Jury trial ends for local teacher accused of sexual exploitation

In closing arguments in the trial of a Windsor teacher accused of “sexually exploiting” two teenagers who had been his students, the prosecution argued Thursday that Ryan Turgeon used his position of authority to take advantage of two vulnerable youths.

One of the complainants, living in a group home at the time, was “uncertain of his sexuality” and seeking advice from a trusted teacher he considered a mentor, said assistant Crown attorney Jayme Lesperance.

The other complainant, a friend of the first and a former student of the accused, was “couch-surfing ” at the time after being “ostracized and punished” by his family for coming out as gay, Lesperance added.

At the start of the trial last week, Ryan Turgeon, 39, pleaded not guilty to eight criminal counts, including two counts each of sexual exploitation and making sexual material available to someone under the age of 18.

Ahead of closing arguments by prosecution and defence on Thursday, Superior Court Justice Brian Dube withdrew two of the counts — for possession of child porn and making and publishing child porn.

Much of the Crown's evidence in the case had long since vanished and the jury, which began deliberations Thursday afternoon, must rely chiefly on the testimony of the complainants. Sexually explicit photos and videos allegedly shared between the teacher and the complainants were on the social media app Snapchat where messages disappear shortly after being shared.

Turgeon, who taught senior classes at Catholic Central High School, was arrested in April 2021 following an investigation by the Windsor Police Service's internet child exploitation unit.

“What is clear is this case is tragic,” Lesperance told jurors.

Both complainants, he added, were “incredibly vulnerable ... they were children at the time, grappling with significant life challenges.”

A standard court-ordered publication ban prevents media from disclosing the names of the complainants or information that might identify them.

In his closing, defence lawyer Dean Embry pointed to many inconsistencies between the complainants' trial testimony and earlier evidence they gave to police and at a preliminary hearing.

Embry said there was evidence of contact between his client and one of the complainants but only after he'd turned 18. He told jurors they might find his client's behaviour “immoral” but that it would be wrong to convict Turgeon criminally.

Prior to being sequestered to reach a verdict, jurors were instructed only to convict if the Crown had proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that “probably true” was not sufficient.

Embry criticized police investigators for searching the contents of Turgeon's phone but failing to also examine those of the complainants.