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
Raymond Hubbard, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Vicki Shannon, OCT, Chair
Irene Dembek, OCT
Marie-Thérèse Hokayem
BETWEEN: ) Janice Duggan, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Rudy Ticzon,
) Student-at-Law
– and – )
RAYMOND HUBBARD ) Raymond Hubbard was self-represented
(CERTIFICATE # 192905) )
) Erica Richler,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel
) ) Heard: April 24, 2017
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on April 24, 2017 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated January 18, 2017 (Exhibit 1) was served on Raymond Hubbard (the “Member”), requesting his presence on January 26, 2017 to set a date for hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for April 24, 2017.
The Member was not in attendance for the hearing and did not have representation. He was contacted by College Counsel on the morning of the hearing, and indicated that he would not be attending.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing 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) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
b) 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);
c) he contravened a law 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);
d) 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
e) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Raymond Hubbard is 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 with respect to the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Durham District School Board (the “Board”) as a Grade one teacher at Terry Fox Public School in Ajax, Ontario.
In the Fall of 2015, the Canton Police Department in Michigan, U.S.A. (the “Canton Police”) investigated the Member in relation to Facebook messages that he allegedly sent to a [XXX]-year-old girl.
The Member’s Facebook profile had no privacy settings, so the Canton Police were able to determine that the Member lived in Ajax, Ontario.
On November 3, 2015, the Canton Police advised the Durham Regional Police Service about the Member’s alleged activities on Facebook.
On December 10, 2015, an Officer with the Durham Regional Police Service began to converse with the Member through Facebook and an instant messaging service called KIK. The Officer conversed using the persona of a 14-year-old girl with the initials K.P.
Between December 10, 2015 and January 3, 2016, [sic] the Member conducted online conversations with K.P. Of the 1793 messages exchanged in this time period, the Member sent 991. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the chat logs of the messages exchanged by the Member and K.P. via Facebook and KIK. As indicated in the chat log, some messages exchanged on KIK were not screen captured and KIK overwrote them.
From the outset of the message exchanges, the Member presumed that he had previously met K.P. The Member asked K.P. how they had met. K.P. told the Member that he looked familiar and perhaps she knew him from school or lived near him in Oshawa.
K.P. told the Member that she was using a backup account to converse with him because her parents checked her real account.
K.P. told the Member that she was 14 years old. The Member understood and accepted K.P.’s age. The Member did not specify his age, but advised that he was “older” and asked K.P. if she was “okay” with that fact.
Very early on in the message exchange, the Member made the following statements to K.P.: “[y]ou aint gonna [sic] report me are you?” and “[i]f we chat and get to know each other you’re not going to run and complain that we chatted?”
Over the course of their message exchange, the Member sent 17 photographs of himself to K.P. The Member’s photographs included three of him shirtless. One of the Member’s photographs depicted him with his tongue sticking out with a classroom in the background.
Early on in the message exchange, the Member asked K.P. what she did for fun. The Member also offered to be K.P.’s friend so that she was “not alone.”
The Member exchanged messages with K.P. throughout the day, but the predominant time for conversation was between 10:00 p.m. and 1:30 a.m.
As the nighttime conversations wound down, the Member would want to “cuddle” with K.P. and he would describe “cuddling” with K.P. in bed. The first time that the Member referred to cuddling with K.P. was on December 10, 2015, which was the first day that the Member and K.P. exchanged messages.
When the Member first raised the issue of cuddling, K.P. feigned confusion, so the Member explained that by using their imaginations he and K.P. would establish an emotional connection.
On December 17, 2015, the Member and K. P. had the following message exchange regarding photographs:
(a) K.P.: “…my mom is at work until late.”
(b) The Member: “She’s not home. Send me those pictures!”
(c) K.P.: “U never told me wut [sic] to take!!!!! > :(”
(d) The Member: “I’m not allowed to tell you to take a sexy picture. So take some PRETTY pictures.”
(e) K.P.: “Wut [sic]…?...im [sic] too dumb to get this I think :(“
(f) The Member: “Send me any pictures. I’ll rate them…honestly.”
(g) K.P.: “U [sic] said that u [sic] aren’t allowed to ask for pics from me tho…Im [sic] getting mixed up.”
(h) The Member: “Iw [sic] would love it if you sent them. Do you want to?”
(i) K.P.: “Sexy pix?”
(j) The Member: “Do you want to?”
(k) K.P.: “I can try I gues [sic].”
- Later, on December 17, 2015, the Member sent K.P. a picture of himself and the following messages were exchanged:
K.P.: “Nice.”
The Member: “Your turn and I want sexy.”
Eventually, the Member began to describe what a sexy/sensual/pretty photograph involved.
On December 19, 2015, the Member began to send messages of a more intimate nature to K.P. The Member began talking of very intimate encounters as though he and K.P. were in her bedroom. The conversation involved a narrative in which the Member described having K.P. rub his genitals over his clothing. The Member asked K.P. if she knew “what happens when [she’s] with [him] and [he’s] excited”, which referred to the Member having an erection.
On December 21, 2015, the Member renewed his request for photographs of K.P. The following messages were exchanged:
The Member: “Take a picture for me but clothes stay on.”
K.P.: “Not dressed yet…wuts [sic] wit [sic] the picx u [sic] have wit [sic] clothes on?”
The Member: “You can send me those pictures too.”
The Member: “Would we stay as friends?”
K.P.: “Stay as friends after wut [sic]?”
The Member: “[K], you and I are friends who like to have fun here.”
The Member: “When you say you have no clothes on, of course I want to see!”
K.P.: “Ooohhhh….so would we b [sic] friends if I sent u a nudie?”
The Member: “I would. Would you still be?”
K.P.: “Sure why not …should I not b [sic]?”
The Member: “Of course we will stay friends and secret friends.”
K.P.: “So u do want nudies?”
The Member: “Is it going to change our friendship?”
K.P.: “No….don’t tink [sic] so.”
The Member: “It’s your body you decide.”
K.P.: “NVM [Never mind] then…im gonna go shower.”
The Member: “Send me some pictures.”
The Member: “I want them.”
On December 26, 2015, the Member guided K.P. in detail about how to masturbate properly and described how he would engage in sexual intercourse with K.P. while she masturbated. The Member described how he would wet his fingers to touch K.P.’s vagina and told K.P. at what point he would put on a condom.
On December 28, 2015, following K.P.’s feigned frustration over the “cuddling” aspect of the conversations, the Member asked K.P. to participate in a Facebook video chat. The Member suggested that he and K.P. could watch each other “play with themselves.”
On December 28, 2015, shortly after 11:17 p.m., there was the first mention of a possible meeting between the Member and K.P. After an argument that arose when K.P. feigned frustration over the Member wanting to cuddle every night, the Member asked K.P. if she would like to meet him. K.P. expressed interest in meeting.
On December 29, 2015, the Member and K.P. continued to discuss meeting and discussed locations, including a movie theatre or a mall.
On December 29, 2015, the Member told K.P. that he had lost during his poker game that evening, which prompted the following message exchange:
The Member: “I lost again tonight and I was considering looking for you!”
K.P.: “U [sic] wouldn’t dare just show up!!!” Wut [sic] would u [sic] say to my mom!?!?! no [sic].”
The Member: “Hi, my name is Raymond Hubbard. I’m here to sleep with your daughter.”
K.P.: “Bahahaha….that’s be [sic] so bad.”
The Member: “Maybe the three of us could get to know each better…first!”
K.P.: “Ewwwww!!>:)”
The Member: “Who am I kidding? I want you now. ;)
K.P.: “Do u? :D”
The Member: “Of course!”
The Member: “And you want me!”
K.P.: “Sure.”
The Member: “Good answer. But I prefer yes.”
- On January 3, 2016, at approximately 8:30 p.m., the Member and K.P. discussed meeting on January 6, 2016. The following exchange between the Member and K.P. occurred:
The Member: “Yup, we might have met just before Christmas break.”
K.P.: “Oh well any ideas?”
The Member: “Besides cuddling?”
K.P.: “Other than cuddling.”
The Member: “Do you wanna still – you wanna meet still?”
K.P.: “Sure why not?”
K.P.: “Hello?”
The Member: “Sorry problems on Facebook.”
K.P.: “What kind of probs?”
The Member: “I’m in a group where; sorry I’m in a group where [sic] make jokes and random stuff.”
The Member: “Then they started bashing me because of my ages so I had to do some damage control.”
K.P.: “What, why?”
The Member: “That’s the way it goes, you try to fit in some accept you but when others start liking an asshole wrecks the party [sic].”
K.P.: “What were you chatting about that they ganged up on you? It’s mean!!!!”
K.P.: What you think [sic] about meeting?”
The Member: “It’s tough to call. We’d be sneaking around and it’s so tricky.”
K.P.: “K NVM [okay, never mind];
The Member: “Do you wanna stay friends?”
K.P.: “What do you mean”?
The Member: “Do you wanna give up on us? Or do you wanna try another time?
K.P.: “What do you mean by try another time?”
The Member: “Do you still want to be together?”
K.P.: “Sure I do.”
The Member: “Good answer.”
The Member: “It’ just won’t be tomorrow.”
K.P.: “K when? I don’t know what you’re trying to say.”
The Member: “My schedule is so busy, during Christmas would have been great.”
The Member: “Next week.”
K.P.: “k I can probably do a Wednesday ‘cuz I usually sleep over at my cousins after guitar lesson.”
The Member: “Okay your cousin would keep your secret?”
K.P.: Yeah she’s super solid as long as I’m there to sleep is all.”
The Member: “We would see each [sic] and I would bring you back there.”
K.P.: “Yep that works for me.”
The Member: “Cool what time is guitar lessons [sic] over?”
K.P.: “Six-thirty.”
The Member: “In Oshawa?”
K.P.: “Have to be at my cousins by 10 or 10:30. Yes in Oshawa.”
The Member: “Okay I will try this Wednesday.”
K.P.: “Really!?! Neat!! :D”
K.P.: “What you wanna do?”
The Member: “If not we might wait one more week.”
The Member: “Take you somewhere excluded [sic], hug, cuddle like we pretended to do on the couch.”
K.P.: “Cool!”
The Member: “Where are the guitar lessons? I’ll find a place we can chill afterwards.”
K.P.: “Long and McQuaid on Simcoe Street.”
The Member: “Cool I’m on it.”
The Member: “Wednesday January 13th.”
K.P.: “That’s not this week?”
The Member: “I’ll try. Okay but we might have to wait.”
K.P.: “K.”
The Member: “Are you worth the wait?”
K.P.: “I don’t know, just not good at waiting is all. I’m impatient.”
The Member: “Yes we have waited a month.”
K.P.: “Okay cool.”
The January 6, 2016 meeting between the Member and K.P. did not occur. The Member cancelled by advising K.P. that he was going to the gym with a friend. The Member suggested to K.P. that there was a possibility that they could meet the following week.
On January 6, 2016, the Member and K.P. had the following message exchange:
The Member: “Next week?”
K.P.: “Okay we’ll see if we’re both free then.”
The Member: “I will.”
The Member: “For now we will just think of it.”
K.P.: “For sure dude! ;)”
The Member: “Hawt, H-A-W-T!”
K.P: “What’s hot?”
The Member: “You, me, passion.”
The Member: “You choose.”
- On January 6, 2016, shortly after the exchange of messages set out in paragraph 29, the Member was arrested and charged with:
(a) one count of child luring to facilitate sexual interference, contrary to subsection 172.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Canada);
(b) one count of child luring to make child pornography, contrary to subsection 172.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Canada); and
(c) one count of child luring to facilitate invitation to sexual touching, contrary to subsection 172.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Canada).
On January 7, 2016, the Board suspended the Member with pay.
The Member was denied bail.
On June 20, 2016, the Member pleaded guilty to one count of child luring to facilitate invitation to sexual touching, contrary to subsection 172.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Canada) before the Honourable Mr. Justice J. Adamson. The Crown withdrew the other two counts. The particulars of the conviction are as follow:
(a) Between the 28th day of December in the year 2015 and the 6th day of January in the year 2016, at the Town of Ajax in the Central East region, did by means of a telecommunication communicate with a person, namely K.P., who was or was believed to be under the age of 16 years for the purposes of facilitating the commission of an offence under Section 152 of the Criminal Code with respect to that person, contrary to Section 172.1, subsection (2) of the Criminal Code of Canada.
On June 20, 2016, the Member was sentenced by Honourable Justice J. Adamson to 12 months’ incarceration less pre-trial custody, which amounted to 115 days’ incarceration post-conviction.
As part of the sentence, the Member was subject to two years’ probation and a number of ancillary orders.1
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a certified copy of the Court Information with respect to the charges, dated January 7, 2016.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a certified copy of the Prohibition Order dated June 20, 2016.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E” is a certified copy of the Probation Order dated June 20, 2016.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “F” is a certified copy of the ancillary orders, dated June 20, 2016.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “G” is a certified copy of the transcript of the Proceedings at Guilty Plea and Reasons for Sentence, dated June 20, 2016.
On June 21, 2016, the Board terminated the Member’s employment.
On or about October 13, 2016, the Member was released from incarceration.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1-42 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly:
(a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) 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);
(c) he contravened a law 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);
(d) 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
(e) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
- 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 the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons shall be published on the College’s website, and that a summary of the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons, including his name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between him and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed does not bind the Discipline Committee; and
(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this document 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 Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of College Counsel, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 42 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and pleaded guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Committee accepts that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19).
Paragraphs 6, 7, 10-29, and 33-35 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5).
Paragraphs 6, 7, 10-29, and 33-35 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member 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).
Paragraphs 6, 7, 10-29, and 33-35 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member contravened a law 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).
Paragraphs 6, 7, 10-29, and 33-35 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member 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).
Paragraphs 6, 7, 10-29, and 33-35 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 4), the parties jointly submitted that the appropriate penalty to be imposed in this matter would be that the Committee:
- direct the Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Registrar”) to immediately revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member, which Certificate the Member is to immediately surrender to the Registrar.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty presented by the parties and makes an order in accordance with its terms, as set out above.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Committee recognizes that, once it ensures that it has jurisdiction to make the order requested, the law confines the Committee’s role to determining whether the proposed penalty is so unreasonable that accepting it would bring the administration of the discipline process into disrepute or be otherwise contrary to the public interest. The Committee finds that the penalty proposed in the Joint Submission on Penalty is proportionate to the misconduct committed by the Member and is reasonable given the circumstances of this case. The penalty proposed by the parties is also within a reasonable range, based on the following analogous cases presented by College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Beaulieu (24 August 2016) and Ontario College of Teachers v. Schalm, 2008 ONOCT 57.
The Committee was apprised of the fact that the Member pled guilty and was convicted on June 20, 2016 of one count of child luring to facilitate invitation to sexual touching with a person he believed to be 14 years old. On December 10, 2015, the Member began to converse through Facebook and KIK with a person that he believed to be a 14-year-old girl, who was in fact an undercover police officer. The conversations continued until January 6, 2016, and included 1793 messages, of which 991 were from the Member. In these conversations, the Member identified himself as a male who was “older”, and asked whether she was “okay” with that fact. He also sent 17 photographs of himself, three in which he was shirtless, and one which was taken in a classroom. The conversations included requests to “cuddle” with the young girl to establish “an emotional connection”, and he asked her for “pretty” or “sexy” pictures. The Member also initiated discussion about sexual encounters such as masturbation, sexual intercourse, and “meeting up”. Following a final conversation in which the Member attempted to plan an encounter, the Member was arrested and charged.
The Committee finds that this type of misconduct is very serious. It is particularly disgraceful that the Member would engage in such egregious behaviour when he is a teacher who is entrusted with the protection of children. The Member’s conduct was very disturbing and was intended to take advantage of a vulnerable child. Children must be protected against predators who use the Internet as a tool to lure them into situations in which they can be sexually exploited and abused.
Given the serious nature of the Member’s actions and his criminal conviction, the Committee finds that, in order to protect the public, and children in particular, as well as to maintain the integrity of the profession, the Member’s certificate must be revoked. This sanction serves as both a specific and general deterrent, demonstrating to the profession that such behaviour will not be tolerated.
Publication of this decision with the Member’s name is now mandatory in accordance with subsection 45.1 of the Act. Accordingly, the Committee’s decision and reasons will be published with the Member’s name on the College’s website and a summary will be published with the Member’s name in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
The Committee is satisfied that its findings and penalty protect the public interest and maintain the standards of the teaching profession.
Date: May 10, 2017
______________________________ Vicki Shannon, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
______________________________ Irene Dembek, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Marie-Thérèse Hokayem
Member, Discipline Panel