Re: Ray Newell
ORB File No: 6772
Hearing held on: Wednesday, May 28, 2025
Place of hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th 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: Ray Newell Counsel: Mr. J. Chrolavicius
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. B. Adsett
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated July 4, 2025)
Introduction:
On April 27, 2015, Ray Newell was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of assault with a weapon, using imitation firearm in commission of offence, and failure to comply with condition of judicial release (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 5th Campus (“SJHCH” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including community living in Southern Ontario in approved accommodation. He is also required to abstain from substance use, refrain from possessing weapons, and refrain from contacting certain individuals.
On May 28, 2025, a panel of the Board convened at SJHCH to conduct Mr. Newell’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Newell attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Mr. Chrolavicius.
The Hospital Report dated April 28, 2025, was marked as Exhibit 1. In addition to the documentary evidence, Dr. Olivia Lee gave oral evidence. Dr. Lee is a forensic psychiatry fellow working under the supervision of Mr. Newell’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. Olubukola Kolawole.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Newell 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. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Barney took the position that Mr. Newell continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that a continuation of the existing Detention Order remained necessary and appropriate.
Mr. Adsett supported the position of the hospital on behalf of the Attorney General.
Ms. Chrolavicius took the position that a Conditional Discharge with appropriate conditions was the least restrictive Disposition.
Findings:
- For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Newell continues to pose 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 continuation of the Detention Order.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances of the index offences are set out in the Hospital Report at pages 3-4 and can be summarized as follows. On August 4, 2014 at 12:01 a.m., Mr. Newell ran up to a group of five people and displayed a black imitation firearm. He pressed it firmly against the neck of the first victim and directed the group to drop everything they had. He pointed the imitation firearm at the second victim and stole her cell phone after she dropped it. Mr. Newell then discharged the imitation firearm, and one of the several pellets struck the second victim in the left upper arm causing her to suffer minor bruising. It was determined that Mr. Newell was at large on a recognizance, and failed to comply with a condition that he “remain in your residence daily between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. except unless you are in the presence of your surety or your brother.”
Background:
Mr. Newell’s personal history is outlined in the Hospital Report in detail and will not be repeated here. In summary, Mr. Newell is a 44-year-old man who was born in Jamaica. He is the middle of three children. He came to Canada when he was approximately one year old with his mother and his brother, and grew up in Brampton. He has a younger sister who was born in Toronto. Mr. Newell’s parents divorced when he was a child and his father remarried.
Mr. Newell completed high school as well as two years of an engineering program at Sheridan College. He transferred to a kinesiology program at York University, but dropped out soon after when he started experiencing symptoms of his mental illness. Mr. Newell worked as a security guard and a model, but has not worked since 2001. He is supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program.
Mr. Newell has a history of substance use. He reported using marijuana daily since he was a teenager.
Mr. Newell was living with his mother and brother at the time of the index offences, however his brother was away for work frequently. In the days and weeks before the index offences, Mr. Newell was responding to voices and was disorganized. His mother had tried to get him seen by a mental health professional.
Mr. Newell has a son who was born in December 2020 and lives with Mr. Newell’s mother. His son’s mother died of an accidental overdose in November 2021.
Criminal History:
- Mr. Newell’s criminal history is set out in the Hospital Report at page 10. It was summarized in last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows (at paragraph 10):
“Prior to the index offences, Mr. Newell had a criminal record which includes convictions for break and enter with intent, use of weapon during commission of indictable offence, dangerous operation of motor vehicle, flight while pursued by police officer, unauthorized possession of a weapon in a motor vehicle, possession of a weapon, fail to appear, assault causing bodily harm. Those offences occurred between 2006 and 2007. Mr. Newell also has an outstanding charge of theft under and assault in 2013. In 2020, he was charged with assault following a domestic incident with his partner. He was granted a Conditional Release with the stipulation that he reside at the hospital. He was convicted of this offence on October 22, 2020 and sentenced to a term of probation.”
Psychiatric History:
The Hospital Report outlines Mr. Newell’s psychiatric history both before and after the index offences. In brief, Mr. Newell was admitted to hospital in June 2004 and was diagnosed with “Schizophreniform Disorder/Delusional Disorder.” He was noncompliant with medication after this. He subsequently received outpatient psychiatric follow-up through the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) in 2008, and then through the North Halton Mental Health Outpatient Clinic. However, he stopped attending appointments and taking antipsychotic medication around 2013.
Following the NCR finding, Mr. Newell was detained at SJHCH. He initially experienced auditory hallucinations and paranoid delusions. His behaviour was described as unpredictable and he had poor insight. He completed substance use programming, and his mother became an Approved Person in 2015. By 2017, Mr. Newell was doing better. He was compliant with medication, was cooperative with the treatment team, had successful visits with his mother, and his urine drug screens were consistently negative. He received a long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication and self-administered his oral medication.
Between April 2018 and July 2020, Mr. Newell had three periods of time when he was living in the community. Between April 2018 and June 2018, and then again between September 2018 and April 2019, Mr. Newell lived in an independent apartment. He was readmitted to hospital following two positive drug tests for cocaine and for breach of his Disposition. Mr. Newell was then discharged to live at Emmaus Place in January 2020, but was readmitted to hospital following an assault charge against his girlfriend in July 2020. He has been an inpatient at SJHCH since that time.
The Hospital Report included details about three times when Mr. Newell absconded from hospital. In July 2021, he absconded while on a pass and was at large for approximately three weeks. He was arrested in Montreal and tested positive for cannabis. In August and September 2022, Mr. Newell did not return from passes and used substances. He was charged with being unlawfully at large.
Mr. Newell had numerous positive tests for substances in recent years and his privileges were frequently cancelled as a result.
Mr. Newell’s current diagnoses are Schizophrenia and Polysubstance Use Disorder. He is capable of consenting to treatment and managing his finances.
Evidence at the Hearing:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Newell’s mental status and presentation had been mostly stable over the reporting year, however he engaged in impulsive behaviour at times, including being unlawfully at large, smashing hospital property, and relapsing into substance use. He endorsed having auditory hallucinations at times, which make mean and disparaging remarks towards him and cause him stress. He also expressed paranoid delusions, and on several occasions was found masturbating in his bedroom during clinical monitoring. To his credit, there have been no incidents of agitation or physical aggression requiring seclusion.
Mr. Newell was unlawfully at large when he did not return from a pass in May 2024 following his ORB hearing. He used cannabis and crystal methamphetamine. He was picked up by the police the next morning and was in police custody for one night before he was returned to the hospital. Mr. Newell was charged with being unlawfully at large.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Newell has been unable to abstain from substance use, and his privileges have been held several times as a result. He tested positive for cannabis multiple times in January and February 2025.
Mr. Newell continues to have the support of his mother who has full custody of his son, and spends considerable time in Jamaica. However, they speak on the phone regularly. While Mr. Newell would like his brother to become an Approved Person, the treatment team is waiting for a criminal record check from him before moving forward with the process.
Mr. Newell remains on two waiting lists for 24-hour supervised accommodation, however the housing situation is a source of frustration for Mr. Newell. The Hospital Report included the following comment about this (at page 66):
“Mr. Newell’s wait in hospital for an appropriate bed is a source of frustration for him and likewise for the team. Mr. Newell wishes to live in an independent apartment and frequently speaks to SW about this. It however remains the opinion of the clinical team that Mr. Newell will require a degree of onsite support and supervision in his community residence to be successful in community living. Further, Mr. Newell’s income requires any accommodation to be subsidized. Mr. Newell understands the team’s opinion. He is encouraged to continue to engage in programming that work to build his independent living skills.”
The Hospital Report stated that the Psychological Risk Assessment completed by Dr. B. Losier in March 2023 remained valid, and considered Mr. Newell’s risk for violent reoffending to be in the moderate-high range with the support and supervision provided under a Detention Order.
The Clinical Risk Summary described Mr. Newell’s insight as being limited in terms of how his substance use has deleterious effects on his mental health and rehabilitation. He has repeated issues with rule breaking, breaches of his Disposition, and inappropriate behaviour.
The Hospital Report included the following comments about the issue of significant threat (at page 68):
“Absent the current degree of supervision and support, Mr. Newell would be at a high risk of medication non-adherence, substance use, and an acute deterioration of his mental health. In the event of his mental health deteriorating, Mr. Newell would be at risk of re-offending to the same or a similar degree as the index offence. It is therefore the treatment team’s opinion that Mr. Newell continues to meet the threshold for significant threat to the safety of the public. It is our opinion that his current risk can be managed with the continuation of a Detention Order.”
Dr. Lee testified that she had been involved with Mr. Newell’s care since March 2025. She reiterated that Mr. Newell had a variable course over the past year with some relative stability and some quite challenging periods. She reported that Mr. Newell had tested positive for cannabis on May 7, 2025 and his privileges were again cancelled. He was currently working his way back up the privilege ladder. He also exhibited some symptoms on May 20, 2025 as a result of some family stressors. Dr. Lee explained that Mr. Newell’s sister recently got married, and Mr. Newell was reminded of an argument he had with his now brother-in-law and experienced an auditory hallucination, namely hearing the disparaging voice of the brother-in-law.
Dr. Lee testified that it was the opinion of the treatment team that Mr. Newell cannot be managed on a Conditional Discharge because it is imperative that the hospital have the ability to oversee Mr. Newell’s living situation. She stated that he requires 24-hour supervised housing in order to ensure that his medications and mental status are closely monitored. Dr. Lee also stated that the Mental Health Act (“MHA”) would not be adequate to manage Mr. Newell’s risk as he would be unlikely to meet Box A criteria, and would require rapid intervention in order to return him to the hospital if his mental status decompensated. She explained that use of the MHA or police intervention would be “reactive” protections that were insufficient to address Mr. Newell’s risk to the public. Further, Dr. Lee did not think that a Young clause requiring Mr. Newell to attend at the hospital upon request would be adequate as it would not enable the team to keep him in the hospital. Dr. Lee also did not think that Mr. Newell would be amenable to a voluntary admission in light of his elopements from hospital and his history of difficulty following rules.
Dr. Lee stated that Mr. Newell would not have anywhere to live if he was granted a Conditional Discharge, and she would be concerned that he would choose housing that would not meet his needs.
Dr. Lee testified that Mr. Newell would likely be ready for discharge if an appropriate bed was offered to him, however he will require a sustained period of abstinence from substances first. Mr. Newell is scheduled to start a group psychotherapy program for substance use next week.
Mr. Chrolavicius asked Dr. Lee whether Mr. Newell could live with his mother. Dr. Lee responded that while it was her understanding that Mr. Newell’s mother intends to stay in Canada (she had previously indicated that she may move full-time to Jamaica), there are barriers to Mr. Newell living with her. At the time of the hearing, it was not clear if Mr. Newell’s mother had a residence. She was expected back in Canada at the end of May. Dr. Lee said that the treatment team would be meeting with her and with Mr. Newell on her return. Dr. Lee reiterated that it is the team’s opinion that Mr. Newell would not be able to safely manage independent living.
In response to questioning by Mr. Chrolavicius, Dr. Lee agreed that no one was physically hurt by Mr. Newell during the index offences, and that he had been under the jurisdiction of the ORB for longer than he would have been in jail if he had been convicted of the same offences. Dr. Lee understood why Mr. Newell would be frustrated with his situation. However, she noted that Mr. Newell had been discharged to the community a number of times in the past, and Warrants of Committal were required to bring him back to the hospital. On the last occasion, Mr. Newell had been charged with assault (in July 2020). Dr. Lee maintained that Mr. Newell remains a risk to himself and the public, and cannot be managed on a Conditional Discharge as a result of his impulsivity, substance use, anger and sexually inappropriate behaviours, and the likelihood that he would discontinue medications.
In response to a question about Mr. Newell’s breakthrough auditory hallucinations, Dr. Lee stated that the treatment team may revisit dosages of medication or other options. When asked about Mr. Newell’s inappropriate sexual behaviours, Dr. Lee stated that Dr. Moulden had conducted a sexual behaviours risk assessment, and it was her opinion that Mr. Newell’s behaviours were not caused by his illness, but rather were secondary to stress, boredom, or a lack of structure. For this reason, the treatment team was also working with Mr. Newell on issues of consent and boundaries.
Submissions:
Ms. Barney maintained the hospital’s position that Mr. Newell remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a continuation of the Detention Order is the appropriate Disposition. She acknowledged Mr. Newell’s frustrations since being under the ORB, however noted that he has engaged in significant breaches of the rules and of his Disposition, which have contributed to his stunted progress in the forensic system. Ms. Barney submitted that there are still many risk factors that need close monitoring, and the hospital requires the ability to approve Mr. Newell’s housing and bring him back to the hospital quickly, especially in the context of Mr. Newell’s history where Warrants of Committal were required after discharges to the community. Ms. Barney maintained that the MHA is insufficient. She also noted that it was the treatment team’s opinion that Mr. Newell requires 24-hour supervised housing, however he wants to live in independent housing. Therefore, if Mr. Newell were granted a Conditional Discharge, it is likely that he would choose inappropriate housing, or have nowhere to go, which would not meet his needs, and would not protect the public.
Mr. Adsett adopted the submissions of the hospital.
Mr. Chrolavicius submitted that Mr. Newell was requesting a Conditional Discharge. He stated that Mr. Newell had been under the jurisdiction of the ORB for ten years with no real change, no one was hurt during the index offences, and the hospital’s reasons for Mr. Newell not progressing were often minor things, such as using drugs. Mr. Chrolavicius submitted that many people with mental illness live in the community and use substances without harming anyone, and Mr. Newell should be given that chance.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Based on the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. Lee, the panel concluded that there was clear evidence that Mr. Newell remains a significant threat to public safety. Mr. Newell has a persistent mental illness with residual symptoms, as well as a substance use disorder. He has a significant history of criminal activities in the community, and was convicted of assault while subject to the jurisdiction of the ORB and living in the community. Mr. Newell has been unable to abstain from substance use both while in the community and in the hospital, and he continually breaks hospital rules. The panel accepted the treatment team’s opinion that without the supervision and support of the forensic system, Mr. Newell would be at high risk of medication noncompliance, substance use, and an acute deterioration of his mental health. This would likely lead to criminal behaviour that would harm members of the public.
Although Dr. Lee agreed with counsel’s suggestion that no one was physically hurt during the index offences, the panel found the circumstances to be very concerning. Mr. Newell used an imitation firearm (which the victims did not know was not real), held it to the neck of one victim, pointed it at the other victim, and actually discharged it. This undoubtedly would have caused intense fear and psychological harm to the victims. In addition, one of the several pellets discharged struck one of the victims, causing minor bruising to her arm. Fortunately, none of the pellets struck a more sensitive area, such as an eye. The panel also noted that Mr. Newell’s risk of violence under a Detention Order was found to be moderately-high. This would undoubtedly increase if he were not subject to forensic oversight.
The panel concluded that a continuation of the Detention Order was necessary and appropriate, and the least onerous and least restrictive Disposition for Mr. Newell at this time. It was clear that the hospital requires the ability approve Mr. Newell’s housing for a number of reasons. Mr. Newell does not agree that he requires supervised accommodation, and multiple attempts at discharging Mr. Newell to the community in the past have failed. Any discharge to the community will need to be carefully planned and implemented cautiously in light of Mr. Newell’s history, his elopements, and his substance use. The panel was also persuaded that the MHA would not be sufficient to readmit Mr. Newell to hospital if he were to become medication nonadherent, use substances, or decompensate in the community. The panel noted that Mr. Newell assaulted his girlfriend the last time he was living in the community, and it is important that the hospital has the ability to use a Warrant of Committal in order to protect the public.
While the panel understands Mr. Newell’s frustration with the forensic system, the evidence demonstrated that much of his slow progress was due to his own behaviours. Further, the forensic mental health system is purposefully different than the criminal system. Mr. Newell is encouraged to engage with the treatment team, and work towards reintegration into the community by following the rules and further developing his skills.
DATED this 4th day of July 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Suzanne Clapp Alternate Chair
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board