877-Ben-Hall 517-798-5801 877-Ben-Hall Awards & Recognition
The biggest risk in a campus sexual assault allegation usually isn’t the hearing day. It’s the assumption that the university process stays inside the school. It doesn’t. What you say to a Title IX investigator can end up in a police file, and that changes how you should handle every interview, email, and meeting.
This situation exists because you’re dealing with two separate systems that run at the same time:
They intersect at one place that matters more than anything else: evidence. Universities collect statements, texts, screenshots, witness interviews, and timelines, while police and prosecutors look for the same material. That overlap creates a trap for students who walk into a Title IX interview and try to talk their way out of it.
Here’s the core problem: the university expects you to give a detailed story, whereas the Constitution protects you from being forced to give the state evidence against you. Investigators understand that tension, but if you don’t, you can end up handing over a clean, organized version of events that becomes the foundation for criminal charges.
The goal is to protect your education without building a case for the prosecution. That takes a coordinated approach, not two separate strategies that accidentally collide.
If you’re under investigation at MSU or another Michigan university and law enforcement is involved, call Ben Hall Law. We’ll review what’s already been said and collected, then set a plan that protects your future in both arenas.
A common but incorrect assumption is that Double Jeopardy applies between a university hearing and a criminal trial. It does not; the two systems operate independently. This means you could be found not responsible by the university and still face criminal charges, or you could be acquitted in court and still be expelled from school.
This creates immense confusion, largely because the two forums use completely different definitions and standards for what constitutes misconduct.
Because these systems run on separate tracks, a defense must be managed as one integrated front. Hiring a lawyer who only understands student conduct could leave you exposed criminally. On the other hand, a criminal defense attorney who ignores the Title IX timeline and its unique procedures might inadvertently sacrifice your education.
The only effective approach is a unified defense strategy that addresses both venues simultaneously.
You must understand that the files from a university’s Title IX investigation are not automatically private or protected. These records, which include investigator’s notes, summaries of witness interviews, and even verbatim transcripts of your testimony, may become a primary source of evidence for the police and prosecutors.
While the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) generally protects the privacy of student records, it contains key exceptions. The most significant is the lawfully issued subpoena exception. It is routine for a prosecutor’s office or police department to subpoena a university’s entire Title IX file. The school must comply with this legal demand, effectively creating an evidence pipeline from the campus to the courthouse.
Prosecutors sometimes use the Title IX process as a fishing expedition to gather information they wouldn’t otherwise have at an early stage. Here’s how:
Prosecutors are aware of this dynamic. They can monitor the university process to see what is said, locking a student into a specific story before criminal charges are even filed. Any small inconsistency between what you say in a Title IX interview and what you might say later in a criminal proceeding may be used to attack your credibility.
Furthermore, local relationships between campus police (like the Michigan State University Department of Police and Public Safety) and university administrators are typically close. Federal laws like the Clery Act require information sharing about campus crime statistics, and many universities have Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with local police departments that facilitate cooperation. This makes it even easier for information to flow between the two investigations.
The different rules surrounding your right to remain silent create one of the most difficult challenges in these parallel cases. The protections you have in criminal court are not the same as those in a campus hearing.
This conflict forces you into what feels like an impossible choice:
It doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing decision. A defense attorney can intervene to negotiate the terms of your participation. This might involve submitting a carefully worded written statement, allowing your advisor to speak on your behalf, or limiting the scope of questions you are willing to answer. The goal is to provide just enough information to defend yourself in the Title IX process without creating evidence that might be used against you in court.
The reason it’s possible to be cleared in criminal court but still be expelled by your university comes down to the different standards of proof required in each venue.
Title IX hearings use a preponderance of the evidence standard. This is the lowest standard of proof in the legal system—it simply means “more likely than not.” If the hearing panel believes there is just a 50.1% chance that the allegation is true, they must find you responsible. It’s a tipping of the scales, no matter how slight.
Criminal court requires the highest standard of proof: beyond a reasonable doubt. This does not mean 100% certainty, but it is very close. The prosecution’s evidence must be so convincing that there is no other logical explanation for the facts except that the defendant committed the crime. If there is any reasonable doubt, the jury must acquit.
Because the university’s standard is so much lower, it is far easier for them to issue a sanction like suspension or expulsion. A prosecutor might look at the same evidence and conclude they cannot possibly meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, choosing not to file charges or losing at trial.
This outcome does not bind the university. Under Title IX regulations, the school has an independent federal obligation to investigate and adjudicate the complaint based on its own policies and its much lower standard of proof.
When facing two investigations at once, managing the timeline is a key strategic component. An experienced attorney will not simply react to demands from investigators but will actively work to control the flow of information and the timing of proceedings.
One primary strategy is to formally request that the university pause, or stay, its Title IX investigation until the criminal matter is resolved.
The argument for this is straightforward: a student should not be forced to choose between defending themselves in a campus hearing and preserving their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in a criminal case.
However, universities frequently deny these requests. Federal guidance under Title IX urges schools to complete their investigations “promptly,” and a long delay for a criminal case could conflict with that directive. Despite this, a well-argued request sometimes results in a temporary delay to allow for fact-finding.
If a stay is denied, a decision must be made about what evidence to present to the university. We will conduct a careful risk-reward analysis:
Current Title IX rules require a live hearing where each party’s advisor can conduct cross-examination of the other party and witnesses.
This is a defensive tool. An experienced criminal defense attorney acting as your Title IX advisor will use this opportunity to question the accuser and witnesses under oath. This process can uncover inconsistencies, expose weaknesses in the allegations, and provide a valuable preview of how a witness might perform on the stand in a potential criminal trial. This can all happen before any criminal charges are officially filed.
Yes. Under federal Title IX regulations, you are entitled to have an advisor of your choice present with you throughout the process, including at the live hearing. This advisor can be an attorney. Given the significant overlap, having an advisor who understands both criminal law and university procedures is highly beneficial.
No, not automatically. The university’s finding does not legally trigger a criminal charge. However, the university can and usually does report its findings to the local prosecutor’s office. A prosecutor might then use the school’s investigation and report as a basis to establish probable cause and initiate a formal criminal case.
No. A university’s obligation to investigate under Title IX is independent of the criminal justice system. Even if an accuser decides not to cooperate with the police or asks for charges to be dropped, the university may still move forward with its own investigation if it believes a potential policy violation and campus safety risk exists.
This is difficult. Courts have generally given universities the latitude to proceed with their own disciplinary processes, even when a parallel criminal case is pending. However, if the school failed to follow its own procedures, violated federal Title IX regulations, or demonstrated clear bias in its handling of the case, there might be grounds to challenge the outcome in court later on.
A no contest or nolo contendere plea has the same effect as a guilty plea in a criminal court for sentencing purposes. For a university’s disciplinary process, a no contest plea will almost certainly be treated as an admission of guilt. This will likely result in the most severe sanctions, including expulsion, without the need for a full hearing.
A single misstep in a university interview might echo for years, potentially leading to a criminal conviction. The system is structured in a way that forces you to choose between your degree and your liberty.
We reject that choice. The practice at Ben Hall Law is focused on managing the difficult interplay between university administrative procedures and a strong criminal defense. We understand how to assert your rights in one venue to protect you in the other.
If you are facing a Title IX investigation with the potential for criminal charges in East Lansing or anywhere in Michigan, call us immediately. We will intervene to build that firewall and preserve your rights before any irreversible damage is done.
