Ontario Review Board
Re: Rihanna Eischen
ORB File No: 8763
Hearing held on: Monday, September 22, 2025
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby
Pursuant to: Sections 672.47(1) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. M. Kalia Dr. S. Swaminath Hon. A. Sosna Mr. S. Doherty
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Rihanna Eischen Counsel: Mr. G. Iwasiw
The Person in charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. A. Marshall
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated November 6, 2025)
Introduction
On April 9, 2025, Ms. Rihanna Eischen was found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code"). No disposition was rendered, and the matter was referred to the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board for a disposition hearing.
On September 22, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (the "ORB" or the "Board") convened a hearing pursuant to ss. 672.47(1) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Ms. Eischen was in attendance and was represented by her counsel, Mr. Iwasiw.
Initial Position of the Parties
Ms. Marshall, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (Ontario Shores) counsel, indicated that the hospital position is that Ms. Eischen remains unfit, and that the necessary and appropriate disposition remains a detention disposition. Both Ms. MacDonald for the Crown, and Mr. Iwasiw for Ms. Eischen, reserved their positions until having heard the evidence.
Background and Index Offences
The circumstances of the index offences are taken from the Hospital Report dated July 14, 2025, as follows:
“On Thursday January 30, 2025 in the First Nation Territory of Poplar Hill at approximately 6:00 PM, Sally MOOSE and Noah MOOSE were in their residence when Rihanna EISCHEN began acting erratic. Rihanna EISCHEN then grabbed a chair raising it above her head and stated that she was going to hit Sally MOOSE with it. Noah MOOSE and Sally MOOSE then ran out of the residence to a family members who then called police.
Police later located Rihanna EISCHEN who was arrested for Assault with a weapon.
Rihanna EISCHEN was afforded her right to counsel and requested to speak with duty counsel. Rihanna EISCHEN spoke privately with duty counsel lawyer S.BHADDI.
Rihanna EISCHEN was held for remote Kenora Bail Court, January 31, 2025 at 11:00AM Central.”
Current Diagnoses
Intellectual Developmental Disorder,
Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and other Psychotic Disorder.
Evidence at Hearing
Ms. Marshall called two witnesses: the first, Dr. Leionen, Thunder Bay Regional health Sciences Centre, who assessed Ms. Eischen by video link on July 3, 2025 and Dr. Bhullar, Ms. Eischen’s treating psychiatrist at Ontario Shores.
Evidence of Dr. Leionen
Dr. Leionen’s only contact with Ms. Eischen occurred when he assessed her via video link. His impression was similar to that of Dr. Kravtsenyuk, who had assessed her on April 7, 2025. Specifically, that Ms. Eischen remains unfit to stand trial. When interacting with Dr. Leionen Ms. Eischen was minimally engaged and unclear whether she understood the purpose of their meeting. Her responses were limited to one or two words. It became unclear if she understood some of the Taylor test questions. Even after significant education was provided regarding potential outcomes and the purpose of the court process her responses remained limited to one to two words or “I don't know”. Dr. Leinonen attributed her unfitness to intellectual disability and mental illness. Dr. Leionen did not observe any symptoms of psychosis which were likely in remission on that day.
Mr. Iwasiw noted that Ms. Eischen is from Poplar Hill, a fly-in Ojibwe community in Northern Ontario. He questioned if fitness questioning should have been conducted the Ojibwe language. Dr. Leionen responded that this possibility had not been considered.
A panel member inquired if Ms. Eischen's intellectual disability will impact her fitness on a long-term basis. Dr. Leionen referenced page 7 of the Hospital Report that Ms. Eischen’s only previous psychological assessment occurred when she was eight years old. Dr. Leionen understands that she has now been referred for a DSO assessment in October of 2025.
Another panel member referenced Dr. Kravtsenyuk’s April 2025 psychiatric report and inquired if Dr. Leionen agreed with its finding. He responded that after having met with Ms. Eishchen on July 3, his impression was similar.
Evidence of Dr. Bhullar
Dr. Bhullar has been Ms. Eischen’s treating psychiatrist since her July 27, 2025, admission to Ontario Shores. Ms. Eischen is currently housed on a secure forensic unit. She was found treatment incapable on August 21, 2025. Her grandparents are her legal guardians, and the treatment team is conversing with them in relation to their becoming their granddaughter’s SDM.
Ms. Eischen does not appreciate the circumstances that led to this admission or being under ORB jurisdiction. Her psychotropic medications are likely to be changed over the coming year.
Dr. Bhullar last assessed Ms. Eischen vis-à-vis her fitness on September 17, 2025. The treatment plan is to optimize her psychiatric treatment and better understand her intellectual disability. There have been no violent outbursts since admission.
Ms. Marshall inquired about what steps are necessary for Ms. Eischen to transfer to a general forensic unit and thereafter to a community discharge. Dr. Bhullar responded that it is premature to consider a community discharge at this juncture. The hospital first needs to ascertain the extent of her intellectual functioning and self-care capabilities because these will inform the suitability of a potential community placement. It is also important to optimize treatment for her psychotic symptoms and ensure she does not present safety concerns and can follow staff direction before community placement is considered. There are no timelines associated with each step. Progression is dependent on how Ms. Eischen is doing clinically. This is why consideration of potential community placements options has not begun.
Ms. MacDonald inquired about the questions put to Ms. Eischen by Dr. Bhullar which led to her determination that this patient remains unfit. Dr. Bhullar noted that with much support, Ms. Eischen can now identify the index offence charge. Dr. Bhullar agreed with Dr. Leionen’s testimony that Ms. Eischen typically responds with one-to-two-word answers; “I don't know” or “what is a guilty plea?” After sharing information/educating Ms. Eischen, she will respond “okay”. However, when then asked to put the information in her own words, she often appears to be responding to internal stimuli and will typically respond “I don't know” or “tell me what you want me to say”. Since her admission, Ms. Eischen has received fitness coaching approximately every other day.
Mr. Iwasiw inquired if there were any Indigenous programs for inpatients at this hospital. Dr. Bhullar responded that there were. These include drumming circles as well as the availability of country food, which Ms. Eischen has thus far declined. Dr. Bhullar agreed that the ordering of a Gladue Report by the Board would be helpful.
Ms. Eischen continues to present with the same residual symptoms seen at the time of admission. As referenced earlier, changes to Ms. Eischen’s psychotropic medications are contemplated. She remains on the same dosage of olanzapine, However, as she has elevated prolactin levels medical causes must first be ruled out subsequent to which treatment with Abilify may be initiated to replace her current olanzapine regime.
Responding to questions from another panel member, Dr. Bhullar testified that her patient is unable to make and communicate reality-based decisions in the conduct of her defence and is also unable to instruct counsel to do so.
Closing Observations
Ms. Marshall submitted that Ms. Eischen remains unfit as per the criteria set out by the Supreme Court in Bharwani. The hospital takes no position with regard to the appropriateness of a Gladue Report. The hospital position remains that a Detention Disposition to the hospital's Forensic Service with privileges up to and including community living in supervised accommodation is necessary and appropriate.
Ms. MacDonald advised that the Crown supports the hospital’s recommendation and requests that a Gladue Report be ordered. This will assist the hospital in dealing with Ms. Eischen’s rights as an Indigenous person and provide the Board with additional information about her.
Mr. Iwasiw agreed with the hospital’s recommended Disposition and that a Gladue Report will benefit his client.
Issues to Be Determined
The issue to be determined by the Board is whether Ms. Eischen is unfit to stand trial and, if so, the necessary and appropriate disposition taking into account the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code. Should the Board find that Ms. Eischen:
-, is fit, OR
-is unlikely to ever become fit, OR
-no longer poses a significant threat to the safety of the public,
It must return the matter to the Court in order to hold an inquiry to ascertain whether a stay of proceedings should be ordered pursuant to section 672.851 of the Criminal Code.
The Board was ultimately presented with a joint position that Ms. Eichen is currently unfit. Aided by this joint position and following an independent analysis of the facts this panel of the Board unanimously determines that Ms. Eichen is currently unfit to stand trial. Dr.. Kravtsenyuk’s April 7, 2025 Report in tandem with the testimony of Drs. Leionin and Dr. Bhullar on today’s date confirm that Ms. Eischen’s fitness to stand trial has not attained, let alone approached the standard for fitness as set out in the Supreme Court of Canada’s Bharwani decision from earlier this year. Specifically, that she is unable to make and communicate reality-based decisions in the conduct of her defence and unable to instruct counsel to do so. Dr. Bhullar last assessed Ms. Eichen five day prior to this hearing. Nothing in the evidence casts doubt on that opinion. Despite regular fitness coaching since admission, Ms. Eischen’s truncated responses substantiate her continued inability to address the Taylor test questions and also substantiate why she fail to meet the Bharwani fitness test referenced earlier in this paragraph.
Changes to Ms. Eischen’s psychotropic medications are contemplated because of her residual psychotic symptoms, ongoing since admission. This panel wishes Ms. Eischen well in her recovery under the care of Dr. Bhullar’s treatment team.
DATED this 6^th^ day of November 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Capelle
Alternate Chairperson
__________________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board