Brian Kenneth Adsett

During a murder trial, counsel for one co-accused renewed an application to recall two witnesses to testify about the deceased's general reputation for violence and aggression, arguing that the evidentiary basis had changed since both co-accused had now testified.

The court had previously permitted specific Scopelliti evidence of the deceased's prior acts of weaponized intimidation but denied broader character evidence.

The court found that the law and reasons from its prior ruling continued to apply and denied the renewed request, noting that unlike the other co-accused who had established an air of reality for self-defence, the moving co-accused had not satisfied that threshold.

The hospital requested an early review of the accused's Conditional Discharge Disposition after he eloped from the hospital and his mental health deteriorated due to medication non-compliance.

The accused, who has a diagnosis of Schizoaffective Disorder and a history of unprovoked violence, experienced a psychotic decompensation requiring involuntary admission and seclusion.

The Ontario Review Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a Detention Order Disposition, as his risk could no longer be safely managed in the community.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault.

The hospital reported a significant restriction of liberty after the accused was placed in seclusion following an unprovoked assault on a co-patient.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia, remains a significant threat to public safety due to escalating unpredictable physical aggression.

The Board upheld the restriction of liberty as necessary and appropriate, and ordered the accused transferred to a high-secure provincial forensic program, with reduced privileges pending the transfer.

Flora Sadik, previously found NCR for assault with a weapon, was subject to a mandatory annual review of her Detention Order by the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital and Crown recommended continuing the Detention Order, which the accused did not contest.

The Board accepted expert psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to experience symptoms of psychosis, lacks insight into her illness, and would likely decompensate and pose a significant threat to public safety if discharged.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order to ensure medication adherence and facilitate a highly supervised transition to community living.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for break and enter with intent, underwent an annual Review Board hearing.

The hospital and Attorney General recommended maintaining his detention at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton with slight amendments to community privileges, while retaining a prohibition on substance use.

The accused requested the removal of the cannabis prohibition.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his schizoaffective disorder, cannabis use disorder, and lack of insight.

The Board ordered his continued detention with the agreed-upon privilege amendments, concluding that removing the cannabis prohibition would be premature and increase his risk of relapse and violence.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for sexual interference, criminal harassment, and sexual assault.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to make a disposition.

The Board accepted the joint submission and the unchallenged psychiatric evidence that the accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia and experiences offence-paralleling delusions, poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention order with privileges up to and including community living in approved accommodation to allow for inpatient treatment, medication optimization, and rehabilitative programming.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, was subject to an annual review of his detention disposition.

The Ontario Review Board heard evidence that he suffers from bipolar disorder and cannabis use disorder, and that his mental state remains fragile and prone to rapid decompensation when non-compliant with medication or using cannabis.

The Board found that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his detention at the hospital, concluding that a conditional discharge would not adequately manage his risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The accused had suffered a severe traumatic brain injury prior to the index offence, which likely precipitated a psychotic episode.

The Board found that the accused has been stable, medication adherent, and supported by his family and community services.

Applying the threshold from Winko, the Board concluded that the accused no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including aggravated assault, is currently subject to a detention order at a psychiatric hospital.

The accused requested an amendment to his disposition to allow for the use of cannabis from a government-authorized retailer.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his brittle schizophrenia, history of non-adherence with medication, and vulnerability to substance use.

The Board concluded that allowing cannabis use would not be a good risk management strategy and ordered no change to the current detention disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and other offences.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and major depressive disorder.

The attending psychiatrist testified that while the accused's trajectory has been positive, he lacks insight and would likely discontinue medication without forensic supports, leading to a reemergence of psychotic symptoms and inappropriate behaviour.

The Board applied the Winko test and found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order Disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for uttering threats and breach of probation.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had successfully transitioned to community living but remained reliant on a strict medication regimen and extensive outpatient support.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, as he would likely become medication non-adherent and decompensate without the structure of a Detention Order.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order with no changes to its conditions.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a restriction of liberties hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for arson.

The hospital had readmitted the accused from the community due to decompensation linked to cigarette smoking, which lowered his clozapine levels.

The Board found the readmission was warranted and the least restrictive measure available to manage his risk.

The Board also concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his treatment-refractory schizoaffective disorder, history of medication non-compliance, and risk of rapid decompensation.

A Detention Order was maintained.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for firearms and uttering threats offences and was diagnosed with schizophrenia.

The Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight, ongoing paranoia, and risk of medication non-compliance if discharged.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order on the same terms to support his gradual transition to community living.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to determine the fitness and disposition of the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including break and enter and theft.

Based on the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused remained unfit to stand trial due to a severe thought disorder stemming from schizophrenia.

The Board ordered a detention order as the necessary and appropriate disposition, noting the accused's history of homelessness and non-compliance with treatment, but declined to impose a condition prohibiting the use of intoxicating substances due to a lack of evidence of substance abuse.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson and other offences.

The accused had been living in the community without readmission since 2021, demonstrating good insight into his schizoaffective disorder and substance use issues.

All parties, including the hospital and the Attorney General, jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

The Board agreed and ordered an absolute discharge.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder, was subject to an annual review of his Conditional Discharge.

The Ontario Review Board considered whether he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on a joint submission and psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's schizophrenia and history of violence necessitated ongoing supervision to ensure medication compliance, especially following the recent death of his mother who had been his primary support.

The Board concluded the accused remained a significant threat and ordered the continuation of his Conditional Discharge with existing conditions.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The accused had a lengthy history of mental illness, substance abuse, and antisocial personality disorder, marked by repeated rule violations and bringing contraband into the hospital.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, finding that the accused continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

A Detention Order was maintained as the necessary and appropriate disposition, being the least onerous and least restrictive option available to manage the accused's risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, had a history of non-compliance, substance use, and elopement from the hospital.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his persistent mental illness, substance use, and risk of decompensation if not supervised.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for numerous offences including dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, arson, and robbery.

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder and Cannabis Abuse Disorder, had been living in the community subject to a Conditional Discharge.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the evidence of the attending psychiatrist that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his fragile mental state, susceptibility to stress, and risk of relapse into substance use and medication non-adherence.

The Board ordered a continuation of the Conditional Discharge with a reduced reporting requirement of not less than once per month.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assaulting a peace officer, was subject to a Restriction of Liberty by the hospital following a positive drug screen for cocaine and concerning behavioural changes.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction.

The Board found that the restriction was well justified, necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive and least onerous course of action given the accused's substance use, lack of transparency, and need for close monitoring.