Ontario Review Board
Re: Janet MacLean
ORB File No: 7716
Hearing held on: Thursday June 12, 2025
Place of Hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. R. Bigelow
Members: Ms. L. Maunder Dr. P. Darby Dr. G. Stones Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Janet MacLean Counsel: Mr. J. Lefurgey
The Person in Charge Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. I. Shaikh
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION (Dated July 23, 2025)
Introduction
1On March 26, 2020, Janet MacLean was found not criminally responsible (NCR) on charges of attempt to commit arson contrary to section 463(b) and arson damage to property (x2) contrary to section 434 the Criminal Code. Ms. MacLean is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the Board) dated June 17, 2024, ordering her detention at the Forensic Psychiatry Program of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (the Hospital) with privileges up to and including residence in the community of Southern Ontario in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
2On Thursday, June 12, 2025, the Board convened a hearing to review Ms. MacLean`s disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Ms. MacLean was present and represented by counsel, Mr. Lefurgey. The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Ms. MacLean continued to constitute a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, what was the necessary and appropriate disposition that was also the least onerous and least restrictive taking into account the factors set out in 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Initial Positions of the Parties
3At the commencement of the hearing the parties were requested to provide their initial without prejudice positions with respect to the issues before the Board. Counsel for the Hospital indicated that it was the Hospital’s position that Ms. MacLean continued to represent a significant threat to the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a continuation of the current order without change.
4Both counsel for the Attorney General and Counsel for Ms. MacLean supported the Hospital recommendation.
Evidence at the hearing
5The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated March 13, 2025, and the oral evidence of Dr. Shariati, Ms. MacLean’s treating psychiatrist. In addition, at the hearing Dr. Shariati gave detailed evidence with respect to the efforts made by the Hospital social worker to find a long-term care facility for Ms. MacLean and counsel for the Hospital undertook, with the agreement of all parties, to provide the panel with a written summary of those efforts subsequent to the hearing. That summary is attached to these reasons as an addendum.
Findings:
6For the Reasons that follow, the Board finds that Ms. MacLean continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current disposition without change.
Index Offences:
7The circumstances surrounding the index offences as summarized in last year’s Reasons for Disposition are as follows:
Attempt to Commit (arson) Sec 463(b) CC
On Wednesday July 10, 2019, uniform officers were patrolling an area of St. Catharines which had been identified as a target area for a rash of recent car fires and attempt car fires. This area was designated as the areas of Thomas Street to the West; Carlton Street to the North, George Street to the East and Albert Street to the South. At approximately 4:05 am, while in the area of Beech Street and Henry Street; the accused was observed walking southbound on the west side of Henry Street approximately 1metre north of Beech Street. Also observed at this time, approximately 100 meters behind the accused, was smoke emanating from the undercarriage of a vehicle parked on the street. A small green cardboard box, later identified as a Dare cookie box, was observed under the front end of the vehicle, appearing to have recently been started. As the only person in the area at the time that this occurred the accused was detained for investigation detention. Information gathered from a previous car fire in the area (inc# 19-64675) provided a description of a suspect which matched the accused. Subsequently the accused was placed under arrest, read rights to counsel and cautioned and was transported to 2 District Central Cells. Detective Constine of 1 District CIB, Officer in charge of the car fires project was notified of the arrest and attended 2 District cells to interview the accused.
During an interview obtained after Rights to Counsel explained and Secondary caution provided, the accused advised she had utilized cookie boxes and tea boxes, stuffed with paper and placed under the engine of cars to set fires in the city.
Arson, Damage to Property
On Tuesday July 9, 2019 at approximately 4:03 am, uniform officers were called to the area of 92 Vole Avenue, St. Catharines in regard to a vehicle on fire. Further investigation revealed an individual matching the description of the accused was in the area at the time of the offence. Based on the description match, and the location of the accused found, the accused has been charged with this offence.
Arson -Damage to Property-Sec 434 C.C.
On Monday July 1, 2019 police attended the area Dufferin St. and York Street in the city of St. Catharines for a belated report pertaining to vehicle damage. Upon investigation it was determined that the damage occurred between the hours of 11:00 pm June 30 2019 and the reporting time of 4:00 pm July 1, 2019. A partially burnt chocolate chip cookie box was found under the target vehicle which had incurred damages. Based on the time and location of this incident, and the similarity of the incendiary device, the accused has been charged with this offence.
Background Information Regarding the Accused:
8Ms. MacLean is currently 61 years of age and second in a sibline of three with brothers born in 1959 and 1970. Her brothers report that their father was a heavy drinker and was abusive both towards their mother and the children. Her parents separated in 1978 and divorced in 1981. After the separation Ms. MacLean lived with her mother and it was around that time that she began displaying behavioural problems as well as increasing substance use. In 1979 she began living at Bethel Home for Girls but was asked to leave after a short time due to “undesirable behaviours such as moodiness and belligerence”.
9She Resided at Oolagen House (Skyler Children, Youth, and Families) until she reportedly vandalized a social worker’s car which resulted in her discharge from the program. She was later readmitted into that program but after six months was transferred to Grant House, Street Haven Addictions Services (a residential treatment program for women with substance use issues) in Beaverton Ontario where she resided intermittently until January 1982 when she was asked to leave due to unacceptable behaviour. She resided with her father briefly before moving to St. Catharines where she initially resided with her mother then moved into her own residence.
Substance Use History
10Ms. MacLean reported that she began drinking alcohol heavily when she was 14 years old and consumed alcohol on a daily basis until approximately 1991. At that time, she commenced attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous and reports that she has now been sober for over 25 years. Her brothers report that she experimented with illicit substances during her youth however Ms. MacLean denies any recent substance use of any kind.
Legal History:
11Ms. MacLean has the following criminal record:
| Date Sentenced | Offence | Sentence/Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1980-07-29 Toronto | Mischief to Public Property | Conditional Discharge & Probation 1 year |
| 1981-02-04 Toronto | Mischief to Public Property X2 | Suspended Sentence & Probation for 2 years on each charge concurrent |
| 1984-02-07 Toronto | (1) Arson (2) Mischief to Private Property (X2) (3) Mischief to Public Property (4) Willfully Set Fire, Sec. 389(1)(A) CC |
(1) 2 years less 1 day (2) 9 months on each charge concurrent (3-4) 6 months on each charge concurrently & concurrently with #1 |
| 1991-09-18 St. Catharines | (1) Mischief Under $1000, Sec.430(4) CC (X13) (2) Mischief Over $1000, Sec. 430(3) CC |
(1) 3 months on each charge concurrent & probation 3 years (2) 2 months & probation 3 years concurrent |
Psychiatric History
12Ms. McLean has had multiple hospital admissions prior to the index offences. She was admitted to Centenary Hospital on three occasions due to mental health related issues in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s and was diagnosed with schizophrenia in 1983. Additionally, Ms. MacLean has had admissions to Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and St. Catharines General – Site - Niagara Health System. Records indicate that Ms. MacLean received outpatient follow-up care from a clinic in Burlington until approximately 2014, and then commencing May 11, 2015, she had attended the Medication Clinic at St. Catharines General Hospital to receive her intramuscular injection of Invega Sustenna.
Current Diagnosis
13Ms. MacLean’s current diagnoses are:
- Schizophrenia
- Alcohol Use Disorder, Severe, in Sustained Remission
- Unspecified Neurocognitive Disorder
Evidence of Dr. Shariati
14Dr. Shariati indicated that he had been Ms. MacLean’s treating psychiatrist since October 2023 and had reviewed and adopted the contents of the Hospital Report. There had been no significant changes in Ms. Maclean’s presentation over the reporting year. Her mental health is stable, but she continues to suffer from symptoms of her illness including religious delusions, disorganized thought, beliefs that she has a “inner child”, speaks in a childlike manner at times and at times exhibits disorganized speech and behaviour. Her insight is limited, and she continues to suffer functional impairment from her neurocognitive disorder.
15Dr. Shariati advised that Ms. MacLean’s cognitive status remained stable, she is incapable with respect to placement and treatment decisions1 and she has expressed a wish to be discharged from hospital to a long-term care facility and in the treatment team’s opinion she is ready for discharge transition to such a facility when one becomes available.
16In response to questions from counsel for the Attorney General with respect to further particulars of Ms. MacLean’s neurocognitive disorder, Dr. Shariati referred to the Hospital Report at page 40 where it states:
A neuropsychological evaluation completed in June 2024 supports the presence of cognitive impairment across multiple domains, including memory, attention, language, visuospatial processing, and executive functioning. A formal diagnosis of Unspecified Neurocognitive Disorder was made. The profile is understood to be multifactorial, influenced by schizophrenia, historical alcohol use, vascular changes, and likely developmental limitations. While there is no current evidence of progressive dementia, Ms. MacLean is considered to have a "vulnerable brain" and to be at high risk for future cognitive decline or delirium in the context of physical illness.
From a community living standpoint, Ms. MacLean’s current level of function is not compatible with independent or semi-independent community living. She requires a 24/7 supervised setting capable of supporting her psychiatric, cognitive, and physical care needs. The team continues to advocate for long-term care placement.
17In response to questions from panel members with respect to the basis for the treatment team’s opinion with respect to significant threat, Dr. Shariati stated that Ms. MacLean remains stable both with respect to her mental health and her behaviour but that is within the structured setting of the Hospital which significantly mitigates her risk. She continues to have delusional thoughts and has poor insight into her mental illness and her cognitive disability. Absent support she would be unlikely to be able to manage her treatment and community resources are not currently available to assist her in that regard. Therefore, absent support she would likely deteriorate to a state similar to that of the index offences.
Final Submissions of the Parties
18Counsel for the Hospital maintained her position that Ms. MacLean continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a continuation of the current detention order without change. She noted that the evidence clearly establish that the Hospital needed to be able to approve accommodation and that the accommodation would require 24/7 support. She submitted that it was clear from the evidence provided with respect to the attempts by the Hospital Social Worker to find a long-term care facility for Ms. MacLean that there had been inordinate bureaucratic delay in processing the application and that the waitlist for such facilities lacked transparency.
19Counsel for the Attorney General maintained his initial position.
20Counsel for Ms. MacLean also maintained his initial position but also expressed concern about the excessive delays in finding an appropriate residence for Ms. MacLean.
Analysis and Conclusion, Significant Threat
21Although the issue of significant threat was not contested at the hearing, the Board nevertheless makes an independent finding that Ms. MacLean does represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. She suffers from a major mental illness, schizophrenia, remains symptomatic with disorganized thoughts and speech, identity disturbances (adult versus child), religious delusions, response to internal stimuli, and cognitive impairment despite adherence to medication. Absent supervision, she would clearly be unable to manage her medications, and there would be a substantial likelihood of her suffering decompensation thereby significantly increasing her risk to the safety of the public. She has no supports within the community and although it is the unanimous opinion of the treatment team that she could be safely discharged to a long-term care facility where her risk could be safely managed, no such facility is available at this time.
22The Board agrees with the comments of counsel for the Hospital with respect to the inordinate bureaucratic delay in processing the application for a long-term care facility despite the conscientious efforts of the Hospital Social Worker as well as the lack of transparency with respect to waiting lists. The delay is both contrary to the interests of Ms. MacLean as well as the interests of the public. Those delays have resulted in the use of one of the limited number of forensic beds available in the province when alternative and less costly options might well have been available or at least Ms. MacLean could have moved up significantly on waiting lists absent the inordinate delay in her application.
23Should there be no signs of progress with respect to finding an appropriate residence in the community for Ms. MacLean in the upcoming year, the Board suggests that the parties request a prehearing conference prior to the next hearing to discuss the option of requiring that a representative of Ontario Health attend the hearing to explain the delays.
Analysis and Conclusion, Necessary and Appropriate Disposition
24The Board finds that the evidence also amply supports the joint submission that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order without change. The evidence is clear that the Hospital requires the ability to approve accommodation for Ms. MacLean in order to manage risk which requires a detention order disposition.
DATED this 23rd day of July 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Robert Bigelow Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board