Ontario Review Board
Re: Sejin Lee
ORB File No: 8703
Hearing held on: Wednesday, March 5, 2025
Place of hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care 401 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas
Pursuant to: Sections 672.47(1) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Weinstein
Members: Dr. R.D. Chandrasena
Dr. B. Sheppard
Ms. K. Tomaszewski
Ms. C. Plyley
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Sejin Lee
Counsel: Mr. C.P. Dobson
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. D. Rows
AMENDED REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated April 11, 2025)
Please see underlined change at paragraph 4 of the original reasons made April 14, 2025:
Paragraph 4 of the Reasons has been amended to read his counsel, Mr. C.P. Dobson instead of Ms. N. Circelli.
Introduction:
On December 28, 2024, Mr. Sejin Lee was found unfit to stand trial on charges of harassment, utter threat to cause death, fail to comply with release order, and assault (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”). That finding was based on an assessment, and related report, of Dr. Ajay Prakash, dated March 10, 2024.
The Court did not make a Disposition and ordered Mr. Lee be detained at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“Southwest”) for an initial Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”), pursuant to s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code.
On March 5, 2025, the Board convened a hearing at Southwest to make an initial Disposition.
Mr. Lee was present at the hearing and was represented by his counsel, Mr. C.P. Dobson.
A Hospital Report, dated January 15, 2025 (the "Hospital Report"), was entered as Exhibit 1.
In accordance with s. 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code, the Board must decide whether Mr. Lee is unfit to stand trial on the day of the hearing, within the meaning of s. 2 of the Criminal Code. Specifically, is Mr. Lee unable, on account of mental disorder, to understand the nature of a trial and the possible consequences of the proceedings and to meaningfully communicate with counsel. If Mr. Lee is found fit, he must be sent back to court. If he is found unfit, the Board must make a Disposition that is necessary and appropriate, considering the criteria set forth in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons set out below, and based on the expert evidence before it, the Board concluded that Mr. Lee is fit to stand trial and that he should be returned to court. Furthermore, the Board ordered that a Keep Fit Order, pursuant to s. 672.49 of the Criminal Code, should be made, to ensure that Mr. Lee’s fitness is maintained prior to his trial. Pending Mr. Lee’s return to court, he is ordered to be detained at the Southwest Centre, with the highest privilege level being to enter Elgin County, accompanied by staff, or a person or delegate approved by the person in charge of the Southwest Centre.
Current Psychiatric Diagnoses:
- Schizophrenia
Antisocial Personality Disorder
Outstanding Charges:
- The circumstances giving rise to the Outstanding Charges occurred on May 18, 2021, June 23, 2022, and May 12, 2023. The following extracts from the Hospital Report provide a summary of the Outstanding Charges:
“Harassment & Utter Threat Cause Death, May 18, 2021
The victim in this matter is Coleby PEARSON who was with his 3 year old and 7 month old children at the time of the incident.
The accused was parked in the parking lot located at 825 Oxford Street East in the City of London. The victim was riding his bicycle with an attached child trailer which was occupied by his two children. The victim took a small pathway and passed the accused's vehicle. The 7 month old child began to cry and the accused yelled to the victim and his family "shut the fuck up." The victim stopped his bicycle and looked back to see the accused approaching him prompting him to continue biking. LEE continued to yell at PEARSON and said that he would 'fuck them up' and stated "I am going to kill you." These comments and LEE's behaviour made PEARSON fearful. PEARSON removed his children from the trailer and entered the store in order to find safety.
While waiting for police arrival, the accused drove around the store with his vehicle before parking in front of the customer service doors. LEE enters the store and approached the victim's bike while the victim and his children hid in a separate room. At 10:15 am, the accused exits the store and returns to his vehicle.”
“Fail to Comply with Release Order, June 23, 2022”
“Assault x2, May 12, 2023
The victims in this matter are Jadrian Elijah (39 years old) and his son Fox Elijah (4
years old).
On the afternoon of Friday, May 12, 2023 Jadrian was walking eastbound on the north side of Mount Pleasant Ave in the City of London with his daughter and his son.
Jadrian was suddenly approached by the accused. The accused asked, "who the fuck do you think you are?" and proceeded to grab Jadrian by his jacket and backpack straps and pushed him off balance causing him to land on top of Fox. The accused held Jadrian down on the ground such that he was unable to break free from his grasp. Jadrian made numerous efforts to break free including kicking the accused, however, was unsuccessful. Concerned for the safety of himself and his children Jadrian wielded his pocketknife, which he often has on his person, and struck the accused in the leg and yelled for help. Jadrian continued to struggle to break free and struck the accused in the face with his hands; during this the accused managed to gain control of the knife.”
Course Prior to Being Found Unfit
- Mr. Lee’s course prior to being found unfit is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:
“After Mr. Lee’s most recent alleged index offence, May 12, 2023, he was admitted to London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC). He was discharged on June 30, 2023. He was then admitted to Elgin Middlesex Detention Centre on August 21, 2023.
Subsequently, on October 11, 2023, Mr. Lee was admitted to the Southwest Centre on the assessment unit pursuant to an assessment order dated October 4, 2023. It was requested that the Southwest Centre assess Mr. Lee’s fitness to stand trial for the above-noted alleged charges.
On October 18, 2023, Mr. Lee was returned to court and found unfit to stand trial. A treatment order on the same date was issued. Mr. Lee returned to court on December 20, 2023, had been found fit to stand trial, and returned to the Southwest Centre on a "keep fit" order.
On January 8, 2024, an assessment order was issued to assess his criminal responsibility concerning the alleged offences. Mr. Lee returned to court on March 13, 2024, and there, a second NCR opinion was requested. He was remanded at the Southwest Centre under a Treatment/Keep Fit Order.
On December 11, 2024, Mr. Lee returned to court and was found unfit to stand trial. He was to remain at the Southwest Centre until a hearing was held by the Ontario Review Board and a disposition made.”
Legal History:
- Mr. Lee’s legal history is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:
“The following information is from the Criminal Records Check from the RCMP dated May 19, 2023, and Local Criminal Record from the London Police Service dated May 19, 2023:
2010-06-23 Windsor, Ontario (Youth Justice Court)
- Theft under $5000
- Fail to comply with disposition
- Fail to comply with recognizance
30 days & 15 days under supervision in the community on each chg conc
2010-06-23 Windsor, Ontario
Fail to comply with recognizance
Unauthorized poss of a prohibited or restricted weapon
1 day & (30 day presentence custody) & probation 15 mos
1 day conc & (30 days presentence custody) & probation 15 & discretionary prohibition order for two years
2011-10-18 Windsor, Ontario
Poss of property obtained by crime under $5000
Poss of property obtained by crime
Fail to comply with conditions of undertaking given by officer in charge
Fail to comply with recognizance
Fail to comply with conditions of undertaking given by officer in charge
– 2. 2 days (12 days presentence custody) on each chg
- 4 days on each chg but consec & (12 days presentence custody) probation 1 yr on each chg
3 days consec & (12 days presentence custody).
2012-05-10 London, Ontario
- Theft under $5000
$200
The following charges were withdrawn:
2010-06-23, Fail to comply with recognizance
2011-10-18, Trespassing at night, fail to comply with conditions of undertaking
2019-03-08, Criminal harassment
2022-01-26, Fail to comply with order
2022-01-26, Assault with a weapon, fail to comply with undertaking.”
Psychiatric History:
- Mr. Lee’s psychiatric history is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:
“Prior to the first alleged index offence, dated May 18, 2021, records indicated that Mr. Lee did not have any psychiatric admissions. However, health records have opined that Mr. Lee suffered from a psychotic-based disorder with an onset of illness as early as 2017. His symptoms have included auditory hallucinations, persecutory delusions (the essential feature of his illness), and disorganized thoughts and behaviours.
London Health Sciences Centre (admission from August 16 – 24, 2022)
It was noted that “most recently, his mother has left the home and returned to Korea due to concerns for physical safety”.
Mr. Lee was brought into hospital on a Form 2 under the Mental Health Act of Ontario that was instigated by his father.
Collateral information received from his father indicated that he used cannabis on a regular basis and had been using more recently. His father stated that sometimes Mr. Lee was smoking cannabis nonstop the whole day. He had also been moving around with weapons and at one time had a hammer on him. In the recent weeks prior to his admission, he had assaulted his father by hitting him with a household item on his forehead leading to him to come to the emergency department due to bleeding; he received six sutures for this wound. His father stated that Mr. Lee was no longer welcome at their place because they had all been living in fear of him.
London Health Sciences Centre (admission from December 20, 2022 – March 1, 2023)
Mr. Lee was brought to hospital by London Police Services who were called to his parents' home by his mother as he was acting aggressively and had allegedly attacked his father. When he arrived at the hospital, he was uncooperative and combative. He appeared to be experiencing perceptual abnormalities. Mr. Lee was placed on a Form 1.
On June 10, 2024, as per a Consent Capacity Board decision, Mr. Lee was found incapable to consent to treatment for his mental condition with anti-psychotic and mood stabilizing medication. His father returned to being his SDM and consented to starting clopixol (antipsychotic medication). By July 2024, Mr. Lee’s presentation improved; he had not been placed in seclusion and there had been no behavioral issues.”
Course in Hospital:
- Mr. Lee’s course in hospital is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:
“Mr. Lee continued to reside on the assessment unit under the psychiatric care of Dr. Ajay Prakash.
Mr. Lee displayed symptoms of his antisocial personality disorder. He had difficulty following directions and understanding that his behaviours were inappropriate; he often challenged unit expectations.
Mr. Lee was repeatedly touching staff and encroaching on personal space. He was unwilling to accept redirection which resulted in seclusion. He reported that he would do it again, justified his actions as trying to socialize with staff, and denied having any intention to bother staff. He remained in seclusion until the following day.
He targeted peers who were vulnerable and functioned at a lower capacity than him.
His lack of insight into his behaviour was profound.”
Position of the Parties:
At the conclusion of the hearing, counsel for the hospital, the Attorney General and Mr. Lee advised that this was a joint submission; all were adopting the hospital’s position that Mr. Lee is now fit to stand trial and that a Keep Fit Order is necessary to maintain his fitness, pending his return to court.
In his closing submissions, counsel for Mr. Lee advised that he agreed with Dr. Prakash’s evidence, based on a February 28, 2025 meeting he had had with his client, which had lasted for over an hour. He was satisfied that Mr. Lee is fit to stand trial and is capable of instructing counsel.
Evidence at the Hearing:
- The Board had available to it the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Exhibits, and oral evidence from Dr. Ajay Prakash. Dr. Prakash co-authored the Hospital Report and testified as follows:
a) He has been treating Mr. Lee at Southwest for over a year. Mr. Lee has been found incapable to consent to treatment and has a substitute decision maker.
b) Mr. Lee has gone through several medication changes during his course in hospital, which have resulted in an improvement in his delusional ideations.
c) His opinion about Mr. Lee’s fitness to stand trial, set out on pages 40 and 41 of the Hospital Report, still stands.
d) Mr. Lee had a recent attendance at Chatham Court with respect to charges not related to the Outstanding Charges. At the time, he had been able to engage with duty counsel meaningfully and participate in the trial.
e) He reassessed Mr. Lee’s fitness to stand trial this morning. His opinion is that Mr. Lee is fit to stand trial, considering the test set out in R v Taylor and R v Bharwani.
f) Prior to Mr. Lee being treated with clozapine, he remained unfit and continued to suffer from schizophrenia, including his delusional beliefs. Since the optimization of his medication regimen, Mr. Lee has only been suffering from negative symptoms of his major mental illness.
g) Mr. Lee was deemed treatment incapable because he does not have insight into his major mental illness or his need for treatment. Because of this lack of insight, the hospital needs to detain Mr. Lee, to make sure that he remains fit for trial and does not engage in substances.
- In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Lee, Dr. Prakash testified:
a) He no longer stands by his Assessment Reports of March 10, 2024, and December 10, 2023, in which he found Mr. Lee unfit to stand trial, as Mr. Lee no longer has active delusions about the court process.
b) Mr. Lee’s current medication regimen does control his delusions about the court process, and Mr. Lee no longer holds the view that a trial judge is part of the conspiracy against him. He also no longer has strong delusions about either the witnesses, the police officers, or the Crown Attorney being against him.
- In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Prakash testified:
a) Although Mr. Lee’s delusional systems are largely contained, there is still room to optimize his medication.
b) Mr. Lee has no insight into his need for medication, and he requires external supervision in order to maintain his adherence to his medication regimen.
c) The assessment of Mr. Lee’s fitness for trial was conducted in a room with eight other individuals present, to more closely replicate the environment of a court.
d) He reviewed the Outstanding Charges against Mr. Lee, including the Crown Brief, and Mr. Lee was able to understand them. Previously, when he tried to discuss the Outstanding Charges, Mr. Lee would spiral into his delusional beliefs, and the discussion would have to end. Mr. Lee is no longer reacting that way.
e) Mr. Lee still does not believe that he has a major mental illness, and his insight into the Outstanding Charges is still poor.
f) Mr. Lee does understand the nature and object of the proceedings and their possible consequences. He can communicate meaningfully with counsel and has the ability to make decisions regarding his case.
- No other evidence was called.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Having heard and considered all of the evidence and submissions from the parties, the Board agrees with the joint submission of the parties that Mr. Lee is fit to stand trial. The Board finds the test for fitness, as outlined in s. 672 of the Criminal Code and in R v Taylor and R v Bharwani, has been met. Mr. Lee does understand the nature and object of the proceedings; he understands their possible consequences, and he can communicate meaningfully with counsel. Mr. Lee has a reality-based understanding of the nature and object and possible consequences of the proceedings and has the ability to make decisions regarding his case.
In particular, the Board relies on the following extract from the Hospital Report:
“It is the opinion of Dr. Prakash that Mr. Lee: (a) understands the nature or object of the proceedings; (b) understands the possible consequences of the proceedings; and has the ability to (c) communicate with counsel. It is clear that Mr. Lee continues to have delusional beliefs around the charges in question. However, it is the opinion of Dr. Prakash that Mr. Lee need not be able to act in his best interest in order to be fit, but that he be able to recount to counsel the necessary facts relating to the offence in such a way that counsel can properly present a defence. It is Dr. Prakash’s opinion that, even though Mr. Lee likely has delusional beliefs about the charges in question, he still has a reality-based understanding as to the nature and object, and possible consequences of the proceedings such that he can meaningfully participate. Finally, Mr. Lee has the ability to make decisions. He understands the available options, has the ability to select from among them, and to understand the basic consequences arising from each. He would have the ability to intelligibly communicate this to counsel or the court.”
Absent forensic supervision and detention in hospital, Mr. Lee would attempt to live in the community, in his family home. He would not take his medication because of his poor insight into his mental illness and treatment. This non-adherence would exacerbate his irritability, induce psychotic symptoms and render him unfit to stand trial. As a result of Mr. Lee’s lack of insight into his mental health, his need for treatment, his risk of violence, and his limited motivation to engage in treatment, the Board orders that he be subject to a Keep Fit Order and that he be returned to court. This is the necessary and appropriate finding in this matter.
Pending his return to court, pursuant to s. 672.49 of the Criminal Code, we find that the least onerous and least restrictive Disposition is as recommended in the Hospital Report. We order that he be detained at Southwest, with the terms set out in our formal order and Disposition.
DATED this 11th day of April 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Mr. J. Weinstein
Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board