Ontario Review Board
Re: Christopher Deme
ORB File No: 6706
Hearing held on: Monday, June 16, 2025
Place of hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care 401 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Kert
Members: Dr. T. Verny Dr. J. C. Rose Ms. K. Tomaszewski Ms. C. Plyley
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Christopher Deme Counsel: Mr. J. J. Chapnick
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. K. Dalrymple
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated July 22, 2025)
Introduction
On February 23, 2015, Christopher Deme was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of being unlawfully in a dwelling house, failing to comply with a probation order, theft exceeding $5000, and failing to attend court, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).
Mr. Deme is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”) dated July 2, 2024, which detains him at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“SCFMHC” or the “hospital”) with a variety of privileges up to living in the community of Elgin and Middlesex Counties in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital.
On June 16, 2025, a panel of the Board convened to review Mr. Deme’s Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. He was present for his hearing and represented by his counsel, Mr. J.J. Chapnick, throughout.
The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Mr. Deme represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
When parties were canvassed for their initial, tentative positions at the commencement of the hearing, counsel for the Hospital submitted that Mr. Deme remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition was a Detention Order containing the same terms as found in the previous Disposition. Counsel for the Attorney General and counsel for Mr. Deme both supported the Hospital’s position.
All parties maintained their respective positions at the conclusion of the evidence, and the Board was thus presented with a joint submission on all issues.
Following deliberations, the panel unanimously agreed with the joint submission and concluded that Mr. Deme is a significant threat to the safety of the public as that term is defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and explained in the governing authorities. The panel further found that the necessary and appropriate Disposition for the management of Mr. Deme’s risk is a Detention Order on the terms jointly recommended by the parties.
Index Offences
- The circumstances surrounding the index offences are set forth in detail in the Hospital Report to the Board dated April 4, 2024, (the “Hospital Report”), and are summarized in last year’s ORB Reasons for Disposition, as follows:
" On May 30, 2013, Mr. Deme, accompanied by another man, broke into an apartment and stole a flat-screen T.V. at a time when he was under probation. On January 30, 2014, he failed to attend Court as required by the terms of his release.”
At the time of the index offences, he was subject to a probation order from convictions in 2010 for assault with a weapon and failing to comply with probation.
Mr. Deme’s personal background is set forth in detail in the Hospital Report and need not be repeated here. The following summary is excerpted from the Board’s latest Reasons for Decision, dated December 2, 2024.
Mr. Deme is a 38-year-old man who was born in Toronto. He was removed from his biological mother’s care at six months of age and placed in foster care until his adoption by the Demes at 17 months of age. His adoptive parents currently live in British Columbia. In recent years, he has connected with his biological mother, who lives in Toronto.
Mr. Deme was hyperactive at home and in his elementary school and was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (“ADHD”) and treated with Ritalin. On his parents’ initiative, he was placed in special supportive school programs and successfully completed elementary school. His high school years were disrupted by drug use and absenteeism, and he did not complete high school at that time. He did, however, obtain his high school diploma in 2018 while under the ORB’s jurisdiction and has taken several college courses since then.
Mr. Deme began to use alcohol in grade 8 and in grade 9, this progressed to marijuana, ecstasy and cocaine. His substance use continued and expanded to other drugs over the next several years. He also became involved in selling drugs. By 2005, Mr. Deme was using considerable amounts of cocaine, was residing in various shelters, and was supporting himself by working in a nightclub in downtown Toronto.
Mr. Deme was married but has been separated for several years. His relationship with his wife (at that time his girlfriend) dates to 2016 and was reportedly tumultuous, causing significant stress that continued, including during disputes over access to their daughter, born in 2021.
Mr. Deme has a criminal record starting in 2002 (Youth Court). His adult convictions started in 2005 and continued up to the time of the index offences, with approximately 30 convictions for offences, including numerous convictions including for assault and criminal harassment, as well as for property offences, driving offences, breaching probation orders or undertakings, and narcotics offences. At the time of the index offences, Mr. Deme's most recent criminal convictions were from October 4, 2012, for criminal harassment and failing to comply with probation order, for which he received a suspended sentence and been placed on probation for three years.
Mr. Deme has a history of admissions to psychiatric facilities dating back to 2005. The Hospital Report contains a comprehensive review of these admissions, his psychiatric and risk assessments, and his course under the Board’s jurisdiction. As this document is an exhibit, its contents will not be repeated in these Reasons.
Mr. Deme’s current diagnoses are: Schizoaffective Disorder; Substance Abuse Disorder (in remission in a controlled setting); ADHD (by history); Borderline traits and Antisocial traits (by history); and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder.
Evidence at the Hearing
The Board received documentary evidence in the form of a Hospital Report dated April 16, 2025. The Board also heard oral evidence from Dr. Ajay Prakash, Mr. Deme’s attending psychiatrist.
The Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Deme was discharged from the hospital on July 5, 2024, to live in an apartment in London which is subsidized and supported by the Forensic Supportive Housing Program (“FSHP”) and managed/operated through St. Leonard’s Community Services. While living in the community, Mr. Deme was supported by the Forensic Outreach team and FSHP.
Over the summer months in 2024, Mr. Deme began to disclose that he was experiencing loneliness and disturbed sleep. He also stated he was experiencing increased family-related stressors and Irritable Bowel Syndrome symptoms. There was a noted increase in ER visits to address physical symptoms which Dr. Prakash advised often correlates to early warning signs of a mental status decompensation.
On August 19, 2024, a urine drug screen (“UDS”) returned positive for crystal methamphetamine. A UDS from September 1, 2024, again returned positive for crystal methamphetamine. On September 13, 2024, an additional UDS returned positive for cocaine.
Mr. Deme began missing structured activities and was not attending to his ADLs. Further, he presented with increased impulsivity and hopelessness, and he reported experiencing more frequent night terrors.
As a result of the escalating pattern of alcohol and illicit substance use, on September 16, 2024, Mr. Deme was admitted to the hospital. Mr. Deme stated that his friends’ substance use was a significant trigger for him. The plan for Mr. Deme’s admission was to interrupt his pattern of substance use to prevent a more acute decompensation in his mental health and a resultant increase in his risk to public safety.
On December 16, 2024, Mr. Deme was discharged back to his FSHP apartment.
Dr. Prakash testified that at the time Mr. Deme was admitted to the hospital in September 2024, Mr. Deme was not floridly psychotic, but the Treatment Team noticed changes in his presentation which they recognized as early warning signs of a potential decompensation in mental status. These early warning signs included loneliness, boredom, restlessness, stressors, somatic issues, and a relapse into substance use.
Dr. Prakash pointed out that Mr. Deme is capable to make treatment decisions, and that none of the early warning signs provided sufficient grounds to admit Mr. Deme to the hospital under the Mental Health Act.
Since returning to his FSHP apartment, Mr. Deme has displayed no positive symptoms of his mental illness. He completed an IT diploma, has remained abstinent from substances, and continues to take his medications.
Dr. Prakash highlighted Mr. Deme’s strengths: he works well with the Treatment Team; regrets his relapse into substance use; and wants a prosocial life so he can “do well” for his daughter.
Mr. Deme has good insight into his mental illness and believes that he needs treatment. His insight into his future risk of violence is underdeveloped. According to the Hospital Report, “Mr. Deme reports that he does not believe there is a risk that he will reoffend or become violent again, noting that he has not had any reoffences since his index offence. He stated that he was using "large amounts" of methamphetamines during his previous charges and that he does not believe he would reoffend or become violent unless he used large amounts of substances again, which he reports he does not intend to do.”
Dr. Prakash indicated that the Treatment Team provides Mr. Deme with addiction relapse prevention support. The doctor described how during the reporting period various community support programs for relapse prevention and psychotherapy (trauma) became unavailable to Mr. Deme due to staffing issues, through no fault of Mr. Deme. The Treatment Team will continue to seek out community psychotherapy resources for Mr. Deme.
Dr. Prakash commended Mr. Deme for his efforts to find employment. He told the panel that Mr. Deme spends up to two hours per day looking for work.
Mr. Deme also has personal supports, but the doctor indicated that his personal supports are not able to mitigate Mr. Deme’s risk of violence at this time.
Stress is a significant risk factor. In the summer months of 2024, Mr. Deme adopted maladaptive coping strategies in the community by relapsing to drug use, which resulted in an increase in his risk to public safety. During the upcoming year the Treatment Team will continue to assess Mr. Deme’s stability and abstinence and will continue to support Mr. Deme in developing adaptive coping strategies to deal with stressors.
No further evidence was led at the hearing following Dr. Prakash’s testimony.
Analysis and Conclusions
The panel agrees with the parties’ joint position and is also independently satisfied on the evidence that Mr. Deme is a significant threat to the safety of the public. His schizoaffective disorder significantly disrupts his mental stability, causing him to struggle with impulsivity, anxiety, severe bouts of depression and mood changes. Mr. Deme has a history of reverting to substance use when he becomes overly stressed. This pattern was repeated during the reporting period when Mr. Deme relapsed into substance use during the summer of 2024. His use of substances can lead to violent acts resulting in serious physical or psychological harm.
The panel adopts the Re-Offence Scenario set out on page 209 of the Hospital Report:
Without extensive support and supervision, Mr. Deme would likely decompensate and become nonadherent to treatment. He would likely cope with using substances and involve himself with negative peer groups, and his potential for violence would increase. His underlying thought patterns, disorganization, and impulsivity would likely resurface, and the risk to the community would likely increase.
The panel is further satisfied that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a Detention Order containing the same terms and conditions as Mr. Deme’s previous Disposition. It is important that the hospital continues to have the authority to approve Mr. Deme’s accommodation, given Mr. Deme’s need for adequate support and supervision, and his history of impulsive decisions (e.g. an abrupt decision in 2021 to move to Toronto).
To protect the safety of the public, the hospital needs to be able to return Mr. Deme to the hospital expeditiously, before he experiences psychotic symptoms. While Mr. Deme returned voluntarily to the hospital on one occasion in the past, on other occasions the hospital required the Warrant of Committal to bring Mr. Deme into the hospital. When Mr. Deme relapsed into substance use in the summer of 2024, the Treatment Team recognized the early warning signs of potential decompensation and readmitted him before Mr. Deme developed symptoms of psychosis. This would not have been possible under the Mental Health Act. It is clear that to protect the safety of the public, the hospital needs to be able to admit Mr. Deme to the hospital in the event of a relapse into substance use, or the appearance of early warning signs before he experiences psychosis, both to support Mr. Deme’s mental stability, and to protect the public from the risk of violence.
The panel expresses its sincere hope that the positive trajectory that was established during the second half of the reporting period will continue over the year ahead, and that Mr. Deme will continue to work openly with the Treatment Team.
In coming to these conclusions, the panel has considered the paramount factor of public safety, along with the objectives of addressing Mr. Deme’s mental condition, his other needs, and his reintegration into the community.
DATED this 22nd day of July 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. K. Tomaszewski Legal Member
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board