Dr. Moulden

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.

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

The accused sought an absolute discharge or, alternatively, the removal of a cannabis prohibition from his disposition.

The hospital and Crown sought continued detention.

Relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused lacks insight, rejects his schizophrenia diagnosis, and would abandon treatment and abuse substances if discharged, the Board found he remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered continued detention with the existing conditions, including the cannabis prohibition.

AL pleaded guilty to one count of sexual interference against a child (KB, aged 9-11).

The offence involved over-the-clothes touching, inviting the victim to touch his penis, and masturbating in her presence.

The court considered significant aggravating factors, including the nature of the offence against a child, abuse of trust, and AL's high risk of reoffence due to diagnosed pedophilia, fetishism, hypersexuality, cannabis use disorder, borderline personality disorder, and anger issues.

Mitigating factors included his early guilty plea, remorse, lack of prior record, military service with PTSD, intellectual disability, and adverse childhood experiences.

While acknowledging diminished moral blameworthiness due to his background, the court prioritized public protection and found a conditional sentence insufficient.

AL was sentenced to two years in the penitentiary followed by three years of probation, along with ancillary orders including DNA, firearms prohibition, a 20-year SOIRA order, and a no-contact order with the victim.

The appellant, found not criminally responsible due to mental disorder, appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (ORB) ordering his detention.

He sought an absolute or conditional discharge, arguing the ORB erred in finding he posed a significant public threat and in not adequately applying Gladue principles.

The Court of Appeal granted fresh evidence motions from both parties but dismissed the appeal, finding the ORB's decision reasonable.

The court affirmed that the appellant remained a significant threat due to unstable mental health, risk of medication non-compliance, and substance abuse, which could lead to re-offending.

The refusal of a conditional discharge was also deemed reasonable, as no adequate community treatment plan was in place, despite the consideration of Gladue factors.