K. Lundrigan

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

The accused suffers from delusional disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and substance use disorders.

The Board accepted the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his polysubstance abuse and underdeveloped insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order Disposition, with a modification to permit Canada-wide travel.

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

The accused suffers from schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Relying on the uncontroverted evidence of the hospital, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition with the addition of overnight privileges at his father's residence, noting significant improvements in his behavioral regulation and an upcoming transition to community accommodation.

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

The accused, diagnosed with chronic relapsing schizophrenia, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended a conditional discharge, citing the accused's history of discontinuing medication and decompensating when previously granted an absolute discharge, as well as his recent disengagement from treatment.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a conditional discharge with monthly reporting as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused was charged with one count of sexual assault arising from an incident alleged to have occurred in the washroom of a bar where he was the manager and the complainant was training as a bartender.

The Crown alleged the accused forced oral sex on the complainant while she was intoxicated and vomiting.

The court found significant inconsistencies and contradictions in the complainant's testimony, rendering her account unreliable and untrustworthy.

The court concluded the Crown failed to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused.