DATE: December 13, 2016
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. K.Y. (“the Student”)
Hearing Date(s): October 7, 2016
Panel Members:
Ms. Michelle S. Henry, Lawyer, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, Chair
Professor Louis Florence, Faculty Panel Member
Mr. Chad Jankowski, Student Panel Member
Appearances:
Mr. Victor Kim, Legal Case Worker for the Student, Downtown Legal Services
Ms. Tina Lie, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
In Attendance:
The Student
Ms. Andrea McGee, Registrar and Assistant Dean, Office of Student Services
Mr. John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design
Ms. Krista Osbourne, Administrative Assistant, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
Trial Division – s. B.i.1(a) of Code – forged documents – Verification of Student Illness or Injury form – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – Agreed Statement of Facts on Penalty – Joint Submission on Penalty – sentencing principles – Mr. C. factors to be considered in appropriate penalty – grade assignment of zero in the course; a suspension of three years and four months; a notation on the Student’s transcript until graduation; and a report to the Provost.
Student charged with two charges of forging a document under s. B.i.1(a) of the Code, or in the alternative, two charges of academic dishonesty under s.B.i.3(b) of the Code. The charges related to allegations that the Student submitted a forged Verification of Student Illness or Injury Form in support of a request for academic accommodation.
The matter proceeded by an Agreed Statement of Facts which set out that the Student first submitted a forged Verification of Student Illness Form to his professor via email after he had submitted an assignment after its due date. When the professor requested that the Student provide her with the original Verification of Student Illness Form, the Student gave her a document that he admitted was forged. The Student pled guilty to the forgery charges. Upon the Panel finding guilt on the forgery charges, the University withdrew the alternative charges of academic misconduct.
The parties made a Joint Submission on Penalty. The Panel heard submissions regarding the appropriateness of the penalty and how the Mr. C factors applied to this case. The Panel took into consideration the serious and deliberate nature of the offences; that the Student's conduct in forging medical notes implicated medical professionals, and undermined the integrity of those charged with providing those medical notes as well as the University's procedure for assessing and granting accommodations to its students; that this was also not the first offence for the Student; and that the Student had submitted two false forms. Mitigating factors included his early admission of guilt and full cooperation with the discipline process. The Panel accepted the parties’ Joint Submission on Penalty of a grade assignment of zero in the course; a suspension of three years and four months; a notation on the Student’s transcript until graduation; and a report to the Provost.