DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
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
Damir Ivan Bulic, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
DAMIR IVAN BULIC (REGISTRATION #444991)
PANEL: Stéphane Vallée, OCT, Chair Andrew Glenny Pauline Smart
HEARD: October 21, 2021
Yufei (Fiona) Wang, for the Ontario College of Teachers
No one appearing for Damir Ivan Bulic
Erica Richler, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsections 32.1(3) and 32.1(4) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing, or the person who was allegedly sexually abused or the subject of the sexual misconduct or a prohibited act involving child pornography.
By order of Justice R.D. Cornell of the Superior Court of Justice, there is also a publication ban on any information that could identify the victim or a witness in this matter, pursuant to subsection 486.4 of the Criminal Code.
1This proceeding was heard electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on October 21, 2021, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.
2Damir Ivan Bulic (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing and did not have legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.
A. PUBLICATION ban
3The Panel ordered a publication ban pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which makes such an order mandatory. Accordingly, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of, any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
4Additionally, a publication ban was ordered pursuant to subsection 32.1(4) of the Act at the request of College Counsel on behalf of the Student, who was allegedly sexually abused, or the subject of sexual misconduct or a prohibited act involving child pornography. Accordingly, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of the Student.
5The Panel also received a certified copy of the proceedings at trial (Reasons for Judgment) of the Member’s criminal proceeding before Justice R.D. Cornell dated July 15, 2018 (Exhibit 2 at Appendix C). In these proceedings before the Superior Court of Justice, an order restricting publication was made pursuant to section 486.4 of the Criminal Code of Canada. The Panel is required to uphold this publication ban. Accordingly, any information that could identify the victim or a witness involved in this matter shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way.
B. THE ALLEGATIONS
6The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated June 18, 2021 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Damir Ivan Bulic is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in 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, verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) he abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(d) 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 or students 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 has caused or may cause a student who is under the member’s professional supervision 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);
(i) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
C. STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS
7College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Damir Ivan Bulic is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
The Member obtained a Certificate of Qualification and Registration on May 31, 2001. Attached hereto and marked 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 by the Sudbury Catholic District School Board (the “Board”) as a teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in Sudbury, Ontario.
At all material times, the Member was the [XXX] teacher of a [XXX] year-old male student (the “Student”) at the School.
During the 2010-2011 academic year, the Member engaged in an inappropriate personal relationship with the Student. The Member:
(a) Hung out with the Student during and after school;
(b) Took the Student off the School premises for lunch approximately once a week;
(c) Permitted the Student to be absent from the School to travel with the Member to a [XXX];
(d) Bought the Student various gifts, including a [XXX];
(e) Took the Student on trips;
(f) Provided the Student with cigarettes and alcohol;
(g) Took the Student to an [XXX] and purchased a [XXX] for the Student; and
(h) Engaged the Student in a variety of sex talk on several occasions.
- In or about the summer of 2011, the Member engaged in indecent acts in the presence of the Student. The Member:
(a) told the Student pornographic stories and had sex with a watermelon in the presence of the Student;
(b) drove the Student to a park and asked the Student to videotape him while he masturbated;
(c) During an overnight trip to [XXX], consumed alcohol with the Student and had sex with a Styrofoam bucket that contained food items in the presence of the Student; and
(d) took the Student to a [XXX] on [XXX], smoked and drank alcohol with the Student, engaged the Student in a variety of sex talk, and masturbated in the presence of the Student.
- During the trip to the [XXX] on [XXX], the Member told the Student that the he could give the Student a blow job (i.e. fellatio). The Student declined this invitation.
Criminal Proceedings/Convictions
- On or about June 20, 2017, the Member was charged by the Greater Sudbury Police Service with:
(a) Between the 1st day of September, 2010 and the 30th day of September, 2011 at the Greater City of Sudbury in the said Region, willfully committed an indecent act to wit: expose his private part to the Student, a person under the age of sixteen years, contrary to Section 173(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada (exposure).
(b) Between the 1st day of September, 2010 and the 30th day of September, 2011 at the Greater City of Sudbury in the said Region, willfully committed an indecent act to wit: masturbate in presence of the Student, a person under the age of sixteen years, contrary to Section 173(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada (exposure).
(c) Between the 1st day of September, 2010 and the 30th day of September, 2011 at the City of Vaughan in the said Region, willfully committed an indecent act to wit: masturbate in presence of the Student, a person under the age of sixteen years, contrary to Section 173(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada (exposure).
(d) Between the 1st day of September, 2010 and the 30th day of September, 2011 at [XXX] in the said Region, willfully committed an indecent act to wit: masturbate in presence of the Student, a person under the age of sixteen years, contrary to Section 173(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada (exposure).
(e) Between the 1st day of September, 2010 and the 30th day of September, 2011 at [XXX] in the said Region, did for a sexual purpose invite the Student, a person under the age of sixteen years, to touch directly with a part of his body to wit: penis, the body of the Student, contrary to Section 152 of the Criminal Code of Canada (invitation to sexual touching).
The Member pleaded not guilty to the charges and the matter proceeded to trial.
On or about July 15, 2018, the Honourable Justice Cornell of the Superior Court of Justice found the Member guilty of all five offences above.
On May 15, 2019, the Member was sentenced to two years less a day in custody, followed by three years of probation. The Member was also made subject to a number of ancillary orders.
Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” are certified true copies of the Court Information, Probation Order and ancillary orders pertaining to these charges and convictions.
Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “C” is a certified copy of the proceedings at trial (Reasons for Judgment) before the Honourable Justice Cornell, dated July 15, 2018.
Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “D” is a certified copy of the proceedings (Reasons for Sentence) before the Honourable Justice Cornell, dated May 15, 2019.
The Member appealed his convictions and sentence to the Court of Appeal for Ontario and was released on a Recognizance of Bail with conditions.
On December 31, 2020, the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the Member’s appeal.
Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “E” is a copy of the Reasons for Decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, dated December 31, 2020.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member pleads no contest, for the purposes of this proceeding only, to the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1 to 17 above (the “Uncontested Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that paragraphs 5-14 of the Uncontested Facts constitute conduct that is professional misconduct and pleads no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct made against him in the Notice of Hearing, being more particularly that he engaged in sexual abuse of a student as defined in section 1 of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and breached Ontario Regulation 437/97 (Professional Misconduct) subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 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 Uncontested Facts (including the Appendices) being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading no contest to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to otherwise prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that the Discipline Committee can accept the Uncontested Facts as correct, and can accept that those facts constitute professional misconduct;
(e) 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;
(f) he understands that any agreement between him, or his legal counsel, and the College with respect to the penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and
(g) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this document voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel or the opportunity to have obtained legal advice.
The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and Fitness to Practise Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purposes of this proceeding under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.
In light of the Uncontested Facts and circumstances and the plea of no contest, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
D. DECISION
8Having considered the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and the submissions of College Counsel, the Panel rendered an oral decision on October 21, 2021, finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(7.3), 1(15), 1(16), 1(17), 1(18) and 1(19). The Member also engaged in sexual abuse of a student as defined in section 1 of the Act.
E. REASONS FOR DECISION
9The Member did not contest the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 17 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the Uncontested Facts at paragraphs 5 to 14 constitute professional misconduct under the headings of misconduct set out above. The Uncontested Facts demonstrate that the Member engaged in an inappropriate personal relationship with the Student, engaged in indecent acts in the presence of the Student and offered to give the Student a fellatio. The Member was found guilty of exposure and invitation to sexual touching with respect to the Student in his prior criminal proceedings.
10The Panel finds that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to subsection 1(5) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member’s conduct in this case clearly fell below the standards of the profession. The Member engaged in an inappropriate personal relationship with the Student and engaged in various indecent acts of a sexual nature in the presence of the student. Conduct of this nature, which amounts to sexual abuse of a student as defined in the Act, is so notorious that expert evidence is not required to prove the breach of professional standards.
11The Member abused a student verbally, contrary to subsection 1(7) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Uncontested Facts demonstrate that the Member engaged the Student in a variety of sex talk on several occasions, told the Student pornographic stories, asked the Student to videotape him while he masturbated and told the Student that he could give the Student fellatio (which the Student declined). The Panel finds that it is highly inappropriate and offensive for a teacher to engage in conversations of a sexual nature with a student, as the Member did in this case. Such conduct amounts to verbal abuse by the Member.
12The Member abused a student psychologically or emotionally, contrary to subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Panel notes that the Student was [XXX]years old at the time of the events. As such, he was vulnerable by virtue of his age. The Panel received evidence from the Member’s criminal proceedings that the Member’s actions had caused significant emotional harm to the Student. At the time of the criminal proceedings, the Student was [XXX] as a result of the Member’s actions. Moreover, the Student’s mother filed a victim impact statement in which she described how the Student engaged in [XXX] following the events at issue. She described that the Student [XXX]. He became sad, angry, [XXX]and pushed everyone away. He was [XXX]. Given the grave impact that the Member’s conduct had on the Student, the Panel finds that the Member psychologically or emotionally abused the Student.
13The Member’s conduct constitutes sexual abuse of a student contrary to subsection 1(7.3) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 and as defined in section 1 of the Act. The definition of sexual abuse at section 1 of the Act includes behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by a member towards a student. The Member made a number of sexual comments to the Student and engaged in sexual behaviours in the Student’s presence, which included: telling the Student pornographic stories and having sex with a watermelon; engaging in a variety of sex talk; asking the Student to videotape him while he masturbated; masturbating in front of the Student; having sex with a Styrofoam bucket in the presence of the Student; and offering to give the Student fellatio, which the Student declined. This conduct meets the definition of sexual abuse at section 1 of the Act. This finding is further supported by the fact that the Member was found guilty of exposure and invitation to sexual touching of the Student in his prior criminal proceedings.
14The Member contravened subsection 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 by failing to comply with section 264(1) of the Education Act, which sets out the duties of a teacher. Section 264(1)(c) provides that it is the duty of a teacher to “inculcate by precept and example […] the highest regard for truth, justice, loyalty, love of country, humanity, benevolence, sobriety, industry, frugality, purity, temperance and all other virtues.” Simply put, teachers must behave with integrity and serve as positive role models. The Member’s conduct was antithetical to these principles. He abused his trusted and privileged position as a teacher in the most egregious manner. In addition to his sexually abusive conduct towards the Student, the Member also provided alcohol and cigarettes to the Student, consumed alcohol with the Student, took the Student to an [XXX] and purchased a [XXX] for the Student. He blatantly ignored the emotional harm that would be caused to the Student. By engaging in such immoral and abusive conduct with his student, the Member failed to fulfil the fundamental duties of a teacher.
15The Panel finds that the Member’s criminal findings of guilt for having breached sections 173(2) and 152 of the Criminal Code demonstrate that he contravened a law relevant to his suitability to hold a Certificate of Qualification and Registration and which has caused a student to be put at risk, contrary to subsections 1(16) and 1(17) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. Members of the profession must be trusted to work closely with students and ensure their safety and well-being. By engaging in the sexual offences described above, the Member put the Student’s safety at risk and demonstrated that he is no longer suitable to hold a teaching certificate.
16The Member committed acts that would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. It is completely unacceptable for teachers, who are expected to be upstanding members of the community and to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with students, to engage in sexual activities in the presence of students and to invite students to engage in sexual acts with them. The Member showed a complete lack of professional judgment by fostering an inappropriate personal relationship with the Student, by providing him with cigarettes and alcohol, and by exposing the student to various sexual acts. The Member’s conduct can therefore be characterized as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.
17Finally, the Member’s conduct, as described above, is unbecoming a member, contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. When parents send their children to school, they expect that they will be safe and that their teachers will not exploit their position of trust and authority to sexually abuse them. The Member’s egregious conduct has undermined the reputation of the teaching profession and violated the trust that parents, students, and the public place in teachers. It reflects poorly on the profession as a whole when members engage in sexually abusive behaviour with students.
F. PENALTY Decision
18The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on October 21, 2021, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
The Member is directed to receive a reprimand, in writing, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers; and
The Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers is directed to immediately revoke the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member.
G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
19The Member’s professional misconduct consisted of or included the sexual abuse of a student, as described in subsection 30.2(2) of the Act. Given this finding, section 30.2(1) of the Act provides that the Panel must make an order: (1) requiring that the Member be reprimanded by the Panel; and (2) directing the Registrar to revoke the Member’s certificate of qualification and registration. The Panel makes both of these orders and notes that it has no discretion in this regard. In relation to the form of the reprimand, the Panel finds that a written reprimand is appropriate in the circumstances and given the parties’ agreement. The Panel recognizes that it may also order costs or a fine in accordance with subsection 30(5) of the Act but finds it reasonable not to make these additional orders in light of the Member’s plea of no contest and joint submission on penalty.
20The Panel denounces the Member’s misconduct in the strongest terms.
Date: October 25, 2021
Stéphane Vallée, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Andrew Glenny Member, Discipline Panel
Pauline Smart Member, Discipline Panel