Fort Frances school principal charged with child luring; RRDSB removes him from duties
OPP lay two luring charges after online exploitation investigation
FORT FRANCES, ON — Ontario Provincial Police say a Fort Frances resident is facing two counts of child luringfollowing an online child sexual exploitation investigation.
Police allege Shane Beckett, 53, of Fort Frances communicated by telecommunication with a person believed to be under 16 for the purpose of facilitating a sexual offence. Beckett is scheduled to appear in the Ontario Court of Justice in Fort Frances on April 2, 2026.
Beckett is the principal of Robert Moore School. The Rainy River District School Board (RRDSB) says he has been removed from his duties while the matter proceeds.
In a Statement today: “The Rainy River District School Board (RRDSB) has been made aware that a principal employed by the Board has been arrested by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) in connection with an ongoing investigation.
“We recognize that this news is deeply concerning for our students, families, staff, and the broader community. At this time, the individual has been removed from their duties, and the Board is taking all necessary steps to ensure stability and support within the affected school community.
“As this matter proceeds through the legal system, the RRDSB will continue to cooperate fully with law enforcement. Because this is an active police investigation, and to respect the privacy and legal rights of those involved, the Board will not be providing additional details at this time.
“The safety, wellbeing, and protection of our students and staff remain our highest priority. Our schools continue to be safe, caring learning environments, and we are committed to ensuring that all appropriate supports are available to students, families, and employees who may be impacted by this information”.
The accused is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
School board cites “stability and support” for the school community
In a statement issued Thursday, RRDSB said it was aware of the arrest and would continue cooperating with law enforcement. The board added the individual “has been removed from their duties,” and it is taking steps “to ensure stability and support within the affected school community.”
RRDSB has indicated acting leadership is in place at the school, and the board has pointed families to school-based counselling supports.
Criminal Code explainer: What “luring a person under 16” means
The charge police laid
The offence commonly called “child luring” is set out in Criminal Code section 172.1. In general terms, it criminalizes communicating by telecommunication (texts, apps, social media, email, online chat, etc.) with a young person — or someone the accused believes is a young person — for the purpose of facilitating certain sexual offences.
Because police allege the target was under 16, the relevant part is s. 172.1(1)(b), which focuses on communications intended to facilitate offences such as sexual interference (s. 151), invitation to sexual touching (s. 152), indecent acts (certain provisions), and sexual assault (s. 271–273), among others listed in the section.
What the Crown generally must prove (at trial)
In plain language, to convict on s. 172.1, the prosecution typically must show:
-
Communication occurred using a telecommunication method; and
-
The communication was with a person under 16 (or someone the accused believed was under 16); and
-
The purpose of the communication was to facilitate a listed sexual offence.
A key point for readers: a meeting does not need to occur for the offence to be complete — the focus is the communication and intent.
Potential penalties if convicted
Under the Criminal Code, child luring is a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can proceed by indictment or by summary conviction. The Code sets maximum penalties of up to 14 years (indictment) or up to two years less a day(summary).
The Criminal Code text still lists mandatory minimum sentences, but the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. Bertrand Marchand (2023 SCC 26) that the mandatory minimums for child luring are unconstitutional. Sentencing remains fact-specific, and courts can still impose significant penitentiary terms in serious cases.
What a publication ban is — and why it’s used in these cases
What it does
A publication ban is a court order that restricts anyone from publishing, broadcasting, or transmitting information that could identify a protected person (often an alleged victim or witness). This includes sharing identifying details on social media.
Why courts issue them
Publication bans are commonly sought in sexual-offence-related matters to:
-
Protect privacy and safety of complainants and witnesses, particularly youth;
-
Encourage reporting and participation in the justice process without fear of exposure;
-
Reduce the risk of additional harm, harassment, or retaliation.
What can’t be shared
A ban often covers more than names. It can include any detail that could lead to identification, depending on how the order is written.
Consequences for violating a ban
Failing to comply with certain publication bans is a Criminal Code offence punishable on summary conviction.
Reporting and support
Anyone with information is asked to contact the OPP at 1-888-310-1122.
Anonymous tips can be submitted through Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS).
Online child sexual exploitation tips can also be made to Cybertip.ca.
If you or someone you know needs support, RRDSB has pointed families to school-based counselling supports through the school office, and local victim services are also available in the Rainy River District.
