Ontario Review Board
Re: Derek Halat
ORB File No: 4773
Hearing held on: Monday, May 5, 2025
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care 500 Church Street, Penetanguishene
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. M. Segal (via Zoom) Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Ms. M. Chamberlain Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing: Accused: Derek Halat Counsel: Mr. A. Schieck
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 11, 2025)
Introduction:
[1]. Derek Halat, age 48, was found not guilty by reason of mental disorder on May 7, 2007, in relation to charges of assault, failure to comply with probation order (x2), and assault with a weapon, contrary to the Criminal Code.
[2]. On May 5, 2025, Mr. Halat appeared before the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) from the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (the “hospital”) for his annual hearing. The Board had before it as Exhibit 1 the Hospital Report dated March 28, 2025, and the most recent Disposition and most recent Reasons for Disposition.
[3]. In preliminary positions the hospital recommended that the current Disposition be maintained including a transfer to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”). Crown counsel agreed but would recommend community living. Mr. Schieck, for the accused, submitted than a conditional discharge should be imposed with the addition of community living. Mr. Halat’s goal was to return to Poland. Mr. Schieck conceded significant threat.
Current Diagnosis
[4].
- Schizophrenia,
- Opioid Use Disorder, Severe, in remission in a controlled environment
- Alcohol Use Disorder, Severe, in remission in a controlled environment
- Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Index Offences
[5]. The circumstances of the index offences are taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition, as follows:
“On July 25, 2006, the police were called to the residence of Mr. Halat's father, who informed them his son had been drinking wine and had approached him and accused him of stealing his driver's license and other documents. His son punched him in the face and walked away.
On September 4, 2006, Mr. Halat’s father was in the garage of his home in Waterloo when he was met by his son. They entered the residence, and the accused began accusing his father of having connections with President Bush and demanded he arrange to have hostages in Iraq released from custody. Mr. Halat put a rope around his father's neck and began strangling him. He eventually released the rope, whereupon his father ran from the residence and contacted police by cell phone. At the time Mr. Halat was subject to terms of probation requiring him to abstain from the consumption of alcohol and to keep the peace and be of good behaviour.”
Background
[6]. A good review of Mr. Halat’s background is found in last year’s Reasons:
“His criminal record spans the years 1999 to 2007 and includes convictions for impaired driving and driving with excess blood alcohol in 1999, assault (three charges), assault police officer, and two convictions for failing to comply with probation. He has a grade 9 education and has spent most of his adult life unemployed. He has a significant history of substance abuse from a young age, including alcohol, cannabis, opiates, and psilocybin, as well as cocaine and the over-use of prescription medication. The Hospital Report at page 7 indicates he started to sniff glue around the age of seven or eight and began to drink alcohol at the age of eight.
His psychiatric history before being found not criminally responsible includes paranoid and delusional ideation which resulted in hospital admissions. Further admissions occurred as a result of court-ordered psychiatric assessments in relation to pending criminal charges.
Mr. Halat has remained under the jurisdiction of the Board since being found not criminally responsible in 2007 and the Hospital Report sets out his treatment over the next seventeen years.
He is incapable to consent to psychiatric treatment and his mother acts as his substitute decision maker. Mr. Halat's lack of insight and potential for instability, as well as past treatment nonadherence, necessitates treatment with injectable medication. His substitute decision maker is opposed to a trial of Clozapine.
Mr. Halat's thought process and thought content are generally confabulated and preoccupied; he believes staff are part of a conspiracy, that he is a secret agent in the employ of CSIS and/or the CIA, and that he is a very powerful, influential man with ties to -- among other groups -- various mafias. He expresses many paranoid delusions, persecutory delusions involving staff, as well as delusions of grandeur. His impulse control and judgment are described as poor, although he calms himself down with staff assistance before any physical aggression occurs.”
Evidence at Hearing
[7]. Dr. Hudson, the patient’s psychiatrist, testified. Dr. Hudson indicated that overall Mr. Halat does well on his current medications and is fairly stable. Mr. Halat continues to have well encapsulated delusions.
[8]. Mr. Halat’s mother is his substitute decision maker. She is not in favour of changes to medication. She is not in favour of a trial of clozapine although Dr. Hudson wishes to proceed with that drug.
[9]. Mr. Halat is on the Beausoleil wing which is the most liberal unit in the hospital. He has C4 privileges which gives him up to two hours off his ward at a time.
[10]. There have been no management issues. There has been an absence of violence since 2020.
[11]. Dr. Hudson has reservations about community living in view of the addiction history and the lack of engagement in substance therapy. Mr. Halat’s position is that he has been substance free for 10 years and therefore does not need relapse prevention. If substances become an issue, which Dr. Hudson is very concerned about, the doctor indicated that Mr. Halat’s mental state would deteriorate, and he would be prone to committing acts of violence such as the index offences.
[12]. If on a conditional discharge, the only likely place he could reside would be with his father, which is not ideal, he being the victim of the index offences. The Mental Health Act is inadequate in Mr. Halat’s case to bring him back in expeditiously and to maintain him in hospital to achieve stability.
[13]. Dr. Hudson is not in favour of a community living clause. If unwell Dr. Hudson was of the view that Mr. Halat would be unlikely to seek assistance. He has little insight into his illness. Mr. Halat would be unlikely to view his symptoms as an illness. To live in the community there would have to be a psychiatrist and team which does not exist for him at present. There is no concrete plan to live outside hospital. Bearing in mind the lack of interest in substance relapse prevention therapy, Dr. Hudson could not endorse community living at all.
[14]. While not impossible to acquire illicit substances in hospital, Dr. Hudson said it is quite difficult to do so at Waypoint. It would be important to consider substance abuse therapy before going to a less secure hospital where substances would be more easily accessible.
[15]. Mr. Halat has been much improved over the last two years. A sticking point is how dismissive he is to return to therapy.
[16]. Mr. Halat could apply for C5 privileges which would mean four hours off ward at time. However, all efforts to interest him in activities such as recreational, vocational or educational have been rejected. Mr. Halat has declined to go outside the security perimeter area.
[17]. Last year Mr. Halat was apparently sixth on the list for transfer to CAMH. Dr. Hudson is not sure where Mr. Halat now stands on that list.
[18]. Dr. Hudson agreed it would be useful to revisit if Mr. Halat was interested in possible transfers to other less secure forensic hospitals apart from CAMH.
[19]. The hospital has reached out to CAMH five times this past year to inquire about Mr. Halat’s status but has not received a reply. The hospital is going to escalate its inquiries up the chain of command at CAMH.
[20]. Dr. Hudson did not view Mr. Halat as suffering from PTSD.
[21]. Final submissions mirrored opening submissions. Mr. Schieck recognized that a conditional discharge may not be the most realistic pathway. Mr. Schieck acknowledged that he had not sent Rule 13 inquiries to any other less secure forensic hospitals apart from CAMH.
Analysis
[22]. Significant threat to the safety of the community was conceded. It is amply supported by the Hospital Report. The Board is of the view that a conditional discharge is not realistic at present. Mr. Halat requires structure in a hospital setting. There is no plan for him to live in the community. Mr. Halat requires an Assertive Community Team headed by a psychiatrist. The hospital needs to approve accommodation. There has been no discussion of where he would live. Living in the community is not appropriate currently bearing in mind his dismissive attitude towards substance abuse therapy. Such therapy is important to move forward including transfer to a less secure hospital where substances are a greater challenge. If Mr. Halat became unwell, he would not recognize his symptoms, and would not seek help, and would not voluntarily return to hospital. To move ahead, engaging in therapy and more involvement in recreation, vocational training, and/or education, would be beneficial.
[23]. It would also potentially be beneficial for both the hospital and Mr. Halat’s counsel to canvas whether other last secure hospitals maybe prepared to take the patient in addition to CAMH. We wish Mr. Halat well.
DATED this 11^th^ day of June 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. M.D. Segal Alternate Chairperson Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board