Ontario Review Board
Re: Nathan C. Chauvin
ORB File No: 8159
Hearing held on: Monday, June 9, 2025
Place of hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care 401 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas ON
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. M. D. Segal Members: Dr. T. Verny Dr. S. Wiseman Ms. K. Tomaszewski Ms. C. Plyley
Parties Appearing: Accused: Nathan C. Chauvin Counsel: Mr. A. Andreopoulos
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. D. Rows
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 20, 2025)
Introduction
On September 28, 2022, Nathan Chauvin was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on two counts of mischief under $5000 and one count of uttering threat, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. He is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated December 20, 2023, that detains him at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, St. Joseph’s Health Care London (hereinafter “the Hospital”) with privileges up to and including to live in the community of Elgin and Middlesex in accommodation approved by the person in charge at the Hospital.
The Board convened to review that disposition on December 18, 2024, and was advised that on December 16, 2024, Mr. Chauvin’s counsel was appointed a Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice. Accordingly, the hearing was adjourned until the earliest available date, to permit Mr. Chauvin to retain new counsel. On June 9, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at the Hospital to review the disposition. Mr. Chauvin was present and was represented by counsel throughout the hearing.
At the outset of the hearing the parties consented to a Hospital Report dated November 3, 2024, and an Update to the Hospital report dated May 23, 2025, being entered into evidence as exhibits. They then severally advised the position that the evidence was expected to satisfy the threshold issue, namely that Mr. Chauvin continued to represent a significant risk to the safety of the public. They also each indicated the initial position that a detention order, with the terms discussed below, was necessary and appropriate to manage that risk, having regard to the Board’s primary objective of ensuring the safety of the public as well as the other objectives of attending to Mr. Chauvin’s mental health and other needs including the ultimate objective of reintegration into the community. At the conclusion of the hearing, all parties maintained a joint submission, with changes to the current detention disposition as discussed below.
Having considered the joint submission and the evidence received, and for the reasons set out below, the Board agrees that Mr. Chauvin does represent a significant threat to the safety of the public as that term has been defined in the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625. It further agrees that a detention disposition is necessary and appropriate having regard to the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code and represents the least intrusive option available to manage the risk represented at this time.
Index Offences and Background
- The Hospital Report and the Update contain extensive information about Mr. Chauvin’s background, and his course since the Index Offences. Most of those details need not be repeated in detail in these Reasons. The following excerpts describing the Index Offences and Mr. Chauvin’s background are taken from the Board’s latest Reasons for Disposition, dated January 29, 2024:
Mischief Under
On or about the 5th day of May in the year 20221 at the Municipality of Chatham-Kent in the said Region, did commit mischief by willfully smashing without legal justification or excuses and without colour or right property to with water metre of ENTEGRUS INC the value of which did no[t] exceed five thousand dollars contrary to Section 430(4) of the Criminal Code.
…On May 05, 2021, Mr. Chauvin was agitated for no known reason, began to yell, went over to a cluster of Neptune boxes which were attached to a wall, smashed two of them
off the wall rendering them useless and picked up the pieces and threw them into a nearby dumpster before leaving the area. A witness called 911. Mr. Chauvin saw the witness, called the person names, and threatened to kill the person. He walked through a field to the train tracks. Mr. Chauvin was located a short distance away, arrested and read his rights to counsel and caution and understood them. He was released on Form 9 Appearance Notice.
Utter Threat
Mr. Chauvin was arrested on June 19, 2021. The form documented that Mr. Chauvin on or about the 19th day of June in the year 2021 at the Municipality of Chatham-Kent in the said Region, did by word of mouth knowingly utter a threat to BONNIE PATRICIA-ROSE-LYNN SITZES to cause death… contrary to section 264.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
On June 19, 2021, it is alleged that the victim observed Mr. Chauvin leave through a window of an abandoned house which is next door to her residence. She told him to put the window and board back up, at which point, he told her to go “fuck herself” and he was security for the building. She told him that he was not hired for security. Mr. Chauvin started walking away. She took a photograph of him. Mr. Chauvin then went to her home, kicked over her plants, said he was going to kill her and walked away. The police located him later on a walking bridge, arrested him, read his rights to counsel and caution, took him to the police station for booking and released him.
Mischief Under (second count)
Mr. Chauvin was arrested on August 30, 2021. The form documented that Mr. Chauvin on or about the 28th day of August in the year 2021 at the Municipality of Chatham-Kent in the said Region, did commit mischief by willfully smashing without legal justification or excuse and without colour of right property to with menu board of TIM HORTONS the value of which did not exceed five thousand dollars contrary to Section 430(4) of the Criminal Code.
Background
… Mr. Chauvin had not been taking any prescribed medications but had been using crystal methamphetamine, cocaine and butane and had consumed six beers at the time of the May 5, 2021, index offence. He admitted to experiencing psychotic symptoms at that time, thinking that the hydro boxes were alien, were mind controlling devices and had been put in place by aliens. He said that he was experiencing auditory hallucinations.
…Mr. Chauvin was experiencing delusions and thought the victim of the offence was working with drug dealers to get rid of him. He described hallucinations at the time that included him seeing cars following him at night with knives and guns pulled out and said that he was afraid for his life. He indicated that he had used cocaine and crystal methamphetamine and had consumed a couple of beers and forty ounces of liquor that day.
…at the time of the [menu board] offence he “couldn’t get the voices to shut up.” He said he was experiencing auditory hallucinations that told him that Tim Horton’s was evil and that he had to destroy the menu board because it was recording him. He was not compliant with medication at that time and initially indicated that he had used crystal methamphetamine earlier that day.
The Hospital Report also sets out Mr. Chauvin’s criminal record at pages 5 and 6. It dates to February 2020 and includes Mischiefs, Substance-related offences, and threats. The Hospital Report notes that Mr. Chauvin had fifty-nine police occurrences in 2021.
The Hospital Report is cumulative in nature and contains details as to Mr. Chauvin’s background information, College education in Computer Forensics through Ashworth College in Georgia, and employment history. It notes his source of income as coming from ODSP and indicates that he has experienced behavioral difficulties from a young age. He is currently diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder (rule out Bipolar Disorder I) and Substance Use Disorder.
Evidence at the Hearing
At the beginning of this extended reporting period, Mr. Chauvin was living at the C.K. Clarke Centre, a 24/7 supervised Transitional Rehabilitation Housing Program in London, Ontario. This Centre is managed and operated by St. Leonard’s Community Services. Mr. Chauvin did remarkably well at the C.K. Clarke Centre.
On March 13, 2025, Mr. Chauvin moved from the C.K. Clarke Centre to an independent apartment at 352 Westlake Street, London. He receives ongoing support from the Forensic Supportive Housing Program (FSHP) staff through St. Leonard’s Community Services and the Forensic Outreach Treatment team. Mr. Chauvin’s psychiatric care remains under Dr. Ajay Prakash, Forensic Psychiatrist, and the Forensic Outreach Treatment team.
Dr. Ajay Prakash testified on behalf of the Hospital and adopted the contents of the Hospital Report and the Update.
Dr. Prakash stressed that during the reporting period Mr. Chauvin has done “very well in the 24/7 supervised housing”; “remarkably well in living in the community”; “very well so far in independent housing”; and “remarkably well with respect to not using substances”.
Substance use is a major criminogenic risk factor for Mr. Chauvin. Substance use was a factor in the Index Offences, and in many encounters with law enforcement (59 police occurrences in 2021 related to substance use and homelessness).
The doctor testified that Mr. Chauvin has not used substances since he became involved with the forensic system. He is internally motivated to abstain from substances and values his weekly AA meetings. When he moved to his independent apartment, he independently sought out AA groups in his new community and continued the relationship with his AA sponsor. Mr. Chauvin is now an AA facilitator.
Dr. Prakash addressed the proposed changes to the disposition. The purpose of removing the ‘abstain’ clause from the disposition is to give the Treatment Team an opportunity to assess the strength of Mr. Chauvin’s internal motivation to abstain from substances as he adjusts to living independently in the community.
Although Mr. Chauvin has completed hospital-based substance use prevention programming and is internally motivated to remain abstinent, Dr. Prakash recommended retaining the ‘residential treatment clause’ in the disposition for the upcoming reporting period, as the Treatment Team assesses Mr. Chauvin’s ability to remain abstinent while living independently in the community.
The extension of passes to include indirectly supervised passes for up to seven days is designed to allow Mr. Chauvin to travel to connect with his personal supports in the Wallaceburg area.
The doctor also recommended removing the ‘do not attend’ clause, which includes a Tim Horton’s location in Wallaceburg; an LCBO in Wallaceburg; and the address of a victim of one of the Index Offences. Mr. Chauvin harbours no ill will to the staff at the Tim Hortons or the LCBO and has no desire to attend at the LCBO. The prohibition of attending in these areas does not address any public safety issues.
The victim is a stranger to Mr. Chauvin, and he harbours no ill-will toward them, and has made no attempts to connect with them. Dr. Prakash indicated, however, that the Hospital has not received an updated Victim Impact Statement, and that the Hospital would not object if counsel for the Attorney-General wishes to retain this clause in respect of the victim’s address, pending consultation by counsel for the Attorney-General with the victim.
Dr. Prakash indicated that the Treatment Team did not consider an absolute discharge this year, for the reasons set out on pages 25- 26 of the Hospital Report. It should be noted that a conditional discharge was not considered when the Hospital Report was prepared but was considered after Mr. Chauvin transitioned to independent housing in March 2025. The Treatment Team decided that a detention disposition remained necessary for the following reasons, as set out on pages 25- 26 of the Hospital Report:
The treatment team recommends that Mr. Chauvin continue to be subjected to his current Detention disposition. The treatment team will need to approve his accommodation and requires the warrant of committal. Historically Mr. Chauvin has coped with stressors by abusing drugs, falling into a negative peer group, and becoming socioeconomically deprived. This has led to violence (index offences) and has also led to numerous police occurrences.
As Mr. Chauvin transitions away from his highly supervised environment, stressors will increase. As well, Mr. Chauvin will be further tested with the proposed removal of the abstain clause. The detention order is required to manage his (future) risks.
An alternative disposition (e.g., Conditional discharge) was not considered sufficient due to the reasons outlined above. That is, the hospital requires the ability to approve accommodation, and the warrant of committal to be able to intervene in a preventative manner versus a reactive manner (e.g., Mental Health Act of Ontario). As he integrates into the community more independently, potential stress from new environments may arise. To support this transition, increased liberties and independence should be introduced gradually, carefully balancing his progress with the historical risk factors outlined above.
The treatment team is recommending that clause 2(g) (“to attend and participate in a drug and alcohol rehabilitation treatment program”) remain to account for possible risk of substance relapse as he transitions to more independent living. Clause 3(g) has been removed to further test his ability to abstain from using drugs and alcohol. Clause 3(d) is also being removed as Mr. Chauvin is aware that he had set fire to the family home by leaving a cigarette burning and holds a great deal of remorse around this incident. Furthermore, when considering future employment, it is recommended that this clause be removed. His treatment team recommends having his pass limit increased in 2(e) to account for more visits with family members in the coming year. Clauses 3(f) and (g) have also been removed (no contact orders/not attend) as the person impacted by the index offences is unknown to him, he is unable to recognize this person and demonstrated remorse for his actions. He also has no desire to attend the outlined areas. He also reported that he would not attend these areas as he voiced being banned from most places in the vicinity. He would be content with complying to attend other areas in distance from these areas. This will allow more flexibility for him to walk around the community promoting further integration.
In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Prakash agreed to undertake a review of the need for the medication ‘propranolol’. Dr. Prakash indicated that the differential diagnosis (Schizoaffective Disorder (rule out Bipolar Disorder I) has no impact on Mr. Chauvin’s treatment regime.
No further evidence was adduced by the parties.
Submissions
At the end of the hearing the parties renewed their submissions as presented at the hearing’s outset. All agreed that the evidence established that Mr. Chauvin continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. All agreed that a detention disposition was necessary and appropriate to manage that risk, and that only a detention disposition could satisfy the objectives set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code at this time.
The parties adopted the Hospital’s recommendations as set out in the Hospital Report, with the exception of the removal of the ‘do not attend’ provision in relation to the victim’s address. The parties agreed that this clause should remain in the disposition in relation to the victim’s address. Counsel for the Attorney-General indicated that he would reach out to the victim to discuss this.
Analysis and Conclusion
The panel agrees with the parties’ joint submission.
With respect to the threshold issue of significant risk, the panel engaged in its own independent consideration as to whether the risk posed by Mr. Chauvin attained to the level of significance described by the Supreme Court of Canada in Winko.
The panel noted that Mr. Chauvin has a major mental disorder, namely Schizoaffective Disorder, symptoms of which have led to violent behaviours historically and which has yet to fully assessed in an independent environment, with its additional stressors. Mr. Chauvin’s community reintegration progress is in the early stages. While doing remarkably well, Mr. Chauvin has been living independently for less than three months. Prior to March 2025, he had not lived a self-sufficient life independently due to years of precarious housing and chronic housing deprivation. Mr. Chauvin has an extensive history of substance use, which has been connected to his psychotic symptoms and violent behaviours in the past. He has maintained abstinence, but this has yet to be assessed in the context of both independent living and the removal of the abstain clause. Mr. Chauvin has limited personal and professional support systems aside from his Forensic and FSHP support, although it is to be hoped that his uncle will become an Approved Person during the upcoming reporting period.
In arriving at the conclusion that the risk is significant in terms of seriousness of physical or psychological harm that would be caused by reoffending behavior, the panel considered the Index Offences and the hallucinations and delusions that led to the offending behavior. This evidence supports the conclusion that the harm that would be caused by future violent offences would be serious, both psychologically and physically. Accordingly, the panel concludes that the level of risk is significant in satisfaction of the Winko test.
Regarding the disposition, the panel also agrees that a conditional discharge is not realistic currently. A detention disposition is both necessary and appropriate. In arriving at this conclusion, the panel has considered the primary objective of assuring the safety of the public, as well as the other objectives set out in the Criminal Code dealing with providing for Mr. Chauvin’s mental health and well-being, including the ultimate objective of reintegration into the community.
Mr. Chauvin has made remarkable progress during the reporting period. He has developed increased insight across all domains and has maintained abstinence from substances. He is actively seeking employment and has expressed the goal of reducing and eventually quitting smoking cigarettes. He is capable of making treatment decisions and has become independent in his oral medication regime. He has been compliant with all non-pharmacological treatment and cooperative with his Outreach and FSHP team in engaging in all aspects of his rehabilitation. These positive achievements are significant, and the Board congratulates Mr. Chauvin on his progress in integration into the community.
Nevertheless, it is early days in Mr. Chauvin’s integration into independent living in the community. The Treatment Team has not yet had the opportunity to assess how Mr. Chauvin will respond to stressors in the community as he transitions to fully independent living. As noted above, Mr. Chauvin has not lived a self-sufficient life independently dues to years of precarious housing and chronic housing deprivation. He has only lived without 24/7 supervision for three months.
In the context of the removal of the abstain clause and given the significant role of substances in the Index Offences, the Hospital requires the ability to bring Mr. Chauvin to the Hospital quickly if Mr. Chauvin is unable to maintain his abstinence from substances while he adapts to independent living.
With respect to the terms of the disposition, the panel concluded that it is necessary and appropriate to maintain the ‘do not attend’ clause in relation to the address of the victim for the purpose of reducing the risk of psychological harm to the victim. The panel encourages the office of the Attorney-General to contact the victim to determine the level of comfort the victim has with the removal of this clause and to have this information available to the Board prior to the next annual hearing.
With respect to the other recommended changes to the disposition, the panel agrees with the reasons for the changes as set out in the Hospital Report at page 26, and as set out above in these Reasons.
Accordingly, the Board concludes that Mr. Chauvin continues to represent a risk of significant harm to the safety of the public and that a detention disposition is necessary and appropriate to manage that risk currently.
In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the joint position and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Prakash and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Mr. Chauvin’s mental condition, his reintegration into society and other needs.
The Board congratulates Mr. Chauvin on his remarkable progress and wishes him every success in the upcoming year.
DATED this 20th day of June 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. K. Tomaszewski Legal Member
______________________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board