Jacqueline Masse

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

The accused, previously found NCR for mischief and uttering threats, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining the current detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his major mental illness, lack of insight, and history of non-compliance with treatment.

The Board ordered the maintenance of the current detention order, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including assault with a weapon.

The hospital and the Crown recommended a conditional discharge, while the accused consented to a conditional discharge but also asked the Board to consider an absolute discharge.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of violence, personality disorders, and need for ongoing support to transition to the civil mental health system.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms including residing at a specific address, reporting to the hospital, and abstaining from intoxicants.

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on charges including assault with a weapon and theft under $5,000.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Board considered psychiatric evidence indicating the accused suffers from schizophrenia and substance use disorders, with ongoing psychotic symptoms and crystalized delusions.

Applying the test from R. v. Bharwani, the Board concluded the accused remained unfit to stand trial as he lacked a reality-based understanding of the proceedings and could not meaningfully communicate with counsel.

The Board found the accused posed a significant threat to public safety and ordered his detention at the hospital, adopting the recommended conditions as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, with minor modifications to driving and reporting requirements.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson and other offences.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended a continuation of the detention disposition, while the accused sought a conditional discharge.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to her borderline personality disorder and risk of substance use relapse.

The Board concluded that a detention disposition remains necessary and appropriate to manage her risk while supporting her transition to independent living in the community.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various assault and weapons offences.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and a cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted evidence of the treating psychiatrist that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, particularly due to the risk of psychotic relapse and medication non-compliance in a less supervised setting.

The Board ordered the continuation of a detention disposition with minor amendments to allow for greater travel privileges, and maintained the existing publication ban.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.

The parties presented a joint position that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his schizoaffective disorder and history of substance use.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation, finding that absent a disposition, the accused would likely become non-compliant with medication and decompensate.

The Board ordered a renewal of the detention disposition with privileges, including supervised community accommodation.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for several offences, including assaulting peace officers, and was granted a conditional discharge by the court.

At the initial Review Board hearing, the Hospital and the Attorney General sought to continue the conditional discharge, while the accused sought an absolute discharge.

The Review Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to a history of medication non-compliance and cannabis use leading to psychotic relapses.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge, maintaining the requirement for urine screening but removing unnecessary weapons and no-contact prohibitions.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for multiple violent offences.

The hospital recommended continuing the detention order with amendments to expand the accused's travel radius for cultural events and to remove a no-contact condition regarding his mother.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his complex mental health needs, substance use history, and ongoing behavioural issues.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with the hospital's recommended amendments, concluding it was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition available.

The accused appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing after being found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.

The accused suffers from an untreated delusional disorder, lacks insight into his illness, and exhibits paranoid and persecutory beliefs.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his high risk of violence and lack of protective factors.

A detention order was issued, requiring the accused to remain detained at the hospital with conditions including a communication prohibition and a radius restriction regarding the victims.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had been residing in a supervised group home and demonstrating relative stability.

Based on psychiatric evidence and joint submissions, the Board concluded the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge requiring the accused to reside at the group home, with a provision authorizing police to arrest and return her to the hospital in the event of a breach.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for committing an indecent act and sexual assault.

The hospital and the Attorney-General recommended a continuation of the detention disposition, and the accused's counsel joined this position.

Relying on the uncontroverted expert evidence of the hospital's representative, the Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his ongoing mental illness and need for structure.

The Board ordered a continuation of the detention disposition with minor amendments to his community access privileges.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible, was admitted to the hospital involuntarily under the Mental Health Act.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board, prompting a potential restriction of liberty hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Board determined it lacked jurisdiction to hold the hearing, as confinement under the Mental Health Act is governed by its own criteria and procedures, and does not constitute a restriction of liberty delegated by the Board.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and other offences committed against his family members during a psychotic episode.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the treatment team and the Crown jointly submitted that he remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board agreed, finding that his risk of violent recidivism is moderate but would be high if he consumed substances or faced stressors.

The Board ordered his detention in a secure forensic unit.

While the hospital recommended staff-accompanied community access, the Board rejected this request, granting only indirectly supervised access to the secure hospital area and accompanied access to the hospital grounds, prioritizing public safety given the short period of observation.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for multiple offences, was subject to an annual review of his disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia and severe substance use disorders, noting a recent elopement where he consumed large quantities of drugs.

The Board approved a request to transfer the accused to the Royal Ottawa Hospital to be closer to his sister for support.

However, the Board dismissed the accused's request to amend his disposition to allow the consumption of legal recreational substances like alcohol and cannabis, finding they would exacerbate his psychotic symptoms.

Allan Victor Gay, found not criminally responsible in 1994 for assault and weapons charges, appeared for his annual Ontario Review Board hearing.

He has schizophrenia and numerous physical ailments.

The hospital, Crown, and accused's counsel all agreed that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the current detention order at the Brockville Mental Health Centre remains appropriate.

The Board accepted this joint position, noting the accused's preference to remain at the hospital, and upheld the detention order.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and assaulting a peace officer.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and antisocial personality disorder, sought privileges to consume alcohol.

The treating psychiatrist opposed the request, recommending the accused first engage with an addictions counsellor given his history of substance abuse.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered that his current conditions remain the same, denying the request for alcohol privileges.

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

The accused's attending psychiatrist testified that the accused had stabilized, secured full-time employment, and moved into supportive housing, recommending a conditional discharge.

The Crown opposed the conditional discharge due to partial insight and risk factors.

The Board found that the accused had made commendable progress over the past year and granted a conditional discharge with conditions, including a specified address to consolidate recent gains.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault and criminal harassment, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

The hospital and Crown submitted that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, which the Board accepted.

The hospital requested a transfer to the Royal Ottawa Hospital to allow the accused to be closer to her oncologist for breast cancer treatment.

The Board approved the transfer, maintaining the current disposition conditions.

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

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and break and enter, had been progressing well in 24-hour supervised housing until a recent incident involving the abuse of prescription medication and a lack of transparency with the treatment team regarding an inappropriate relationship with a former staff member.

The Board accepted the hospital's expert evidence that the accused's risk had elevated to moderate.

The Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the Detention Disposition, modifying it to require supervised accommodation rather than 24-hour supervision, and granting expanded day passes.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused had been found not criminally responsible for arson.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, substance use history, and partial insight into his illness.

The Board concluded that a conditional discharge was not appropriate, as the civil commitment mechanisms under the Mental Health Act would be insufficient to protect public safety in the event of rapid decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of a detention disposition, while granting additional indirectly supervised privileges to facilitate community reintegration.