Ontario Review Board
Re: Karoly Gonczi
ORB File No: 6308
Hearing held on: Friday, March 14, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Clapp Members: Dr. R. Sheppard Dr. S. Lessard Mr. D. Sandor Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing: Accused: Karoly Gonczi Counsel: Ms. T. Mohamed
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. J. Tupper
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated May 6, 2025)
Introduction:
On March 14, 2013, Karoly Gonczi was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of sexual assault (x2), indecent act (x2), and criminal harassment, all contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”) dated February 1, 2024, whereby he is detained at the Forensic Service of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including community living in the Greater Toronto Area in accommodation approved by the person in charge. The Disposition also requires that Mr. Gonczi abstain from substance use, not possess any weapons, and refrain from contact with the victims of the index offences.
On March 14, 2025, a panel of the Board convened at CAMH to conduct Mr. Gonczi’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Gonczi attended the hearing and was represented by counsel. There was also a Hungarian interpreter present who provided consecutive interpretation for Mr. Gonczi throughout the hearing.
The Hospital Report dated February 13, 2025 was marked as Exhibit 1, and the Victim Impact Statement dated November 8, 2023 was marked as Exhibit 2. Counsel for the Attorney General provided a CPIC Report dated December 29, 2023, which was marked as Exhibit 3. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Gonczi’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. S. Woodside, gave evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Gonczi continues to meet the test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition, bearing in mind the four factors in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Position of the Parties:
- At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Szabo took the position that Mr. Gonczi remained a significant threat to the safety of the public and there should be no change to the current Detention Order Disposition. Mr. Tupper supported the hospital’s position on behalf of the Attorney General. Ms. Mohamed stated that Mr. Gonczi also supported the hospital’s position. The panel therefore had a joint recommendation before it.
Findings:
- For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Gonczi continues to pose a significant threat to public safety. The panel concluded that the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive in the circumstances, is a continuation of the existing Detention Order.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances giving rise to the index offences are stated in the Hospital Report according to official records as follows (at pages 8-9):
“On May 11, 2012, Mr. Gonczi entered a yoga class at the Touchstone Youth Shelter (where he was known to be a resident at) asking for a lighter. The female instructor asked Mr. Gonczi to leave; he complied. When the instructor followed him into the hallway, Mr. Gonczi exposed his penis to her. Later in the day, Mr. Gonczi attempted