J
Ontario Review Board
Re: Kyodie Wedderburn
ORB File No: 6725
Hearing held on: Monday, January 27, 2025
Place of Hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. Flanagan
Members: Dr. R. Sheppard
Dr. M. Kalia
Ms. J. Greenwood
Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Kyodie Wedderburn
Counsel: Mr. F. Bernhardt
Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. A. Marshall
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 25, 2025)
Introduction
On March 4, 2015, Kyodie Wedderburn was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of armed robbery, disguise with intent, and failure to comply with a probation order (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code.
Mr. Wedderburn is currently subject to the terms and conditions of a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB”) dated July 27, 2023, detaining him within the General Forensic Unit of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores” or “the Hospital”) with certain privileges, including to live in the community in supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On January 27, 2025, a panel of the Board convened to review the Disposition in accordance with the requirements of s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. F. Bernhardt, counsel for Mr. Wedderburn, attended the hearing, as did Mr. Wedderburn. A Hospital Report dated January 6, 2025, was filed as Exhibit 1 at the hearing.
The issue to be determined is whether Mr. Wedderburn continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage that risk, having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Initial Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Ms. Marshall, on behalf of the Hospital, submitted that Mr. Wedderburn continues to be a significant threat to the safety of the public and recommended no change to the existing Detention Disposition.
Ms. N. MacDonald, on behalf of the Attorney General of Ontario, supported the recommendation of the Hospital.
Mr. Bernhardt, on behalf of Mr. Wedderburn, conceded significant threat to the safety of the public and requested a Conditional Discharge Disposition. Mr. Bernhardt advised that Mr. Wedderburn would consent to a treatment clause, pursuant to s. 672.55 of the Criminal Code, and a residency clause in the Disposition.
Index Offence
- The circumstances of the index offences are taken from the Toronto Police Service referred to in the Hospital Report as follows:
“On the morning of Thursday May 29, 2014, the accused, Kyodie Wedderburn, entered the Petro Gas station located at 1896 Eglington Avenue East in the city of Toronto. At this time, Mr. Wedderburn was wearing a black hooded sweatshirt with the hood up effectively hiding his face from the video surveillance located within the gas station. Mr. Wedderburn approached a drink display counter where he briefly stopped and appeared to be looking at the display.
A short time later, Mr. Wedderburn entered the area behind the cash counter by reaching over the locked door and unlatching the lock. Mr. Wedderburn approached two female employees who were working at the time (the victims). Mr. Wedderburn approached the victim (Anna Diduca) and placed a hard object to her back. Mr. Wedderburn stated to the victims “Open the till – I have a gun”. Both victims then opened their cash tills and allowed Mr. Wedderburn to take a quantity of cash from them. Mr. Wedderburn then left the cash counter area and stated to the victims” “Don’t call police until I leave”. Mr. Wedderburn then left the gas station through the front door and was observed by the witness (Manalac) and the victim (Diduca) taking off his black hooded sweatshirt in an area East of the Petro Canada parking lot.
Mr. Wedderburn was located by police in the area of Hakimi Avenue and Eglington Avenue East. Mr. Wedderburn was arrested, read his rights to counsel and cautioned. At the time of arrest, Mr. Wedderburn was found to be in possession of the money taken from the Petro Canada Gas station (as described by the victim – two 20s and a bunch of fives). This money was located stuffed in Mr. Wedderburn’s left shoe.”
Personal Background/Psychiatric History
Mr. Wedderburn’s personal background and psychiatric history are extensively reviewed in the Hospital Report, filed as an exhibit at the hearing.
Briefly, Mr. Wedderburn was born in Jamaica and is the youngest of four, having two brothers and a sister. Following his mother’s remarriage in Jamaica, Mr. Wedderburn immigrated to Canada at the age of 13, with his mother, brother, and mother’s new partner.
After graduating from high school, Mr. Wedderburn went to Central Tech for a plumbing apprenticeship program with resulted in a placement for six months. He worked part-time as a general labourer for several temporary agencies. His longest term of full-time employment was two years as a forklift operator, at the age of 22.
Mr. Wedderburn reported he started drinking alcohol at age 14. As he got older, his drinking increased, and he would drink every weekend, approximately three to four beers. He started smoking cannabis in high school, stopped after he was hospitalized, and started again after he completed high school. He noted that his auditory hallucinations worsened when he used cannabis.
In 2012, he was charged with assaulting his girlfriend which was diverted. On July 26, 2013, he was convicted of two counts of robbery and two counts of disguise with intent, receiving nine months’ custody with two years’ probation and a weapons prohibition. On March 6, 2014, a charge of assault a peace officer with a weapon was withdrawn. On April 10, 2014, Mr. Wedderburn was convicted of failing to comply with probation and received a suspended sentence and a one-year probation term.
Mr. Wedderburn’s psychiatric history is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. His first psychiatric admission was in 2012, with an admission to Humber River Regional Hospital. He was described as paranoid, and his drug screen was positive for cannabis. Between January 16, 2014, and February 14, 2024, Mr. Wedderburn was admitted to Royal Ottawa Healthcare Centre/Brockville Mental Health Centre. On admission, he was noted to be responding to internal stimuli and hearing voices and endorsed a history of illicit substance use. He was assessed as “relatively unpredictable regarding his future risk of harm towards others and acting in an impulsive manner”. The discharge summary noted a diagnosis of Schizophrenia, disorganized type. Later, in 2014, Mr. Wedderburn had several visits to the emergency department of Scarborough Hospital.
Prior to the index offences, Mr. Wedderburn was residing with his mother in Scarborough. He was unemployed and supported himself via Ontario Works. While incarcerated, between the index offences and the NCR verdict, Mr. Wedderburn engaged with the Justice and Mental Health program.
Current Diagnosis
- Mr. Wedderburn’s current diagnoses are Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar type, Cannabis Use Disorder, moderate, and Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder.
Evidence at the Hearing
The Hospital’s evidence was presented through the oral testimony of Dr. D. Bhullar to supplement the Hospital Report, filed as an exhibit at the hearing.
Dr. Bhullar advised she has been Mr. Wedderburn’s outpatient psychiatrist since his discharge to the community in 2022. Mr. Wedderburn is incapable of consenting to treatment and his mother is his substitute decision-maker (SDM).
In January 2024, Mr. Wedderburn moved to Skeene House, a transitional group home within the Durham Mental Health Service, with 24-hour supervision and support. In September 2024, Mr. Wedderburn moved to Scott house, a similar highly supported residence in Ajax, Ontario. Throughout the reporting year, he engaged in recreational programming and maintained regular contact with his mother. He had no incidents of violence and remained abstinent from alcohol and substance use.
Dr. Bhullar advised that Mr. Wedderburn continues to experience both positive and negative symptoms of psychosis. His illness is fragile and is easily impacted by stress. At baseline, Mr. Wedderburn still hears voices, and his treatment is not presently optimized. Mr. Wedderburn’s treatment includes two oral antipsychotic medications, namely, clozapine and aripiprazole. Despite Mr. Wedderburn's adherence to his prescribed medication regimen, Dr. Bhullar advised that there is potential to increase his antipsychotic dosage to more effectively manage his symptoms.
Mr. Wedderburn hears voices daily and continues to believe that others put their voice in his head. Dr. Bhullar advised that in October 2024, a matter was brought to the treatment team’s attention by staff at Mr. Wedderburn’s supported accommodation. In this regard, the doctor referred to page 49 of the Hospital Report which states:
“In October 2024, it was reported that Mr. Wedderburn called his sister to tell her “get your boyfriend out of my head.” His sister called their mother who in turn called staff to advise of the update as she is aware these types of symptoms have led to assaultive behaviour in the past. When the treatment team discussed the new voice with Mr. Wedderburn, he noted it was bothersome to him because he does not like his sister’s boyfriend and did not want him “in my head.”
Dr. Bhullar stated that Mr. Wedderburn’s mother was concerned with her son’s recent behaviour. Historically, when her son perceived others around him were inserting voices in his head that were bothering him, he became violent. As a result, the treatment team brought Mr. Wedderburn into hospital for an assessment. At that time, Mr. Wedderburn advised the doctor that the “voice” was recent, and did not know what triggered it. He stated that he did not like his sister’s boyfriend, they did not get along, that he was upset to hear his voice, and called his sister to demand that she ask the boyfriend to “get out of his head”.
Dr. Bhullar stated that this was an exacerbation of Mr. Wedderburn’s psychotic symptoms. Due to past evidence that such symptoms impacted his violent risk to others, Dr. Bhullar spoke at length with Mr. Wedderburn about managing this risk by increasing his dosage of antipsychotic medication. Mr. Wedderburn was reminded by Dr. Bhullar that in December 2022, after an increase in symptoms, he agreed to an increase in his antipsychotic medication, which was effective.
Dr. Bhullar advised that Mr. Wedderburn adamantly refused to increase his antipsychotic medication. He informed the doctor that if his SDM approved of an increase in medication, he would consider discontinuing all his medication. Dr. Bhullar advised she had several conversations with Mr. Wedderburn to increase his antipsychotic medication, but he has consistently resisted and declined. After some time, Mr. Wedderburn reported to the treatment team that the “voice” had spontaneously disappeared. The doctor advised that Mr. Wedderburn agreed to take the additional medication "as needed", but he has not done so despite encouragement from the treatment team and housing staff.
Dr. Bhullar confirmed that Mr. Wedderburn has not contacted his sister’s boyfriend, and there have been no incidents of violence or threatening behaviour for several years, including during his discharge into the community. In this regard, the doctor emphasized that Mr. Wedderburn’s high-support environment and prompt intervention from the treatment team has ensured that no such behaviour has taken place. As an example, she stated that when Mr. Wedderburn was previously transitioned to MacKay House, a 24/7 supervised group home, there was an increase in his symptoms which necessitated the team moving him to Skeene House, a smaller complex care transitional group home. Dr. Bhullar stated that at that time, there were concerns about threats to others and his impulsiveness. The doctor also referred to a time when Mr. Wedderburn was stopped from going to Scarborough by the treatment team, because of their concern about an increase in voices.
Dr. Bhullar advised that Mr. Wedderburn’s relationship with the treatment team is quite guarded, and she believes he would not have independently reported the recent increase in auditory hallucinations in October. The doctor advised that it was concerning that the treatment team had to rely on other people, such as staff at his residence, or his mother, to report any ongoing issues affecting his mental state. As outlined on page 56 of the Hospital Report:
“Historically, Mr. Wedderburn is known to be guarded with disclosing symptoms and has not always presented with an appreciable change in his presentation when experiencing active psychotic symptoms, thus, any sign of decompensation may not be detected until he engages in a violent manner. In a decompensated state, his violent acts towards others have been impulsive, unprovoked and directed towards people in his physical proximity”
Dr. Bhullar advised that Mr. Wedderburn’s insight is limited and underdeveloped. He does not believe the “voices” are symptoms of a psychotic illness, but rather people around him are putting the voices in his head. The doctor also confirmed that Mr. Wedderburn has limited insight into his need for medication.
Dr. Bhullar maintained that Mr. Wedderburn continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and it was appropriate that he remain on a Detention Order Disposition. In this regard, Dr. Bhullar adopted her clinical risk assessment, and the factors set out on pages 55-56 of the Hospital Report. The doctor reiterated that Mr. Wedderburn has limited insight into his need for medication and recently has refused an increase to his antipsychotic medication. Dr. Bhullar advised that if Mr. Wedderburn stopped taking medication he would decompensate rapidly, his risk would increase, and he would become violent to anyone in his near vicinity.
Dr. Bhullar advised that a Conditional Discharge Disposition was not appropriate at this juncture, and that Mr. Wedderburn’s risk would increase with such a Disposition. As stated on page 54 of the Hospital Report:
“Mr. Wedderburn is considered a Moderate risk to reoffend violently if he were awarded a Conditional Discharge. However, his risk is estimated to be low and well managed under his current Disposition.”
The doctor emphasized that the Mental Health Act (MHA) will not be sufficient to manage his risk of violence. She stated that the hospital needed to approve his housing, which at present is highly supported and supervised. She emphasized that Mr. Wedderburn remains quite guarded and when he experiences symptoms, he can act violently, as he has done in the past. In this regard, the treatment team needs to intervene quickly when such a concern arises.
Dr. Bhullar elaborated that Mr. Wedderburn would need to meet the specific criteria under the MHA, to be admitted into hospital on a Conditional Discharge Disposition. The doctor advised that a treatment clause pursuant to s. 672.55 of the Criminal Code did not assist the hospital in terms of risk. The concern is managing his risk when his symptoms worsen or exacerbate. First, Mr. Wedderburn is incapable of consenting to treatment and cannot consent to a treatment clause. Secondly, Mr. Wedderburn would very likely not agree to an increase in antipsychotic medication, as evidenced by the exacerbation of his psychotic symptoms in October of the past reporting year. Mr. Wedderburn does not make the connection that an increase in medication can assist in mitigating his risk of violence. In this regard, Dr. Bhullar highlighted that Mr. Wedderburn has stated that if requested to be admitted due to concerns by the treatment team, he will not agree to voluntary admission.
Finally, Dr. Bhullar advised that the hospital needs to approve accommodation and if there was a residency clause, there was no guarantee Mr. Wedderburn would remain at the residence. Dr. Bhullar added that if a treatment clause or specific residency clause is breached under a Conditional Discharge Disposition, although such a breach could bring him back to hospital, he could not be admitted unless he met the specific criteria under the MHA.
Dr. Bhullar highlighted that prior to a Conditional Discharge Disposition, the treatment team needs to optimize Mr. Wedderburn’s medication regimen to better address his ongoing symptoms. He should participate in recommended therapeutic and structured programs to enhance his understanding of his violent risk, psychotic illness, the importance of medication, and to improve his social skills. Further, as reported in the Hospital Report, Mr. Wedderburn needs to be more open and transparent with the team about his psychotic symptoms. The doctor
would like to see Mr. Wedderburn work towards a transition from his highly supported complex care housing to less supported accommodation, such as independent housing, over the next year.
Dr. Bhullar was asked by counsel, whether the treatment team would agree to add an international travel clause to Mr. Wedderburn’s Disposition, given his mother has talked about a trip to Jamaica. Dr. Bhullar responded that Mr. Wedderburn has not brought this up with her, but that she would be open to adding such a clause, including with an approved person and itinerary approved by the person in charge. In this regard, Dr. Bhullar highlighted that Mr. Wedderburn’s mother, who is an approved person, is very responsible and engaged with the treatment team.
No further evidence was presented at the hearing.
Final Submissions of the Parties
Ms. Marshall, on behalf of the Hospital, maintained her initial position that Mr. Wedderburn remained a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the existing Detention Disposition was the least onerous and least restrictive. She submitted that at this time, a Conditional Discharge is premature. She submitted that the MHA would not be sufficient to manage his risk given Mr. Wedderburn’s resistance to optimizing his medication regimen, the emergence of breakthrough symptoms in October, and his guardedness with the treatment team who would not necessarily be aware of his declining mental state requiring early intervention. Further, she submitted Mr. Wedderburn would not be open to a return to hospital if requested by the treatment team.
Ms. Marshall highlighted that despite a residency clause in a Conditional Discharge Disposition, Mr. Wedderburn could elect to move from his accommodation and the MHA would not allow him to be readmitted to hospital outside of calling an early Board. With respect to the newly proposed international travel clause, Ms. Marshall submitted that there needed to be further discussion amongst the treatment team before the Hospital could take a position.
Ms. MacDonald, on behalf of the Attorney General of Ontario, adopted the Hospital’s submissions. She was opposed to the proposed international travel clause. She submitted that stress would be difficult for Mr. Wedderburn, and it was too early to consider adding such a clause to his Disposition.
Mr. Bernhardt, on behalf of Mr. Wedderburn, requested that a clause allowing international travel for seven days with an approved person and an itinerary approved by the person in charge be added to the Disposition. This would allow Mr. Wedderburn to travel to Jamaica with his mother, who is an approved person, and in any event, not allowing such a trip without specific approval by the person in charge addresses any concerns.
Mr. Bernhardt maintained his initial request for a Conditional Discharge Disposition. He submitted that there has been no aggression or violence since 2018, and Mr. Wedderburn’s medication regimen would remain the same. He acknowledged that Mr. Wedderburn had a certain position on adjusting his medication but submitted that he has not been aggressive while on the current medication regimen. He further submitted that Mr. Wedderburn’s housing can be specified in a Conditional Discharge Disposition to eliminate him choosing to live elsewhere and if there was a move from this accommodation, an early Board can be called to address the issue.
Conclusion and Disposition
Having considered all the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board finds that Mr. Wedderburn continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code. We make this finding based on the evidence of Dr. Bhullar and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report filed as an exhibit at the hearing, notwithstanding the joint position on significant threat of the parties.
Mr. Wedderburn has multiple diagnoses which include a major mental illness and a history of violence. His psychotic illness is fragile and known to be exacerbated by either substance use and/or psychosocial stressors. In a decompensated state, his violent acts towards others have been impulsive, unprovoked and directed towards people in his physical proximity.
His medication is yet to be optimized. Despite being treated with two antipsychotic medications, he continues to experience positive and negative psychotic symptoms, including auditory hallucinations. Exacerbation of his psychotic symptoms has led to violent and threatening behaviour in the past, particularly when he is hearing voices that bother him. In this regard, it is noteworthy that Mr. Wedderburn’s mental status has remained stable this year in the context of residing in a 24-hour supervised and highly supported setting and receiving immense support.
Mr. Wedderburn’s guardedness with the treatment team regarding his ongoing thoughts and psychotic symptoms remains a concern. Such was the case in October, when he failed to report troubling “voices” in his head to his treatment team which ultimately resulted in his concerned mother (and sister) contacting staff at his residence, who notified the team.
Mr. Wedderburn continues to have limited insight into the need for treatment and has refused psychotherapeutic programming to develop his insight. He does not make the connection that an increase in medication can assist in mitigating his risk of violence. Despite the exacerbation of his psychotic symptoms in October and several attempts by Dr. Bhullar to optimize his medication regimen to manage his symptoms and risk, Mr. Wedderburn has resisted and declined. At one point, he indicated that he would consider discontinuing medication altogether, should his SDM consent be obtained.
This panel finds that a Conditional Discharge Disposition is unrealistic and not appropriate at this juncture. Mr. Wedderburn presently requires highly supported and supervised housing, which needs to be approved by the hospital. Although a proposed residency condition in a Conditional Discharge Disposition may assist in having him remain at his current residence, a breach of this condition would not allow an admission to hospital unless he met the specific criteria under the MHA.
Managing Mr. Wedderburn’s risk to public safety, when his symptoms worsen or exacerbate, presents a significant concern on a Conditional Discharge Disposition. Mr. Wedderburn remains quite guarded, which negatively impacts early intervention. When experiencing psychotic symptoms, he can act impulsively and violently, as he has done in the past. In this regard, the treatment team needs to intervene quickly to ensure public safety and readmit him in the event of a decompensation or threatened decompensation in his mental state. In such circumstances, the provisions of the MHA would not be sufficient to manage the risk.
Further, the proposed addition of a treatment clause, pursuant to s. 672.55 of the Criminal Code, in a Conditional Discharge Disposition, would not realistically assist in managing his risk. Mr. Wedderburn would very likely not agree to any increase in antipsychotic medication to manage the risk, as evidenced by the exacerbation of his psychotic symptoms in October of the past reporting year.
Further, it is highly unlikely that Mr. Wedderburn, if requested to be admitted due to concerns by the treatment team, would agree to such admission. In fact, he has advised the doctor that he would not do so. As set out on page 53 of the Hospital Report:
“He has poor appreciation that an interruption in his antipsychotic medication regimen would lead to an exacerbation of his symptoms and significantly increase his risk for assaultive behaviour, as they have in the past. Rather, he has stated that he would not come back to the hospital voluntarily if his symptoms were to worsen or if the staff of his group home raised concerns for safety.”
To his credit, in the last four months, Mr. Wedderburn has settled well at his highly supported transitional Scott House. There has been no aggression or violence for several years, including while on his current medication regimen. In this regard, however, it should be kept in mind that he is in a highly controlled setting. There also have been no positive urine screens. While he lives a fairly seclusive lifestyle, he enjoys visits and contact from his family. It may be that in the coming year, Mr. Wedderburn’s treatment can be optimized, he can be more engaged in therapeutic programming and less guarded and more open with the treatment team regarding his ongoing psychotic symptoms, as he works towards independent living.
This panel agrees, however, that an international travel condition can be added to Mr. Wedderburn’s Disposition to allow travel to Jamaica. In this regard, his risk is mitigated by requiring specific approval by the person in charge of the hospital of an itinerary together with an approved person. We note that Mr. Wedderburn’s mother is an approved person who has been very responsible and engaged with the treatment team regarding her son’s mental health, as evidenced by the incident in October.
For the reasons set out above, we came to the unanimous conclusion that Mr. Wedderburn remains a significant threat to the safety of public and that the most appropriate and necessary Disposition was the continuation of the existing Detention Disposition with the addition of an international travel clause to read:
- travel passes for up to 7 days outside of Canada with an approved person(s), and upon first obtaining approval of his itinerary by the person in charge of the hospital.
- In reaching our decision, the Board has considered the safety of the public, Mr. Wedderburn’s mental condition, his reintegration into society, and his other needs.
DATED this 25th day of March 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. C. Flanagan
Legal Member
_______________________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board