Blog

Texas College Doesn't Want to Let Go of Single Investigator Model for Title IX Claims Because it Makes Students Feel Better

Posted by Joseph D. Lento | Jul 25, 2019 | 0 Comments

A college in Texas is criticizing proposed changes to Title IX law for outlawing its preferred investigation methods. Those methods, numerous courts have found, violate the due process rights of accused students. The college, though, insists that both the accuser and the accused students prefer it to a hearing that includes cross-examination.

Those statements bring to the forefront one of the most fundamental reasons why colleges should not be allowed to handle sexual misconduct allegations unless there are assurances that the process is as equitable as possible: They are more concerned with the preferences of their students than they are about reaching the correct outcome in the case.

Texas College Laments Return to Due Process in Title IX Cases

An article in the TCU 360 delved into how proposed rule changes to Title IX would impact students at Texas Christian University. The conclusion: They would “roll us back decades” by reducing the number of students who report sexual misconduct and rape on campus.

Texas Christian University was one of the many colleges across the country that changed their Title IX investigation and hearing process to conform with the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter released by the Department of Education under the Obama administration. Those Title IX changes at TCU replaced a courtroom-like hearing with the single investigator model.

Under this model, the accuser, the accused student, and all witnesses to the alleged act of sexual misconduct met in one-on-one meetings with a Title IX officer at the school. After hearing all sides of the story and weighing the credibility of each party, the Title IX officer then made a recommendation to the school about whether a violation had occurred and an appropriate sanction.

According to TCU's Title IX coordinator, even accused students preferred the single investigator model because of how fairly they felt the process treated them.

College Focuses on How Students Feel About Process

The problem is that accused students have a legal right to cross-examine someone accusing them of such a serious act of misconduct, and the single investigator model strips them of that right.

This cross-examination process is a tried-and-true method of figuring out which of two conflicting stories about an event is the right one. Courts learned that cross-examination works over a hundred years ago, and they are in the best position to know its value.

That TCU does not want to return to the old way of handling Title IX cases is not surprising: Colleges have been struggling to keep up with the changing landscape of Title IX law for awhile, and it has only just begun to settle down. However, that they want to stick with the current single investigator model because it makes both accusing and accused students feel better is disturbing when there is clearly a more accurate way of determining whose side of the study is correct.

Title IX Defense Lawyer Joseph D. Lento

Joseph D. Lento is a national Title IX advisor and a Title IX defense attorney who can represent those who have been accused of sexual misconduct on campus. Contact him online or call his law office at (888) 535-3686.

About the Author

Joseph D. Lento

"I pride myself on having heart and driving hard to get results!" Attorney Joseph D. Lento passionately fights for the futures of his clients nationwide. Attorney Lento and his team represent students and others in disciplinary cases and various other proceedings at colleges and universities across the United States. Attorney Lento has helped countless students, professors, and others in academia at more than a thousand colleges and universities across the United States, and when necessary, he and his team have sought justice on behalf of clients in courts across the nation. He does not settle for the easiest outcome, and instead prioritizes his clients' needs and well-being. Joseph D. Lento is licensed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, is admitted pro hac vice as needed nationwide, and he can help you or your student address any school-related issue or concern anywhere in the United States.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact Us Today!

If you, or your student, are facing any kind of disciplinary action, or other negative academic sanction, and are having feelings of uncertainty and anxiety for what the future may hold, contact the Lento Law Firm today, and let us help secure your academic career.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations - the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lancaster, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill, and York County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.

Menu