Ontario Review Board
Re: Jingfu Luo
ORB File No: 8239
Hearing held on: Wednesday, October 8, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks Members: Dr. L.E. Cappe Dr. C. Rose Hon. C. Nelson Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Jingfu Luo Counsel: Ms. M. Murphy
The Person in Charge of Hospital: Counsel: Mr. D. Blumenkrans
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Cressman
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated November 6, 2025)
Introduction
On February 14, 2023, Jingfu Luo was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, on a charge of second-degree murder. Mr. Luo is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated October 3, 2024, by which he was ordered to be detained at a General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH”) with a number of prohibitions and a number of privileges up to and including living in the community in supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On Wednesday, October 8, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened an in-person hearing at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) and conducted the annual review of Mr. Luo’s Disposition. Mr. Blumenkrans represented the hospital; Ms. Cressman, the Crown and Ms. Murphy, Mr. Luo.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Mr. Blumenkrans appeared for CAMH. He advised that Mr. Luo remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of last year’s Detention Order without change. Ms. Cressman, for the Crown, advised that she supported the hospital’s position. Ms. Murphy, for Mr. Luo, agreed with the hospital and the Crown; therefore, the matter proceeded as a joint submission.
An interpreter was present at the hearing to assist Mr. Luo with a verbatim translation of the hearing.
Index Offence
- "On December 21, 2020, the deceased, Mr. Luo and the entire family were in the family residence. Without warning, Mr. Luo went to the kitchen, got a knife out of a drawer, and inexplicably went downstairs and repeatedly stabbed his elderly father-in-law, killing him.
In the days leading up to the killing, Mr. Luo harboured several paranoid ideations: he believed his father-in-law was sexually abusing Mr. Luo’s daughter and that people were watching the house and planning to do them great harm. On the day before the killing, he reached out to his supervisor at work, asking for a leave of absence, as people were out to kill him. His family members observed that he was exhibiting paranoid delusions the day before, and the day of, the killing. He also self-reported command auditory hallucinations shortly before the killing, instructing him to kill his father-in-law.”
Evidence at Hearing
The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated September 22, 2025. The Hospital Report provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. Luo, details of the index offence, details of Mr. Luo’s personal history and mental health history and Mr. Luo’s course in hospital subsequent to the date of the NCR finding. As the Hospital Report was made an exhibit in this hearing, it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained in the Hospital Report in these Reasons. We do note the stated diagnosis of Schizophrenia and that Mr. Luo is now 55 years old.
In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. S. Woodside, the author of the Hospital Report and Mr. Luo’s former treating psychiatrist. Dr. Woodside stated, at the outset, that as Mr. Luo had been discharged to Transitional Rehabilitation Housing Program 2 (TRHP2) housing on September 8, 2025, he was now under the care of Dr. R. McMaster. Dr. Woodside told the Board that he had recently spoken to Dr. McMaster about Mr. Luo’s care and treatment.
Dr. McMaster testified that Mr. Luo had settled in well at his community housing. There was a slight increase in Mr. Luo’s paranoia after discharge. He reported that people were trying to come into his room to kill him. But, on the positive side, he recognized this as paranoia and knew it was not happening. This development was not surprising, given Mr. Luo’s recent discharge from the hospital. Dr. Woodside also testified that this had no bearing on the recommendation before the Board. The fact that Mr. Luo reported his symptoms is considered a good sign.
Dr. Woodside emphasized that Mr. Luo had a good year in that he achieved his major goal of a discharge from the hospital. His next goal is to obtain employment and establish more of a social network, especially as his immediate family wishes no contact with him.
The Hospital Report indicates that there were no incidents of violence or aggression. He was compliant with all treatment recommendations and there was no evidence of substance use. He achieved Level 9 passes, allowing him to do trial overnight visits to his outpatient accommodation.
Finally, Dr. Woodside stated that Mr. Luo’s current Disposition will allow for his milestones to be met.
Ms. Cressman had no questions for Dr. Woodside.
In answer to a question from Ms. Murphy, Dr. Woodside stated Mr. Luo had increased the work he was doing on a voluntary basis. The Hospital Report sets out in detail the nature of the work and participation in programs by Mr. Luo.
In answer to a question from a Board member about the alcohol prohibition in last year’s Disposition, Dr. Woodside recommended that it be kept in given Mr. Luo’s past history. It should remain because of his recent transition to the community as he is still in his early days in his residential housing.
Dr. Woodside also added that there is staff supervision in Mr. Luo’s current residence.
At discharge, Mr. Luo’s olanzapine medication was optimized. Normally, Dr. Woodside stated he would recommend a transition to a long-acting injectable medication but olanzapine does not come in long-acting form. In any event, Dr. Woodside would be loath to change Mr. Luo’s regimen as he has done well. There are no concerns about noncompliance. Mr. Luo has good insight into his illness and the necessity of ongoing treatment.
At the conclusion of the evidence, Ms. Cressman advised the Board that the Crown had reached out to the victim’s family about the Victim Impact Program but had heard nothing from them.
Final Submissions
- The parties maintained their initial positions and had nothing further to add. Ms. Murphy stated that Mr. Luo had demonstrated ongoing insight and that this was positive.
Findings of The Board
The Board finds that the joint submission of the parties, which accepts the fact that Mr. Luo remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, is well founded.
Mr. Luo’s offence was very violent and extremely serious. The index offence was carried out in the context of psychotic symptoms. The ongoing treatment with antipsychotic medication has abated Mr. Luo’s psychotic symptoms. However, were he to discontinue treatment with medication, it is likely he would once again experience active symptoms of psychosis. Thus, he still remains a significant risk to the safety of the public. While Mr. Luo has had a very good year and is to be congratulated for this, his discharge into the community is very recent, and he has just begun to be tested. The Board agrees that a Detention Order with the same terms as last year’s is the necessary and appropriate Disposition. It is also the least restrictive and least onerous Disposition.
If Mr. Luo abstains from alcohol in the coming year, the Board should consider removing the alcohol restriction in his Disposition at his next annual review.
In arriving at our conclusion for the appropriate Disposition, the Board has considered the paramount factor of the safety of the public, Mr. Luo’s community reintegration, his mental condition and his other needs, all as required by s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
DATED this 6th day of November, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Hon. C. Nelson Legal Member
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board