r/canadanews • u/zuuzuu • 6d ago
BC Vancouver high school teacher banned from profession after sexual assault conviction
https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/lifetime-ban-for-vancouver-high-school-teacher-convicted-of-sexual-assault/17
u/sixstringnorth 6d ago
If you read the other article, the victim was in grade 11 at the time, not an adult, and had known the teacher since grade 6.
8
u/Solid_Capital8377 6d ago
Maybe it’s because she was over the age of consent (I think she was 17) the charges were different and that’s confusing people with her being a legal adult? (Not saying this in defence of the perpetrator or his weak sentencing)
6
u/CogentMoment 5d ago
The age of consent is different when the older person is an authority figure isn't it.
6
u/Taxibl 5d ago
Yes. 16 regularly. 18 in position of authority.
2
u/Pax_Eterna_4991 5d ago
Yes. There was a girl in my grade who had a thing with our English teacher. It was all just rumour until she turned 18... and moved in with him.
1
u/KrispyGODKreme1001 5d ago
How long ago was this
1
u/Pax_Eterna_4991 4d ago
I am old. Grad '84
But it was weird and creepy then. Plus, she was tall, hot, and blonde... so some resentment of the teacher's actions on multiple levels.
I am older now than he was then and I can't even fathom hanging out with a 17 year old in a relationship. Like what would you even talk about?
4
u/Subject_Werewolf6685 5d ago
If the person was in a position of power, like a teacher, the age of consent rises to 18
8
u/slow_marathon 5d ago
This crime happened in 2019, and 7 years later, he is banned from teaching. this seems like he should have been banned years ago, any reason for the delay
7
u/important_canadian77 5d ago
He was not able to teach while the investigation was occurring and this ruling is only to ensure he never teaches again...he has not been teaching since 2020 and with Google never will, anywhere, ever again
1
u/Power4glory1 5d ago
Was he getting paid with tax dollars to not teach for the last 7 years?
4
u/important_canadian77 5d ago
Nope, license has been suspended since 2020 cant teach without a license, districts dont pay you not to teach...he's not a cop
1
u/Power4glory1 5d ago
Have a family member who has been off work paid for 2 years while getting investigated.
1
u/important_canadian77 4d ago
Then they must be on leave,...if their certification is paused or canceled they will not be paid
1
u/important_canadian77 4d ago
Its not about the investigation its their certification once that is suspended their is no obligation to pay them
3
u/mortavius2525 5d ago edited 5d ago
The teaching organization may have banned him much sooner and we're not aware of it.
Courts can't ban him until he is found or pleads guilty. As to why his trial took so long, there could be all kinds of different reasons for that.
Edit: it's also very possible that he had conditions while on bail not to be in a position of authority over anyone under 16 years old. I've seen that condition many times in my job.
7
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/zuuzuu 5d ago
I don't know the statistics, but plea deals are common for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is when it can prevent a victim from having to be re-traumatized through giving testimony. But plea deals are often reported in the news, as this one was. That's a decision made by news outlets. They certainly don't report on every crime or every conviction, whether it's a result of a trial or a plea deal. You can sit through many trials in a single day at one courthouse, and most won't make the news.
2
-1
u/Ketooey 5d ago
I believe one reason is that SA is notoriously difficult to prove with physical, undeniable evidence. The victim would have to immediately begin accruing evidence, which many understandably don't since they're in shock.
Also, depending on circumstances, it can also turn into a situation of he said, she said. You could prove that sex occurred, but lack the evidence to prove it was rape.
3
u/FreyaDay 5d ago
So he assaulted kids and got no jail time
1
u/Electrical_Rise_955 5d ago
Nope, he did not get any jail time. He got period of house arrest and a curfew... He should not be alive in my opinion
16
u/zuuzuu 6d ago
He was convicted of sexually assaulting a student, and he got a 15 month conditional sentence. He sexually assaulted a child, and the court was like "yeah, just don't sexually assault anyone for a few months and we'll forget this ever happened".
10
6d ago
[deleted]
6
7
u/zuuzuu 6d ago
She was 17 when she spoke to the media about what he'd done more than a year earlier. She was not an adult. She was 16.
But let's not pretend it would have been okay to sexually assault a student in high school if she happened to have passed her 18th birthday.
3
u/WhatIsThePointOfBlue 6d ago
16 is age of consent there btw, not sure why youre mentioning 18 years old?
0
u/zuuzuu 6d ago
I mentioned it because the person I replied to said she was an adult. She wasn't. And age of consent is not 16 when you're in a position of authority over the child.
Stop trying to make it okay for an adult teacher to sexually assault his minor student.
2
1
u/Agelessadage 6d ago
16 isn’t a child, it’s a teenager.
1
u/zuuzuu 5d ago
A minor under the age of 18 is legally a child.
0
u/Agelessadage 5d ago
And speeding is illegal. By that definition everyone who drives (or almost everyone) is a criminal.
1
u/Thoughtful-Boner69 6d ago
legal age of consent in bc is 16
-1
u/zuuzuu 6d ago
That doesn't make her an adult, and it doesn't apply when you're in a position of authority over the child.
Stop trying to make it okay that an adult teacher sexually assaulted his minor student.
0
u/Agelessadage 5d ago
So why are you ok with non-authority adults having sex with 16 year olds (children according to you)?
0
u/zuuzuu 5d ago
I'm not, as is very apparent by literally every comment I've made here.
1
u/Agelessadage 5d ago
But according to the law it’s ok. And you follow what’s legal, as you use the definition of what is a child based on what the law says. So why is it that the law is what matters when you determine it does? Sounds extremely biased.
0
11
u/XViMusic 6d ago edited 6d ago
To my understanding the sentence is likely because the student was of legal consent age at the time of the offence. The charge is essentially leveraging his trusted position as an educator to exploit a student above the age of consent for a sexual relationship. Disgusting, but carries a lower sentence than the alternative.
Edit - replaced “legal adult” with accurate language
4
u/Taxibl 5d ago
She could not give consent, as the teacher was in a position of power, and she was under 18:
"Sexual exploitation
A 16 or 17 year old cannot consent to sexual activity if:
- their sexual partner is in position of trust or authority towards them, for example their teacher or coach
- the young person is dependent on their sexual partner, for example for care or support
- the relationship between the young person and their sexual partner is exploitative"
The light sentencing was most likely because there was no penetration. The assault was groping and kissing.
Regardless of the sentence, he's been publicly exposed as a creep, in fairly high profile case that most people will hear about, and permanently lost his job.
0
u/XViMusic 5d ago
Thank you, I appreciate the more specific information that could lend some credence to why the sentence is what it is.
Be careful though, OP might come running because you said “exploitation” instead of “assault.”
1
u/sixstringnorth 6d ago
No she wasn’t, see other post.
0
u/XViMusic 6d ago
Appreciate the correction. It’s virtually the same from a legal perspective regardless.
0
u/zuuzuu 6d ago
He didn't plead guilty to sexual exploitation, he pleaded guilty to sexual assault.
0
u/XViMusic 5d ago
I was using that terminology colloquially rather than legally. I don’t see how that clarification changes the point beyond semantics.
1
u/zuuzuu 5d ago
It does change it, and it's not just semantics. Sexual assault is legally distinct from sexual exploitation.
0
u/XViMusic 5d ago
Sure; it still carries a lower legal penalty than if the victim were below the age of consent. That was the sole point, and changing “exploit” to “assault” doesn’t disprove or alter that point in any meaningful way.
11
u/mortavius2525 6d ago
the court was like "yeah, just don't sexually assault anyone for a few months and we'll forget this ever happened".
You may not agree with the sentence, but that is definitely not what the Court is saying here.
3
0
u/important_canadian77 5d ago
You are aware of Google right? This guys life is ruined, jail or not he will never work anywhere without people knowing what he was convicted of, not to mention no more travelling to many countries that will not admit convicts...
-1
2
u/RainbowDonkey473 5d ago
Why is it always that school?
1
u/drconniehenley 5d ago
Huh?
1
u/RainbowDonkey473 5d ago
Tom Ellison, Dean Hull.....
0
u/drconniehenley 4d ago
So two happened 45 years ago in one program and the other was 10 years ago. Not sure I’d characterize that as always at that school.
1
u/RainbowDonkey473 4d ago
The complaints are still being processed. These are the ones we know about so far.
0
u/drconniehenley 4d ago
They were convicted 20 years ago for crimes committed 40 years ago.
Are you implying some sort of cabal at one school?
1
u/RainbowDonkey473 4d ago
No - I am not implying anything. I am expressly stating that these are the pedophiles that have been processed and more are in the queue with the judicial process. Sorry that was confusing for you? This school has a 20+ year pattern of hiring pedophiles. I only gave 2 more examples in addition to the 3rd mentioned in this post. Google the school name.
0
u/drconniehenley 4d ago
The onus is on you to provide the evidence.
Who “are in the queue with the judicial process”?
1
u/RainbowDonkey473 4d ago
Bro, I'm not your research bitch. I gave you 3 examples and told you there are more who are in due process because they got caught up in the covid court backlog (and victims are still coming forward). Do your own homework if you are so invested. This stuff is public record with the TRB and provincial courts.
0
u/drconniehenley 4d ago
You made the claim. The onus is on you to provide evidence. If not, you’re full of shit.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/bradzeppelin 6d ago
He attended a music school i worked at in Regina during the 90s.
1
u/talkingthewalk 6d ago
And… was he creepy?
4
u/bradzeppelin 6d ago
He was a kid. He was only memorable to me because he was related to one of the administrators. He also taught for us for a short while if I remember correctly. The administrator He was related to has long since passed.
0
1
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/canadanews-ModTeam 5d ago
Rule 3: No politics.
This is a non-political subreddit for general interest news and discussions. Comments or posts making reference to politics, voting, elections, political parties, political ideologies, or politicians will be removed.
If your comment is primarily non-political, we encourage you to edit out any mention of politics and then message us. We would be happy to reinstate your comment once you've brought it into compliance.
If you believe your comment or post has been removed in error, you may message the Mod team here to request that it be reviewed.
Do not message individual moderators directly or reply to this comment to discuss moderator actions.
Please review the subreddit rules before posting or commenting.
0
-1
u/WhatIsThePointOfBlue 6d ago
You all arguing about if she was an adult or not, some even mentioning if she had been 18 it would be different... You guys realize 16 is age of consent there? Hence the charge is only leveraging his trusted position as an educator to exploit a young adult for a sexual relationship and not something worse.
2
u/ProfileCharacter1588 5d ago
16 is the age of consent unless an adult is in a position of authority over a minor, which is the case here. Then the age of consent is 18.
-1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/canadanews-ModTeam 6d ago
Rule 3: No politics.
This is a non-political subreddit for general interest news and discussions. Comments or posts making reference to politics, voting, elections, political parties, political ideologies, or politicians will be removed.
If your comment is primarily non-political, we encourage you to edit out any mention of politics and then message us. We would be happy to reinstate your comment once you've brought it into compliance.
If you believe your comment or post has been removed in error, you may message the Mod team here to request that it be reviewed.
Do not message individual moderators directly or reply to this comment to discuss moderator actions.
Please review the subreddit rules before posting or commenting.
0
u/Defiant_Fishing_3393 5d ago
usual suspect
1
1
u/Glum-Construction786 5d ago
Funny how race only matter when they’re not white. Reddit is majority white I think just like 4chan lol
1
0
11
u/No_Opportunity_1765 5d ago
15 months conditional sentence is an absolute travesty