Hearings

Three-member panels of the Discipline Committee conduct public hearings into cases of alleged incompetence or professional misconduct. The panels are a mix of elected and appointed Council members.

If found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence, a member's certificate may be revoked, suspended or limited. In cases of professional misconduct only, the committee may also reprimand, admonish or counsel the member, impose a fine, publish its order in Professionally Speaking, or order the member to pay costs.

Panels of the Discipline Committee have ordered summaries of these recent disciplinary cases to be published in Professionally Speaking.


Member: Mark Edward De Sousa
Registration number: 186661
Decision: Revocation

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on April 3, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Mark Edward De Sousa for conducting inappropriate and unprofessional relationships with four female students.

De Sousa, who received his teaching certificate in June 1993 and taught music for the Near North DSB, did not attend the hearing but was represented by legal counsel.

The panel heard evidence that De Sousa drove the girls home unaccompanied on several occasions. He gave one student handwritten notes, cards, books and other gifts and made inappropriate physical contact with her, including placing his hand on her shoulder. Orally and in writing, De Sousa expressed his “love” several times to a student. He also professed his love for a student in several phone calls. De Sousa “persistently and intrusively” questioned a student about personal and family issues, including her relationship with her father. As well, he offered the student money, the use of a cell phone and invited her to gatherings with his family.

Despite warnings from the board and a suspension with pay, De Sousa continued to contact a student by phone and express endearments. He also interfered with a board investigation by contacting two students and asking one to tape an interview surreptitiously. Subsequently, the board fired him.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found De Sousa guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration.

“These boundary violations … constitute disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional conduct unbecoming a member,” the panel wrote in its decision. “He physically, emotionally and psychologically abused students and failed to maintain the standards of the profession.”

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Jeffrey Robert Orman
Registration number: 262794
Decision: Reprimand and suspension

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on April 3, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Jeffrey Robert Orman for using school computers to access and download pornography.

A high school science teacher for the Avon Maitland DSB, Orman, who was certified to teach in June 1993, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that Orman used school computers to access pornographic images and movies portraying teenage girls, some presenting themselves as under 18.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded Orman for professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to suspend his Certificates of Qualification and Registration for six months.

“The member’s actions of accessing and downloading a variety of pornographic materials on school computers constitute disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional conduct and conduct unbecoming a member,” the panel wrote in its decision.

The panel said Orman’s conduct warranted the suspension and that the reprimand provides a specific deterrent to the member himself. Publication of his name serves as a general deterrent to College members and lets the public know the College denounces and will not tolerate this type of conduct, the panel said.

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on April 6, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for grabbing and pinching students’ arms and expressing his anger verbally in class.

The member, who was certified to teach in October 1995 and taught at the Intermediate level with the Toronto DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that the member used inappropriate language and epithets with reference to students, including references to their race, and grabbed and pinched students’ arms and shoulders.

Following initial complaints, the member was warned by his principal and suspended for two days without pay. He was then placed in an interim teaching position for the balance of the school year and transferred to another school the next academic year. The board also told the member to complete equity and anger management courses, which he did. However, in the new school, the member also grabbed and pinched a student’s arm and frequently demonstrated anger in class through verbal comments. Subsequently, the board suspended the member for seven more days for inappropriate physical contact with students.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct.

Further, the panel directed the member to complete, at his own expense, a course on boundary and violation issues within three months from the date of the order.

The panel considered the reprimand a personal deterrent that “serves to reinforce the necessity to maintain appropriate professional boundaries.” The panel said that the boundaries course will help the member understand the acceptable limits of student-teacher interaction and, further, lets the public know that the College does not take this type of misconduct lightly.

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on April 6, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for using inappropriate discipline and testing methods with students.

The member, who was certified to teach in August 2003 and taught Grade 8 in the Toronto DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that the member shut a female student in a storage cupboard at the back of his classroom to discipline her. School administrators investigated further and learned that the member had used the cupboard as a disciplinary strategy on two previous occasions. As a result, the board sent the member a letter of discipline and instructed him to attend a course on classroom management strategies.

As well, the member gave his Grade 8 math students a homework assignment entitled City of Los Angeles High School Math Proficiency Exam. The mock test’s questions referred to criminal activities such as drive-by shootings, drug trafficking, prostitution, theft and murder. For example, one question asked, “If the average spray paint can covers 22 square feet and the average letter is 3 square feet, how many letters can a tagger spray with 3 cans of paint?” The test also used offensive, sexually based words such as “pimping,” “tricks” and “knocked up.” In response, the board suspended the member for 20 days without pay and instructed him to take equity training. Subsequently, the member completed a two-day professional boundaries course.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct.

Further, the panel directed the member to complete, at his own expense, a course on professional ethics within 60 days from the date of the order.

In its written decision, the panel said it “found the member’s inappropriate discipline methods and extremely poor judgment in his choice of testing material was unprofessional and unbecoming a member of the profession.”

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Andrew Stephen Corbett
Registration number: 442800
Decision: Revocation

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on May 20, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Andrew Stephen Corbett for sexually abusing students.

Corbett, who received his teaching certificate in May 2001 and worked as an occasional teacher for the Peel DSB, did not attend the hearing and was not represented by legal counsel.

The panel heard evidence that Corbett engaged in inappropriate and or sexual touching of young males in elementary and intermediate schools, including rubbing their backs and hugging and rubbing the thighs of one or more students. In all cases the boys were between nine and 13 years of age.

In one instance Corbett sexually assaulted a 10-year-old by rubbing his foot into the boy’s groin in a darkened classroom with other students present while a film played.

In February 2006 the board removed Corbett from its occasional teachers list. In November 2008 Corbett pled guilty in criminal court to sexual assault, was given a suspended sentence of 15 months and was placed on probation. He was ordered to provide a DNA sample and to comply with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act.

Further, Corbett was ordered not to communicate or associate directly or indirectly with any of the students involved and to stay away from children under 14 (except family members) unless in the presence of an adult.

Having considered the evidence and the submissions of College counsel, the panel found Corbett guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke his Certificates of Qualification and Registration.

“The member’s actions were brazen and aggressive, being conducted in an open classroom with other students present,” the panel wrote in its decision. “Sexually assaultive conduct towards children by a person in a position of trust is especially repugnant to our moral values and in turn amounts to seriously blameworthy conduct and a crime of deserved gravity.”

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: David Bryan Anderson
Registration number: 157319
Decision: Suspension and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on May 6, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against David Bryan Anderson for physically and verbally abusing students and for accosting a student teacher sexually.

Anderson, who was certified to teach in June 1979 and taught at the Elementary level for the York Region DSB, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that, on several occasions over two years, Anderson poked and prodded students to get their attention or made disparaging remarks about them regarding their inattention or misbehaviour. He also approached a student teacher from behind, pressed himself against her buttocks, grabbed her by the waist and spoke to her in a manner that she perceived as sexual and that was unwelcome.

Anderson resigned from the board in October 2006.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel directed the Registrar to suspend Anderson’s Certificates of Qualification and Registration for one year.

Further, the panel ordered Anderson to complete a course on appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues, at his own expense, within six months.

“The member engaged in repeated verbal and physical abuse of students in a classroom setting. This behaviour will not be tolerated,” the panel wrote in its decision. “Further, the member pressed himself up against a student teacher and spoke to her in a manner she deemed sexual. Interaction with colleagues must be respectful and beyond reproach.”

Despite arguments from his lawyer, the panel ordered publication of the finding with Anderson’s name.

“The behaviour of the member occurred over a period of two school years and displayed a pattern,” the panel said. “This shameful misconduct warrants the severe penalty of suspension and publication of his name.”

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on June 11, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for twice making inappropriate and unprofessional comments in the presence of a female student teacher.

The member, who was certified to teach in October 2000 and taught high school for the Peel DSB until resigning in August 2008, attended the hearing via teleconference and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that the member uttered inappropriate comments within earshot of a female student teacher following his use of a washroom. Further, he whispered comments about one of his female students who was applying lipstick at the end of a class that caused discomfort for the student teacher.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct.

The panel directed the member to provide the Registrar with written notice at least seven days before resuming teaching, including the name of the employer, the nature of the job, its start date and proof that he has completed, at his own expense, a course on boundary and violation issues.

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on June 16, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for inappropriate remarks to her principal and unprofessional communication toward her colleagues.

The member, who was certified to teach in June 1991 and taught Junior-level classes at an elementary school for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that the member, reacting to what she deemed as special treatment of elite student athletes, told the principal that “figuratively speaking, you have raped me” and that “you make me sick working with you as leader of the school.”

On a separate occasion, the member called a fellow female teacher a “rapist,” believing that the teacher had violated her trust.

During the 2004–05 school year, the member singled out a male teacher for attention by telling other colleagues that she had his picture under her pillow, and by leaving a candy in his mailbox with a handwritten note stating, “I was thinking of you. Does there need to be a reason?”

The member apologized to her colleagues for each event. A subsequent psychiatric assessment at the board’s request determined that that member did not have any psychiatric diagnosis or illness that would prevent her from teaching. However, the psychiatrist noted that the member suffered from a troubled past, including depression, and was sensitive to notions of fairness.

The board suspended the member, and then transferred her to another school.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct.

The panel also directed the member to complete, at her own expense, a course on communication skills and professional boundaries within 90 days of the order.

In its written decision, the panel called the statements about the principal “unprofessional, inappropriate and disrespectful.

“The member engaged in further inappropriate communication with colleagues, including calling a fellow female teacher a ‘rapist’ and engaged in a course of conduct with a male colleague, which he perceived to be harassing,” the panel wrote.

Her interaction with students was not an issue, the panel added.

The full decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Leslie Merlino
Registration number: 444045
Decision: Revocation

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on June 16, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against Leslie Merlino for sexually abusing a student, which resulted in a criminal conviction for assault.

Merlino, who received her teaching certificate in May 2001 and taught high school for the Peel DSB, was represented by counsel. She did not attend the hearing.

The panel heard evidence that Merlino, while acting as a chaperone on a student trip to Spain and France in March 2006, initiated a personal relationship with a student that progressed to summer walks, meetings at coffee shops, sexually explicit electronic conversations online and touching the student without her consent. Consequently, Merlino was charged with assault and found guilty in criminal court.

The court gave Merlino a suspended sentence, placed her on probation for 18 months and ordered her to perform 40 hours of community service. She was told not to communicate directly or indirectly with the student during the period of probation and was ordered to provide a DNA sample.

Having considered the evidence and based on a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Merlino guilty of professional misconduct and directed the Registrar to revoke her Certificates of Qualification and Registration.

Merlino “engaged in conduct that would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful and dishonorable,” the panel wrote in its decision.

The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.


Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions

A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on June 17, 2009 into allegations of professional misconduct against a member for speaking aggressively and making inappropriate physical contact with students.

The member, who was certified to teach in June 1980 and taught at the elementary level for the Hastings and Prince Edward DSB, attended the hearing and was represented by counsel.

The panel heard evidence that the member brushed his foot against the buttocks of a female student during a basketball practice, for which he received a disciplinary letter from the board. Later in the 2007 school year, the member put his hand on the shoulder of another female student while talking about a detention. He also touched the back of another girl during a dance practice to place her on her mark. Based on those events, the board suspended the member for two days without pay.

In 2009, at another school, the member aggressively spoke to and tousled the hair of a young boy during an exhibition baseball game. Consequently, the board suspended the member without pay for five days.

Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel reprimanded the member for professional misconduct.

The panel also directed the member to complete, at his own expense, a course on appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues within 90 days of the order.

The panel upheld defence counsel’s request to publish the decision without the name of the member, arguing that the misconduct was not serious, there were no safety concerns identified and there was no evidence of any prior or subsequent misconduct.

The panel’s full decision appears on the College’s public register.

Top of Page