[Kevin]

I have nothing more than your story to go on, but it leaves out some things I'd love to know. Namely:

1) What sort of testimony was given by the alleged victim? Did she testify in person? Was there an opportunity for cross-examination? In other words, did Beta have the opportunity to confront its accuser? This is a quasi-criminal sort of court as it is supposedly hearing evidence of a crime and then meting out pretty significant punishment. I know the U.S. Constitution does not require those things in this particular setting (See Osteen v. Henley), but how about the relevant Florida laws?

Also, Osteen v. Henley is not going to be exactly on point here. In that case, the student had already admitted guilt. I wonder whether the Constitution would confer other procedural safeguards which wouldn't have been allowed in Osteen? The Matthews v. Eldridge balancing test isn't especially helpful here.

2) Was it proper for the hearing officer to speak to the press? That action churns my stomach. I know he's not a real judge, but he's serving in a judicial capacity on what is maybe (depending on whether the enabling legislation aspect is fatal to the board's jurisdiction) a quasi-judicial administrative board. In the real world judges and courts do not give press conferences.

3) Are the arguments you're talking about in your article the only ones being raised? I can think of others, but I have no idea about any part of Florida law.