Ontario Review Board

Re: Eduardo Gonzalez

ORB File No: 6370

Hearing held on: Friday, December 5, 2025

Place of hearing: St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton West 5th Campus, 100 West 5th Street

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks Members: Dr. M. Attia Dr. P. Wright Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Mr. A. Mete

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Eduardo Gonzalez Counsel: Mr. V. Zenobio

Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. S. O’Brien

Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. C. Gzik

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated December 31, 2025)

Introduction:

1. On July 11, 2013, Mr. Eduardo Gonzalez was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”), on charges of aggravated assault and assault causing bodily harm, both contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”).

2. Mr. Gonzalez is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) dated September 20, 2024, whereby he is discharged subject to a variety of terms and conditions, including that he reside at a specified location, report to the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton (“St. Joseph’s” or the “hospital”) not less than once per month, and refrain from possession of weapons.

3. On December 5, 2025, a panel of the Board convened a hearing at St. Joseph’s to conduct Mr. Gonzalez’s annual hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Gonzalez was present and was represented by his counsel, Ms. V. Zenobio.

4. The issue at this hearing is whether Mr. Gonzalez is a significant threat to public safety, as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code. If so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances must be determined, bearing in mind the factors enunciated in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

5. For the reasons set out below and based on the expert evidence and opinions before it, the Board concluded that Mr. Gonzalez no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and accordingly, he must be absolutely discharged.

Positions of the Parties:

6. At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial positions. The Board was presented with a joint recommendation from the parties that Mr. Gonzalez no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and that he must be absolutely discharged.

7. All parties maintained their joint recommendation that Mr. Gonzalez be granted an Absolute Discharge in closing submissions.

Personal Background and Index Offences:

8. Mr. Gonzalez’s personal and psychiatric history as well as the particulars of the index offences are set out in the Hospital Report to the ORB dated November 17, 2025 (the “Hospital Report”) in detail and will not be repeated here as that document was entered as an Exhibit at the hearing. We have also relied on a summary of this information as set forth in last year's Board Reasons for Disposition dated October 28, 2024, as follows:

" Mr. Gonzalez is 38 [now 39] years of age. He was born in Argentina and moved to Canada with his family when he was four. He had no criminal history prior to the Index Offences, nor any history of alcohol or drug abuse.

As set out in the Hospital Report Mr. Gonzalez's parents noticed a gradual change in his personality, starting around September 2000, when he was 15. He had some difficulties at school, including aggression. He also began to exhibit unusual behaviours.

Mr. Gonzalez’s first psychiatric admission was in mid-December 2003, when (at the age of 17) he was admitted to the Credit Valley Hospital, following a suicide attempt. He was started on olanzapine and transferred to the Early Psychosis Unit at CAMH, where he was admitted for approximately a month. During that admission, Mr. Gonzalez confided that he had become increasingly preoccupied with religious issues over the preceding months. He thought that by ending his life, he would be able to ascend to heaven. His medication was increased gradually, with some positive effect, and he was discharged to outpatient follow-up with a community ACT Team.

In 2007, Mr. Gonzalez decompensated to the point where a two-month readmission to CAMH was necessary. In early 2008, he was readmitted to CAMH for a period of 10 months. This hospitalization was described as long and challenging, during which Mr. Gonzalez remained grossly disorganized, despite various medication trials. His pharmacological treatment was augmented with ECT, following which he was gradually able to obtain passes to his family home.

He was eventually referred to the Peel ACT Team to assist with his reintegration into the community and for psychiatric follow up.

In the community, the ACT team monitored Mr. Gonzalez’s psychiatric progress. Despite being under psychiatric care, on August 19, 2011, Mr. Gonzalez assaulted his father with a knife, following dinner at the family cottage, causing significant injury to his neck. Mr. Gonzalez fled the cottage and was not located until the following morning, when he was arrested without incident. This was the first Index Offence.

Shortly after his arrest, Mr. Gonzalez was sent to Waypoint for assessment. He was found unfit to stand trial and came under the jurisdiction of the Review Board. His initial disposition required Mr. Gonzalez to be detained at Waypoint. While at Waypoint, Mr. Gonzalez's behaviour continued to be problematic. In early September 2012, he attacked a co-patient in an unprovoked assault. In November 2012, he committed the second Index Offence, an assault on a nurse at Waypoint. That offence occurred just weeks after Mr. Gonzalez had been found fit to stand trial.

In the 2020-2021 clinical year, given the length of time that Mr. Gonzalez remained on the waitlist for appropriate accommodation, and in view of the successful passes that he exercised to his parents' home, Mr. Gonzalez's parents began to seriously consider bringing their son home to live with them. With the impact of the pandemic on his visits home and passes to the community, Mr. Gonzalez's parents and the clinical team agreed on a plan to discharge him to the family home. After eight years as an inpatient, Mr. Gonzalez was discharged to the direct supervision of his parents, on February 12, 2021.”

Criminal History:

9. Prior to the commission of the index offences, Mr. Gonzalez had no criminal record.

Current Diagnoses:

10. Mr. Gonzalez’s current diagnoses are:

Schizophrenia; and

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

Evidence at the Hearing:

11. The Board had available to it the documentary evidence forming the Record and the Exhibits, and oral evidence from Dr. Y. Alatishe, who has been Mr. Gonzalez’s treating psychiatrist since August 2016. The doctor adopted the contents of the Hospital Report, including the opinion that Mr. Gonzalez no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public.

12. Dr. Alatishe stated that Mr. Gonzalez has had another excellent year in the community residing with his parents. He commented that Mr. Gonzalez has in fact, done very well in the community since returning to live with his parents in 2021. He has never required a hospital readmission.

13. Mr. Gonzalez is content to reside with his parents and he has no plans to move out or explore alternative housing. In response to a question posed by a panel member. Dr. Alatishe stated that should Mr. Gonzalez ever desire to move out of the family residence or if, for any reason, his parents are no longer able to care for him, then Mr. Gonzalez would likely require alternative long-term supportive housing.

14. Mr. Gonzalez is assessed as incapable to consent to treatment and his mother acts as his Substitute Decision Maker (“SDM”). Under his SDM’s consent, he is treated with the gold-standard oral antipsychotic medication, Clozapine, at a dose of 650 mg daily. Mr. Gonzalez is also treated with a long-acting injection (“LAI”) of the antipsychotic medication, Invega Sustenna, which he receives every 28 days. He is adherent with treatment and he takes his oral medications under his parents’ supervision. His LAI is administered at the outpatient clinic. He has remained adherent to all blood monitoring protocols required with Clozapine treatment and his Clozapine blood levels have been stable over the year in review indicating consistent medication compliance. The doctor advised that he considers Mr. Gonzalez’s medications to be optimized.

15. The Hospital Report indicates that with medication adherence, “Mr. Gonzalez has demonstrated consistent psychiatric stability throughout the current review period. At every clinical encounter, he has been calm, pleasant, cooperative, and functioning at his established baseline. He denies hallucinations, delusions, paranoia, or harmful ideation, and no evidence of psychosis, mood disturbance, or behavioural disorganization has been observed by the treatment team or reported by his family. His mental status examinations remain unchanged: linear and simple thought processes, flat but congruent affect, no perceptual abnormalities, and behaviour reflective of stability and routine. Collateral from his parents continues to affirm that he has been “doing very well,” with no changes in behaviour or mental state.”

16. There have been no concerns with regard to Mr. Gonzalez engaging in alcohol or substance use. This is not a risk factor.

17. In terms of his daily activities, Mr. Gonzalez has a predictable daily routine that includes working regularly at his father’s car detailing business, helping out with household chores, and a daily walk or work out. He travels with his family to their cottage as well as on trips to Miami.

18. Mr. Gonzalez attends all scheduled appointments with his Forensic Outpatient (“FOP”) team, accompanied by his mother or father. He does not have friends outside of his family unit but is described as socializing appropriately while working at his father’s business.

19. According to the Hospital Report, in 2024, a risk assessment was completed for Mr. Gonzalez and it indicated that his risk of violent recidivism is “low”. That assessment remains valid and accurate at this time.

20. Dr. Alatishe testified that Mr. Gonzalez is extremely fortunate to have the consistent support of his parents. The Hospital Report indicates “His family remains his primary social support and a major protective factor; they provide structure, routine supervision, transportation, medication support, and close observation.” Dr. Alatishe testified that Mr. Gonzalez’s parents are very insightful regarding their son’s major mental illness, its symptoms, and early warning signs. They are committed to ensuring that their son remains treatment adherent. They are intimately aware of the potential serious consequences of any decompensation in their son’s mental state and, in Dr. Alatishe’s opinion, they would be highly likely to notice any changes in his presentation and immediately report same to his mental health care providers. Dr. Alatishe stated that he has a high level of confidence that Mr. Gonzalez’s parents can be relied upon to exercise good judgment in supporting their son’s mental health needs. In the doctor’s opinion, Mr. Gonzalez’s illness is currently in remission.

21. Dr. Alatishe reported that Mr. Gonzalez has been provisionally accepted to the Psychosis Spectrum Clinic at Trillium Health Partners (“Trillium”) in Mississauga, Ontario. On November 3, 2025, Mr. Gonzalez and his parents attended a comprehensive psychiatric consultation with Dr. S. Abid. Dr. Abid has advised that Mr. Gonzalez is appropriate for the Trillium civil mental health service should he be granted an Absolute Discharge by the ORB.

22. The Trillium service would offer Mr. Gonzalez ongoing psychiatric follow-up, monthly Clozapine monitoring, administration of his monthly LAI, ongoing medication review, and regular mental status assessments. If granted an Absolute Discharge, Trillium will assume care of Mr. Gonzalez in early January 2026. Dr. Alatishe reported that he and the FOP team case manager recently spoke with Dr. Adid and he advised that no concerns were expressed about Trillium managing Mr. Gonzalez’s care going forward. The doctor also testified that he has a high degree of confidence that Mr. Gonzalez’s parents will ensure that Mr. Gonzalez will commit to follow-up with Trillium and they will facilitate his engagement with this new civil team. Further, Mr. Gonzalez has consistently expressed his willingness to move forward on this basis.

23. In response to a question posed by a panel member, Dr. Alatishe advised that the decision of the treatment team to recommend Mr. Gonzalez be absolutely discharged was a unanimous one.

24. No further evidence was called by the parties.

Analysis and Conclusion:

1. The Board is unanimous in finding that Mr. Gonzalez no longer meets the threshold of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public. In coming to this conclusion, we have relied upon the documentary evidence and the expert testimony of Dr. Alatishe, particularly regarding Mr. Gonzalez’s course over the past several reporting years. As well, the panel carefully considered the decision of the Supreme Court in Winko v. British Columbia. In that case, the Court identified a significant risk as 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". There must be a positive finding by the Board of a significant risk to the safety of the public to engage the provisions of the Criminal Code and to support restrictions on an NCR accused’s liberty. Anything else, for example, uncertainty, cannot suffice. If the Board cannot resolve the question of whether or not the NCR accused constitutes a significant threat to public safety, it must grant the accused an Absolute Discharge.

2. In Winko, the Supreme Court also outlined that in coming to a conclusion on the issue of significant risk, a Review Board should closely examine a range of evidence including the circumstances of the original offence, the past and expected course of the accused's treatment, the present state of the NCR accused's medical condition and the NCR accused's own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community and, perhaps most importantly, the recommendations provided by experts who have examined the NCR accused. In this case, the treatment team’s decision to recommend an Absolute Discharge was unanimous and was endorsed by the person in charge of the hospital.

3. We are mindful of Mr. Gonzalez’s history which reveals that when he decompensates, he is capable of engaging in violent acts of physical aggression, as was the case at the time of the index offences. However, we note that Mr. Gonzalez has not engaged in any further violence over the past 13 years. Further, he has been stable in the community for more than four years.

4. Despite the presence of static risk factors which are immutable to change, the expert evidence before the panel highlighted the sustained progress that Mr. Gonzalez has displayed over the past many years. We note that the positive symptoms of Mr. Gonzalez’s mental illness have been in sustained and complete remission for many years. He is optimally treated and he has remained compliant with his treatment. He does not present with any overt symptoms of psychosis or mood disturbance.

5. Mr. Gonzalez has attended all of his scheduled appointments with the FOP team, without issue. He is consistently assisted in that regard by his parents who are invested in his ongoing recovery and full community reintegration. Mr. Gonzalez has complied with all of the terms of his ORB Disposition. At every clinical encounter, he is reported to be “calm, pleasant, cooperative, and functioning at his established baseline”.

6. As stated, Mr. Gonzalez has been residing successfully in the community with his family, without incident. Further, there have been no reported incidents of concern since Mr. Gonzalez’s discharge to the community.

7. Unfortunately, Mr. Gonzalez expresses fairly limited insight into his illness and its early warning signs. While he has acknowledged that his medications help him, he is unable to articulate exactly how. Despite marked limitations in Mr. Gonzalez’s insight, he has been consistently compliant with his prescribed treatment and he has consistently expressed his intention to remain compliant, whether or not he receives an Absolute Discharge.

8. The Board agrees with the expert evidence that Mr. Gonzalez’s risk will be sufficiently mitigated in the context of an Absolute Discharge in light of the many protective factors referred to above. The Board notes that Mr. Gonzalez has been accepted into the Trillium program which offers ongoing psychiatric follow-up, monthly Clozapine monitoring, administration of Mr. Gonzalez’s monthly LAI, ongoing medication review, and regular mental status assessments. Both Mr. Gonzalez and his parents have committed to ensuring he stays connected and engaged with the Trillium program and team members. With the comprehensive support of this civil mental health service and the continuing support from his immediate family, the Board has every confidence that Mr. Gonzalez will be appropriately supervised, monitored, and supported absent a Disposition of the ORB and we wish him continued success.

9. In view of the foregoing, this Board finds that Mr. Gonzalez no longer meets the threshold of significant risk to the safety of the public and we order that he be absolutely discharged. The Board congratulates Mr. Gonzalez and wishes him continued success in the future.

Dated this 31^st day of December 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. L. Banks

Alternate Chairperson

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board