Re: Christopher La Russa, 2025 CanLII 23533

Ontario Review Board

Re: Christopher La Russa

ORB File No: 8276-8464

Hearing held on: Wednesday, January 8, 2025

Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2) of the Criminal Code

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Hageraats Members: Dr. S. Lessard Dr. G. Glancy Mr. P. Capelle Mr. M. Hajek

Parties Appearing: Accused: Christopher La Russa Counsel: Ms. K. Macrae Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. M. Strike Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. M. Dufort

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated March 18, 2025)

Introduction

1. On March 22, 2023, the accused, Christopher J. La-Russa, was found not criminally responsible (NCR) on two counts of fail to comply with a probation order, one count of operation of a motor vehicle while prohibited, one count of possession of stolen property under $5,000 and one count of obstruct peace officer, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the Criminal Code).

2. In addition, on January 15th, 2024, Mr. La Russa was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder on a charge of break and enter. Mr. La Russa is currently subject to a decision and disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated April 16, 2024.

3. By letter dated August 29th, 2024, the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre advised the Ontario Review Board they were seeking an early review of Mr. La Russa’s current disposition.

4. On January 8th, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“the ORB” or “the Board”) convened a hearing at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre (“ROMHC”) to conduct an early review hearing for Mr. La Russa. Mr. La Russa attended his hearing via Zoom Technology and was represented by his counsel, Ms. Kristin Macrae. A hospital report dated December 19th, 2024 was entered as Exhibit No. 1.

Without Prejudice Position of the Parties:

5. Dr. Strike advised the continuation of the current Detention Disposition were recommended together with the terms and conditions set out at page 64 of the hospital report which include:

• Permission to access the hospital and its grounds, accompanied by staff;
• Permission to access the hospital and its grounds, indirectly supervised;
• Permission to enter the community of Eastern Ontario, indirectly supervised;
• Permission to reside in the community in an accommodation approved by the person in charge.

6. Ms. Dufort, on behalf of the Attorney-General, indicated that she anticipated adopting the hospital’s position. Ms. Macrae, on behalf of Mr. La Russa, indicated she would likely agree to the continuation of her client’s Detention Disposition together with the additional terms and conditions proposed by Dr. Strike. She noted that the terms and conditions of the current disposition do not allow Mr. La Russa to remain for up to six months at the Stonehenge Residential treatment facility. As this is ordinarily a six-month program she emphasized the need for the inclusion of a term allowing him to remain there as long as necessary, or to return for a refresher, or to attend at another facility as required.

7. Given the foregoing, as the parties were essentially Ad Idem, the hearing proceeded by way of joint position that was maintained throughout the hearing.

Current Diagnoses

• Psychotic disorder due to another medical condition (traumatic brain injury), versus Unspecified schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorder, in full remission, (no psychotic symptoms since the late summer of 2023,)
• Alcohol use disorder, severe; (in a controlled environment),
• Opioid use disorder, severe; (in a controlled environment),
• Stimulant use disorder, severe; (in a controlled environment),
• Unspecified trauma and stress-related disorder,
• Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, combined presentation.

Index Offences:

5. The circumstances of the index offence for File No. 8276 are as follows:

“On April 17, 2020, as well as on August 18, 2021, Mr. La Russa’s driving licence was suspended.

On June 24, 2022, as well as June 27, 2022, Mr. La Russa entered into a probation order for 12 months. Both orders included a condition that he was to keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

On December 10, 2022, Mr. La Russa was stopped by a Provincial Police officer on Highway 17. He had been driving a motor vehicle. He told the police officer that the vehicle belonged to his boss and that he had the permission to drive it. It was later confirmed that the vehicle had been stolen. He was charged with operating a motor vehicle while prohibited from doing so and with possession of stolen property as well as two counts of failing to comply with a probation order and obstructing a peace officer”.

6. The circumstances of the index offence for file No., 8464 are as follows:

“On July 30, 2023, Mr. Larussa, who had left the Royal Ottawa Hospital without authorization, attended the home of Gillian Huntley located at 162 Sherwood Drive. At around 0409, Mr. Larussa broke a patio door in the backyard of the home. A coffee table inside the home was damaged in the process. The homeowner (Huntley), woke up from the sound and found Mr. Larussa reading a magazine in her living room. The police were contacted and Mr. Larussa was arrested. “All rights and cautions were read and [Mr.] Larussa was found to be exhibiting strange behaviour advising officers that he was “told to break into any house,” as he was cold and had nowhere to go.”

Evidence at the Hearing:

7. The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated December 19th, 2024 as Exhibit 1. The document provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. La Russa’s personal history, mental health history as well as his course in hospital and in the community both prior to and subsequence to the index offences. As the Hospital Report was made an Exhibit, it is unnecessary to reproduce the information contained therein in these Reasons.

8. Dr. Strike testified that following Mr. La Russa’s August 8th 2024 elopement his mother immediately began looking for him and returned him to hospital on August 9th when she found him at his girlfriend’s apartment. It was noted that Mr. La Russa’s mother is supportive and helpful and that she is a retired probation officer, as is his father.

9. Responding to questions from Ms. Macrae, Dr. Strike advised that her patient was discouraged by last year’s decision of the Board to restrict him to the hospital’s Forensic Assessment Unit. She added that the restriction had a negative impact on his mental health. Nevertheless, overall, he has had a positive year notwithstanding some minor slips.

10. Responding to questions from a panel member, Dr. Strike opined that her patient’s aetiology is more related to Schizophrenia than to a brain injury although this is multi-factorial. His schizophrenia was worsened by the brain injury.

11. Mr. La Russa was transported to the Stonehenge Rehabilitation Centre in Guelph on November 20, 2024. He initially presented as nervous but excited. In his first few weeks, he worked to find comfort in the community and shared actively in groups. He shared his life story in group therapy and spoke openly about his past traumas and substance use history. On December 9, 2024, Mr. La Russa shared his goals in group therapy, and received constructive feedback from peers. On December 10, 2024 he began working on Coping Skills, Anxiety, and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. On December 30, 2024, Mr. La Russa shared his goal summary vis-à-vis his coping skills in group therapy and discussed approaches that did not work for him in the past and skills he would like to utilize going forward. On January 2, 2025, Mr. La Russa shared his goal summary on anxiety in group therapy, and discussed his history of anxiety dating back to childhood and coping skills that are currently working to help with anxiety. Mr. La Russa continues to engage in group therapy by providing supportive feedback to his peers and welcoming constructive feedback from others on his goal summaries.

12. Dr. Strike observed that Mr. La Russa is thriving at Stonehenge. Addictions’ counsellor, Jamie Armstrong emailed Dr. Strike on January 7th advising that Mr. La Russa is doing exceptionally well. Dr. Strike maintains ongoing communication with Mr. La Russa. During regular psychiatric follow-up appointments via zoom Dr. Strike also speaks with a responsible staff member regarding her patient’s progress. By late January 2025 it is expected that he will be allowed to access the grounds of Stonehenge as well as the community of Guelph indirectly supervised. He remains abstinent, psychiatrically and medically stable. He hopes to remain at Stonehenge for the entirety of the six- month program, return to the ROMHC’s Assessment Unit in the spring and then transfer to the Hospital’s Rehabilitation Unit. At that juncture, the treatment team will investigate transitional supervised housing for him.

13. Ms. Dufort inquired how Mr. La Russa would access the community if he remained at Stonehenge for the entirety of the six-month program. At present, he is unable to access the grounds of Stonehenge, or the community of Guelph due to the terms and conditions of his current detention disposition. Given the new terms and conditions envisioned, he would be permitted to complete Stonehenge’s six-month program. However, during the re-entry stage, anticipated between April 1st and May 4th in advance of discharge, he will not be permitted to exercise overnight passes or travel ordinarily granted to Stonehenge participants. This is because these activities are not envisioned in the recommended terms and conditions of his proposed detention disposition for 2025-2026.

14. Dr. Strike confirmed that she stands by the findings of the HCR-20. Mr. La Russa’s historical factors are unchanged. His clinical risk factors remain valid however he no longer presents with features of violent ideation. His future dangerousness is tied to an elevated risk of break and enter, theft, driving related offences, resist peace officer, all of which he has previously engaged in. These offences always occurred in conjunction with substance use which is the key risk factor being targeted in treatment.

15. The current plan is to place him on a transfer list from the hospital’s Forensic Assessment Unit to the Forensic Rehabilitation Unit prior to his return to the Forensic Assessment Unit from Stonehenge. Dr. Strike believes that he is ready to be placed on that wait list as of the date of this hearing. This will allow him 1:1 walks on hospital grounds with staff and with a group of patients as he awaits a transfer to the Forensic Rehabilitation Unit.

Closing Observations

16. Dr. Strike congratulated Mr. La Russa on his progress during the past reporting year.

17. Ms. Dufort submitted that Mr. La Russa requires a detention disposition so that the hospital can exercise a Form 49 as he eloped on August 8th, 2024 and because of the break and enter which occurred in the summer of 2023. Mr. La Russa has serious longstanding polysubstance addictions. Ms. Dufort would like the Board to consider the use of the following wording:

1] Stonehenge:

1. Reside at the Stonehenge residential program, while participating in the program.
2. While residing at the Stonehenge residential treatment program: to enter the community of Guelph or Southern Ontario with staff of Stonehenge or a person approved by the Person in Charge of the Hospital.
3. While residing at the Stonehenge residential treatment program: to enter the community of Guelph, indirectly supervised, as approved by the Person in Charge of the Hospital.

[2] Residing at Residential Treatment Program (Eastern Ontario)

1. Reside at a residential treatment program in Eastern Ontario, while participating in the program as approved by the person in charge of the Hospital.

2. Ms. Dufort submitted that community placement in a minimum 8-hour supervised accommodation is required to address the risk management needs attributable to this patient’s polysubstance use disorder.

3. Ms. Macrae conceded that the significant threat threshold continues to be met and agreed with Ms. Dufort’s recommendation vis-à-vis the terms and conditions attributable to Stonehenge as recommended by Ms. Dufort. Ms. Macrae would also want to see wording that enables her client to attend a residential treatment program anywhere in Ontario and not just in eastern Ontario

4. Dr. Strike added that pursuant to the proposed terms and conditions Mr. La Russa would be prevented from exercising overnight passes or travel from Stonehenge but would have access to indirectly supervised day passes if approved by the hospital between April 1st and May 4th 2025

Analysis and Decision

(a) Significant Threat

Ongoing significant threat to the safety of the public cannot be speculative. It must entail a real risk of serious physical or psychological harm arising from conduct that is both serious and criminal in nature.

In determining whether Mr. La Russa continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public the Board has carefully analyzed the evidence as it relates to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Winko, 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.

The Board unanimously finds that Mr. La Russa continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In arriving at this determination, the Board considered the joint position of the parties and accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Strike that Mr. La Russa continues to pose a significant threat. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report and the Risk Assessment contained therein in determining that Mr. La Russa suffers from a major mental illness, that in the past has been complicated by disorders relating to Alcohol, Opioids, Stimulants, Unspecified trauma, Stress and Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

As described by Strike at page 64 of the Hospital Report “Mr. Larussa’s reoffence scenario is most likely to occur in the context of decompensation of psychosis, resulting from medication non-adherence, recreational drug use, and/or psychosocial stress.” It is therefore to be anticipated that psychotic disorganization and delusional beliefs will drive him to act aggressively toward others. Given the foregoing, this panel of the Board accepts that absent an ORB Disposition, Mr. La Russa would likely become non-compliant with prescribed medications which would lead to decompensation, use of substances and the re-emergence of behaviours similar to those seen at the time of the index offences. We are satisfied that absent an ORB Disposition, it is likely that Mr. La Russa will cause serious physical or psychological harm to members of the public and such conduct will likely be criminal in nature.

(b) Disposition

Flowing from the Board’s finding that Mr. La Russa continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public it must shape a Disposition for the year ahead. Its paramount consideration in doing so must be the safety of the public while also considering Mr. La Russa’s needs pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

The necessary and appropriate disposition for Mr. La Russa provides him as much freedom as possible without subjecting the community to a real risk of dangerous behaviour.

In considering Mr. La Russa’s needs, the Board was attentive to his positive trajectory at the Stonehenge Residential Centre. That success is attributable to the efforts of Mr. La Russa to address his addiction issues in conjunction with the expertise of Stonehenge staff and the ROMHC’s treatment team’s willingness to afford him the opportunity to move forward with his rehabilitative and reintegration objectives. It is clear from the evidence before this panel, that notwithstanding the restrictive terms of his current Detention Disposition Mr. La Russa has managed to remain motivated and goal oriented. We share Dr. Strike’s optimism that he will continue to progress.

Mr. Larussa has shown that he deserves the opportunity to complete the six month Stonehenge program. However, the Board’s conditions of oversight remain essential for the coming year to ensure the protection of the public. This is why he will not be permitted the overnight passes or travel ordinarily accorded to Stonehenge program participants. That being said, we accept Ms. Macrae’s submission that the 2025-2026 Disposition contain wording which would enable Mr. La Russa to extend his time at Stonehenge as required and/or attend any residential treatment program within the province of Ontario.

Inclusion of a community living provision was recommended by the hospital. Both the Crown and Patient’s Counsel joined in this recommendation. While the panel is prepared to accept this joint recommendation we remain skeptical that a community living placement will materialize for Mr. La Russa within the upcoming reporting year. Nevertheless, we are well aware of the direction recently provided by this province’s Court of Appeal in this regard and have not excluded that possibility. If it occur, community placement in a minimum 8-hour supervised accommodation is necessary and appropriate given Mr. La Russa’s recent history of elopement as well as his elevated risk of break and enter, theft, driving related offences, obstruct peace officer, all of which are directly associated to his substance use disorder.

Conclusion

Therefore, the Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat Mr. La Russa poses to the safety of the public while still meeting his needs, is a Detention Disposition with amended privileges as set out in these Reasons for Disposition.

In arriving at this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Strike and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Mr. La Russa’s mental condition, his reintegration into society and other needs.

DATED this 18th day of March 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. P. Capelle Legal Member

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board