Re: Catherine M. Cummings
ORB File No: 8640
Hearing held on: Friday, May 30, 2025
Place of hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus Hamilton, Ontario
Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Clapp
Members: Dr. M. Attia Dr. T. Stirpe Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Ms. R. Chopra
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Catherine M. Cummings Counsel: Mr. A. Confente
Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. I. Shaikh
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 26, 2025)
Introduction:
On September 17, 2024, Catherine M. Cummings was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of dangerous operation causing death, contrary to the Criminal Code. The court did not make a Disposition and referred the matter to the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) for an initial hearing. At the time of the hearing, Ms. Cummings was living in the community.
Pre-hearing conferences were held by the Board on November 13, 2024, January 6, 2025, January 24, 2025, March 3, 2025, March 17, 2025, and April 22, 2025. A risk assessment was conducted at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus (“SJHCH” or the “hospital’) on an out of custody basis on November 20, 2024.
On May 30, 2025 a panel of the Board convened at SJHCH to conduct Ms. Cummings’ initial Disposition hearing pursuant to ss. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code. Ms. Cummings attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Mr. A. Confente.
The panel had the documents that were submitted as the Record, as well ten Exhibits which included the Disposition Hearing Outcome dated September 17, 2024, the Agreed Statement of Facts, an Assessment Order dated April 11, 2024, documents related to the collision reconstruction, transcripts from interviews in June 2023, the transcript from the NCR hearing on September 17, 2024, and an Assessment Report dated June 13, 2024 (Exhibits 1-8). A Risk Assessment Report dated December 20, 2024 was Exhibit 9. The panel had also received Victim Impact Statements (“VIS”) from seven individuals who were family and friends of the deceased victim, Jeff Robson. These were marked collectively as Exhibit 10, and most of the individuals read their VIS at the hearing, with one person being too distraught to read theirs so another family member did so.1 In addition to the documentary evidence, Dr. Gary A. Chaimowitz gave evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Ms. Cummings meets the test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition, taking into account the four factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Positions of the Parties:
The parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions at the outset of the hearing. Ms. Barney, on behalf of the hospital, took the position that Ms. Cummings represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and recommended that she be detained at the Forensic Psychiatry Program at SJHCH with privileges up to and including community living in Southern Ontario in accommodation approved by the person in charge (including the standard terms and conditions for privileges related to passes in hospital), with a reporting requirement of not less than once per month. Ms. Barney stated that there should also be requirements that Ms. Cummings abstain from the use of alcohol and drugs, and be required to provide urine and breath samples for testing. Ms. Barney advised that the hospital was also seeking a driving prohibition.
Mr. Shaikh supported the hospital’s position on behalf of the Attorney General. Mr. Confente stated that his instructions were not to contest the issue of significant threat, and to join in the recommendations made by the hospital. There was therefore a joint submission before the panel.
Findings:
- For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Ms. Cummings meets the threshold test of significant threat to the safety of the public, and agreed with the joint submission that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is that she be detained at the Forensic Psychiatry Program at SJHCH with the terms and conditions as recommended by the hospital, specifically including a driving prohibition.
Index Offence:
Exhibit 2 was an Agreed Statement of Fact that was relied upon at the NCR hearing on September 17, 2024. Based on that document, the circumstances of the index offence can be summarized as follows. On June 2, 2023 at approximately 2:50 p.m., Ms. Cummings was driving southbound on Nassagaweya-Esquesing Townline when she collided with Jeff Robson who was driving his motorcycle eastbound on 25 Side Road. The motorcycle had the right of way and there were no adverse road or weather conditions. Ms. Cummings entered the intersection at a high rate of speed (over 100 km/h) without slowing or stopping, and failed to stop at a stop sign at the intersection prior to the collision. Mr. Robson was pronounced deceased at the scene by paramedics. Ms. Cummings was transported to hospital with non-life threatening injuries.
Shortly prior to the collision, Ms. Cummings drove her vehicle into a ditch nearby after failing to stop at a stop sign. Witnesses helped her move her car from the ditch and watched her speed off.
At the time of the incident, Ms. Cummings told police that she sped out of control, went through a stop sign, and hit someone. On June 6, 2023, Ms. Cummings told police that she did not remember anything, that she was diagnosed with schizophrenia, and referenced hearing voices. During the assessments conducted in June and November 2024, Ms. Cummings stated that she believed that she was an actress in a film and her director was giving her cues and instructions. Her character was named “Caitlyn”, and she portrayed a woman with mental health issues that was rising to success.
Background:
The Risk Assessment Report (Exhibit 9) outlines Ms. Cummings’ personal history and background in detail and will not be repeated here. Briefly summarized, Ms. Cummings is currently 60 years old. She is single with no children. Ms. Cummings was born in Grimsby, Ontario and was raised by her adoptive parents, who are now both deceased. She has one younger brother. They had a good childhood and their parents were caring and loving. Ms. Cummings spent much of her time outside of school at a local barn where she cared for horses and participated in jumping competitions and barrel racing. Ms. Cummings completed grade 12 and then attended CDI College in Toronto where she completed a program in cardiovascular technology.
Ms. Cummings left the family home at age 22 and moved to Waterdown where she lived independently in a mobile home. She then lived at various times in Burlington, Aurora, Tottenham, King City, Brantford, and Milton. She lived in Tottenham the longest, for approximately 18 years, where she lived with her partner and looked after her own horses. Ms. Cummings reported having four male partners over the years, some of whom she lived with for periods of time.
Ms. Cummings worked in the field of cardiovascular technology for one year, and then worked as an administrative assistant, facilities coordinator, and project accountant for a construction engineering team. She quit working as an administrative assistant in 2023 prior to the index offence. She is currently supported by the Canada Pension Plan (recently transitioned from the Ontario Disability Support Program).
At the age of 18, Ms. Cummings was in a horse riding accident where she fractured her arm and multiple ribs, and also hit her head and injured her back. She subsequently developed chronic back pain, and was prescribed Percocet for many years.
In the period of time leading up to the index offence, Ms. Cummings quit her job, endorsed stress related to ending a long-term romantic relationship, was experiencing fainting episodes, and was acting strangely. She was discharged from hospital approximately 10 days before the index offence after receiving treatment for a psychotic episode.
Ms. Cummings currently lives with her brother in Ancaster.
Criminal History:
- Ms. Cummings does not have a criminal record.
Psychiatric History:
The Risk Assessment Report included detailed information about Ms. Cummings’ psychiatric history. In brief, her first psychiatric admission was in June 2012 after she required police intervention because she was running along a highway after driving and leaving her vehicle. She reported persecutory auditory hallucinations, significant weight loss, racing thoughts, elevated energy levels, sleep disturbances, difficulty concentrating, and increased alcohol intake. Ms. Cummings responded well to treatment with antipsychotic medication and was diagnosed with a psychotic disorder, with a differential diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder with psychotic features. Ms. Cummings then self-presented to hospital in January 2013 after stopping her medications and experiencing similar symptoms. She again improved with medication, and was diagnosed with Schizophreniform Disorder, Alcohol Use Disorder, Alcohol Induced Psychotic Disorder with Hallucinations, and Mixed Personality Disorder.
The Risk Assessment Report noted that Ms. Cummings was referred by her family doctor to a psychiatrist, Dr. S. Sharma, due to psychotic symptoms (including auditory and command hallucinations). It appears that Ms. Cummings had one appointment with Dr. Sharma in January 2016 but did not follow-up. Ms. Cummings did not have further contact with psychiatric services until April 30, 2023 when she was brought to hospital by police after she drove into the driveway of a random residence and refused to engage with anyone or move her vehicle. Ms. Cummings denied experiencing any paranoia or hallucinations on assessment.
Ms. Cummings was admitted to Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital from May 15-23, 2023. Her friends had requested a wellness check, and police observed her “rolling around the front lawn of her house naked.” She became violent with paramedics and required chemical restraint. She was experiencing psychotic symptoms as well as fainting episodes. Ms. Cummings stayed in hospital on a voluntary basis and improved with antipsychotic medication. She was reported to display “fair insight into her symptoms and was cooperative with treatment”, and was discharged into her brother’s care. Her diagnosis was Schizophrenia and she was instructed to follow-up with her family physician.
The index offence occurred on June 2, 2023 and Ms. Cummings was brought to hospital following the motor vehicle collision. A CT scan of her head revealed no acute intracranial abnormalities and her urine drug screen tested positive for opioids.
Ms. Cummings was brought to hospital by her brother on June 10, 2023 as a result of bizarre behaviour. She was disorganized, agitated, lacked insight, and reported grandiose delusions about being the main character in a movie. She had stopped taking her medication because she could not afford it. Ms. Cummings was again diagnosed with Schizophrenia and improved with treatment with antipsychotic medication. She was discharged on July 10, 2023 to her brother’s home and was to be followed by Dr. Singh through the Community Psychiatry Clinic.
Ms. Cummings was then admitted to SJHCH from October 4, 2023 to January 4, 2024 after Dr. Singh found her mental health status to be deteriorating in the community, and that she was experiencing grandiose delusions believing she was starring in a movie. She was treated on the inpatient Schizophrenia Unit and her psychotic and mood symptoms resolved by the time of discharge back to her brother’s home. She was accepted into the Transitional Outpatient Program of Schizophrenia Services (“TOPSS”) with planned follow-up by Dr. Peter Cook.
Ms. Cummings had monthly meetings with her case management team from TOPSS and saw Dr. Cook every two months. On October 31, 2024, she was placed on three-month injections. No concerns had been raised by the TOPSS team.
Ms. Cummings reported using alcohol, nicotine (smoking or vaping), and cannabis since age 14. She used cocaine intermittently between age 22 and 26, including a six-month period where she used daily. Ms. Cummings was prescribed Percocet for many years due to chronic back pain.
Evidence at the Hearing:
The Risk Assessment Report included results of a Psychological Assessment conducted by Dr. Bruno Losier in November 2024. It concluded that Ms. Cummings’ risk for general and violent recidivism is “Low-Moderate” taking into account a number of factors including her abstinence from significant substance use, adequate personal supports, and satisfactory professional supports outside of the forensic system. It stated however, that should Ms. Cummings’ ability to engage and benefit from treatment be compromised, her mental health status is likely to decompensate and her risk would be significantly elevated.
The following excerpt is taken from the Clinical Risk Assessment section in the Risk Assessment Report (at page 22):
“Ms. Cummings has a well-established diagnosis of Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type, for which she continues to receive treatment. She follows up with a case manager and a psychiatrist and has done so for some time now. She has recently transitioned from monthly antipsychotic injections to every three months.
Ms. Cummings also has a Stimulant (cocaine) Use Disorder, moderate severity, in sustained remission. She has used other drugs. She was taking Percocet on a regular basis, but does not, in my opinion, have Opioid Use Disorder. She has a history of alcohol and cannabis use but not sufficient to make a diagnosis. Nonetheless, in the context of dangerous driving and psychosis, that will need to be monitored. Ms. Cummings does have a history of medication nonadherence which appeared to be operating at the time of the index offence.
Nonetheless, Ms. Cummings is an otherwise prosocial individual, whose risk, in my opinion, comes primarily from her psychotic disorder, if active. She also has some risk of either alcohol or illicit drugs accentuating or causing psychotic symptoms and increasing her overall risk if that is active.
Given the gravity of the index offence, her history, her mental illness, her medication nonadherence and substance use, it is my opinion that Ms. Cummings poses a significant risk to the safety of the public. In the event that she becomes medication nonadherent, in the event that her illness re-emergences [sic] notwithstanding medication utilization, or in the event that she uses substances of abuse or any combination of those, Ms. Cummings would likely become psychotic with associated poor judgment.
In the index offence, Ms. Cummings acted irrationally within the context of motor vehicle use. Although she does not have her licence currently, it is important to realize that it is quite possible that she may receive her licence at some point in the future.”
Dr. Chaimowitz testified that he is the Head of Service for the Forensic Psychiatry Program at SJHCH. He assessed Ms. Cummings on April 19, 2024, May 3, 2024 and May 9, 2024 for the purpose of providing an opinion to the court as to whether she was not criminally responsible of the charges against her as a result of mental disorder. He also assessed Ms. Cummings on November 20, 2024 in order to inform the Board regarding risk assessment at her initial hearing.
Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Ms. Cummings committed a very serious motor vehicle offence which resulted in death. She has a well established diagnosis of major mental illness, Schizoaffective Disorder, which is a combination of Schizophrenia (symptoms include hearing voices, false fixed beliefs, and feelings of special powers) and Bipolar Disorder (extreme periods of depression or mania, as well as irrational actions). Dr. Chaimowitz stated that Schizoaffective Disorder is one of the most serious mental illnesses that affects a person’s thinking and behaviours, and causes a person to lose touch with reality. Episodes often cannot be predicted, and most people do not know that they are becoming unwell. The mainstay of treatment is antipsychotic medication which reduces the frequency and likelihood of relapse.
While Ms. Cummings was currently on medication and being followed in the community, Dr. Chaimowitz stated that if she were to stop taking medication (as she has before), she is likely to become psychotic again and pose a risk to herself and others and cause serious harm or death. Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Ms. Cummings’ risk stems from times when she is psychotic and her inappropriate use of a motor vehicle.
Dr. Chaimowitz testified that Ms. Cummings has a good relationship with her current psychiatrist, Dr. Cook, whom he spoke to. Dr. Cook is a senior psychiatrist who has worked in the schizophrenia program for many years, and is familiar with the ORB and risk management. Dr. Chaimowitz stated that the transition to a three-month injectable antipsychotic medication is very important because it assures the treatment team that Ms. Cummings is treated with medication for a minimum of three months. This is significant in the context of potential nonadherence with medication, which can be common with people with Schizoaffective Disorder. Further, any nonadherence with medication will be noticed since Ms. Cummings is followed by an outpatient team. Although Dr. Chaimowitz had not seen Ms. Cummings since November 20, 2024 (the Board ordered a brief assessment period in advance of the initial hearing), he stated that it was his understanding that she has been taking her medication and doing well in the community.
Dr. Chaimowitz believed that a Detention Order with community living in approved accommodation was an appropriate Disposition for Ms. Cummings at this time given that she has been living in the community for some time, has a treatment team, and is compliant with treatment and following up. He anticipated that this would continue. Dr. Chaimowitz stated that he considered whether a Conditional Discharge may be appropriate, but concluded that the hospital requires the ability to bring Ms. Cummings to the hospital immediately in the event that she stopped taking medication, used drugs, or exhibited a change in behaviour. Specifically, Dr. Chaimowitz testified that the provisions of the Mental Health Act (“MHA”) would not be sufficient to protect the public at the current time.
Dr. Chaimowitz anticipated that Ms. Cummings would continue to be followed by the TOPSS team, and that the forensic team would also see her once a Disposition is issued. She will therefore be followed by two teams in the community. While Dr. Chaimowitz will not be part of the forensic team, he stated that the team would likely see Ms. Cummings once per week initially in order to get to know her. They would independently assess her risk and then determine how often to see her going forward. They would also perform regular and random urine drug screen testing.
Mr. Shaikh asked Dr. Chaimowitz about Ms. Cummings’ risk in relation to driving a motor vehicle. Dr. Chaimowitz testified that past behaviour often dictates future behaviour. Ms. Cummings is a prosocial person when she is well and does not have a history of criminal or antisocial behaviours. She is not intrinsically violent, and is unlikely to hurt someone with a weapon or in any other way. However, when she lost touch with reality, she drove a “very powerful machine” that resulted in the tragic death of the victim. Although there were references to Ms. Cummings being violent with paramedics, and requiring chemical restraints in hospital in the past, Dr. Chaimowitz stated that this was not “goal-directed violence”, and was more likely a misinterpretation or resistance to being apprehended.
Mr. Shaikh also asked Dr. Chaimowitz about Ms. Cummings’ history of drug use and any related psychiatric diagnoses. Dr. Chaimowitz stated that it was his opinion that Ms. Cummings had used Percocet as prescribed, and did not use it in excess. He also stated that although Ms. Cummings had used alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine in the past, they were not involved in the index offence and any diagnoses were in remission now. However, Dr. Chaimowitz was clear that the forensic team would keep a very close eye on substance use issues.
In response to questions from Mr. Confente, Dr. Chaimowitz agreed that Ms. Cummings has an excellent relationship with Dr. Cook and the TOPSS team, she attends all appointments, is adherent to her medications, recognizes the benefit of them, and has expressed remorse. He anticipated that this cooperation will continue.
In terms of Ms. Cummings’ housing, Dr. Chaimowitz explained that the forensic team would check on the home where she lives with her brother and ensure that it is safe and appropriate “post-haste.” If she wished to move from there, she would need the approval of the hospital under a Detention Order Disposition. The forensic team would also meet with Ms. Cummings’ brother as he is a significant component of the risk management plan. He has been a good source of information up to this point, and Dr. Chaimowitz anticipated that he may become an Approved Person.
In terms of driving, Dr. Chaimowitz stated that although the Ministry of Transportation has taken Ms. Cummings’ licence away, it is not within the control of the forensic team and her licence could be reinstated. The forensic team does not want Ms. Cummings driving, therefore a driving prohibition is being recommended as a term of the Disposition. If Ms. Cummings were to drive, the forensic team could admit her to hospital immediately, and she would also likely face criminal charges. Dr. Chaimowitz assumed that there was a car at her home (given that it is in a suburban area without much public transit), but he did not believe that Ms. Cummings had attempted to drive at all.
Dr. Chaimowitz was also asked about the references in the Risk Assessment Report to Ms. Cummings being dishonest with doctors or misleading health care providers to believe that she was not experiencing symptoms when she was. Dr. Chaimowitz acknowledged that this is an important aspect of her mental status and risk management, but also stated that it is very common for people to minimize symptoms to get out of the hospital. The forensic team will therefore listen to Ms. Cummings, assess her, and check to verify that what she says is accurate. He added that in his opinion, forensic teams are often more rigorous with this issue. Dr. Chaimowitz reiterated that Ms. Cummings is a prosocial person when well, and he did not believe that this was active deception.
When asked about Ms. Cummings’ insight, Dr. Chaimowitz responded that it was “good”, not excellent, based on his meetings with her.
The panel heard the Victim Impact Statements read by Jeff Robson’s wife, mother, brother, sister-in-law, and two friends. The hearing was understandably emotionally difficult for many present, and everyone demonstrated commendable restraint and respect throughout. It was clear to the panel that Jeff Robson was a beloved husband, father, son, brother, and friend, who was the “glue” that held their family together. His tragic death has impacted his friends and family profoundly and irreparably. We considered these Statements when deciding on a necessary and appropriate Disposition, and specifically in the context of the paramount consideration of the safety of the public.
Submissions:
- All parties maintained their initial positions and the panel had a joint submission before it.
Analysis and Conclusions:
After considering the Exhibits and the evidence of Dr. Chaimowitz, the panel found that Ms. Cummings represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. The index offence was extremely serious, involved a motor vehicle, and caused the death of an innocent victim who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ms. Cummings has a major mental illness that causes her to lose touch with reality and engage in risky behaviours. She has a history of psychiatric admissions and medication nonadherence over a number of years, as well as substance use which may trigger or exacerbate her psychotic symptoms. On at least two prior occasions, her active psychotic symptoms accompanied the driving of a motor vehicle. She has also been known to minimize her symptoms. The panel accepted the opinion of Dr. Chaimowitz, that if Ms. Cummings were to stop taking medication, and/or use substances, she is likely to become psychotic again and cause serious harm or death to members of the public.
The panel accepted the joint submission that a Detention Order is both necessary and appropriate at this time to safely manage Ms. Cummings’ risk to the public. Although Ms. Cummings has been living in the community since the index offence, she required admissions to hospital due to deteriorations in her mental state during that time. Further, while she is currently followed in the community by the TOPSS team, these are still early days in her treatment and recovery, and it remains to be seen whether she will be able to maintain the progress she has made while under the jurisdiction of the Board.
The panel concluded that the hospital needs to be able to approve Ms. Cummings’ housing. Ms. Cummings’ living arrangement with her brother is an integral part of the risk management plan at this time, and the forensic team needs to ensure that it is a healthy and supportive environment going forward. Further, any move needs to be approved by the hospital. The panel also found that the hospital needs the ability to bring Ms. Cummings to the hospital immediately if she is nonadherent to medication, uses substances, her mental status or behaviours change, or she is reported or seen driving a vehicle. The panel accepted Dr. Chaimowitz’s opinion that the provisions of the MHA would not be sufficient to protect the public.
The panel found that the terms of the Disposition as recommended by the hospital, and accepted by the other parties, were necessary and appropriate, and the least restrictive at the current time. It is important that Ms. Cummings abstain from the use of alcohol and nonprescribed drugs, and that urine drug screening tests be conducted regularly given Ms. Cummings’ history of substance use.
Finally, it was clear to the panel that a driving prohibition is required in this case. The index offence involved a motor vehicle and caused the death of the victim. Ms. Cummings’ has a concerning history involving the use of a motor vehicle when she is unwell. In June 2012, she reported being followed by cars, and when she was unable to sleep and attend work, she “attempted to drive on the highway to see a friend and fell asleep in her car. When she awoke, she was unable to drive as she believed someone was blocking her car, which was parked near an old barn” (Exhibit 9, page 8). Ms. Cummings reported that she then scaled a six-foot fence, ran up the 407 highway, and crossed highway traffic until she was “boxed in” by police cars and taken to the hospital. On April 23, 2023, Ms. Cummings was brought to the hospital by police after she drove into the driveway of a random residence and refused to engage with anyone or move her vehicle. During that admission, Ms. Cummings informed her care team that she had gone for a drive following an argument with her boyfriend. She stated that she became lost in her own thoughts and pulled into an unfamiliar driveway (Exhibit 9, page 296). Although the MTO has rescinded Ms. Cummings’ licence at the current time, the panel found that this extra layer of prohibition against driving is imperative to protect the public.
The panel inquired as to whether the family of the deceased victim wished there to be a no-contact provision in Ms. Cummings’ Disposition. Mr. Shaikh advised that they were not seeking one.
In making this Disposition, the panel carefully considered the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, specifically the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Ms. Cummings’ mental condition, her reintegration into society, and her other needs.
DATED this 26th day of June 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Suzanne Clapp
Alternate Chair
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board
Footnotes
- VIS were received as follows: Denny Robson (May 6, 2025); Melanie Robson (April 2, 2025); Deb Delfabbro (January 22, 2025) (VIS read by Denny Robson at the hearing); Gwen Robson (January 2, 2025); Steve Robson (January 2, 2025); Robert Shawana (April 1, 2025); and Denise Shawana (February 12, 2025).