Ontario College of Teachers v Jennings, 2015 ONOCT 41

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Jennings, 2015 ONOCT 41

Date: 2015-02-24

IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the "Act"), and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;

AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against

Charles Thomas Jennings, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers

PANEL: Robert Gagné, Chair Christine Bellini, OCT

Irene Dembek, OCT

BETWEEN: ) ) Caroline Zayid,

) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Bev Hodsdon,

) Law Clerk

• and – )

) ) Charles Thomas Jennings,

CHARLES THOMAS JENNINGS ) was not present or represented

(CERTIFICATE # 216260) )

) Erica Richler,

) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: February 17, 2015

DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the "Committee") on February 17, 2015 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the "College") at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1) dated October 2, 2014 was served on Charles Thomas Jennings (the "Member"), requesting his attendance before the Discipline Committee on October 24, 2014 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for February 17, 2015.

The Member did not attend the hearing and did not have legal representation.

Counsel for the College submitted an Affidavit of Daniela De Bartolo, (Exhibit 2) sworn February 13, 2015, to prove that the Member had been informed of the allegations against him, the time and date of the hearing, as well as the penalty being sought. In this affidavit, Ms. De Bartolo, a law clerk with McCarthy Tétrault, outlines her communications with the Member and provides proof of proper service of all required disclosure documents. On January 21, 2015, the Member advised Ms. De Bartolo by telephone, that he had received her letter of January 16, 2015 and stated that he had no intention of attending the proceedings before the Discipline Committee.

In light of this affidavit, the Committee was satisfied that the Member had been properly served with the Notice of Hearing and all disclosure documents and was aware of the time and date of the hearing and the penalty being sought.

The Committee therefore proceeded to hear the matter in the absence of the Member.

THE ALLEGATIONS

The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated October 2, 2014 are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsections 30(2) and 40(1.1) 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 physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);

(c) he abused a student psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);

(d) he abused a student sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3) and/or engaged in sexual abuse of a student as defined in section 1 of the Act;

(e) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);

(f) 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);

(g) he contravened a law, the contravention of which may cause a student to be put at or to remain at risk, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(17);

(h) 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

(i) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a Member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).

PARTICULARS OF THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Charles Thomas Jennings is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board as a teacher at [XXX] School (the "School") in Mississauga, Ontario.

3. At all material times, the Student was a female student at the School.

4. During the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 academic year, the Member:

(a) had an inappropriate personal relationship with the Student;

(b) engaged in sexual contact with the Student;

(c) had inappropriate electronic communication with the Student.

5. On or about September 6, 2013, the Member pleaded guilty to and was found guilty of the following charge in that he:

(a) did unlawfully commit a sexual assault on the Student contrary to subsection 271(1) of the Criminal Code (Canada).

6. On or about September 6, 2013, the Member was given a ninety (90) day conditional sentence and fifteen (15) months probation.

7. The Member has not appealed the conviction and/or sentence.

MEMBER'S PLEA

As the Member was not present or represented by counsel, the Committee proceeded on the basis that the Member denied the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing. The Chair, on behalf of the Member, entered a plea of not guilty to the allegations.

THE EVIDENCE

College Counsel entered into evidence the Registered Member Information for Charles Thomas Jennings (Exhibit 3), which indicates that the Member was registered with the College during the period of the alleged events. Counsel for the College also provided the Committee with a Brief of Court Documents: Her Majesty The Queen v. Charles Thomas Jennings (Exhibit 4) which contained the following documents:

TAB

DOCUMENT

PAGE No.

A.

Certified Copy of Information

1-5

B.

Transcript of the Guilty Plea before the Honourable Mr. Justice R.F. Kelly at Brampton dated September 6, 2013

1-35

C.

Transcript of the Reasons for Judgment before the Honourable Mr. Justice R.F. Kelly at Brampton dated September 6, 2013

1-16

The evidence presented in the Brief of Court Documents (Exhibit 4) confirms that on or about September 6, 2013, the Member was found guilty of sexual assault, contrary to s. 271(1) of the Criminal Code (Canada), and was given a ninety day conditional sentence and fifteen months' probation.

SUBMISSIONS ON FINDING

College Counsel submitted the Brief of Court Documents in support of the allegations in the Notice of Hearing. The Member had legal representation in the criminal proceedings.

College Counsel submitted that the Committee that they could rely on the court documents, which included the criminal conviction, as proof that the offence had been committed and that there was no evidence to the contrary. According to College Counsel, the Member has not appealed the conviction or the sentence. College Counsel stated that the Member's behaviour as detailed in the record of the criminal proceedings and the resultant criminal conviction provided a sufficient basis to justify a finding of professional misconduct under all the heads of misconduct alleged in the Notice of Hearing.

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 Charles Thomas Jennings committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7.1), 1(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19). The Committee further finds that the Member engaged in sexual abuse of a student of a nature defined in sections 1 and 40(1.1) of the Act.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Given the information provided in the Brief of Court Documents (Exhibit 4), the Committee accepts as fact that on September 6, 2013, the Member was convicted of sexual assault and given a ninety day conditional sentence and fifteen months' probation. The Member has not appealed the criminal conviction or sentence.

Rules 13.03 and 13.04 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee allow the Committee to accept a certified copy of a Court Information as proof that an offence was committed by a person, where there is a finding of guilt and conviction in a Canadian court, provided that there is no evidence to the contrary and the Member has not appealed the conviction or sentence.

SUBMISSIONS ON PENALTY

College Counsel submitted that the Member's misconduct was very serious in nature and in these circumstances, the only appropriate penalty is to revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member. College Counsel submitted that publication of the findings, in summary form, with the name of the Member, in the College's official magazine, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession is warranted in this case.

PENALTY DECISION

The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:

1. The Committee directs the Registrar to revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member; and

2. The findings and order of the Committee shall be published in summary form, with the name of the Member, in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.

REASONS FOR PENALTY

The Member met the Student on a class trip in March 2012 and they began texting one another and spending time together. The following summer, the Member and the Student were in the same summer school and other students began noticing the Student and the Member spending an unusual amount of time together, which generated some talk in the school. The Member and the Student began exchanging sexual text messages, such as "I love you", "I love you, too", "I long for your kiss", "I want to kiss the back of your neck", and "long for your touch", and made plans for a "touching session". The Member continued to foster a relationship with the Student and sometime between March 1 and December 21, 2012, the Member went to the Student's home and they participated in sexual activity on at least three different occasions. The Member was subsequently arrested as a result of the aforementioned activity. He pleaded guilty to the charge of sexual assault, contrary to s. 271(1) of the Criminal Code (Canada).

Even though the Student was a willing participant and stated that these sexual acts were consensual, Justice Kelly, in the criminal proceedings stated that the relationship may have been "factually consensual, but it was legally not consensual and he [the Member] fully acknowledges that" (Exhibit 4, Tab B, page 16).

The Committee finds it is always the responsibility of a teacher to maintain appropriate relationships and boundaries with students. In this case, the Member abused the authority and trust vested in him in his role as a teacher and took advantage of and engaged in sexual abuse of the Student. The Member's behaviour has brought the profession into disrepute and was in conflict with the duty of a teacher to protect students. The Member, as a result of his conduct, has forfeited the privilege of holding a teaching certificate and being a member of the teaching profession. This most serious misconduct warrants that the Member receive the maximum penalty available to the Committee, which is the revocation of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration.

Publication of the findings and order of the Committee, in summary, with the name of the Member, identifies to the profession the nature of the Member's misconduct and the consequences for such behaviour. Publication, in this case, acts as a general deterrent and informs the profession that such behaviour will not be tolerated and will result in the harshest penalty. Publication serves the public interest by reassuring and informing the community that the profession acts decisively when matters of this nature are brought to its attention.

The Committee is satisfied that the finding and penalty protect the public interest and uphold the standards of the teaching profession.

Dated: February 24, 2015

______________________________ Robert Gagné

Chair, Discipline Panel ______________________________ Christine Bellini, OCT Member, Discipline Panel

Irene Dembek, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel