Retired teacher pleads guilty to abusive behaviour
Lawyer presented penalty submission at hearing, to be imposed should he decide to teach again
Ian Dwight Gray pleaded guilty to allegations of misconduct and abusive behaviour dating back to 2006, at an Ontario College of Teachers hearing on Thursday.
The now-retired Toronto teacher was not present for the hearing as lawyer Shane D’Souza detailed a joint submission for the panel, which he called misconduct, verbal, physical and psychological or emotional abuse.
The allegations began in 2006 at the MukiBaum Accessibility Centre: a facility for students with complex disabilities, where Gray used his foot to “make contact” with a ball a student sat on. The student then fell to the floor.
An investigation was launched by the principal and vice-principal in 2007, after parent and staff complaints about Gray’s behaviour. He didn’t agree with an allegation about being found alone with a student with the door nearly shut. But, D’Souza said, Gray agreed that he’d acted inappropriately.
The incident was one of many alleged at MukiBaum. Gray was seen at one point “totally surrounding” a student crying in the hallway, D’Souza said, and told another that, based on his behaviour, he was a candidate for jail.
The student had family in a correctional facility at the time, D’Souza said.
Gray was given a two-day suspension without pay after the investigation, and assigned to another school in Toronto.
At Keele Street Public School, though, alarms were raised about Gray again from 2010 to 2013.
He left red marks on a young girl after physically restraining her.
At one point, he raised a guitar over his head, saying “I oughta!” to a group of students who wouldn’t settle down.
A student was singled out and humiliated, the college said, by Gray’s refusal to let them use a washroom. The student urinated in their pants.
He was given a chance to respond to those and other allegations in September 2013, and was asked to complete classroom management workshops and anger management counselling. Since then, Gray has retired from teaching.
In April last year, his certificate of qualification and registration was suspended for nonpayment of fees. Gray never intends to return to teaching again, D’Souza told the room, and had made a joint submission for penalty.
That penalty was a six-month suspension, plus additional coursework in boundaries and anger management, and an in-person reprimand. All three penalties would be imposed if Gray ever wanted his certification back.
“Why not revocation?” appointed panel member Marie-Therese Hokayem asked D’Souza. “Since this is the second time, and since the person is saying he’s not returning and he’s retired? To prevent him from teaching again?”
“It is literally the death penalty,” D’Souza replied.
He listed multiple precedents where similarly serious incidents received lower penalties. The panel later agreed to the submission, with provisions such as having the syllabus for Gray’s course or courses ap- proved by the registrar.
D’Souza maintained that imposing a penalty was important, whether the defendant was still teaching or not: for Gray, for other teachers and for the public perception.
“You’re reminding and reassuring the public that this college, that this committee of the college, does properly and proportionally sanction members when they engage in professional misconduct.”