DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Darcy Douglas Jack, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT, Chair Irene Dembek, OCT
Mel Greif
BETWEEN: ) ) David Leonard,
) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Bev Hodsdon,
) Law Clerk
- and – )
) Darcy Douglas Jack was ) not present or represented
DARCY DOUGLAS JACK )
(CERTIFICATE #427549) )
) Julie Maciura,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: December 12, 2013
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter was scheduled for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on December 12, 2013 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
The Member was not in attendance at the hearing.
A Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1), dated February 1, 2011 was served on Darcy Douglas Jack, requesting his attendance before the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers on February 22, 2011 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for December 12, 2013.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against Darcy Douglas Jack (the “Member”) in the Notice of Hearing are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Darcy Douglas Jack is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in section 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:
(a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) he abused a student or students physically, sexually, verbally, psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1 (7);
(c) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically section 264(1)(c) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(d) he contravened a law, the contravention of which is relevant to the Member’s suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16);
(e) he contravened a law, the contravention of which has caused students under the Member’s professional supervision to be put at or remain at risk, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(17);
(f) he committed acts that having regard to all the circumstances would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18); and
(g) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
PUBLICATION BAN
There is a publication ban in the criminal proceedings on divulging any information that would tend to identify the victims. The Discipline Committee recognizes and honours this publication ban.
College Counsel advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts, and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 3), which provides as follows:
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
At all material times, the Member was a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information respecting the Member.
The Member was employed by the Rainy River District School Board (the “Board”) at all times material hereto and was a teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in [XXX], Ontario and taught at the Grade [XXX] level.
During the 2007/2008 academic year, A and B were teenaged female students who had previously been taught by the Member.
On or about each of February 15, 2008 and February 25, 2008, while A and B were babysitting the Member’s children at the Member’s residence and spending the night there, the Member videotaped A and B without their knowledge.
The Member had secretly installed a camera directed at a shower and toilet stall in an unfinished downstairs bathroom which was used by A and B, and recorded them while they were showering and performing their bathroom rituals. At no time were A and B aware that they were being watched and videotaped by the Member.
On or about April 9, 2008, the Member was charged by Ontario Provincial Police, inter alia, that he, for a sexual purpose, did surreptitiously make a visual recording of persons who in circumstances giving rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy and where the persons can reasonably be expected to be nude or to expose their genital organs, anal region or their breasts, contrary to Section 162 (1)(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada.
On August 12, 2008, the Member entered a plea of guilty to the charge of voyeurism against him as described in paragraph 5 above. Attached and marked as Exhibit “B” is a transcript of the proceedings before the Honourable Mr. Justice Fraser.
On July 7, 2009, before the Honourable Mr. Justice A.T. McKay, the Member was convicted of the charge of voyeurism to which he pleaded guilty on August 12, 2008 as referred to above. The Member received a conditional sentence of 90 days and a 12-month probation. Attached as Exhibit “C” is a transcript of the proceedings before Mr. Justice McKay on July 7, 2009. Attached as Exhibit “D” is a certified copy of the Certificate of Conviction and a certified copy of the Probation Order Transfer.
The Member resigned from his employment with the Board as of August 31, 2008.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 9 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts referred to in paragraph 4 to 8 above constitute professional misconduct, being more particularly a breach of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18), and 1(19). The Member also admits that he engaged in sexual abuse of a student(s) of a nature defined in Sections 1 and 40(1.1) of the Act.
By this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading guilty to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that depending on the penalty ordered by the Discipline Committee, the decision of the Committee and a summary of its reasons, including reference to his name, may be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between himself and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and without the advice of legal counsel.
- In light of the admitted facts and circumstances and the plea of guilt, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
DECISION
Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof, and the submissions made by College Counsel, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that Darcy Douglas Jack committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 9 above (the “Admitted Facts”). He acknowledged that the Admitted Facts referred to in paragraphs 4 to 8 above, constitute professional misconduct and pleaded guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19).
The Committee accepted the Member’s guilty plea and the facts in the Agreed Statement of Facts, and Guilty Plea.
The Member had secretly installed a camera directed at a shower and toilet stall in an unfinished downstairs bathroom which was used by Students A and B, and recorded them while they were showering and performing their bathroom rituals. At no time were A and B aware that they were being watched and videotaped by the Member. The students had previously been taught by the Member. They agreed to babysit for the Member and spent nights at the Member’s home, where the Member videotaped them. These video images were recorded on a rented lap top in the Member’s possession. On return of the lap top to the rental store, an employee came across the video images of the two girls and contacted the police. The Member was subsequently charged and pleaded guilty to the charge of voyeurism. He received a conditional sentence of 90 days and a 12-month probation.
The Committee finds that based on the Member’s aforementioned conduct, he committed acts of professional misconduct, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 5), College Counsel and the Member jointly submitted that the appropriate penalty to be imposed by the Discipline Committee in this matter would be that the Committee direct the Registrar to revoke the Certificate of Qualification of the Member. The parties had not agreed on whether or not the Member’s name should be published and made submissions on that issue.
SUBMISSIONS ON PUBLICATION
College Counsel submitted that publication with name was appropriate given the nature of the misconduct. Publication with name advises teachers and the public of the gravity of the misconduct and will serve as a general deterrent to the profession and assist in the maintenance of the public trust. It also serves to demonstrate transparency of the discipline process.
The Committee was provided with a written submission from the Member requesting that his name not be published. In his submission, the Member identified several concerns: the community is small; the families involved would be identified; it would bring up unnecessary embarrassment and unnecessary negative memories. He indicates that he has taken full responsibilities for his actions and sought counselling. The Member feels that he has been sufficiently shamed and argued that further specific deterrence is unwarranted.
PENALTY DECISION
a) The Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers is directed to revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member; and
b) There shall be publication of the findings and order of the Committee, in summary form, with the name of the Member, in the official publication of the College Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee carefully considered and accepted the joint submission on penalty. The Member, by videotaping intimate acts of students in the bathroom in his home breached the public trust and the sense of public decency. This conduct resulted in a criminal conviction for voyeurism. The Member used his position of trust as a teacher in a small community to abuse students. Revocation is the fitting consequence.
Revocation and publication with name is warranted, given the nature of the misconduct. Publication with name informs the community of teachers, students and parents that such conduct will never be tolerated and will invoke publication with name. Publication with name asserts the importance of transparency.
Dated: December 12, 2013
Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel ______________________________ Irene Dembek, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Mel Greif
Member, Discipline Panel