Skip to main content
Aerial view of campus
Addressing Sexual Misconduct The Butler Way

Complainant and Respondent Rights under The Non-Discrimination Policy

Both Complainant and Respondent are afforded certain rights within the Administrative Investigation and Adjudication Process under the Non-Discrimination Policy. These rights are summarized below. For a full explanation of rights, please refer to the Policy.

  • Advisors
    • Each party may select an advisor of their choice. This advisor may be internal or external to the University, but may not serve as a witness in the matter, nor may they be someone whose University responsibilities create a conflict of interest.
    • The advisor is permitted to be present in all phases of the Administrative Investigation and Adjudication Process, but may not participate in the process directly.
    • The advisor may whisper or write notes to their advisee, but they may not interrupt, speak on behalf of their advisee, or otherwise interfere.
    • If an advisor violates these parameters, the advisor’s participation may be further limited.
  • Disability Accommodations
    • Parties may seek reasonable accommodations for any part of the sexual misconduct process. Students should contact Student Disability Services (SDS) for assistance. Employees should contact their HR Consultant at askhr@butler.edu.
  • Presumption of Non-Responsibility
    • While a case is pending, Respondent is presumed to be not responsible for violating the Policy.
      • This means that the University will not treat Respondent as though they are responsible prior to a finding of responsibility.
      • This does not mean that any party will be viewed as credible or not credible simply based on their status as Complainant or Respondent.
    • The determination of responsibility will be made by a decision-maker after a live hearing.
  • Challenge to Investigator Impartiality
    • The Title IX Coordinator will appoint an investigator to conduct a thorough, impartial, and equitable investigation. Each party will be notified of this appointment in writing.
    • Complainant and Respondent each have the opportunity to challenge the appointment of the investigator for lack of impartiality or conflict of interest.
      • The challenge must be submitted in writing within three business days of notice of appointment, and must include a justification for the challenge.
  • Submission of Information
    • Each party will have an opportunity to share their perspective with the investigator, to identify relevant witnesses, and to provide other relevant information. If either party chooses not to share information, the investigation will continue without the benefit of their participation.
  • Investigation Report Review and Response
    • Upon completion of the information-gathering phase of the investigation, the investigator will prepare a Preliminary Investigation Report, summarizing the relevant information that has been gathered. Each party will be provided with the Report, and each party may submit a response. The investigator will provide each party with any response submitted by the other party. The parties will have an opportunity to submit a final response to the investigator. This is the last opportunity for either party to provide information prior to the hearing.
    • At the end of the final response period, the investigator will prepare a Final Investigation Report and submit it to the Title IX Coordinator. Upon receipt of the Final Report, the Title IX Coordinator will refer the matter to a live hearing.
  • Determination of Responsibility
    • A determination of responsibility will be made after a live hearing before a decision-maker. This decision-maker could be one person or a panel of people. Determinations of responsibility are made by the decision-maker in closed deliberations and are based on the preponderance of the information (more likely than not) standard.
  • Appeals
    • Each party has the opportunity to appeal the decision-maker(s)’ decision to the appropriate appellate official.
    • Grounds for appeals are limited to the following:
      • Procedural error or omission that significantly impacted the outcome of the case, or
      • Availability of new information that could substantially impact the outcome of the case.