Search

Trial Division - s. B.i.1(a) of Code – forged documents – forged letters, forged Motor Vehicle Accident Report, false information and forged fax in support of false information – two courses – hearing not attended – hearing adjourned to locate Student and serve notice of hearing – guilty plea – Agreed Statement of Facts - credibility doubted and testimony unreliable - egregious and reprehensible actions – repeated lies to professors, forgery of documents and implication of third party – clear and calculating attempt to avoid full accountability - events a reaction to stress of learning about becoming a father - lies began before learning about becoming a father – inconsistencies between character and core values of University not made up by possibility of success in meeting acceptable academic threshold - University submission on penalty accepted - grade assignment of zero for two courses; recommendation that the Student be expelled as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; five-year suspension pending expulsion decision; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.1(b) of Code – unauthorized aid – possession of formulae relevant to subject matter of exam – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – Joint Submission on Penalty – second academic offence – second offence occurred in term immediately following first offence – offence committed in honour system - offence discovered by chance – deterrent required – grade assignment of zero for course; two-year suspension; two-year notation on transcript; and report issued to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged academic records – forged transcript misrepresenting marks and GPA – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – repetition of offence unlikely due to period of anguish between commission of offence and hearing – no premeditation – scope of offence contained - extenuating circumstances influenced severity of sanction - University submission on penalty accepted - five-year suspension; five-year notation; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.1(b) and s. B.ii of Code – unauthorized aid – allowed another student to copy from exam answers – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – identical answers – other student admitted to receiving assistance – extenuating fact of other student’s illness not helpful given honest options available – mitigating facts of guilty plea, expression of remorse, personal relationship with co-defendant, acceptance of appropriateness of sanctions – medical attention or deferral not sought – guilt not admitted at earliest opportunity – hearing three years after commission of offence - sufficient credits to graduate – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero for course; two-year suspension; three-year notation; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.1(b) and s. B.ii of Code – unauthorized aid – collaboration with another student during an exam – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – identical answers – other student admitted to providing assistance – extenuating fact of illness not helpful given honest options available – mitigating facts of guilty plea, expression of remorse, personal relationship with co-defendant, acceptance of appropriateness of sanctions – medical attention or deferral not sought – guilt not admitted at earliest opportunity – hearing three years after commission of offence - sufficient credits to graduate – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero for course; two-year suspension; three-year notation; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged academic record - attempted implication of academic advisor in act – hearing not attended – reasonable notice of hearing– see s. 6 (1) of Statutory Powers Procedures Act and s. C.ii.(a)4 of Code – finding of guilt – third party implicated made offence egregious and provided indication of character – probability of behaviour being repeated in absence of contrary evidence – not possible to gauge whether excuses were accurate in absence of evidence – prior academic offence - previous suspension meant nothing to Student - recommendation that the Student be expelled as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; permanent notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.l(a) and s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged documents - falsified document substituted for test after the fact – guilty plea to s. B.i.l(a) of Code – Agreed Statement of Facts - Joint Submission on Penalty – premeditated offence impacted significantly on integrity of University – possibility for rehabilitation – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero for course; one-year suspension; one-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Trial Division - s. B.i.1(f) of Code – concoction – falsified research in conference abstract and podium presentation – guilty plea - Agreed Statement of Facts - conduct violated all University ethical research policies and guidelines – see Policy on Ethical Conduct in Research, s. 4.4 of Faculty of Medicine’s Principles and Responsibilities regarding Conduct of Research, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans and School of Graduates Studies Student Guide on Ethical Conduct – general deterrence most important consideration – unfair and inappropriate to impose expulsion due to mitigating circumstances - reasonably held belief that second chance was provided by academic supervisor - Dean’s conclusions not supported by file - evidence of remorse and recognition of seriousness of conduct – five-year suspension; five-year notation on transcript; grade assignment of zero for course; and report to Provost

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(c), s. B.ii.1(a)(ii) and s. B.i.1(a) of Code – impersonation, omitting to report an offence and two forgeries – Student had another person impersonate him at academic examination – Student submitted falsified medical documents to University – finding of guilt – offences extremely serious but mitigating factors present: Student substantially improved academic performance in intervening period; charges surrounded short period of time; no previous convictions or further misconduct – efforts to do better academically and to seek help indicative of positive aspect of Student’s character –detrimental effect to University of conduct - five year suspension; corresponding notation on Student’s academic record for five year period; grade of zero; and publication by Provost of notice of decision and sanctions with the Student’s name withheld.

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(b) of Code – unauthorized aids – two examinations – hearing not attended – Student charges not responded to – reasonable notice of hearing – see Statutory Powers Procedure Act – unaware of possession of aid – appearance of cheat sheet and high degree of relevance – unauthorized aid copied into examination booklet – Student knew or ought to have known of possession of unauthorized aid – finding of guilt - prior academic offence – breach of trust evoking at least two year suspension and a suspension of three years or longer for repeat offences – see case of Mr. S.B. – pre–meditation and deceit – timing of offences – failure to engage in process – University submission on penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero in two courses; recommendation that the Student be expelled as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; and report to Provost

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(a) of Code – forged documents – altered mid–term and term test resubmitted – hearing not attended – charges not responded to – reasonable notice of hearing – see Policy on Official Correspondence with Students and Statutory Powers Procedure Act – finding of guilt – breach of trust evoking at least two year suspension – see case of Mr. S.B. – on-going campaign of deception – third party implicated and named – University Submission on Penalty accepted – grade assignment of zero for two courses; four-year suspension; six-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(a) of Code – forged document – Letter of Permission for Visiting Student Admission Application – hearing not attended – reasonable notice of hearing – see Code and s.6(3)(b) of Statutory Powers Procedure Act – efforts to effect proper service not negated by failure to review emails or check ROSI mailing address – forgery confirmed by Professor – finding of guilt – prior academic offence – academic success – charges not responded to – recommendation that the Student be expelled as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; and permanent notation on academic record

Trial Division – charges under Code – plagiarism, forgery of documents and impersonation – course work and final examinations – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – depression and pressure exerted by family – cultural background made it difficult to seek help from University services – each case depends on its own facts – see Appendix “C” to Code – circumstances mitigated against recommending expulsion – grade assignment of zero for two courses; five-year suspension; ten-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost – ten-year suspension would have been imposed had authority to do so existed

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(d) and s. B.i.1(b) of Code – plagiarism and unauthorized aids – sold essays to other students – Agreed Statement of Facts – Student’s statement to the Campus Police – sworn affidavit from a buyer – case delayed for six months due to the lack cooperation from Student – guilty plea – finding of guilt based on agreed statement of facts – Tribunal adjourned for penalty phase – further delay of three months due to Student terminating his counsel – Student’s father’s testimony – receipts for prescriptions for medication; letters confirming employment and volunteer services – adverse finding on character – risk of re-offending – a “seller” in general is not a more significant player but engagement in an on-going enterprise is an aggravating factor – detriment to University as discussed in V.L. (Case No. 440) – Appendix “C” of the Code – evidence of previous offences – no basis to reduce penalty due to general deterrence effect being minimal – need for specific deterrence as Student has not displayed remorse – principle of consistency as discussed in Y. (Case No. 404) – Student completed courses and earned credits he would not have earned if not for the delay – five-year suspension commencing the date of the original hearing; seven-year notation on transcript; report to Provost

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(c) and s. B.i.1(b) – impersonation – impersonator paid to write term test – hearing not attended - Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – Joint Submission on Penalty - expulsion recommended for impersonation – see Code - deference shown to joint submission – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted - grade assignment of zero for course; five-year suspension; seven-year notation on transcript or until graduation; and report to Provost

Trial Division – s.B.i.1(a) of Code – forged documents – forged medical notes submitted in support of petitions for deferred examinations in five courses – agreed statement of facts – guilty plea – finding of guilt – joint submission on penalty – aggravating factor of length of time over which offences occurred – mitigating factors of statement of remorse (submitted and read by Student at hearing), guilty plea, and engagement and cooperation in the process – while not bound by a joint submission on penalty, a joint submission on penalty should not be rejected unless it would be contrary to the public interest or it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute – high threshold for rejecting joint submissions on penalty – joint submission on the high end of the appropriate range, but still appropriate – joint submission accepted – Panel imposed: 1) a final grade of zero in each of the five courses; 2) a five year suspension; 3) a transcript notation until one year after the Student graduates from the University; and 4) a report to the Provost.

Trial Division – s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged academic records – TA, Student’s brother, altered Student’s marks – TA and Student claimed that the Student did not know that his marks had been inflated – Dean’s designate decided not to charge the Student – University subsequently discovered changes to Student’s marks in an earlier course and decided to lay charges with respect to both courses – Student argued that University was barred from reversing the earlier decision – Panel found that it was not necessary to consider the issue because University failed to prove that Student knew about the changes on a balance of probabilities – no direct evidence and insufficient circumstantial evidence – Student found not guilty

Trial Division – plagiarism – concocting references – course work – hearing not attended – agreed statement of facts – joint submission on penalty – agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty accepted – finding of guilt – prior offences - grade of zero in course; 4 year suspension; 5 year notation on transcript; and report to Provost with name of Student withheld

Trial Division - s. B.I.1(a) and s. B.I.1(d) of Code – forged documents – forged medical certificate – false doctor’s letter - plagiarism – altered date and content from a previous medical certificate – doctor’s letter – submitted essay containing passages plagiarized from internet – purchased essay over the internet – Agreed Statement of Facts – Joint Submission on Penalty – Sopinka principles – no prior offences – three offences treated concurrently – early admission of events and acts – lengthy period of reflection – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – grade of zero in seven courses; five-year suspension; seven-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Trial Division – academic dishonesty and forged documents - medical notes – guilty plea – third party implicated – agreed statement of facts and joint submission on penalty – guilty plea - finding of guilt –deliberate conduct – accepting joint submission on penalty does not bring administration of justice into disrepute – character references - joint submission on penalty accepted – two year suspension; three year transcript notation; report to the Provost

Trial Division – s.B.i.3(a) of Code­ – forging academic record – forging a University of Toronto degree – hearing not attended – reasonable notice of hearing provided – finding of guilt – forgery of academic records is one of the most serious of offences – typical sanction of expulsion – Panel imposed: 1) a 5 year suspension; 2) a recommendation of expulsion; and 3) a report to the Provost. The Panel recommended to the Provost and Governing Council that the Code be amended to allow for the names of expelled students to be published, in the interest of deterrence

Trial Division – s. B.i.1(a) of Code – forged documents – forged and submitted a letter of admissions in support of an application for student loan – hearing not attended – Agreed Statement of Facts – finding of guilt – Joint Submission on Penalty – two previous offences – negative finding on character as Student committed offences in three consecutive years – offence was deliberate and planned – University should not be implicated in criminal behaviour – no extenuating circumstances; Student had other options – strong need for deterrence considering the potential damage to the University’s reputation – Panel accepted the JSP – recommendation that the Student be expelled; five-year suspension; report to Provost

Trial Division – s. B.I.3(b) of Code – fraud and misrepresentation of academic work - missed deadline – attempt to represent project was completed and handed in on time - improper access to a University office – missed deadlines – previously granted extension – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – Joint Submission on Penalty – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – grade of zero in one course; three-year suspension; three-year notation on transcript; and report to Provost

Trial Division – s.B.i.1(b) of Code – unauthorized assistance – TA assisting three students during a final examination and two terms tests in exchange for money – finding of guilty on eight charges of providing unauthorized assistance – sentencing factors in University of Toronto and Mr. C (1976-77) – little evidence of Student’s character – likely to recommit offence – breach of trust – among the most serious offences – initial denial of offences - length and scope of the scheme – detriment to the University – need for deterrence – students are subject to the Code even if they commit offence while employed as a TA (University of Toronto and A, January 14, 2009) – Panel found the TA had a “corrupt commercial enterprise” with no precedent in the university jurisprudence - University of Toronto and Ms. VWSL (April 6, 2006), which deals with purchased work, used as precedent for the seriousness of TA’s offence - Tribunal imposed a sanction of: 1) a five year suspension, 2) a recommendation of expulsion, and 3) a report to the Provost.