Section II, Regulation 1 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that this organization was playing music too loudly and disturbing the neighbors. The board found that the student organization had violated the CNAC as a noise complaint did come in and loud music was actually being played that night. The Board recommended a disciplinary warning and 5 hours of community service.

 

Two students were charged with violating regulations 1, 4, and 10. Specifically, the two students were found on the top of the roof of an abandoned building. They were accused of having thrown bottles and roof shingles into the road. The board found them in violation of 4, due to their presence on the building, but not in violation of 1 and 10 because of insufficient evidence linking them to the glass and shingles in the road. The board recommended that the students received disciplinary warnings.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 1 and 14 of CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had played his music too loudly and did not attend the judicial conference with his Area Coordinator. The Board found the student had indeed violated Regulation 1 and 14 because he had disturbed the peace and tranquility of his surroundings and did not attend the judicial conference. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning with a very stern warning that the student be warned that this is his last warning for noise violations because he has had priors.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that the students had violated Regulation 1 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that student A and B were playing loud music. The Board found that the students were in violation and as a sanction, issued a disciplinary warning.

 

In a joint student-administrative hearing, the Board considered an allegation that House A had violated Section II, Regulations 1 and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the House held an unregistered loud party who’s occupants exceeded the 50 person limit. The Board found that House A did in fact violate the CNAC because there were more than 50 people present and loud music coming from the unit. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the House receive a disciplinary warning and complete host training.

 

In a full hearing the board considered an allegation that a house had violated Section 2, Regulations 1,2,10, and 13c. The Board found that the house was in violation of Regulations 1, 10, and 13c. The Board recommended as a sanction that the house be placed on disciplinary probation to the end of Thanksgiving of 2009, University service for 75 hours by the end of this semester.

 

The Board considered and allegation that a student had violated Section II Regulation 1 of the CNAC. The student pled not guilty for case 09-027 and guilty for 09-026. The Board found that the student was in violation of 09-026, not in violation of 09-027. The Board recommended as a sanction a disciplinary warning.

 

The Board considered and allegation that a house unit had violated Section II, Regulation  1 and 15 of the CNAC. The Board found the students in violation of the code and recommended a sanction of 20 hours for the house.

 

The Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 1 and 14 of the CNAC. The student pled not in violation. The board found that the student was in violated and recommended a sanction of a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students had violated Section II, Regulation 1 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the group had loud music. The Board found that the group was indeed in violation because they were loud. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the group be issued a disciplinary warning and 5 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that the organization violation Section II, Regulations 1, 4, 10, 13c, and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the organization violated privacy and tranquility, vandalized property, created a dangerous environment, distributing alcohol and department regulations. The board found the organization in violation of the code because they created a dangerous environment, distributed alcohol to underage people, and departmental regulations. As a sanction, the organization was given a disciplinary warning and 20 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered that 5 students had violated Section II, Regulation 1 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students had been playing music loudly during the night hours. The Board found the students in violation of the Code as the students pleaded in violated of the code and along with the report. As a sanction, the house that the students live in was put on probation through 1/21/09 and required them to complete host training of all residents in the house.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students (house) violated Section II, Regulations 1, 13c, and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the house hosted loud music and distributed alcohol at a registered event. The Board found that the house had not violated any of the above regulations because evidence indicated they were not responsible.

 

The Board considered an allegation that 2 students had violated Section II, Regulation 1 and 2. The board found the students not in violation because the students at the house thought they were non-Wesleyan students and they weren’t making any noise.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a house had violated Section II, Regulations 1, 14, 15, of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the house exceeded the limit of people for an unregistered party, had an unreasonable level of noise and missed a judicial conference. The board found that the house did violate 14 and 15 of the CNAC and not regulation 1. As a sanction, the Board recommends a disciplinary warning and that each member complete host training.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, Regulations 1, 2, 10, 14, 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student drove a vehicle through a red light on the wrong side of the street with pedestrians on the crosswalk. It was alleged that he turned up his music in his car despite being asked earlier to turn it down, and that he was non-compliant with the police officer including throwing his WesID on the ground when asked for it. The Board found the student in violation of Regulations 10 and 15 of the Code due to reckless driving on campus and the breaking of traffic laws. The board found the student not in violation of Regulations 1, 12, and 14. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student write a 3 page paper comparing and contrasting New York traffic laws and be placed on probation through the beginning of next semester.

 

In a simplified hearing the SJB heard allegations that two students had violated Sections1 and 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, the charges derived from allegations that the two students had been playing music too loud and had not responded to requests for a judicial conference.  Both students pled not in violation on both charges.  The Board found the students to be in violation on both counts.  Because it was a second violation of Section 14 for both students, the board recommended that they receive disciplinary warnings and be required to complete 5 hours of community service each.

 

 In a simplified hearing, the SJB heard allegations that four students had violated Section 1 of the CNAC.  Specifically, the charges derived from allegations that the students had held an excessively loud party.  One student did not attend the hearing.  All three attending students pled in violation.  The board determined that while there had been a violation the students in question were not responsible, and found as such.

 

Regulation 2 Harassment and Abuse-Harasssment and abuse, intentionally directed toward individuals or groups, may include at least the following forms: the intentional use or threat of physical violence, coercion, intimidation, and verbal harassment and abuse.  Wesleyan University's commitment to nondiscrimination means that intentional discriminatory harassment may be punished more severely than nondiscriminatory or unintentional forms of harassment.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Sec. II, Reg. 2, 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student used verbally abusive language, threatened and refused to provide identification to authorities. The board found that the student had indeed violated the code given the evidence and student’s plea. As sanctions the Board recommended Disciplinary Probation till commencement 2011, an OBHS evaluation with mandated compliance, Fri/Sat ride alongs with Public Safety per semester through probationary period, a 3 page report of ride along submitted to Dean Culliton within 7 days and 10hrs community service per semester for 6 semesters.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 2 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that student had punched another student. The Board found the student in violation of the Code as the student admitted to the event and there was sufficient evidence to support to decision. As a sanction the Board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation until graduation and perform 20 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing the Board considered the allegation that the students had violated regulation 13c and 2 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that a group of students provided alcohol to an underage individual and was rude and harassing to Public Safety. The Board found the students not in violation due to lack of evidence.

 

In a full hearing the board considered an allegation that a house had violated Section II, Regulations 1,2,10, and 13c. The Board found that the house was in violated of Regulations 1, 10, and 13c. The Board recommended as a sanction that the house be placed on disciplinary probation to the end of Thanksgiving of 2009, University service for 75 hours by the end of this semester.

 

The Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section 2, regulations 2 and 4. The student did not show up to the hearing. The Board found the student in violated of both counts and recommended a sanction of disciplinary probation for one year from to Sept. 17^th, 2009 and community service hours at Usdan for 20 hours. He had until Oct 22^nd 2008 to comply with these hours.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 2, 13b, and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student used physical force with a Public Safety officer when the officer asked the student to leave a 30-pack of beer on the floor. The board found that student A had violated the Code because the student admitted to failing to comply, and for his possession of drugs and alcohol. He spoke about the incident in a manner which implied he had initiated contact with a public safety officer. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation for a year and CHOICES and University service at Physical plant for 20 hours, over 5 weeks.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 2 and 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that a student was intoxicated and was verbally abusive. The Board found that the student had violated the Code because the student was yelling harassing remarks indiscriminately. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation for 2 years, 15 hours of community service, CHOICES, an OBHS assessment, and an apology to all persons involved.

 

In a joint student-administrative hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II Regulations 2, 5, and 14 of CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had pushed a Public Safety officer, failed to comply, and did not yield identification. The Board found the student was in violated of 2 and 14 due to overwhelming evidence for the violation, but not sufficient evidence was found to be in violation of Regulation 5. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be placed on probation through graduation, perform 50 hours of university service, and meet with public safety and the Dean of Students Office.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, Regulation 2 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that Student A assaulted Student B at a Wesleyan event. The Board found that Student A was in violation of the code. As a sanction the Board Recommends that student be given a disciplinary warning and Health Education Referral.

 

The Board considered an allegation that 2 students had violated Section II, Regulation 1 and 2. The board found the students not in violated because the students at the house thought they were non-Wesleyan students and they weren’t making any noise.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section I Regulation 2 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student used abusive language toward of Public Safety officer. The Board found the student not in violated of the Code because the student did not intend to harass the public safety officer.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, Regulations 2 and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that student A shoved Student B at an event and then ran away from authorities. The Board found that Student A had indeed violated the Code because student A caused the injury of Student B and failed to comply with University personnel. As a sanction the board recommended Student A be placed on disciplinary probation for the remainder of the Fall 2008 semester, participate in a public safety ride along on October 10^th and 11^th, and do 10 hours of physical plant service.

 

Regulation 3 Sexual Misconduct - Sexual misconduct, including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual assault, coercion, and threats or use of force, is prohibited. (See University Policies-Sexual Misconduct and Assault Policy, page 27.)

 

An administrative panel was convened to consider the allegations that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 3 of the Code of Non-Academic Conduct.  Specifically, it was alleged that student A attempted to pressure Student B into engaging in intimate physical contact.  The panel was unable to reach a decision based on the information presented at the hearing and returned a decision of "no finding".  Student A was referred to the Office of Behavioral Health for Students (OBHS) as a result of the information presented at the hearing.

 

Regulation 4 Property - The unauthorized use, or the abuse, destruction, or theft of university property or the property of any of its members, guests, or neighbors is prohibited.  This includes but is not limited to all tunnels, roofs, and areas under construction.  This regulation prohibits the unauthorized appropriation or "borrowing" of common property for personal use. 

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students had violated Sec. II, Reg. 4 and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students were spray painting and ran away from Public Safety. The Board found that one student was indeed in violation because she ran from Public Safety and had committed the actual act of vandalism. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning and serve 5hrs of university service.

 

A student was charged with violating regulations 4, 10, and 13g. He admitted to driving while under the influence and to breaking into the Freeman Athletic Center. Since the student was cooperative with public safety and allows public safety to drive him back to his place rather than driving himself, we were more lenient with sanctioning. The student received a disciplinary warning and 20 hours of community service.

 

A student was charged with violating regulation 4. She admitted to stealing from WesShop. Since she had no prior regulation 4 violations, she was given a sanction of DW and 3 hours of community service to be completed in Usdan.

 

Several students were charged with violating regulation 4 breaking into a house. Based on the public safety report, witness testimony, and the fact that on of the students was seen running from the house, the Board found two of the students in violation of regulation 4. The other students were not present at the break-in and were therefore not found in violation. The two guilty students were each given a disciplinary and ten hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 4 and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had urinated in public, was consuming alcohol, and was standing in his underwear on the sidelines of a club soccer game. The Board found the student in violation of Regulation 15, but not Regulation 4, as the student had admitted to drinking during the game. The Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning. 

 

The Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II Regulation 4 of the CNAC. It was alleged that the student took a stack of cones. Since he was reported extremely respectful, cooperative and compliant, and lacking malicious content, the Board found him in violation but recommended no sanction.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that the student had violated the CNAC, Section II, Regulation 4. Specifically, the group of students entered a locked university building in an unauthorized manner. The Board found the students had indeed violated the Code because they entered the roof of a university building. As a sanction student A got 5 hours of community service because of priors. Student 5 got 10 hours of community services due of priors. The remaining students received disciplinary warnings due to no priors.

 

In a simplified hearing, the SJB heard allegations that a student had violated sections 4 and 7 of the CNAC.  Specifically, the charges related from an incident in which the student was caught attempting to pick a university lock after leaving the roof of a building.  The student pled in violation on both counts.  The Board found the student to be in violation on both counts.  The board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning, and be required to complete 5 hours of physical plant service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II,  Regulation 4 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the students had been breaking chairs in a lounge.  The case was unresolved at the time, as the Board had determined that more information was needed to make a proper decision.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Regulations 4, 5, and 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student was skateboarding in the Westco Café.  The Board found the student in violation to all three regulations of the CNAC because the student explained actions that proved to be in violation of these regulations.  As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a Disciplinary Warning and Community Service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Regulation 4 and 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student had trespassed and did not respond to a communication from their area coordinator to schedule a judicial conference.  The Board found the student in violation of both regulations.  As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning and community service.

 

In a Full Hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students had violated Section II, Regulations 4 and 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the students uprooted a tree on University property and leaned it up against a car.  The Board found that the students were indeed in violation of 4 and 14 because they admitted guilt, and were very apologetic.  As a sanction, the Board recommended that the two be placed on Disciplinary Probation and pay restitution for the tree.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that an on-campus organization had violated the CNAC, Sec. II Reg. 4 and 14. Specifically, it was alleged that the group used Wesleyan property despite explicit instructions otherwise. The board found the group not in violation as conflicting information, independently obtained led to unintentional misuse of Wesleyan property.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board heard an allegation that a student violated sections 5, 13b, and 14 of the CNAC. The student pled in violation to charges 13b and 14, but not in violation of Section 5. The board found that the student was indeed in violation of 13b and 14 because they were underage, had a can of beer in their hand, and ran away from Public Safety. The board found the student not in violation of 5. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and 10 hours of community service.

 

Regulation 5 False Information - Knowingly furnishing false information to a university officer or member of any constituted hearing board acting in performance of his/her duties is prohibited.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that Student A had violated Section II, Regulations 5, 13b, and 14. Specifically it was alleged that student A was in possession of alcohol underage and that when approached by public safety she did not go to Wesleyan. She then walking away contrary to Public Safety’s request. Student A admitted to being in violated of 13b. The Board then found student A in violated of 5 and 14 because she stated the report did not lie, but she could not remember the situation. As a sanction, the Board recommended a disciplinary warning with 5 hours of community service and a mandate to attend CHOICES.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that student A had violated Regulations 5, 13b and 13d of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that Student A was in possession of alcohol underage a fake ID and provided false information.  The board found the student in violation of 5 and 13b.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning and 5 hours community service.

 

Regulation 6 Misuse of Documents - Forgery, alteration, or the unauthorized possession or use of university documents, records or instruments of identification is prohibited.

 

Regulation 7 Tampering with Locks and Duplication of Keys - Tampering with locks in university buildings, unauthorized possession or use of university keys, and alteration or unauthorized duplication of university keys are prohibited. 

 

Regulation 8 Fire Protection Systems - Tampering with fire extinguishers, fire alarm boxes, or smoke or heat detectors anywhere on university property is prohibited.

 

Regulation 9 Restricted Items/Fire Hazards - The following are considered fire hazards and are prohibited within any university-owned or -operated facility:

    9a-Starting a fire anywhere on university property without explicit permission from the Office of Public Safety is prohibited.

    9e-Lethal Weapons-Personal possession or use of operable firearms, air guns, or other lethal weapons is prohibited on the Wesleyan campus or while participating in university activities.  Students wishing to maintain firearms for hunting or target shooting in the Middletown area must notify the Office of Public Safety prior to bringing the weapon to Middletown and must immediately upon their arrive deposit the weapon at the Office of Public Safety for storage.  A student may check out a weapon for sporting activity immediately prior to his/her departure for the activity and must return it to the office immediately upon his/her return from the activity.

 

Three students were charged with violating regulation 10. Two of the students were found not in violation because they were not lighting a match and were trying to get their friend to stop his dangerous actions. Also, one student was charged with violating regulation 9. He was found in violation because he admitted to lighting the match. He was also found in violation of regulation 10 because his actions could have started a fire since they were standing in a dumpster. This student was given a DW and 20 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students were in violation of Section II, Regulation 9a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that group of students had a bonfire. The Board found that the group of students was not in violation because the fire was not on University owned property.

 

The student was charged with violating regulations 13a and 9e. The student was found in violated of 13a because he admitted to having the marijuana in his room (also observed marijuana in the photographs). But the student was not found in violation of 9e because the sword appeared to be souvenir rather than a weapon (as seen in the photographs). 

 

Regulation 10 Reckless Endangerment - Creating condition(s) or an environment that endangers, or has the potential to endanger, other members of the community or property is prohibited.  Failure to take reasonable constructive action to remedy such conditions may also constitute a violation.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II, Regulations 10, 13g, and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was driving a vehicle while under the influence and endangered pedestrians, and did not pull over when asked to do so by Public Safety. The Board found that the students were indeed in violation of Failure to Comply as he admitted to failing to comply, but there was no sufficient information concerning the other charges. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and not be allowed to have his car for the rest of the semester.

 

Three students were charged with violating regulation 10. Two of the students were found not in violation because they were not lighting a match and were trying to get their friend to stop his dangerous actions. Also, one student was charged with violating regulation 9. He was found in violation because he admitted to lighting the match. He was also found in violation of regulation 10 because his actions could have started a fire since they were standing in a dumpster. This student was given a disciplinary warning and 20 hours of community service.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, regulations 10 and 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had intentionally allowed that on his property, that there was an event where alcohol was distributed, and two students were sent to the hospital as a result of severe intoxication. The Board found that the student was not in violated on the code, as he seemed to take all the steps that he needed to and clearly did not distribute the alcohol.

 

Regulation 11 Pets - Pets are not allowed in any university facility, including residential facilities, classrooms, libraries, laboratories, studios, sports facilities, food service areas, administrative offices, and public meeting areas. 

 

Regulation 12 Disruptions - The following "ground rules" for political freedom on campus are excerpted from the booklet "Academic Freedom and Civil Liberties of Students in College and University," published by the American Civil Liberties Union in 1970. 

 

Regulation 13 Drugs and Alcohol - The University prohibits underage and unlawful possession, use, or distribution of illicit drugs and alcohol.  This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, the following:

    13a The possession, use, manufacture, distribution, or dispensing of illegal drugs or controlled substances by any member of the Wesleyan community.  Students should be advised that university personnel may confiscate drug paraphernalia (including bongs, water pipes, etc.).  Such items will be tested for drug residue and the owner held responsible for a drug policy violation if appropriate.

    13b Underage possession or consumption of alcohol anywhere on university property or at university-sponsored events.

    13c Distribution of alcohol to underage persons anywhere on university property or at university-sponsored events.  Hosts of social events where alcohol is distributed may be held responsible for any such illegal distribution committed by their guests.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of illicit drugs. The Board found that the student had not violated Regulation 13a because there was not enough evidence that there actually were illicit drugs in the student’s room, only some pain medication.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of drug paraphernalia and was smoking marijuana. The Board found that the student was in possession of drug paraphernalia and was smoking marijuana. The Board found that the student had violated the CNAC as he was responsible for whatever was in his room. The Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning and 5 hours of community service.

 

Four students were charged with violating regulation 13a. The students admitted that the marijuana was in their low-rise apartment. One student was found not in violation for regulation 13a because she was not on campus at the time of the incident. The other three students were given a disciplinary warning,  but no community service hours because it was deemed highly likely that the marijuana was brought into the low-rise by a guest during a party.

 

Three students were charged with violating regulation 13a. Specifically, the students were found to be smoking marijuana in their Hewitt dorm room. All three plead in violation. The board found the students in violation and recommended that two students (with relevant priors) serve 5 hours of community service each while the other student receives a disciplinary warning.        

 

Two students were charged with violating regulations 13a and 15. One student was found in violation of both regulations because he admitted to the violations. The other student was found not to be in violation of 13a and 15 because he was sleeping during the incident.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 13a and 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of cocaine in her room, as well as alcohol in her room. The Board found the student in violation of both charges, as there was photographic evidence suggesting that it was in her room and she was aware of both being there. The board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation through graduation, receive a WesWell referral, 5 hours of service in WesWell, 10 hours of community service, 3 page essay regarding CT and federal laws concerning cocaine and regarding health related risks of cocaine use.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that the student had violated regulation 13a and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically it was alleged that there was marijuana in the student’s room, and that the student missed a judicial hearing. The Board found that the student had indeed violated the code in both regulation 13a and 14 because the marijuana was in the student’s room. As a sanction the Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, 13a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of a roach. The Board found that the student was not in violation, as no test was done to determine if it was marijuana or tobacco.

 

In a simplified hearing, a student had violated Section II, Regulations 13a and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of marijuana and failed to attend a Judicial Conference. The Board found that the student was indeed in violated as they are responsible for things in their room, and the student did not schedule a Judicial Conference. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning and complete an online marijuana assessment.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 13a and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was on psychoactive drugs and was harassing Public Safety and noncompliant. The Board found that the student was not in violated because it was a first time medical assist, and 14 is not assigned to first time medical assists.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students had violated Section II, Regulations 13a and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students had been smoking marijuana in their dorm room. The Board found that the students were indeed in violated because of the strong smell and possession of marijuana. As a sanction the Board recommended that the students be issued a disciplinary warning and 5 hours of community service, except the individual whose room it was, who was issued 10.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had used heroin. The Board found the student not in violation of the code because there was nothing that linked that student to use of this drug.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that students A, B, and C violated Section II, Regulation 13a. Specifically, it was alleged that students A, B, and C were smoking marijuana on school property. The Board found all student in violated because they admitted to smoking marijuana on contrary to section II, Regulation 13a. The Board further considered that all students had attempted to coerce public safety with mentions of affiliations with the school administration. As a sanction the Board recommended that all students receive a DW with 15 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a house had violated Section II, Regulation 13a of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the house was in possession of marijuana. The Board found the house not in violated of the CNAC.

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13a, 13b, and 15 of the Code of Non-Academic Conduct.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student had marijuana in her room, as well as was in possession of alcohol at another point in the semester.  The Board found the student in violation as there was sufficient evidence that the alcohol and marijuana was present in her room, as well as allowing guests to smoke cigarettes in her room.  Due to a number of previous violations, her disciplinary probation was extended for another semester.  She was assigned Wes Well service hours with additional hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that students had violated Section II, Regulation 13a and 13b of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the students had been smoking marijuana and were in possession of a can of beer.  The Board found that the students were not in violation of section 13b, but that they had violated section 13a.  The board recommended that each student receive a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Sec. II, Reg. 13b and 14 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was underage with a beer and then did not comply with sanctioning. The Board found that the student was indeed in violation because he didn’t schedule a meeting and was underage. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and 15hrs of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board heard an allegation that a student violated sections 5, 13b, and 14 of the code of non-academic conduct. The student pled in violation to charges 13b and 14, but not in violation of Section 5. The board found that the student was indeed in violation of 13b and 14 because they were underage, had a can of beer in their hand, and ran away from Public Safety. The board found the student not in violation of 5. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and 10 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that an organization had violated Section II, Regulation 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the organization was distributing alcohol to underaged students. The Board found that the organization had not violated the code due to lack of sufficient evidence.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was underage and possessed alcohol. The Board found that the student was indeed in violation because he was under 21 years old and had a beer. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of alcohol. The Board found that the student had indeed violated the code because she admitted to holding the alcohol. As a sanction the Board recommended the student be placed on disciplinary probation for one month, 5 hours of community service, and CHOICES.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II, Regulations 1, 13b, 13c, 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students possessed and distributed alcohol to underage students at an unregistered event. The Board found that the students were indeed in violation because they were in possession of a keg that they did not monitor and they also did not monitor the noise or the number of people at the party. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and 10 hours of university service. 

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated. Section II, Regulation 1 and 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was sleeping in someone else’s room and was very intoxicated. The Board found that the student had not violated the CNAC as he was simply experiencing early symptoms of mono which he is now diagnosed with.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b and 14 of CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of alcohol at a non-alcoholic event and repeatedly failed to offer identification when asked to do so by Public Safety, as well as making attempts to run away from the Public Safety officer. The Board found that the student had violated that CNAC as he was holding a bottle of alcohol and there was substantial evidence that he did fail to comply. The Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning and complete 10 hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b and 14. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had consumed or possessed alcohol while underaged, and did not attend the judicial conference with his Area Coordinator. The Board found that the student was in violated of 13b but not 14. He was in possession of the alcohol, but his Area Coordinator had not contacted him regarding the judicial conference. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a disciplinary warning.

 

A student was charged with violating regulation 13b of the CNAC. He admitted that he was intoxicated. As a sanction, the Board gave the student a DW.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that 12 students had violated Section II, Regulation 13b and three of those twelve students had violated Regulation 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students possessed and distributed alcohol to underage students in a room. The Board found that the three students who had admitted to having alcohol on the scene were indeed in violation of 13b and 13c who admitted to buying and possessing the alcohol, while there was not sufficient evidence that the other nine students were in possession of drinking alcohol. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student with a prior alcohol offense be issued a DW and 15 hours of university service, and the other two students were recommended CHOICES and 5 hours of university service as they had no prior alcohol-related violations.  

 

In a full hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 13a and 13b of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student was in possession of cocaine in her room, as well as alcohol in her room. The Board found the student in violation of both charges, as there was photographic evidence suggesting that it was in her room and she was aware of both being there. The board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation through graduation, receive a WesWell referral, 5 hours of service in WesWell, 10 hours of community service, 3 page essay regarding CT and federal laws concerning cocaine and regarding health related risks of cocaine use.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was allege that the student had been caught holding alcoholic beverage while underage.  The board found that the student was indeed in violation.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning, five hours of community service and a two-page educational paper about substance and alcohol abuse.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b, 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student had alcohol in his hand and then did not show up to his judicial conference.  The board found the student in violation of both regulations as he admitted to possessing alcohol and not showing up to the scheduled judicial conference.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning and two hours of community service.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 13b, 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student had alcohol in his hand and refused to pour it out when asked.  The board found the student in violation of 13b but not 14 as he admitted to possessing alcohol but denied ever being asked to empty the alcohol.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning.

 

In a full hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, Regulation 13b of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alledged that the student was intoxicated and walking in the middle of the main road.  The board found that the student was indeed in violation because he was underage.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student be put on disciplinary probation until he is 21.  Also, the student is mandated to receive an OBHS assessment and comply with recommended treatments.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II, Regulations 1, 13b, 13c, 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students possessed and distributed alcohol to underage students at n unregistered event. The Board found that the students were indeed in violation because they were in possession of a keg that they did not monitor and they also did not monitor the noise or the number of people at the party. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student be issued a DW and 10 hours of university service. 

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that two students had violated Section II, Regulation 13c and 15 of CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students had distributed alcohol to minors and allowed this distribution to happen during a registered event. The Board found that the two students had indeed violated Regulation 15 because they did not fulfill their obligations as hosts of an event. One student was found in violated of 13c because he was present at the event, while the other student was found not in violated of 13c because he was not present at the event. As a sanction, the Board recommended that both students be issued disciplinary warnings, and the second students be revoked of his ability to host events until Fall Break ’08 as well because he should not have left the other student in a lurch by not showing up to an event and he has had priors of a similar nature.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that 12 students had violated Section II, Regulation 13b and three of those twelve students had violated Regulation 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students possessed and distributed alcohol to underage students in a room. The Board found that the three students who had admitted to having alcohol on the scene were indeed in violation of 13b and 13c who admitted to buying and possessing the alcohol, while there was not sufficient evidence that the other nine students were in possession of drinking alcohol. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the student with a prior alcohol offense be issued a DW and 15 hours of university service, and the other two students were recommended CHOICES and 5 hours of university service as they had no prior alcohol-related violations. 

 

In a simplified hearing the Board considered the allegation that the students had violated regulation 13c and 2 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that a group of students provided alcohol to an underage individual and was rude and harassing to Public Safety. The Board found the students no in violation due to lack of evidence.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a group of students had violated Section II, Regulations 13c and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the students held and unregistered party with over 49 people and were distributing alcohol to minors. The Board found that the students were indeed in violated of 15, as there were approximately 90 people in the house, but not in violation of 13c because as no under-aged individuals were found. As a sanction, the Board recommended that the group be issued a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered the allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 13c and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had registered a party without alcohol, and was supplying alcohol to underage students at that party. The Board found that the student was indeed in violation in 13c and 15 as there were underage people drinking alcohol that was for the band, and party hosts are responsible for what happens at an event.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that an organization had violated Section II, Regulation 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the organization was distributing alcohol to underaged students. The Board found that the organization had not violated the code due to lack of sufficient evidence.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that an organization had violated Section II, Regulation 13c of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the organization was distributing alcohol to underaged students. The Board found that the organization had not violated the code due to lack of sufficient evidence.

 

Regulation 14 Failure to Comply - Members of the community are expected to comply with requests made by university personnel acting within the capacity of their responsibilities, including requests for adequate identification.  Public Safety officers should be allowed to enter private residential spaces to address suspected policy violations.  Officers may enter private residential spaces without residents' permission only with the approval of the vice president for student affairs (or designee).

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student violated Section II, Regulations 14 and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, alleged student missed a judicial conference and violated departmental Regulations. The Board found that the student violated the CNAC by not attending his judicial conference and did not violate departmental regulations. As a sanction the board recommended University service and a disciplinary warning.

 

In a full hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 14 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student did not comply with previously assigned sanctions.  The board found that the student was indeed in violation because he failed to attend CHOICES multiple times.  As a sanction, the board recommended that he be placed on disciplinary probation until the end of the year and attend CHOICES.

 

In a full hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 14 and 15 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the student contracted and hosted an event.  The board found that the student was indeed in violation on both counts because he had previously hosted events incorrectly and as part of his sanction was not allowed to host events.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the student be placed on disciplinary probation, not be allowed to host events, and pay restitution for the event.

 

Regulation 15 Department Regulations - Members of the community are expected to abide by duly established and promulgated non-academic regulations.  This is intended to cover the operating regulations of all university programs and facilities.  These include, but are not limited to, the policies outlined later in this booklet and available at www.wesleyan.edu/studenthandbook/3_univpolicies.html.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that the resident of house A had violated the CNAC, Section II Reg. 15. Specifically, it was alleged that the student held an unregistered party at their residence that totaled over 50 guests. The board found that the students were not in violation because they took sufficient steps to regulate the number of people at their residence.

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulations 4 and 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the student had urinated in public, was consuming alcohol, and was standing in his underwear on the sidelines of a club soccer game. The Board found the student in violation of Regulation 15, but not Regulation 4, as the student had admitted to drinking during the game. The Board recommended that the student receive a disciplinary warning. 

 

In a simplified hearing, the Board considered an allegation that a house violated Section II Regulation 15 of the CNAC. Specifically, it was alleged that the house was hosting over 49 people. The Board found that the house had indeed had over 49 people. As a sanction, the Board recommended the house be administered a disciplinary warning.

 

In a simplified hearing, the board considered an allegation that a student had violated Section II, Regulation 15 of the CNAC.  Specifically, it was alleged that the organization held a noisy gathering of 60 plus individuals.  The Board found that the student was indeed in violation.  As a sanction, the board recommended that the organization receive a disciplinary warning.