Article content
A Windsor high school teacher has been found guilty on two criminal counts connected to the sexual exploitation of a former student who was a minor.
Following a trial in Superior Court of Justice, a 12-member jury on Friday night returned guilty verdicts for Ryan Turgeon, 36, for sexual exploitation of a child, as well as making sexual material available to a person under the age of 18.
Advertisement 2
Article content
Article content
The jury found the former Catholic Central High School religion and drama teacher not guilty on four additional counts related to sex crimes involving a second male complainant.
Superior Court Justice Brian Dube ruled Turgeon could remain free on bail pending a sentencing hearing. His next appearance is in assignment court on May 3.
While not wanting to comment ahead of Turgeon’s sentencing, assistant Crown attorney Jayme Lesperance told the Windsor Star that the Crown will be seeking a “significant” sentence for the teacher. He wouldn’t elaborate.
Defence lawyer Dean Embry would not comment to the Star immediately following Friday night’s verdict, including whether there might be any appeal.
At the start of the trial on April 2, Turgeon 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.
The jury heard closing arguments from the Crown and defence Thursday morning before a lengthy (108-page) charge and instructions from Justice Dube. The jury deliberations behind closed doors Thursday night and then all day Friday were interrupted on several occasions for questions to the judge, including asking for the definition of child luring.
Headline News
Article content
Advertisement 3
Article content
Ahead of the closing submissions by prosecution and defence on Thursday, Dube withdrew two of the counts — for possession of child porn and making and publishing child porn.
Turgeon, who taught senior classes at Catholic Central, was arrested in April 2021 following an investigation by the Windsor Police Service’s internet child exploitation unit.
In his trial closing address, Lesperance described the two male complainants as “incredibly vulnerable” teens, one exploring his sexuality and living in a group home, the other “ostracized and punished” by his family, and homeless and couch-surfing, after coming out as gay. Turgeon was seen as a mentor and someone the students could confide in.
It was the first student’s testimony the jury found believable, with Lesperance describing him as a boy “struggling whether he was gay or straight.
“Mr. Turgeon offered to provide him with experience.”
The jurors heard graphic and sexually explicit testimony.
Turgeon’s lawyer Embry countered that the alleged criminal conduct was fabricated or happened after a complainant had turned 18. He pointed to discrepancies in trial testimony versus what had been said to police and at the preliminary hearing.
Advertisement 4
Article content
Embry also criticized police investigators for only having examined the contents of Turgeon’s cellphone and not those of the complainants, described as friends and former classmates.
What made the case challenging to prosecute was the fact much of the evidence had vanished — communications on the social media app Snapchat disappear shortly after being shared.
A standard court-ordered publication ban prevents media from disclosing the names of the complainants or information that might identify them.
Lesperance described the case as “tragic” and said the “grooming was extensive” by someone in a position of trust with children.
Recommended from Editorial
According to the Ontario College of Teachers, the status of Turgeon’s professional certificate of qualification and registration changed to “inactive/non-practising” effective May 7, 2022. Turgeon was first charged by Windsor police on April 27, 2021, with additional counts added on May 4, 2021.
Under his bail conditions, Turgeon cannot attend public parks, school grounds, playgrounds, community centres or other areas where persons under the age of 16 “can reasonably be expected to be present.” He can also not be in the company of, or communicate directly or indirectly with, children under the age of 16.
Article content
