J. Thomson

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, who was previously found not criminally responsible for multiple violent offences, has diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorders.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight, history of unpredictable aggression, and ongoing psychotic symptoms.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order with no change to its terms, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review hearing for a dual status offender who was found not guilty by reason of insanity for attempted murder and kidnapping, and later convicted of escaping lawful custody and sexual assault with a weapon.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to recent institutional misconduct, including physical altercations and sexually inappropriate behaviour.

The Board ordered his continued detention at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, should his federal incarceration cease, and extended the time for his next review to 24 months.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the restriction of the accused's liberty following his placement in seclusion at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The accused's mental condition had deteriorated due to medication non-adherence, leading to aggressive behaviour.

The Board found that the seclusion from February 16 to March 15, 2026, was necessary and appropriate to mitigate the risk to co-patients and staff, and was the least onerous and least restrictive option available.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of the accused's liberty after he was placed in seclusion for a period exceeding seven days at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The accused, who has treatment-refractory schizophrenia and a history of violence, experienced a rapid deterioration of symptoms and became aggressive towards staff.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was justified, necessary, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive option available to the hospital at the time, given the failure of de-escalation techniques and the risk posed to staff and others.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and other disorders, had a difficult year marked by violence and required ongoing seclusion.

However, his mental state had recently improved with medication optimization.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted evidence of the hospital's physician that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing detention disposition at the secure forensic hospital.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, and history of unpredictable aggression.

While the accused is ready for community living, appropriate housing is unavailable.

The Board ordered continued detention at the high-secure forensic program but directed a prehearing conference to address the Ministry's delay in funding a specialized residential placement.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for murder and other offences.

The accused is currently detained at a high secure forensic hospital.

Based on psychiatric evidence and the joint submission of the parties, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of severe violence and risk of substance relapse.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing detention order without change.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the hospital's decision to place the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for murder, in seclusion for more than seven days.

The accused had discontinued his medication, decompensated, and attempted to assault staff.

All parties agreed that the seclusion was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive option available.

The Board accepted the joint position and found the restriction of liberty was justified.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a restriction of liberties review for an accused found not criminally responsible for uttering threats and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The accused, who suffers from schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorders, had been readmitted to the hospital after becoming disorganized and entering a stranger's car.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his fragile insight and risk of decompensation when non-adherent to medication.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order and found the restriction of his liberties upon readmission to be necessary and appropriate.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board of a restriction of the accused's liberty lasting over seven days due to his placement in seclusion.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon, became aggressive and uncooperative with staff, leading to his seclusion.

The Board held a hearing and found that the restriction of liberty was necessary and appropriate for the safety of the public and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure available at the time it was imposed and throughout its duration.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of the accused, who was secluded at a mental health facility for over a month following aggressive and non-compliant behaviour.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been unmedicated and refused seclusion relief or communication with staff.

The Board found that the seclusion was a significant departure from his liberty norm but concluded it was necessary and appropriate for the safety of the public, representing the least onerous and least restrictive measure available at the time.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder.

The accused had recently assaulted his attending psychiatrist with a concealed weapon and remained in seclusion, refusing to engage with treatment staff while researching knives on the internet.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the evidence of the attending psychiatrist, finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the high-secure provincial forensic program without change.

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

The accused, diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizoaffective disorder, did not attend the hearing due to the risk of violent behaviour.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing regressive behaviours, a history of aggression, and persistent psychiatric symptoms requiring seclusion.

The Board ordered that the accused remain detained at the high-secure forensic hospital, concluding that a less secure environment would be inappropriate and unsafe.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for common nuisance, forcible confinement, assaulting a peace officer, and mischief.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the panel found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his diagnosis of schizophrenia, history of violence, and noncompliance with medication.

The panel ordered his detention at the High Secure Provincial Forensic Program at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of liberty imposed on the accused, who was placed in seclusion at a mental health facility for over seven days following an uncharacteristic assault on a staff member.

The accused, who has an anoxic brain injury and is largely non-verbal, was secluded after becoming highly agitated and striking a staff member.

The Board found that the seclusion was warranted to protect staff, other patients, and the accused himself.

The Board concluded that the seclusion was the least onerous and least restrictive intervention available and was appropriately discontinued once the accused successfully participated in seclusion relief.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder.

The accused sought an absolute or conditional discharge, while the hospital and the Attorney General argued for continued detention.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to persistent grandiose and persecutory delusions, lack of insight, and a history of violence.

The Board ordered that the accused remain detained at the high-secure provincial forensic program, concluding that neither an absolute nor a conditional discharge would adequately mitigate the risk to the public.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberty hearing after the hospital reported that the accused had been in seclusion for more than seven days.

The accused, an ultra-treatment resistant patient, was placed in seclusion after an unprovoked attempt to strike a staff member.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the seclusion was warranted and found that the ongoing seclusion from May 8 to May 28 remained the least onerous and least restrictive decision consistent with public safety available to the hospital.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for multiple assault charges, appeared for an annual review hearing before the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital and Crown recommended maintaining the current disposition, which the accused's counsel supported.

The Board heard evidence from the treating psychiatrist that while the accused's schizophrenia is stable, he continues to exhibit unprovoked and unpredictable assaultive behaviour towards staff due to antisocial personality disorder.

The Board concluded the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the current disposition be maintained as the least restrictive and least onerous option.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorder, had shown significant behavioural improvements following medication changes.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, necessitating a continued Detention Order.

However, the Board concluded that a high-secure setting was no longer necessary and ordered the accused's transfer to a less secure facility with staff-escorted and accompanied hospital and grounds privileges.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for first-degree murder and remanded to a psychiatric hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine the appropriate disposition.

The Board found that the accused represents a significant threat to public safety due to a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, a history of medication noncompliance, and repeated violent behavior.

The Board ordered the accused detained at the hospital's High Secure Provincial Forensic Programs Division, with privileges including escorted access to hospital grounds beyond the secure perimeter.