DATE:
January 25, 2024
PARTIES:
University of Toronto v. H.S. ("the Student")
HEARING DATE:
November 27, 2023, via Zoom
PANEL MEMBERS:
Alexandra Clark, Chair
Dr. Emily Nacol, Faculty Panel Member
Ryan Cortez, Student Panel Member
APPEARANCES:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Lily Chen, Representative for the Student, Downtown Legal Services
IN ATTENDANCE:
The Student
HEARING SECRETARY:
Carmelle Salomon-Labbe, Associate Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
The Student was charged with two counts under section B.i.1(a) of the Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters, 2019 (the “Code”) for knowingly altering or falsifying a document or evidence required by the University or making use of the falsified document, specifically a death certificate and a document containing an invitation to celebration of life in support of the Student’s petition for academic accommodation or relief in a course (the “Course”). In the alternative, the Student was charged with one count for knowingly engaging in a form of cheating, academic dishonesty or misconduct, fraud, or misrepresentation to obtain academic credit contrary to section B.i.3(b) of the Code.
The Student attended the hearing, and was represented by legal counsel. The Panel reviewed an Agreed Statement of Facts (“ASF”) submitted jointly by the Student and the University. As part of the Course, the Student was required to submit a paper (the “Paper”), worth 30% of the Course mark. The Student failed to submit the paper, and received a failing grade in the Course which consequently prevented the Student from graduating in June 2023 as planned. In May 2023, the Student filed a petition in which they requested an extension to file her petition and to submit the Paper late, due to the passing of a family member. In support of the petition, the Student provided several pieces of documentation, including an invitation to a celebration of life for the deceased family member and, when prompted for further documentation, a death certificate (collectively, the “Petition Documents”). The Student subsequently admitted to falsifying the Petition Documents and apologized for their conduct in a meeting with the Assistant Registrar and in a separate correspondence sent to the Vice Provost’s office. Based on the facts set out in the ASF, the Panel concluded that the Student was guilty of the charges laid under section B.i.1(a) of the Code. The University withdrew the alternative charged under section B.i.3(b) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered the factors set out in the decision of University of Toronto v. Mr. C. (Case No. 1976/77-3), namely, the character of the person charged, the nature of the offence committed, the detriment to the University occasioned by the offence, and the need to deter other from committing a similar offence. The Panel noted that the nature of the offence, and in particular the fact that the Student had circulated forged documents on two separate occasions, coupled with the fact that the Student had committed a prior academic offence , the Student merited a more severe penalty. The Panel further stated that the gravity of offence, one of the most serious contemplated by the Code, merited a sanction capable of meeting the goals of both specific and general deterrence. However, the Panel considered the Student’s admission to the offence to be a mitigating factor. The Panel found that it was unnecessary to prolong the duration of the notation on the Student’s academic record beyond the period of the suspension proposed by the University, given that the Student had already completed their coursework.
Based on these factors, and the sanctions imposed in similar cases presented by the University, the Panel imposed the following sanction on the Student: a final grade of zero in the Course; a four-year suspension, and; a four-year notation of the sanction on the Student’s academic record and transcript.