Ontario Review Board
Re: Ryan Harris
ORB File No: 8570
Hearing held on: Monday July 7, 2025
Place of Hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Sections 672.81(2) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. R. Bigelow
Members: Dr. A. Jones Dr. J. Cheston Mr. D. Sandor Ms. K. Brisson
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Ryan Harris Counsel: Ms. A. Jervis
The Person in charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. D. Rose
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated August 12, 2025)
Introduction
On May 21, 2024, Ryan Harris was found unfit to stand trial on charges of being unlawfully in a dwelling, fail to comply with undertaking (3 counts), mischief, and fail to comply with release order contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the Board) finding that he continued to be unfit to stand trial and ordering his detention at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (the Hospital) with privileges up to and including residence in the community of Elgin County in 24/7 supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
By letter dated May 8, 2025, the Hospital notified the Board that it was now the position of the Hospital that Mr. Harris was fit to stand trial and requested that an early hearing be scheduled for the Board to review Mr. Harris’ fitness.
On Monday, July 7, 2025, the Board convened a hearing at pursuant to sections 672.48(1) & 672.81(2) of the Criminal Code. The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Mr. Harris continued to be unfit to stand trial and, if so, to determine 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
At 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 position of the Hospital that Mr. Harris was now fit to stand trial and should be returned to court, but should the Board find that he continues to be unfit, it was the Hospital’s position that a detention order should be continued on the terms as set out at pages 32 and 33 of the Hospital report.
Both Counsel for the Attorney General and Counsel for Mr. Harris supported the Hospital recommendation.
Evidence at the hearing
- The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report and the oral evidence of Dr. Mokhber, Mr. Harris’ treating psychiatrist.
Findings:
- For the Reasons that follow, the Board finds that Mr. Harris is currently fit to stand trial and directs his return to court.
Index Offences:
- The allegations surrounding the index charges as summarized in the last year’s reasons for disposition are as follows :
Count 1: Being Unlawfully in Dwelling House, Sec 349 (1) CCC: Mr. Harris had been living with his mother until she asked him to leave her residence two weeks before the alleged offence. Mr. Harris was homeless after leaving his mother’s residence. He subsequently returned to her residence multiple times and attempted to gain entry into the home. Police were contacted and removed him from the property. On December 18, 2023, his mother returned to her home after discharge from a hospital and found Mr. Harris asleep in her bed. Mr. Harris’ mother asked him to leave her property multiple times and the two argued. Mr. Harris reportedly left the property after his mother phoned the police. His mother reported to police that she was afraid of Mr. Harris. Mr. Harris was located in the community, arrested, and was released on a Form 10, with conditions not to communicate with his mother and not to attend her property.
Count 2: Fail to Comply Undertaking x2, Sec 145 (4) (a): On December 23, 2023, Mr. Harris’ mother phoned police and reported that Mr. Harris was allegedly outside of her residence yelling at her. At the time, he was subject to conditions that he have no contact with his mother and not attend her residence.
Count 3: Mischief, Sec. 430 (1) (c): Prior to the alleged offence, police had attended a laundromat (King’s Variety) on four separate complaints of an unwanted person. On January 14, 2024, Mr. Harris was arrested under the Trespass to Property Act and removed from the premises. He was released on a Provincial Offence Notice. Later that same day, Mr. Harris allegedly returned to the laundromat and began harassing several customers. The victim, who worked at the business, asked Mr. Harris to leave. Mr. Harris refused to leave and the victim phoned the police for assistance. The victim reported to the police that Mr. Harris’ presence was disrupting the operation of the business, as he would continually harass both staff and customers. Mr. Harris was arrested and later released on a Form 10 with conditions.
Count 4: Fail to Comply Undertaking, Sec. 145 (4) (a): On January 15, 2024, police attended King’s Variety in response to complaints about an unwanted person. Mr. Harris was located outside of the business. Employees of the laundromat reported that he had been in the store prior to the arrival of police. At the time, Mr. Harris was subject to a release order requiring him not to attend King’s Variety. He was arrested and released on a Form 11, which included a condition not to attend King’s variety.
Count 5: Fail to comply Undertaking, Sec. 145 (4) (a): On January 16, 2024, police observed Mr. Harris entering King’s Variety. Police entered the business and arrested Mr. Harris for failing to abide by his release condition not to attend the business.
Count 6: Fail to Comply Release Order, Sec. 145 (5) (a): On January 15, 2024, police attended King’s Variety in response to complaints about an unwanted person. Mr. Harris was located outside of the business. Employees of the laundromat reported that he had been in the store prior to the arrival of police. At the time, Mr. Harris was subject to a release order requiring him not to attend King’s Variety. He was arrested and released on a Form 11, which included a condition not to attend King’s variety.
Background Information Regarding the Accused:
As of the date of the hearing Mr. Harris was 29 years of age (turning 30 in early August) and was born and raised in St. Thomas. The Hospital Report contains little information regarding his family of origin. His self-reports regarding intimate partnerships have been inconsistent. He has reported that he was divorced from a partner who died in 1982 (Mr. Harris was born in 1995). He has reported that he has a son who was deceased but also that he has a two-year-old son with whom he had contact. He has also reported that he has no children.
Mr. Harris dropped out of school in grade 10 or 11 and he self-reports that he has a learning disability involving reading and writing as well as attention deficit disorder. He has a limited history of employment indicating that he has worked processing pig manure and has done volunteer work at a waste management service. At the time of his arrest on the outstanding charges, he was in receipt of ODSP and had no fixed address.
Substance Use History
- Mr. Harris has no history of alcohol abuse, however, he reported that he used cannabis every weekend when he was younger but has asserted that he last used cannabis in 2011, many years prior to the index charges stating that “I quit because of laced fentanyl weed going around”. However, during hospital admissions in 2019 and 2024 he reported recent cannabis use.
Legal History:
- Mr. Harris has no prior criminal record.
Psychiatric History
Documents suggest that Mr. Harris’ first psychiatric admission was in September 2017, at the age of 22. During this admission, he was diagnosed with a first episode psychosis and was started on a long-acting injectable medication. He was reportedly reluctant to start medication but eventually agreed. Community psychiatric follow-up was recommended at discharge. It is unclear if Mr. Harris followed through with community care.
Mr. Harris’ next admission took place in July 2019 after a Mobile Crisis Unit had attended his apartment for a safety check. There had been a fire in the apartment the day before and there were on-going concerns about fire setting. Documentation suggests that Mr. Harris was subject to a non-contact order with his mother and he self-reported threatening her. Additionally, he had not been compliant with his long-acting medication. He also reported heavy cannabis use in the week prior to admission. He was reportedly accepted by Adult Protection Services and had access to Passport dollars. He was referred to an ACT team, which declined the referral. His mother is noted to have been his substitute decision maker. Upon discharge, Mr. Harris was to follow-up with community psychiatric services.
On January 5, 2024, Mr. Harris was assessed in an emergency department. He had been recently “kicked out” of his mother’s home and was unable to access shelter beds due to challenging behaviour. He presented as delusional, reporting concerns about having cancer and describing several individuals who were threatening him or taking advantage of him. Mr. Harris reported recent cannabis use and did not believe that he had a mental illness. Mr. Harris did not meet criteria for admission under the Mental Health Act. He was offered a voluntary admission, which he adamantly refused.
Current Diagnosis
- Mr. Harris’ current diagnoses are:
Schizophrenia
Intellectual Developmental Disorder (Mild)
Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission in a controlled environment
Query Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Evidence of Dr. Mokhber
Dr. Mokhber indicated that she had been Mr. Harris’ attending physician since January 2025 and had read and adopted the contents of the Hospital Report. She noted that Mr. Harris continues to experience some delusions concerning his safety and would frequently leave programs early because he didn’t feel safe. However, with careful urging, he could be coached to continue with the programs. Although he was cooperative with medications, he needed reminders due to his cognitive issues and tendency to forget.
Dr. Mokhber stated that the treatment team had reviewed Mr. Harris’ cognitive abilities with the MOCA test on which he scored 14/30 clearly indicating cognitive impairment. Difficulties were noted in attention, abstraction, executive functioning and delayed recall. However, his visual memory was “perfect”, and the treatment team found that using photographs when performing a fitness assessment greatly assisted Mr. Harris in being able to respond to fitness related questions appropriately. She had last assessed his fitness on the previous Thursday (4 days prior to the hearing) and he had been able to respond to all of the Taylor-type questions. In her opinion his understanding of the court processes and roles of the various parties was reality-based, and the treatment team was unanimously of the view that he was now fit to stand trial.
Dr. Mokhber noted that Mr. Harris no longer held beliefs such as that he could be sentenced to death and that his lawyer was conspiring against him which he had expressed her earlier in his hospitalization.
Dr. Mokhber stated that Mr. Harris now had level 2 pass privileges and was able to leave his unit three times a day for up to one hour and that the treatment team had started looking for appropriate housing for him. A referral to the Community Homes for Opportunity (CHO) program a supportive housing program for individuals with serious mental illness who may require 24-hour support of care, had been made. Dr. Mokhber emphasized that Mr. Harris needed a place to live where he would feel safe.
Dr. Mokhber noted that Mr. Harris had neither a criminal history nor a history of physical violence. The treatment team had been unable to confirm a diagnosis of PTSD largely due to the fact that Mr. Harris was not a reliable historian and did not appear to have some of the more usual symptoms of PTSD. However, in order to confirm or reject that diagnosis a psychologist with experience dealing with individuals with cognitive issues would need to review that diagnosis.
Dr. Mokhber stated that in her opinion the change in the opinion of the treatment team with respect to fitness was likely the result of three changes since November 2024:
Optimization of medications
The use of visual cues, and
His improved rapport with the treatment team.
Dr. Mokhber indicated that the treatment team based its recommendation for a detention order, should the Board find that Mr. Harris continued to be unfit, on the fact that Mr. Harris would be unable to take medication without supervision and without medication compliance there would be a high risk of a return of behaviour similar to that of the index offences. She also noted that Mr. Harris currently had no place to go outside of the hospital.
In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Harris Dr. Mokhber stated that without medication Mr. Harris’ symptoms would get worse, he would begin to feel unsafe and could react aggressively in situations where he felt unsafe.
In response to questions from panel members, Dr. Mokhber advised that a Community Treatment Order (CTO) was “on the radar” and that after the Hospital received the Board disposition the Hospital would explore one. She believed that Mr. Harris would remain in hospital voluntarily while CTOs were explored.
Analysis and Conclusion, Fitness:
The Board finds that the joint submission with respect to Mr. Harris’s fitness is well supported by the evidence. Dr. Mokhber’s evidence with respect to fitness as well as her evidence with respect to the reasons for the change in her opinion on fitness were clear and uncontradicted. In her view, although Mr. Harris continues to experience symptoms of his mental illness, he has a reality-based understanding of the nature of the proceedings, can recount his charges and plea options, and understands the roles of the various parties in a court proceeding and the meaning of an oath. She also indicated that he was able to listen to and integrate information and ask appropriate questions as well as instruct counsel in a meaningful way.
The Board finds that as of the date of the hearing Mr. Harris was fit to stand trial and should be returned to court for a review of his fitness by the court.
DATED this 12th day of August 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Robert Bigelow
Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board