Re: Jens Thoger Norgaard
ORB File No: 8260 Hearing held on: Tuesday, March 4, 2025 Place of Hearing: Providence Care Hospital, Kingston Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Hanbidge Members: Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Dr. J. Watts Dr. J. Cheston Mr. R. Rainboth
Parties Appearing: Accused: Jens Thoger Norgaard Counsel: Mr. M. Rodé Person in charge of hospital: Representative Ms. T. Tom Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Ferguson
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated May 5, 2025)
Introduction
On February 17, 2023, the accused, Jens Thoger Norgaard, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of assault with a weapon, failing to comply with release order other than attend court, and failing to comply with an undertaking (prints), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”).
Mr. Norgaard is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) dated April 25, 2024. The Disposition ordered that he be detained at the Secure Forensic Unit of the Providence Care Hospital (“PCH”) in Kingston, with privileges up to and including to live in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On Tuesday, March 4, 2025, a panel of the Board convened for an in-person hearing at PCH to conduct a review of Mr. Norgaard’s Disposition. Mr. Norgaard was in attendance and was represented by legal counsel, Mr. Michael Rodé. Mr. Norgaard’s sister also attended the hearing as an observer.
The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Mr. Norgaard 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 restrictive and least onerous taking into account the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Position 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.
Ms. Tina Tom appeared for PCH. She advised of the Hospital position that Mr. Norgaard remains a significant threat to public safety, and if the Board so finds, the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of a Detention Order with the same conditions as were contained in last year’s Disposition, save and except for one amendment – to paragraph #1 – delete the words “the Secure Forensic Unit of”, so that it now states: “detained at Providence Care Hospital, Kingston.”.
Both Ms. Jennifer Ferguson, appearing for the Attorney-General, and Mr. Rodé, appearing for Mr. Norgaard, supported the Hospital’s position in respect of Mr. Norgaard’s continued significant threat to public safety, as well as the recommended Disposition.
Findings:
- For the Reasons that follow, the panel found that the threshold for significant threat is met, and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the current Disposition, namely, a Detention Order, with the same conditions and privileges as were contained in last year’s Disposition, save and except for one amendment – to paragraph #1 – delete the words “the Secure Forensic Unit of”, so that it now states: “detained at Providence Care Hospital, Kingston.”.
Index Offence:
- The details giving rise to the index offence are extracted from the most recent Reasons for Disposition, dated June 10, 2024, as follows:
"On September 14th, 2021, at approximately 1220hrs the victim, was at work at Goodlife Fitness located at 64 Barrack St. The victim observed a male, later identified as Jens NORGAARD attempting to steal a bike which was sitting out front of Goodlife.
The victim approached NORGAARD and said "I don't think that's your bike", to which NORGAARD responded "I don't care I'm taking it anyway." The victim then told NORGAARD he shouldn't take the bike. At that point NORGAARD pulled out a steel blade kitchen knife and said "is it worth dying over?" The victim responded by saying "are you going to kill me with a paring knife?" To which NORGAARD replied "I'm pretty good with a blade."
NORGAARD left Goodlife property leaving the bike behind and proceeded across the street to the Food Basics, The victim contacted police and continued to watch NORGAARD.
On arrival PC Colangeli and PC Gorry were flagged down by the victim who pointed out NORGAARD walking South bound on Wellington St towards Queen St. PC Colangeli and PC Gorry located NORGAARD at the corner of Wellington St and Queen St. NORGAARD was observed to be wearing a leather sheath on his belt on the right side of his person. A knife was also observed inside of the sheath.
NORGAARD was detained at 1225 hrs by PC Colangeli, at this time PC Colangeli seized the knife from NORGAARD'S sheath. PC Colangeli cautioned NORGAARD Re: Assault with a weapon to which NORGAARD replied "It was self defense."
PC Bahan spoke to the victim and then advised PC Colangeli of grounds to charge NORGAARD with Assault with a Weapon and Poss. of Weapon Dangerous, PC Behan also advised that the victim was going to provide an audio statement in relation to this offence.
At 1229hrs PC Colangeli advised NORGAARD he was under arrest for Assault with a Weapon and Possession of Weapons Dangerous. NORGAARD was read rights to counsel and caution to which he stated, "I'll let my lawyer do the talking."
NORGAARD was transported to 705 Division St where he was booked by St. Hughes. Once at 705 Division St NORGAARD advised he would call a lawyer on his own time when he was ready.
While in the printing area NORGAARD advised PC Bahan he was trying to steal a bike because his bike had been stolen and that he had gotten angry. NORGAARD stated "I say things and people think I'm serious, but I'm not."
On the 14th day of September, 2021, the accused before the court-Jens NORGAARD-was arrested by the Kingston Police and charged with one count of Assault with a Weapon. He was subsequently released on an Officer in Charge- Undertaking with a first appearance court date of October 21st, 2021, at the Ontario Court of Justice-279 Wellington Street, Kingston, Ontario.
The accused appeared for his October 21st, 2021 first appearance, and subsequent required appearances, until he failed to appear in court for the first time on April 7th, 2022. A Bench Warrant was issued for the accused's arrest. No charge of Fail to Appear was laid at this time.
The accused was arrested by the Kington Police on the strength of the Bench Warrant on May 4th, wow and subsequently released on a new Officer in Charge- Undertaking. The Officer in Charge-Undertaking had a first appearance court date of June 9th, 2022, at the Ontario Court of Justice-279 Wellington Street, Kingston, Ontario.
On June 14, 2022, the accused Jens NORGAARD, was released on a Release order by Justice of the Peace R. CAMPBELL, sitting in the Ontario Court Justice, Bail Court, in the city of Kingston, East Region. Release conditions included; Report to the Bail Supervision Program at John Howard Society at 771 Montreal St. Kingston Wednesday, June 15th 2022, in person, at 10:30am and thereafter as required.
On June 15th, 2022, the accused has missed his scheduled appointment and has made no attempt to contact the John Howard Society, therefore breaching a condition on his Release order. Court Worker/Bail Supervisor of the accused, has informed the Police of this information.”
Current Diagnoses:
- Mr. Norgaard’s current diagnoses are Bipolar 1 Disorder, Neuro-Cognitive Disorder, and Alcohol Misuse (history).
Background:
The Hospital Report dated February 3, 2025, (entered as an Exhibit at the hearing) provides a considerable amount of information concerning Mr. Norgaard, his personal history, his criminal and mental health histories, details of the index offence, his course in hospital, then in the community, and then re-admission to hospital subsequent to the date of the NCR finding. As the Hospital Report was made an Exhibit in this hearing it is not necessary to reproduce all of the information contained in it in these Reasons, except as highlighted hereafter.
Briefly, Mr. Norgaard is now 80 years of age. Mr. Norgaard was born in Copenhagen, Denmark and his family immigrated to Canada when Mr. Norgaard was seven years old. He has a large family of eleven siblings, including two brothers and nine sisters. After eighth grade, he attended a trade school and subsequently worked as a bricklayer for his father’s company. Mr. Norgaard has resided in Kingston most of his life and is currently financially supported by old age security and Canada Pension.
Mr. Norgaard has a history of sustaining several injuries, including potential head injuries. He was seen in the Emergency Department on numerous occasions over the past few decades. Most of the injuries appear to have been the result of falls (bicycle accident, falling on chairs, and falling while walking towards the street).
In 1997 Mr. Norgaard began seeing a physician in Kingston for depression. In 2000, he was admitted to Providence Continuing Care Centre (now PCH) and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. In 2004, Mr. Norgaard was brought to the Hospital Emergency by police because of intimidating behaviour in front of a local store. He was admitted for the first time as an involuntary patient on a Form 1 under the Mental Health Act (“MHA”). In August 2004, he was brought into hospital following a fire at his apartment. At that time, he advised emergency physicians that he was an “operative for the CIA.” Police indicated that this was the second such incident of fire setting, having been called the previous week. Mr. Norgaard denied setting the fire and was subsequently discharged against medical advice.
Prior to his NCR verdict in February 2023, Mr. Norgaard had lived in a rooming house in Kingston and was supported locally by his sister. His initial review board hearing occurred on March 28, 2023, with a subsequent Disposition allowing for community transitioning in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
Since the initial review board hearing, Mr. Norgaard has continued to reside on the PHC’s forensic unit as an NCR accused.
Mr. Norgaard has a longstanding bipolar diagnosis dating back some 25 years ago which has been stabilized since his NCR admission. He is presently taking olanzapine.
Mr. Norgaard’s main community supports are through either staff accompanied ventures or his sister who visits weekly and takes him out into the community, including to her home. She advised that there were no struggles with Mr. Norgaard in these settings. On the unit, Mr. Norgaard keeps to himself, says very little to others and stays in his room. He does go off the unit in the evenings for daily smoking breaks but has not shown interest in increasing this to other times. Significantly, he has learned how to navigate the exit to go smoking outside the hospital property. He has not shown much interest in accessing the coffee shops within the confines of the hospital.
Mr. Norgaard does tend to be neglectful of self-care such as showering.
As noted in the Hospital Report, a major outstanding clinical question is to clarify Mr. Norgaard’s neurocognitive diagnosis and whether this is a progressive declining condition. As a result, a geriatric psychiatry consult from Dr. M. Tobin was requested and completed in January 2025. Test results indicated that overall Mr. Norgaard did not present with any functional decline or deterioration of memory. It was noted that he could do well at playing chess games and exhibited other planning strategies. His executive function was thought to be intact, and there were no issues with his social cognition. However, with the occupational therapist (“OT”) Mr. Norgaard was reluctant to participate in the functional assessment used to assess Mr. Norgaard’s independent living skills to determine what supports he may need for future discharge planning. Nor did he participate with neuro imaging. Mr. Norgaard has complained of poor memory, which is evident, but somehow, he manages to get by.
Dr. Tobin was therefore hesitant to make a dementia diagnosis for Mr. Norgaard given the lack of his progressive deterioration and suggested the treatment team keep monitoring Mr. Norgaard’s overall functioning. Dr. Tobin’s recommendation was that, if community placement were being considered for Mr. Norgaard, it should be a supportive setting where Mr. Norgaard would have provision for meals, supervision, and regular monitoring. Dr. Chan and the treatment team do not view Mr. Norgaard as being able to function independently despite his lack of engagement with the OT assessment. Dr. Tobin agrees.
The Hospital Report noted that the treatment was unable to identify a place that would be suitable for Mr. Norgaard, given his age, memory issues, etc. It was felt that a long-term care setting was not appropriate at this time. Furthermore, retirement home settings are private requiring substantial resources which Mr. Norgaard does not have. As well, the Transitional Rehabilitation Housing Program (“TRHP”) group home accessed by PCH is geared towards individuals working to learn skills to return to independent living over the short-term as the overarching goal which conflicts with Mr. Norgaard’s needs. Finally, Mr. Norgaard’s family are unable to offer him housing in the community. In the absence of identified housing, the only option would be discharge to a shelter. However, a shelter would not meet Mr. Norgaard’s care needs and would place him at risk of harm to self and others. It remains unclear at this time what accommodation would be available to Mr. Norgaard. PCH is the current default setting.
The Hospital Report notes that to properly conduct a violence risk assessment concerning Mr. Norgaard, there needs to be an ability to access information about Mr. Norgaard’s past convictions. Perhaps the Attorney General’s representative may assist with obtaining this information and providing same to the treatment team at PCH, for reference at future ORB review hearings.
The Hospital Report states that Mr. Norgaard’s risk for sexual re-offence is considered to be very low given Static-99R risk estimates, his age, and substantial amount of sexual offence-free time in the community (i.e., over 20 years). The risk is further reduced by treatment of his bipolar condition. Mr. Norgaard’s risk for non-sexual violence is dependent on the amount of environmental and external support he receives. In the context of an absolute discharge with no identified housing, Mr. Norgaard’s risk is assessed as low to moderate. The majority of risk factors identified in this scenario are more relevant to risk to self, as opposed to risk to others. When considering risk to others, important risk factors include presence of manic symptoms, and non-compliance with medication. Consumption of alcohol is also relevant given the potential disinhibition and interference with medication compliance.
Dr. Rose, who conducted a January 2025 psychological risk assessment report for Mr. Norgaard, noted that there was ample evidence to support active symptoms of mania as a crucial destabilizing factor associated with Mr. Norgaard’s risk for violence. This was evident during his initial admission to PCH where he demonstrated disruptive, aggressive and emotionally reactive behaviour. With active treatment, both his manic symptoms and aggressive conduct resolved, which delineates the connection between mania and violence risk.
Mr. Norgaard’s risk is low if he were absolutely discharged to a supervised setting that provides assistance with his activities of daily living, monitoring of medication compliance, and access to a prescribing physician. His Bipolar disorder diagnosis is being treated under the consent of a substitute decision-maker, currently the Public Guardian and Trustee. Mr. Norgaard’s risk factors of mania and medication non-compliance are manageable in a non-forensic setting, but such facility is currently unavailable to Mr. Norgaard.
The Hospital Report, at page 29, concludes with the following observation:
“Therefore, [Mr. Norgaard] requires a lot of supervision or he may be tempted to disconnect from aftercare, stop taking his medications and then relapse. Alcohol may or may not be part of the struggle, but it would contribute to risk of present. Therefore, given the delicate balance of supports available at present as a forensic system NCR accused, he is viewed as a significant risk to the safety of the public, absent any supports or supervisory framework.”
- Accordingly, the Hospital Report recommends that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of a Detention Order with the same conditions as were contained in last year’s Disposition, save and except for one amendment – to paragraph #1 – to delete the words “the Secure Forensic Unit of”, so that it now states: “detained at Providence Care Hospital, Kingston.”.
Oral Testimony at the Hearing:
The Hospital’s evidence was presented through the oral testimony of Dr. Michael Chan to supplement the evidence contained in the Hospital Report. Dr. Chan has been Mr. Norgaard’s treating psychiatrist for the past 18 months. Dr. Chan was the author of the Hospital Report and adopted its contents at the hearing.
Dr. Chan confirmed that at present Mr. Norgaard represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. Dr. Chan referenced Dr. Rose’s recent psychological risk assessment report in support of such conclusion. Mr. Norgaard has been diagnosed with a longstanding major mental illness, namely, Bipolar disorder. Mr. Norgaard relapsed while residing in the community leading to criminal charges and the subsequent finding of NCR.
Mr. Norgaard’s current main support in the community is his sister, acknowledge as being present as an observer at the hearing.
According to Dr. Chan, Dr. Norgaard has done well since Dr. Chan has been involved in his mental health care at PCH.
Dr. Chan noted that Mr. Norgaard keeps to himself, seldom goes out on outings, and has few pleasures, including smoking cigarettes off the unit at the PCH’s water’s edge property line. He shares his cigarettes with other patients.
Dr. Chan further testified that he had recently added, as an adjunct to Mr. Norgaard’s current medication regimen, a further antipsychotic medication, namely. Abilify, with the goal to reduce Mr. Norgaard’s sedation.
Dr. Chan noted that Mr. Norgaard’s current risk of violence was low given the wrap around support coverage provided to Mr. Norgaard at PCH. Given his age and needs, it is difficult to find a community placement for Mr. Norgaard. He cannot live on his own.
As noted previously in these Reasons, a geriatric psychiatry consult was obtained two months ago, with findings that stop short of concluding that Mr. Norgaard was suffering from neurological decompensation, especially given Mr. Norgaard’s refusal to undergo some of the testing requirements needed for a proper assessment. The testing was done by Dr. Tobin who based his assessment on the information he was able to gather at the time, including the fact that Mr. Norgaard was able to find his own way to the edge of the hospital property for cigarette breaks, as well as beat everyone at the game of chess. The conclusion was that Mr. Norgaard’s executive functioning was still good. Although he had some cognitive issues, these were insufficient to definitively diagnose Dementia.
Other unit placements at PCH are being explored for Mr. Norgaard. The difficulty is that there are no unsecure (unlocked) forensic units at PCH. As well, outside agency placement options for Mr. Norgaard are currently being explored, but any private placement requires funding which is unavailable to Mr. Norgaard. Mr. Norgaard is quite ambulatory at present, a factor which also needs to be taken into account for any placement.
Dr. Chan testified that Mr. Norgaard requires supervision for taking his prescribed medication, otherwise he would forget to take it. If not compliant with his medication, Dr. Chan noted that Mr. Norgaard would pose a substantial risk to public safety, as he had demonstrated at the time of the index offences. There is also concern with Mr. Norgaard consuming intoxicant (i.e., alcohol) which would lead to Mr. Norgaard’s relapse. Accordingly, Dr. Chan agreed with Dr. Rose’s violence risk assessment as detailed in the Hospital Report. Mr. Norgaard is not able to live independently, nor is Mr. Norgaard presently motivated to do so. Dr. Chan advised that Mr. Norgaard requires a Detention Order Disposition in order to be adequately supervised.
In response to questions posed by some panel members, Dr. Chan confirmed that paragraph 2(f) of the existing Disposition [which states: “to live in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.”] adequately addresses future community placement and treatment considerations, with Dr. Chan adding that any contemplated placement would entail Kingston, Ontario, as that is where Mr. Norgaard’s sister resides and where PCH & community based service supports are located.
With limited findings concerning Mr. Norgaard’s Neuro-Cognitive disorder, Dr. Chan was asked whether this would prevent funding being offered, specifically DSO funding. Dr. Chan responded that Mr. Norgaard’s circumstances would not involve FDSO funding but rather funding from either long-term care or Ontario at Home agencies. In any case, Dr. Chan added that Mr. Norgaard is presently not interested in engaging in any such discussion.
Dr. Chan did not believe that Mr. Norgaard’s decision to not participate in psychological testing was based on a preference to remain hospitalized at PCH.
Dr. Chan provided an update to the information contained in the Hospital Report concerning the current substitute decision-maker (“SDM”), advising that the Public Guardian & Trustee is no longer Mr. Norgaard’s SDM for treatment issues, but rather it is his sister.
Dr. Chan confirmed that Mr. Norgaard’s current diagnoses (apart from Bipolar disorder) does not include dementia but rather a Neuro-Cognitive Disorder that is not of major proportions, based on the fact that he did not participate in appropriate testing.
Dr. Chan also noted that Mr. Norgaard also suffered from Alcohol Use disorder in the past, but he has had no access to alcohol given his current hospital placement.
Dr. Chan advised that Ablify has been recently added to Mr. Norgaard’s medication regimen in order to hopefully address Mr. Norgaard’s complaints of side effects, specifically Mr. Norgaard feeling “dopey” and sluggish. Dr. Chan added that this medication will be administered cautiously.
No further evidence was presented at the hearing by the parties.
Analysis and Necessary and Appropriate Disposition
Having considered all the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board concurs with the joint submission of the parties and finds that Mr. Norgaard 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. Chan and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report, independently of the parties’ joint submission.
Mr. Norgaard has suffered from a lifelong bipolar disorder complicated by long-standing, consistent and persistent alcohol misuse. Notably he also suffers from a significant neuro-cognitive disorder causing his memory to be very poor. All these factors contribute to a significant threat to the safety of the public. The evidence is clear that to manage this risk Mr. Norgaard requires structure, support, and ongoing supervision to keep him away from excessive alcohol and/or a manic relapse both of which would lead to inappropriate behaviour and an elevation of risk to the community. In this regard, we accept the evidence of Dr. Chan, who adopted the violence risk assessment report authored by Dr. Rose as outlined with partial excerpts commencing at page 19 of the Hospital Report.
To his credit Mr. Norgaard, who is presently in his eighty-first year, has had a good reporting year, compliant with his medication regimen, and without any behavioural incidents. Although leading a somewhat restrictive lifestyle in hospital, refraining from social activities and programs, Mr. Norgaard quite enjoys frequent community outings with his sister on an ongoing basis. He also enjoys smoking, in which he partakes on a regular basis.
It is also clear on the evidence that if Mr. Norgaard is to be discharged into the community, he would require special accommodation to address his unique needs. Unfortunately, at the present time, given his limited cognitive ability in conjunction with his other risk factors, there is no appropriate community accommodation that meets his needs and manages the potential risk. The Hospital is currently exploring placement options both within the hospital and in the community. We also acknowledge that given his age, his major mental illness and ongoing cognitive disabilities, Mr. Norgaard may have to be transferred to a non-forensic unit in the hospital should the need arise. In this regard, we agree that an amendment (as noted hereinafter) to Mr. Norgaard’s Disposition for the upcoming review period is in order to accommodate this potential transfer within PCH.
Although not advanced by the parties, we find that a Conditional Discharge Disposition has no air of reality given that the Hospital needs to approve appropriate supervised housing should Mr. Norgaard be transitioned to the community.
For the reasons set out above, the most appropriate and necessary Disposition is a continuation of the current Disposition, namely, a Detention Order, with the same conditions and privileges as were contained in last year’s Disposition, save and except for one amendment – to paragraph #1 – delete the words “the Secure Forensic Unit of”, so that it now states: “detained at Providence Care Hospital, Kingston.”.
In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the joint position of the parties, the evidence of Dr. Chan, and the contents of the Hospital Report entered as an exhibit at the hearing and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of sections 672.54 and 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons (with the public's safety being the Board's paramount consideration), Mr. Norgaard’s mental condition and his reintegration into society and other needs.
DATED this 5th day of May 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. John Hanbidge Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board