Dr. Bunker

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault offences.

The accused is currently detained at a secure forensic psychiatric hospital.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia and risk of medication non-compliance.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on assault charges.

The accused, who has schizophrenia, is detained at a secure forensic psychiatric facility.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused remains unable to understand court proceedings or instruct counsel, and therefore remains unfit to stand trial.

The Board further found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, as he would likely become non-compliant with medication and decompensate if released.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of an accused found not criminally responsible, who had been placed in seclusion at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and a history of violence, was placed in seclusion after his mental state decompensated and he refused medication.

The Board heard evidence from the treating psychiatrist that the seclusion remained necessary due to the accused's risk, though he was showing improvement after starting injectable medication.

The Board concluded that the restriction of liberty was justified, necessary, and the least onerous and least restrictive placement available.

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on charges of indecent act and disobeying a court order.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine fitness and disposition.

Relying on the evidence of the treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to Schizoaffective Disorder, bipolar type, and continues to pose a significant risk for violence.

The Board ordered a detention order at the High Secure Provincial Forensic Program.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for two counts of murder, rape, and indecent assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Sexual Sadism, Transvestic Fetishism, and Antisocial Personality Disorder, sought an amendment to his detention disposition to allow an escorted bank visit.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that his disorders are untreatable.

The Board maintained the detention disposition at the secure forensic facility but granted the request for a one-time, staff-escorted bank visit.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences in 1993.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused remains residually psychotic, lacks insight, and refuses to engage with the treatment team.

Applying the Winko threshold, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the high-secure forensic hospital, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The appellant, found unfit to stand trial by the Ontario Court of Justice, appealed the Ontario Review Board's (ORB) subsequent disposition finding him unfit and ordering his detention.

The Court of Appeal confirmed its jurisdiction to hear appeals from ORB findings of unfitness that result in a disposition, distinguishing them from findings of fitness which do not.

On the merits, the court found the ORB's decision to be reasonable, giving appropriate weight to psychiatric assessments and counsel's representations regarding the appellant's ability to instruct counsel.

The appeal was dismissed.