Re: Isaiah Edie
ORB File No: 7759
Hearing held on: Friday, October 10, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks
Members: Dr. L. Cappe
Dr. C. Rose
Hon. C. Nelson
Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Isaiah Edie
Counsel: Mr. D. Escuduro
The Person in Charge of Hospital: Counsel: Mr. D. Blumenkrans
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Cressman
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated October 30, 2025)
Introduction:
On July 23, 2020, Isaiah Edie was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of assault with a weapon and failure to comply with probation, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.
Mr. Edie is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”) dated August 25, 2025, pursuant to which he is ordered detained within the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH” or the “hospital”) subject to a variety of terms and conditions with privileges up to living in the community of the Greater Toronto Area in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital.
By letters dated September 19, 2025, CAMH gave notice to ORB and Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“Southwest”) requesting an early hearing and advising that the hospital was recommending a transfer of Mr. Edie’s care to Southwestern.
On October 10, 2025, a panel of the ORB convened to conduct an early review of Mr. Edie’s Disposition pursuant to section 672.81(2) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Edie attended the hearing by Zoom videoconference. He was represented by his counsel, Mr. Escuduro.
The issues to be decided on the hearing were whether Mr. Edie continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, what was the necessary and appropriate Disposition to be made in the circumstances, bearing in mind s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons set out below, the Board concluded that Mr. Edie continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is that his care be transferred to Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“Southwest”) pursuant to a Detention Order Disposition subject to the terms set forth at the conclusion of these Reasons.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances giving rise to the index offences are set forth in detail in the Hospital Report to the ORB dated October 2, 2025 (the “Hospital Report”), and are summarized in the Board’s recent Reasons for Disposition dated September 19, 2025, as follows:
“On August 10, 2018, Mr. Edie was walking by a patio restaurant in downtown Toronto when he picked up a glass and smashed it to the ground. He then continued along the street to another restaurant where he took a glass and threw it at a passing crowd on the street. The glass hit no one. He continued along the street and struck four girls in the forehead with a cellphone he was holding. Pedestrians chased Mr. Edie and held him until the police arrived. The police arrested him. Mr. Edie indicated that at the time of the index offence, he had been kicked out of his father’s home. He was homeless, not taking his medications and experiencing paranoid persecutory delusions commanding him to take certain actions."
Positions of the Parties:
- At the commencement of the hearing, all parties were canvassed as to their initial positions. Counsel for the hospital recommended that Mr. Edie continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is that he be transferred to Southwest pursuant to a Detention Order Disposition with privileges up to and including living in the community of Southwestern Ontario in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital (“PIC”) together with the following terms:
reporting of not less than once every two-weeks or as required;
travel passes within Canada for up to 7 days, indirectly supervised, and subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
travel passes within Canada up to two weeks, while accompanied by a person approved by the PIC and subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
travel passes outside Canada for up to 21 days, while accompanied by a person approved by the PIC subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
prohibition on the use of non-medical use alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant and related testing provisions; and
prohibition on possession of weapons.
Counsel for the Crown supported the hospital’s recommendation.
Counsel for Mr. Edie conceded the issue of significant threat and supported the hospital’s recommendation.
All parties maintained their joint recommendation in closing submissions.
Personal Background:
Mr. Edie’s background and history are set out in detail in the Hospital Report and need not be repeated at length here. Briefly summarized, Mr. Edie is now 28 years of age. He was born in Toronto. His parents were in a common law relationship and separated when he was three years old. He lived with his mother until he was in grade 6 when he moved in with his father where he remained until grade 9 and then returned to live with his mother. He reports that his parents were verbally abusive and physically punishing for misbehaviour.
Mr. Edie completed grade 12 and obtained his high school diploma in 2015 at the age of
He states that he got in a few fights in school mostly in reaction to what he perceived to be other students’ provocations.
Mr. Edie worked as a general laborer from 2016 to 2019 when he obtained his fork lift license and began working in that capacity in July 2019. However, in March 2020, he was laid off due to the impact of the pandemic. He remained unemployed until August 2020 when he commenced full-time employment again as a fork lift operator.
Criminal History:
- Mr. Edie has received conditional discharges with respect to charges of fail to comply with a recognizance, being unlawfully in a dwelling house and theft under. Charges of assault, theft under, robbery and failed to comply were stayed by the Crown. Full particulars of his legal history are contained in the Hospital Report.
Substance Use History:
Mr. Edie reports that he first used cannabis at the age of 17 and began using on a regular basis at the age of 20 smoking up to a gram per day. He acknowledged having smoked 3 grams of cannabis on the date of the April 7 index offences. He states that he stopped smoking cannabis after being charged with the index offences but recommenced while unemployed from April to July 2020. After re-commencing work, he indicated that he reduced his cannabis use to weekends only.
He stated that he began drinking alcohol at the age of 13 but used infrequently. However, during the time of his unemployment from April to July, he was drinking 2 to 3 beers a day. Since recommencing employment, he only consumes alcohol on weekends.
Psychiatric History:
- Mr. Edie’s first contact with mental health services was in 2016 at the age of 19 when he was hospitalized at Humber River Regional Hospital. Between 2016 and 2018, he was hospitalized on approximately seven occasions. He was diagnosed with Schizophrenia and it was noted that he often experienced decompensation as a result of non-adherence to psychotropic medications and or alcohol and cannabis misuse. It was also noted that he had poor insight into his illness and the need for treatment.
Current Diagnoses:
- Mr. Edie’s current diagnoses are:
Schizophrenia; and
Substance Use Disorder (alcohol, cannabis).
Evidence at Hearing:
In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. Igoumenou. Counsel for the hospital asked the doctor why the team is requesting a transfer of Mr. Edie’s care to Southwest subject to a Detention Order and the doctor responded by advising that Mr. Edie was discharged from CAMH in July of 2024 to live in a supervised residence in Toronto. The doctor advised that on September 8, 2025, Mr. Edie started a new job in the aviation industry and that the company he is now working for is based in Windsor, Ontario. The doctor also advised that CAMH approved Mr. Edie’s August 30, 2025 move to Windsor, Ontario.
The CAMH treatment team’s case manager has examined Mr. Edie’s residence in Windsor, and it has been found appropriate. The doctor noted that Mr. Edie is living in his sister’s home, with her and her young son.
Since his relocation to Windsor, Mr. Edie has continued to be followed by CAMH’s Forensic Out-patient Service (“FOPS”) as required via online meetings and through text messages. Mr. Edie reported taking his prescribed medications. The doctor stated that Mr. Edie’s mental state remained stable and there were no reported incidents of concern.
When assessed in September 2025, the Hospital Report notes that: “There was no evidence of formal thought disorder or delusional beliefs elicited. He denied any hallucinatory experiences and there was no evidence during the interview. His cognition was grossly intact.”
The Hospital Report indicates that since his move to Windsor, Mr. Edie had complied with all urine drug screens and the results of same, which were conducted locally through CAMH affiliates, returned negative for the presence of alcohol or other intoxicants. Mr. Edie has self-reported that he had not used any substances (including alcohol) and that the protocols at his place of employment were a big factor in his decision to remain abstinent as the company performs random drug testing.
Mr. Edie advised the treatment team that his move to Windsor was uneventful and that he is enjoying his new job and had no concerns about living with his sister and his three-year-old nephew. The Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Edie’s sister oversees his medication administration and she reported that his mental state has remained stable.
Mr. Edie contributes to the rent of his residence and he has his own room in the house.
In terms of his leisure time, he has been going on walks to the waterfront, attending the gym, and spending time with his sister and nephew.
The doctor stated that the treatment team is of the view that a Detention Order Disposition remains necessary and appropriate given Mr. Edie has recently started a new job in a new city. The doctor stated that if the Board approved the transfer of Mr. Edie’s care to Southwest then it will be important for his new treatment team to become acquainted with him and assess the suitability of his residence to ensure they are confident that it is appropriate and meets his needs.
In response to questions regarding whether Mr. Edie could be safely managed under a less restrictive Conditional Discharge Disposition, the doctor advised that given Mr. Edie’s recent move to, and new employment in, Windsor Ontario, it remains necessary for his supervising hospital to retain the authority of a Detention Order Disposition for two critical risk management reasons. First, the hospital must be able to act quickly to readmit Mr. Edie to the hospital should he present with signs of a decompensation in his mental status as a result of medication noncompliance, increased substance use, stressors, or otherwise. The doctor advised that if the team was unable to admit Mr. Edie to the hospital until he was able to be certified under the Mental Health Act, that would not allow the hospital to safely manage his risk to the public. Even if he were certifiable under the legislation, the doctor stated that it would be unlikely that the team would be able to detain him for a prolonged period in hospital following the expiry of a Form 1. Finally, the doctor advised that it was not certain that Mr. Edie would agree to a voluntary readmission to the hospital if under a Conditional Discharge Disposition, if decompensated.
Additionally, the doctor advised that the team supervising Mr. Edie in the community will require the ongoing authority of a Detention Order to approve his accommodation. The doctor reiterated that Mr. Edie’s move to his sister’s home in Windsor is very recent and the supervising hospital will need to assess how he manages there and whether it is appropriate to meet his needs. Mr. Edie Mr. Edie has previously experienced precarious housing, including residing in the shelter system. The doctor stated that stable housing is a key component of his risk management and the hospital must retain oversight of same.
The doctor advised that notice had been provided to Southwestern of the proposed transfer as Windsor is within that hospital’s catchment area. Southwestern has indicated that it is amenable to accepting the transfer of Mr. Edie’s care to that hospital on the terms of his existing Detention Order Disposition but for a change to reflect that the geographical area of “Southwestern Ontario” in place of existing references to “Greater Toronto Area”.
By letter dated September 30, 2025, Dr. A. Prakash of Southwest advised that if the Board approves the transfer of Mr. Edie’s care to Southwest, then the Outreach Team at Southwest will become connected with Mr. Edie to assume responsibility for his care. Dr. Igoumenou stated that until the formal transfer of his care is assumed by Southwest, Mr. Edie will continue to be supervised by CAMH.
According to the risk assessment contained in the Hospital Report, Mr. Edie’s risk of his risk of any future violence would be Moderate. His risk of imminent violence would be Low. Dr. Igoumenou testified that his risk would be elevated if not under a Detention Order.
No further evidence was called by the parties.
Analysis and Conclusions:
The Board unanimously finds that Mr. Edie continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In coming to this conclusion, the Board notes the position of the parties as to risk. The Board also accepts and relies on the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Igoumenou that Mr. Edie continues to pose such a risk. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report and the evidence that Mr. Edie suffers from a major mental illness, namely, Schizophrenia, complicated by his ongoing substance abuse diagnosis.
The Board accepts that without close supervision of the forensic system and the oversight of the Board, Mr. Edie would be likely to experience housing instability and/or stressors in the context of limited professional supports. In this context, on balance, it is likely that he may relapse to substance use and/or become medication non-compliant, experience a mental state decompensation and engage in violent re-offending similar to that which occurred at the time of the index offences.
The Board is particularly mindful of his history of unprovoked and unpredictable violence directed at random strangers. Prior to his tenure under the ORB, Mr. Edie demonstrated a pattern of treatment and supervision response failures, characterized by repeated medication non-compliance. As well, Mr. Edie continues to present with underdeveloped insight, particularly with regard to the need for medication and his risk factors for reoffending.
In light of the Board’s finding of significant threat, it must shape a Disposition for the coming year. In doing so, its paramount consideration must be the safety of the public, but it must also take into account the needs of Mr. Edie pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
The Board considered whether Mr. Edie could be safely managed under a less restrictive Conditional Discharge Disposition. In our opinion, he cannot as it remains imperative that the hospital retain the authority to approve his community housing to ensure that it provides him with the requisite degree of structure and stability. Further, given his risk factors as outlined in the hospital’s evidence, the hospital requires the ability to readmit Mr. Edie expeditiously and at an early juncture to manage his risk to members of the public should he suffer a decompensation in his mental state, whether as a result of heightened substance use, medication non-compliance, or otherwise.
Mr. Edie very recently moved to Windsor area to start a new job. He has transitioned well to date and should be congratulated for that. We are hopeful that he continues to thrive in his new residence and at his place of employment; however, we are mindful of the fact that these are early days in that transition and it remains necessary and appropriate that he remain subject to a Detention Order Disposition for the reasons articulated in the evidence as summarized in paragraphs 32 and 33 above.
Accordingly, the Board accepts the joint recommendation and finds the necessary and appropriate, as well as least restrictive and least onerous, Disposition to manage the risk posed to the public while still meeting Mr. Edie’s needs is that he be subject to the terms of a Detention Order Disposition at the Forensic Psychiatry Program at Southwest on the following terms:
to attend within or outside of the hospital for necessary medical, dental, legal or compassionate purposes;
hospital and grounds privileges, escorted by staff, accompanied by staff or person approved by the PIC, or, indirectly supervised;
to enter the community of the Southwestern Ontario, escorted by staff, accompanied by staff or person approved by the PIC, or, indirectly supervised;
travel passes within Canada for up to 7 days, indirectly supervised, subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
travel passes within Canada up to two weeks, while accompanied by a person approved by the PIC and subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
travel passes outside Canada for up to 21 days, while accompanied by a person approved by the PIC subject to an itinerary approved by the hospital;
to live in the community of Southwestern Ontario an accommodation approved by the PIC;
abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
submit samples of their urine and/or breath to the PIC for the purpose of analyzing whether the accused has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant;
refrain from having in their possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer; and
when living in the community, report to the PIC or their designate not less than once every two weeks, or as required.
- In making this Disposition, the Board has reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and has carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, the mental condition of Mr. Edie and his reintegration into society and his other needs.
DATED this 30^th^ day of October, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region
Ms. L. Banks
Alternate Chairperson
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board