Ontario Review Board
Re: Shawn McDoom
ORB File No: 7496
Hearing held on: Tuesday, February 11, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto by Zoom videoconference
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan Dr. G. Stones Ms. K. Tomaszewski Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Shawn McDoom Counsel: Ms. C.E. Currie
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. P.L. Darby
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. M. Feindel
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 17, 2025)
Introduction
On February 11, 2019, Mr. McDoom was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (‘NCR’) on charges of threatening death (x3), assault, assault with a weapon, failures to comply with a release order and with probation, and criminal harassment.
Mr. McDoom is currently subject to a Disposition dated August 22, 2024, detaining him at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Care (“CAMH”), with conditions including substance use, weapons, and contact prohibitions, and privileges extending to living in approved supervised accommodation in the community.
On December 10, 2024, CAMH advised the Board that “On November 28, 2024, Mr. McDoom was admitted on an inpatient basis. Mr. McDoom is currently detained on the PRTU5.”
On December 10, 2024, the Board advised CAMH that it would proceed to schedule an ROL hearing pursuant to section 672.81(2.1) of the Code.
On February 11, 2025, a panel of the ORB convened a hearing via Zoom videoconference at CAMH to conduct a review of the period of increased restrictions on Mr. McDoom’s liberty which commenced on November 28, 2024, and continue to the date of the hearing, pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.
Ms. Currie, Mr. McDoom’s counsel, indicated that she had spoken with him prior to the hearing, and that he had provided instructions enabling her to proceed in his absence. As a result, Mr. McDoom’s presence was excused pursuant to s. 672.5(10) of the Criminal Code.
The issue the Board considered was whether the restriction on Mr. McDoom’s liberties during the admission to CAMH which commenced on November 28, 2024, and continues to the date of the hearing (the “ROL”), was necessary and appropriate as well as the least restrictive and least onerous available to CAMH, both initially and throughout its duration.
For the reasons which follow, the Board found that there was a significant restriction on the liberties of Mr. McDoom during the ROL and that this was necessary and appropriate as well as the least restrictive and least onerous restriction in the circumstances, both initially and throughout its duration to the date of the hearing.
The evidence at the hearing included a Restriction of Liberty Report dated February 4, 2025 (the “ROL Report”); a Hospital Report of August 2024 (the ‘Hospital Report’); and the viva voce evidence of Dr. P. Darby.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board. Dr. Darby submitted on behalf of the hospital that the restriction of Mr. McDoom’s liberty during the ROL was necessary and appropriate and the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital in the circumstances, both at the commencement of the ROL and to the date of the hearing. The doctor advised that the existing Detention Disposition remained necessary and appropriate, with no changes recommended.
Counsel for the Attorney General and for Mr. McDoom both adopted the hospital’s recommendations. The Board had before it a joint recommendation.
Index Offences
- The following description of the index offences is excerpted from the Board’s latest Reasons for Disposition (dated November 20, 2024):
The circumstances of the eight index offences are set out in the Hospital Report. The majority of the offences were against a person who was Mr. McDoom's childhood neighbour, Ms. G., and her family; the others were against strangers. The offences occurred during the year between September 2017 and August 2018, and can be summarized as follows:
September 15, 2017 (Criminal Harassment: see July 24, 27, August 1, 2018, below)
On this day, Ms. G. was in her townhouse and heard glass breaking near her front door. She opened the door to find Mr. McDoom standing there with a broken bottle in his hand. He threatened to kill her and she quickly closed the front door.
June 25, 2018 (Threaten Death x2, Breach of Probation Order)
Mr. McDoom entered the St. George TTC Station, began yelling profanities at two TTC employees in the ticket booth, made a hand gesture of a gun pointed at them while walking backwards away, then fled. He was arrested in front of the station by two TTC Special Constables. In committing this offence, he breached a condition to keep the peace and be of good behaviour, in a Probation Order of April 4, 2018, in connection with his conviction for Assault (x2) and Failure to Comply.
June 30, 2018 (Assault)
Mr. McDoom entered a gas station shop in Scarborough, asked a patron to give him $2.00, then inexplicably slapped the hat off the patron's head, punched him in the lip area with a closed fist, and fled. He was last seen walking up Victoria Park Avenue.
July 24 and 27, 2018 (Criminal Harassment: see September 2017 and August 2018)
Mr. McDoom jumped Ms. G.'s backyard fence and entered her home through the back door. He confronted her, her children, and her mother, threatening to kill them. He ran from the home after Ms. G. and her mother verbally confronted him.
Three days later, he returned to the backyard. Ms. G. and her two-year-old child were there. He screamed at them, picked up a tricycle and waved it high in the air. Ms. G. used a chair to protect her child and herself, he threw the tricycle against the fence, and left. (See two descriptions of apparently the same incident, Hospital Report, pg. 15.)
August 1, 2018 (Crim. Harassment, Threats, Assault w/ Weapon, Breach Recognizance)
Mr. McDoom confronted Ms. G. as she pulled into her driveway, yelling obscenities, threatening to kill her, and pushing on the hood and door of her car. She locked the car and dialed 911, Mr. McDoom laughed, and she exited the car and ran into her home.
A short time later, Mr. McDoom returned and jumped the fence, brandishing a pair of scissors and threatening to kill Ms. G. and her mother, who were in the backyard. Ms. G. picked up a phone, pretended to record him, and Mr. McDoom ran out of the backyard.
In later psychiatric interviews, Mr. McDoom denied making threats to Ms. G. and said he was "arguing" with her because he thought she was doing witchcraft.
Background
Mr. McDoom is diagnosed with schizophrenia, substance use disorder (cannabis and alcohol), and antisocial traits vs. personality disorder.
As the Hospital Report was made an Exhibit in this hearing, it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained therein. What follows is updated information from the ROL Report, which describes the circumstances leading up to the ROL.
Evidence from the ROL Report
Mr. McDoom was discharged to the community on July 11, 2022, to a high support residence. There were continued episodes of rule breaking and irritability. Mr. McDoom did not engage well with the clinical team and often expressed a desire to move to a different residence.
In early April 2024, Mr. McDoom became increasingly irritable. He was increasingly loud, challenging and threatening with the clinical team. He left his housing and missed his antipsychotic injection. Mr. McDoom was agitated, kicking the doors of other residents’ apartments and punching walls. He came down to the office and started swearing at staff. Given the level of behavioural dyscontrol and aggressive behaviour, it was decided that Mr. McDoom needed to be admitted to hospital to ensure the safety of others.
On admission to hospital, Mr. McDoom was quite dismissive of the concerns that led to admission. He denied banging walls or doors and denied threatening staff. Mr. McDoom also complained about his dislike of his residence and the difficulty he had walking up the stairs.
A meeting was arranged with Mr. McDoom’s case manager and the supervisor at his housing. The housing supervisor emphasized that Mr. McDoom was at risk of eviction should he continue to break housing rules. Goals were stressed to him: No smoking inside his apartment, curfew from 10 PM to 6 AM, and no bullying other residents for cigarettes.
Mr. McDoom appeared to settle over his time in hospital and returned to his baseline. He was discharged back to his LOFT residence on April 23, 2024.
In spite of several joint meetings with the Forensic Outpatient Service team and housing management, Mr. McDoom appeared unable or unwilling to modify his behaviour. He would repeatedly make commitments to "not do that again" but would then persist with the behaviour.
Given the persistence of the behaviour, and the impact it was having on other residents, LOFT management decided that Mr. McDoom could no longer be tolerated at the residence and gave him formal notice of eviction.
Mr. McDoom was admitted to CAMH on November 28, 2024.
When LOFT staff entered Mr. McDoom's apartment after his eviction, they found that he had done considerable damage to the apartment, including damage to his couch, a cabinet and a door.
Mr. McDoom was initially admitted to a civil unit under the care of Dr. Kevin Rohani. Dr. Darby and Dr. Rohani liaised on a regular basis. It was felt that this admission was triggered more by personality factors than by symptoms of his primary psychotic illness. No changes, therefore, were made to his medication.
Mr. McDoom eventually progressed to indirectly supervised passes. He was very fixated on negotiating for increased privileges.
Mr. McDoom was transferred to Unit FGUB under the care of Dr. Sumeeta Chatterjee. Mr. McDoom's presentation on the unit has been stable.
Given Mr. McDoom’s previous expressions of dissatisfaction with his LOFT residence, an Access Point application had been completed by his outpatient team prior to his eviction notice. This application was declined as he already had housing at that time.
The main barrier to Mr. McDoom's discharge back to the community is the lack of suitable housing. His previous residence at LOFT was a high support residence with staff available 24/7. Finding suitable alternative accommodation will be a significant challenge.
Evidence at the Hearing
Dr. Darby testified that the reason for the ROL, and its continuation, is the lack of alternate approved accommodation available to Mr. McDoom.
The social worker on the inpatient unit has updated his Access Point application so that further housing options can be pursued, but this could be a lengthy process. Mr. McDoom needs a residence with a high level of support, and there are few such residences available.
Mr. McDoom continues to be irritable and demanding when his demands are not met. Dr. Chatterjee is considering trying to introduce a mood stabilizer, as there is some evidence that this has helped Mr. McDoom in the past.
Mr. McDoom currently resides on a general forensic unit, with level 5 privileges, giving Mr. McDoom indirectly supervised access to the hospital grounds. He exercises those privileges several times per day.
Dr. Darby stated that Mr. McDoom’s insight into the behaviour that resulted in his eviction is limited. At times he will say he understands, but then he will continue the same behaviour.
Mr. McDoom is fairly reluctant to participate in programming, although the team has tried to persuade him to participate in more programs.
In response to a question by Ms. Currie, Dr. Darby indicated that Unit 1-5 is not indicated for Mr. McDoom. Unit 1-5 has a higher level of staffing and more programming. In Dr. Darby’s opinion, Mr. McDoom is not a good candidate for that unit.
Analysis and Decision
The analytical framework established by Campbell (Re), 2018 ONCA 140 requires the Board to consider the liberty norm and the liberty status of an accused on a restriction. The liberty norm and liberty status for each restriction must be examined to determine the significance of the increase (if any) on the restriction of an accused’s liberty caused by the restriction. In determining the liberty norm of an accused at the outset of each period of restriction, the Board must “take a contextual approach, one that considers the individual’s pattern of liberty in the recent past.” ((Re) Campbell, ibid at para. 66). The liberty she/he was actually experiencing (rather than what she/he was entitled to) at the time of the increase is what the Board is to consider, and that “liberty must be of sufficient duration to have become, objectively speaking, the NCR accused’s norm” ((Re) Campbell, supra at para. 65).
Pursuant to the decision of (Re) Campbell, the Board agrees that a restriction of liberty had taken place. Mr. McDoom had been living in the community and is now being detained on the general forensics unit at CAMH.
The Board finds that the restrictions of liberty imposed on Mr. McDoom during the ROL represented the least onerous and least restrictive interventions in the circumstances, and that these continued to the date of the hearing. We find the restriction of Mr. McDoom’s liberty throughout this time frame was warranted and necessary for public safety.
Mr. McDoom is subject to a Detention Disposition with privileges up to and including, living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge. Mr. McDoom requires accommodation with a high level of support. There was and continues to be no appropriate accommodation available to Mr. McDoom.
In reaching our Decision, the Board carefully considered public safety, Mr. McDoom’s mental condition, his integration into society, and his other needs.
DATED this 17th day of March, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. K. Tomaszewski Legal Member
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board