2. The chair of the Honesty Committee, in consultation with the faculty member assigned to investigate the report (if this person is different from the chair), has the authority to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant an Honesty Committee hearing. A hearing is warranted whenever there is reason to believe that academic dishonesty (whether major or minor) might have occurred. After reviewing the case, the chair of the Honesty Committee has two options:
a) He or she may decide that there is not sufficient evidence of major or minor academic dishonesty to warrant a hearing. If the chair reaches this decision, he or she shall so notify the student suspected of a violation, the instructor and the reporting student(s) (if any), and shall destroy all records related to the case.
b) The chair may decide that a hearing would be warranted. If the report of a possible violation was submitted by anyone other than the instructor in the course, the chair informs the instructor both of the report and of the evidence and asks the instructor if he or she wishes to contact the student to see if the case can be settled via an Honor Code Violation Report (see V.D. above). If the instructor declines to do so, the chair will then write a letter to the student(s) suspected of the violation. The letter shall describe the possible violation, state the known evidence (including witnesses and documents involved, if any), and state the time and place of the hearing. The letter shall also inform the student(s) under suspicion that he or she can bring to the hearing members of the University community for support and/or to serve as witnesses.
.