Re: Pravin C. Anthony
ORB File No: 8042
Hearing held on: Monday, May 26, 2025
Place of hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5^th^ Campus Hamilton, Ontario
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(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: Pravin C. Anthony Counsel: Ms. M. Addie
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. K. Malkovich
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated July 4, 2025)
Introduction:
On March 24, 2022, Pravin C. Anthony was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) on account of mental disorder on charges of aggravated assault and failure to appear or to comply with appearance notice (x2), contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”) dated May 15, 2024, whereby he is detained at the Forensic Psychiatry Program of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5^th^ Campus (“SJHCH” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including community living in Southern Ontario in accommodation approved by the person in charge. The Disposition also requires that Mr. Anthony abstain from substance use, not possess any weapons, refrain from contact with the victims of the index offences, and report to the person in charge not less than once per month when living in the community.
On May 26, 2025, a panel of the Board convened at SJHCH to conduct Mr. Anthony’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Anthony attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Ms. Addie.
The Hospital Report dated May 8, 2025, was marked as Exhibit 1 at the hearing. A Victim Impact Statement from RH dated February 7, 2025, was marked as Exhibit 2. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Anthony’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. Olubukola Kolawole, gave oral evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Anthony continues to meet 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.
Position of the Parties:
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. Ms. Barney, on behalf of the hospital, took the position that Mr. Anthony remained a significant threat to the safety of the public, but that his risk could now be managed under a Conditional Discharge. The conditions recommended by the hospital were outlined at page 39 of the Hospital Report, and included conditions that were similar to the Detention Order, including a residence condition, a no contact condition, and a Young clause.
Ms. Malkovich deferred taking a position on behalf of the Attorney General at the outset of the hearing. During her submissions at the end of the hearing, Ms. Malkovich took the position that a Detention Order remained necessary and appropriate.
Ms. Addie supported the position of the hospital on behalf of Mr. Anthony.
Findings:
- For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Anthony continues to represent a significant threat to public safety. The panel concluded that the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive in the circumstances, is a Conditional Discharge with the terms and conditions as recommended by the hospital. The full list of conditions is set out at the end of these Reasons.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances of the index offences are outlined in detail in the Hospital Report at pages 2-5, but were summarized in last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows (at paragraph 7):
“Halton Police received a call on March 30, 2021 that a man, later identified as Pravin Anthony, was armed with a stick and a knife and had struck Mr. Robert Harvey with the stick and stabbed him with the knife in the abdomen. This occurred in the area of Clearview Park in Oakville. The accused was arrested a short distance from the assault, and the victim was transported to hospital where he underwent surgery to repair the wounds. The police were also advised that preceding the assault on Mr. Harvey, the accused approached Mr. Brad Warden, who was at the park with his family. The accused approached this family aggressively, swearing and swinging a stick at them.
The accused was charged on July 12th and 13th, 2020 with aggravated assault and fail to comply with a peace bond and was bound by terms of release that included “not to possess any weapons.”
He was also subject to conditions from an undertaking for the offences of mischief and disobey court order dated June 11th, 2020 which required him to “keep the peace and be of good behaviour.” In addition, he was further subject to a release order for charges of mischief and fail to comply with court order dated March 12th and 13th, 2021 which required him “to not possess any weapons.”
- Mr. Anthony reported that he was homeless and living in a shelter at the time of the index offences. He stated that a guy was following him in the park and he heard a voice telling him to stab the guy. He claimed to have no memory of stabbing the victim. Mr. Anthony was not taking prescribed medication for his psychotic disorder at the time.
Background:
Mr. Anthony’s personal background is set out in detail in the Hospital Report and will not be repeated here. Briefly summarized, Mr. Anthony is a 38-year-old single man who was born in India and grew up in Dubai. He has a twin brother and a younger sister. Mr. Anthony and his family immigrated to Canada in 2003, where he completed his final year of high school. Mr. Anthony was a competitive tennis player, and returned to India for six months following high school to play tennis. Upon his return to Canada, he attended university for three years (at two different universities) and then completed a Business Administration diploma at Sheridan College. Following that, Mr. Anthony worked as an insurance claim assistant.
Mr. Anthony’s family noticed a deterioration in his mood and behaviour when he was in his mid-twenties. He quit his job, withdrew from social activities, and became reclusive to his room in the basement, watching videos and smoking cannabis regularly. He was heard yelling and talking to himself. “Out of the blue,” Mr. Anthony travelled to India to attend a music school, after pressuring his father to help cover the costs by engaging in a “hunger strike”, but he withdrew from the program after only one week. Mr. Anthony stayed with relatives in India for several months and his bizarre behaviour continued.
Upon returning to his parents’ home, Mr. Anthony became increasingly aggressive, suspicious, and angry. His cannabis consumption increased and he started drinking alcohol daily. He reportedly got into verbal and physical altercations with his brother and father, as well as people in the community, resulting in police intervention. Mr. Anthony refused his family’s efforts to obtain mental health or substance abuse treatment for him. They began to feel unsafe around him and asked him to leave their home in 2016. Mr. Anthony then became homeless and lived in shelters. There were brief periods when Mr. Anthony’s family sought to support him by allowing him back into the home; however, these periods were short-lived in light of Mr. Anthony’s continued substance use, lack of insight into his mental health condition, and continued conflict with family members.
Mr. Anthony’s parents are retired and live in Georgetown. Mr. Anthony’s siblings and their spouses also live in the family home.
Criminal History:
Mr. Anthony has a criminal record consisting of convictions on October 5, 2021 for assault causing bodily harm and three counts of mischief under $5,000.
The Board’s Reasons for Disposition from last year requested that the parties attempt to obtain some information about the conviction for assault causing bodily harm. Ms. Malkovich reported having only limited information from the police synopsis, as the incident occurred in a different jurisdiction (Peel), and she was unaware of what facts were accepted by the court. According to the synopsis, Mr. Anthony allegedly became involved in an altercation with a stranger in a parking lot. Both had weapons. It was alleged that Mr. Anthony had a wooden stick and assaulted the victim. He continued to assault him with the stick when he was on the ground. The victim suffered fairly serious injuries. Mr. Anthony was arrested on or around July 12, 2020.
Psychiatric History:
The Hospital Report outlined Mr. Anthony’s psychiatric history prior to the index offences in detail and will not be repeated here. Briefly, Mr. Anthony had four psychiatric admissions to various hospitals between December 2017 and November 2020. He consistently refused medication or psychiatric follow-up on discharge.
On at least three of the admissions, Mr. Anthony was brought to hospital by police. The events precipitating admission included: a verbal altercation at a coffee shop that included accusing an elderly man of staring at his genitals; incidents of unspecified aggression against his parents; threatening roommates with a knife; and carrying a knife while running around outside in a verbally and physically aggressive manner. Mr. Anthony was detained in hospital involuntarily, and during three of the admissions he was treated with medication and his mental condition improved. On one occasion, Mr. Anthony refused medication and left the hospital against medical advice.
During the last admission from October to November 2020, Mr. Anthony was physically aggressive and required both physical and chemical restraints. He was found incapable of consenting to treatment and the Public Guardian and Trustee was his substitute decision-maker. Mr. Anthony improved with treatment and was discharged to a friend’s home with a prescription and referral to a Psychosis Disorder Clinic. He did not follow-up.
Following his arrest for the index offences, Mr. Anthony was in custody at the Maplehurst Correctional Complex. On May 4, 2021, he was transferred to hospital on a Form 1 due to an “acute relapse of psychosis.” The Institutional Crisis Intervention Team was required to extract him from his cell and pepper spray was used to subdue him. Mr. Anthony continued to be highly agitated and aggressive in hospital, resulting in regular administration of chemical restraints. He eventually accepted oral antipsychotic medication, and his symptoms improved enough such that he was returned to Maplehurst on May 20, 2021.
Mr. Anthony’s mental condition improved significantly under the jurisdiction of the Board. He accepted treatment with a long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication, and his symptoms resolved. He was described as calm and cooperative, and kept a low profile on the unit. He attended substance use programming and did not exhibit any aggression.
Mr. Anthony was discharged to his parents’ home on November 28, 2023, and has done well since then. While his insight is described as limited, he has been adherent to medication and has not had any symptoms. He lives a sedentary and unstructured lifestyle, and has had difficulties following through with employment.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Anthony’s diagnoses are: Schizophrenia; Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission; and Alcohol Use Disorder, in sustained remission. He is capable of consenting to treatment and managing his finances.
Evidence at the Hearing:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Anthony continues to reside in the family home with his mother and father, as well as his brother and sister-in-law and their infant child. He has remained compliant with his long-acting injectable antipsychotic, which is administered every 12 weeks. All urine drug screens have been negative. His mental status has remained stable. His current reporting schedule is once per week, alternating between clinic and home visits. It was noted that Mr. Anthony often gives brief initial responses and requires prompting or additional questioning to elicit further detail. At times he also omits information, such as when he failed to tell the team that he initially missed the departure for a family trip to the Dominican Republic due to a water damaged passport. He was able to obtain an emergency passport and purchase a new ticket, and then travelled on his own to meet his family. The Hospital Report also indicated concerns regarding the potential influence of Mr. Anthony’s parents on his treatment decisions, housing arrangements, and employment goals.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Anthony started Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Psychosis (CBTp) in March 2025. He also volunteers one afternoon per week at the Good Shepherd Donation Centre in Hamilton, participates in a recreational volleyball group, and participates in a virtual peer group on mindfulness. Mr. Anthony reported applying to over one thousand jobs over the past year, but had not secured employment.
Mr. Anthony has indicated a desire to live independently in the future and remains on the waitlist for the transitional recovery homes program with Good Shepherd.
An updated Psychological Risk Assessment was completed in February 2025, and made the following statement about Mr. Anthony’s insight (at page 35):
“Past violence risk assessments have identified Mr. Anthony’s level of insight as his most notable dynamic risk factor. Since his last fulsome risk assessment in 2022, his level of insight appears to have improved. In particular, he appears to have a better understanding of the impact of prior substance use on his mental health functioning and appears to accept his psychiatric diagnosis and need for medication. With this being said, his level of insight over this past reporting year is somewhat difficult to fully assess given the dearth and brevity of information he provides. Specifically, his insight presents as somewhat superficial in that he can say the right things but it is not entirely clear how fully he accepts his psychiatric diagnosis, the limitations that may come from same, or the need for life long psychiatric care. Moreover, he did not readily disclose or report important information related to changes on his recent international trip, which is seemingly reflective of his limited insight and potentially poor judgment.”
The conclusion of the Psychological Risk Assessment was that Mr. Anthony’s risk for violence over the next reporting year was considered to be low if he was granted a Conditional Discharge.
The Clinical Risk Summary contained in the Hospital Report stated the following about the issue of significant threat, and the recommendation for a Conditional Discharge (with conditions similar to those that are currently in place under the Detention Order) (at pages 38-39):
“Although Mr. Anthony has made significant progress over the past reporting year, this progress is attributable not only to his internal motivation, but more critically to the external structure, supervision, and support afforded by his current legal disposition. In the absence of this legal framework—specifically the oversight and support provided by the Forensic Psychiatry Program—it is highly likely that Mr. Anthony would discontinue his medication, disengage from services, and resume the use of cannabis and alcohol. This would likely lead to a deterioration in his mental health and could result in a recurrence of aggressive behaviour similar in nature and severity to the index offence.
Accordingly, the treatment team unanimously agrees that Mr. Anthony continues to meet the threshold for being a significant threat to public safety. However, given the meaningful progress he has made under the current disposition, it is our opinion that his risk can now be safely managed under the authority of a Conditional Discharge, provided the following terms and conditions are strictly adhered to.”
Dr. Kolawole testified that he had been Mr. Anthony’s attending psychiatrist since June 2022. He reiterated that Mr. Anthony had progressed well this year. He was stable, asymptomatic, adherent to medication, abstinent from substances, and fully engaged with the treatment team and their recommendations. There were no incidents of violence or aggression, which Dr. Kolawole noted was in “sharp contrast” to Mr. Anthony’s turbulent history prior to coming under the jurisdiction of the Board.
Dr. Kolawole stated that there had been significant improvement in Mr. Anthony’s insight, specifically with respect to the nature of his mental illness, the need to take medication, and the potential impact of substance use and nonadherence to medication. Dr. Kolawole stated that Mr. Anthony is ready to take the next step in his recovery, and test his internal motivation to stay well.
Dr. Kolawole expressed a high degree of confidence, later clarified as 'more probable than not', that Mr. Anthony would return to the hospital voluntarily should his mental status deteriorate, citing the strong rapport between Mr. Anthony and the treatment team, as well as the support of his family. Dr. Kolawole also stated his opinion that Box A under the Mental Health Act (“MHA”) would be sufficient to intervene and return Mr. Anthony to the hospital if required. In response to questions, Dr. Kolawole acknowledged that prior to the index offences, Mr. Anthony had not been detained under the MHA for more than approximately 15 days. However, he noted that several factors had since changed—namely, an extended period of stability, strong engagement with the treatment team, and adherence to long-acting injectable medication—and stated that he now had a “higher degree of certainty” that the MHA would serve as an effective intervention tool. He testified that a Young clause would also provide an additional benefit because it would get Mr. Anthony to the hospital for assessment.
Dr. Kolawole testified that a residence condition would name Mr. Anthony’s family home. He noted that Mr. Anthony is still on a waiting list for Emmaus Place, which provides supported and affordable housing, and would be a good “starting point or stepping stone” toward independent living for Mr. Anthony. If Mr. Anthony wished to change his residence in the upcoming year, an early Board hearing would be requested.
Dr. Kolawole acknowledged that Mr. Anthony’s medication dosage was reduced approximately four months ago. He stated that it was done at Mr. Anthony’s request in response to sexual side effects. Mr. Anthony had tolerated the decrease, and there had been no change in his mental status. Dr. Kolawole agreed that the reduction in dose had also improved some of the negative symptoms that Mr. Anthony was experiencing such as apathy, amotivation, and affective blunting. However, Dr. Kolawole clarified that Mr. Anthony’s negative symptoms are mild, and stated that he is “moderately high functioning.”
Ms. Malkovich asked Dr. Kolawole about the Hospital Report’s comments that Mr. Anthony’s parents had been questioning the necessity of his continued long-term use of medication. Dr. Kolawole responded that Mr. Anthony’s parents are very supportive, and he and Mr. Anthony’s caseworker had multiple meetings with them. He explained that some psychoeducation was required, but they now understand Mr. Anthony’s mental illness, the need for long-term medication, and the real risk that he will become very ill again without medication. Dr. Kolawole acknowledged that their insight was still developing, but also stated that they had lived though Mr. Anthony’s turbulent past. He was confident that Mr. Anthony’s family would reach out to the treatment team with any concerns.
Dr. Kolawole was asked his opinion about why Mr. Anthony had not secured employment after having applied for over 1000 jobs. Dr. Kolawole responded that it was likely due to a number of factors, including negative symptoms of his illness, the fact that he has a criminal record, and that he may be applying for more high profile jobs that are not suitable for him. Dr. Kolawole agreed that Mr. Anthony had declined support from vocational services and had chosen to pursue work on his own. The treatment team found this to be reasonable, partially due to the fact that he lives relatively far away from the hospital.
It was noted that it was still relatively early days since Mr. Anthony was found NCR (just over four years), and Dr. Kolawole stated that Mr. Anthony had made “remarkable progress relative to his difficulties before the index offences.” He described three phases: (1) a premorbid phase, during which Mr. Anthony was a skilled tennis player; (2) an illness phase, characterized by significant psychiatric symptoms; and (3) the current phase, in which Mr. Anthony has responded well to medication and treatment, and a framework is being developed to mitigate risk.
In response to questions from Ms. Addie, Dr. Kolawole agreed that Mr. Anthony had worked on building structure into his day and making social connections over the last year, and had done so on his own initiative. He also agreed that while Mr. Anthony would like to eventually live independently, he is currently content to live with his family and has not taken any active steps to move out.
In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Kolawole stated that Mr. Anthony currently has contact with the team approximately four times per week, taking into account his reporting requirements, participation in CBTp, volunteer work, and involvement in recreational activities. Dr. Kolawole was asked to comment on the recommendation for a reporting requirement of not less than once per month, given that Mr. Anthony is currently reporting at a significantly higher frequency. Dr. Kolawole responded that many of Mr. Anthony’s current contacts are informal, and that they would gradually decrease the reporting requirement depending on how he is doing.
Dr. Kolawole did not think that a consent to treatment clause was necessary in Mr. Anthony’s Disposition, given that he has good insight and is capable. Dr. Kolawole also did not think that there needed to be a travel condition, as he was of the opinion that it was an opportunity for Mr. Anthony to make some decisions on his own and work with the treatment team.
Submissions:
Ms. Barney maintained the hospital’s position that a Conditional Discharge was necessary and appropriate. She emphasized the evidence that reflected that Mr. Anthony had a positive year, including: no admissions to hospital; no positive drug screens; developing insight; engaged in CBTp since March; adherent to medication; supportive family; and good rapport with the treatment team. She submitted that the treatment team was confident that Mr. Anthony would attend the hospital voluntarily if he was asked to do so, and that Mr. Anthony’s family would reach out if there were any concerns. If this did not occur, the Young clause and/or the MHA would be sufficient to bring Mr. Anthony to the hospital for assessment.
Ms. Malkovich submitted that this was a “borderline case.” She acknowledged Mr. Anthony’s positive year, and agreed that a residence clause in a Conditional Discharge removed one concern. Ms. Malkovich submitted that her concerns were that Mr. Anthony may not return to the hospital voluntarily given his history, and that the MHA would not be sufficient to protect the public and manage Mr. Anthony’s risk at this time. She also noted that Mr. Anthony’s insight, and that of his family, regarding the need for long-term medication is still developing. As such, she supported a Detention Order.
Ms. Addie submitted that this was not a borderline case, but was in fact a “textbook case” for a transition from a Detention Order to a Conditional Discharge. She noted how well Mr. Anthony had done under the jurisdiction of the Board, after being very unwell, on the street, and using drugs. She submitted that his trajectory has been nothing but upwards, and he has benefitted from the structure provided by the Board. He takes his medication and benefits from it, he finished his university degree, and he has been doing very well while living in the community. His insight has progressed significantly, and he appreciates the need for medication and that using substances would be disastrous for him. Ms. Addie submitted that Mr. Anthony’s family shares the memories of how unwell he was, and have supported him under the ORB. He has returned home to live with them in a “multi-generational” set-up. Ms. Addie emphasized that Mr. Anthony has the insight and motivation to move forward with his life, and abide by the conditions of a Conditional Discharge.
Analysis and Conclusions:
The panel carefully considered the evidence and the submissions of the parties, and found that the evidence contained in the Hospital Report and presented by Dr. Kolawole supported a finding that Mr. Anthony continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. While Mr. Anthony has made considerable progress in his recovery, this has all occurred while subject to the jurisdiction of the Board and the external structure and supervision of the forensic system. The panel accepted that in the absence of this oversight, Mr. Anthony is likely to discontinue medication, disengage from mental health services, and resume the use of substances. Any insight that he has gained would disappear and he would be reluctant to accept treatment or assistance. This would likely lead to deterioration of his mental health and the return of symptoms that would lead to aggressive behaviour, as happened in the past, and at the time of the index offences. The Victim Impact Statement of RH illustrates the ongoing effects that Mr. Anthony’s actions have had, and continue to have, on a member of the public.
The panel found that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a Conditional Discharge with the conditions set out below. The panel accepted the evidence that Mr. Anthony’s trajectory has been consistently positive, and that he is ready to take the next step in his progress and recovery under the Board. He has good engagement with the team, has been consistently compliant with medication, and has been abstinent from substances even while living in the community. While it is still unclear how much of his motivation to abstain from substances and take medication is external, increasing Mr. Anthony’s liberties gradually will begin to test Mr. Anthony in this regard.
The panel also considered that although Mr. Anthony’s family’s insight was described as developing, this is the same family that lived through Mr. Anthony’s periods of extreme unwellness, and asked him to move out their house. They have demonstrated a commitment to support him by allowing him to live with them again, and the panel accepted Dr. Kolawole’s testimony that they would reach out to the treatment team if any concerns arose. The conditions will require Mr. Anthony to continue residing in the family home. The panel was also satisfied that a Young clause and the MHA would be sufficient to bring Mr. Anthony to hospital if there was a deterioration in his mental state.
Mr. Anthony is discharged subject to the following conditions, which are very similar to the requirements under the previous Detention Order:
(a) reside at 195 Princess Ann Drive, Georgetown, Ontario;
(b) report to the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus, or his or her designate, not less than once per month;
(c) abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
(d) submit samples of their urine and/or breath to the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus, or his or her designate for the purpose of analyzing whether the accused has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant;
(e) refrain from having in their possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer;
(f) refrain from contact or communication, direct or indirect, with Robert Harvey and Brad Warden;
(g) advise the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus, or his or her designate, in advance, of any absence from their residence of 24 hours or more;
(h) participate in a program of rehabilitation created for him by the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus, or his or her designate;
(i) upon notice by the person in charge of St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton-West 5th Campus, will immediately submit to attendance at the hospital for psychiatric assessment;
(j) upon notice, attend before the Ontario Review Board as required; and
(k) keep the peace and be of good behavior.
DATED this 4^th^ day of July 2025 at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region
Suzanne Clapp Alternate Chair
_________________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board