Ontario Review Board
Re: Wu Liu
ORB File No: 5260
Hearing held on: Tuesday, March 4, 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. J. Goldenberg
Members: Dr. W. Johnston Dr. S. Wiseman Ms. C. Murray Mr. S. Duffy
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Wu Liu Counsel: Mr. C. Hynes
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. K. Dow
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 17, 2025)
On January 15, 2009, Wu Liu was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of attempted murder.
Mr. Liu is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated March 15, 2024, by which he was ordered to be discharged subject to a number of conditions.
On Tuesday, March 4, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores”) and conducted the annual review of Mr. Liu’s Disposition.
A Mandarin interpreter was present at this hearing. In response to a question from the Alternate Chair, Mr. Liu stated his wish to have verbatim translation. The Board instructed the interpreter to provide verbatim translation of the evidence. We note as an aside that last year Mr. Liu did not request verbatim translation.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Mr. Dow appeared for Ontario Shores. He advised that the hospital is of the opinion that Mr. Liu remains a significant threat to public safety, and at the present time his threat to public safety can only be managed with a Detention Order rather than a Conditional Discharge. In response to a question from the Alternate Chair, Mr. Dow acknowledged that if the Board were to specify a level of security it would be to a General Forensic Unit.
Ms. MacDonald appeared for the Attorney General. She supported the hospital’s position.
Mr. Liu was represented by counsel, Mr. C. Hynes. Mr. Hynes advised that his client is requesting an Absolute Discharge. Mr. Hynes went on to note that in the event the Board finds his client to remain a significant threat to public safety, he and his client are asking for the Board to continue with a Conditional Discharge with the exact terms set out in last year’s Disposition.
Index Offence:
- “The accused had rented a room in an apartment building at 1 Reidmount Avenue about two weeks before the index offence. When his landlord became concerned about the accused's confused and unresponsive actions while walking around the building, the landlord telephoned the male victim and asked him to check on the accused.
When the victim attended the accused's apartment a scuffle ensued and in the course of this the accused stabbed the victim three times. The victim, bleeding badly, managed to make his way to the main floor where he called for help. He was then transported to Sunnybrook where he received emergency medical treatment.
The police were called and arrived at the accused's apartment. The accused was found sitting in a bed holding a large knife, possibly a machete, and flipping through magazines. They also noticed a sleeve of material with about eight knives in this sleeve lying at the accused’s feet. He was unresponsive to their demands. Officers then entered the apartment to physically apprehend the accused. The accused walked toward the officers holding something in his hands and had the rolled-up sleeve of knives under his arm. He continued to ignore the demands of the police officer and he was then disabled by taser and taken into custody.”
Evidence at Hearing:
The Board admitted into evidence a Hospital Report dated February 5, 2025. The Hospital Report provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. Liu, his personal history, his mental health history, details of the index offence and Mr. Liu’s course in hospital and in the community subsequent to the date of the index offence. The Hospital Report also sets out under notable incidents in that in May 2024, Mr. Liu was admitted to Ontario Shores following his arrest for vandalizing several churches in the local community. The Board also admitted into evidence on consent of all parties, a summary of the damages allegedly caused by Mr. Liu on May 14 and May 15, which sets out significant damages caused by stones thrown through windows of a number of churches in the Whitby/Oshawa area.
As the Hospital Report was made an exhibit in this hearing it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained in the Hospital Report in these Reasons.
We do note, however, the stated diagnoses of Schizophrenia, paranoid type.
In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. Wang. Dr. Wang has been following Mr. Liu since late in 2022. Dr. Wang agrees with the contents of the Hospital Report and the conclusion of the hospital that a Detention Order is now both necessary and appropriate.
In response to questions from Mr. Dow as to whether there are any updates, Dr. Wang noted that last week his patient stated that he wants to go back to China and requested a return of his passport.
Dr. Wang summarized this year as “very difficult”. There have been three admissions to hospital within the last 12 months.
Dr. Wang also noted the new criminal charges that have been filed against Mr. Liu. The doctor repeated that within the last 12 months there were three readmissions to hospital. The last readmission ended in February of this year.
Dr. Wang believes that Mr. Liu is “more or less” back to his baseline. The doctor believes that Mr. Liu has been mostly compliant with his medication requirement. There has been some suspicion whether Mr. Liu has been cheeking his medication and Dr. Wang simply noted that while in the community he has been observed taking his medication frequently but not all the time. The doctor did report that Mr. Liu denies missing any of his medication.
Mr. Liu lives in a CMHA-supported apartment. He has lived there for a considerable period of time. Mr. Liu is followed both by members of the Forensic Outpatient Service and by staff of CMHA.
Dr. Wang was asked why the hospital was now requesting a Detention Order. The doctor did acknowledge that with respect to the first two admissions to hospital, the hospital relied upon the provisions of the Mental Health Act and Mr. Liu did attend to hospital as requested. On the third occasion, however, Mr. Liu did not return voluntarily. It took approximately an additional two to four weeks before the hospital was in a position to utilize the Mental Health Act to bring Mr. Liu back to hospital.
The doctor repeated that the provisions of the Mental Health Act simply failed on this latter occasion. The doctor noted that the clinical team had to wait for Mr. Liu’s decompensation before being able to bring him into hospital. The doctor repeated that his preference would have been to have Mr. Liu back in hospital approximately four weeks before the actual return to hospital.
The doctor was asked about Mr. Liu’s insight. Mr. Liu does understand that he suffers from a mental illness but does not have adequate insight in recognizing any signs of decompensation.
Dr. Wang was asked about the overall plans for this year. Dr. Wang noted his hope that Mr. Liu will be able to live appropriately in the community. Dr. Wang indicated the intention to have more supervision and monitoring of Mr. Liu over the next 12 months.
Ms. MacDonald had filed a Crown document outlining the damage done to a number of churches in May of last year. In response to questions from Ms. MacDonald, Dr. Wang acknowledged that there is no supervision of Mr. Liu during night time.
Dr. Wang agreed that the stone throwing incident caused significant damage. Those incidents came as “quite a surprise” to the doctor and the clinical team. The doctor noted that he and the clinical team had not noted any significant decompensation in the week or so before the events of the damage to the windows of a number of churches. When first brought into hospital Mr. Liu had to be placed in seclusion. He was spitting on people and, on other occasions he be exposed himself to female staff. The doctor noted that it took a few weeks in hospital before Mr. Liu stabilized.
Again, in response to questions from Ms. MacDonald, the doctor acknowledged that Mr. Liu provided a number of urine samples which were all negative for substances.
The doctor repeated that on the third readmission Mr. Liu was not willing to come to hospital voluntarily.
Dr. Wang repeated that Mr. Liu “clearly” remains a significant threat to public safety. The doctor agreed that it would be preferable for Mr. Liu to be treated with injectable medication. Mr. Liu, however, is capable of making treatment decisions. He has declined treatment with injectable medication based upon some unwelcome side effects during a period of time when he was accepting of injectable medication.
Dr. Wang acknowledged that absent medication Mr. Liu’s threat to public safety increases significantly.
In response to questions from Mr. Hynes, Dr. Wang noted that the first readmission took place between May 18 and July 15, 2024. The second readmission was from October 31 to November 5, 2024 and the third readmission was between January 10 and February 3, 2025.
In response to questions from panel members, Dr. Wang stated that he is “not sure” that Mr. Liu would return voluntarily to hospital.
In response to questions from another panel member, Dr. Wang noted that there is still an outstanding issue regarding Mr. Liu’s status in Canada and whether he might be subject to deportation. We note, however, that Mr. Liu has been in Canada for a number of years.
No other evidence was called on behalf of the hospital.
The Crown did not call evidence.
Mr. Hynes advised that his client wished to speak to the Board. Mr. Liu did so. The thrust of Mr. Liu’s statements was his strong preference to remain under a Conditional Discharge rather than a Detention Order. Mr. Liu went on to state that “I was wrong to throw the stones”. At another point in his statement Mr. Liu stated from time-to-time he gets angry and also stated his position that “medication is poison”. Mr. Liu repeated that injections did make him sick and if he were in a position to do so he would not take any medication.
Final Submissions:
Mr. Dow asked the panel to accept Dr. Wang’s evidence that public safety would be compromised with any Disposition other than a Detention Order.
Ms. MacDonald, on behalf of the Crown, agreed with the hospital and agreed that a Detention Order is both necessary and appropriate.
Mr. Hynes indicated that he would not be making any submissions on the issue of significant threat and although at one point he indicated that he was not making submissions on the issue of necessary and appropriate Disposition, Mr. Hynes did note that the provisions of the Mental Health Act did work appropriately at least with respect to the first two admissions to hospital.
Findings of the Board:
The Board accepts without reservation the evidence of Dr. Wang and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report.
We accept that Mr. Liu remains a significant threat to public safety. Ultimately, this issue was not disputed. Quite apart from that, we accept the evidence in the Hospital Report. We also are concerned by the events of May 14 and 15 when Mr. Lu caused considerable damage to a number of churches in the Whitby/Oshawa area and also threw a stone through the building in which he is residing.
Our Disposition shall direct detention on a General Forensic Service at Ontario Shores. We now are of the opinion that the reporting requirement be not less than once per week.
Ms. MacDonald asked a number of questions about the possibility of the Board directing curfew requiring Mr. Liu to remain in his residence during night-time hours. Ms. MacDonald did acknowledge that it would difficult to enforce such a curfew but did ask the Board to consider this issue.
The panel is not persuaded to impose a curfew. The panel accepts that the clinical team and indeed the CMHA workers will be more alert to Mr. Liu’s mental status given the events of May 14 and 15.
In reaching our Disposition, the Board has taken into consideration public safety, Mr. Liu’s mental condition and his other needs, and Mr. Liu’s reintegration into society.
DATED this 17th day of March, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. J. Goldenberg Alternate Chairperson Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board