Ontario Review Board
Re: Jay Slade
ORB File No: 8705
Hearing held on: Wednesday, June 18, 2025
Place of Hearing: Brockville Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. G. Beasley
Members: Dr. Y. Alatishe Dr. G. Eayrs Mr. M. Segal Ms. R. MacIntyre
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Jay Slade Counsel: Mr. M. Davies
Person in charge of the hospital: Representative Dr. J. Gray
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Masse
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated August 7, 2025)
Introduction
On January 15th, 2025, the accused, Jay Slade, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of First Degree Murder, Indecent Interference with Human Remains and Assault causing Bodily Harm (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. At the time of the finding of not criminally responsible, the Honourable Court did not make a disposition and referred the matter to the Ontario Review Board (ORB).
On June 18th, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened at the Brockville Mental Health Centre (Brockville), hereinafter referred to as the Hospital, to conduct an initial hearing for Mr. Slade pursuant to s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Slade attended the hearing and was represented by his counsel, Mr. Michael Davies. Dr. Jonathan Gray appeared as the representative of the Hospital and Ms. Masse appeared as counsel for the Attorney- General of Ontario.
The following documents were entered as Exhibits:
Revised Notice of Hearing
Pre-Hearing Report (x2)
Victim Impact Statements(x3)
Warrant of Committal
Synopsis
Indictment
Trial Endorsement
Judicial Approval Form
Transcript
Assessment Report – June 2022
Psychiatric Report – June 28, 2024
Hospital Report dated June 9, 2025
Pre-hearing Conference Report – June 4, 2025.
The issues for this hearing are whether Mr. Slade represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, to determine the disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances.
For the reasons set out below, the Board finds that Mr. Slade is a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined by s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and that taking into consideration all of the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order on the secure forensic unit of the hospital in Brockville. Privileges will include accompanied passes to the hospital and grounds.
Background
Mr. Slade’s personal history and background are comprehensively reviewed in the assessment report dated June, 2022, the psychiatric report dated June 28th, 2024 and the hospital report dated June 9th, 2025, all of which were filed as Exhibits at the hearing. For that reason, the details will not be repeated in these reasons. However, the immediate background leading up to the commission of the index offences is relevant. The following excerpt is from the Synopsis, also filed as an exhibit at the hearing:
“The accused, Jay SLADE, is a 36 year old male who was living a transient lifestyle. The accused does not have a fixed address and was believed to be living out of his motor vehicle, a grey 2014 Jeep Wrangler, for an extended period of time more recently and intermittently over the past several years. He has been identified by those closest to him as a self-proclaimed survivalist. Jay SLADE is a licensed electrician by trade.
Jay SLADE is the youngest of three children to Mary SLADE and William SLADE Sr. (deceased 2014). William SLADE Jr. is 41 years of age and resides in the Greater Toronto Area with his wife and young child. Blake SLADE is 40 years old and resided with her widowed mother and her 44 year old common law husband, Colin GILL. Mary SLADE, Blake SLADE, and Colin GILL, lived at 120 Highway 15 in the Village of Seeley’s Bay, Ontario, which is where this crime occurred.
In the spring of 2020, Jay SLADE was attending Concordia University in the City of Montreal. As the COVID-19 pandemic spread globally, post-secondary institutions closed and Jay SLADE returned to stay at his mother’s, Mary SLADE’s residence at 120 Highway 15, Seeley’s Bay, Ontario. During this time Jay SLADE’s mental health was observed to decline. Jay SLADE attempted to travel to western Canada from Ontario. While in the city of Sault Ste. Marie, there were several occurrences involving police, and ultimately led to an admission to the Sault Ste. Marie Hospital for a mental health assessment.
Mary SLADE flew to Sault Ste. Marie upon his release from the hospital and escorted Jay SLADE back to her residence in Seeley’s Bay, Ontario where he remained until the end of 2020. Toward the latter part of 2020, Mary SLADE noticed an obvious decline in Jay SLADE, in which she described him as depressed. Tension in the home rose as Jay SLADE was not actively assisting in household chores, contributing to groceries, nor communicating. He frequently remained in his room as a recluse. Most communication between Jay SLADE and the family resulted in arguments. Due to this tension, Mary SLADE encouraged him to find work, which he appeared to respond positively to. She also informed Jay SLADE that he needed to find his own living accommodation. Jay SLADE was told by Mary SLADE, Blake SLADE, and, ultimately, Colin GILL stepped in to reiterate that he was no longer welcome to reside with them and needed to find alternative arrangements. Jay SLADE secured work as an electrician with a company in Kingston, Ontario, as well as board in a rooming house. Jay SLADE officially moved out of his mother’s house on the 6th of January, 2021, reluctantly.
Jay SLADE did not communicate with any member of his family after he moved out on the 6th of January, 2021, nor did he attend the job he secured. Members of his family would often drive by the rooming house to ensure he was still living there as he would not respond to any outreach. Jay SLADE remained at the rooming house in Kingston for several months before he was asked to leave on the 10th of April, 2021, due to his odd behavior.
Mary became increasingly worried about Jay’s whereabouts when unable to locate his motor vehicle at the rooming house. Due to her concern, she called in a missing person’s report with the Kingston Police Service. On the 22nd of April 2021, Jay was located by police in the Town of Gananoque at which point the officers determined he required a mental health assessment and brought him to the Brockville General Hospital. After his release from the Brockville General Hospital, Jay continued to have noted presence in the community, causing police interaction and ultimately another admission for a mental health assessment, this time at the Kingston General Hospital on the 25th of May 2021.
Mary SLADE visited Jay SLADE on the day of his release from Kingston General Hospital on the 30th of May, 2021. She described their interaction as initially pleasant, but changing quickly to anger when she did not provide him with something he asked for. Upon release from the hospital later that day, Jay Slade returned to Mary Slade’s residence to retrieve his motor vehicle. At approximately 9:00 p.m., Jay SLADE entered into the home, announcing his presence yet uninvited, demanded his keys and left.”
Index Offences
- The circumstances of the index offences are taken from the Synopsis as follows:
“Within several hours of collecting his motor vehicle from 120 Highway Seeley’s Bay, Ontario, Jay SLADE engaged Leeds County OPP officers in a high speed pursuit. On the 31st of May, 2021, at approximately 03:19 a.m., Jay SLADE ditched his 2014 grey Jeep Wrangler and fled into the bush line along Hartsgravel Road and County Road 42 in Rideau Lakes Township. Officers secured the scene and initiated a canine track to locate Jay SLADE, yielding negative results. At 8:18 a.m., that morning, Jay SLADE was recorded on a residential security camera while he walked up the driveway of 69 King Street in the Village of Delta from the roadway. Within seconds, Jay SLADE was recorded rapidly walking back toward the roadway as a result of encountering four dogs in the backyard of the property.
Jay SLADE was observed later that morning by numerous witnesses walking or hitch hiking south of the Village of Delta, and subsequent roadways leading in the direction of 120 highway 15, Seeley’s Bay.
During the evening of the 31st of May, 2021, Blake SLADE, Mary SLADE, and Colin GILL, celebrated Blake SLADE’s 40th birthday at their residence. After dinner, Mary SLADE, Blake SLADE, and Colin GILL watched a movie together. Mary SLADE and Blake SLADE then retired to their respective bedrooms in the upper level of the home. Colin GILL fell asleep on the couch in the living room, as he often did, and was last seen by Blake SLADE there as she went upstairs.
Blake SLADE fell asleep in her bedroom sometime after 1:00 a.m.
Count #2: First Degree Murder 235(1) CC (Victim Colin GILL)
Count #3: Indignity to a Dead Body 182(b) CC (Victim Colin GILL)
Sometime after 1:00 a.m., on the 1st of June, 2021, Jay SLADE entered his family’s unlocked residence at120 Highway 15, Seeley’s Bay, Ontario. Once inside, Jay SLADE retrieved a hatchet, and a gardening hand implement from the garage as well as a large knife from the kitchen. Jay SLADE entered the living room where Colin GILL was sleeping on the couch. Jay SLADE struck Colin GILL in the face with the hatchet multiple times causing deep lacerations to the right side of his face and slicing the maxilla (upper jaw) bone. Colin GILL awoke from the initial blunt force trauma and attempted to defend himself by blocking the blows to his body with his arms. Numerous lacerations and bruising from multiple weapons were evident on Colin GILL’s forearms in an attempt to protect himself. Jay SLADE then used a large knife to stab Colin GILL continuously around the neck in which Colin GILL died as a result of the multiple injuries sustained.
Jay SLADE left the living room and retrieved a large handled axe from the garage, evident by bloody footprints leading from the living room to the garage and back. As Colin GILL lay on the floor succumbed to the injuries of the initial blitz attack, Jay SLADE utilized a long handled axe to decapitate Colin GILL with so much force that a large split in the floorboard and under the depth of two area rugs was discovered underneath his body. The accused then moved Colin GILL’s head to the kitchen where he placed the victim’s head on a table. Jay SLADE then used a knife to remove a portion of Colin GILL’s scalp. Jay SLADE left the head of Colin GILL positioned on the table facing the doorway with the weapons in a displayed fashion. He then washed his hands in the kitchen sink.
Charge #1: Assault Causing Bodily Harm 267(b) CC (Victim Mary SLADE)
Charge #4: Assault Causing Bodily Harm 267(b) (Victim Blake SLADE)
Jay SLADE then entered the upstairs area of the home, entering the bedroom of his mother, Mary SLADE. Jay SLADE struck his mother in the head with an object, believed to be the hatchet, as she lay sleeping. Jay SLADE took hold of Mary SLADE by her arms and violently shook her, causing a break to her upper right arm.
Blake SLADE was awakened by screams coming from her mother’s room. She could hear Mary SLADE yelling; “He’s trying to kill me, help! He’s trying to kill me”.
Blake SLADE entered into her mother’s room and observed her brother, Jay SLADE, standing over Mary SLADE and as she entered the room he said; “don’t come in here or I’ll kill you too.” Jay SLADE turned, pushed Blake SLADE and struck her in the head with the hatchet.
Jay SLADE was enraged and yelled at Mary SLADE and Blake SLADE. Jay SLADE told Blake SLADE that he killed her husband, Colin GILL. He told her he decapitated him, scalped him, and placed his head on the kitchen table. Jay SLADE demanded the passcode to Mary SLADE’s phone and tablet, stating he would cut two of their fingers off if they didn’t provide the passcode. Jay SLADE forcefully stomped on Mary SLADE’s face when she was unable to provide the accurate passcode. Eventually Jay SLADE received the correct passcode and called 911 dispatch in front of Mary SLADE and Blake SLADE before he left the bedroom, Jay SLADE exited the house.”
After Mr. Slade left the house he contacted the OPP Communications Centre and advised them of his location and that he had been involved in a “bit of a domestic dispute.” He requested that both police and an ambulance attend the scene. He told the communications’ officer that there had been “a bit of a scuffle but nothing too serious.” He then advised police that he would go outside and wait for officers to arrive. At the same time, Mr. Slade’s sister Blake, called 911 and asked police to attend the residence. She provided details of the attack on herself and her mother and that Mr. Slade had told her that he had already killed her boyfriend. At 4:57a.m. police officers arrived at the scene and arrested Mr. Slade.
They attended at Kingston General Hospital. The Emergency Room Doctor informed officers that the initial injuries to Mary Slade were fractures to the orbital bone of her left eye, a broken humerus bone of her right arm, and trauma to her head. Blake Slade sustained a laceration to her skull requiring several staples to suture it closed and bruising to her arm and leg.
A postmortem was completed on the body of Colin GILL by Forensic Pathologist Doctor J. Parai at the Ottawa Hospital over a two day period commencing the 3rd of June, 2021. The preliminary findings were that the deceased sustained multiple sharp injuries, including stab wounds, chop wounds, blunt force wounds, decapitation, defensive wounds on both forearms, and postmortem scalping. The face of the deceased had severe trauma. Several different weapons were suspected of being used, with an uncertainty of exactly how many.
Identification Officers attended and executed the warrant to search, processing the scene and identifying items seized for evidentiary value and forensic analysis. Several weapons of interest were located in a displayed fashion in the kitchen. These weapons were a kitchen butcher style knife, a smaller wooden handled hatchet, and a long wooden handled axe. A long wooden handled garden implement was also located near Colin Gill’s body in the living room.
Current Diagnosis
- Mr. Slade’s current diagnoses are:
- Unspecified Schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorder
- Query substance-induced psychotic disorder in full remission
- Cannabis use disorder, Moderate, in remission in controlled environment
Position of the Parties
- At the outset of the hearing, Dr. Gray stated that the recommendation of the treatment team was that Mr. Slade represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a detention order with privileges up to and including staff accompanied ground and community access. Dr. Gray also stated that the team supported Mr. Davies’ request that Mr. Slade be permitted indirect access to the secure portion of the hospital. Ms. Masse agreed with the recommendation of the hospital as it related to significant threat and the necessary and the appropriate disposition being a detention order. She also agreed with the recommendation for staff escorted or accompanied privileges to the grounds but opposed any access to the community. Ms. Masse supported indirectly supervised privileges to the secure portion of the hospital. Finally, Ms. Masse stated that only Mary Slade supported contact or communication with her written revokable consent. Mr. Davies supported the recommendation of the hospital and treatment team as outlined by Dr. Gray. He also stated that he wished to explore the possibility of indirectly supervised privileges to the hospital grounds.
Evidence
The evidence on behalf of the hospital was presented by Dr. Gray. He is Mr. Slade’s attending psychiatrist and the co-author of the hospital report which was filed as an Exhibit. Dr. Gray stated that the hospital report itself contains significant excerpts from the reports filed by Dr. Gojer, Dr. Iosif, and Dr. Wright. Dr. Gray said that his contact with Mr. Slade has been limited to the month that Mr. Slade has been admitted to Brockville. He stated there have been no problems or issues with Mr. Slade and that he has been fully compliant with his antipsychotic medication. He has been polite and respectful. Mr. Slade has been detained on the most secure unit at the hospital with secure yard privileges only as he had yet to have his initial hearing and receive a Disposition from the ORB. In terms of community support, Dr. Gray stated that Mr. Slade’s paternal aunt, Kim Slade, who was present at the hearing, had visited him three times at the hospital.
With respect to risk, Dr. Gray adopted the risk assessment report set out in its entirety in pages 54 to 67 of the hospital report. The report concluded that given his current stability and level of supervision, Mr. Slade represents a moderate risk for violent recidivism. If under the influence of substances or suffering from other stressors, the risk assessment would be high. Dr. Gray stated that the recommendation of the treatment team was for privileges up to and including staff accompanied access to the community. He said that it would be “hard to see violent incidents” while Mr. Slade is either confined, or with staff on the grounds and or in the community. Dr. Gray thought there would need to be other factors including substance use, relationship issues or other stressors in order for there to be a violent incident. Dr. Gray acknowledged that substances are available in the Hospital therefore the treatment team is requesting that Mr. Slade provide Urine Drug Samples (UDS) to allow detection. Dr. Gray stated that in his opinion, there is a strong external incentive or motivation for Mr. Slade to remain on his medication. He advised the hearing that the Crown is appealing the NCR verdict and that were Mr. Slade to stop taking his medication, that might be favourable to the Crown appeal.
Dr. Gray specifically addressed the risk factors involved in Mr. Slade having access to the community with staff. He considered two possible problems, the first of these was the possibility of a violent incident while in the community with staff. Dr. Gray said that the index offences were the culmination of a series of events and stressors combined with extensive substance abuse which led to the commission of the offences. With the supervision that Mr. Slade is under in the hospital, Dr. Gray did not anticipate that there will be a culmination of events which might result in a violent incident.
The second possible problem would be if Mr. Slade were to elope while in the community. Once again, Dr. Gray stated that in his opinion, there was a strong external motivation arising from the pending Crown appeal of the NCR finding. Also, Mr. Slade is an intelligent and educated man who would know that the consequences of running away would be ultimately apprehension by the police and return to the hospital. Dr. Gray stated that the only real concern about elopement would be if Mr. Slade were to learn that the Crown appeal was either likely to be allowed or had been allowed which would represent an incentive for him to abscond from the hospital.
Finally, Dr. Gray submitted that the Disposition ought to allow Mr. Slade indirectly supervised privileges within the hospital in the secure area on the second floor. This would allow him to attend groups, and the café located on the second floor. It would also facilitate visits with his aunt who has been his only community support.
In response to a question from Ms. Masse, Dr. Gray stated that the Hospital does not support indirectly supervised grounds or community privileges. Dr. Gray confirmed that this opinion with respect to indirectly supervised access to either the grounds or the community is in consideration of the protection of the safety of the public. Dr. Gray confirmed that in the risk analysis portion of the Hospital Report, the reference to “possible gaps” was with respect to the limited time that Mr. Slade had been at the Hospital and the need of time for the treatment team to get to know him. Ms. Masse asked if the time which Mr. Slade has spent in jail since 2021 have potentially led to destabilization in Mr. Slade’s mental status. Dr. Gray did not agree, stating that Mr. Slade became destabilized in the community while consuming substances and with other stressors. Dr. Gray agreed that there have been some religious themes in what Mr. Slade has said since the index offences. He has met with the Chaplin. When asked about religious delusions, Dr. Gray said that Mr. Slade speaks of them in the past tense. Ms. Masse asked about impression management or malingering. Dr. Gray stated these have been observed “slightly” in the language which Mr. Slade uses in discussing his illness. He added that Mr. Slade has been very polite and very professional. Ms. Masse asked about how impression management might affect risk analysis. Dr. Gray stated that if there was a high degree of impression management, then there would be cross references with other observations made by the treatment team. He agreed that it was possible that Mr. Slade was just “saying the right thing.” Dr. Gray said that Mr. Slade’s use of clinical language was the result of a natural tendency for patients to pick it up. With respect to the use of cannabis, Dr. Gray agreed that Mr. Slade’s use exacerbated his symptoms of his illness. Dr. Gray did not consider it to be a major factor. Dr. Gray agreed that Mr. Slade’s use of marijuana was to assist him in coping with stressors.
In responses from Ms. Masse, Dr. Gray said that overall Mr. Slade’s risk would be considered moderate but if he were in the community, homeless and consuming substances then it would be high.
Finally, Dr. Gray said that the only concerning behaviour in the month that Mr. Slade has been in Brockville was his taking food off a co-patient’s tray. Other than that, Dr. Gray stated Mr. Slade has been “almost obsequious.” Dr. Gray recommended that Mr. Slade engage in groups such as Substance Abuse, Healthy Relationships, and Anger Management.
Mr. Davies referred Dr. Gray to the portion of the hospital report which described Mr. Slade as having his first psychotic break in 2008 which was diagnosed as psychosis likely induced by cannabis. Dr. Gray agreed that the primary concern for a future episode for Mr. Slade was in the context of the consumption of substances. Dr. Gray agreed that as long as Mr. Slade is not consuming cannabis, then “in the moment” his risk is low. He qualified his answer by adding that this is as long as Mr. Slade stays on the antipsychotic medication, olanzapine. To this point, Mr. Slade has not refused to take his medication. The requested UDS will take place on a random basis or if the treatment team notices any change in behaviour. Dr. Gray agreed that impression management is used by individuals to manipulate perception of their mental status. He said that the treatment team and nursing staff are all alert to this being a possibility and are looking out for it.
Mr. Davies asked Dr. Gray what in-hospital privileges Mr. Slade might be able to enjoy if he were permitted indirectly supervised access. Dr. Gray stated that the secure area of the second floor is where the River Café is located. This is run by patients for the benefit of other patients. He would also have access to the recreational area. There are groups available including drumming, trivia, and current events. If Mr. Slade were to have in-hospital indirectly supervised privileges, it would provide more flexibility to the treatment team. When asked about indirectly supervised grounds privileges, Dr. Gray stated that the boundaries of the grounds of the hospital are covered by cameras. He stated that when patients have indirectly supervised grounds privileges they are time controlled in the sense that they start with one half hour maximum time out of the unit on the grounds. This can be increased to all day privileges with reports every hour.
Dr. Gray reviewed the difference between accompanied and escorted passes. Accompanied passes are a ratio of one staff to up to four patients while escorted passes are one staff per patient. Escorted passes limit the ability to offer community access because of staff needs. Accompanied passes allow staff to take patients to such things as Wal-Mart for shopping or to the theatre. Dr. Gray stated that for obvious reasons it would be easier to elope from an accompanied pass than from an escorted pass. He said there was no evidence of Mr. Slade’s intention to elope from the hospital, but this was just a theoretical risk. Finally, in response to questions from Mr. Davies, Dr. Gray stated that Mr. Slade’s aunt has met with the team’s social worker and there is a possibility that she could become an Approved Person.
A panel member asked Dr. Gray what Mr. Slade has been doing during the month he has spent at the hospital. Dr. Gray stated that Mr. Slade has been reading and has engaged in some peer association. He watches television and has spent time talking to his aunt. He has been polite with staff throughout the month. Mr. Slade has so far been consistent in his accounts of his history leading up to the index offences. Mr. Slade is currently receiving oral medication, but it is possible that it could be switched to long-acting injections. Dr. Gray reiterated that indirectly supervised hospital privileges would be confined to the secure area on the second floor known as the “treatment mall.” When asked if Mr. Slade had discussed the index offences, Dr. Gray stated that the team psychologist has reported that Mr. Slade gave the same history as he gave to Dr. Gojer. However, this was not a long discussion, and Mr. Slade did not show any emotion in discussing the index offences. Dr. Gray agreed with an observation by a panel member that there appeared to be a gap in the records from the correctional system, particularly as it relates to his more recent history in the jail and that these might be helpful in the treatment moving forward for Mr. Slade. Dr. Gray stated that there are no therapy or group programs in the community which would necessitate the patient having community based privileges to attend. He stated that one of the purposes of having patients go to the mall or to other community areas is to observe how they interact with the general public while in the community.
Dr. Gray was asked about the timeline for Mr. Slade being able to access the community accompanied by staff were that to be included in the Disposition. Dr. Gray said that if everything went according to plan then it was feasible that Mr. Slade would have staff accompanied community privileges sometime in the early Fall. Dr. Gray did agree that there was no baseline knowledge about Mr. Slade as it related to the possibility that he might choose to elope while on a pass with staff. Dr. Gray repeated his opinion with respect to the possible modifier of the outstanding Crown appeal as it relates to Mr. Slade’s behaviour. Dr. Gray was asked about the security in the area of the hospital where it was proposed Mr. Slade would have indirectly supervised privileges. He said that this area is secured by two locked doors creating a portal that people have to go through in order to get in and out.
At the conclusion of Dr. Gray’s evidence, Ms. Masse read a Victim Impact Statement from Mr. Slade’s mother, Mary Slade.
Ms. Masse did not call any further evidence, and Mr. Davies did not call any evidence.
Submissions of the Parties
Dr. Gray reiterated the submission made at the outset of the hearing. He stated that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a detention order with privileges up to and including staff accompanied access to the community. Dr. Gray did not support indirectly supervised access to either the grounds or the community. In addition, Dr. Gray requested that Mr. Slade be permitted to access the secure area of the second floor of the hospital indirectly supervised.
Ms. Masse supported the recommendation of the hospital, as set out in the Hospital Report, up to but not including escorted or accompanied passes to the community. She submitted that this was based on public safety grounds given the extreme violence of the index offence and the fact that Mr. Slade had only been at the hospital for a month and the hospital had very little information about him at this time. Ms. Masse did support the inclusion of the indirectly supervised access to the secure areas of the hospital. Finally, Ms. Masse requested that there be no contact or communication orders with respect to three named individuals along with a no contact or communication order with respect to Mr. Slade’s mother Mary, without her prior written revokable consent.
Mr. Davies stated that he agreed with most of the hospital’s recommendations. Mr. Davies stated that where he differed from the submissions of the hospital and the Attorney-General was that there be indirectly supervised grounds privileges in the disposition. Mr. Davies candidly acknowledged that there is a heightened anxiety around this matter due to the severity and nature of the index offence but urged the panel not to turn the medium secure hospital into a maximum secure facility. Mr. Davies submitted that the disposition should always provide a path forward for the individual and should set out the realistic next step, which in Mr. Slade’s case is indirectly supervised grounds privileges.
Analysis and Disposition
At the outset of the hearing, the panel was presented with a joint submission that Mr. Slade is a significant threat to the safety of the public. The panel is unanimous in accepting this joint submission without hesitation. The index offences were crimes of extreme and brutal violence against members of his own family. The facts, as set out above, speak for themselves. On any definition of risk, Mr. Slade represents a significant threat to the safety of the public.
The parties also jointly submitted that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order. Again, the panel is unanimous in accepting the joint submission as to the nature of the disposition. There would be no “air of reality” to even a passing consideration of a conditional discharge.
The parties jointly submitted that one of the privileges to be set out in the disposition would be permission for Mr. Slade to have indirectly supervised access to the secure area of the second floor of the hospital known as the “treatment mall.” This would provide Mr. Slade with access to the patient operated Café, the recreation facilities, and more liberal opportunities for engagement with co-patients, staff, and visitors. Dr. Gray’s evidence was that this area is secured behind two sets of locked doors within the main hospital building. The panel accepts the joint submission as it relates to the secure area of the hospital.
On behalf of the hospital, Dr. Gray submitted that the proposed privilege level should extend to staff accompanied access to the community. Ms. Masse, on behalf of the Attorney-General, supported staff accompanied access to the grounds but did not support the community access. Mr. Davies supported the community access and went further with respect to the grounds submitting that it would be appropriate to include privileges to access the grounds indirectly supervised as a “path forward.”
In drafting a Disposition, the panel must consider the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code. This section does direct that the panel take into account the “mental condition of the accused, the reintegration of the accused into society, and the other needs of the accused.” However, as set out in the Criminal Code, the “paramount consideration” is the safety of the public. While suffering from a psychotic episode, Mr. Slade committed crimes of the most extreme violence and brutality. Since his arrest he has been in custody primarily in a correctional institution. Following the finding of not criminally responsible, Mr. Slade continued to be detained in the jail until his very recent transfer to the Brockville hospital. In Brockville, while waiting for his initial hearing and Disposition, Mr. Slade has been detained in a high secure unit which provides access only to a secure outdoor yard.
The terms of the Disposition to be drafted will set out the level of privilege consistent with the paramount concern of the safety of the public but also take into account the other factors set out above. From the evidence of Dr. Gray’s testimony at the hearing, the Hospital has only had a very short period of approximately one month to begin to know and understand Mr. Slade. Even that period of time has been under highly restrictive conditions. Dr. Gray submitted that the outer envelope of requested privileges was accompanied passes to the community. The purpose of these passes would be to allow Mr. Slade to participate in group travel to shopping and other entertainment. Dr. Gray acknowledged that there were no therapeutic programs which would require Mr. Slade to have escorted or accompanied passes to the community. Given the daily monitoring that Mr. Slade will have while in the hospital, Dr. Gray candidly did not think that there would be a risk of development of the cumulative stressors and substance use which led to the index offences. Dr. Gray acknowledged that there would be a greater elopement risk from accompanied passes to either the grounds or the community but that, in his opinion, this risk was unlikely, partially because of the pending Crown appeal of Mr. Slade’s NCR verdict.
The panel is unanimous in rejecting the inclusion of either escorted or accompanied passes to the community. The evidence does not support a finding that such passes are either necessary or appropriate. There was no evidence to support the conclusion that they would be necessary in the immediate rehabilitation and reintegration of Mr. Slade into the community. The simple fact is that the hospital has very little hands-on knowledge about Mr. Slade and what his behaviour might be once the details of his supervision are relaxed from the current high security. The panel acknowledges Dr. Gray’s opinion with respect to the elopement risk but takes note that there is no direct evidence on this crucial point. Similarly, the panel is unanimous in rejecting Mr. Davies’ submission that indirectly supervised grounds privileges should be considered as providing “a path forward.” That may be the case and is a logical goal but given the very limited knowledge that the treatment team has about Mr. Slade and his cooperation and behaviour while accompanied on the grounds of the hospital, the panel finds that the paramount concern must remain the safety of the public.
For all of the above reasons, the panel is unanimous in finding that Mr. Slade represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order on the secure unit of the Brockville Hospital with privileges inside the secure area of the hospital indirectly supervised. The access to the Hospital grounds is only while either escorted or accompanied by staff.
DATED this 7th day of August, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. G. Beasley
Alternate Chairperson
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board