Case #577

DATE: February 17, 2011
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. Y.M.


Hearing Date(s): December 20, 2010

Panel Members:
Lisa Brownstone, Chair
Professor Graeme Hirst, Faculty Member
Albert So, Student Member

Appearances:
Robert Centa, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University
Maurice Vaturi, Counsel for the Student

In Attendance:
Jane Alderice, Quality Assessment and Governance, School o f Graduate Studies
Y.M., the Student

Trial Division – s. B.I.1(b); s. B.I.3(b); s. B.II.1(a)(ii) of Code – unauthorized assistance with a final examination – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – guilty plea accepted – Joint Submission on Penalty – first academic offense – not motivated by personal academic gain – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted - five-year suspension; five-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Student charged under s. B.I.1(b), s. B.I.3(b), and s. B.II.1(a)(ii) of the Code. The charges related to the allegations that the Student used a digital camera to take photographs of an examination and sent the digital photographs to another student in an attempt to provide them with unauthorized assistance in connection with said examination. The Student was hired to act as an invigilator for another student who was registered with the AccessAbility Resource Centre to write the examination at an earlier time and, as such, had access to the examination. The matter proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts. The Student plead guilty to the charge under s. B.I.1(b). The remaining charges were withdrawn by the University. The matter then proceeded on a Joint Submission on Penalty. The Student made a statement advising he was ashamed of his actions and had no valid excuse for them, that he was not motivated by greed or gain, had had no previous charges, and was a hard working student. The Student further advised the act was not premeditated and that he wished for the chance to rehabilitate himself. Discipline Counsel reminded the Panel that there is a high threshold for refusing to accept a Joint Submission on Penalty. The Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and held that it fell within the appropriate range of sanctions. The Panel imposed a five-year suspension, a five-year notation on the Student’s academic record, and that a report to the Provost be issued.