Re Christopher Ducharme, 2025 CanLII 42630

Ontario Review Board

Re: Christopher Ducharme

ORB File No: 7202

Hearing held on: Friday, April 4, 2025

Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care 500 Church Street, Penetanguishene

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. M.D. Segal Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. G. Kerry Ms. M. Chamberlain Mr. J. Cyr

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Christopher Ducharme Counsel: Mr. M. Schloss

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

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

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated May 8 2025)

1. On March 2, 2015, Christopher Ducharme was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of fail to comply with a promise to appear, fraudulently obtaining food, possession of property obtained by crime, dangerous driving, failure to stop at the scene of an accident, and uttering threats (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).

2. Mr. Ducharme is subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated April 2, 2024, which orders that he be detained at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care – High Secure Provincial Forensic Programs Division (“Waypoint” or the “Hospital”), with privileges up to hospital and grounds, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff.

3. On Friday, April 4, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at Waypoint pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Ms. Lefebvre represented the Hospital and Ms. Armenise represented the Attorney General. Mr. Ducharme did not attend this hearing. Mr. Schloss, counsel for Mr. Ducharme, advised the panel that his client did not want to attend the hearing. He stated that he had been able to meet with his client and had instructions. Mr. Ducharme’s presence was therefore excused per s. 672.5 (10) (a) of the Criminal Code.

Position of the Parties

1. Ms. Lefebvre stated that the Hospital was recommending a continuation of the existing Disposition along with the recommendation that he be transferred to the Institute of Philippe-Pinel in Quebec. This position was supported by Ms. Armenise, on behalf of the Attorney General. Mr. Schloss informed the Board that his client was also in agreement with the Hospital’s recommendation.
2. The parties all maintained their initial positions at the conclusion of the hearing.

Background and Index Offences:

6. Mr. Ducharme's personal and developmental history is set out in extensive detail in the Hospital Report and will not be repeated in these Reasons. Mr. Ducharme's parents divorced when he was quite young. He reports being raised in Toronto with his mother, brother, and sister. His father now lives in a remote area of northern Quebec. According to Mr. Ducharme, he was essentially on his own and looking after himself from the age of 14. He reported living in both foster care and juvenile detention facilities. There is no information about Mr. Ducharme's educational history. He has an older history of being employed in home maintenance. Mr. Ducharme reports that he is unmarried and has no children. He had one relationship which lasted approximately 18 months. Mr. Ducharme reports a history of using alcohol, cannabis and LSD when living in the community.

7. As indicated in the Hospital Report, Mr. Ducharme’s current diagnoses consist of the following:

• Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder

• Cannabis Use Disorder (in remission in a controlled environment)

8. The circumstances of the index offences are taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition, as follows:

“November 24, 2014 Index Offences

The following was informally translated from the Service de Police de la Ville de Montreal (SPVM) summary of facts:

In this case, the accused showed up at restaurant The KEG on Ia rue St-Paul E. on November 24, 2014 and left the restaurant without paying. The accused also stole a steak knife. The witness Mr. Simptinidis, employee at the KEG, noticed the accused leaving without paying and followed him outside. He stopped following him when the accused started to run. The witness later heard that the accused was arrested shortly after.

After leaving the KEG, the accused entered the back of a taxi of PLV Naciri around 2205 after stopping him close to the streets Notre Dame/St-Sulpice. When the PLV asked him where he was going, the accused ordered him to get off by putting a knife in his throat. The PLV obeyed, got out of the taxi, and saw the accused coming out of the back of took the wheel. The accused drove few meters but found himself trapped behind vehicles stuck in traffic near the 420 St-Sulpice. Unable to move forward, the accused backed up the vehicle at high speed and hit the witness Mr. Risione's vehicle that was driving on StSulpice around South despite the attempt to avoid him. The accused wasn't worried about the accident and attempted to start again to turn around St-Sulpice. In doing so, it hits the wall of 418 St- Sulpice with full force. The PLV Naciri who was watching the whole incident, went straight to the taxi and attempted to open the taxi door in order to control the accused.

On the other hand, the witness Mr. Comtois also witnessed the accident while he was working at the hotel reception. When he saw the PLV struggling with the accused, he went to help him. At the moment he was trying to remove the ignition key, he noticed the knife in the accused hands and he took it from him. He then gave the knife to his coworker, Mr. Mathieu Lalance, who in his turn gave it to CST Dufort # 5855.

During the altercation, the PLV Naciri had his right index finger cut but was able to remove the ignition key and get away from the taxi. The witness Mr. Comtois ordered the accused to stay in the vehicle while waiting for the police but the accused tried to flee on foot. The witness then took him down and was able to handle him until the police arrived.

CST Dorais #6533 (21-1 with CST Plante# 6303) arrested the accused at 2216 for robbery. When he attempted to identify him verbally, the accused said to him "You are lucky, I should have cut your throat and killed you" The CST Dorais informed him that he is being arrested also for death threat. The CST took the knife from the CST Duffort and the police officers went to the C.O. South. Once at the C.O., the accused told the CST Plante "I want to kill you" and repeat the same thing several times. He was identified by obtaining his fingerprints.

The CRPQ checks indicated that the accused cannot leave Ontario under conditions laid down in a file where he was accused of simple possession "(DOS: 2014-3036208.D52, Toronto Police, EXP: 2015-10- 03). Therefore there is breach of condition.

At 0530 on November 24, 2014, I met with the accused in his cell and explained to him in English he was arrested for robbery, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, death threats, dangerous driving, hit and run, fraudulent obtaining of food, theft and receiving and breach of conditions and that he will appear in court for the mentioned accusations. The accused seems lucid and said he did not want a lawyer and did not want to talk.

September 22, 2016 Index Offence

The following was informally translated from the Service de Police de la Ville de Montreal (SPVM) summary of facts:

On September 22, 2016, Mr. Christopher Ducharme was taken to the Montreal General Hospital by the police as he was in crisis. While he was on a psychiatric unit, hand cuffs were removed and the care was transferred.

When Mr. Hanidi Benham, the hospital attendant was trying to change Mr. Ducharme's clothes to the hospital gown, Mr. Christopher Ducharme punched him in the face. After receiving the punch, Mr. Benham left the room and returned to the nursing station where he fainted.

The police were called back to the premises on September 22, 2016 at Mr. Benham request who wish to charge Mr. Christopher Ducharme. When the police arrived, Mr. Ducharme remained in the hospital but was given a strong sedative. He was sleepy and was not aware of his surrounding which made it difficult to put him under arrest or to summon him. Police came back on two other occasions to summon him but Mr. Ducharme remained under sedation.”

Evidence at Hearing:

1. The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated February 26, 2025 as well as the testimony of Dr. Hudson.
2. Mr. Ducharme’s progress since his last annual review is summarized in the Hospital Report as follows:

“Over the course of the most recent review period, Mr. Ducharme continues to make statements that indicate the presence of violent thoughts. Over this year, Mr. Ducharme has reported having thoughts to harm others and is fearful he will be unable to resist these urges. This has occurred on a monthly basis, if not more often and has resulted in Mr. Ducharme limiting the interactions he has with others. In correlation, Mr. Ducharme has reported having violent thoughts to harm himself and indicated that he had a strong urge to rip his penis off on several occasions. As well, Mr. Ducharme has made concerning statements about his psychiatrist; due to Mr. Ducharme’s perception that his psychiatrist is responsible for his detainment and medication routine, it is likely that Mr. Ducharme’s psychiatrist is at a significant risk of harm should Mr. Ducharme ever have the opportunity to harm him. As such, Mr. Ducharme continues to present a real and significant risk of harm towards others and himself.”

3. Ms. Newman called Dr. Hudson to give evidence on behalf of the Hospital. The doctor agreed with the contents of the Hospital Report and the recommendations contained therein.
4. Dr. Hudson informed the Board that Mr. Ducharme remained on Paliperidone against his will. He noted that Mr. Ducharme remains in seclusion but is offered seclusion relief daily which he typically refuses. Mr. Ducharme is willing to engage in musical therapy. He is currently working on an album with the Hospital’s music therapist.
5. The Hospital has recommended psychometric testing, genetic testing and pharmacogenetic testing which have all been declined by Mr. Ducharme.
6. Mr. Ducharme continues to have psychotic symptoms and the Hospital has consulted with external doctors about options for him. They have suggested prescribing higher levels of Paliperidone or Abilify for Mr. Ducharme. Dr. Hudson stated that he disagreed with this suggestion as he was not confident that those being consulted had a full medication history for Mr. Ducharme. He noted that in March of 2021, Mr. Ducharme was being treated with a lower dosage of Risperidone and he reacted well to this. By April 2021, Mr. Ducharme was out of seclusion and would attend activities in the Hospital such as going to the gym. Mr. Ducharme’s Substitute Decision Maker at the time discontinued the Risperidone, resulting in a regression in his mental status.
7. Dr. Hudson informed the Board that Mr. Ducharme’s father lived in a very remote home in northern Quebec. He needs to walk a distance in order to get cell phone reception. Despite this difficulty, Mr. Ducharme’s father phones his son several times a month. Mr. Ducharme’s mother lives in Nova Scotia and she communicates with him by Zoom. The family is supportive of Mr. Ducharme. His father has a plan to have Mr. Ducharme come to live in the property next to his (which Mr. Ducharme owns) and help him rehabilitate in this remote location.
8. Dr. Hudson stated that the fact that Mr. Ducharme’s father was in Quebec was part of the reason that the Hospital remained in support of a transfer to the Institute of Philippe-Pinel in Quebec. He noted that Mr. Ducharme had done well at this facility in the past and that if he stabilized there, he could then move into the community and ultimately go live with his father.
9. The Hospital is aware that Mr. Ducharme and both of his parents are opposed to medication. He noted that the Public Guardian and Trustee is Mr. Ducharme’s substitute decision maker (SDM) and has permitted injectable medication which he does not contest. Despite his current level of medication, Mr. Ducharme continues to experience psychotic symptoms and aggression.
10. Dr. Hudson stated that he believed that Mr. Ducharme remained a significant threat to the safety of the public. His assessment was based on Mr. Ducharme’s lack of understanding that he requires medications as well as his aggression towards others. Mr. Ducharme has stated that he is absolutely opposed to treatment from Dr. Hudson and says he would like to kill the doctor.
11. In response to Mr. Schloss, Dr. Hudson stated that the Hospital has had a hard time getting Mr. Ducharme to leave his room. The music therapy started in January had been very positive for Mr. Ducharme. Normally, this therapy would end after a couple of weeks but the Hospital is making an effort to have it continue for a longer period.
12. The Board asked the doctor about Mr. Ducharme’s vacillation about transferring to the Institute of Philippe-Pinel in Quebec that is outlined in the Hospital Report. Dr. Hudson stated that Mr. Ducharme is content with his current situation and is sometimes ambivalent about going to Quebec. He further noted that Mr. Ducharme’s father is very motivated to have his son move to Quebec and ultimately live with him in the back bush in Quebec

Final Submissions:

1. In closing submissions, counsel for the Hospital stated that the evidence demonstrated that Mr. Ducharme remained a significant threat to the safety of the public. She noted the ongoing psychosis and instrumental risk associated with Mr. Ducharme’s resistance to anti-psychotic medication. She encouraged the Board to maintain the current Disposition including the recommendation that Mr. Ducharme transfer to Quebec. Ms. Lefebvre noted that there had been some positives in the last reporting year. Mr. Ducharme continued to engage in a relationship with both of his parents and music therapy had helped him come out of his room more for seclusion relief.
2. Crown counsel and counsel for Mr. Ducharme agreed with Ms. Lefebvre’s comments. Mr. Schloss noted that music is very important to his client and the music therapy had been very beneficial. He was hopeful that this therapy could continue.

Findings of the Board:

1. The Board unanimously finds that Mr. Ducharme continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the existing Detention Order should remain in place, including a transfer to the Institute of Philippe-Pinel in Quebec. In arriving at this determination, the Board considered the position of the parties and accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Hudson that Mr. Ducharme continues to pose a significant threat. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report, which notes the following:

“.Mr. Ducharme continues to require the structure and support of the High Secure Forensic Program at this time, and that he be transferred to the Institute of Philippe-Pinel. Mr. Ducharme is not opposed to transfer to Philip Pinel Institute although this has varied from time to time. Mr. Ducharme has many options available to him within the Province of Quebec. He owns a property in the region of his father's home; his father would like to assist him with ongoing stability when discharged to the community. Only after a careful period of assessment, therapeutic interventions, and rehabilitation, should a transition to the community be considered. “

2. The Board commends the Hospital for dealing with this very complex case in a sensitive manner. The music therapy is clearly a benefit to Mr. Ducharme. It is hoped that this can continue during the next reporting period.
3. In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Hudson 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. Ducharme’s mental condition, their reintegration into society and their other needs.

DATED this 8th day of May 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. M. Chamberlain Legal Member Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board