Ian Brent Stirling (Re), 2025 CanLII 45858

Ontario Review Board

Re: Ian Brent Stirling

ORB File No: 3533

Hearing held on: Friday, April 11, 2025

Place of hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, St. Thomas, Ontario

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

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Clapp Members: Dr. S. Swaminath, Dr. M. Green, Mr. R. Bigelow, Ms. C. Plyley

Parties Appearing: Accused: Ian Brent Stirling Counsel: Ms. C. Francis

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

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. K. Dalrymple

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated May 12, 2025)

Introduction:

1On April 8, 2002, Ian Stirling was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of break and enter with intent, contrary to the Criminal Code. Since that time, he has been subject to Dispositions of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”). He is currently subject to a Disposition dated April 24, 2024, whereby he is detained at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“Southwest” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including indirectly supervised access to the community of Elgin County. He is also required to abstain from substance use and refrain from having weapons.

2On April 11, 2025, a panel of the Board convened at Southwest to conduct Mr. Stirling’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Stirling attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Ms. Francis, who attended by video.

3The Hospital Report dated March 14, 2025, was marked as Exhibit 1. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Stirling’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. Naghmeh Mokhber, gave evidence.

4The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Stirling continues to meet the test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition, taking into account the four factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

Position of the Parties:

5At the outset of the hearing the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Zamprogna took the position that Mr. Stirling continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that a Detention Order remained necessary and appropriate. However, the hospital was recommending more than was indicated in the Hospital Report; specifically, the addition of passes into the community with a person approved, as well as community living in Elgin County in approved accommodation with reporting not less than four times per month.

6Ms. Dalrymple agreed with the position of the hospital on behalf of the Attorney General. Ms. Francis stated that the issue of significant threat was conceded, that her client had been working towards community living, and that his father was willing to be an Approved Person. It was therefore a joint submission.

Findings:

7For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Stirling 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 Detention Order, with the additional provisions as recommended by the hospital.

Index Offence:

8The circumstances of the index offence are set out in the Hospital Report at pages 2-3, and were concisely summarized in last year’s Reasons for Disposition dated May 6, 2024, as follows (at paragraphs 3-5):

“On November 15, 2001, an individual (not Mr. Stirling) attended the home of the female victim. He asked if her sister was in the residence and was told to leave. He refused to leave, and the victim threatened to have his legs broken if he did not leave. He said he would return with friends and left the residence.

The following day the male reattended the residence in the company of others and began pounding on the door. He invited the sister to exit the residence and stated there was a female present prepared to fight her. The male cut the front screen of the residence with an unknown object and reached through, breaking the inner window. The female victim also heard pounding at the front door and police were contacted.

When two police officers arrived, they observed three males jumping over the fence on the west side of the residence and running north. One of the males was Mr. Stirling. They proceeded to arrest him.”

9Mr. Stirling reported that he felt his actions were good “because it was a voice from God telling me to do it”, the voice was “coming from the wind”, and he believed in “an eye for an eye.”

Background:

10Mr. Stirling’s personal history is outlined in the Hospital Report in detail and will not be repeated here. In summary, Mr. Stirling is a 47-year-old single man who has never been married and does not have any children. He was adopted at the age of six months. His biological mother was diagnosed with schizophrenia and his biological father was an alcoholic. Mr. Stirling displayed behavioural problems as a young child and throughout his school career. He harmed his sister and mother, harmed animals, and was assaultive to his peers.

11From the age of eight to 13, Mr. Stirling attended a residential treatment centre. His family reported that he was frequently uncontrollable during weekend visits home. The Children’s Aid Society placed him in a group home at the age of 13, but he returned to live with his family after being arrested for the first time.

12Mr. Stirling attended three different high schools but did not complete grade 9. He was expelled from schools for behaviors such as yelling, swearing at a teacher, banging lockers, assaulting other students, and throwing rocks at a senior citizen. Mr. Stirling was also involved in illicit drug use. He was in and out of secure and open custody as a result of criminal charges.

13Mr. Stirling was supported by the Canadian Mental Health Association from June 2000 to October 2001 and lived in a group home. While he did well there for a period of time, he was ultimately evicted due to drug use, inappropriate behaviour, damage to property, and non-compliance with rules.

14In the six to seven years before the index offence Mr. Stirling lived on and off at his parents’ home. During that time, he tried to overdose on medication four times and stole money from his parents. He was eventually asked to leave the home.

Criminal History:

15Mr. Stirling’s criminal history is extensive and is set out in the Hospital Report at pages 4-5. It includes offences annually between 1992 and 2001, including two counts of escape lawful custody, assault, carrying a concealed weapon, possession of a prohibited weapon, being unlawfully at large, and a number of shoplifting convictions.

16Mr. Stirling was sentenced to six months in custody and 12 months’ probation following an assault causing bodily harm conviction on April 23, 2015. Mr. Stirling was detained at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint”) at that time and had thrown a cup of boiling water at the face of a female staff member, causing burns to her face, neck and cornea.

Psychiatric History:

17The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Stirling had numerous admissions to hospital between February 1993 and June 2001. His diagnoses included conduct disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, personality disorder, substance use disorder, psycho-affective disorder, psychosis possibly due to schizophrenia or substance abuse, and affective mood disorder. Mr. Stirling also displayed obsessional cleaning and ritualistic behaviours.

18Mr. Stirling’s course under the jurisdiction of the ORB is summarized in the Hospital Report as follows (at pages 10-11):

“Since being found NCR in 2002, Mr. Stirling was an inpatient at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care except for two relatively brief periods. He was transferred to Ontario Shores in July 2011 and returned to Waypoint at his request in May 2012. On August 13, 2014, while at Waypoint, Mr. Stirling threw a cup of boiling water at a female staff's face, resulting in the staff suffering from burns to her face, neck and one cornea. As a result, he was convicted of assault causing bodily harm and sentenced to six months in jail, 12 months probation, a 10-year weapons prohibition and ordered to provide a DNA sample. On May 25, 2015, Mr. Stirling was transferred to the St. Lawrence Treatment Centre in Brockville to serve his sentence. He returned to Waypoint on August 23, 2015, and was admitted to the Forensic Assessment Program.

Overall, Mr. Stirling's time at Waypoint was marked by significant instability, behavioural difficulties, aggression and some sexual preoccupation. During his second year at Waypoint and due to increased behavioural instability, he was transferred between units six different times. Periods of seclusion were also routine in almost every reporting period, with 71 days in seclusion reported from April 1, 2003, to May 4, 2004. Throughout his time at Waypoint, Mr. Stirling consistently had issues with medication compliance, often refusing his medication. This resulted in him being made treatment incapable on April 15, 2005, and the Public Guardian and Trustee was made his Substitute Decision Maker (SDM). Mr. Stirling has had significant difficulties with his relationships with both peers and staff, particularly with female staff. He tested and strained the limits of all therapeutic relationships with the staff, either through his efforts to sexualize his relationships with some female staff or by criticizing and insulting others.”

19Mr. Stirling had a better year in 2021 as he was compliant with medication, was not physically assaultive, and his insight and engagement with the treatment team improved. However, Mr. Stirling continued to misuse substances even in the highly secure setting at Waypoint.

20Mr. Stirling was transferred to Southwest on November 7, 2022, in order to be closer to his family and reside in a less secure setting. Dr. Mokhber has been his attending psychiatrist at Southwest since then. Although Mr. Stirling did not engage in threatening or violent behaviour, he continued to make inappropriate comments to female staff and was argumentative when his needs were not met. Mr. Stirling had a history of buying, selling, and trading with peers while at Waypoint, and this continued at Southwest. Attempts to work with a Behavior Analyst were unsuccessful. Mr. Stirling also tested positive for methamphetamines in March 2023 and January 2024, and frequently broke the rules related to smoking. It was noted that he continued to lack motivation and follow-through.

21A Psychological Assessment focused on Mr. Stirling’s cognitive abilities and personality was conducted from July 2023 to January 2024. It concluded that Mr. Stirling’s general cognitive abilities were in the Borderline range, and that his personality profile was complex as he endorsed several clinically significant traits of histrionic, obsessive-compulsive, narcissistic, borderline and antisocial personality.

22The first page of the Hospital Report lists Mr. Stirling’s current diagnoses as: Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type, multiple episodes, in full remission; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; Stimulant and Alcohol Use Disorders, Severe, in sustained remission in a controlled environment; Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission in a controlled environment; Antisocial, Histrionic, and Borderline Personality Disorders; and Intellectual Disability.

23Dr. Mokhber testified that Obsessive Compulsive Disorder should be added to the list of diagnoses.

Evidence at the Hearing:

24The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Stirling had ongoing issues with his impulsive and attention seeking behaviours, rule breaking behaviours, lack of motivation to succeed, and incidents of defiant behaviour over the reporting period. He also voiced a desire to go back to Waypoint as it felt like a home to him. Mr. Stirling tested positive for methamphetamines in August 2024. While he engaged in rehabilitation programs for substance use, the Hospital Report stated that the treatment team are of the opinion that his participation was superficial and a form of impression management. Mr. Stirling typically gave up prior to completing the program, and has stated that he has no intention of not using substances if they are offered to him while in the hospital or the community. However, Mr. Stirling attends Alcoholics Anonymous (“AA”) meetings almost every week and finds them useful.

25The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Stirling has good insight into the index offence and his future risk of violence, and partial insight into his diagnoses and the need for medication. He is capable of consenting to treatment.

26Mr. Stirling was described as an active participant in occupational therapy groups, and it was noted that his participation in leisure programs had increased this year. Mr. Stirling was referred for psychological treatment in May 2024 and is seen approximately every two weeks. He was described as attending the sessions in a responsible and timely manner and as being very engaged in the sessions.

27Mr. Stirling identified his adoptive father as a potential Approved Person, and he has indicated a willingness to take on this role. Dr. Mokhber testified that they will start that process this year and noted that some education may be required.

28The current risk assessment included in the Hospital Report concluded that Mr. Stirling’s overall risk for violence is moderate if he is managed in the hospital on a Detention Order. Dr. Mokhber testified that this was true even if Mr. Stirling was living in the community under a Detention Order. She explained that the risk would increase to high if Mr. Stirling was living in the community and not on a Detention Order.

29The Hospital Report included the following as the Re-offence Scenario (at pages 39-40):

“Without the ongoing support from treatment team members, and the current structure, and supervision, Mr. Stirling would likely fall away from any routine, resume substance use and discontinue his psychiatric medications resulting in a decompensation of his mental state. This would increase his risk to others, as he would potentially act out violently, as he has in the past.”

30Dr. Mokhber testified that Mr. Stirling’s schizoaffective disorder is under control now that his adherence to Clozapine has been more sustained, and he is free of mood and psychotic symptoms. His ADHD is also under control with medications, and his OCD has responded partially. Dr. Mokhber stated that Mr. Stirling’s insight has improved significantly and he has been willing to take all medications that have been recommended. His insight into substance use still needs improvement.

31Dr. Mokhber noted Mr. Stirling’s three personality disorder diagnoses and stated that he has been working with a psychologist on these issues and has been cooperative and engaged. The team has been working to tailor education programs for Mr. Stirling’s cognitive deficiencies, and he has been more motivated in programming recently. Although his behavioural symptoms remain present, she noted that issues have been less frequent this year.

32Dr. Mokhber testified that Mr. Stirling had multiple passes into the community escorted by staff and there have been no issues.

33Dr. Mokhber testified that in light of Mr. Stirling’s openness to treatment, and his recent improvements and progress, the treatment team believes it is appropriate to increase his privileges. She stated that Mr. Stirling’s main barrier is a lack of motivation, and they are still working on that. Mr. Stirling has a long history of living in psychiatric institutions and has had very little access to the community. The treatment team is working with Mr. Stirling to increase his goals for life and think about a different lifestyle. Dr. Mokhber testified that Mr. Stirling is now open to working towards living in the community and this is a positive step forward. However, this has just occurred recently and they will progress towards these goals gradually as there is still a lot of work to be done. Dr. Mokhber stated that including passes with an Approved Person and community living in Mr. Stirling’s Disposition “opens windows for fresh air” for Mr. Stirling and provides him with opportunities for his future.

34Dr. Mokhber stated that she hopes that Mr. Stirling will be in a position to move to the rehabilitation unit this year, and work toward community living. She noted that that may not happen in the upcoming year but it is a possibility. Dr. Mokhber also stated that Mr. Stirling needs the privilege of community living in his Disposition in order to move to the rehabilitation unit.

35Dr. Mokhber was asked about substance use treatment and she stated that Mr. Stirling should continue to participate in programming and they are thinking about a residential treatment program. Mr. Stirling then advised the panel that he had received a sobriety coin from AA and showed it to the panel. He also stated that he had been participating in concurrent disorder programming.

Analysis and Conclusions:

36Based on the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. Mokhber, the panel concluded that Mr. Stirling remains a significant threat to public safety. Mr. Stirling has a serious and persistent mental illness as well as personality disorders. He has a long history of disruptive and criminal activities in the community and a significant criminal record. He also has a history of substance abuse over many years, with only partial insight into how this affects his mental condition and violence risk. The panel accepted the re-offence scenario included in the Hospital Report (and cited above) and concluded that without the ongoing support, structure, and supervision of the forensic system, Mr. Stirling would fall away from treatment, resume substance use, experience a decompensation in his mental state, and act out violently, as has happened in the past.

37The panel accepted the joint submission that a continuation of a Detention Order was necessary and appropriate, and the least onerous and least restrictive Disposition in the circumstances. The panel also accepted that it was appropriate to add additional privileges for Mr. Stirling at this time, specifically indirectly supervised passes with a person approved, and community living in Elgin County in approved accommodation (with reporting not less than four times per month). Mr. Stirling has shown some recent improvements and motivation to work with the treatment team and progress through the forensic system. It is still early days for these improvements, but the panel was of the view that it is important to continue this momentum and motivation for Mr. Stirling. Although there is still a lot of work to be done, Dr. Mokhber’s evidence was that Mr. Stirling may be ready to move to the rehabilitation unit in the coming year and progress towards community living. Further, allowing Mr. Stirling an opportunity to enter the community with an Approved Person will assist him with a gradual reintegration into the community.

38The panel is hopeful that Mr. Stirling will continue on his current positive trajectory (including his sobriety which he is very proud of) and put himself in a position where he will be able to utilize these privileges in the upcoming year.

39The panel found that it was important that the hospital retain the ability to approve Mr. Stirling’s housing when he gets to that stage, and also the ability to return him to the hospital quickly in the event of any decompensation or substance use in the community. As such, a Conditional Discharge was not appropriate.