Re Suzanne Emery McLean, 2025 CanLII 15876

Ontario Review Board

Re: Suzanne Emery McLean

ORB File No: 8150

Hearing held on: Wednesday, December 18, 2024

Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. M. Labrosse

Members: Dr. S. Lessard

Dr. R. Cormier

Mr. D. Sandor

Mr. R. Rainboth

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Suzanne Emery Mclean Counsel: Mr. M. Godoy

Person in charge of hospital: Representative Dr. A. Sandhu

Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. J. Wright

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated February 27, 2025)

Introduction

1. On September 15, 2022, the accused, Suzanne Emery Mclean, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of criminal harassment and failing to comply with a release order, all contrary the Criminal Code of Canada.

2. Ms. Emery McLean is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated December 21, 2023 (and a subsequent Order dated February 26, 2024) detaining her within the Secure Forensic Unit of the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, with privileges up to and including community living in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital.

3. On December 18, 2024, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, hereinafter referred to as the hospital, to conduct Ms. Emery Mclean’s annual hearing, pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Ms. Emery Mclean attended her hearing and was unrepresented. Mr. Mellington Godoy was appointed by the Ontario Review Board to act as Amicus Curiae. A Hospital Report dated December 13, 2024, was entered as Exhibit 1 for the hearing. Two Victim Impact Statements were also filed as Exhibits 2 and 3, respectively.

4. The issues for this hearing are whether Mr. Emery McLean continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, to determine the disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances.

5. For the reasons set out below, the Board finds that Ms. Emery McLean no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and accordingly, we grant her an absolute discharge.

Index Offences

6. The details of the index offences are summarized in last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:

“The accused has had 39 incidents with Ottawa Police Service in the last 18 months all dealing with harassment and MHA issues. The accused has been offered assistance repeatedly for mental health issues but refuses. Due to ongoing harassment, 6 victims have recently come forward expressing fear from the accused due to increasing erratic and threatening behaviour and nonstop communication.

William and Barb Evans were former neighbours of the accused until the accused moved away 6 years ago. Since that time the couple have been constantly harassed by the accused. The accused has called the Evan's 14 times since January 2021 and showed up at their home unannounced causing a scene.

Dr. Jane and her husband James Talmage have received telephone calls and voicemail messages from the accused sporadically since she moved from the area 6 years ago. They would occur every 3-6 months and often notes would be left in their mailbox but since Summer of 2019 the calls have increased and the accused has lived in the same neighborhood and she walks past their home causing them to fear for their safety.”

Background History

7. Ms. Emery McLean’s personal, legal and psychiatric history is set out in detail in the hospital report. Briefly summarized, Ms. Emery McLean is presently 57 years of age and was born and raised in Saint John, New Brunswick. She met her childhood developmental milestones on time. She was the youngest of three siblings. Her parents divorced when she was nine years old. When Ms. Emery McLean was about 12, her mother got a job as a pediatric recreational therapist in Fredericton, NB.

8. The family then moved one or two years later to Halifax, NS, when Ms. Emery McLean’s mother became the director of a Ronald McDonald house at the children’s hospital. Her mother eventually lost this job after an incident where she apparently struck Ms. Emery McLean with her car during an altercation. Ms. Emery McLean was treated at the hospital where her mother worked, and she was fired afterwards. They moved back to Fredericton and Ms. Emery McLean completed high school there. Ms. Emery McLean described her relationship with her mother in the 2018 report as “complicated”.

9. Ms. Emery McLean met her husband, Barry McLean, while she was completing a nursing practicum at CFB Gagetown. Mr. McLean was an officer on the base, approximately ten years older than her. They were married in 1994. They separated in 2014 but have not divorced. Mr. McLean continues to provide personal and financial support to her. He was her surety while she was released on bail. He has since retired from the military and was working for Transport Canada at the time of the criminal responsibility assessment.

10. Ms. Emery McLean’s son, Ethan, was in Grade 11 and living with his father at the time of the assessment.

11. Ms. Emery McLean acknowledged that alcohol had been a problem in her life since about 2018. She had stopped drinking when she received a court order not to do so and had not consumed alcohol for several months before the assessment. She reported that she had never used drugs.

Criminal History

12. A CPIC criminal record provided shows that Ms. Emery McLean’s sole conviction was for Driving While Impaired in 2018.

Psychiatric History

13. Ms. Emery McLean denied any previous mental health conditions or diagnoses. However, reports from other hospitals indicated that Ms. McLean’s first reported psychiatric admission was at the Kingston Health Sciences Centre from February 7-10, 2014. She had come to the Emergency Department after a suicide attempt where she had impulsively driven to blow off steam after an argument with her husband and decided to place her car on the train tracks. She initially ran away and was brought back on a Form 1. She remained in hospital for the three-day Form 1 observation period, then left against medical advice.

14. Subsequently, Ms. Emery McLean had the following admissions and contacts with psychiatric services:

• February 2014, Kingston Health Sciences Center

• June – July 2014, the Ottawa Hospital

• June 2017, the Ottawa Hospital Emergency Department

• February-March 2018, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences for NCR assessment

• September 28, 2020, the Queensway-Carleton Hospital

• February 25, 2021, the Queensway-Carleton Hospital

• July 12, 2021, the Ottawa Hospital

15. These various admissions and contacts are described in the NCR Assessment Report dated September 11, 2022.

16. Ms. Emery McLean’s current diagnoses are:

17. Schizophrenia

18. Alcohol use disorder, in sustained remission

Evidence at the Hearing

17. The hospital’s evidence was presented through its report as well as through the oral testimony of Dr. Amanjot Sandhu. This evidence is summarized below.

18. Dr. Sandhu adopted the contents of the hospital report and summarized Ms. Emery McLean’s last year as being very positive.

19. Dr. Sandhu took over Ms. Emery McLean’s care just prior to her last hearing in December of 2023 and had only met with her a few times before her hearing. Dr. Sandhu explained that due to the paucity of information at that time and the lack of therapeutic relationship with Ms. Emery McLean he was unable to recommend anything other than the maintenance of a detention order given the very little time that he had been her attending psychiatrist. Dr. Sandhu believes that this information is important to understand why the hospital is recommending to progress from a detention order to an absolute discharge.

20. In addition, Ms. Emery McLean was demonstrating prominent negative symptoms around the time of her last hearing, and was still facing outstanding criminal charges that have since been stayed.

21. At the time of her last hearing, Ms. Emery McLean was residing in the Hintonburg neighbourhood of Ottawa and was maintaining daily contact with her husband who still resides in the matrimonial home which is situated near the homes of the victims of the index offences.

22. Ms. Emery McLean returned to the matrimonial home over the Christmas holidays of 2023 and was able to avoid any contact with the victims of the index offences and focused on renewing her relationships with her family. According to Dr. Sandhu, Ms. Emery McLean now appreciates the impact that her illness has had on her relationships. She has found it beneficial to her mental health to focus on those relationships.

23. Ms. Emery McLean is now residing in a townhouse in the community of Merrickville and has planned again to visit at the matrimonial home to spend time with her family overnight during the upcoming Christmas holidays.

24. In addition to working towards her personal goals with family, Ms. Emery McLean has worked on her abstinence from alcohol which she has maintained except for one reported incident over the summer when she disclosed to the treatment team that she had consumed alcohol, but that she planned to continue to abstain. Ms. Emery McLean has also travelled out east to visit with her brother and this travel was done in the context of an itinerary presented to and approved by the treatment team.

25. Ms. Emery McLean’s symptoms of schizophrenia have all resolved with treatment. She is currently receiving a long-acting injectable medication Abilify and reports no side effects. She attends at the hospital to receive her injection.

26. In response to questions posed to him by counsel for the Attorney-General, Mr. Wright, Dr. Sandhu testified as follows:

i) In his opinion, Ms. Emery McLean understands the consequences of the index offences and has demonstrated remorse about the impact of her behaviour on the victims.

ii) Last summer Ms. Emery McLean had been going out on dates but has since decided that she wants to remain single. She reported having consumed alcohol during one of those dates, which is contrary to the terms of her disposition. According to Dr. Sandhu, Ms. Emery McLean appears to have insight about the importance of abstaining from alcohol, and she has indicated that it is her intention to do so.

27. In response to questions posed to him by Ms Emery McLean, Dr. Sandhu acknowledged that there were differences in the diagnosis as set out by Dr. de Laplante, and subsequently by Dr. Sandhu himself. Dr. de Laplante referred to Ms. Emery McLean’s primary diagnosis as that of “late onset schizophrenia” whereas Dr. Sandhu has set out the primary diagnosis as “schizophrenia”. Dr. Sandhu indicated that he does not disagree with Dr. de Laplante’s diagnosis of “late onset” schizophrenia which he refers to as a specifier however, Dr. Sandhu indicated his preference not to use that specifier when he does not know the full details of Ms. Emery McLean’s psychiatric history. Accordingly, Dr. Sandhu had simply referred to the diagnosis as schizophrenia in the hospital report.

28. Dr. Sandhu acknowledges that Ms. Emery McLean indicated her preference to have the specifier reflected in the diagnosis and Dr. Sandhu stated that he had no difficulty with that.

29. In response to questions posed to him by members of the panel, Dr. Sandhu testified as follows:

i) With respect to follow-up psychiatric services, should Ms. Emery McLean be granted an absolute discharge by the Board, Dr. Sandhu stated that psychiatric follow-up with himself would be for an indefinite period but that services from the treatment team, including the forensic case manager, would be available to Ms. Emery McLean for up to a year. Dr. Sandhu added that during that time the Forensic Case Manager, Ms. Christina Stromberg, would assist Ms. Emery McLean in securing any additional resources that she would like to have in the community.

ii) Dr. Sandhu confirmed that Ms. Emery McLean’s son is currently living in the U.S. but that due to her disposition, which only allows for travel within Canada, Ms. Emery McLean has not been able to visit him within the last year. Dr. Sandhu believes that it would be positive for Ms. Emery McLean to be able to visit with her son.

iii) Though she lives separate and apart from her husband, Ms. Emery McLean does continue to occasionally visit the matrimonial home, and her husband visits her at her home as well. Dr. Sandhu confirmed that Ms. Emery McLean reports that she has had no impulse to engage with the neighbours and that she has had no contact with any of them in the past year. She reported having seen one while driving up to the house but did not try to engage in any way. Ms. Emery McLean’s husband appreciates the importance that there be no contact with the victims. He asked the treatment team on how to manage this issue of when Ms. Emery McLean comes to the house, and whether he should inform the victims ahead of time.

iv) According to Dr. Sandhu, Ms. Emery McLean appreciates the impact of her actions on the victims. When this is discussed, Ms. Emery McLean gets very emotional and upset. Dr. Sandhu does not want to induce further guilt in addressing this issue with her and they have settled on the fact that it is important for her to understand that this behaviour was a function of her psychosis. According to Dr. Sandhu this is a significant improvement from last year when Ms. Emery McLean refused to talk about the issue and simply stated that she “would act the way that she acts”.

v) Dr. Sandhu stated that Ms. Emery McLean is currently on no other psychotropic medications. She had been taking Naltrexone as a means of addressing her cravings for alcohol but has since discontinued it as she has stated that she is not suffering from cravings.

30. No other evidence was presented.

Submissions of the Parties

31. The Board was presented with a joint submission of all parties that Ms. Emery McLean no longer meets the threshold of significant threat to the safety of the public and that she should be granted an absolute discharge.

Conclusion and Disposition

32. Having considered all of the evidence tendered at the hearing, and the joint submission of the parties, the Board finds that Ms. Emery McLean no longer poses a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out 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.

33. Ms. Emery McLean now appears to be fully engaged in treatment and demonstrates good insight into need for long term treatment of her late onset schizophrenia. She engages positively with the members of her treatment team and has satisfactorily addressed the issues that actively contributed to her level of risk, including her illness and alcohol use disorder.

34. Ms. Emery McLean demonstrates insight into the index offences and remorseful for the harm that she caused to victims. She also recognizes the impact that her situation has had on her own relationships.

35. The Board acknowledges the two Victim Impact Statements that were filed for the hearing and which set out the concerns of the victims as well as the impact of the index offences on them.

36. The evidence clearly sets out the significant progress made by Ms. Emery McLean since the time of the index offences, including the development of good insight into her illness and the need for ongoing treatment. Her engagement in future care appears genuine and we hope that she will continue to avail herself of the supports which are offered to her.

DATED this 27^th^ day of February 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. M. Labrosse

Alternate Chairperson

____________________________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board