Ontario Review Board
Re: Michael O’Leary
ORB File No: 1655
Hearing held on: Wednesday, September 3, 2025
Place of Hearing: Brockville Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan Dr. W. Loza Ms. M. den Haan Ms. R. MacIntyre
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Michael O’Leary Counsel: Mr. M. Bird
Person in charge of hospital: Representative : Dr. S. Gulati
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Masse
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated October 14, 2025)
Introduction:
On July 8, 1993, Michael O’Leary was tried in court on charges of committing an indecent act and sexual assault, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. The court determined that, based on his mental disorder, he was not criminally responsible (NCR). Since that time, Mr. O’Leary has been under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board (ORB or “the Board”).
Mr. O’Leary is currently subject to an Ontario Review Board Disposition dated September 4th, 2024, detaining him at the Secure Forensic Unit of the Brockville Mental Health Centre He has privileges that include the ability to live in the community of Brockville in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On September 3rd, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board convened at the Brockville Mental Health Centre, hereinafter referred to as the Hospital, to conduct Mr. O’Leary’s annual review hearing. Mr. O’Leary attended the hearing and was represented by his counsel, Mr. Michael Bird.
A hospital report dated August 16th, 2025 was entered as Exhibit No. 1.
Without Prejudice Position of the Parties
Dr. Gulati on behalf of the hospital, indicated that Mr. O’Leary continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and that a continuation of the detention disposition with no changes is recommended.
Both Ms. Masse, on behalf of the Attorney-General, and Mr. Bird, on behalf of Mr. O’Leary, joined with the hospital’s recommendation such that the hearing proceeded by way of a joint position.
Index Offences
- The circumstances are set out in last year’s reasons for disposition as follows:
On December 4, 1992, at approximately 08:35 hours, Mr. O'Leary's neighbour noticed him masturbating in his laneway while looking at the neighbour's residence door. The neighbour remained inside her residence. She called another neighbour as a witness and they both confirmed that Mr. O'Leary was masturbating. When the neighbour came outside, Mr. O'Leary ran down the laneway. When he returned a short time later and was standing on the sidewalk, the neighbour called the police and made the complaint.
On December 7, 1992, at approximately 09:00 hours, the victim was walking on Florence Street in Ottawa. The victim noticed Mr. O'Leary across the street playing with the zipper of his pants. When the victim walked on the street earlier in the opposite direction, she had noticed him doing the same thing. As she kept walking, she noticed Mr. O'Leary running across the street in her direction. She turned around to see him behind her. He pushed her on the shoulders to the ground and got on top of her. While making grunting noises, Mr. O'Leary took his penis out of his pants and started masturbating himself. The victim was afraid what he might do. She grabbed his penis with her left hand and tried to push him away with her right hand, while screaming for help. Mr. O'Leary stopped what he was doing and noticed some people looking out of windows. He got up and ran across the street from where he came.
A witness took the victim in and police were called. The victim and the witness identified Mr. O'Leary. He was arrested at approximately 09:05 hours the same day and taken into custody.
When interviewed by police, he denied being present at the scene in either incident.”
Current Diagnoses
Schizophrenia, Paranoid Type, continues with residual positive and negative symptoms
Sexual Dysfunction NOS (Hypersexuality) - in remission in a controlled environment and sex drive reducing medication
Paraphilic Disorder
Exhibitionism - in remission with pharmacological treatment
Telephone Scatologia - in remission in a controlled environment and with pharmacological treatment
Personality Disorder NOS (Schizotypal, Schizoid and Paranoid Traits)
Anemia secondary to Antiandrogen treatment
Overweight
Evidence
The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated August 16th, 2025 ( Exhibit 1). The document provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. O’Leary’s personal history, mental health history as well as his course in hospital and in the community both prior to and subsequence to the index offences. As the Hospital Report was made an Exhibit, it is unnecessary to reproduce the information contained therein in these Reasons.
Dr. Gulati testified that Mr. O’Leary transitioned from 24-7 supervised accommodation to an 8-hour supervised group home in March of 2025. He is much happier at this new residence as he had issues with a peer at his previous residence.
Mr. O’Leary continues to express religious-based thoughts, which if contained, allow him to function reasonably well in the community. There have been no admissions this reporting year due to the structure and supervision provided by the treatment team and his supervised residences.
A detention disposition remains a necessary and appropriate protective factor as an absence of oversight would result in relapse, thereby compromising public safety.
Ms. Masse referenced an excerpt at page 125 of the hospital report to which Dr. Gulati agreed. It is reproduced below for ease of reference:
”Mental status examinations usually reveal stability but when explored further, it is evident that his insight into his mental illness remains partial, and he continues to experience residual positive and negative symptoms of Schizophrenia, including delusional beliefs around religion, sex, and life events. His mood is thymic or mildly with active affect, and no evidence of suicidal or homicidal ideation. Although these symptoms are currently managed within the structured environment, their persistence indicate ongoing clinical vulnerability and potential for risk if external supports are removed”
Mr. Bird inquired if his client’s residual symptoms are adequately managed. Dr. Gulati responded that they are, adding that the reduction of supervision has gone well and that there have been no problems with alcohol or substances this past year.
The panel proposed that the wording of subparagraph 2(e) be changed to read as follows:
“Passes for up to 72 hours, to enter the community of Ontario, within a 75km radius of the Brockville Mental Health Centre, indirectly supervised and approved by the person in charge.”
- Dr. Gulati, Ms. Masse and Mr. Bird had no objection to that proposed amendment.
Closing Observations
- Both Dr. Gulati and Ms. Masse indicated they had nothing to add. Mr. Bird noted that his client has had an incredibly good year.
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 a criminal offence.
In determining whether Mr. O’Leary represents 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.
After independently considering the documentary evidence and the uncontroverted expert evidence of Dr. Gulati, the panel accepts the joint position of the parties that Mr. O’Leary continues to represent a significant threat. The panel’s determination also relies on the excerpt taken from page 125 of the Hospital Report; specifically, the Clinical Factors subheading of the most recent Risk Assessment, completed with the assistance of the HCR-20 v3, a comprehensive set of professional guidelines for the assessment and management of violence risk.
(b) Disposition
Flowing from the Board’s finding that Mr. O’Leary 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 Mr. O’Leary’s needs pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code. The necessary and appropriate Disposition for Mr. O’Leary provides him as much freedom as possible without subjecting the community to a real risk of dangerous behaviour.
The panel was pleased to learn that Mr. O’Leary is happy and settled in the 8-hour supervised group home he transitioned to in March of 2025. While the housing change did not require an amendment to Mr. O’Leary current disposition it nevertheless signals that his rehabilitation and community reintegration continue to advance.
Thus, it remains essential for the hospital to retain the authority to approve Mr. O’Leary’s housing due to his ongoing need for stability and structure. Ensuring his expeditious return to hospital for stabilization and treatment also remains essential. Any reduction of oversight at this juncture would precipitate a decompensation and exacerbation of the symptoms of his mental illness that are currently adequately managed. These safeguards can only be guaranteed pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Detention Disposition.
Conclusion
Therefore, the Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat Mr. O’Leary poses to the safety of the public while still meeting his needs, remains a Detention Disposition on the same terms and conditions.
In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Gulati 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 carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Mr. O’Leary’s mental condition, his reintegration into society and other needs.
DATED this 14th day of October, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Capelle
Alternate Chairperson
__________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board