Warning: this article includes graphic details.

A Barrie dermatologist who argued he could not possibly have rubbed his penis against his female patients because it was covered by his large belly has been found guilty of a number of allegations at Ontario’s medical regulator.

The five-member panel of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario’s discipline committee found that Dr. Rodion Andrew Kunynetz sexually abused one patient by touching her breasts under her bra without clinical justification for doing so.

He was also found guilty of “disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct” by failing to give two patients proper warning or explanation for removing some of their clothes.

But it’s the conduct that involved the doctor’s genital area and the contact, if any, that it had with female patients that was the primary focus of the discipline committee’s 47-page decision made public Tuesday. A number of patients testified that Kunynetz rubbed his penis against their legs during examinations, an allegation that Kunynetz argued was physically impossible.

Kunynetz denied all allegations before the panel. His lawyer, Matthew Sammon, told the Star they are reviewing the committee’s decision.

“We note, from our preliminary review of the decision, that the committee has dismissed most of the allegations of sexual abuse against Dr. Kunynetz,” he wrote in an email. “The committee found that the college had not proven the allegations of sexual abuse with respect to alleged contact between Dr. Kunynetz’s genitalia and patients’ legs.”

He said they are analyzing the one sexual abuse finding the committee did make, and whether an appeal will be initiated.

The committee explained that Kunynetz underwent two examinations with urology experts — one hired by the defence, the other by the college — to chemically induce erections in Kunynetz and then simulate patient examinations to determine if indeed his penis could be felt against a patient’s leg.

After conflicting results from the two experts and after consulting photographic evidence from one of the procedures, the committee could only conclude “that the impossibility of contact between the doctor’s penis and a patient’s skin (through clothing) was not established.”

Penis questions aside, the committee did state, based on the evidence, that there had been contact between the patients “and that part of Dr. Kunynetz’s lower abdomen at the level of his pelvis, and that the patients were distressed by this.” That part is known as an abdominal panniculus, or “abdominal fat pad” as the committee put it.

The panel found this contact to be professional misconduct because it “was not accompanied by any form of warning, apology or excuse.”

Kunynetz had already been suspended from practicing since October 2015. He is facing 11 criminal counts of sexual assault and one count of gross indecency, the Barrie courthouse confirmed Tuesday.

His criminal lawyer, David Humphrey, said the charges relate to 11 patients. The case is currently at the preliminary inquiry stage.

The discipline hearing heard from a number of witnesses over 38 days that stretched across the first half of last year. The patients’ identities are covered by a publication ban.

In the case of Patient C, she testified Kunynetz pressed his penis against the side of her leg when she was sitting on the side of the examination table.

“She testified that she felt he was starting to get an erection and she ‘could not wait until the appointment was over,’ ” the panel, chaired by Dr. Peeter Poldre, wrote. “She felt it was ‘disgusting and degrading.’ ”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Patient D testified that when she was sitting on the examination table, Kunynetz “pushed his hips against her thigh, and in doing so, she felt his penis against her thigh some inches above her knee. It was her perception that his penis was semi-erect. She testified ‘it was very forceful and could not have been accidental,’ ” according to the decision.

She described the movement as “gyrating.”

The college also called what are known as similar fact witnesses — patients with similar allegations, but who were not the focus of the case against Kunynetz.

When asked how she knew it was a penis rubbing up against her, one of those witnesses, Patient SC, testified: “I’m a woman of almost 70 years; I know what a penis is and what it feels like. I have no doubt at all that it was a penis.”

For the defence, Dr. Sidney Radomski, head of urology at Toronto Western hospital, injected Kunynetz with a “triple mixture” of drugs to induce an erection and then had the doctor, wearing his underwear, conduct a simulated examination on him while sitting on the examination table.

The simulated examination took place when the penis was flaccid and after the arrival of the erection. “Dr. Radomski concluded that it would not have been possible for Dr. Kunynetz to have rubbed his genitalia, flaccid or erect, against the patients,” according to the decision.

On cross-examination, he admitted other factors, such as how Kunynetz’s body was positioned, could have affected his conclusions.

Then came Dr. Gerald Brock, expert for the college, professor of surgery at Western University and specialist in erectile dysfunction. His examination of Kunynetz, where he also injected drugs to cause an erection, was observed by a college investigator and a lawyer representing the defence, whose job was to take pictures.

Brock also acted as the mock patient in the simulated examinations, which he conducted at three different examination table heights.

“When Dr. Brock sat on the examination table, he was able to feel Dr. Kunynetz’s penis when Dr. Kunynetz was standing and moving forward towards him,” the committee wrote. “He was also able to visualize the penis. Dr. Brock testified that he was able to feel the penis at all three table heights.”

A penalty hearing in the case will now be scheduled.