Ontario Review Board
Re: Edward Steacy
ORB File No: 8401/8482
Hearing held on: Wednesday, February 12, 2025
Place of hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care Via Zoom Video Conference
Pursuant to: Sections 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Fromstein
Members: Dr. T. Verny Dr. M. Kalia Ms. C. Murray Ms. C. Plyley
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Edward Steacy Counsel: Mr. A. Confente
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. K. Dalrymple
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated February 26, 2025)
Introduction
On October 3, 2023, Edward Steacy was found unfit to stand trial at the Ontario Court of Justice on two charges of assault and five charges of fail to comply (FTC) with probation, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. On February 6, 2024, Mr. Steacy was further found unfit to stand trial by the court on charges of assault with a weapon, uttering threats, fail to comply with undertaking and carry concealed weapon, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.
On March 22, 2024, Mr. Steacy had his initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board. At that hearing the Board found Mr. Steacy unfit to stand trial and he is currently subject to a Disposition dated March 26, 2024, detaining him at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, St. Joseph's Health Care London (“Southwest” or “hospital”) with privileges up to and including that he be permitted to enter Elgin and Middlesex Counties, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge.
On February 12, 2025, Mr. Steacy appeared for his annual hearing before the Ontario Review Board. The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether Mr. Steacy is fit to stand trial. If found unfit to stand trial, then the purpose is to issue a Disposition that is necessary and appropriate in consideration of the factors contained in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Initial Positions
At the outset of the hearing, Ms. Zamprogna, on behalf of the hospital, submitted the opinion that Mr. Steacy is now fit to stand trial. She noted that if the Board finds that Mr. Steacy remains unfit to stand trial, then the hospital is recommending a detention order with privileges as set out at pages 35 and 36 of the Hospital Report. If Mr. Steacy is found fit to stand trial, the hospital is recommending an order that he be maintained in hospital pending his return to court on the basis that he would become unfit to stand trial if released from hospital.
Ms. Dalrymple, on behalf of the Crown, joined the hospital position.
Mr. Confente, counsel for Mr. Steacy, indicated that he is satisfied that his client can provide instructions to him and that Mr. Steacy has instructed him to join the hospital position.
Alleged Offences
- The details of the index offences are set out in the Reasons for Disposition of last year, as follows:
“Assault x 2 -April 19, 2022, and December 31, 2022
On April 19, 2022, Dr. K. Poku, a psychiatrist at the Elgin General Hospital in St. Thomas responded to a Code White. Dr. Poku left his office to respond per hospital protocol. Upon entering the unit, Mr. Steacy exited his room and began yelling and screaming and uttering racial expletives at the doctor. Dr. Poku tried to verbally deescalate Mr. Steacy but was unsuccessful. Mr. Steacy approached the doctor and began throwing several punches toward him. Dr. Poku dodged the first few, although the last punch landed on the side of his face knocking him to the ground. Other staff arrived to intercede.
On December 31,2022 the victim was in his wheelchair at 38 Chester Street, St. Thomas waiting for his dinner. The accused walked past the victim and asked: “what are you looking at me like that?” and proceeded to punch him in the face and temple area. The accused then pushed the victim's head to the wall. The victim had a headache and nausea and was transported to the hospital for treatment. “
Fail to Comply with probation
There was no information in the Hospital Report regarding the specifics of the failing to comply with probation order charges. However, Mr. Steacy’s criminal record includes multiple probation orders three of which were in effect at the time of the alleged offences.
Assault with a weapon, uttering threats, fail to comply with an undertaking and carry a concealed weapon - November 10, 2023
On November 10, 2023, at approximately 8:45 pm Calvert heard a disturbance between two people in the dining room of 75 Wellington St, the group home. When she broke up the argument between who she knows as Steacy and another male, Steacy pulled out a black knife and made a flicking motion with his wrist to open the blade. Stacy then put the knife towards and within an inch of Calvert’s abdomen and said, “I will kill you”. Calvert pushed his arm away and ran outside and called police.
Steacy was arrested a short time later and the search revealed five knives on his person. A butcher’s knife was located in his coat pocket, a black knife and green paring knife were located in his left sock and a blue and red paring knife located in his right sock.
The provisions of Mr. Steacy’s undertaking required, inter alia, that he not communicate with Tracy Calvert.”
Background
Mr. Steacy, whose date of birth is August 3, 1984, is presently 40 years of age. He has been in hospital since November 27, 2023, first on an assessment order and subsequently on a treatment order subject to his second set of index offences. He has a significant criminal record that spans the years 2004 to 2022, which includes multiple offences of assaults and threatening amongst other offences. It is reported that Mr. Steacy has historically attempted suicide on three occasions. He is reported to have been living on the streets for most of his teen and adult life, having been evicted from supportive housing due to his behaviours and has spent a great deal of time both in and out of hospital and jail settings. It is reported that Mr. Steacy became unmanageable in the community in 2023 and was subject to experiencing delusions that resulted in his threatening staff and peers in his group home. He was placed on a community treatment order which he appealed without success.
On October 3, 2023, Mr. Steacy was found unfit to stand trial on the first set of charges – fail to comply probation (x5) and assault (x2). On November 4, 2023, the second set of alleged offences took place on allegations that he punched both his psychiatrist at Elgin Hospital as well as a female staff member, and on November 10, 2023, committed the assault on the co-patient.
Evidence at the Hearing
Mr. Steacy’s initial course in hospital following his admission in November 2023 had been quite difficult. He engaged in numerous aggressive incidents, showing positive symptoms of his mental illness through delusions. He felt he was being kept against his will in the hospital and blamed others. Mr. Steacy was subject to many necessary seclusions. There has, however, been a significant change in Mr. Steacy’s symptoms following the introduction of clozapine medication in the course of the past year.
Dr. Mokhber provided evidence at the hearing. She was Mr. Steacy’s attending psychiatrist beginning in May 2024 until December 2024. Dr. Malka, who was present at the hearing, is Mr. Steacy’s current attending psychiatrist.
Dr. Mokhber confirmed Mr. Steacy’s diagnoses of schizophrenia, polysubstance abuse disorder and intellectual disability. She indicated that Mr. Steacy had been tried on multiple medications. He had been impacted by his psychotic symptoms which led to his aggressive and impulsive behaviours that often-required hospital seclusions. On a very positive note, in September of 2024, the treatment team was able to find the right combination of medications and Mr. Steacy has shown significant improvement in his presentation. He is no longer a management issue on the unit and there have not been any major issues since that time. He follows hospital rules but needs reassurance. Because of his cognitive disabilities he requires the assistance of persons to remind him about taking his medication. He has been granted off-unit privileges but is shadowed to ensure that he can find his way in the hospital and back to the unit.
It was first determined by the treatment team in November 2024 that Mr. Steacy had regained fitness. Dr. Mokhber met with him again on the day of this hearing to reassess his fitness. She testified that he understands who the key persons are in the court proceedings and that the judge makes the final trial decisions. Mr. Steacy was capable of answering all the Taylor questions with respect to his options for pleas, the consequences of a finding of guilt or not guilty, the meaning of an oath and the meaning and consequences of perjury. She testified that he indicated at their meeting that he intends to plead not guilty. He understands what the allegations are against him but indicated that he did not feel that he started the altercation with the co-patient or did anything wrong. She noted that Mr. Steacy had been able to tolerate the approximate 35- minute interview this morning. He is able to concentrate and stay focused during programs. He has a reality-based understanding of the options and the consequences in relation to his charges.
Dr. Mokhber testified that if Mr. Steacy remained under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board, it is the position of the hospital that he is ready for community living. He has DSO funding. The plan to proceed, as per the DSO protocol, is for someone from DSO to attend hospital and assess Mr. Steacy’s needs to be able to suggest an appropriate residence where those needs can be met. In her opinion, Mr. Steacy requires 24-hour supervision. She noted that a staff member would be assigned to take Mr. Steacy into the community and provide appropriate programming for his DSO.
Mr. Steacy at this time attends all programs that are offered to him in the hospital. He is able to tolerate and concentrate at these programs.
Dr. Mokhber testified that it is the treatment team’s position that Mr. Steacy remains a significant risk for the reasons set out in the Hospital Report. He requires supervision to take his medication which play a very important role in his maintaining his present level of mental health. He does, at this time, take his medications but needs supervision to maintain adherence. Before he was admitted to hospital, he had been non-adherent with medication compliance. She noted that today he thanked her for the medications that he receives.
Dr. Mokhber agreed with the conclusion in the Hospital Report that Mr. Steacy presents a moderate to high risk when placed on the current unit in hospital. If he were to be released from hospital his risk is considered to be very high. The reasons for the hospital’s position of significant threat are set out in detail at pages 33 and 34 in the Hospital Report. She testified that it is essential that Mr. Steacy remain in hospital pending his return to court. This is “absolutely necessary”.
The Hospital Report notes that in the past year a rapid referral to Behavioural Services was made to develop a behavioural support plan which was initiated. It required staff intervention at the outset. His behaviour became much more manageable with a change to his medication and the continuation of his behavioural plan and the addition of 1:1 support. There was a significant reduction in his aggressive incident scores and the need for frequent solution. The plan moving forward will be to continue to increase his tolerance to hospital programming and his ability to engage. This will be continued with 1:1 staff support.
The hospital report notes that Mr. Steacy’s protective factors are predominantly external. The intensity of professional care received through his current treatment team and behavioural support plan serve as protective factors in mitigating his risk of re-offence. His current living situation and the mental health care facility serves as a significant protective factor when considering his risk profile. His risk assessment notes factors of a serious and persistent mental illness which are connected to his ongoing violence risk that were present at the time of the alleged index offences. He has a history of non-adherence and would not likely continue taking his medication without close monitoring and supervision. He also has a significant history of substance use which has been a clear destabilizer in the past. For these reasons the hospital recommends that Mr. Steacy remain in hospital until he returns to court to face his charges.
Evidence was presented with respect to the terms of a Disposition should the Board find that Mr. Steacy remains unfit to stand trial. These included recommended expansions to allow him access to all of Ontario to give the hospital greater opportunity to find appropriate accommodations for him with the limited resources available in the province.
Dr. Mokhber also noted, positively, that Mr. Steacy’s personality is that of a very kind person and this can be seen in his interactions with staff. He also makes sincere effort to attend programs. She noted that, with ongoing medication and close supervision, she has strong hopes that he will have a bright future ahead.
Dr. Mokhber confirmed that Mr. Steacy is compliant with all of the required testing necessary with respect to his clozapine medication.
He is no longer subject to a community treatment order as he is a patient in hospital. If he were to be discharged from the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board then it may be possible to reinstitute a community treatment order. Mr. Steacy has clarified to Dr. Mokhber that he wishes to in the future to move into and reside in a group home.
She noted, with respect to diagnoses, that his diagnosis of intellectual disability has been clarified and confirmed as part of his DSO assessment. The diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome had been noted in the past as one was not able to be ruled out. It is a differential diagnosis that is not confirmed.
Submissions
All parties maintained their initial positions that Mr. Steacy is now fit to stand trial and should be returned to court. They also maintained their joint position that, pending his return to court, he should continue to be detained in the hospital to ensure that his fitness is maintained.
Ms. Zamprogna indicated, in support of the hospital position that Mr. Steacy is fit to stand trial, that he can answer all of the Taylor questions. He has a reality-based understanding of the proceedings. He is able to rationally select from choices and instruct counsel and he can tolerate the court process. She submitted that therefore he is fit to stand trial and should be returned to court to address his charges. She submitted further that, based on the evidence, it is necessary that Mr. Steacy be maintained in the hospital to maintain his fitness pending his return to court. She noted that should the Board find Mr. Steacy to be unfit to stand trial, that they maintain the request for an expansion of his current Disposition to assist in planning for his discharge to DSO housing.
Ms. Dalrymple, on behalf of the Crown, adopted the submissions of the hospital.
Mr. Confente, on behalf of Mr. Steacy, also adopted the submissions of the hospital. He also expressed his thanks to the doctor and the treatment team for their help and to his client, Mr. Steacy, for his willingness to work with the treatment team.
Deliberation
- The Board is unanimous in finding that Mr. Steacy is fit to stand trial. Section 2 of the Criminal Code defines “unfit to stand trial” as follows:
“unfit to stand trial means unable on account mental disorder to conduct a defence at any stage of the proceedings before a verdict is rendered or to instruct counsel to do so, and, in particular, unable on account of mental disorder to
(a) understand the nature or object of the proceedings,
(b) understand the possible consequences of the proceedings, or
(c) communicate with counsel.”
The test for fitness was addressed most recently by the Court of Appeal in R v Bharwani 2023 ONCA 203. In the decision, the court emphasized that the fundamental purpose of the s. 2 definition is to ensure that all accused are able to be meaningfully present and meaningfully participate in their criminal trials, concepts that are rooted in trial fairness.
Based on the evidence at the hearing, we are satisfied that Mr. Steacy does have a reality-based understanding of the nature and object and possible consequences of the proceedings and the ability to make decisions. He was able to answer all of the Taylor questions and his lawyer also feels that he is able to receive cogent instructions from his client. The evidence supports that Mr. Steacy is able to meaningfully participate in his criminal trial. For this reason, we make the order pursuant to s. 672.48(2) that Mr. Steacy be sent back to court for the court to determine the issue of fitness and render a verdict.
On the evidence before us, the Board also agrees with the joint position that Mr. Steacy should be maintained in the hospital pending his return to court in order to ensure he remains fit. Mr. Steacy has shown significant and remarkable improvement in the past several months due to a change in his medication. He does, because of his cognitive disability, require close supervision to ensure his compliance with his oral medication. This medication also requires weekly medical testing. Mr. Steacy is compliant with his medication under supervision. His behaviour has also, with the 1:1 supervision he receives, his behavioural plan, and the close hospital support, very much improved in the past months allowing his kind nature to show through. However, there is a real concern that if he were not in hospital that Mr. Steacy might relapse to noncompliance which would dramatically impact his mental health status. On the evidence he poses a significant risk of violence in those circumstances to others. In order to maintain his fitness, we agree with the view of the parties that it is absolutely necessary that he be maintained in the hospital pending his return to court.
We make this order pursuant to s. 672.49(1) which sets out that Mr. Steacy can continue to be detained in hospital until the court determines whether he is fit to stand trial if the Review Board has reasonable grounds to believe that the accused would become unfit to stand trial if released.
DATED this 10th day of March 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. C. Fromstein Alternate Chairperson
________________________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board