DATE: September 8, 2010
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. Y.M.
Hearing Date(s): August 4, 2010
Panel Members:
Lisa Brownstone, Chair
Professor Louis Florence, Faculty Member
Hanif Bayat-Movahed, Student Member
Appearances:
Camille Labchuk, DLS for the Student
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University
In Attedance:
Dr. Kristi Gourlay, Manager of the Office of Student Academic Integrity
Dr. Martha Harris, Academic Integrity Officer
Trial Division – s. B.I.3(a); s. B.I.3(b) of Code – forged documents – forged academic record – purchased transcripts – admission to UTM – transfer to University of Toronto, St. George – hearing not attended – hearing attended by Student’s legal representative – guilty plea – finding of guilt – Joint Submission on Penalty – see case of Mr. M (#496)) – see case of Mr. Y (#467) – Joint Submission on Penalty Accepted – five-year suspension; recommendation to the President that the Student be expelled; and report to Provost
Student charged with four offences under s. B.I.3(a) and s. B.I.3(b) of the Code. The charges related to the allegations that the Student made use of a forged academic record on two occasions and knowingly engaged in a form of academic dishonesty. The Student allegedly purchased a transcript from a third party, knowing it was false and a forgery, and used it in support of her application to University of Toronto Mississauga and in support of a transfer application to the University of Toronto, St. George campus. The matter proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts. The Student pled guilty to two charges under s. B.I.3(a). The University withdrew the remaining two charges under s. B.I.3(b). The parties submitted a Joint Submission on Penalty. The Panel accepted the Student’s guilty plea. The Panel agreed with the University’s submission that the alteration of University records is among the most serious offences that a student can commit. Discipline Counsel noted the high threshold for refusing to accept a joint submission and that the Panel would have to be of the view that the administration of justice would be brought into disrepute by the acceptance of a joint submission in order to reject it. Discipline Counsel submitted that this case was an appropriate case for expulsion as there was no reason that the University ought to be prepared to give the Student a second change as the Student was only attending the University on false pretences. The case of Mr. M was submitted to support this submission. The Panel referred to the case of Mr. Y in noting that University records are the instruments that the University certifies academic achievement and its academic reputation and credibility hinges on these records. The Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and imposed an immediate five-year suspension, a recommendation to the President that the Student be expelled, and that a report to the Provost be issued.