Re: Filmon Gebrekristose
ORB File No: 6790
Hearing held on: Thursday, October 30, 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: Mr. C. Flanagan
Members: Dr. K. Hand
Dr. S. Wiseman
Ms. N. Nathanson
Ms. R. Chopra
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Filmon Gebrekristose
Counsel: Mr. W. Stickland
Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Mr. T. Trenker
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. D. McCaig
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated December 17, 2025)
Introduction
Filmon Gebrekristose was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on three counts of mischief not exceeding $5,000 and uttering a threat to cause death or bodily harm, on July 7, 2015, contrary to the Criminal Code.
Mr. Gebrekristose is currently subject to the terms and conditions of a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) dated November 5, 2024, as amended December 5, 2024. The Disposition detained Mr. Gebrekristose at the North Bay Regional Health Centre (“NBRHC” or “Hospital”), with privileges up to and including community living in accommodation approved by the Person-in-Charge and indirectly supervised travel for up to 7 days in the Province of Ontario.
On October 30, 2025, the Board held an annual hearing at the Hospital. Mr. Gebrekristose did not appear. He was represented by counsel who had instructions to proceed in his absence.
The Board made an order pursuant to s. 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code permitting Mr. Gebrekristose to be absent during the hearing and an order pursuant to s. 672.5(8)(b) of the Criminal Code assigning counsel, Mr. Stickland, to act for Mr. Gebrekristose.
The Board had the Hospital Report dated August 30, 2025 before it as Exhibit 1.
Issues
- The issues for the Board to decide were whether Mr. Gebrekristose continues to be a significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, the necessary and appropriate disposition for the coming year based on the factors in 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Initial Position of the Parties:
The Hospital’s initial position was that the accused no longer represented a significant threat to the safety of the public and that an absolute discharge was the appropriate disposition. Counsel for the accused joined the Hospital in its position. Counsel for the Ministry of the Attorney General reserved her decision subject to the Hospital’s evidence.
It should be noted that the Hospital changed its position after the evidence.
Index Offence:
- The circumstances giving rise to the index offences are set out on pages 2 to 3 in the Hospital Report as follows:
On the evening of 14 January 2015 at approximately 17:15 hrs, the Manitoulin OPP were dispatched to a report of an unwanted person at the Value Mart grocery store in Gore Bay. The compl (sic) in this matter was the store manager. She was called to report that an unknown male had been in the store wandering around for approx. an hour. During that time he had damaged several bulletin boards in the hallway leading up to the store and was disturbing staff and customers. While enroute, a further update was rec’d from the compl (sic) advising that the male suspect was threatening a staff member from the grocery store. He had been climbing one of the ladders in the store and when approached by a staff member, the male suspect told the staff member “to fuck off or I will smash your (sic) face in”. The suspect continued walking around the store repeating this threat. Police arrived on the scene. On entering the building, officers observed that several of the bulletin boards in the main hallway had been ripped off the wall. Officers entered the hardware store, but the male suspect was no longer in that area of the building. Officers proceeded to the grocery store section of the building. On entering the grocery store, officers observe a number of staff and customers gathered near the front entrance of the store. Officers then observed an adult male standing by the produce section of the grocery store. That male matched the description of the male suspect provided by the compli (sic) in this matter.
Officers approached the male who was standing with his hands in his pockets. The suspect was asked by officers to remove his hands from his pockets so officers could see his hands. The male refused to comply with the request. The officers then asked the male what had taken place. The male replied saying that none of the people in the store belonged there and that he owned most of the contents of the grocery store. The male was arrested for mischief and uttering threats. He was taken into custody without incident.
Once placed in the rear of the police vehicle, Cst. Manley read the male the arrest, legal rights and caution. The male would not reply when asked if he understood and continued to repeat that the people in the store did not belong there, that nobody owned the store and that he owned most of what was in the store. When asked if he understood, the male refused to reply.
The male finally verbally identified himself as “Filmon”. Officers then recognized the male to be Filmon Gebrekristose (27 years) who had grown up in the Town of Gore Bay.
Mr. Gebrekristose was transported to the Gore Bay Detachment where he was lodged without incident. Once lodged, Cst. Manley asked Gebrekristose if he would like to speak to a lawyer. Gebrekristose replied saying that he did not want to speak to a lawyer or anyone else. He then continued to repeat that no one owned the store and that all those people should not be allowed in the store. He also stated numerous times that when he was released, he would be returning there and doing the same thing over again till (sic) those people stop coming to the store. He went on to individually name numerous people he would hurt if they came back to the store. Among the persons identified by name were teachers and school staff who the accused would have known from when he was growing up in Gore Bay. The accused specifically stated that if he saw these individuals at the store again, he would hurt them.
Filmon Gebrekristose has been charged with mischief under $5000 and utter threats, both contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.
While in custody at the Gore Bay OPP Detachment in Gordon Township, District of Manitoulin, at 2209 hours, 14JAN15, GEBREKRISTOSE flooded the sink in the cell area, causing water to cascade throughout the cell and forcing police to shut the water off to cell #2 to prevent further damage to the detachment. This will be one count of mischief at the Gore Bay OPP station.
At 2206 hours, GEBREKRISTOSE ripped apart the video camera equipment in cell #2 at the Gore Bay OPP station rendering it inoperable. This will be a second count of mischief at the Gore Bay OPP station.
The guard, Ben CASE, advised that GEBREKRISTOSE told him at 2207 hours that he was done being nice, and that he will slit the throats of the 4 officers when he is released. GEBREKRISTOSE further stated that he would make sure that the 4 officers were not here anymore. This will be a count of utter death threats.
Sgt. PATTERSON advised GEBREKRISTOSE a (sic) 2224 hours that he was being charged with two more counts of mischief, and a further count of uttering death threats. Sgt. PATTERSON read GEBREKRISTOSE his 10B charter rights, which he understood. Sgt. PATTERSON also read GEBREKRISTOSE the standard and supplementary cautions, each of which he indicated he understood.
Background
Mr. Grebrekristose’s personal background is set out in Hospital Report and need not be extensively set out in these Reasons.
Briefly, Mr. Gebrekristose, 38 years, is the eldest of five children. He was born in Canada to his parents who had immigrated from Eritrea, Africa. The family initially lived in Winnipeg and then settled in Gore Bay. Other than absences for attendances at university and a brief period in Toronto, Mr. Gebrekristose resided in the family home in Gore Bay.
Mr. Gebrekristose had no prior criminal record at the time of the index offences. He had an intermittent employment history and no significant romantic relationships. Prior to his NCR finding Mr. Gebrekristose did not have contact with psychiatric services. His symptoms emerged about six months prior to the index offence. Mr. Gebrekristose’s current diagnoses are schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorder (alcohol, cocaine), in sustained remission, in a controlled setting.
The Reasons for Disposition of November 5, 2024, indicate:
Following his NCR finding in 2016, Mr. Gebrekristose disclosed a two-year history of cannabis use beginning in approximately 2000. He reported experimentation with cocaine, ecstasy, mushroom and MDMA. He also reported alcohol consumption “a few times per month”.
When first at NBRHC Mr. Gebrekristose was psychotic, experiencing persecutory and grandiose delusions. He stabilized and was discharged into the community in March of 2018. He had to be readmitted to Hospital from the Maplewood residence after sneaking in liquor and cocaine. He was discharged again in February 2020 to Maplewood and then to independent living. After repeated alcohol incidents he was readmitted to hospital in March 2020. In December 2020 he experienced a deterioration characterized by pressured speech, hyper-talkativeness, increased pacing, and jovial mood. In February 2021 he reported low energy and mood, no appetite, and poor sleep. His diagnosis was changed from schizophrenia to schizoaffective disorder.
In December 2020 Mr. Gebrekristose threatened to smash a co-patient with a rock (Hospital Report, page 38) and in April 2021 he threatened to smash a co-patient’s head in with a baseball bat (Hospital Report, page 39). In 2023, after a number of months in supervised accommodation, he was readmitted to Hospital, due to an unauthorized absence after which he admitted to cannabis consumption. In February 2022, he threatened nursing staff stating, “I’m going to take my coffee back to the unit and throw it in their face” and “I’m going to fucking punch them out” and regarding the banking machine, he stated “I’m going to take out what I want and whoever tries to stop me I am going to fucking kill them.” (Hospital Report, page 45)
While the past few years have indicated periods of stability, the Hospital Report also references periodic instances of angry outbursts, substance use and readmissions to hospital due to noncompliance.
Since February 12, 2025, Mr. Gebrekristose has been living in supervised housing at 501 Morris Street. In the past year, he has made comments about discontinuing his long-acting injectable medication and there were instances of medication refusal although he has not gone more than 24 hours without eventually accepting it with the support of the treatment team. While the Hospital Report indicates that his mental status has remained generally stable and unchanged, he did have a period of agitation, impulsiveness and poor judgment related to ODSP (March 2025). He has also threatened to staff to go AWOL but later denied doing so to Dr. Gagnon. From May 13-20, 2025, he was readmitted to Hospital at his own request, having expressed a desire not to remain at 501 Morris. He was readmitted to prevent further deterioration based on his history of “escalating behavior and medication non-compliance”. On May 20, he was discharged back to 501 Morris.
The Hospital Report at page 71 indicates,
On July 17th, the outreach clinician received a call from staff at 501 Morris saying that Mr. Gebrekristose was angry, claiming people were bothering him and that they needed to leave him alone. Although the exact words were unclear, staff thought he was implying he would use physical force if they didn't. Mr. Gebrekristose wasn't specific about anyone, saying “everyone,” leaving it unclear who he was referring to or what sparked his anger. At dinner, he sat by himself and appeared angry. The clinician went to 501 Morris Street to find Mr. Gebrekristose in his room, irritable and vague about what happened. He agreed to stay in his room until he could “cool off.” The clinician noted that Mr. Gebrekristose had had angry episodes before but had usually only reacted verbally. On July 18th, Mr. Gebrekristose seemed improved but was still frustrated, saying, “If people don’t leave me alone, I'll fuck them up.”
In August, he returned to the home after curfew and admitted to having consumed beer. He was somewhat agitated but otherwise engaging with staff.
The treatment team are of the view that some of Mr. Gebrekristose’s conduct is self- sabotaging behavior as a way of avoiding discharge. He has been attempting to disengage from Outreach programming, requesting meetings be changed to quarterly. He was advised that meeting bi-weekly with the team is set out in his Disposition with checks for random urine collection on alternate weeks. It would be a breach of his Disposition to change to quarterly meetings. He responded by indicating that he didn’t care. He also stated that the team could come to him for such tests.
Recently, a vacancy at 774 Lakeshore has become available. This is a residence with peer support staff providing supports during the day but offers less structure. The treatment team believes this home is more appropriately geared for Mr. Gebrekristose as there are fewer expectations of the residents and it offers a permanent placement.
Current Diagnoses
- Schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorder (alcohol, cocaine), in sustained remission, in a controlled setting.
Evidence at the hearing
Dr. Gagnon, Mr. Gebrekristose’s treating psychiatrist for the past five years, provided evidence that Mr. Gebrekristose has been stable and unchanged for a number of years and there has been no violence. He stated that Mr. Gebrekristose is fully institutionalized and wants to be left alone to do nothing. He engages in self-sabotage and is oppositional-defiant, particularly when demands are made of him. Dr. Gagnon believes that Mr. Gebrekristose’s non-attendance at the hearing was an act of self-sabotage.
Dr. Gagnon characterized the incident and comments in July as a conditional threat resulting from anger when demands are made of him. Dr. Gagnon stated that, while substance use is a risk factor, he does not crave substances though he indicated that if he gets bored, he could consume alcohol and “get into trouble”. Dr. Gagnon also characterized Mr. Gebrekristose’s substance use as an act of “self-sabotage”. However, at the same time, he was of the view that Mr. Gebrekristose has good insight into the need for abstinence and he has expressed an intention to abstain. Dr. Gagnon indicated that Mr. Gebrekristose could move to 774 Lakeshore after an absolute discharge. In Dr. Gagnon’s view Mr. Gebrekristose would benefit from the less structured environment at 774 Lakeshore where he would not be pressed by a team into engaging in programming or activities. That facility has daytime staffing, and night-time monitoring through cameras. If needed, staff are available at night at a facility next door. When questioned, he noted that this move could also occur under the terms of a conditional discharge.
Initially, Dr. Gagnon supported an absolute discharge. He was of the view that any residual risk could be mitigated by a future Community Treatment Order (“CTO”) which he was prepared to sign and with the involvement of an ACT outreach team (“ACTT”), to which there has been a referral. Upon questioning, it was determined that it is not yet known when or if Mr. Grebrekristose will be accepted by the ACTT. Even if accepted, there are waitlists for the service. Dr. Gagnon indicated that Mr. Gebrekristose was agreeable to enter into a CTO and that his risk could be managed with these tools and, if necessary, under the Mental Health Act. Dr. Gagnon stated that he had not yet initiated the process of a CTO because it was not possible while on a detention order. While Mr. Gebrekristose is not currently deemed capable to make treatment decisions. Dr. Gagnon was of the view that for the purposes of the CTO, he could be deemed capable or his mother, who is his substitute decision-maker, could make this decision. It should be noted that Mr. Gebrekristose’s parents were present at the hearing, although the mother was not present for all of the evidence.
Dr. Gagnon agreed that Mr. Grebrekristose needs some support to manage his risk to the public and he stated that Mr. Gebrekristose has acknowledged that he needs support. When asked about risk from possible future substance abuse, Dr. Gagnon stated that if Mr. Gebrekristose was taking substances, he would “one hundred percent” decompensate and be a risk to the public. Dr. Gagnon, however, did not think Mr. Gebrekristose would consume substances even though he has done so on a number of occasions.
Final Submissions
After hearing Dr. Gagnon’s evidence, the Hospital changed its position and submitted that, upon reflection, Mr. Gebrekristose continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public that can be addressed by way of a conditional discharge with terms requiring him to reside in CMHA supportive housing or 501 Morris Street or 774 Lakeshore Drive.
Counsel for the Ministry of the Attorney General submitted that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a conditional discharge with both potential addresses specified, and a weapons prohibition based on the July 17 incident.
Mr.Stickland submitted that Mr. Gebrekristose no longer represented a significant threat to the safety of the public and that any risk could be managed by a CTO with non-forensic supports in the community. In support of his position Mr. Stickland cited the following authorities:
Medcof (Re) [2019] O.R.B.D. 970 for the proposition that a CTO can be used to effect a transition to an Absolute Discharge. The Board notes that it declined to do so in Murdoch’s case as he continued to represent a significant threat.
Murdoch (Re) [2018] O.R.B.D. 1980 for the proposition that an absolute discharge can be granted in anticipation of the accused person’s transfer to a non-forensic team at the hospital and a CTO.
R. v. Stanley 2010 ONCA 324 where the Court allowed an absolute discharge with a CTO to address ongoing concerns about the accused’s medication compliance.
Gibson (Re), 2022 ONCA 527 for the proposition that the standard under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code is an onerous one.
Analysis and Decision
- The issue to be determined is whether Mr. Grebekristose continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. In making this determination, 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 at para. 57.
To engage these provisions of the Criminal Code, the threat posed must be more than speculative in nature; it must be supported by evidence. The threat must also be “significant”, both in the sense that there must be a real risk of physical or psychological harm occurring to individuals in the community and in the sense that this potential harm must be serious. A minuscule risk of a grave harm will not suffice. Similarly, a high risk of trivial harm will not meet the threshold. Finally, the conduct or activity creating the harm must be criminal in nature. In short, Part XX.1 can only maintain its authority over an NCR accused where the court or Review Board concludes that the individual poses a significant risk of committing a serious criminal offence. If that finding of significant risk cannot be made, there is no power in Part XX.1 to maintain restraints on the NCR accused's liberty.
- In Re Gibson, supra the Court states at paras. 8-9
Under s. 672.5401 “significant threat to the safety of the public” means “a risk of serious physical or psychological harm to members of the public – including any victim of or witness to the offence, or any person under the age of 18 years – resulting from conduct that is criminal in nature but not necessarily violent”.
Huscroft J.A. said in Carrick (Re), 2015 ONCA 866, 128 O.R. (3d) 209, at para. 17, that “the ‘significant threat’ standard is an onerous one”. He added that “[t]he board must be satisfied as to both the existence and gravity of the risk of physical or psychological harm posed by the appellant in order to deny him an absolute discharge”. Mere speculation is insufficient.
Mr. Gebrekristose has experienced challenges adapting to community living over the past number of years. He has been noncompliant with medication and has returned to Hospital on a number of occasions. He has engaged in significant threatening conduct on several occasions over the past years, including this past summer in July (three months before the hearing), when staff at his residence, fearing he would use physical force, reached out to the Hospital team to attend the residence. Mr. Gebrekristose remained in his room for several days while he calmed down. Mr. Grebrekristose has had instances of medication resistance and several instances of refusal. To his credit, eventually he has taken his medication, with the support of the treatment team.
Dr. Gagnon advised that while living in the community, Mr. Gebrekristose requires accommodation that is supported. In this regard, Mr. Gebrekristose has only been living in 24/7 supported and supervised housing since February 2025 and has only just recently been approved for less structured housing at 744 Lakeshore Rd. He has yet to move to this residence, and his ability to cope with less structure and a looser set of restrictions has yet to be tested. Although it did not lead to decompensation, Mr. Gebrekristose did consume alcohol, against his Disposition, in August 2025. There remain significant risks- ongoing instances of threatening conduct and resistance to medication as well as the potential for greater levels of substance use in the absence of daily structure and support.
The Board finds that Mr. Gebrekristose continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. This is not speculation. Based on the evidence, there is a clear risk that without the oversight of the ORB, he would engage in threatening conduct similar that which has occurred multiple times over the past years and during the Index Offence. Accordingly, an absolute discharge is not warranted at this time.
A conditional discharge is the necessary and appropriate and the least onerous and least restrictive Disposition with a requirement to reside at either Morris Street or Lakeview Road with looser restrictions. There will be no requirement for abstention from substances but there will be regular screens for substances. The Board declines to impose a weapons prohibition as there has not been one in place in the previous disposition and the evidence does not support it.
The Board notes there is no Community Treatment Order in place at this time and while there has been a referral to ACTT, it is not certain that an ACTT will become involved, and if it does, whether it will be an effective support for Mr. Gebrekristose.
Should Mr. Gebrekristose be placed on a CTO with appropriate community follow-up in the upcoming year, and continue to do well, an early hearing with the Board may be requested.
DATED this 17th day of December 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Norine Nathanson
Legal Member
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board