This research was designed to explore the likelihood of rape myth interference with the university Title IX adjudication process of sexual assault reports. The purpose of the research was to determine what evidence a Title IX investigative panel needed to find an accused person responsible for a campus sexual assault. The research explores whether individuals, when assuming the responsibility of a Title IX investigator, incorporate common rape myths in their decision-making process. The research was conducted via mock Title IX hearing panels using written vignettes of two campus sexual assault cases. Volunteer participants were divided into small groups based on gender. Each group was given a short training session on Title IX investigation and hearing panel responsibility and procedure. The hearing panel discussions were audio recorded and transcribed for data collection. Each recording was coded for utterance of rape myth by individual. The data was analyzed for frequency of type of myth used by group and by individual. The results show that gender was not a significant predictor of use of rape myth. The research highlighted some procedural discrepancies and policy wording that is unclear, these issues could potentially keep a student from reporting an assault. This research also has potential to be useful in developing training for Title IX investigative personnel and developing or revising hearing panel policies.