Keith Forde

The applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for mental or nervous shock, bereavement counselling, and expenses following the fatal stabbing of her brother.

The Board found that the applicant did not meet the legal test for mental or nervous shock because she did not witness the crime or its immediate aftermath.

However, the Board awarded $1,800 for future bereavement counselling to assist with the grief and distress associated with the loss.

Claims for travel expenses and loss of income were denied due to lack of documentation and failure to meet the distance threshold.

The applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board after being struck by an ATV on his property.

The ATV and a dirt bike fled the scene after the collision.

The Board found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the collision was an intentional assault by a motor vehicle rather than a motor vehicle accident.

As the incident did not meet the definition of a crime of violence under the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act, the application was denied.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained in two separate incidents: a stabbing during a fight at a party, and a shooting during an illegal drug transaction.

The Board found that the Applicant was a victim of crimes of violence in both incidents.

However, compensation was denied under sections 17(1) and 17(2) of the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act because the Applicant failed to report the first incident to the police, and in the second incident, his injuries were proportional to his involvement in the illegal drug trade and he unreasonably refused to cooperate with the police investigation.

The Board awarded $400 towards the Applicant's legal expenses.

The applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries allegedly resulting from an assault.

The applicant had no memory of the incident due to heavy intoxication and relied on hearsay evidence from a friend.

Medical and ambulance reports suggested the injuries were consistent with a fall down a flight of stairs.

The Board found insufficient reliable evidence to prove the injuries resulted from a crime of violence and denied the application, though it awarded disbursements to the applicant's counsel.

The applicant, a peace officer injured during a workplace assault, sought a review of a single member's decision awarding $5,000 for pain and suffering and denying medical expenses.

The applicant sought to introduce new medical evidence regarding a subsequent shoulder surgery.

The review panel found the new evidence did not meet the test for admission as it would not have an important influence on the result, noting the single member had already considered the likelihood of future surgery.

The panel upheld the pain and suffering award as reasonable and confirmed the denial of medical expenses due to a lack of documentation regarding WSIB coverage.

The original order was confirmed.

The applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for funeral and burial expenses, airline tickets, and tuition fees following the death of an international student who was stabbed to death.

The Board found the deceased was a victim of a crime of violence under the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act.

The Board awarded $1,525.43 for funeral-related expenses but denied the claims for airline tickets and tuition fees, as it is not the Board's usual practice to cover such costs.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for a traumatic brain injury allegedly sustained when he was punched by a security guard.

The Board preferred police evidence indicating that the highly intoxicated Applicant was the instigator of multiple altercations and that the person who pushed him acted in self-defense.

The application was denied under section 17(1) of the CVCA because the Applicant's conduct contributed to his injuries.

A post-hearing allegation of bias against the adjudicator was also dismissed.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for emotional injuries allegedly resulting from an armed robbery at her workplace.

The Applicant was working in the back kitchen and did not directly witness the robbery, only hearing a coworker shout about a gun.

The Board found that the Applicant was not a direct victim of the crime of violence.

Furthermore, medical evidence indicated her emotional issues pre-dated the incident.

The application for compensation was denied.

The applicant requested a review of a single member's decision refusing to vary an original compensation order to cover the cost of prescribed medical marijuana.

The applicant suffered from PTSD following the murder of his father and testified that medical marijuana significantly reduced his symptoms, allowing him to stop taking other medication.

The review panel found that the denial of the variation request was unreasonable, given the contemplated need for future treatment in the original order and the demonstrated benefits of the new treatment.

The panel authorized a six-month supply of medical marijuana at a maximum cost of $960.

The applicant requested a review of a single member's decision denying his request for an additional $10,000 for dental expenses related to a 2013 assault.

The applicant had previously been awarded compensation, including a $10,000 contribution towards dental work.

The review panel found that the single member did not err in law or unreasonably exercise his discretion in denying further compensation, noting that victims are not necessarily entitled to be made completely whole.

The application for additional dental expenses was dismissed.

The applicant sought a review of a single member's decision denying her request for an additional $2,680.00 for future dental expenses related to a 2008 assault.

The review panel found no serious error of law or unreasonable exercise of discretion in the original decision, as the dental report did not link the new dental issues to the 2008 crime of violence.

The request for variation was denied and the original decision confirmed.

The applicant sought a review of a single member's decision denying his request for a variation to award an additional 4,350 euros for dental expenses related to a 1992 assault.

The review panel found that the single member did not err in concluding that the dental report failed to link the 1992 assault with the applicant's 2017 dental issues, which were attributed to gum disease and natural deterioration.

The application for review was dismissed, and the original order remained in effect.

The applicant, a police officer, applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for compensation after fracturing his hand while arresting a suspect on an outstanding bench warrant.

The Board denied the application, finding that the injury was not the result of a crime of violence, nor did it occur while arresting an offender for an offence against another person or preventing an offence against another person, as required by section 5 of the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act.

The applicant sought a review of a single member's decision denying compensation under the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act for an eye injury caused by a paintball.

The original member found insufficient evidence that the injury resulted from an intentional assault rather than an accident.

The review panel held that a review hearing is not an opportunity to present new evidence or re-argue the case.

Finding no serious error of law or unreasonable exercise of discretion in the original decision, the panel dismissed the review and upheld the original order.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for physical and psychological injuries sustained after being assaulted by an intoxicated friend.

The offender was convicted of assault.

The Board found the Applicant was a victim of a crime of violence and awarded $5,000 for pain and suffering, plus expenses for medication, travel, medical reports, and lost wages, totaling $5,652.07.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries allegedly sustained during an assault by a co-worker at a restaurant.

The Applicant claimed the co-worker strangled and threatened him.

However, CCTV footage and the co-worker's testimony indicated that the Applicant initiated the physical contact and the co-worker acted in self-defence.

The Board found the Applicant's testimony unreliable and concluded he was not a victim of a crime of violence.

The claim for compensation was denied.

The applicant sought a review of a single member's decision denying her application to vary an original compensation order.

The applicant claimed her condition had worsened since the original hearing, citing increased pain and inability to work.

The review panel upheld the single member's decision, finding no new objective medical evidence of a change in circumstances or deterioration that would justify a variation, and concluded there was no failure to properly exercise discretion or error of law.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for mental or nervous shock after witnessing the brutal stabbing death of her friend.

The Board found that the incident was exceedingly violent, the Applicant had a close personal relationship with the deceased, and she sustained significant psychological injuries, including PTSD and Major Depressive Disorder, directly induced by witnessing the crime.

The Board awarded $8,000 for pain and suffering, along with $3,600 for past and future therapy expenses.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for physical and psychological injuries sustained during an aggravated assault by a friend.

The offender was convicted and sentenced for the assault.

The Board found the Applicant was a victim of a crime of violence and awarded $9,000 for pain and suffering, plus $1,200 for future counselling, while denying travel expenses.

The applicant, a police officer, sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained while escorting a prisoner.

The applicant dislocated his finger while attempting to prevent the prisoner from assaulting another officer.

The Board found the applicant was injured while attempting to prevent an offence, satisfying section 5(b) of the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act.

The Board awarded $1,500 for pain and suffering and $218.64 for travel expenses.