Re: Joao Pinho
ORB File No: 6293
Hearing held on: Tuesday February 18, 2025
Place of Hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. R. Bigelow
Members: Dr. S. Simpson
Dr. M. Kalia
Mr. S. Doherty
Ms. L. Maunder
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Joao Pinho
Counsel: Mr. A. Confente
The Person in Charge Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. C. Gzik
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION (Dated April 2, 2025)
Introduction
On February 22nd, 2013, Joao Pinho was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCR) on 2 charges of attempted murder and failure to comply with a probation order contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the Board) dated February 22, 2024, ordering his detention at the Forensic Psychiatry Program of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (the Hospital) with privileges up to and including residence in the community in 24/7 supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On Tuesday, February 18, 2025, the Board convened a hearing to review Mr. Pinho’s disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Pinho was not present at the hearing. His Counsel, Mr. Confente, advised the panel that his client would not be attending and that he had provided instructions to proceed in his absence. Neither counsel for the Hospital nor counsel for the Attorney General raised an issue with proceeding in Pinho’s absence and the hearing proceeded without him pursuant to section 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code1. The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Mr. Pinho continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, what was the necessary and appropriate disposition which was also the least onerous and least restrictive, taking into account the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Positions of the Parties
- At the commencement of the hearing the parties were requested to provide their initial without prejudice positions with respect to the issues before the Board. All three parties submitted that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a continuation of the current detention order without change to the terms.
Findings:
- For the Reasons that follow, the Board finds that Mr. Pinho continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order without change.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances surrounding the index offences of May and September 2012 taken from last year’s reasons for disposition are as follows:
Attempted Murder (2 charges) s.239: On February 10, 2011, the accused was at his residence … where he resides with his elderly parents. The accused became enraged and angry at his elderly parents and began beating them repeatedly to the point that they were unable to move and were barely conscious. The accused left the residence later, leaving both of his parents in severe medical distress. The accused then attended [street address] which he is bound by a Probation Order not to be within 500m of that residence. Police were called to investigate the Breach of Probation and attended the accused's residence to check on his whereabouts.
Upon police arrival, there was no answer at the door and observations were made by the police that Victims #1 and #2 were lying on the ground in the living room in obvious distress. The door was breached by police and entry was gained and ambulance was called and both parties transported to hospital with serious injuries. Through investigation, it was determined that the attempted murder on both of the victims occurred at approximately 10:00 a.m. and they were not located until approximately 5:00 p.m. later in the day.
Mr. Pinho’s parents both suffered significant injuries including bleeding on the brain.
Failure to Comply with Probation: The accused was on probation with conditions that he not communicate or be within 500m of the residence of his daughter, Melanie Pinho.
On February 10, 2011, the accused breached the probation conditions by attending the residence located at [street address] in the Town of Bradford/ West Gwillimbury. He Approached his daughter holding a kitten in his hands. He spoke to his daughter, saying “Melanie, come here Melanie.” At this point her mother arrived and Mr. Pinho left the area. The accused was located at the Comfort Motel on Yonge Street in the Region of York. When officers attended the motel, the accused could be heard screaming: “I killed my mom and dad;” “I’m the devil;” “You’re not afraid;” and “I’m possessed by the devil.”
Background Information Regarding the Accused:
Mr. Pinho was 58 years of age on the date of the hearing, turning 59 a week after the hearing. He was born in Portugal and moved to Canada with his parents in 1970 at the age of four. At the end of grade 8 his father took him out of school to work with him on a sod farm. Subsequently he worked seasonally and sporadically in construction.
Mr. Pinho was married in Portugal in 1988 and has two daughters both now adults. Although there was a history of marital discord, Mr. Pinho lived with his wife and daughters until he assaulted his wife in June 2009. Subsequently he resided with his parents up to the time of the index offences.
Psychiatric History
- Mr. Pinho has a long-standing history of treatment resistant schizoaffective disorder and severe polysubstance abuse disorder. He has a history of mental health issues starting in his early teens. Prior to the index offences he had been admitted to hospital with respect to mental health related issues on nine separate occasions. His usual presentation involves auditory hallucinations, thought insertion, thought broadcasting, paranoid and referential delusions and believing he is being listened to much of the time. On a number of occasions, he acted aggressively towards family members threatening them with weapons.
Current Diagnosis
- Mr. Pinho’s current diagnosis is schizoaffective disorder.
Legal History:
- Mr. Pinho’s criminal record prior to the index offensives consisted of convictions for assault causing bodily harm and assault with intent to resist arrest in March 2010 as well as convictions for criminal harassment and failure to comply with a probation order in April 2010.
Evidence of Dr. Courtright
Dr. Courtright advised that she had been Mr. Pinho’s attending psychiatrist for a period of time in 2020 and then again commencing in September 2024. She adopted the contents of the Hospital Report and indicated that she had no significant updates to the Report. Over the reporting year Mr. Pinho had remained largely the same as for the last several years. He continues to be quite reclusive and maintains that all of his actions are determined by God and that God has a great plan for his future. He has used some recreational passes successfully. With respect to treatment, he remains incapable but is entirely cooperative with taking medications and there has been no change in his medication regime over the year.
Dr. Courtright advised that, although compliant with medication, Mr. Pinho has little insight into the need for medication and indicates that the only positive effect of medication is that it does make him calmer. He also shows little insight into his illness.
Dr. Courtright stated that a referral to a long-term care facility has been submitted and is currently being evaluated and, in her opinion, his risk could be managed in such a facility. The plan for the upcoming year is to continue to encourage him to access the community and look to moving him to a long-term care facility should he be accepted.
In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Pinho Dr. Courtright advised that Mr. Pinho strongly believes that he has to atone for sins he committed as a young man, but this does not include atoning for the index offences. She advised that the rationale for his reluctance to leave Hospital was multifactorial including his psychotic illness, avoidance and maladaptive coping.
Dr. Courtright indicated that Mr. Pinho had been reluctant to agree to an evaluation with respect to long-term care facilities largely because he was concerned about whether he would receive a sufficient level of care. However, once the team had made it clear to him that the level of care would be similar to that of the hospital, he agreed to the evaluation. The long-term care facility coordinators would need to determine whether he is capable of consenting to a placement.
Analysis and Conclusion, Significant Threat:
- Although the issue of significant threat was not contested at the hearing, the Board nevertheless makes an independent finding that Mr. Pinho does represent a significant threat to the safety public. Mr. Pinho suffers from a major mental illness, schizoaffective disorder, and despite medication compliance continues to experience symptoms including delusions with respect to God speaking to him and directing his daily activities. He continues to have poor insight into his illness, his need for treatment, the relationship between his illness and the index offences and remains treatment incapable. His only support is the Forensic Psychiatry Program, and he has few protective factors against violence. Absent the supervision of the Board and the external controls associated with his disposition he would almost certainly discontinue treatment, disengage from psychiatric care and experience a worsening of his psychotic symptoms resulting in a high risk of aggression towards members of the public.
Analysis and Conclusion, Necessary and Appropriate Disposition:
- The Board finds that the evidence amply supports the joint submission that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order on the terms as recommended by the Hospital. Given his lengthy history of the nonadherence to medication, substance use and life-threatening aggression, any return to the community by Mr. Pinho must be gradual and carefully monitored. The treatment team needs to approve accommodation in order to ensure that appropriate supervision is in place to monitor medication compliance and to ensure that any decompensation in the community would be quickly noted so that he could be returned to hospital before meeting the admission criteria under the Mental Health Act.
DATED this 2nd day of April 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Robert Bigelow
Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board