A former support worker in Colwood youth homes was found guilty of sexually assaulting a teenage boy after being told his unprofessional relationship with the boy warranted a three-month separation.
Matthew Arlen Porcher was found guilty in November of sexual assault and touching for a sexual purpose a person under 16.
Porcher worked as a resident support worker — making meals, waking kids up and encouraging them to get to school, taking them to appointments and putting them to bed — from the fall of 2021 to April 2022 for a company that operated homes for youth in the care of the province. The 14-year-old boy, who cannot be named due to a publication ban to protect his identity, lived in a home operated by the same company.
Porcher, who was 20 or 21 at the time of the events, developed a close bond with the boy, prompting his employer to determine they needed to separate for at least three months, according to a recently released written decision by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Gareth Morley.
On April 24, 2022, Porcher was given time to tell the boy about the separation, staying well past the two hours he was given to explain the situation, the decision says.
The boy didn’t want him to leave and began crying.
Porcher frequently stayed later than the end of his shift and had been warned twice by his employer for doing so. Employees who testified said it was not unusual for support workers to have to stay late, but they were required to report to management as soon as possible for approval. They were also not to have any physical contact beyond a hug, and only if initiated by a youth.
His relationship with the boy involved other breaches, including roughhousing with him and his brother while the boy was shirtless, giving him shirtless massages to help him sleep and exchanging daily messages via text and social media, even on days Porcher wasn’t working. Porcher knew the massages violated policy and hid them from other staff, the decision says.
Porcher met the boy twice in his car in a nearby park, which required him to encourage the boy to break his curfew. Porcher said he did this because the boy threatened to hurt himself if he couldn’t see Porcher.
After a dispute on the night of April 24 between the boy and his brother, that lasted into the early morning, Porcher told the support worker on shift she could go home and he would put the boy to bed. He gave the boy a back massage to fall asleep, as he had on several previous occasions, because of an injury to the boy’s back, the decision says.
The boy testified that when Porcher thought he was asleep, Porcher touched his genitals and buttocks. He said he endured the touching for about 20 minutes out of fear, before pretending to wake up. Porcher tried to get him back to sleep but he would not, so Porcher left, the decision says.
Porcher testified in his own defence, denying he touched the boy’s genitals but admitting to giving massages contrary to his employer’s policies.
The boy reported the incident the next day without details and without naming the staff member. When Porcher read the incident report, he sent the boy messages via Snapchat saying they should talk.
“I didn’t do that for me … you were having a really tough day. Thought it would be what you wanted.” Porcher wrote. “It was really tough to do that but I thought it might help you, pal.”
Porcher testified that those messages referred to the back massage.
Later that day, he made a dozen unanswered calls to the boy and sent a barrage of messages asking him to meet Porcher in a park to talk.
“I will let you come punch me in the face [right now],” he wrote. “I’m so sorry. This hurts me so bad. I’m sorry it hurt you.”
The boy called the police, who met Porcher at the park and began an investigation that led to Porcher being charged.
Morley found Porcher’s explanation for why he breached rules about staying late and having physical contact with the boy inconsistent and lacking sense, therefore undermining his credibility, he wrote in his decision.
“In general, the accused’s explanations for his text messages are obviously after-the-fact rationalizations and implausible ones. They show the accused has no compunction about lying,” Morley wrote, calling Porcher “a practised liar and manipulator.”
