when i was on the student conduct board at a state university you could appeal an "in violation" (i.e, guilty) decision, but once a panel found the person "non in violation" that was the end of it. sounds like the chancellor fucked up, and after hearing a one-sided account at that.
one thing i learned from the sexual assault cases i was on was that there is virtually no evidence other than the testimony of the accused and accuser, and given that they operate on preponderance of evidence it basically comes down to whoever you believe more. the one exception was a case where the police officer accidentally let it slip that this wasn't the first time this kid was in trouble for sex assault. it came up after i asked him what his opinion was on the case and he said "Well my first impression was, 'Oh, it's he's at it again'" technically previous cases are not supposed to be brought up in these hearings unless the person is found in violation since this will determine the weight of the sanctions.
of course liberals would probably call me a fascist for considering the judgment of a police officer.