Joel Goldenberg

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences.

The hospital and the accused's counsel jointly recommended an absolute discharge, supported by expert psychiatric evidence that the accused was fully compliant with treatment, abstinent from alcohol, and no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

Applying the Supreme Court's framework in Winko, the Board accepted the unanimous clinical recommendation and granted the accused an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's conditional discharge.

The accused had previously been found unfit to stand trial on charges including criminal harassment and public mischief.

The hospital and all parties recommended a continuation of the conditional discharge, as the accused's severe anxiety prevented a meaningful fitness assessment, though he could not be deemed permanently unfit.

The Board accepted the evidence, found the accused remains unfit to stand trial, and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief, animal cruelty, and break and enter.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been detained at a secure forensic unit but was living in the community.

Following a voluntary hospital admission to transition to Clozapine, his mental health and insight significantly improved.

The Board found that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, he can be safely managed in the community.

A conditional discharge was ordered.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for her mandatory annual hearing.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly submitted that she remains a significant threat to public safety and that her current detention disposition should continue.

The Board accepted the joint submission, relying on expert psychiatric evidence that the accused's limited cognitive capacity and lack of insight into her illness pose a real risk of harm, particularly when she is non-compliant with medication.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention disposition on the same terms.