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
William John Kemp, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Robert Gagné, Chair
Tom Potter
Vicki Shannon, OCT
BETWEEN: )
) Jean-François Schaan, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Yufei (Fiona) Wang,
) Student-at-Law
– and – )
WILLIAM JOHN KEMP ) William John Kemp,
(CERTIFICATE #617393) ) Self-represented
) Renée Kopp,
) Jones Litigation Counsel LLP,
) Independent Legal Counsel
) ) Heard: October 2, 2017
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on October 2, 2017 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated June 6, 2017 (Exhibit 1) was served on William John Kemp (the “Member”), requesting his presence on July 12, 2017 to set a date for hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for October 2, 2017.
The Member was not in attendance for the hearing and did not have legal representation.
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 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 psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(c) he abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3) and/or section 1 of the Act;
(d) 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);
(e) 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
(f) 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:
William John Kemp was at all material times a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. In August 2011, the Member obtained a Certificate of Qualification and Registration. Attached as Appendix “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 as a secondary school teacher by the Halton District School Board (the “Board”) with various schools.
At all material times, Student 1 was a [XXX]-year-old female student at [XXX]School located in Burlington, Ontario.
At all material times, Student 2 was a [XXX]-year-old female student at [XXX]School located in Burlington, Ontario.
Student 1 and Student 2 were friends with one another.
During the 2013-2014 school year, Student 3 was a grade [XXX] female student at [XXX]School located in Oakville, Ontario.
In June 2016, Student 3 was a grade [XXX] student at [XXX]School.
Student 1
Student 1 was a [XXX]student at [XXX] School in the 2015-2016 school year. In January 2016, Student 1 was a student in the Member’s [XXX]class.
The Member would eat lunch in his classroom. During lunch, he opened the class to students who wanted extra help in[XXX]. Student 1 obtained extra help from the Member during the lunch periods and after school. Student 1 would spend every lunch hour in the Member’s classroom. Student 1 would spend time in the Member’s classroom after school on a daily basis and would often be alone with the Member during that time.
Inappropriate Personal Relationship with Student 1
During the course of providing extra assistance to Student 1, the Member and Student 1 began to speak of personal matters. On one occasion, Student 1 came to the Member after school for extra help, the Member told Student 1 that he was very upset. Student 1 offered to listen to the Member vent. The Member complained that: he got three hours of sleep the night before; his daughter was not sleeping, and his wife was upset and “grumpy” when his daughter was not sleeping.
In or about April 2016, the Member told Student 1 that he was upset and gave Student 1 his personal cell phone number in order to exchange messages with Student 1.
In or about April 2016, the Member asked Student 1 to put his name in her cell phone contact list. The Member asked Student 1 to list his contact name as “smartass.”
On another occasion, the Member took Student 1’s cell phone, went into her contact list and placed hearts around his name in the contact list.
Between April 2016 and July 2016, the Member would send text messages to Student 1 on a daily basis. The Member would text Student 1 early in the morning (e.g., 6:45 a.m.) to say good morning to her. Student 1 would not respond. The latest text message that the Member sent to Student 1 was at 1:00 a.m.
The Member sent Student 1 text messages in which he said his life was “messed up” and that Student 1 was the only “good thing” in his life.
The Member sent Student 1 text messages in which he discussed his wife and daughter.
The Member sent Student 1 photographs of what he was doing when his wife was away.
The Member sent photographs of him and his daughter to Student 1. The Member sent photographs of him [XXX] with the school [XXX] group. The Member sent an audio file of him playing the guitar to Student 1.
The Member also showed Student 1 photographs on his Facebook page. Student 1 and her friend, Student 2, added the Member to their respective Facebook pages. The Member then told Student 1 that he would have access to her photographs. As a result, Student 1 blocked the Member on Facebook.
After the Member had seen Student 1’s Facebook photographs, he asked her on several occasion if she would send him a particular photograph of Student 1 that he liked. Student 1 finally sent the Member the photograph. The Member used the photograph as her picture in his cell phone. On more than one occasion, the Member complimented Student 1 on the photograph. The Member told Student 1 that he would get into trouble for saying these complimentary remarks.
The Member would often tell Student 1 that she was “amazing” and that he was “happy” with her.
The Member gave Student 1 his debit card to use at Tim Hortons and McDonald’s. The Member also went to Starbucks for Student 1 and purchased coffee for her.
The Member also followed Student 1 on Instagram.
Between May 11 and May 20, 2016, the Member and Student 1 exchanged numerous email messages. The email exchanges included discussions about, among other things, favourite movies, favourite foods, favourite seasons, favourite clothing and what the Member was watching on television/Netflix. Attached as Appendix “B” is a copy of the email communications between the Member and Student 1.
Excerpts of Emails Exchanged Between the Member and Student 1
On May 11, 2016 at 4:32 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Home alone tonight what should I do [sic]?”
On May 14, 2016 at 12:05 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “I could only imagine what being trapped in a confined space would be like. You know with your bitchy tone [smirking emoji].”
On May 17, 2016 at 5:06 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Sorry if I was a downer today. Just sort of came out I didn’t even know how we got there. Although you listened really well thanks. Have I told you that I think that your [sic] an amazing person [smiley face].”
On May 17, 2016 at 7:04 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Well if we are going mythical than [sic] definitely a dragon. I’d be like boom how’s the heat!!! I’m a m*&ther F:@$ing dragon.”
On May 17, 2016 at 9:50 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Ok amazing but Vanilla Coke is fucking fantastic!!!!”
On May 18, 2016 at 3:11 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “What did you end up doing without me? Wonder [sic] aimlessly, pout, cry?”
On May 18, 2016 at 5:22 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “So how do we make the next 26 days awesome [sic]. I don’t want to just leave and that’s it. Your [sic] to [sic] important to me to do that [smiley emoji]. So we need a plan. 26 awesome days they [sic] we’ll never forget. What do you think?”
On May 18, 2016 at 10:14 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Totally using your bitch tone when I read that one. Lol.”
On May 19, 2016 at 4:27 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “I believe life is an adventure and the people we meet are important and special. Especially when you make an unexpected connection (you). I think their [sic] are certain personalities and people that are meant to cross paths, the unexpected part of that is exciting. I wouldn’t want to know who I meet and when or how long I get to spend with those people. I want to believe that’s [sic] one connections are short lived [sic] and some last forever.”
On May 20, 2016 at 6:56 a.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “Lonely is a choice. You could have whatever you [sic] and whoever you want. And your [sic] never going to be lonely if I have anything to say. I’ve told you this a hundred times your [sic] important to me and I hope our story does not end in 20 days but the next chapter begins.”
On May 20, 2016 at 8:23 a.m., the Member and Student 1 had the following email exchange:
(a) The Member: “But I think I heard Mrs. [XXX] is away again today. If you decide to skip maybe we can do something 4th [period].”
(b) Student 1: “I kind of decide then and there if I’m skipping or not, because it really depends on the supply. Sometimes they are scary and I would rather not push their buttons. Would we just do [XXX]help?”
(c) The Member: “No way. I give enough [XXX]help. We could call it skip day theme. To outside or McDonald’s day I’m just thinking out loud. I probably should just do work. And you can got [sic] to your favourite class foods [smiley emoji].”
(d) Student 1: “That would be awesome, oh god. Like I said, I see if the teacher is nice or not [smiley emoji].”
Student 1 did not skip her class.
On May 20, 2016 at 9:41 p.m., the Member sent the following email to Student 1: “I shouldn’t be but I’m really sad. I need to chat with you I can try to express in email or text me if your [sic] not busy right now.”
The Member told Student 1 in person and via text message that Student 1 should not divulge to anyone that the Member and Student 1 were communicating via email and text message.
In June 2016, the Member left the following handwritten note for Student 1 in one of her school books: “June 2016 Not sure when you will see this maybe this year maybe next maybe never…Simply I [heart] U [.] You rock!!” Attached as Appendix “C” is a copy of the Member’s June 2016 note to Student 1.
In or about June 2016, the Member left the following handwritten note for Student 1 in one of her school books:
“I can’t really put everything down here but…I will sum up like this. I will miss you our hangouts our conversations. All those moments where I realized we were so alike. I hate letting go but there is no other option.
Have a great Life
Dream Big
Work Hard
Never Give Up
Make Each Day Count
Be Positive”
Attached as Appendix “D” is a copy of the Member’s June 2016 note to Student 1.
As time passed, Student 1 felt increasingly uncomfortable with the Member’s behaviour.
Physical Contact and Sexual Conduct with Student 1
In or about the middle of May 2016, the Member began to physically touch Student 1. The Member would rub Student 1’s back. The Member would also stroke Student 1’s head. The Member made this physical contact on approximately eight occasions.
On or about June 15, 2016, Student 1 was alone with the Member in his classroom after school hours. Student 1 was upset about a project in [XXX] class. Student 1 was sitting on a desk.
The Member approached Student 1 and hugged her. The Member and Student 1’s chests were touching and the Member put his head on Student 1’s shoulder. The Member then began to rub Student 1’s back.
After approximately eight to ten seconds had passed, the Member then pressed his forehead to Student 1’s forehead and asked, “Why are you not looking at me?” Student 1 did not respond. After approximately 20 seconds, Student 1 pulled her head back from the Member. After this, the Member leaned back from Student 1 and let go, but then immediately hugged Student 1 again.
Student 1 was not expecting the Member to hug her and she was “surprised.” During the hugs, Student 1 felt “very uncomfortable.” Student 1 found the Member’s behaviour “really weird” and she “did not like it.”
On or about June 20-21, 2016, the Member hugged Student 1 in front of Student 2. Student 1 felt awkward.
On or about June 26, 2016, which was the last day of school, Student 1 was alone with the Member in his classroom. The Member hugged Student 1 and placed his head on her shoulder.
During the course of the 2015-2016 school year’s winter term, the Member asked Student 1 to leave the school property on several occasions. Student 1 declined to go with the Member.
In or about May/June 2016, the Member told Student 1 that he would be teaching summer school at [XXX] School in Burlington, Ontario and he said that he and Student 1 could meet at Starbucks. Student 1 made excuses not to meet the Member.
On one occasion after school, the Member attempted to have a “casual sex” talk with Student 1. Student 1 felt that the Member had crossed a line and that he liked her “more than a student.” Student 1’s friends remarked that the Member had a crush on Student 1.
Student 2
Student 2 was close friends with Student 1. Student 2 was in the same [XXX]class, taught by the Member, as Student 1 during the winter semester of the 2015-2016 school year.
Student 2 also obtained extra assistance in [XXX] from the Member at lunch and after school.
The Member gave Student 2 his debit card so that she could buy coffee.
The Member also bought pizza for Student 1 and Student 2.
The Member followed Student 2 on Instagram.
On the last day of school in the 2015-2016 school year, the Member hugged Student 2.
Student 3
During the 2013-2014 school year, the Member taught Student 3 grade [XXX] [XXX]at [XXX]School located in Oakville, Ontario.
Once during class, Student 3 misplaced her cell phone. Student 3 used another cell phone that she saw was unlocked to text her cell phone in an attempt to locate her cell phone. After she used the other cell phone, Student 3 realized it was the Member’s cell phone.
Following that incident, the Member began to send texts to Student 3. Student 3 found the Member texting her to be “weird” since he was an adult. After the end of the 2013-2014 school year, Student 3 did not hear from the Member.
In or about June 2016, the Member began to text Student 3 again. The Member told Student 3 that his wife and child were on vacation. Student 3 found that “odd.” Student 3 attempted to make excuses so she would not have to communicate with the Member.
Student 3 noted that the Member seemed upset that they had not communicated in over two years. The Member sent Student 3 a long text apologizing for not having kept in contact. The Member asked Student 3 not to hate him.
The Member wanted to meet Student 3 for a coffee. Student 3 made up excuses so she would not have to meet the Member.
On one occasion, the Member asked Student 3 to go on a day trip with him. Student 3 thought that the Member was “crossing the line.”
On June 28, 2016, the Member sent his last text to Student 3.
The Member followed Student 3 on Twitter and Instagram until July 2016.
Halton Regional Police Services and Halton Children’s Aid Society Involvement
On or about July 6, 2016, Student 1’s mother found the communications between Student 1 and the Member on Student 1’s iPad. Student 1’s mother contacted the Halton Regional Police Services (the “H.R.P.S.”).
On or about July 7, 2016, [XXX] School administration contacted the Halton Children’s Aid Society (the “C.A.S.”) regarding the Member.
The C.A.S. opened a joint investigation with the H.R.P.S. Child Abuse and Sexual Assault Unit into the Member’s conduct.
During the course of the investigation, Student 1 advised the H.R.P.S. that she wanted no further contact with the Member.
On or about July 7, 2016, the Board advised the Member that he was assigned home with pay pending the completion of the joint H.R.P.S. and C.A.S. investigation. Attached as Appendix “E” is a copy of the Board’s letter to the Member.
On or about August 31, 2016, the H.R.P.S. cautioned the Member with respect to sexual assault (s. 271 of the Criminal Code (Canada)) and sexual exploitation (s. 153 of the Criminal Code (Canada)).
On or about September 2, 2016, the C.A.S. advised the Board that it had completed its investigation. The C.A.S. advised “…risk that [Student 1] is likely to be sexually harmed/questionable sexual activity has been verified.” Attached and marked as Appendix “F” is a copy of the C.A.S.’s September 2, 2016 letter to the Board.
The Member’s Current Status
On September 20, 2016, the Member resigned from the Board. Attached as Appendix “G” is a copy of the Member’s letter of resignation.
On April 19, 2017, the Member was administratively suspended by the College for failure to pay his annual fees.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and Appendices referred to in paragraphs 1-76 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 (the “Act”) 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 abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(c) he abused a student or students 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;
(d) 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);
(e) 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
(f) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
- By this document1 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 Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and without the advice of legal counsel.
- In light of the Admitted Facts and circumstances and the plea of guilt, the College 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(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19). The Member also engaged in sexual abuse of a student of a nature defined in section 1 of the Act.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 76 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(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19), and that he engaged in sexual abuse of a student of a nature defined in section 1 of the Act.
Paragraphs 10-35, 37-43, 45-52, 55-58 and 61-74 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 42, 46-52, 61-65, 71 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2).
Paragraphs 43-49, 52, 58, 73 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3) and/or section 1 of the Act.
Paragraphs 10-35, 37-43, 45-52, 55-58 and 61-74 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 10-35, 37-43, 45-52, 55-58 and 61-74 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 10-35, 37-43, 45-52, 55-58 and 61-74 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 3), 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. Renn, 2017 ONOCT 9, Ontario College of Teachers v. Kernohan, 2014 ONOCT 53 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Rouhani, 2015 ONOCT 69.
The Committee accepts that the revocation of the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, as requested in the Joint Submission on Penalty, is reasonable given the circumstances of this case. The Member repeatedly failed to maintain appropriate boundaries with several students over an extended period of time. His actions amounted to sexual misconduct, which made several students feel very uncomfortable. He invited students to meet him off school property. He engaged in inappropriate personal communications with students via email and text message, including late at night and early in the morning. The Member’s conduct was completely inappropriate and represents a reprehensible pattern of grooming behaviour. The Member flagrantly abused his position of trust and authority, he failed to provide students with a physically and emotionally safe learning environment, and he jeopardized the public’s confidence in the teaching profession. The Member’s behaviour demonstrates disregard for the trust that parents and the public place in teachers. Accordingly, the Member has forfeited the privilege of holding a teaching certificate and being a member of the teaching profession in Ontario.
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 the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: October 2, 2017
Robert Gagné
Chair, Discipline Panel
______________________________ Tom Potter
Member, Discipline Panel
Vicki Shannon, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel