Re: Rohan Mark Cole
(DOB: 15.01.69)
ORB File No: 5070/6141/7465
Hearing held on: Wednesday, January 15, 2025
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. MacIntyre, K.C.
Members: Dr. K. Patel Dr. W. Loza Ms. C. Murray Mr. S. Duffy
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Rohan M. Cole Counsel: Mr. A. Rai
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 29, 2025)
Introduction
On April 18, 2008, Rohan Mark Cole was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of criminal harassment, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).
On June 14, 2021, Rohan Mark Cole was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of criminal harassment (x2), and fail to comply with condition of undertaking or recognizance, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).
On December 13, 2018, Rohan Mark Cole was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of disobeying a court order (x2), repeatedly communicating directly or indirectly with person, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).
On January 15, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“Board” or “panel”) convened to review Mr. Cole’s current Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. At the time of the hearing, Mr. Cole was ordered detained within the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores” or the “hospital”) on a Detention Disposition, with privileges up to and including passes for up to 12 hours to enter the community, within a 150-kilometre radius of the hospital, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge.
Mr. Cole was present for his hearing. He was represented by counsel, Mr. A. Rai, throughout the proceedings.
A Hospital Report dated December 29, 2024, was entered as Exhibit 1. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) Rule 13 Response dated January 14, 2025, was entered as Exhibit 2. Exhibit 3 is the Victim Impact Statement dated January 10, 2025. The Addendum to the Hospital Report dated January 14, 2025, was entered as Exhibit 4.
The issues to be determined are whether Mr. Cole continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons set out below and based on the evidence and opinions before us, the Board found that Mr. Cole continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board finds that a Detention Disposition in a Secure Forensic Unit at the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences is the necessary and appropriate Order having regard to the safety of the public, which is the paramount concern, and also having regard to Mr. Cole’s mental health, reintegration into society, and his other needs.
Current Psychiatric Diagnoses
- Schizophrenia
Cannabis Use Disorder, in remission in a controlled environment
Alcohol Use Disorder, in remission in a controlled environment
Position of the Parties
- At the commencement of the hearing, the parties were canvassed for their, without prejudice, initial positions. The hospital, supported by counsel for the Attorney General, took the position that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the Detention Order at the Forensic Program at Ontario Shores with changes to the terms as follows:
a. Removal of clause 4(d);
b. Addition of passes for up to 72 hours to enter the community, within a 150-kilometre radius of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge;
c. Passes for up to 72 hours to enter the community, within a 150-kilometre radius of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, indirectly supervised.
The hospital further requested that the third last paragraph of the Victim Impact Statement not be considered by the Board because the terms recommended by the Victim fall outside of the provisions of the Criminal Code.
Counsel for Mr. Cole advised that his client was no longer seeking a transfer to the CAMH. He advised that his client supported the position of the hospital.
Index Offences
- The details of the index offences are included in the Hospital Report and are summarized as follows:
“The index offences, involving criminal harassment and repeatedly communicating directly or indirectly with a person, were all perpetrated against the same individual, a Canadian actress and TV personality. Mr. Cole was suffering from Schizophrenia characterized by erotomaniac delusions at the time the offences were committed.”
Background and History
The Hospital Report contains extensive information regarding Mr. Cole’s background and history, the entirety of which need not be repeated here in detail. However, the following particulars are noteworthy.
Mr. Cole is a 55-year-old, father of four. He was born in Jamaica. He has a grade 10 education at which time he quit school to pursue employment. He emigrated to Canada at the age of 15.
Mr. Cole has worked at Canadian Tire, with a government agency, and at a grocery store. Toward the end of his employment he broke his leg, at which point he began receiving a pension. He is currently financially supported by Canada Pension Plan (“CPP”) disability benefits.
Mr. Cole does not have an approved person.
Mr. Cole is capable of consenting to psychiatric treatment.
Mr. Cole’s criminal record before being found NCR includes a 1991 conviction for break and enter and theft, along with attempt break and enter and theft, a 1993 conviction for break and enter with intent, and a 1997 conviction for use of credit card obtained by crime.
Mr. Cole had psychiatric admissions / contacts prior to his NCR finding. In 1998 and 1999 he was assessed three times at the Addictions Research Foundation at CAMH. Mr. Cole was admitted to St. Michael’s Hospital in May 2007. He was non-compliant with psychotropic medication and discharged from hospital.
Mr. Cole continues to have contact with his ex-wife and his children as well as his brother.
Course Since Last Disposition
On August 23, 2024, Mr. Cole was transitioned to Forensic Community Reintegration Unit (FCRU) from Forensic Assessment and Rehabilitation Unit (FARU).
There were several occasions this reporting year where Mr. Cole was observed laughing to himself in his bedroom. He acknowledged experiencing auditory hallucinations, although he reported that the voices have quieted by about ninety percent. He shared an experience where he directly addressed the loudest voice, which he identified as belonging to the victim of his index offence, telling her to “move on”.
Mr. Cole continued to have challenges with impulse control and emotional regulation. Since the last reporting year, he has shown a significant decline in conflicts with staff.
In October 2024, there were two incidents when Mr. Cole declined to take his medications.
Mr. Cole engaged in several verbal altercations during the reporting year. On July 18, 2024, he engaged in an incident of physical aggression by pushing a co-patient who entered his personal space.
On August 5, 2024, Mr. Cole threatened to “punch out” a co-patient who he claims brushed up against him several times.
Mr. Cole was granted indirectly supervised hospital grounds privileges on September 18, 2024. His indirectly supervised privileges were cancelled after his elopement on November 9, 2024 (details in paragraphs 29 and 30, below). As of the date of the Hospital Report (December 29, 2024), his privileges remained on hold.
On October 25, 2024, an assessment terminated for staff safety concerns when Mr. Cole moved to block the doorway to the room where his staff met with him and he jabbed his finger toward the staff’s face.
On November 9, 2024, Mr. Cole did not check in with the unit at the specified time while using his indirectly supervised hospital grounds privileges, and he did not return at the expected time. Mr. Cole was scheduled to receive his long-acting injectable antipsychotic, flupentixol, on November 9 but he absconded prior to receiving the medication. On November 11, 2024, police located Mr. Cole at his brother’s house in Brampton and he was returned to hospital. He reported that he had deceived his brother into believing that he had been formally discharged from hospital. On assessment, Mr. Cole admitted that he did not have any intention of returning to hospital if he had not been found, and had not made any arrangements to obtain his medications in the community. When he began noticing symptoms such as difficulty sleeping, he opted for over the counter NyQuil that was at his brother’s house rather than seeking his medication.
During his elopement, Mr. Cole was in breach of term 4(d) of his disposition. Police noted that he was in possession of electronic devices without being under the supervision of staff at Ontario Shores. As a result of the elopement, Mr. Cole’s indirectly supervised privileges were cancelled.
On January 12, 2025, Mr. Cole eloped from hospital again while on indirect hospital grounds privileges. He was returned by police within a few hours of his unauthorized leave of absence. The on-call physician noted that Mr. Cole was verbally aggressive, not cooperative, agitated, and belligerent. He was placed in locked seclusion until the evening of January 12, 2025. The next day, Mr. Cole reported that he had absconded to purchase “cheap cigarettes”. He was experiencing auditory hallucinations that to him to leave the hospital to buy cigarettes.
Evidence at the Hearing
The Board had available to it the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Hospital Report, and oral evidence of Dr. Beverly Chuong, Mr. Cole’s psychiatrist and author of the Hospital Report.
Dr. Chuong testified that the hospital is no longer recommending the community living provision or reporting clause set out in their Hospital Report in light of the two recent elopements. Mr. Cole has reported worsening auditory hallucinations in the past week. The team is in the early stages of reassessing Mr. Cole. The team is in the process of determining if Mr. Cole’s risk is best managed on a Secure Unit or a General Unit.
In the past, after transfer to a General Unit, Mr. Cole has asked to be returned to a Secure Unit. He considers there to be fewer rules to follow on the secure unit because there are fewer freedoms.
There has been a decline in physical conflicts compared to previous years. This is because the behavioural therapist has worked with Mr. Cole to reduce his problematic behaviours and has worked with the team to modify and enforce his treatment plan.
Dr. Chuong testified that there are several considerations in deciding whether Mr. Cole will remain on a General Unit or be transferred back to a Secure Unit. These include whether his auditory hallucinations subside, an assessment of factors that led to the elopements, and whether there continues to be an escalation of verbal outbursts.
Mr. Cole has not attempted to contact the victim. Currently, he does not have access to electronics without supervision and his phone calls are monitored. Due to an inadvertence of the unit, he did have access to electronics unsupervised for several months up to a half year. He did not contact the victim during that time. Dr. Chuong testified that clause 4(d) of the current disposition is no longer necessary or appropriate as he has demonstrated that he can use the devices without supervision. She testified that the treatment team would gradually provide less and less supervision over electronics and the telephone. She opined that Mr. Cole may not agree to supervision over his phone communications and electronics if there is not a clause in his Disposition permitting such supervision. She stated that the victim has been reliable reporting communications from Mr. Cole. It has been several years since he contacted the victim. Mr. Cole has stated that he still hears the victim’s voice but has told her to “move on”.
In response to a question of the panel, Dr. Chuong testified that Mr. Cole’s elopements may be due to the fact that he resorts to some behaviours that are detrimental to his progress. His elopements may be part of his plan to be returned to a familiar Secure Unit.
Dr. Chuong testified that she would not be opposed to the Board finding whether Mr. Cole is to be detained on a Secure Unit or General Unit. There are fewer opportunities for Mr. Cole to abscond from hospital when he is on a Secure Unit.
Submissions
At the conclusion of the hearing, the hospital submitted that it would be overly restrictive to specify that Mr. Cole be detained on a Secure Unit. Counsel for the hospital submitted that the hospital would like the option of moving Mr. Cole to a Secure Unit if behaviour escalates. Ms. Szabo submitted that Mr. Cole is being managed on a General Unit currently. Ms. Szabo submitted that Mr. Cole’s reintegration into the community is a factor that the panel must consider in making their decision.
Ms. Szabo further submitted that Mr. Cole has not contacted the victim since 2018. There remains a clause in his disposition that he is not to contact the victim. Therefore, despite the removal of the electronics supervision clause 4(d), she submits that the victim would be protected. She argued that it is onerous and restrictive to not have access freely to his devices. She reminded the panel that during the period that the hospital inadvertently did not enforce clause 4(d), Mr. Cole did not contact the victim.
Ms. MacDonald, on behalf of the Attorney General, submitted that the panel must specify that Mr. Cole be managed on a Secure Forensic Unit to manage his risk to the public. Waiting and seeing if Mr. Cole will again abscond puts the victim and other members of the public at risk. Ms. MacDonald reminded the panel that the primary consideration must be protection of the public. She agrees to removal of clause 4(d) only if Mr. Cole is detained on a Secure Forensic Unit, which should allow the hospital to test whether Mr. Cole makes any contact with the victim. Historically, contact with the victim has been periodic with long intervals between contact. The removal of clause 4(d) could be well-managed on a Secure Forensic Unit. Ms. MacDonald pointed out that Dr. Chuong is not opposed to the Board specifying the security level in the Disposition. She argued that clauses 2(b), 2(c), and 2(d) are not needed in the Disposition since community living is not being recommended.
Mr. Rai submitted that Mr. Cole is in agreement with the submissions of the hospital. He reinforced that Mr. Cole did not contact the victim, and the no-contact clause remains in the Disposition. Therefore, clause 4(b) should be removed.
Analysis and Conclusions
Significant Threat
Mr. Cole did not contest a finding of significant risk to the safety of the public. Despite this, the Board makes its own finding of significant risk. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions from the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Cole remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.
Mr. Cole has a diagnosis of Schizophrenia. He continues to experience symptoms including auditory hallucinations, specifically hearing the voice of the target of his index offence. Over the reporting year, Mr. Cole has continued to have active symptoms of his mental illness including challenges with emotional regulation and impulsivity. He eloped from hospital within less than two months after being granted indirectly supervised hospital grounds privileges. He intended to not return and made no plans for medications. He again eloped on January 12, 2025, at the direction of his auditory hallucination telling him to go get cigarettes.
Mr. Cole’s index offences are significant and repeated. He committed the offences while experiencing symptoms of his major mental illness.
Mr. Cole has limited insight into the need for antipsychotic medications for his psychiatric illness. He eloped from hospital on twice since November 9, 2024, without a plan for medication. When he had trouble sleeping at his brother’s home, he resorted to NyQuil.
The Board therefore finds that Mr. Cole continues to present a significant risk to the public.
The Board has concerns that, in assessing risk, the HCR-20 relied on information that may not be accurate. At page 79 of the Hospital Report it is noted that Mr. Cole remained compliant with his antipsychotic medication administration over the review period. The evidence presented at this hearing was clear that Mr. Cole absconded from the hospital on November 9, 2024, prior to administration of his injection. He also did not take his oral medications while on this unauthorized leave of absence.
Necessary and Appropriate Disposition
In light of the Board’s finding of significant risk, it is charged with shaping a Disposition for the coming year.
This reporting year Mr. Cole’s behaviour has been challenging, he has two unauthorized leaves of absence since November 2024, he makes sexualized comments, and he has been aggressive.
A Detention Order on Secure Forensic Service at Ontario Shores is necessary to manage Mr. Cole’s risk. Considering Mr. Cole’s two elopements since November 9, 2024, and his ongoing behavioural issues, it is clear that he is not able to be managed on a General Unit.
On November 9, Mr. Cole eloped knowing that his injectable medication was due. He also stopped his oral medications. He took an electronic device with him when he eloped, in contravention of his Disposition. His risk to the public’s safety increased greatly when he eloped under these conditions.
The Board finds that it is not reasonable to remove clause 4(d) from the disposition. Mr. Cole continues to hear the victim’s voice in auditory hallucinations. The hospital submitted that the victim has been good at letting the hospital know when Mr. Cole breaches the 4(d). However, the Board finds that the expectation for the victim to report a breach is onerous and unreasonable given the serious psychological harm Mr. Cole’s contact causes to the victim. The protection of the public is of utmost importance. The Board finds that, at a minimum, Mr. Cole’s auditory hallucinations should be brought under control before this clause is removed from the Disposition. The restrictiveness of clause 4(d) is tempered by the fact that Mr. Cole may continue to have access to the devices under the direct supervision of the hospital, who we encourage to supervise access to the devices on a regular and frequent basis.
As per the hospital’s recommendation and agreement of the parties, the Board will not be granting community living. There are terms recommended that support a community living clause that are not required in the Disposition including terms 2(d), 2(g), 2(h). Therefore, terms 2(d), 2(g), 2(h) are removed from the disposition.
The Board finds that the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive Disposition is a Detention Disposition within the Secure Forensic Service of Ontario Shores, with terms as set out in our formal disposition.
DATED this 29th day of January 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. C. Murray Legal Member
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board