Re Fitzroy Rainford, 2025 CanLII 81175

Re: Fitzroy Rainford

ORB File No: 8774

Hearing held on: Wednesday, June 11, 2025

Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care

Pursuant to: Sections 672.47(1) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. G. Nexhipi Ms. M. Chamberlain Ms. B. Little

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Fitzroy Rainford Counsel: Ms. C. Francis (via Zoom)

The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Armenise

FRESH REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated August 14, 2025)

1On April 28, 2025, Fitzroy Rainford was found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder a charge of assault with a weapon, assault with intent to steal, disguise with intent, and theft under $5000, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, (the “Criminal Code”).

2On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or the “Hospital”) pursuant to ss. 672.47(1) and 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code, for Mr. Rainford’s initial hearing. Mr. Rainford was in attendance and was represented by his counsel, Ms. C. Francis.

3In accordance with s. 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code, the Board must decide whether Mr. Rainford is fit to stand trial on the day of the hearing, within the meaning of s. 2 of the Criminal Code. Specifically, is Mr. Rainford unable, on account of mental disorder, to understand the nature of a trial and the possible consequences of the proceedings and to meaningfully communicate with counsel.

4If Mr. Rainford is found fit, he must be sent back to court. If he is found unfit, the Board must make a Disposition that is necessary and appropriate, considering the criteria set forth in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

5For the reasons set out below, and based on the joint submission of the parties, this Board concludes that Mr. Rainford is fit to stand trial and that he be sent back to court without delay to have the court determine his fitness to stand trial. We further order that while awaiting his return to court, a Keep Fit Order and a Disposition detaining him at the Forensic Service of Waypoint should be made, pursuant to s. 672.49 of the Criminal Code, to ensure that Mr. Rainford’s fitness is maintained prior to his trial.

Position of the Parties

6At the beginning of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. Ms. Murdock, on behalf of the Hospital, submitted that Mr. Rainford is now Fit and should return to court for his hearing. The Hospital asked the Board to make a Keep Fit order detaining Mr. Rainford at the Hospital until the time of his hearing.

7This position was supported by Ms. Armenise, on behalf of the Attorney General. Ms. Francis stated that her client supported the Hospital on the issue of fitness and was hoping to remain at the Hospital until he could return to court for his hearing.

Index Offence

8The circumstances of the index offence are taken from the Synopsis for Plea, as follows:

“On January 9th 2025 the accused before the court attended the Dollarama at 2480 Eglinton Ave E in the city of Toronto. The accused entered the store painted in Silver covering his face and the body parts visible that were not covered in clothing.

The accused immediately selected a large chef knife from the display. The accused, known to the victim who is a security guard at the Dollarama, recognized the accused and began to follow and record the accused around the store. The accused was observed by the victim select several other items including painter's tape and super glue. The accused then proceeded to the front of the store where he exited the store without paying for any of the items that he had selected.

The accused exited the store as the victim followed the accused outside. The victim demanded for the items back and the accused raised the knife still in the package over his head and said "Get away from me". The victim, fearing for his safety, back away as the accused began to walk Westbound on Eglinton Ave E towards Kennedy Subway Station.

The victim then called police.

The accused was located by police on a Westbound Subway train leaving Kennedy Subway. The accused was arrested on the train and exited at Warden.

The accused refused to identify himself and was transported to 41 Division.”

Current Psychiatric Diagnosis:

• Schizophrenia

Evidence at Hearing:

9The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated May 16, 2025, a Progress Note dated June 11, 2025 and the testimony of Dr. Van Impe.

10Mr. Rainford’s fitness was described in the Progress note as follows:

“I asked FR if I could assess his fitness to stand trial and he agreed to this. FR did remarkably well this morning and participated in a normal give-and-take conversation. He provided responses that were linear, organized, goal-directed and appropriate to the questions asked. For the first time during this admission, FR was able to identify all of his charges and demonstrated an understanding of the alleged conduct that resulted in these charges. He was not certain who his lawyer was but said that he would work with any lawyer assigned to him. He identified this individual as "defense". He was also able to identify and define the roles of the Judge and "prosecutor". He appreciated that the courtroom is an adversarial environment and told me that the "prosecutor" was against him in the courtroom. He identified the pleas available to an accused as "guilty" and "not guilty". He told me that the Judge would determine whether he was guilty or not guilty. I asked FR if he had considered how he would plead to his charges and he replied, "I need to talk to a lawyer first". He said that he could "go to jail" if he was found guilty and said that he would be "free" if he was found not guilty. He was able to correctly define the oath as a "promise to tell the truth". I asked FR if it was a criminal offence to lie while under oath and he said "yes" but could not identify the term perjury.

FR has continued to demonstrate a robust improvement in his mental state over the course of the last two to three weeks. He has maintained compliance with an antipsychotic medication administered via intramuscular injection.”

11Ms. Murdock called Dr. Van Impe to give evidence on behalf of the hospital. The doctor informed the Board that he had assessed Mr. Rainford’s fitness earlier that day and he was able to easily answer all of the Taylor test questions. He was engaged in the conversation with the doctor and was not distracted. Dr. Van Impe opined that Mr. Rainford would be able to attend and meaningfully participate in his criminal proceedings.

12Dr. Van Impe noted that Mr. Rainford remained a bit suspicious but has very few other symptoms of his mental illness. Mr. Rainford’s fitness had been improving over the time that he was at Waypoint but Dr. Van Impe’s assessment earlier that day was the first time he had been clearly fit. The doctor stated that Mr. Rainford’s fitness is largely as a result of the injections that he is receiving. Mr. Rainford will need to remain on his current medication in order to remain fit for his trial. He is capable to consent to his treatment and has agreed to continue to take his medication by injection. There have been times, in the past where Mr. Rainford has resisted his medication while in the community. Therefore, it would be best for him to remain at the Hospital.

13In response to questions from the Board, Dr. Van Impe stated the following:

1. Mr. Rainford has a pattern of medication non-compliance in community.
2. Mr. Rainford was very ill when he came to the Hospital. He posed an elevated risk to staff and the public. This risk is now being controlled due to his antipsychotic injections.
3. Mr. Rainford is currently on the assessment unit at Waypoint with a security level of C2. This allows him to go off unit with other co-patients and one staff member. He will most likely stay on this unit if the Board orders him to remain at Waypoint.

Final Submissions:

14At the conclusion of the hearing, counsel for the Hospital and the Crown relied on the evidence and made no further submissions to the Board. Counsel for Mr. Rainford stated that his client would like to go back to court to answer his charges and wanted to stay at Waypoint until then.

Findings of the Board:

15Having heard and considered all of the evidence and submissions from the parties, the Board agrees with the joint submission that Mr. Rainford is fit to stand trial. The Board finds the test for fitness, as outlined in s. 672 of the Criminal Code and in R v Taylor and R v Bharwani, has been met. Mr. Rainford does understand the nature and object of the proceedings; he understands his charges and their possible consequences; and he can communicate meaningfully with counsel. Mr. Rainford has a reality-based understanding of the nature and object and possible consequences of the proceedings and has the ability to make decisions regarding his case.

16Absent forensic supervision and detention in hospital, it is likely that Mr. Rainford would not take his medication, decompensate and again become unfit to stand trial. As a result, the Board orders that he be made subject to a Keep Fit Order and that he be returned to court. This is the necessary and appropriate finding in this matter.

17Pending his return to court, pursuant to s. 672.49 of the Criminal Code, we find that the least onerous and least restrictive Disposition is as recommended in the Hospital Report. We order that he be detained at Waypoint, with the following terms and privileges:

1. To attend within or outside of the hospital for necessary medical, dental, legal or compassionate purposes;
2. Hospital grounds privileges, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff;
3. To abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
4. To submit samples of his urine and/or breath to the Person in Charge of Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care or his or her designate for the purpose of analyzing whether he has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant; and
5. Refrain from having in his possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer.