Ontario Review Board
Re: Jason A. Rock
ORB File No: 5552
Hearing held on: Monday, May 12, 2025, and Tuesday, July 8, 2025
Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan
Dr. G. Boulais
Ms. M.L. Bridger
Ms. N. Lemieux-McKinnon
Accused: Jason A. Rock
Counsel: Ms. M. Munsterman
Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. P. Miltenberg
Representative: Dr. M. Strike
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. M. Dufort
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated August 21, 2025)
Introduction
On February 12, 2010 Jason Rock was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of fail to comply with a condition of undertaking or recognizance, utter threats to cause death or bodily harm, and failure to comply with probation order, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).
Mr. Rock is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated January 15, 2024, which detains him at the Secure Forensic Unit of the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre with privileges up to and including to live in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On May 12th, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (the “ORB” or the “Board”) convened a hearing at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre (“ROMHC”) pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. The annual review for Mr. Rock was held in person. The Hospital was represented by Ms. Paige Miltenburg, the Attorney-General by Ms. Marie Dufort and Mr. Rock by Ms. Marni Munsterman.
The issues for this hearing are whether Mr. Rock continues to meet the threshold for significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, to determine the Disposition that is necessary and appropriate in all the circumstances.
Preliminary Matters
- Mr. Rock’s hearing was initially scheduled for a full day and subsequently rescheduled to a half-day which began at 9:00 on May 12th. By 12:00 the Panel had yet to begin questioning the treating psychiatrist and it was evident that there was insufficient time to conclude the proceedings in advance of 13:00, when the next hearing was scheduled to begin. The Panel proposed delaying the start time of the hearing scheduled for 13:00 to 14:30 as there was no hearing previously scheduled for that time slot. Patient’s Counsel indicated she had an irrevocable commitment for 13:30 and would therefore not be available at 14:30. The Parties, their respective Counsels and the seized Panel were therefore canvassed to determine and set a one off date during which