Maybe this is just semantics - but I kind of view the honor code office as investigating specific actions or incidents rather than investigating people.

I don't know how they investigate the alleged perpetrator without involving the alleged victim. They would have to interview both. How do they even categorize things? Just because the honor code is investigating what happened, doesn't necessarily mean that they've identified a person as having done wrong and they are then assessing whether said allegation is true or false.

I kind of see them as investigating an incident. Attempting to assess and determine who did what. And once they've reached that point, identifying who, if anyone, acted in violation of the honor code.

But in all honesty - I have no idea how things really work. I just don't think that saying there is an honor code investigation should automatically mean that the people involved in the investigation are ALL suspected of wrongdoing.