Jan. 30, 1998 Contact Maureen Shine (541) 346-3145 EDITOR'S NOTES: To reach President Frohnmayer for comment on the decision, contact Maureen Shine, UO Office of Communications, (541) 346-3145. For information on the conduct code, University Appeals Board and Hearings Officers processes, contact Peter Swan, UO legal counsel, (541) 346-3843. Copies of the decision are available upon request by contacting the UO Office of Communications, (541) 346-3134. EUGENE--University of Oregon President Dave Frohnmayer today (Jan. 30) announced his decision to remand to the University Appeals Board for further review two cases finding Student Conduct Code violations. The cases concern matters of alleged sexual misconduct by a student involving separate accusers. In both cases, the accused was found guilty by a hearings officer, and serious sanctions were imposed. In a letter sent to the University Appeals Board, Frohnmayer said his decision to remand the cases was based solely on serious legal concerns over the due process procedures and was made in consultations with the official legal counsel to the UO and after his "searching and independent review of the law. "I conclude that an appellate court would not sustain the legality of either of the two orders as they presently stand," wrote Frohnmayer. "Remand and reconsideration will allow further proceedings to address these serious legal concerns." In one case, Frohnmayer concluded that the case should be remanded for further consideration in order to honor the clear right of the accused to exercise his right of cross examination, which was denied during the proceeding. Citing Oregon law, Frohnmayer wrote that "a party is given statutory right, without limitation, to cross-examine witnesses and to submit rebuttal evidence. In my professional judgment, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution would require the same result, even if Oregon law were not explicit on this subject." In the other case, Frohnmayer's decision to remand was based on legal questions concerning evidence introduced by the accusing party involving recovered memory. "In years of experience with administrative law cases on this and related evidence issues," wrote Frohnmayer, "I am aware of no instance where a plausible but highly controversial theory of recovered memory has resulted in severe sanctions" unless accompanied by a "sustained, detailed and scientifically validated series of findings." In conclusion, Frohnmayer wrote: "It is widely recognized that this set of cases presents issues of extraordinary difficulty and emotional turmoil for the parties involved and continuation of these proceedings will no doubt be a source of personal difficulty, which everyone profoundly hopes can be minimized. However, the cases squarely present serious and important legal considerations, some of which have never been faced by the University of Oregon and quite possibly by any university disciplinary process. The University is deeply grateful for the time, skill, and professional dedication of the hearings officers who presided over these cases. Nothing in this order should be taken in any manner as a criticism of their high standing in the legal community, their professional skill as adjudicators, and the reputation which both possess for exemplary standards of personal and professional integrity. It is my hope that the issues involved in this remand and reconsideration will be addressed promptly so that all parties can proceed in the secure knowledge that the law has been followed and that justice may be done." The cases will be sent back to the University Appeals Board, which will remand them to hearings officials with appropriate instructions as to the manner in which they will be reconsidered, according to university legal counsel Peter Swan. Concerning sanctions which already have been imposed, Frohnmayer is urging the appeals board to impose a temporary remedy which includes faculty supervision of the accused's academic work; which prohibits any unwanted contact on campus between the accused and the complaining parties; and which stays any other sanctions which have been imposed until appropriate final orders and the university appellate avenues, if any are sought, have been concluded. Sanctions previously imposed by hearings officials include suspension, during which time the accused is banned from any property or building owned by the university; a negative notation on his transcript; disciplinary probation; community service; and counseling. Frohnmayer is one of Oregon's foremost authorities on Oregon administrative law, having authored a major revision of Oregon's Administrative Procedure Act in 1979. He served as Oregon's attorney general from 1981-1992 and represented Oregon before the U.S. Supreme Court, personally winning six of seven cases. A nationally recognized expert in constitutional law, Frohnmayer served as dean of the UO School of Law from 1992-94 before his appointment as president. He was a UO professor of law from 1971-80. -30- #O-4048/Local,PDX