Ontario Review Board
Re: Kadesha M. Wynter
ORB File No: 8167
Hearing held on: Monday, August 18, 2025
Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.81 (1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. M. Labrosse
Members: Dr. W. Sutton
Dr. S. Lessard
Mr. P. Capelle
Mr. A. Bouvier
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Kadesha M. Wynter
Counsel: Mr. M. Godoy
Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. A. Sandhu
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. J. Wright
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated September 19, 2025)
Introduction
On October 12th, 2022, the accused, Kadesha M. Wynter, was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) on account of mental disorder on charges of assault, assault police officer and assault causing bodily harm, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”). Ms. Wynter is currently subject to an Ontario Review Board Decision and Disposition dated May 14th, 2024, and an Order amending that Decision and Disposition dated May 31st, 2024, which detains her in the Forensic Unit of the Hospital with privileges up to and including living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On August 18th, 2025, a Panel of the Ontario Review Board (“the ORB” or “the Board”) convened a hearing at the ROMHC pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. The annual review hearing for Ms. Wynter was held in person. The hospital was represented by Dr. Sandhu, the Attorney-General by Mr. Wright and Kadesha Wynter by Mr. Godoy. Also in attendance was Case Manager, Ms. Meaghan Hartley. A hospital report dated August 6th, 2025, was filed as Exhibit No. 1.
Without Prejudice Position of the Parties
- Dr. Sandhu indicated that a detention disposition with no change was recommended. The hospital was joined in that position by both Mr. Wright and Mr. Godoy. The hearing therefore proceeded by way of joint position that was maintained in closing submissions.
Current Diagnoses
- Mr. Wynter’s current diagnoses are:
Schizophrenia
Alcohol use disorder
Cannabis use disorder
Stimulant use disorder (cocaine sub-type)
Index Offences
- The circumstances giving rise to the charges on the index offence is set out in the hospital report as follows:
“On Tuesday February 25th, 2020, WYNTER Kadesha was at the Civic Hospital at 1053 Carling Ave in the City of Ottawa to visit a sick relative in care. Hospital Security were alerted to a loud verbal altercation at the Tim Hortons on property. WYNTER was found to be involved and was trespassed by Security for her involvement in the disturbance. WYNTER was to be escorted to her vehicle to leave property when she then refused to leave property and was arrested.
During the course of the arrest WYNTER was fighting with Security personnel involved: VEZINA Chris, HARRISON Ross, SCHWARTZ Jessica. In an attempt to bring WYNTER back to the security office HARRISON was kicked multiple times by WYNTER about the calf and leg areas and then struck on the head with an elbow. SCHWARTZ was bitten slightly by WYNTER, who then proceeded to bite VEZINA. VEZINA was further scratched multiple times and received an elbow to the head. (…)
The accused has been diagnosed with multiple mental health issues and has had her child removed from her custody by Quebec DPG.
On Friday February 26, 2021 at around 6:30 pm, the accused arrived at 945 Torovin Private in the City of Ottawa unannounced and uninvited.
She knocked on the door. The accused cousin, Shirley PERCIVAL answered the door. Ms PERCIVAL currently has custody of the accused 4-year-old daughter Meisha WYNTER.
The accused forced her way into the home as Ms PERCIVAL tried to prevent her from entering.
The accused went to grab her daughter and Ms PERCIVAL told her to leave as she was not welcome. The accused grabbed her daughter by the hand tried to leave with her daughter but Ms PERCIVAL kept her in the house while telling her mother, Alvanis JARVIS, to call 911.
Police arrived and continued the arrest without incident.
On Friday, the 13th of March 2021, the accused Kadesha WYNTER in the City of Ottawa did assault Dr GIROUX and Nurse DESROSIERS at the Montfort Hospital. The accused was a patient in the psych ward located at 713 Montreal Rd on the 3rd floor.
The accused was being assessed by Dr GIROUX who decided to keep the accused in the ward until Monday the 15th of March 2021. Dr GIROUX walked to the nurses’ station to complete her notes while the accused questioned why she was still being held.
At 01:50 pm the accused then forced her way into the nurses station and began to hit Dr GIROUX forcefully in the head. The accused also grabbed the Doctors hair ripping out a golf ball sized chunk of hair, knocking her to the ground. Nurse DESROSIERS attempted to separate the accused from the doctor and was injured by the accused during the struggle. (Assault x2)
All parties were separated while DESROSIERS and Dr GIROUX sought medical attention. Dr GIROUX then requested for Dr CAMPBELL to assess WYNTER to see if she should remain in the psych ward. Dr CAMPBELL completed his assessment and found that WYNTER was not suicidal, psychotic or delusional and rescinded the form 1. As WYTNER was being discharged from the hospital and found competent by the Doctors, police were called to attend.
At 06:50 pm police attended the hospital and received witness statements from the victims, and reviewed video footage capturing the incident. WYNTER was then placed under arrest at 08:15 pm and provided her RTC, Caution, Secondary Caution and 524 warning all of which she understood.
The accused spoke in a clear lucid manner, understanding and responding appropriately to police. Doctors informed police the accused fully understood her actions and showed no remorse about hurting the doctor.
To prevent the repetition and continuation of the offence, and to make sure the accused got home safely, police drove her back to her residence in Gatineau Quebec. The accused was released on an undertaking and stated she understood all the conditions.
Dr GIROUX was later diagnosed with a concussion elevating the charge of assault to Assault cause bodily harm against WYNTER.”
Evidence at the Hearing
The hospital report provides a great deal of information concerning Ms. Wynter’s personal history, mental health history as well as her course in hospital and in the community both prior to and subsequent to the index offences. As the document was made an Exhibit, it is unnecessary to reproduce the information contained therein in these Reasons.
Dr. Sandhu indicated that Ms. Wynter continues to work with him, his psychiatry resident Dr. Lehr and Ms. Hartley.
Responding to questions from Mr. Wright, Dr. Sandhu addressed Ms. Wynter’s attempts to enter the Vesta Residential Recovery Treatment Program as set out at page 42 of the hospital report. On her own initiative, she applied to the aforementioned Program and was placed on their wait list. However, by early July, the Vesta Residential Recovery Treatment Program advised that she could no longer continue their preadmission process. This determination was attributable to Ms. Wynter’s difficulties in completing preadmission protocols due to ongoing obligations vis-à-vis her children, her new boyfriend and having to address the absence of locks on the windows of her residence.
Mr. Godoy asked Dr. Sandhu if he had discussed outpatient treatment options with Ms. Wynter. Dr. Sandhu responded that Ms. Wynter had attended concurrent disorders outpatient treatment, and this will continue to be offered to her. He added that Ms. Wynter has an appointment with the Rideauwood Treatment Centre immediately following this hearing and that the hospital would support her participation in their day programming.
Dr. Sandhu advised that he had met with Ms. Wynter’s boyfriend, whose name is Eric, along with Dr. Lehr to convey Ms. Wynter’s responsibilities when subject to an ORB disposition. The team would want to see more of Eric in the coming year as he is spending a significant amount of time at Ms. Wynter’s apartment although his bail conditions for a pending assault dictate where he is to reside.
At present, urine drug screens are conducted randomly approximately every two weeks. Dr. Sandhu’s remains concerned about his patient’s insight relative to her non-schizophrenic symptoms. For example, stress leading to gastrointestinal symptoms. Although the smell of cannabis has repeatedly been reported by Ms. Hartley within Ms. Wynter’s apartment. As indicated at page 42 of the Hospital Report, Ms. Hartley noted that Eric was smoking cannabis in Ms. Wynter’s apartment in the spring of 2025. At that juncture a random urine drug screen tested positive for cocaine metabolites although she denied having ingested cocaine. There were no further positive tests for cannabinoids until the most recent test on July 22nd which came back positive for both cocaine metabolites and THC.
No other evidence was presented.
Closing Observations
Dr. Sandhu stated that since Ms. Wynter’s discharge from hospital in late March she has managed to reintegrate into the community. Ms. Wynter has contemplated and is contemplative of addictions’ treatment. A continuance of a detention disposition will maintain treatment consistency. Dr. Sandhu is hopeful that by the next reporting year that a Form 49 will not be required to return her to hospital in the event of decompensation.
Mr. Wright submitted that it was unfortunate that the residential treatment program did not come to fruition, and it is hopeful that day programing can be successful.
Mr. Godoy submitted that his client wishes to focus on recovery and engagement with her treatment team.
Analysis and Decision
(a) Significant Threat
Ongoing significant threat to the safety of the public cannot be speculative. It must entail a real risk of serious physical or psychological harm arising from conduct that is both serious and criminal in nature.
In determining whether Kadesha Wynter continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public the Board has carefully analyzed the evidence as it relates to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Winko, 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.
The Board unanimously finds that Kadesha Wynter continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In arriving at this determination, the Board conducted an independent analysis and subsequently considered the joint position of the parties. As a result, this Panel of the Board unanimously accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Sandhu that Ms. Wynter’s represents a significant risk to public safety. This determination relies on the rationale set out at pages 46-47 of the Hospital Report, reproduced below for ease of reference:
Ms. Wynter’s ongoing fluctuating engagement with her treatment programming, concern for antisocial influences in her life and heavy reliance on others to maintain her lifestyle continue to increase her risk of decompensation of her mental health and thus, her associated violence risk.
Ms. Wynter’s violence risk, with a history of severe substance use requires the of a Form 49 to detain her to the forensic units at the ROH. Her prior treatment year indicates that this risk cannot be managed via the mental health act. The Form 49 will be necessary to keep Ms. Wynter in hospital to adequately address her various violence risk factors, such as substance use.
(b) Disposition
Flowing from the Board’s finding that Kadesha Wynter continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public it must shape a Disposition for the year ahead. Its paramount consideration in doing so must be the safety of the public while also considering Kadesha’s needs pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
The necessary and appropriate disposition for Kadesha Wynter provides her as much freedom as possible without subjecting the community to a real risk of dangerous behaviour.
Recent instances of substance use in the community necessitate that Ms. Wynter remain subject to a Detention Disposition to enable her expedited return to hospital in the event of mental decompensation. To her credit, Ms. Wayner now recognizes her need for treatment and took the initiative to seek admission to a residential treatment program. Although she was ultimately turned away, her pro-active efforts demonstrate a degree of insight vis-à-vis her need for treatment. Dr. Sandhu’s closing observation that Ms. Wynter has contemplated and is contemplative of addictions’ treatment rings true. The Panel is hopeful that her participation in outpatient concurrent disorders programming and/or the Rideauwood Treatment Centre day programming will enable an internalization of the need to abstain from substances. To achieve this objective, Ms. Wyman and the treatment team must ascertain what, if any, risk Eric’s presence poses to her recovery and rehabilitation given reports of her apartment smelling of cannabis in tandem with recent positive urine screens.
Conclusion
Therefore, the Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat Kadesha Wynter poses to the safety of the public while still meeting her needs, is a Detention Disposition.
In making this Disposition, the Board considered the joint position and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Sandhu and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Ms. Wynter’s mental condition, her reintegration into society and other needs.
DATED this 19th day of September 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Capelle Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board