The appellant, previously found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for sexual offences involving a child, appealed an Ontario Review Board disposition maintaining his detention with limited privileges.
He argued the Board misapprehended his request for indirectly supervised community access, provided inadequate reasons, and issued an unreasonable disposition.
The Court of Appeal held the Board understood the dual nature of his requests and sufficiently explained its reasoning.
The psychiatric evidence demonstrated that the appellant remained a significant threat to public safety and required continuous supervision, particularly given the risk of reoffending against children.
The Board’s refusal to grant broader indirectly supervised community passes was therefore reasonable.
