Re: Dale Bull
Re: Dale Bull
ORB File No: 8749
Hearing held on: June 25, 2025
Place of hearing: Thunder Bay Regional Sciences Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg
Members: Dr. P. Prendergast
Dr. S. Wiseman
Hon. E. Kruzick
Mr. S. Duffy
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Dale Bull
Counsel: Mr. G. Iwasiw
The Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. M. Davidson
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. R. Derouard
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated August 20, 2025)
Introduction
Dale Bull was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) of arson causing damage to property on July 24, 2024, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. Upon the verdict of NCR, the Honourable Court did not make a disposition and remitted the matter for hearing before the ORB. Pursuant to a Release Order and pending this hearing, Mr. Bull has been residing at the home of his parents at 118 Whitefish Bay, Lac Seul First Nation. This is Mr. Bull’s initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “Board”).
Mr. Bull attended today’s hearing by teleconference from Lac Seul, accompanied by his parents, and was represented by his counsel, Mr. G. Iwasiw, who attended the hearing by the Ontario Transport Network (“OTN”) from Kenora.
Issues at the Hearing
- The issues to be decided are whether Mr. Bull poses a significant risk to the safety of the public and, if so, what is the necessary, appropriate, and least restrictive disposition to be made in the circumstances.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the Alt. Chair canvassed the parties with respect to their preliminary without prejudice positions. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Davidson stated that the hospital recommended a finding that Mr. Bull poses a significant threat to the safety of the public and recommended a Detention Disposition to TBRHSC with discretionary privileges that include living in the communing and other terms and conditions as set out in the Hospital Report dated May 28, 2025. The hospital recommended adding a condition that Mr. Bull not be in possession explosive or incendiary substances.
On behalf of the Attorney General, Ms. Derouard indicated that she agreed with the position taken by the Hospital.
Mr. Iwasiw, as counsel for Mr. Bull, stated that he would likely agree with the hospital’s position but wanted to hear the evidence.
Findings
- For the Reasons that follow, the panel found that the threshold for significant threat is met, and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a Detention Disposition on terms and conditions including living in the community.
Index Offence
- The allegations giving rise to the index offence are set out in the Hospital Report as follows:
“June 30, 2023, at 9:00 pm The Lac Seul Police received information of possible House fire in Kejick Bay. Cst. Gordon in the community of Kejick Bay searched with negative results. PCC then advised Officers of several calls reporting a fire in Whitefish Bay at the John Bull Jr. residence.
At 9:22 pm, Cst Gordon arrived on scene at 5 John Bull Drive Whitefish Bay. Police observed a residence to be full engulphed in flames. Lac Seul First Nation fire crews were on scene attempting to extinguish the blaze. Cst Gordon spoke to witnesses on scene, they advised Dale Bull may possibly be inside the residence. A/Sgt Kejick arrived on scene shortly after and assisted with crowd control.
June 30, 2023, John Bull Jr was at his residence with his son Dale Bull. At approximately 7:30 p.m. he left the residence to visit with his other son Jonathan Bull at his residence down the road. At approximately 8:00 pm John returned to his residence meeting with his son Dale Bull as he was exiting the residence. John attended his bedroom where he observed a small fire in his bedroom. John quickly filled up a bin with water and extinguished the fire in his bedroom. He then attended his son Dale’s bedroom where he observed a larger fire. John attempted to extinguish the blaze with negative results. He then ran to the nearby residence on Ian Trout to ask for assistance. The duo re-attended the scene of the fire and quickly learned the fire had gotten out of control and could not be put out. John ran across the street to the residence of community firefighter member Cory Smith to ask for assistance.
Cory then dispatched the rest of Lac Seul First Nations Fire team and all its available resources. Cst Gordon and A/sgt Kejick along with community members showered the community attempting to locate Dale Bull as the fire team battled the blaze.
At approximately 9:52 pm A/Sgt Kejick located Dale Bull emitting from the wooded area adjacent to the residence. As Police approached the male he advised A/Sgt Kejick he started the fire to rid the house of evil spirits. A/Sgt Kejick advised Dale Bull he was under arrest contrary to Section 434 of the Criminal Code of Canada. He was read his Rights to council and Caution which he stated he understood and declined speaking to council. He was placed in the Police vehicle while officers assisted members on scene.
At 11:14 pm Dale was lodged at the Lac Seul Police detachment without incident.”
Background Information
Mr. Bull is a 32-year-old indigenous man born in Sioux Lookout, Ontario.
Prior to his arrest on the index offence, Mr. Bull was living with his parents in Lac Seul, Whitefish Bay First Nation. He is single, not employed, and supported financially by Ontario Works.
Mr. Bull was raised by his parents and is the youngest of four boys. His parents are Residential School survivors who have a history of alcoholism.
Growing up, Mr. Bull met all his milestones and enjoyed a good relationship with his brothers. He succeeded academically with some learning difficulties.
Growing up Mr. Bull had limited involvement with mental health services and has no history of psychiatric admissions. During his adolescence, he also experienced the death of a good friend which was very difficult for him to bear.
At around the age of 17, he engaged in substance use consuming marijuana and alcohol. At age 18, he presented to the Sioux Lookout Emergency Department for a suicide attempt while intoxicated.
During his high school years, Mr. Bull resided in a boarding home in Frenchman's Head, Ontario, a small community northwest of Sioux Lookout.
There was a change in Mr. Bull’s mental health in 2019/2020 when he described feeling depressed, progressing to increased religious beliefs and symptoms of psychosis.
In March 2022, Mr. Bull was employed in seasonal positions involving hands on skills such as renovation, construction, and maintenance at a lodging camp. He last worked in March of 2022 with Valard Construction in building power lines. He discontinued his employment due to his increased anger, conflicts with colleagues, and paranoid thoughts.
Mr. Bull has been abstinent from alcohol and marijuana since May or June 2023.
Prior to the alleged offence, in June 2023, Mr. Bull mostly stayed at home with few outside interactions. As a result of Mr. Bull’s arrest on June 30th, 2023, he was in custody at the Kenora District Jail. Following his release, Mr. Bull was residing at the home of his uncle Frederick as his surety. He was taking prescribed medication and not using substances.
Since February 2024, Mr. Bull has been residing with his parents in Lac Seul.
Psychiatric History
- Mr. Bull’s Current Diagnoses are set out in the Hospital Report as follows:
Schizophrenia, multiple episodes, currently in acute episode
Rule out Alcohol Use Disorder
Rule out Cannabis Use Disorder
Evidence at the Hearing
The Board admitted into evidence several documents, most of which were filed or arise from the court proceedings and included the Assessment Report to the Court dated July 9, 2024, of Dr. M. Kravtsenyuk. The Board also admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated May 28, 2025. The Hospital Report provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. Bull, his personal history, his mental health history, and details of the outstanding charge. In addition, the Board heard the viva voce evidence of Dr. E. Leinonen, a co-author of the Report. Dr. Leinonen adopted the contents of the report.
Dr. Leinonen met with Mr. Bull on May 16, 2025, in the presence of his court support worker Shayna Gardner of Kaakewaaseya Justice Services by OTN. Mr. Bull was referred to Kaakewaaseya Justice Services following the commission of the alleged offence. He meets with his worker weekly by phone and every 2-3 weeks in person.
Mr. Bull was initially referred to the TBRHSC pursuant to a Court ordered Form 48, dated February 15, 2024, for a psychiatric assessment.
In addition to OTN meeting with Mr. Bull, in the preparation of the Hospital Report the following source material was considered:
Phone Interview with Shayna Gardner on April 14, 2025, at 1100 hours
OTN Interview with Mr. Bull on April 22, 2025, at 1130 hours
Phone Interview with Ruby and Johnathon Bull Sr., on April 22, 2025, at 1330 hours
Phone Inquiry with Lac Seul-Kejick Bay Nursing Station on May 15, 2025, at 1100 hours
Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences (TBRHSC) Forensic Documentation:
Forensic Psychosocial Assessment, Kristine Koshowski, RSW-March 26, 2024
Court Report, Dr. Kravtsenyuk-July 9, 2024
Lac Seul Police Service legal documents
Kenora Crown Attorney Office Documentation (received by email on April 11, 2025):
CPIC Query Report
Crown Brief Synopsis-June 30, 2023
In his interview with Dr. Leinonen, Mr. Bull exhibited partial insight and judgement regarding his mental state. Mr. Bull acknowledged that these symptoms may be related to schizophrenia with which he was previously diagnosed. After some education, he appeared inclined to restart the pharmacological treatment.
Dr. Leinonen testified that he prescribed new medications for Mr. Bull which were sent to the pharmacy in Sioux Lookout. At the date of the hearing Mr. Bull did not have the medication as prescribed. Dr. Leinonen testified that it will require further follow-up by the hospital team.
During the interview Dr. Leinonen found Mr. Bull to alert and well oriented and there were no fluctuations in his level of consciousness.
In the assessment of Mr. Bull’s risk of future violence, as set out in the Hospital Report, the HCR-20, Version 3, a clinically structured judgement instrument, was used.
The Hospital Report sets out that Mr. Bull is most likely to re-offend in the context of a decompensation of psychosis. His previous incidents of violence have occurred in the context of psychiatric destabilization and/or substance use. The most likely reason for destabilization of his schizophrenia could result from medication non-adherence, recreational substance use and/or psychosocial stress.
Mr. Bull independently discontinued his antipsychotic medication and has been off his medication now for several months. In the meantime, he continues to have ongoing symptoms of psychosis. This difficulty this poses for the safety of the public is that Mr. Bull has minimal support in the community as well as minimal adaptive coping strategies.
Mr. Bull has stable housing with his parents. Nevertheless, it was Dr. Leinonen’s opinion that it is necessary to manage and oversee the arrangement. If there are any changes to Mr. Bull’s housing, it would be important for the hospital to assess any potential impact that change might have on the safety of the public.
Dr. Leinonen was asked by Mr. Iwasiw when he last spoke to Mr. Bull about the new medication that was prescribed. While there has been no communication with Mr. Bull since May 16th, 2025, Dr. Leinonen stated that the social worker followed up and reported that the prescription had not arrived at Mr. Bull’s pharmacy and that she would again follow up. In Dr. Leinonen’s consultation, Mr. Bull expressed that he was willing to start the medication as prescribed. In the hospital’s future plan for Mr. Bull, it is proposed that there would be blood work, urine, and a breath or saliva follow-up on a random basis for alcohol, drug, and other intoxicants.
When asked pharmaceutical services in Mr. Bull’s community, Dr. Leinonen stated that the only service provider in Sioux Lookout is the nursing station. The reporting would be followed up by phone or remote video conferencing.
When asked about Mr. Bull’s schizophrenia, Dr. Leinonen stated that it has not been active despite not being on medication. The safeguards are Mr. Bull’s parents with whom he resides. For the most part, Mr. Bull remains isolated, occupying himself with watching movies and playing video games.
In his response to a question from the Board, Dr. Leinonen indicated that the proposal of the hospital team is to put together a plan to assess and monitor Mr. Bull. None is in place as yet. It will be addressed by the hospital team once the ORB disposition is in place. Dr. Leinonen added that as long as Mr. Bull maintains his medication regime, he could remain stable and continue to live in the community. In answer to a Board member’s question, Dr. Leinonen indicated if that if things broke down, Mr. Bull may have to be brought to the hospital for treatment and care.
In response to a question from a Board member, Dr. Leinonen testified that Sioux Lookout is approximately 5 ½ hours by car from Lac Seul First Nation where Mr. Bull currently resides. When asked about the recommendation that Mr. Bull refrain from operation of a motor vehicle, Dr. Leinonen stated that the recommendation was made because the team was of the view it may not be safe for Mr. Bull to be driving. In the end, Dr. Leinonen acknowledged that a driving prohibition may not be the most practical of terms to impose on Mr. Bull given the significant distances in Mr. Bull’s community and his need to travel to access resources, services and, perhaps, employment.
When asked about Mr. Bull’s employment, the Board was informed that Mr. Bull is not currently employed but may or could be. It was acknowledged that not being able to drive could make the possibility of employment difficult for Mr. Bull. When Dr. Leinonen was asked if he or the hospital team made a report to the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO), Dr. Leinonen confirmed that no such report was made. To the best of Dr. Leinonen’s knowledge, Mr. Bull has not been involved in any motor vehicle accidents where he was the driver.
The Board was informed that given that Mr. Bull resides in Lac Seul, which is an independent First Nation, that he would not need a driver’s license because the community is independent of the MTO. Dr. Leinonen stated that Mr. Bull would need a MTO driver’s permit to drive to Sioux Lookout or Kenora.
In response to a question from the Board about any the plans for psychological education, Dr. Leinonen indicated that given Mr. Bull’s remote community and the geographic issues that poses, the hospital team could provide Mr. Bull and his family with virtual educational programs. On the issue of community resources, the local community has a population of under five thousand inhabitants, so resources are limited.
When asked about Mr. Bull’s insight into his illness, Dr. Leinonen was of the view that it was partial. Dr. Leinonen added that Mr. Bull’s illness is such that needs to be on medication.
No further evidence was called.
Submissions of Counsel
Ms. Davidson indicated that the submission of the hospital was as stated at the outset for a finding that Mr. Bull poses a significant threat to the safety of the public. The hospital submission was for a Detention Disposition with discretionary privileges that include living in the communing and other terms and conditions set out in the Hospital Report. In its submission, the hospital recommended adding as a condition that Mr. Bull not be in possession of explosive or incendiary substances.
On behalf of the Attorney General, Ms. Derouard indicated that she agreed with the submissions of the Hospital.
Mr. Iwasiw, as counsel for Mr. Bull, stated that he agreed with the hospital’s position on the finding of significant threat. Mr. Iwasiw submitted that on the issue of the driving restriction, Mr. Bull has no criminal driving record, and he should not be restricted from driving. Otherwise, Mr. Iwasiw agreed with the disposition as sought. In closing his submission, Mr. Iwasiw expressed that Mr. Bull has the support of his family who want the best for him and that his client’s medications should be put in place.
Analysis
a) Significant Threat
As set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625, at para. 62, the court referred to a significant threat as: “[A] real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the public that is serious in the sense of going beyond the merely trivial or annoying. The conduct giving rise to harm must be criminal in nature.” Justice McLachlin made it clear in Winko that the threshold of significant threat is a “relatively high” one. She said at para. 69, that “the phrase conjures a threat to public safety of sufficient importance to justify depriving a person of his or her liberty”.
Based on the evidence of Dr. Leinonen, which we accept, the panel unanimously finds that Mr. Bull poses a significant threat to the safety of the public within the meaning of s.672.5401 of the Criminal Code.
In coming to our conclusion, the panel accepts the expert opinion of Dr. Leinonen, and the finding of the psychological risk assessment as set out in the Hospital Report. Mr. Bull is diagnosed with serious mental illnesses, namely his schizophrenia and substance use disorders. As assessed by Dr. Leinonen, we accept the evidence that Mr. Bull lacks insight into his illness and the seriousness of the index offence. On the evidence, we are satisfied that Mr. Bull poses a significant threat to the safety of the public.
b) Disposition
All parties agreed that at the present time, Mr. Bull represents a significant threat to public safety, and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a Detention Order.
In the Board’s opinion, the parties’ joint recommendation of a Detention Disposition is well-founded. Quite apart from the joint recommendation, the Board has no hesitation in accepting the evidence of Dr. Leinonen, as set out in the summary of the evidence, and the contents of the Hospital Report.
The Board relies on the expert evidence that Mr. Bull is most likely to re-offend in the context of a decompensation of psychosis. His previous incidents of violence have occurred in the context of psychiatric destabilization and/or substance use. While he is not currently using alcohol or cannabis the most likely reason for destabilization of his schizophrenia could result from medication non-adherence, recreational substance use and/or psychosocial stress.
Given that Mr. Bull poses a significant threat to the safety of the public a detention disposition is both necessary and appropriate.
The Board carefully examined terms and conditions. We agree with the privileges as proposed that include Mr. Bull’s continued living in the community on specific terms and conditions set out in the Hospital Report. We agree with the Hospital Report that although Mr. Bull currently has stable housing in the home of his parents, the approved accommodation condition is necessary to manage his violence risk should that change.
If there are any changes in his housing, it would be important for the hospital to assess any potential impact on the public safety. Based on evidence, it appears unlikely that Mr. Bull would be able to live independently at this time.
In considering the evidence, the Board does not agree with the Hospital Report that would require Mr. Bull to refrain from operating a motor vehicle. The recommendation of living in the community, which we accept, Seul Lac First Nation presents geographic challenges in accessing necessary resources, services, and the future possibility of Mr. Bull’s employment. Living in the northernly region of Northwestern Ontario, the Board recognized that driving could be necessary. We therefore find that the driving prohibition should not be a term of Mr. Bull’s detention disposition. In coming to our conclusion, we are also mindful that Mr. Bull has no record of a causing a motor vehicle accident nor a criminal driving record.
In its submission, the hospital recommended that Mr. Bull abstain from alcohol and all other non-prescribed substances. While this is not issue for Mr. Bull currently, we are mindful of the evidence that he has had issues with the consumption of alcohol and substances. The evidence supports that these substances could rapidly destabilize Mr. Bull’s psychotic disorder. Any use of psychoactive substances should be approved by the person in charge.
Bearing in mind the index offence, the panel concludes that in the disposition, Mr. Bull should not be in possession explosive or incendiary substances. We note that all counsel agree with that inclusion. On the evidence, we find that Mr. Bull should therefore be prohibited from possession of explosive substances and incendiary devices.
Based on the evidence as presented at this hearing, the Board finds that a Detention Order is both necessary and appropriate.
Conclusion
On the evidence, we find that the jurisdictional threshold of significant threat is met.
We also conclude that a Detention Disposition with discretionary privileges that include living in the community is the necessary and appropriate disposition that is a the least onerous and least restrictive while recognizing public safety as our paramount consideration and Mr. Bull’s rehabilitation and other needs.
DATED this 20th day of August 2025 at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
E. Kruzick
Legal Member
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board