Re: Robert Blais
ORB File No: 4337
Hearing held on: Tuesday, October 07, 2025
Place of hearing: North Bay Regional Health Centre – North Bay Site
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. M. Labrosse
Members Dr. W. Johnston
Dr. G. Nexhipi
Hon. E. Kruzick
Ms. D. Smith
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Robert Blais
Agent for Counsel: Mr. W. Stickland
The Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. C. Condie
Counsel: Mr. P. Trenker via Zoom
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. M. Mazurski
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated December 2, 2025)
Introduction
On November 17, 2005, Robert Blais was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon, carrying a concealed weapon, possession of a weapon for dangerous purposes, robbery and resisting or obstructing a peace officer, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.
Mr. Blais is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB”) dated November 4, 2024, which discharges him on various terms and conditions including the requirement to reside at 774 Lakeshore Drive, North Bay, Ontario, and on his consent, to take treatment as prescribed pursuant to s. 672.55(1) of the Criminal Code.
On October 7, 2025, the ORB convened at the North Bay Regional Health Centre – North Bay Site, hereinafter referred to as the hospital, to review Mr. Blais’ disposition, pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Blais was present and represented by Mr. W. Stickland, acting as agent for Mr. Blais’ counsel, Mr. C. Bracken.
The issues for this hearing are whether Mr. Blais continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and if so, to determine the necessary and appropriate disposition having regard to the factors enunciated at s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing the parties were canvassed for their initial positions. Counsel for the hospital, Mr. Trenker, indicated that the hospital was seeking the maintenance of the current disposition with no changes. Counsel for the Attorney General, Ms. Mazurski, indicated her support of the hospital recommendation, whereas counsel for Mr. Blais, Mr. Stickland, advised that his client was seeking an absolute discharge. The parties confirmed these positions at the end of the hearing.
For the reasons set out below the Board finds that Mr. Blais continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a conditional discharge remains the necessary and appropriate disposition, with the removal of the consent to treatment provision as the hearing panel concluded that this condition was no longer necessary and appropriate.
Summary of the Index Offences
- The index offences stem from two unrelated incidents occurring about one month apart and can be summarized as follows:
First Incident – August 4, 2005:
- Around 22:12 hrs., two Sudbury police officers observed Mr. Blais acting erratically near an apartment entrance on the Kingsway.
- He displayed aggressive behavior, yelling at passers-by and assuming a fighter’s stance when approached.
- Officers noticed a large knife partially visible in his jeans pocket. Mr. Blais reached for the knife in an aggressive manner, ignoring commands to comply.
- After repeated orders, he eventually dropped the knife and lay on the ground but resisted arrest, requiring physical force to handcuff him.
- He was arrested for assault with a weapon, carrying a concealed weapon, weapons dangerous, and resisting arrest.
Second Incident – September 21, 2005:
- Mr. Blais entered a Kwikway store demanding cigarettes without proper ID.
- When refused, he attempted to steal display cases, leading to a scuffle with a customer during which he damaged property.
- He fled before police arrived but returned to the store multiple times afterward.
- On October 2, 2005, he was identified by a clerk based on a scar on his neck, and police were contacted.
Background History
The details of Mr. Blais’ personal, legal and psychiatric background are set out in the hospital report. Briefly, Mr. Blais is 44 years of age and was born in Edmonton. His parents separated when he was four years of age, but he maintained a good relationship with both parents.
The family relocated from Edmonton to Elliot Lake when Mr. Blais was six years of age. They then moved to Sudbury.
Mr. Blais has a history of conduct disorder while growing up. He reported that he was the victim of bullying. He also reported having sexual activities with dogs and cats when he was 14 to 18 years of age.
Mr. Blais completed grade 12 and one semester of software engineering at Cambrian College. He stated that, at that time, he was feeling quite depressed and was afraid to be with people. He was also using street drugs. Mr. Blais began using marijuana at the age of 14 and used it daily as a teenager. He also began to use alcohol in his early adolescence. He used LSD on a few occasions.
Mr. Blais is gifted in the areas of art and music. He plays acoustic guitar and writes songs. He also draws cartoons.
Mr. Blais’ current diagnoses are listed in the Hospital Report as follows:
- Schizoaffective Disorder, Depressive Subtype
- Social Anxiety Disorder
Evidence at the Hearing
The hospital’s evidence was presented through its report and through the oral testimony of Dr. G. Munro who has been Mr. Blais’ attending psychiatrist since February 2022. This evidence is summarized below.
Dr. Munro confirmed that Mr. Blais continues to reside at the CMHA Lakeshore Group Home where he has been for several years. His medications are dispensed to him by staff. He is seen at least once per day by the staff at the residence in addition to his attendance at the hospital where he participates in several programs. Mr. Blais is volunteering once per week at the Snack Shack and is also currently enrolled in CBT for Psychosis with the Forensic Program Occupational Therapist. In addition, Mr. Blais receives outpatient support from the hospital including the nursing team and recreational therapy, where he takes part in different activities offered to him.
Dr. Munro confirmed that since the removal of the clause requiring Mr. Blais to abstain from substances, he has done reasonably well in the community with two notable exceptions, one where he ingested a CBD capsule to assist with anxiety, which he voluntarily disclosed to the treatment team. The second incident was when Mr. Blais’ then girlfriend, who was an inpatient at the hospital, eloped and contacted him from the mall. Mr. Blais was concerned for her safety and invited her to his place; however, they ended up going to another person’s home where they consumed beer together. Mr. Blais was contacted by phone by the police who were inquiring about his girlfriend’s whereabouts. He denied knowing where she was but when police later attended at this residence, she was apprehended and returned to the hospital.
Mr. Blais continues to experience ongoing refractory symptoms of his primary psychotic disorder, including chronic auditory hallucinations, particularly when he is stressed or sleep deprived and/or not using his CPAP machine. These symptoms can be quite distressing to Mr. Blais and can impair his functioning.
In the opinion of Dr. Munro, it could be challenging to manage Mr. Blais’ risk with the Mental Health Act, as he is quite socially isolated and withdrawn and his only connections are with the Forensic Outpatient Services and CMHA staff.
Mr. Blais has variable insight into the benefit of medication and often asks to reduce the medications that are prescribed to him. Additionally, when Mr. Blais is unwell, he experiences reduced insight and is typically unable to recognize the symptoms of his illness.
Mr. Blais has a long history of substance use, primarily alcohol and cannabis. If he was not under the supervision of the hospital, he would likely disengage from services, experience a deterioration in his mental health, and resume substance use.
When unwell, Mr. Blais has demonstrated intense paranoia and aggression. He can also experience auditory hallucinations, including command hallucinations. With that constellation of factors, it is likely that Mr. Blais could commit similar offences to those committed prior to coming under ORB jurisdiction without proper oversight. Dr. Munro confirmed that there is currently no post-forensic psychiatric care in place for Mr. Blais.
Though Mr. Blais has inquired about leaving his group home, Dr. Munro does not believe that he has made any progress with respect to securing alternate accommodation. It would be very difficult for Mr. Blais to find market rent accommodation in the City of North Bay given the financial constraints of being on ODSP. Dr. Munro is concerned that Mr. Blais’ risk cannot be adequately managed if he does not live in an environment with the similar supports to those that he is currently receiving.
With respect to the plan for the coming year, Dr. Munro acknowledged that Mr. Blais has made overall significant progress and that he is quite psychiatrically stable at this time. The plan would be to assist him in engaging more in the community and developing social supports as he is quite isolated. Mr. Blais would benefit from more structured pro-social community activities, and the treatment team plans to assist him in developing interpersonal relationships and professional supports that will help to keep him well once he is no longer under an ORB disposition. Mr. Blais needs the support of the treatment team to be able to accomplish all of this.
In response to questions posed to her by counsel for the Attorney General, Ms. Mazurski, Dr. Munro responded as follows:
a) Dr. Munro agreed that Mr. Blais’ first instance of substance use this year was more of an experiment to see if he could use CBD to assist with his anxiety. The incident involving him consuming beer with his girlfriend would more likely be attributable to Mr. Blais being highly influenceable to suggestions by peers.
b) The removal of the abstention condition in last year’s disposition was intended to allow the hospital to monitor Mr. Blais’ ability to remain abstinent while still under the oversight of the Board. Dr. Munro does not believe that the condition should be re-added to his current disposition. The incidents of substance use this year are more reflective of poor judgment and the fact that Mr. Blais is a vulnerable person.
c) Mr. Blais’ perceptual disturbances vary in intensity and do not regularly include command hallucinations. They usually involve derogatory comments. Despite these ongoing symptoms, Mr. Blais has asked periodically to lower his medication and to discontinue the long acting injectable in favour of oral Abilify.
d) Mr. Blais experienced incidents of nocturnal enuresis (bed wetting) and read online that this can be a rare side effect of Paliperidone. The treatment team has determined that Mr. Blais tends to consume lots of fluids in the evening and that this should be addressed before considering any medication changes. According to Dr. Munro, Mr. Blais agreed that he should stay on his current medication.
e) Dr. Munro stated that Mr. Blais has had a longstanding history of religious delusions and that this can explain his belief that some of the voices that he hears originate from the devil. Dr. Munro noted that he has not recently been expressing those religious delusions.
- In response to questions posed to her by counsel for Mr. Blais, Mr. Stickland, Dr. Munro responded as follows:
a) Dr. Munro believes that it would be a step back for Mr. Blais’ disposition to be changed back to a detention order, in order for the hospital to have the authority to approve accommodation.
b) When asked what formal rehabilitation program the hospital has elaborated for Mr. Blais, Dr. Munro answered that there is no formal rehabilitation program but rather an individualized care plan in place for him.
c) The hospital is encouraging Mr. Blais’ participation in recreational activities as he tends to be socially isolated. The occupational therapist is also working with Mr. Blais to help him develop and maintain personal boundaries. These are not supports that would be offered by CMHA, if the hospital were no longer involved. CMHA could check on Mr. Blais and administer medications but do not offer the wide range of services and programming as does the hospital Forensic Program.
d) Following the report that he had used CBD gummies, Mr. Blais’ urine drug screen was negative for THC. All of Mr. Blais’ urine drug screens have been negative for substances in the past year.
- In response to questions posed to her by members of the hearing panel, Dr. Munro testified as follows:
a) The relationship between Mr. Blais and his girlfriend ended approximately 6 months ago. Though he was upset and disappointed with the breakup, Mr. Blais has managed this well with the support of the treatment team.
b) Mr. Blais has ongoing low-key relationship issues with this mother. In the past year, he had visits with her at her home. During a weekend visit, his mother had car trouble and could not drive him back, but he very appropriately contacted the treatment team to have more medication sent to him for his extended stay.
c) Mr. Blais’ CMHA housing is a long-term placement. Mr. Blais talks about wanting to move to live independently and have less constraints. The hospital is prepared to continue to assist Mr. Blais in developing his independent living skills to further that goal.
d) There have been no clinical concerns regarding abnormal sexual behaviours, which have not recurred since Mr. Blais was in his late teens.
e) Mr. Blais remains capable of consenting to treatment. Dr. Munro will leave it up to the Board to decide if the consent to treatment provisions in the disposition remains necessary and appropriate.
f) Dr. Munro agreed that a psychotropic medication consult could be beneficial as Mr. Blais is on high doses of three different antipsychotics.
g) Mr. Blais’ lack of motivation and social anxiety are holding back the progress in his rehabilitation. Though he has been working with the March of Dimes for volunteering opportunities he has so far not found anything suitable. He recently attended an information session at the Capital Arts Centre for a position but felt that the expectations were too high.
h) If he was granted an absolute discharge, Mr. Blais would no longer have the support of the forensic treatment team. He would have to engage with CMHA, and possibly the ACT Team and hospital outpatient services.
In response to questions arising from the panel’s questions, Dr. Munro confirmed that Mr. Blais could remain at his CMHA residence if granted an absolute discharge, but she expects that he would not choose to remain there.
Regarding possible engagement with the ACT Team, Dr. Munro stated that Mr. Blais would have to apply for this, and she was not aware how long that might take. It is also difficult to gage Mr. Blais’ motivation to participate in this in the long term.
Mr. Blais currently has no plan for ongoing treatment should he receive an absolute discharge. If the hospital believed that he was getting close to securing one, they would involve a transitional coordinator to assist in developing a plan with him.
Final Submissions of the Parties
The hospital, through its counsel Mr. Trenker, submits that Mr. Blais continues to meet the threshold of significant threat to the safety of the public. Mr. Blais has done very well in a highly supported environment and needs to be better prepared before being left to his own devices. The hospital submits that a conditional discharge with a condition requiring Mr. Blais to reside at his current residence is the necessary and appropriate disposition for the coming year. Counsel for the Attorney General, Ms. Mazurski, indicated her support of the hospital recommendation.
Counsel for Mr. Blais, Mr. Strickland (acting as agent for Mr. Bracken) reiterated that Mr. Blais is seeking an absolute discharge. In the alternative, he requests the maintenance of the conditional discharge, on the same terms and conditions. Mr. Stickland advised that Mr. Blais had provided consent to treatment to his counsel, Mr. Bracken.
Analysis and Conclusion
Having considered all of the evidence presented at the hearing, and the submissions of the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Blais continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code of Canada and as further defined in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.
According to R. v. Winko, a ‘significant threat to the safety of the public’ means a real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the public that is serious in the sense of going beyond the merely trivial or annoying. The conduct giving rise to the harm must be criminal in nature. Further, it is noted that evidence to determine whether an individual is a significant threat to the safety of the public can include the past and expected course of the NCR accused’s treatment, if any, the present state of the NCR accused’s medical condition, the NCR accused’s own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community, as well as other items.
In finding that Mr. Blais continues to meet the threshold of significant threat to the safety of the public, we rely on the uncontroverted evidence of the hospital, both in its report and in the testimony of Dr. Munro. Though Mr. Blais has had an overall positive year, he continues to demonstrate a fragile mental health, and he remains extremely reliant on the structure and support of his treatment team. Mr. Blais would eventually like to live independently, and the hospital will continue to assist him in developing the necessary skills to do so.
Mr. Blais seeks an absolute discharge, yet there are no plans for any community mental health follow up, but for the support that he currently receives from CHMA. Additionally, social anxiety appears to be a barrier to further community integration and the development of pro-social activities.
We are persuaded that without an ORB disposition requiring him to work with the hospital treatment team, Mr. Blais would likely disengage from mental health supports leading to medication non-compliance and relapse into psychosis. Mr. Blais has a history of becoming paranoid and acting on command hallucinations which would increase the risk to others.
In order to further prepare Mr. Blais for an eventual absolute discharge, and because he has demonstrated good cooperation with his treatment team, we find that the consent to treatment provision is no longer necessary and appropriate, and it shall be removed from the new disposition.
We encourage the hospital and Dr. Munro to engage a medication review over the course of the next year, as was discussed during the hearing. Mr. Blais is currently on high doses of three antipsychotic medications. A review of his current medication regimen could assist in optimizing his treatment, which in turn, may further help to prepare him for eventual absolute discharge.
Having considered the four factors set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, namely the protection of the public which is the paramount consideration, the mental condition of the accused, his reintegration into society and his other needs, the Board finds that a conditional discharge, on the same terms and conditions but without the consent to treatment provision remains the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive disposition in all of the circumstances.
DATED this 2nd day of December 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. Michèle Labrosse
Alternative Chair
____________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board