A review of 39 cases of lawyers committing child sex abuse finds most are still licenced

The legal disciplinary system responds slowly in cases of lawyers involved in child luring, sex with minors and possessing child sex-abuse material

Gavin McNeill Grant leaves a hearing in Toronto on Oct. 2, 2018. He is now believed to be in Thailand. Photo by Dave Abel /Postmedia

Article content

Ontario lawyer Gavin McNeill Grant impregnated a 17-year-old Crown ward, showed off pictures of her in lingerie to his coworker, and assaulted two women, including a client-turned-girlfriend, according to a decision of Ontario’s Law Society Tribunal.

Article content

In all, Grant, who worked as a criminal lawyer in Owen Sound, Ont., engaged in what two provincial Law Societies called a pattern of sexual, drug and physical misconduct involving at least six females, including underage girls.

Article content

Article content

Article content

While complaints about Grant’s sexual misconduct began as early as 2014, it took until June 2017 before a complaint was made to the Law Society of Ontario (LSO), and until the fall of 2018 for the regulator’s independent disciplinary tribunal to suspend Grant’s licence.

Article content

Article content

It wasn’t until January 2022 that the LSO finally revoked Grant’s licence. “His conduct exploited the power imbalance created by his status as a lawyer and was predatory in nature,” the LSO’s disciplinary tribunal concluded.

Article content

“It is conduct of the worst sort.”

Article content

It took another 20 months for the Law Society of Alberta — where Grant was also licensed — to do the same there.

Article content

But those revocations had little impact on Grant, who was not criminally charged with offences in Canada. He had already moved to Thailand.

Article content

On his Thai website advertising his teaching services, Grant says he has degrees in political science and history, as well as law.

Article content

“I was a lawyer before becoming a teacher,” reads his online biography. “I enjoy teaching and I look forward to meeting you and starting our learning adventure together.”

Article content

Article content

The Investigative Journalism Bureau (IJB) tried to reach Grant for comment, but was unable to locate him. However, in 2018 disciplinary documents, Grant “denied much of the evidence against him,” including that he was in an exploitive relationship with a 17-year-old or that he knew she was under-age.

Article content

Article content

Grant’s case is among 35 reviewed by the IJB in which Canadian lawyers and/or judges were criminally convicted or professionally disciplined since 2000 for child sexual offences or misconduct.

Article content

Just 14 of the 35 cases resulted in licence revocation. The majority of disciplinary outcomes allowed lawyers to complete a suspension before resuming practice or to pay a fine or retire in lieu of licence revocation.

Article content

Aside from those 35 cases, four other lawyers during that time were licensed to practise law following criminal convictions for child sexual offences.

Article content

Together, the 39 cases reveal a system that is slow to respond when legal professionals commit offences or engage in misconduct including child luring, sex with minors and possessing child sexual abuse material. When it does, the resulting penalties often fall short of what some lawyers call meaningful accountability.

Article content

Just this past week, two lawyers— one in Alberta and another in Quebec — were charged with producing sexual abuse material involving minors along with other alleged child exploitation offences. Those charges are now before the courts.

Article content

Emily Dixon, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer, says a lawyer not losing their licence for a sexual offence or misconduct involving a child is a “shocking outcome that would probably outrage most members of the public.”

Article content

The IJB’s data on lawyers facing child sex offences or misconduct allegations does not provide comparisons with other professions. But many experts agree the privileged role lawyers play in society — including a responsibility to uphold the law — comes with an elevated expectation of trust.

Article content

“It seems to me fundamentally incompatible with trust in lawyers from a broad public perspective, but also even trust to self-regulate,” says Dixon.

Article content

“I’ll say it plainly: I think we’ve done a terrible job at it.”

Article content

Ontario’s teachers face mandatory licence revocation if they are found to have committed sexual abuse, including findings related to child sexual abuse material (defined as child pornography).

Article content

Article content

Health-care practitioners licensed by any of Ontario’s 29 health regulators face mandatory revocation for the sexual abuse of patients.

Article content

Lawyers found to have committed the same offences or engaged in the same misconduct face no such mandatory revocation.

Article content

***

Article content

The years of delay it took before Grant’s legal career ended over a string of sexual abuse complaints is a common scenario in the cases reviewed by the IJB.

Article content

In response to questions from the IJB, the LSO began investigating Grant in June 2017, spokesperson Jennifer Wing said in a written statement.

Article content

The allegations against Grant, detailed in disciplinary documents, began in 2014 and include propositioning a client, sexually harassing an employee by requesting sexual favours and displaying pornography in the office, substance abuse, missing court dates and partying with his firm’s teenaged clients.

Article content

But the initial investigation was closed after Grant “advised he was attending a rehabilitation program,” Wing’s statement reads.

Article content

A year later, in August 2018, the LSO received a new complaint that Grant “fathered a child with a 17-year-old Crown ward and was being criminally investigated for possession of cocaine.”

Article content

Article content

The LSO suspended his licence until it was revoked in 2022, said Wing.

Article content

“In recent years, the Law Society has improved the way complaints about sexual misconduct are received and responded to,” the statement reads. “The Law Society has adopted an increasingly proactive approach and processes to address high-risk misconduct.”

Article content

At least 14 of the 39 lawyers identified by the IJB are still licensed today.

Article content

***

Article content

Despite being found to have possessed more than 150 images and videos depicting child sexual abuse in March 2016, Mississauga, Ont., lawyer Martin Schulz continues to practise law.

Article content

Following his criminal conviction for possession of child pornography (now called child sexual abuse and exploitation material), Schulz was sentenced to 45 days in prison to be served on weekends, three years’ probation and a 10-year limit on Internet access and usage.

Article content

The Law Society of Ontario did its own investigation, which concluded in December 2021, that Schulz committed “conduct unbecoming a licensee.”

Article content

The Law Society recommended revocation of Schulz’ licence. But the LSO tribunal — an independent adjudicative body that operates separately from the Law Society — disagreed. It chose instead to impose a nine-month suspension.

Article content

“Public confidence in the legal professions … can be maintained in the present case through the imposition of a lengthy suspension and practice restrictions,” reads the tribunal’s reasoning for not revoking Schulz’s licence.

Article content

In September 2022, Schulz returned to practice and remains licensed today. But his penalty remains an active point of contention between the LSO and its independent disciplinary tribunal.

Article content

The Law Society challenged the tribunal’s suspension, arguing before an Ontario divisional court in 2022 that the penalty was “unfit.”

Article content

In 2023, the court overturned the tribunal’s decision on jurisdictional grounds, prompting a second disciplinary hearing, held in October 2025. The decision has not yet been released.

Article content

“The Law Society argued that revocation was the appropriate regulatory outcome,” wrote the LSO’s Wing.

Article content

Article content

Schultz declined an interview request from the IJB.

Article content

***

Article content

Another Mississauga lawyer, Arthur Tan, is also a practising lawyer despite having pleaded guilty to possessing nearly 1,000 images and videos of child pornography in 2014, and serving 90 days in jail.

Article content

Following Tan’s criminal conviction, the LSO held its own disciplinary hearing into his misconduct and suspended his licence for six months beginning in April 2015.

Article content

The Law Society of Ontario said Tan’s previous disciplinary penalty and criminal conviction are detailed on his public-facing profile.

Article content

Article content

Tan did not respond to the IJB’s requests for comment. However, in his criminal sentencing submission he said he obtained the child sexual abuse material “by accident” while downloading adult pornography.

Article content

“I was wrong (for) not having deleted them, and to report the website to the police as soon as I realized what it was,” said Tan in his statement to court.

Article content

“I’m not, and I have never been attracted in (any) way to children, nor do I understand pedophiles or adults who want to have relations with children.”

Article content

Different scales of justice

Article content

There are some offences or misconduct committed by lawyers that are considered so serious that the profession imposes so-called “presumptive revocation” as a default penalty in the absence of exceptional circumstances.

Article content

Article content

But presumptive revocation for lawyers is generally restricted to financial misconduct including misappropriation of trust funds and real estate fraud.

Article content

All other offences or misconduct — including child sexual allegations — are assessed through a range of factors such as seriousness of the allegations, duration, impact on others and remorse of the lawyer.

Article content

“Penalties in discipline cases are fact-specific, but the kinds of cases you’re looking at do not necessarily result in the most serious penalty, whereas financial dishonesty almost always leads to revocation of a lawyer’s right to practise,” said Raj Anand, who sat on LSO’s disciplinary tribunal for almost 18 years and previously served as the chief commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Article content

Ronald Davidovic is a former lawyer who has committed both financial and sexual offences — with two very different responses from the LSO.

Article content

In February 2005, Davidovic was sentenced to 60 months in a Florida federal prison and placed on the sexual offender’s list for life after pleading guilty to “receiving images containing a visual depiction of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct.”

Article content

In court, Davidovic admitted “he had been viewing adult, teen and child pornography for the previous several years.”

Article content

In March 2017, following his release from prison, the dual Canadian-U.S. citizen applied to be licensed in Ontario. After conducting a “good character” hearing, which examined Davidovic’s sexual conviction, the tribunal called his conduct “reprehensible” but decided the offence should not prevent him from being an “ethical and productive lawyer” in the province.

Article content

The LSO did not oppose Davidovic’s licensing application.

Article content

But in 2024, Davidovic’s Ontario licence was revoked following his guilty plea to “conspiracy to commit health care fraud” in Florida for a scheme alleged to have occurred between 2014 and 2019 that defrauded the U.S. government of more than US$3 million.

Article content

“His crime shows him to be dishonest, untrustworthy, and unfit to be a lawyer. His actions bring discredit to the legal profession in Ontario,” reads the tribunal’s disciplinary findings against Davidovic.

Article content

It states that presumptive revocation for fraud is the “only penalty that will maintain public confidence in the trustworthiness of the profession.”

Article content

Article content

The 53-year-old Davidovic, who was released from prison for his second criminal conviction last May, said in a recent interview with the IJB that he doesn’t know why the two crimes receive such different penalties.

Article content

“(A financial offence) could encroach on the practice of law,” said Davidovic. “I can’t imagine a circumstance where downloading child pornography would have touched the practice of law, but I understand how it could go to somebody’s character.”

Article content

In its statement, the LSO said it is increasingly arguing for presumptive revocation for lawyers and paralegals found guilty of child pornography offences, but the tribunal has “declined to adopt the presumptive framework.”

Article content

From child sex offences to law licence

Article content

At least four lawyers in Canada have been licensed since 2000 following a good character hearing that reviewed previous sexual abuse of a minor.

Article content

James Melnick’s Law Society of Ontario professional profile lists his address and telephone number in London, Ont. What it doesn’t show is his criminal conviction for sexual exploitation and luring a child — a conviction for which he served six months in prison — a few years prior to becoming a lawyer.

Article content

Article content

In 2006, after working as a high school teacher and guidance counsellor in Parkhill, Ont., Melnick pleaded guilty to criminal charges of sexual exploitation and child luring in 2004.

Article content

He lost his teaching licence in 2007 for “abusing the authority and trust vested in him in his role as a teacher for his own gratification.”

Article content

Like all potential lawyers who have committed serious offences, Melnick had to undergo a hearing to determine whether he is of “good character.”

Article content

The LSO opposed Melnick being licensed and the tribunal agreed, denying him a licence in November 2012.

Article content

But the tribunal’s ruling was overturned in 2013, when the LSO appeal panel ruled the  evidence “overwhelmingly supports a finding that (Melnick) is now of good character.” The appeal panel cited the passage of time, Melnick’s remorse, and his seeking out therapy as factors in their decision.

Article content

Article content

Melnick declined a request to be interviewed, but did say that he received a full pardon from the Parole Board of Canada. He later provided a document confirming a pardon in 2019.

Article content

“A record suspension has the effect of removing a person’s criminal record from the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) database,” said an emailed statement from the Parole Board of Canada in response to the IJB’s questions.

Article content

“It does not erase the record but sets it aside from other criminal records.”

Article content

Melnick’s public-facing LSO profile contains no reference to his 2006 criminal conviction, pardon or good character hearing.

Article content

“The (public) directory contains summaries of adjudicated findings of professional misconduct, conduct unbecoming or incapacity,” reads the LSO’s statement in response to questions from the IJB.

Article content

“It does not include pre-licensing misconduct.”

Article content

The Investigative Journalism Bureau (IJB) at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health is a collaborative investigative newsroom supported by Postmedia that partners with academics, researchers and journalists while training the next generation of investigative reporters.

Article content

Article content