DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
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
Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Christine Bellini, OCT, Chair Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT
BETWEEN: ) ) Ava Arbuck,
) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Annie Lacroix,
) Law Clerk
- and – )
) ) Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa,
OLGA ALEXSANDROVNA PIATNITSA ) was not present or represented
(CERTIFICATE # 504647) )
) Marc Spector,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: May 25, 2015
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on May 25, 2015 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1) dated August 20, 2013 was served on Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa (the “Member”), requesting her attendance before the Discipline Committee on September 24, 2013 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for May 25, 2015.
The Member did not attend the hearing and did not have legal representation.
Counsel for the College submitted an Affidavit of Annie Lacroix (Exhibit 3) affirmed May 21, 2015, to prove that the Member had been informed of the allegations against her, and the time and date of the hearing. In this affidavit, Ms. Lacroix, a law clerk with McCarthy Tétrault LLP, outlines her communications with the Member and provides proof of service of all required disclosure documents.
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. 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 August 20, 2013 are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:
(a) she failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) she abused a student or student physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);
(c) she abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(d) she 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);
(e) she 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);
(f) she 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);
(g) she 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);
(h) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a Member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
PARTICULARS OF THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board as an [XXX] Teacher.
On or between the 1st of November, 2009 and the 13th of May 13, 2010, the Member physically assaulted “A”, a child aged approximately [XXX] years old.
On or around March 9, 2012, the Member was found guilty of a charge that the Member, on or between the 1st of November 2009 and the 13th of May 2010, at the City of Barrie, did commit an assault on “A”, contrary to Section 266 of the Criminal Code (Canada).
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 Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa (Exhibit 2), 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. Olga Piatnitsa (Exhibit 4) which contained the following documents:
TAB
DOCUMENT
DATE
A.
Information and Appearances
June 16, 2010 to May 16, 2012
B.
Order Authorizing the Taking of Bodily Substances for Forensic DNA Analysis
May 16, 2012
C.
Prohibition Order
May 16, 2012
D.
Probation Order
May 16, 2012
E.
Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice N.A. Dawson
March 9, 2012
F.
Reasons for Sentence of the Honourable Justice N.A. Dawson
May 16, 2012
The evidence presented in the Brief of Court Documents confirms that on or around March 9, 2012, the Member was found guilty of assault of a [XXX] year old child, contrary to section 266 of the Criminal Code (Canada). On or around May 16, 2012 the Member was sentenced to four months in jail and two years’ probation.
SUBMISSIONS ON FINDING
College Counsel submitted the Brief of Court Documents in support of the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing.
College Counsel submitted that the Committee could rely on the court documents, which include 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 resulting 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 Olga Alexsandrovna Piatnitsa 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(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
Given the information provided in the Brief of Court Documents, the Committee accepts as fact that on March 9, 2012, the Member was convicted of assault of a [XXX] year old child and sentenced to four months in jail and two years’ 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 goals of penalty were to protect the public, to maintain high professional standards and to preserve public confidence in the teaching profession and that in this case, these goals would be achieved by revoking the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration.
College Counsel submitted that the Member’s misconduct was very serious in nature and that a criminal conviction for child abuse was inconsistent with being a teacher. In these circumstances the only appropriate penalty was to revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member and to publish the findings, in summary form, with the name of the Member, in the College’s official magazine, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
The Committee directs the Registrar to revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member; and
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 evidence presented in the Brief of Court Documents confirms that on or around March 9, 2012, the Member was found guilty of assault of a [XXX] year old child, contrary to section 266 of the Criminal Code (Canada). On or around May 16, 2012 the Member was sentenced to four months in jail and two years’ probation.
The Member was found guilty of assaulting a child on multiple occasions over a six month period. The abuse included multiple bruises on the child’s body that were inflicted by slapping, punching, pinching, and using a belt. All of the injuries were documented and photographed by a doctor and corroborated by other witnesses, including Educational Assistants, Children’s Aid Society, a police officer, and the child. Eight videos captured some of these assaults and were accepted as evidence in the criminal proceedings. Despite overwhelming evidence, the Member denied any culpability to the point that she stated that it was not her in the videos abusing a child but rather someone else in her clothing. The judge took into consideration mitigating and aggravating factors, and concluded that the Member was guilty of physically assaulting a child. The judge also concluded that the Member psychologically and emotionally abused the child by telling the child to lie about the injuries if asked, and threatened the child with further consequences.
The judge noted that the Member was well-educated, holding several university degrees, was a qualified teacher, and should have known better. Additionally, the Member should have known that teachers are expected to be role models at all times and that resorting to physical, psychological, and emotional abuse of any child is unacceptable.
The Committee was troubled by the fact that the Member has taken no responsibility for her actions, and demonstrated no remorse. Further it is disconcerting that the Member showed absolutely no concern for the child’s health and well-being.
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 her 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 her Certificate of Qualification and Registration.
Publication of the findings and order of the Committee, in summary form, with the name of the Member, informs the profession of the nature of the Member’s misconduct and the consequences for such behaviour. Publication with name also 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: May 29, 2015
______________________________ Christine Bellini, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel ______________________________ Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel