Ontario Review Board
Re: Dexter Bailey, Jr.
ORB File No: 5629
Hearing held on: Friday, June 6, 2025
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks
Members Dr. S. Chatterjee
Dr. M. Kalia
Mr. D. D’Intino
Mr. S. Duffy
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Dexter Bailey, Jr.
Counsel: Ms. J. Boissonneault
The Person in Charge of Hospital: Counsel: Mr. K. Dow
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR ISPOSITION
(Dated June 18, 2025)
Introduction:
On May 14, 2010, Dexter Bailey, Jr. was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder ((“NCR”) on charges of assault causing bodily harm and robbery using a firearm, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code"). Mr. Bailey is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the "Board") dated June 11, 2024, detaining him within the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores" or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge. Mr. Bailey was also ordered to abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs, excluding cannabinoids, which was to be purchased from a retail outlet licensed by the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.
On June 6, 2025, a panel of the Board convened to review Mr. Bailey's existing Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Bailey was not in attendance at the hearing. His counsel, Ms. Boissonneault, advised the Board that Mr. Bailey requested permission to be absent from the hearing due to significant physical disabilities which would make attendance both difficult and painful. Ms. Boissonneault advised that she had fulsome instructions from her client and was content to proceed in his absence. Accordingly, pursuant to s. 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code, Mr. Bailey was excused from the hearing.
The issues to be considered are whether Mr. Bailey continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and, if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition having regard to the criteria in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons set out below, this Board concluded that Mr. Bailey continue to pose a significant threat to public safety and that his existing Disposition remained necessary and appropriate.
Positions of the Parties:
- Counsel for the hospital submitted that Mr. Bailey continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition was