Lock Whiteside’s main platform last year as student chief justice was to raise the burden of proof in the student
judicial system on campus.
After not being able to accomplish it in his first year, the student body re-elected Whiteside who vowed to make it
a reality this year. Whiteside said he saw the re-election as a voice of support for the raise.
“Students are absolutely responding,” Whiteside said. “I’m always having people ask me how it’s going.”
Raising the burden of proof places a greater obligation on the University to prove a person guilty of misconduct.
Student Conduct functions at “clear and convincing” proof which is at a 75-percent level of confidence based on the
amount of evidence at hand.
Whiteside’s proposal would move the burden of proof to 90 percent — a summit called “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“This allows for more information to be presented to the board. So things like the alcohol test will physically be
there,” Whiteside said.
But the increased burden of proof on the University means that each case will take much more time, according to Paul
Cousins, the director of the office of student conduct. And more time would mean fewer cases seen.
“It may even make it unmanageable to prove any case,” Cousins said.
And as “beyond a reasonable doubt” is what is used in the criminal court system, the burden becomes even more
difficult for the University.
“What would happen if some student comes back to us after already going through the legal system?” Cousins said. “We
wouldn’t be able to reach a different decision.”
And so it stands, with debates heating up over what system is best.
Whiteside is presenting his proposal for raising the standard or proof at the Student Senate meeting on Oct. 17. He
said he is still waiting on statistics he had requested from the office of student conduct.
“We’ve been getting the run-around,” Whiteside said.
From the Senate meeting, the proposal will go through Cousins, Evelyn Reiman, associate vice chancellor for student
affairs, and Tom Stafford, vice chancellor for student affairs.
But final approval of a change would have to come from the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees.
“We’ll need to cover our basis with Paul, Evelyn and Dr. Stafford,” Whiteside said. “We have to get them to believe
in it.”
Getting the whole group to believe in it will be difficult though. Because as Cousins notes, “If there’s nothing
broken, what’s to fix?”
“In a bad year, we see about 1,000 students on campus. We should be celebrating the fact that we don’t have more
trouble,” Cousins said. “I haven’t read the proposal, but I’m not aware of problems with the current approach. It
matches the model code and standard.”
The model N.C. State uses as the standard of proof is the model standard of the national organization of judicial
affairs, according to Cousins.
“We have a great program,” he said. “Whenever we present it to our peers, everyone is envious. And we have the
support of the administration, faculty and Campus Police.”
There are other schools that have the 90-percent burden of proof, like UNC and University of Virginia.
“Others have been willing to help with this,” Whiteside said. “The young lady from UVA offered support and advice.
Their system is completely student run.”
Though Cousins said the majority of the schools that use “beyond a reasonable doubt” have law schools that greatly
influence their procedures.
Whiteside said he still has elements to fine tune before next month’s presentation.
“We have to show that it has student support and that it’s not letting students get off,” Whiteside said.