Re Jason M. Hadfield, 2025 CanLII 26068

Ontario Review Board

Re: Jason M. Hadfield

ORB File No: 8046

Hearing held on: Thursday, January 23, 2025

Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Weinstein Members: Dr. W. Johnston Dr. G. Stones Ms. M. Chamberlain Ms. B. Naegele

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Jason M. Hadfield Counsel: Mr. A. Stastny (via Zoom)

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Lefebvre

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Armenise

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated March 27, 2025)

1. On March 31, 2022, Jason Hadfield was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of manslaughter and robbery, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, (the “Criminal Code”).

2. Mr. Hadfield is subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated November 9, 2023, which orders that he be detained at the High Secure Provincial Forensic Programs, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or the “Hospital”), with privileges up to hospital and grounds, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff.

3. On Thursday, January 23, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at Waypoint pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Hadfield was in attendance and was represented by his counsel, Mr. Stastny.

Position of the Parties

4. At the commencement of the hearing, counsel for the Hospital submitted that Mr. Hadfeild remains a significant threat to the safety of the public continued to support his high-risk designation. The Hospital recommended no change in Mr. Hadfield’s detention order. Counsel for the Attorney General agreed with the Hospital’s position. Counsel for Mr. Hadfield noted that the high-risk designation bound the parties to the current disposition and was not opposing the designation at this time. All parties maintained their respective positions in closing submissions.

Evidence at Hearing

5. The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report, dated January 13, 2025, and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Bouskill, Mr. Hadfield’s treating psychiatrist.

6. Six Victim Impact Statements, collectively, were listed as an Exhibit at the hearing. All parties consented to the admissibility of the Victim Impact Statements. The Board marked the Victim Impact Statements as an exhibit but advised all parties that the Board will follow the procedure approved by the Court of Appeal in the decision of Klem 2016 ONCA 119. The Board will only take into consideration those parts of the Victim Impact Statements that comply with the provisions of the Criminal Code.

Index Offences and the Subsequent Path to a High-Risk Accused Designation

7. The circumstances of the index offence are listed in last year’s Reasons for Disposition which were taken from the October 2, 2020 Reasons for Judgment of Justice A.J. O’Marra of the Superior Court of Justice in Toronto, Ontario

“Overview of the Circumstances:

On October 12, 2018 at approximately 5:55 p.m., [name of male victim], age 58 entered the Esso gas station store located at the intersection of Dundas and Church Streets in Toronto in order to use an ATM to withdraw funds. At the same time, as captured on video Mr. Hadfield entered the store, exited briefly and then re-entered, only to leave again. He remained outside near the front windows from which the ATM could be seen. He displays an obvious interest in [the male victim] while he was at the ATM.

At approximately 6:00 p.m., [the male victim] left the store after withdrawing funds and proceeded to walk several blocks, approximately 300 meters west along Dundas Street to a shopping concourse at 10 Dundas Street, near Yonge Street.

Mr. Hadfield, at a distance varying between 2 to 3 to 30 meters, followed [the male victim] from the gas station to and within the multi-level shopping concourse. After [the male victim] made a purchase at a beer store on the lower level, Mr. Hadfield continued to follow [the male victim] out of the shopping concourse, and back to the Esso gas station.

At approximately 6:15 p.m., [the male victim] stopped briefly near the front entrance of the store on the raised concrete portion of the sidewalk of approximately six inches in height at the front of the Esso gas station store. As [the male victim] bent over toward the grey bag in which he carried his purchase from the beer store, Mr. Hadfield moved quickly up to him. From about a foot away, with his right leg, he delivered a forceful kick to [the male victim’s] upper body, roughly in the shoulder to head area that knocked him off his feet. The force of the kick caused [the male victim] to fall backwards and strike the back of his head on the pavement, which rendered him motionless.

Mr. Hadfield then proceeded to bend over the unconscious [male victim] and rifle through his pockets stealing his cigarettes and money. When Mr. Hadfield tried to leave, he was blocked briefly by a passerby, [name of male passerby] who told him “you can’t take that. Give him back his wallet”. Mr. Hadfield told [the male passerby], “get your fucking hands off me”. He broke free, grabbed [the male victim’s] money and wallet and fled east on Dundas Street, then north up Dalhousie Street.

As Mr. Hadfield fled, he was observed by a motorist, [name of male motorist] who followed him. When Mr. Hadfield reached a parking lot and began to walk, [the male motorist] asked him what he had been running from. Mr. Hadfield replied, “I had to do it man. I had to do it”. Mr. Hadfield then took off his shirt and threw it on the ground and repeated: “I had to do it man, I had to do it.”

Mr. Hadfield was arrested on October 15, 2018. At the time of his arrest he was found to be in possession of a crack pipe. [The male victim’s] wallet was not recovered.

In October 2018, Mr. Hadfield, age 33 was homeless and had been living on the street for approximately a year. He has an extensive history of mental illness and psychiatric hospital admissions. He was not under treatment or follow up at the time of the occurrence.”

“Dr. Klassen prepared a further report, dated September 29, 2021, in which he observed that Mr. Hadfield suffers from schizophrenia, a major mental disorder. He noted Mr. Hadfield has an extensive mental health history from the age of 18. He had never been free of psychosis, which included having paranoid delusions and auditory hallucinations. When he went untreated, he would become profoundly psychotic and agitated, which gave rise to aggressive behaviour. There was no indication over the multiple hospital admissions and assessments that he has any insight into the fact that he suffers from a mental disorder . . . Dr. Klassen concluded, Mr. Hadfield was so profoundly thought disordered and so fragmented in his reasoning as being justified in his actions, that due to his psychotic illness he was deprived of the ability to know that his act was wrong.

[With respect to the High Risk Accused designation, Justice O’Marra concluded,] absent a structured setting and direct supervision, [Mr. Hadfield] would discontinue treatment and become psychotic and delusional and become volatile and aggressive, the consequences of which can be severe. His past has shown that when untreated and psychotic he has displayed a dangerous pattern of the use of violence that could endanger the life of or safety of another person.

I am satisfied to a high degree of probability on all of the evidence that unrestrained and untreated Mr. Hadfield will use violence that could endanger the life of or safety of another person.

He shall be designated a high-risk accused for the purpose of disposition as directed by s. 672.64(3) that he be detained in the custody of a hospital where his detention must not be subject to any condition that would allow him to be absent unless the person in charge of the hospital is of the opinion that it is appropriate for medical reasons or necessary treatment if escorted by a person authorized by the person in charge of the hospital, and there is a structured plan in place that addresses risk to the public.”

8. Mr. Hadfield had appealed his high-risk designation but, in a Decision, released on January 21, 2024 his appeal was dismissed. Mr. Hadfield therefore remains designated as a high-risk offender at the time of this hearing.

9. The details of Mr. Hadfield’s background are set out in the Hospital Report. In that it was made an exhibit the contents need not be repeated. The following items are of note.

10. Mr. Hadfield is currently 40 years of age. His current diagnoses are:

• Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type;

• Cannabis Use Disorder, moderate, in sustained remission in a controlled environment

• Cocaine Use Disorder, moderate, in sustained remission in a controlled environment

• Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (by history)

11. Mr. Hadfield was found incapable of making treatment decisions and the Public Guardian and Trustee is his Substitute Decision Maker (SDM).

12. Mr. Hadfield was raised by his mother and stepfather. In his teens he became defiant, and at age 15 was placed into foster care. He completed school up to approximately age 16. He last saw his mother approximately 12 years ago. Mr. Hadfield continues to be estranged from any family relations.

13. Mr. Hadfield has a significant history of substance use. He began smoking cannabis and drinking alcohol at age 14. He since has engaged in the use of multiple substances, and was in his 20’s an almost daily crack cocaine user.

14. Mr. Hadfield has an extensive criminal record for offences of violence and breaches of court orders. He was on six probation orders at the time of the index offences. He has suffered from chronic paranoid and persecutory delusions, often involving the fear of being approached for sexual purposes.

Evidence:

15. Mr. Hadfield’s progress since his last annual review is summarized in the Hospital Report as follows:

“Mr. Hadfield has an extensive mental health history dating back to the age of 18. He has never been free of psychosis, with chronic delusions with persecutory, grandiose and religious themes, and longstanding auditory hallucinations. He has endured episodes of acute decompensation and worsening psychosis in the past. When untreated, Mr. Hadfield has become profoundly psychotic and agitated. Disordered thinking has negatively affected Mr. Hadfield’s insight, reality testing and problem solving. From a clinical perspective, Mr. Hadfield’s risk of recurrent illness is most likely to result from treatment non-compliance in the form of non-adherence with medication and further elevated by a return to substance use. Mr. Hadfield has not had a period of sustained compliance with medication while living in the community, despite extensive monitoring, and has vocalized his intent to discontinue medication once absolutely discharged. He has consistently requested his long acting injection be discontinued in favour of oral medication. He has additionally stated that though he does not intend to seek out substances, if someone were to use in front of him he would use again.”

16. Dr. Bouskill testified that she had read and adopted contents of the Hospital Report. She updated the Board that the Hospital was considering the addition of a mood stabilizer for Mr. Hadfield. She reported that he continues to exhibit symptoms of mental illness and has not returned to his baseline yet. Mr. Hadfield speaks of delusions; he says that he speaks to God. He has a lack of insight and does not attend Hospital programming. With the addition of a mood stabilizer (lithium) the Hospital is hoping to see improvements in Mr. Hadfield. It is further hoped that he would engage in therapeutic programming.

17. Dr. Bouskill stated that the Hospital felt that Mr. Hadfield met the criteria for a High-Risk Offender and that he continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. She noted that currently Mr. Hadfield’s risk is managed by external factors and that if he were not under the jurisdiction of the Board, given his lack of insight and stated intention to use substances, he would most likely decompensate and would present a significant likelihood of harm.

18. Dr. Bouskill felt that Mr. Hadfield’s insight into the nature of his illness, the need for him to take medication and his risk to others in the community would need to be addressed before she would recommend referring Mr. Hadfield to have his High-Risk Offender status reviewed.

19. When Mr. Hadfield decompensates, he begins to experience paranoia and fears for his safety. He can become verbally abusive and has engaged in property damage. Dr. Bouskill noted that this is what occurs in the Hospital where there is 24 hour a day monitoring by staff who are able to intervene early on and have options available to them. Mr. Hadfield has stated that he would discontinue taking his medication if he were in the community. With no ability for the hospital to intervene, Mr. Hadfield would likely endanger others.

20. The Hospital is hoping that the mood stabilizers will further improve Mr. Hadfield’s preoccupation with certain, topics including his beliefs of his finances and wealth as well as his paranoia of staff. There has been a slight improvement during the last year and Mr. Hadfield has not required seclusion since July 2024. He has been compliant with oral medications and has had passes into the community.

21. Mr. Hadfield’s counsel asked the Doctor what his overall prognosis was. She informed the Board that Mr. Hadfield had treatment refractory schizophrenia, and he may never surpass his current level of insight. Dr. Bouskill is aware that Mr. Hadfield’s goal is to have his high-risk designation removed. In order for the hospital to recommend this they would need to see Mr. Hadfeild engage in meaningful programming and continue to make improvements with the assistance of medication. The Hospital is also looking to have a more robust risk assessment for Mr. Hadfield that could be completed in the spring.

22. At the conclusion of the hearing all of the victim impact statements were read into the record. Mr. Hadfield acknowledged each statement after it was read.

Final Submissions:

23. At the conclusion of the hearing counsel for the Hospital noted that Mr. Hadfield remained designated as a High-Risk offender and therefore the existing detention order remained the appropriate disposition. Counsel for the Attorney General agreed with the Hospital and noted that the evidence does not support a referral to court to have the High-Risk status reviewed at this time. The Counsel noted that Mr. Hadfield has shown some improvement but that there was room to progress withing the existing order. Counsel for Mr. Hadfeild stated that his client ultimately would like to have the High-Risk designation removed, although he was not contesting this status at the hearing. Mr. Stastny noted that, after the set back caused by the medication earlier in the reporting period, things had been going in the right direction for Mr. Hadfield.

Findings of the Board:

24. There is no dispute among the parties that Mr. Hadfield continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board makes a finding of significant threat and relies following assessment contained in the Hospital Report:

“The most likely scenario for Mr. Hadfield to reoffend would be during an episode of acute worsening of psychotic symptoms. Should he become unwell, he is likely to struggle to recognize symptoms, to guard against disclosing his experiences to others and resist intervention, as he has in the past. In this state he is likely to develop worsening persecutory delusions and distressing auditory hallucinations including fears for his safety and those of others in need of protection, ideas of reference and messages from God, in keeping with previous episodes of psychosis.”

25. The Board finds that the necessary and appropriate and least onerous and least restrictive disposition is a continuation of the current detention order. Mr. Hadfeild is designated as a High-Risk offender which limits the dispositions available to the Board. The evidence presented at this hearing supports a continuation of the High-Risk designation as well as the existing detention order without change. It is hoped that Mr. Hadfield will continue to stabilize in the coming year.

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

Ms. M. Chamberlain Legal Member

___________________________

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board