D. Embry

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had shown some clinical progress but experienced recent instability and an absconding incident.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the hospital's evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered continued detention at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with privileges up to and including residing in the community in supervised accommodation to ensure medication compliance.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The accused, diagnosed with ultra-treatment resistant schizophrenia, had been residing in the community under a Conditional Discharge.

The Board accepted expert evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight and the high risk of decompensation and violence if he were to discontinue his medication.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Conditional Discharge with a treatment condition, but declined to impose a weapons prohibition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for harassment.

The accused sought a conditional discharge, while the Hospital and Crown jointly recommended maintaining the existing detention order.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the accused's schizophrenia, combined with his limited insight, guardedness, and lack of participation in structured activities, meant he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board concluded that maintaining the detention order with privileges for approved accommodation was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to protect the public.

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

The accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including arson and assault.

The Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial as his psychotic symptoms prevent him from having a reality-based understanding of the proceedings or communicating with counsel.

However, noting improvements in his behavioural control and impulse management, the Board ordered his transfer from a high-secure forensic hospital to a medium-secure facility, with privileges to access the community accompanied by staff.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty imposed on an accused who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.

The hospital had transferred the accused from a general forensic unit to a secure forensic unit after he exhibited escalating risk behaviours, paranoia, and affective instability.

The Board found that the initial transfer and the ongoing restriction of liberty were the least onerous and least restrictive interventions necessary to manage the accused's risk of violence and untoward behaviour.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an Indigenous accused found not criminally responsible for murder and indignity to a dead body.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, history of medication non-compliance, and substance use disorder.

The Board ordered a continuation of his detention at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with the addition of indirectly supervised community access and community living in approved accommodation.

Furthermore, applying Gladue principles, the Board ordered the preparation of a Gladue Report for the accused's next annual review to properly consider his unique circumstances as an Indigenous person.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of an NCR accused who was placed in seclusion at a mental health facility.

The accused's mental state had rapidly deteriorated due to medication changes and non-compliance, leading to agitation and aggressive behaviour.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that seclusion was necessary to manage the high risk of unpredictable physical violence.

The Board concluded that the initial and ongoing restriction of liberty was warranted, necessary for public safety, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive intervention available.

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

The accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia, has been living in the community in supported housing and has been compliant with his medication under supervision.

However, he lacks insight into his illness and has stated he would discontinue medication if no longer under the Board's jurisdiction.

The Board accepted expert evidence that discontinuation of medication would likely lead to an exacerbation of psychotic symptoms and an increased risk of violence.

The Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but concluded his risk could be safely managed under a less restrictive conditional discharge, subject to terms including a consent to treatment condition.

The accused, charged with first-degree murder, challenged the admissibility of statements he made to police following his arrest.

The accused, who was self-represented with the assistance of amicus curiae, argued that his statements were involuntary due to his mental illness, vulnerability, and police inducements involving cigarettes.

The court found that the accused had an operating mind, understood his rights, and made a conscious decision to speak to police.

The court concluded that the police conduct was professional, there were no oppressive circumstances or impermissible inducements, and the statements were proven voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt.