Denounce or be silent? Protect a teenager against her will or “mind her own business”?
Amélie* didn’t ask herself the question for long. On the day of the start of the school year in the fall, she wrote to the principal of Ozias-Leduc secondary school to denounce a teacher.
Throughout the summer, this 64-year-old professor had spent hours “texting” and talking about Teams with a 14 year old student.
Suspicious…
Amelie is 20 years old. She worked all summer 2022 with Béatrice*, this 14-year-old student. Every day, Béatrice confided in her about her relationship with this teacher who was so attentive, so empathetic, so cool.
Sometimes Beatrice came to work tired: she had “chatted” until 3 am with the teacher.
“Not sure it’s prudent, your business…
“Don’t worry, I know what I’m doing,” replied Beatrice.
The more she learned, the more Amélie worried. The teacher wasn’t just active listening. He repeatedly made sexual allusions.
When the teen commented on the teacher’s build and hand size, he replied that it’s “not the only thing that’s fat” about him.
He commented on her necklines. He wanted to get details about her sex life, her relationship with her ex-boyfriend. He was sending her eggplant, peach, and tongue emojis. He said that when she was 18, he would give her a hug. She seemed to enjoy it.
It was all done in writing. They did not see each other. But at the end of August, when there were hints of a physical rapprochement after the start of the school year, the teenager expressed to Amélie her fear that the teacher would become “too sticky”. Even if she said she saw nothing reprehensible in her exchanges so far.
Béatrice asked Amélie to keep the secret. Hearing that, Amélie thought she heard the teacher’s own words coming from the student’s mouth.
She didn’t really hesitate, I said. She denounced the situation at the school on August 30. The teacher was immediately suspended. In the fall, he quietly retired.
Last week, Amélie’s mother said to her: “Did you see that, in The Journal of Montreal ? There was a pimp teacher in Ozias-Leduc…”
The man’s name is Serge Dupuis. He had been teaching science for 15 years at this school in Mont-Saint-Hilaire. Neither Amélie nor anyone in Mont-Saint-Hilaire suspected that this teacher had been convicted twice in the 1990s for pimping in Quebec.
Incredibly, Dupuis did not lose his teaching certificate. Even more incredible, he managed to get hired at Ozias-Leduc. And when the government ordered criminal background checks on teachers, nothing was found about them.
However, the man had not been convicted in Nebraska under a false name. Not even in another province. It happened 200 kilometers away. Better still: his convictions had made the headlines.
The sun, October 25, 1997: “A physics teacher at Vanier secondary school, Serge Dupuis, 38, was accused yesterday of being at the head of a prostitution ring for which he allegedly recruited minors, some of whom students at her school. »
The sun, November 28, 1997: “It seems that Serge Dupuis, this Vanier high school teacher accused on October 24 of pimping involving female students, has not learned his lesson. He was arrested again on Wednesday evening, along with three young girls in the parking lot of the motel Jessy on boulevard Hamel. »
He pleaded guilty in December 1997 and was sentenced to one week (seven days) in prison for living off the fruits of prostitution. Fired in February 1998, he was again arrested a month later, at the head of a new network of “hostesses”.
The sun, June 11, 1998: “The famous professor and pimp Serge Dupuis received, yesterday, a sentence of two years less a day in prison. »
In 2007, it must be believed that his fame had not traveled to Montérégie: he became a science teacher at Ozias-Leduc.
The school took Amélie’s letter seriously. Dupuis was suspended quickly. He no longer taught at school.
But it wasn’t until February 15, when The Journal of Montreal revealed the affair, which the school wrote to the parents. “A flaw in the process, explained by human error”, allowed Serge Dupuis to teach despite three convictions, and to continue to be in contact with minors.
Did you not tempt to warn the parents, the teachers, of the reasons for this suspension, in the light of the serious background of Dupuis? Should we wait hidden under a rock for it to come out – or not – in the newspaper? Maybe no one will notice…
A bit as if, to avoid looking bad, we hoped that everything would pass away silently.
A bit as if lawyers had dictated the letter and that of the school service centre. We know what is the first advice of lawyers in general: above all, do not admit anything! We should never admit responsibility!
There were no reported casualties, but in itself, this exorbitant carelessness brought this repeat offender pimp into contact with teenage girls for years, potentially putting them at risk.
A vague “human error”, like an administrative fog.
The police called Amélie in early February. The investigation is continuing. Maybe we’ll ask him for a deposition…
At the end of our conversation, Amélie explained to me why she had sent her letter.
“It’s my responsibility, anyway!
“I said to myself: if I ever learn that she was abused and that I did nothing to prevent it, I would be responsible. »
Notice well. She didn’t say: I would feel guilty, or I wouldn’t have forgiven myself.
No. She chose this demanding word, this fundamental word which is so frightening to organizations where the only way reigns: responsible.
* Fictitious first names