D.J. Brodsky

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

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault offences, is diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance use disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety, particularly due to his vulnerability to stressors and recent relapse into cannabis use, which historically leads to decompensation and violent behaviour.

The Board concluded that a continued Detention Order at the hospital, with privileges for community living, remains the necessary and appropriate disposition to manage his risk.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual disposition hearing.

The hospital, Crown, and the accused jointly submitted that he continues to pose a significant threat to the public and that his current detention order should continue with the same conditions.

The Board accepted the joint submission, noting the accused's self-sabotaging behaviours, AWOL incidents, and need for further therapeutic engagement.

The Board ordered a continued Detention Order.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, had absconded and was subsequently transferred to a secure unit.

A Restriction of Liberty hearing was held.

The hospital sought to justify the transfer and requested the removal of a cannabis use exception from the accused's disposition.

The Board found the transfer to the secure unit was necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive measure given the accused's frequent AWOLs and chronic cocaine use.

However, the Board declined to remove the cannabis exception at this time, noting it would not result in an increase of risk to the public.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for mischief and sexual assault.

The parties presented a joint submission that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety but had made positive progress, warranting a change in his detention order to allow for privileges up to indirectly supervised on hospital grounds.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding it represented the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.