Re: Marc Caron, 2025 CanLII 45829

Ontario Review Board

Re: Marc Caron

ORB File No: 6835

Hearing held on: Monday, March 31, 2025

Place of hearing: Brockville Mental Health Centre

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. T. Mann

Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan Dr. A. Gibas Ms. M. den Haan Mr. M. Hajek

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Marc Caron Counsel: Mr. M. Davies

The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. E. Carefoot

Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. C. Breault

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated May 14, 2025)

Introduction:

1On October 6, 2015, the accused, Marc Caron, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on a charge of uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.

2Mr. Caron is currently subject to an amended disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“the Board”) dated March 27, 2024, as amended on April 10, 2024, which detains him at the Secure Forensic Unit of the Brockville Mental Health Centre – Member of the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, Brockville, Ontario, with privileges up to and including living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.

3On March 31, 2025 the Board convened a hearing at the Brockville Mental Health Centre (“BMHC” or “the Hospital”), to conduct the annual review of Mr. Caron’s disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Caron was in attendance at the hearing and represented by his counsel, Mr. M. Davies. Also present at the hearing to support Mr. Caron were his fiancée, Ms. Cook and his Alcoholic Anonymous sponsor, Mr. J. Stinson. Ms. A. Leeming, a psychometrist/PhD Candidate with the Hospital, was also in attendance.

4The issues to be determined at the hearing are whether Mr. Caron continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, to determine the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive disposition to manage his risk and his care for the coming year.

5For the reasons set out below, the Board finds that Mr. Caron continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the maintenance of the current disposition, namely a detention order with community living in approved accommodation, remains the necessary and appropriate disposition.

Position of the Parties:

6The parties were canvassed as to their initial, without prejudice recommendations to the Board. The Hospital and the Attorney General joined in recommending that Mr. Caron be found to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and that there be no change to the terms and conditions of Mr. Caron’s current disposition. Mr. Davies advised that his client was not taking issue with the proposed disposition but wanted to explore the Hospital’s plan for transitioning him to the community. Significant threat, while not conceded, was not opposed by Mr. Caron. The parties maintained their respective positions in submissions following the conclusion of the evidence.

Index Offence:

7The circumstances of the index offence are taken from last year’s Reasons for Decision and Disposition dated April 22, 2024, as follows:

“At the time of the offences, Mr. Caron was serving a sentence in an unrelated matter, at the St. Lawrence Valley Correctional and Treatment Centre. During his stay at this facility, he was seeking treatment from Dr. C. Cameron.

Dr. Cameron, when speaking with Mr. Caron, learned that he, since early childhood, has had homicidal thoughts to kill his mother. Dr. Cameron indicates that these urges are so ingrained that, not only does Mr. Caron think about them daily, he also dreams about them at night. Mr. Caron has described to Dr. Cameron that he will kill his mother, cut her up into pieces, cook her and eat her. Mr. Caron indicates he will not actively pursue his mother, but that, if he were to cross her path by random chance, he would not be able to control these urges.

Mr. Caron also revealed to Dr. Cameron a recently thought-out plan to perhaps kill his brother Chris or his sister Tiffany, and when his mother attended their funerals, he would ambush her and kill her.”

Background:

8Mr. Caron’s psychosocial history, as well as his progress under the jurisdiction of the Board, is amply set out in the Hospital Report dated March 10, 2025, which was filed as an exhibit at the hearing. As such, the contents need not be repeated in detail. The areas most pertinent to his current assessment of risk will be reviewed here in brief.

9Mr. Caron is currently 40 years old. He was born in Wallaceburg, Ontario. His early years were marked by instability and trauma, including severe physical, sexual, and emotional abuse inflicted upon him over many years by various family members, peers and institutional caregivers.

10From about six months to nine years of age, Mr. Caron was raised by his paternal aunt and uncle, apparently believing that they were his parents and that his cousins were siblings. When he was nine, his mother reappeared in his life and took him to live with her. He vehemently objected to this, to no avail. He began to harbour homicidal ideation towards his mother which culminated in his stabbing her multiple times with a screwdriver and hitting his father with skates. Following this, he was sent to live at the Child and Parent Resource Institute (CPRI) in London, where he stayed for about three years until he was 12.

11Mr. Caron displayed various and extensive behaviour problems during his youth, including stealing, fighting, lying, running away from home, fire setting, cruelty to animals, challenging authority, breaking rules, and vandalism. He was expelled from school in grade 9 for taking a gun to school and earlier had a number of suspensions for aggressive behaviour.

12At age 19, after unexpectedly encountering his mother on the street, Mr. Caron stabbed her in the back. At age 26, he and one of his sisters together developed a detailed plan to kill their mother which involved luring her to the sister’s residence so that Mr. Caron could enter the home to carry out the attack. The plan was derailed before it could be fully carried out when his mother was alerted to Mr. Caron’s potential presence in the home by the sound of him crawling through a window.

13Mr. Caron’s homicidal ideation towards his mother continued unabated for many years. He frequently and openly discussed his intention to kill her if he could find her and if he could get away with it.

14In terms of intimate relationships, Mr. Caron has a history of several mostly short-term romantic relationships which were tumultuous and characterized by violence in sexual and non-sexual contexts. He has several children but does not appear to have maintained a relationship with them.

15Mr. Caron’s work history prior to being found NCR was inconsistent and impacted by periods of incarceration. He reported having worked at a pizza restaurant and a blueberry factory, the latter for a 3-year period between 2006 and 2009.

16As for substance use, Mr. Caron has a lengthy history of licit and illicit use of intoxicants including alcohol, cannabis, LSD, crystal methamphetamine, opiates, cocaine in addition to, in his words, “anything [he] could get his hands on”. However, his substance of choice was crystal methamphetamine.

17Mr. Caron has an extensive and varied criminal record commencing at a young age, including convictions for violent offences, drug-related offences and multiple breaches of court orders. He has spent a considerable amount of time in custody and has previously reported that he felt more comfortable in jail than in the community. He had many contacts with the criminal justice system that did not result in charges or convictions. He is a registered sex offender. Mr. Caron’s CPIC Record dated March17, 2025, was filed as Exhibit 2 at the hearing.

18In terms of his psychiatric history, the Hospital Report dated March 10, 2025 – filed as Exhibit 1 at the hearing - indicates that as a youth Mr. Caron had multiple attendances at and admissions to various hospitals and institutional settings for mental health concerns including depression and suicidality. Such of the historical record as is available in the Hospital Report points to an enduring theme of his posing a risk of harm to himself and others. Diagnoses over the years included ADHD, persistent depressive disorder with psychotic features, PTSD, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, polysubstance abuse disorder, antisocial personality disorder with (psychopathic features), sexual sadism, sexual masochism and possible schizoaffective disorder. His traumatic childhood figured prominently in his various pathologies.

19On October 6, 2015, following being found NCR on the index offence, Mr. Caron was ordered detained at the Provincial Forensic Program of Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care and deferred the matter of a disposition to the Board. At his initial hearing, the Board issued a disposition detaining Mr. Caron at Waypoint. Initially he resided on the Forensic Treatment Unit but on January 29, 2016 he was transferred to the Beausoleil program which contained Waypoint’s most highly privileged units.

20Mr. Caron did very well within the highly structured and highly supervised forensic setting at Waypoint. His mental status was stable overall, he participated in many therapeutic groups and activities, proving himself to be thoughtful and engaged. He did particularly well in substance abuse programming. For the most part, he complied with unit rules and did not pose any significant management problems; to the contrary, he was described by staff as a “model patient”. He was compliant with his medication regimen, remained abstinent from substances of abuse, was sociable and polite with staff and peers alike and demonstrated patience with less able peers. His homicidal ideas and urges subsided, which he attributed to “likely being because of medications”. Mr. Caron’s treatment team felt that his progress was such that he did not require a high-security setting to manage his risk and recommended that he be transferred to Brockville. The Board concurred, and on April 20, 2017, Mr. Caron was admitted to the Brockville Mental Health Centre – Forensic Treatment Unit.

21By April 2022, Mr. Caron had progressed to the point where he was discharged to the FIT Team (FITT) home which is a 24-hour supervised residence on BMHC grounds. After an initial period where he did well, demonstrating commitment to his treatment plan and working with his treatment team on furthering his rehabilitation and recovery, he relapsed to use of substances and was re-admitted to hospital from June to October 2023. Following a successful 30-day LOA, he was discharged back to FITT in November 2023. Regrettably, his struggle to maintain abstinence from substances while residing in the less-structured setting of FITT continued and after a number of positive urine drug screens he was re-admitted to hospital on January 26, 2024, where he remains to date. Of note, during the period he was actively using, Mr. Caron became uncharacteristically avoidant and deceptive with his treatment team, non-compliant with medication and externalized blame for his situation.

22A combined Restriction of Liberty (ROL) hearing and annual review was held on March 25, 2024. The Board concluded that the ROL was necessary and warranted but declined to revoke the privilege of living in the community in approved accommodation, as this struck the panel as a punitive overreach having regard to the overall clinical picture which was positive.

23More generally, a review of the Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Caron has made excellent overall progress during his time at the Hospital. From the outset, he has remained mostly adherent to this medication regimen and worked cooperatively with his psychiatrists when adjustments to the regimen were made. With the occasional exception (see, for example, the description of his behaviour in 2021 where he was involved in numerous rule violations, at p. 51 of the Hospital Report), he has been compliant with expectations and routines. He appropriately sought help from staff when he experienced changes in his mental status, such as increased anxiety, violent sexual fantasies, low mood and auditory hallucinations which urged him to hurt his mother or himself. Mr. Caron participated actively in a plethora of therapeutic programs and activities, both individual and group and appears to have benefited from them, increasing his insight and coping skills. He has been a motivated participant in vocational services and also completed his secondary school education in 2023. Save for an act of environmental and verbal aggression in June 2021 (banging and kicking a nursing station door and threatening to fight security) he has not been aggressive.

24Mr. Caron’s current diagnoses are as follows:

a. Unspecified Psychotic Disorder

b. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

c. Substance Use Disorder

d. Antisocial Personality Disorder

e. Sexual Sadism Disorder – in remission.

Evidence at Hearing

25The Hospital had available to it the information contained in the record of proceedings and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report and in the CPIC record. In addition, the Board had the benefit of the oral evidence of Mr. Caron’s current psychiatrist, Dr. Esther Carefoot, whose evidence is summarized below.

26Dr. Carefoot indicated that Mr. Caron has done very well since his ROL in March 2024. Except for a urine drug screen in June 2024 that was positive for cocaine metabolites, there has been no other evidence of substance use. He has been compliant with prescribed medication and shown a good level of insight.

27Mr. Caron has successfully weathered a number of stressors, including a family member of his fiancée receiving inappropriate messages from a Snapchat account that purported to be his, but was not, being given property by a peer that was suspicious for criminal activity which he disclosed and turned over to the police, and an assault by a peer on the evening of March 17, 2025 which, combined with an assault in September 2024 by the same peer, caused him to press criminal charges.

28Despite the additional stressors, Mr. Caron has remained mentally stable and engaged with his supports. As such, Dr. Carefoot confirmed that the Hospital’s position is that Mr. Caron is ready to transition to the community, but that this ought to occur within the framework of the current detention disposition order to best ensure the transition is successful.

29The Hospital’s initial plan had been to transition Mr. Caron to his own accommodation in the community, but on March 24, 2025 a case conference was held during which Mr. Caron expressed that he did not feel ready to do so. He instead voiced an interest in going to the Murray Street group home, which is supervised for eight (8) hours a day.

30Unfortunately, there is a waitlist for Murray Street that would result in significantly delaying Mr. Caron’s discharge from hospital so alternative options are being investigated to see if there is a facility outside Brockville that could take Mr. Caron temporarily. Dr. Carefoot advised that a decision to implement this would only be made after consultation with Mr. Caron and his fiancée as residing outside of Brockville would significantly impact their ability to spend time together. Mr. Caron has also voiced interest in residing with his fiancée.

31The team considered whether Mr. Caron would be more likely to use substances at a less supervised facility such as Murray Street as opposed to the 24-hour supervised setting of, say, the FITT house but given his high level of functioning and current supports, the team concluded that it would not result in an increased level of risk if he were discharged to Murray Street. However, if a bed at FITT were to become available sooner than one at Murray Street, the team, in consultation with Mr. Caron, would consider this as an alternative. Currently, the team is not supportive of Mr. Caron residing with his fiancée, as there is concern that a number of specific risk factors would be elevated by his living there including exposure to use of substances and negative peer influences.

32In response to questions from the representative of the Attorney General, Dr. Carefoot agreed that Mr. Caron denies using substances in the fall of 2023 and in June 2024, and that this represents a deficit in his level of insight. However, Dr. Carefoot pointed out that Mr. Caron has been in the community for lengthy periods of time since June 2024 and has not used substances and has furthermore increased his engagement in substance-use prevention support, including interacting with his sponsor, Mr. Stinson and going to AA meetings. Mr. Caron knows that using substances will cause his mental health to decompensate and has no desire to use substances at this time.

33In response to questions from Mr. Caron’s lawyer, Dr. Carefoot agreed with the suggestion that Mr. Caron dealt with the above-mentioned stressors in an appropriate way, including turning to his treatment team for help, which gives her some reassurance that he will do so again should he encounter future stressors when residing in the community.

34According to Dr. Carefoot, Mr. Caron has reached the maximum level of privileges available to him and is currently permitted to be in the community for about 12 hours a day, during which time he is required to report to the treatment team and the team conducts periodic checks in the community. Additionally, Mr. Caron is not allowed to go into any residential address while on indirectly supervised passes to the community because of hospital policy prohibiting staff from going into private residences except in very limited circumstances (such as may be necessary to approve accommodation or to transition patients into supervised visits with family members). This would change if Mr. Caron were to be become an outpatient, since there is no requirement that he be accompanied by an approved person or refrain from entering a residence that has not been approved.

35There have been no significant concerns arising in connection with Mr. Caron’s exercise of privileges, including indirectly supervised privileges within a 250km radius of the Hospital upon first obtaining approval of his itinerary. Mr. Caron has been using his privileges to go to AA meetings with his sponsor.

36Dr. Carefoot said that the treatment team could reassess his fiancée’s application for approved person status (previously declined) if the delay in Mr. Caron’s going to Murray Street becomes inordinate. Dr. Carefoot felt that some of the concerns identified in the previous approved person assessment may now have diminished.

37The doctor went into some detail regarding Mr. Caron having been declined for an approved residence in Brockville some weeks ago due to his inability to prove he could afford the rent. Dr. Carefoot explained the Hospital’s rationale behind this policy as being rooted in financial stress being a known risk factor for decompensation in mental status. The difficulty in Mr. Caron’s case was that he could not conclusively prove the source of varying amounts of funds flowing through his bank account in addition to ODSP and chose to not apply for a forensic subsidy that is available from Lanark, Leeds and Grenville counties, because his financial situation is such that he would not be eligible for it.¹

38Dr. Carefoot said that Mr. Caron will eventually have to provide satisfactory disclosure of his financial circumstances when he is admitted to Murray Street, as there is a different financial contribution requirement (rent) for residents having funds in excess of a certain threshold amount.

39As for Mr. Caron’s wish to reside with his fiancée, Dr. Carefoot explained that even if she were to become an approved person, this might not lead to the treatment team also approving her residence, as different considerations are involved.

40Dr. Carefoot said that Mr. Caron explained his hesitancy to move ahead with independent living as being to do with his concern that he might be more tempted to use substances in a less structured setting. The treatment team will continue to explore other placement options, including some with addiction support as a focus. The doctor described various steps that the treatment team could take to help Mr. Caron develop more confidence about his ability to remain abstinent, including re-connecting in a sustained way with his hospital-based addictions counselor and deepening his engagement in community-based relapse prevent supports such as Mr. Stinson.

41Also, the team will explore ways in which Mr. Caron’s relationship with his fiancée could be supported, such as gradually allowing them to spend more time together, including overnight visits, after he is discharged to Murray Street or another approved setting.

42In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Carefoot indicated when Mr. Caron is discharged to the community, urine drug screens would likely be administered weekly for his 30-day trial period and then, if negative, would likely be reduced to every two weeks or so. The frequency of the testing would depend on Mr. Caron’s risk profile at any given point in time.

43The approval process for Mr. Caron’s fiancée would normally be discussed at the next case conference scheduled for early May 2025, but a request could be made of the treatment team to meet sooner than that to consider the issue. Whether Mr. Caron’s fiancée becomes an approved person is a decision that has to be made by the team. Mr. Caron’s fiancée is aware of his history.

44As for the issue of significant threat, Dr. Carefoot adopted the risk assessment contained in the Hospital Report, and summed up the basis for the Hospital’s recommendation that Mr. Caron needed to remain under a detention disposition, including his previous unsuccessful tenure at the FITT house and the fact that notwithstanding repeat positive urine drug screens, his level of decompensation was insufficient to trigger his being brought back to hospital pursuant to the Mental Health Act. Dr. Carefoot felt that this would be the case in the future, as well.

45No other evidence was presented by any party.

46Mr. Stinson took a few moments after the conclusion of the hearing to reiterate to the Board his qualifications as an internationally certified alcohol and drug counsellor for 30 years and confirmed that Mr. Caron is doing very well in his recovery. He advocated for Mr. Caron being allowed to develop a social network by being allowed to have increased social involvement with others. He felt bad that Mr. Caron had lost his privileges one night for missing curfew due to the large number of sobriety anniversaries at an AA meeting he attended with Mr. Stinson. The Board thanked Mr. Stinson for sharing his observations and concerns and for his ongoing support of Mr. Caron.

Submissions of the Parties

47Dr. Carefoot relied upon the evidence contained in the Hospital Report as well as her oral evidence in support of the Hospital’s position that Mr. Caron continued to meet the threshold for significant threat and that there be no change to his current disposition. Ms. Breault for the Attorney General agreed with the Hospital, noting the clear intention of the treatment team to proceed with caution in terms of transitioning Mr. Caron to the community with a view to protecting the safety of the public. Mr. Davies noted that Mr. Caron’s main concern continued to be how he gets out into the community, and that apart from the “hiccup” that occurred in June of 2024, he has had a pretty good year and continues to do very well, despite experiencing a number of stressors. Mr. Davies submitted that to provide Mr. Caron with an individually tailored plan, the Board should direct the Hospital to revisit its policy that in-patients not be allowed in private residences during their exercise of privileges and to re-assess his fiancée’s suitability to become an approved person and, ultimately, to offer approved accommodation.

Conclusion and Disposition

48Having heard and considered all of the evidence tendered at the hearing, and the submissions of the parties, the Board has no hesitation in finding that Mr. Caron poses a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in s 672.5401 of the Criminal Code of Canada, and as further defined in the Winko decision. Mr. Caron’s risk flows from in part from his lengthy history of violent and antisocial behaviour beginning as a child and continuing through adolescence and adulthood, substance use and a lengthy and diverse criminal history. He has a history of victimization and trauma as a child, and a self-reported history of problems with violent attitudes, ideation and fantasies in relationships with others. He also has a complex array of mental health diagnoses which, operating independently and together, have driven seriously criminal and violent behaviour in the past and are more likely than not to do so in the future absent the requisite degree of structure, support and supervision and in the presence of various risk factors, including but not limited to substance use.

49The Board recognizes that Mr. Caron’s criminal history represents a static risk factor which will continue to contribute to his risk of recidivism on various assessment instruments and tools and agrees that fulsome assessments of risk should also take into account dynamic predictors of risk including progress on clinical and management variables. This being said, Mr. Caron’s high scores on the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide – Revised (VRAG-R) cannot be ignored or discounted, as they inform assessments of his risk of future violence in hospital and upon release to the community.

50The Board accepts the actuarial and structured professional judgment assessment of Ms. Leeming² set out at pp 75-87 of the Hospital Report that Mr. Caron currently represents a moderate risk for both violent and general recidivism in the community without recommended parameters in place. The Board adopts the following recidivism scenario (at p. 85 of the Hospital Report):

Based on the current assessment and historical records…if Mr. Caron were to be placed in the community, that accommodations and environmental exposure to risk-increasing-variables, companions, employment, and substance use would be his main concerns. If recidivism were to occur, it would likely begin with breach of conditions due to substance use. Given the length of time since Mr. Caron’s last charge or conviction (ten years), it is difficult to predict what either general or violent recidivism may look like if it were to take place.

Dynamic factors increasing Mr. Caron’s risk of recidivism include exposure to antisocial attitudes and lifestyle (i.e. justice-involved associates, associates with pro-criminal cognitions or lifestyles, environmental exposure to neighbourhood crime, unstable housing), substance use (including more time with minimal supervision in which to use substances), and contact with individuals involved in drug sub-culture (given his noted history of both severe polysubstance use contributing to crime and of dealing illicit substances while in institution), unstable employment (easing the pathway to instrumental crime), and relationship instability (which may lead to recreation of historical patterns of violence/aggression or a relapse ins substance use to fulfill coping needs).

51On the other hand, Mr. Caron must be given credit for the progress he has made while under the jurisdiction of the Board, including his amenability to treatment and supervision, resulting in his current level of mental and behavioural stability. He seems to be back on track and continuing his forward progress through the forensic system.

52Having found that Mr. Caron poses a significant threat, the Board must fashion a disposition for the coming year. In this regard, the Board finds that Mr. Caron’s dynamic risk factors as set out above, inform the necessity for a detention disposition. Notwithstanding Mr. Caron’s strengths (and there are many), the Board concurs with the recommendation set forth at p. 85 of the Hospital Report that it is critical for any future community placement to take into account Mr. Caron’s identified dynamic risk factors to reduce his risk of violent and general recidivism and that, ideally, whatever accommodations are chosen for him, they should help him to avoid his identified risk-triggers and allow him to continue on his path of stability. It therefore remains necessary for the Hospital to approve his accommodation, which is not possible under a conditional discharge.

53Moreover, the Board accepts Dr. Carefoot’s position that the civil commitment provisions of the Mental Health Act would not be sufficiently proactive to ensure Mr. Caron’s re-admission to hospital in the event of a breach of his disposition conditions and threatened or actual decompensation in his mental state, whether due to substance use or otherwise.

54The Board supports Mr. Caron’s recent decision to delay discharge to the community until he is ready; this may reflect a level of insight that operates to protect public safety. The Board finds that continued caution in transitioning Mr. Caron to the community is warranted given Mr. Caron’s history of relapsing to use of substances and becoming less forthcoming with his treatment team when not in the structured and supported setting of the Hospital. Substance use continues to be a major risk factor for Mr. Caron.

55However, the Board declines to direct the Hospital to review its policy prohibiting in-patients from entering private dwellings. In the Board’s view, this is a matter that should be raised by way of motion, upon proper notice to all parties and the Board. The person in charge of the Hospital may wish to be represented by legal counsel in case such a motion is brought.

56Apart from due process considerations, the Board notes that Dr. Carefoot expressed a high degree of willingness to re-visit the issue of whether Mr. Caron’s fiancée can become an approved person so that overnight passes might be granted in appropriate circumstances and to re-assess the suitability of her home as an approved residence for Mr. Caron. Dr. Carefoot was willing to ask the treatment team to meet earlier than presently scheduled to discuss moving forward with these issues. In these circumstances, there is no need to direct the Hospital to carry out the steps proposed by counsel for Mr. Caron. In addition, given the ongoing efforts of the treatment team to find Mr. Caron suitable accommodation, discharge to outpatient status may come sooner rather than later, rendering the issue moot. Should either of these issues – approved person status or approved accommodation – prove to be a barrier to Mr. Caron’s reintegration into society or his other needs, an early hearing can be arranged.

57The Board wishes Mr. Caron all the best in his recovery journey over the coming year.

58In arriving at to this conclusion, the Board has considered the factors at s. 672.54, namely the protection of the public which is the paramount consideration, the mental condition of the Mr. Caron, the reintegration of Mr. Caron into society and his other needs.

Footnotes

1. 1In 2023, Mr. Caron received a settlement in connection with a lawsuit in which he was involved. The amount of the settlement was $38,000 and the Hospital Report refers to it being payable in monthly amounts over a period of 19 years (see p. 59 of Exhibit 1). Mr. Caron’s social worker attempted to assist him in obtaining the necessary information from the lawyer allegedly managing this for him but was stymied when the name Mr. Caron gave did not yield positive results; that is, no lawyer with that name could be found. This remains a work in progress.
2. 2Supervised by psychologist Dr. M. Seto