Ontario Review Board
Re: McElman Elman ORB File No: 7758 Hearing held on: Thursday, April 10, 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. C. Fromstein Members: Dr. L.E. Cappe Dr. C. Young Hon. C. Nelson Ms. B. Naegele
Parties Appearing: Accused: McElman Elman Counsel: Mr. J. Berman The Person in charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. S. R. Zelaya Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. V. Culp
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 3, 2025)
Introduction
On July 24, 2020, McElman Elman was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of breach of recognizance (x2) and criminal harassment (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code, (the “Code”).
Mr. Elman is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board, (the “Board”) dated February 28, 2024, detaining him at the Forensic Service of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”/”hospital”) subject to conditions and privileges including community living in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On April 10, 2025, the Board convened a hearing, pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Code, to conduct the annual review of the current disposition.
Ms. Rosales Zelaya acted on behalf of the hospital; Ms. V. Culp represented the Attorney General, and Mr. J. Berman was counsel for Mr. Elman who was present at the hearing.
The issue before the Board is whether Mr. Elman continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672. 54 of the Code.
Initial Positions
- The hospital submitted that a conditional discharge subject to various conditions set out on page 27 of the Hospital Report, including a consent to treatment clause, was the necessary and appropriate and least onerous and least restrictive disposition available to Mr. Elman. The Crown deferred her submission until after hearing the evidence. Mr. Berman joined the hospital and agreed with the terms being proposed. He conceded the issue of significant threat.
Finding
- For the reasons that follow, the Board finds that Mr. Elman continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and that his disposition should be changed to one of a conditional discharge with a consent to treatment clause and other conditions set out in the Hospital Report.
Evidentiary Record
- Dr. Pearce authored the Hospital Report dated, April 10, 2025, Exhibit 1, and he testified on behalf of the hospital. No further evidence was offered at the hearing.
Background
Mr. Elman’s personal and psychiatric history, including the details of his mental disorder and treatment since being found NCR, are described in detail in the Hospital Report. Briefly, Mr. Elman is 32 years of age, single and has no dependants. Mr. Elman reports using cannabis on a daily basis since the age of 14.
Mr. Elman’s current diagnoses are schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type and cannabis use disorder. He is capable of consenting to treatment. He is supported by ODSP and living in approved housing in the community.
The Hospital Report states that Mr. Elman had no criminal record predating the index offences which occurred between May and November, 2018. However, he self-reports having previously engaged in shoplifting while acting on impulse.
The following details of the circumstances surrounding the index offences, the victim being a former employee of CAMH, are excerpted from the Hospital Report:
The victim in this matter is quite fearful of the accused. She has never had a personal, professional, nor a medical relationship with the accused. This harassment has been ongoing off and on since August 10th, 2015. The victim swore to a private information in which the accused entered into an 810 Peace Bond that commenced on October 26th, 2017 and is scheduled to end on October 26th, 2018. The main condition is quite clear "Have no contact or communication, directly or indirectly with Alanna Bridgman".
The victim is extremely concerned for her personal safety!
On Sunday May 20th, 2018 at approximately 11:26 PM, the accused messaged the victim's sister and stated "I really love your sister Alanna". The sister then contacted the victim to advise her of the contact. (Charge #1 & #2)
On Wednesday August 1st, 2018 at approximately 1:08 AM, the accused messaged the victim's mother and stated in part, "I am the number 1 admirer of your daughter, Alanna Christina". The mother then advised her daughter of the contact. (Charge #3 & #4)”
Following the NCR finding, Mr. Elman was followed by Dr. Pearce in the Forensic Outpatient Service. He was admitted to hospital in March, 2021 following his use of cannabis, and remained until the beginning of June that year. He was readmitted to hospital for cannabis use and failing to report to hospital at the end of June, where he remained until January, 2022. While in hospital, Mr. Elman shared that using cannabis increased the frequency and intensity of auditory hallucinations and fantasies involving the victim of the index offence. Moreover, Mr. Elman continued to have problems appreciating how cannabis use increased his risk of reoffence and he tended to minimize its negative effects.
As noted in the Hospital Report, Mr. Elman was discharged back to his shared Ecuhome residence in January, 2022. He remained in the community in his apartment until he attended at CAMH on the evening of December 21, 2023, following the death of his roommate.
Evidence at the Hearing
The evidence at the hearing was provided by Dr. Pearce who is Mr. Elman’s treating psychiatrist. Additional evidence was contained in the Hospital Report which was authored by Dr. Pearce and made an exhibit at the hearing.
There was an update to the Hospital Report. Mr. Elman wished to enroll in George Brown College’s Craft Worker Program but he was not accepted by the College. Notwithstanding this rejection, Mr. Elman is doing well. He was discharged into the community to a new Ecuhome residence about a year ago. He presents as cooperative, is medically compliant and rarely displays any psychotic symptoms.
Dr. Pearce testified that Mr. Elman is now ready for a conditional discharge. When issues arose in December, 2024, Mr. Elman attended at the hospital voluntarily. His housing is very close to the hospital which makes it easy for him to attend. He has a very good rapport with his team.
Following his discharge (April, 2024), he met with his FOPS team twice a week. The only negative issue is that he is often late for his appointments. Dr. Pearce does not see this as a major problem. The plan for Mr. Elman this year is to help him with his life goals. He did work as a part-time cook for half a year in a hotel close to the hospital but left that job. While he continues to use cannabis, he has, over the past year, decreased his usage partly because of expense. Dr. Pearce testified that the use of cannabis affects his motivation but not his mental state.
All-in-all, Mr. Elman has had a stable year with very few psychotic symptoms. He discusses his symptoms with the staff when they arise.
In answer to a question from Ms. Culp, Dr. Pearce indicated that Mr. Elman’s cannabis restriction was removed over the last couple of years. He now smokes two to three times a week consuming about half a gram at a time. He has also had a number of negative screens. Dr. Pearce states that this lifestyle and usage has not increased his risk of violence. Dr. Pearce attributes this to medical adherence. However, he also states that, without medication, Mr. Elman would likely experience psychosis. Mr. Elman takes his medication by long-acting injectable every three weeks. This has been changed from every four weeks which seems to be better for Mr. Elman. Ecuhome, where Mr. Elman resides, has a worker who visits every day of the week (Monday-Friday). If Mr. Elman’s mental state was to change, Dr. Pearce is confident the worker would know and report the issue. As far as permanency of housing is concerned, Dr. Pearce testified that he thought there is little chance that Mr. Elman would leave his current residence in the future.
In answer to a further question from Ms. Culp, Dr. Pearce advised that Mr. Elman had no fixation on the victim of the index offence and has not had any fixation in over a couple of years. A conditional discharge will be sufficient to manage Mr. Elman’s risk. In the past he has come to the hospital voluntarily when feeling poorly. Except for the issue of tardiness, it is Dr. Pearce’s evidence that Mr. Elman would now come to the hospital voluntarily if he started to feel unwell.
In answer to questions from Mr. Berman, Dr. Pearce stated that medication has helped Mr. Elman gain insight. While he still occasionally gets hallucinations, they do not relate to the victim of the index offence. He now recognizes that the victim is not his spouse. He remains content with his medication and has not asked that it be changed. Although he now has a relatively new FOPS team (late 2024), he has tolerated this change well. It is Dr. Pearce’s opinion, that given Mr. Elman’s progress over the last year, a conditional discharge is now appropriate, as there is confidence now in the provisions of the Mental Health Act if he were to begin to decompensate.
Finally, Dr. Pearce testified that there is no need to stipulate an address as a condition in the disposition as Mr. Elman would cooperate with the team if he were ever to want a change in residence.
Submissions
- The parties maintained their initial positions. Ms. Culp, on behalf of the Crown, adopted the joint position that a conditional discharge, with a consent to treatment clause, was now warranted.
Conclusion
The Board agrees with the parties’ position on significant threat and finds, independently, that Mr. Elman remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.
Mr. Elman has been diagnosed as having schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type. Schizoaffective disorder is a major mental disorder that is characterized by both symptoms of psychosis (hallucinations and delusions) and mood symptoms (depression or mania). Schizoaffective disorder typically follows a lifelong episodic course and is associated with high rates of relapse. Mr. Elman has bipolar type, which is characterized by episodic periods of expansive or irritable mood, grandiosity, decreased need for sleep, increased talkativeness, racing thoughts, being distractable, increase in activity or agitation, and engaging in activities with negative consequences (such as excessive spending). Psychotic symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions, are usually episodic, but in some cases follow an unremitting course. Positive symptoms of his illness are evident on occasion.
The Board also endorses the re-offence scenario set out at page 25 of the Hospital Report as follows:
“Mr. Elman’s risk arises from him harassing the victim due to erotomanic delusions, which he held for half a decade, arising from a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder. He has not been physically violent, but has caused significant fear and distress in his actions. Absent close and mandated supervision, he would fail to take his antipsychotic medication and attend for regular follow-up. His use of substances may further escalate. In those circumstances, he would become increasingly psychotic and disinhibited. There would be a high risk of re-offence and his behavior would very likely cause significant psychological harm to members of the public. Of note, a small but significant proportion of individuals who engage in harassing or stalking behaviour escalate to physical violence towards the object of their harassment. Finally, the content of the delusions that he holds may change over time, for example as a result of decompensation of mental illness due to substance use or non-compliance with medication, or he may feel angry or slighted by repeated rejection. Under these circumstances, the risk of physical violence would escalate.”
Having heard the evidence, the Board agrees with the parties that a conditional discharge is warranted and should replace the present detention order. The conditions need not contain a fixed address but should contain a reporting clause of no less than once every two weeks. In addition, Mr. Elman should abstain from the non-medical use of alcohol, drugs or other intoxicants save and except for cannabis or cannabis derived products from a legal Ontario dispensary. He should continue to supply urine samples or breath samples and refrain from possessing weapons. As well, he should advise the person in charge or his/her designate in advance of any absence from his residence of more than 24 hours. Mr. Elman should also notify, in writing, the person in charge or his/her designate and the Board, of any change of existing address or telephone number. He should also continue to refrain from contacting or communicating with Alanna Bridgman. His privileges can involve travel outside the GTA with an itinerary approved by the person in charge or his/her designate. Finally, with his consent, he should take treatment pursuant to s. 672.55(1) of the Criminal Code.
The Board is pleased to learn of the progress Mr. Elman has made in transitioning into the community and congratulates him.
In coming to its conclusions, the Board has considered its responsibility pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Code to make a disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances, taking into account the safety of the public, which is the paramount consideration, the mental condition of the accused, his reintegration into society, and his other needs.
DATED this 3rd day of June, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Hon. C. Nelson Legal Member
__________________ Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board