3 total
Detention order continued for NCR accused who remains a significant threat to public safety.
The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for Rick Duc Lao, who was previously found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.
Mr. Lao suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a substance use disorder.
The Board accepted the uncontroverted expert evidence that Mr. Lao lacks insight into his condition, continues to use substances that exacerbate his psychosis, and poses a moderate to high risk of violence.
The Board concluded that Mr. Lao remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his detention order at the forensic hospital.
Detention order continued for NCR accused found to remain a significant threat to public safety.
The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle and failing to stop for police.
The accused's treating psychiatrist testified that the accused's primary diagnosis may be substance-induced rather than bipolar disorder, and that substance use remains a primary trigger for relapse.
The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.
The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order with additional privileges for hospital/ground access and indirectly supervised community access.
The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for arson and related offences.
The accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, has a history of setting fires driven by fixed delusions.
Based on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.
The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order, amending it to remove indirectly supervised grounds privileges due to the accused's risk of absconding and re-offending.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.