Re Claudio Villanova, 2025 CanLII 47493

Re: Claudio Villanova

ORB File No: 8205

Hearing held on: Wednesday, April 23, 2025

Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Silver Members: Dr. R. Wood Hill Dr. G. Stones Mr. D. D’Intino Mr. J. Cyr

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Claudio Villanova Counsel: Ms. J. Boissonneault

The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Mr. K. Dow

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. T. Hewitt

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated May 22, 2025)

Introduction

1. Mr. Villanova was found not criminally responsible on December 23, 2022, for the offence of possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.

2. He is subject to a Detention Order Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated May 17, 2024, which detains him within the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (OSCMHS or Ontario Shores), with privileges up to passes for up to 12 hours to enter the community within a 150-kilometre radius of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge.

3. On April 23, 2025, the Board convened a hearing in person at Ontario Shores to conduct an annual hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. The purpose of this hearing was to determine whether Mr. Villanova remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, to determine the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive means to protect the public, in consideration of the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Code.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses:

• Schizoid Personality Disorder;
• Schizotypal Personality Disorder Traits
• Alcohol use disorder, moderate, in sustained remission in a controlled environment;
• Other Hallucinogen Use Disorder; and
• Moderate Psychopathic Traits

Index Offences:

4. The details of the index offences are extracted from the Hospital Report at page 2, which are as follows:

“ On July 24, 2022, Mr. Villanova attended his grandparents’ home with a rifle in the intent of killing them to assist his family financially. His uncle interrupted him taking the firearm away from Mr. Villanova. He was subsequently taken to Markham Stouffville Hospital (MSH) by his family for a mental health assessment.

During a treatment with his doctor, he disclosed that he purchased the firearm to kill his grandparents.

On August 2, 2022, York Regional Police attended MSH and arrested Mr. Villanova charging him with Attempted Murder, Utter Death Threats, and Weapons Dangerous.”

Without Prejudice Position of the Parties:

5. At the commencement of the hearing, Mr. Dow presented the Hospital’s position, which was that a Detention Order Disposition with privileges up to residing in the community in an accommodation, approved by the Person in Charge, as well as a change to condition 2(e) to allow for unsupervised community passes of up to 72 hours in duration, was the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive Disposition.

6. Mr. Hewitt, for the Attorney General, agreed with this position.

7. Counsel for the accused, Ms. Boissonneault, also agreed, and thus, the parties presented a Joint Position for the Panel’s consideration.

Evidence at the Hearing:

8. The Board had available the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Exhibits, and oral evidence from Dr. Alioglu Karaliyan.

9. Dr. Alioglu Karaliyan testified that Mr. Villanova had a good reporting year. He is residing on a general forensic unit at this time. He used his privileges appropriately, did not use any illicit substances, and did not have any AWOLs or incidents of violent behaviour.

10. Dr. Alioglu Karaliyan stated that Mr. Villanova is not taking any medications, as they are not required for his current diagnoses. Treatment has primarily focused on psychotherapy and skills therapy. While Mr. Villanova’s insight remains underdeveloped, there has been some partial improvement. The doctor believes that Mr. Villanova requires some interpersonal skills training in the coming year.

11. Finally, Dr. Alioglu Karaliyan testified that there is a realistic chance of Mr. Villanova being discharged into the community in the coming year, and that an occupational therapy assessment will be needed before that occurs.

12. In response to questions from a panel member, it was jointly determined that Mr. Villanova’s risk to his paternal grandparents (the intended victims of the principal index offence) is minimal; in the interval since the index offences, his grandfather has died, and his grandmother has relocated to Italy.

13. In response to questions from Ms. Boissonneault, the doctor confirmed that Mr. Villanova completed some family intervention therapy with his family members in the past year, and that his family members are a protective factor for him. Furthermore, Mr. Villanova has engaged well in a number of both group and individual therapy programs. He has also been involved in the horticulture program and also volunteers at the hospital gift shop.

Analysis and Conclusions

14. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions from the parties, the Panel accepts the joint submission position: Mr. Villanova poses a significant threat to the safety of the public and a Detention Order Disposition with the aforementioned privileges is the necessary and appropriate and the least onerous and least restrictive option in consideration of all of the circumstances.

15. Mr. Villanova is diagnosed with a personality disorder and a number of challenging personality traits, as well as some moderate psychopathic traits. Mr. Villanova still struggles with insight. In the past, he has demonstrated a lack of remorse for and minimized the impact of the index offences. Last year, he had an AWOL incident and seemingly did not appreciate the seriousness of his conduct.

16. Mr. Villanova’s risk to the public stems from his personality structure, including his psychopathic traits, impulsivity and lack of insight into the risk of his behaviours. Significant threat was not contested by any of the parties. Upon independent review of the evidence, the Board concurred that the threshold was met in the context of the factors set out in Winko v. British Columbia. The reoffence scenario postulated in the risk assessment was based on static factors and was considered likely to transpire, particularly given his recent absconding and minimizing behaviours both recently and at the time of the index offence. The panel unanimously concluded that Mr. Villanova remained a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the risk entailed a likelihood that he would commit further criminal offences causing serious physical and psychological harm.

17. The Panel unanimously finds that, absent a Detention Order and the strict oversight of the Hospital, it is likely that Mr. Villanova would disengage from treatment and resume his substance use.

18. Therefore, the Panel agrees with the Joint Submission, that Mr. Villanova poses a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a Detention Order with privileges up to and including residing in an accommodation approved by the Person in Charge, is the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive Disposition in consideration of all of the circumstances.

DATED this 22nd day of May 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. D. D’Intino Legal Member

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board