Re Perston McLeod, 2025 CanLII 92536

Re: Perston McLeod

ORB File No: 7695

Hearing held on: Wednesday, August 20, 2025

Place of hearing: North Bay Regional Health Centre – North Bay Site

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. Flanagan

Members: Dr. W.J. Komer Dr. M. Green Ms. C. Murray Ms. B. Naegele

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Perston McLeod Counsel: Mr. W.G. Stickland

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. P. Trenker

The person on behalf of hospital: Mr. R. Holden

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. M. Mazurski

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated September 5, 2025)

Introduction

1. On February 7, 2020, Perston McLeod was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of failing to comply with probation (x5), uttering a threat to cause death or bodily harm (x4), and causing mischief under $5000, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).

2. On August 20, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“Board” or “panel”) convened to review Mr. McLeod’s current Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. At the time of the hearing, Mr. McLeod was ordered detained within the Forensic Programs of the North Bay Regional Health Centre – North Bay Site (“NBRHC” or “the hospital”), with privileges up to and including living in the community within Ontario, in 24-hour supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.

3. Mr. McLeod was present at the hearing and represented throughout by his counsel, Mr. Wayne Stickland.

4. A Hospital Report dated July 3, 2025, was entered as Exhibit 1 at the hearing.

5. The issues to be determined are whether Mr. McLeod continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

6. For the reasons set out below and based on the evidence and opinions before us, the Board found that Mr. McLeod continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board finds that a continuation of the Detention Disposition, with the elimination of clause 2(g) of the Disposition, within the Forensic Programs at NBRHC is the necessary and appropriate Order having regard to the safety of the public, which is the paramount concern, and also having regard to Mr. McLeod’s mental health, reintegration into society, and his other needs.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses

7. Schizoaffective Disorder;

Antisocial Personality Disorder;

Alcohol Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment;

Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment;

Cocaine Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment;

Amphetamine Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment;

Opiate Use Disorder; and

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.

Position of the Parties

8. At the commencement of the hearing, the parties were canvassed for their, without prejudice, positions. The hospital, represented by Mr. Trenker, supported by counsel for the Attorney General, Ms. Mazurski, took the position that Mr. McLeod continues to represent a significant threat to the public and the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the current Detention Order on the same terms as last year, accepting a request for the removal of clause 2(g).

9. Counsel for Mr. McLeod, Mr. Stickland, conceded the issue of significant threat and, after hearing the evidence, agreed with the hospital’s recommendations including the removal of clause 2(g).

10. Therefore, there was a joint recommendation on all issues.

Index Offence

11. The details of the index offences are excerpted from last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:

“The victims of the index offences are employees of the Corner Clinic in Sudbury, Ontario. At the time, Mr. McLeod frequented the clinic on a regular basis. On Sept 17, 2019, he met with Michel Marcotte. When leaving the clinic, Mr. McLeod uttered that he was “going to smash his head through the fucking mirror”. When Mr. McLeod returned to the clinic two days later, he was asked to leave. Mr. McLeod looked directly at the two staff and indicated that he was going to punch them both in the face, calling them vulgar names. Later that same day, he had a brief argument with another client of the clinic and encountered Mr. Marcotte, to whom he stated, “I will fucking kill you.” Police were called and he was arrested at the clinic.”

Evidence at the Hearing

12. The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report as Exhibit 1. This detailed document provides information concerning Mr. McLeod’s personal history and background, criminal history, mental health history, and his course in hospital both prior to the index offences and after. Since the Hospital Report was made an Exhibit, it is not necessary to repeat that information in these Reasons.

13. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. McLeod’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. Le, gave evidence.

14. Dr. Le testified that Mr. McLeod is psychiatrically stable and has made improvements in the past year, particularly regarding impulsive behaviours. Mr. McLeod is first on the waiting list for Dual Diagnosis – Transitional Rehabilitation Housing Program (“DD-TRHP”). Mr. McLeod will be undergoing the transitional process, which includes trial overnight stays and visits to the DD-TRHP home. There is not yet a specific date for his transition to that home.

15. Dr. Le said the hospital is requesting a removal of clause 2(g) from the Disposition. That clause specifically states, “to attend an addictions treatment program anywhere in the Province of Ontario and be permitted indirectly supervised privileges as necessary for the purpose of the program.” Dr. Le testified that Mr. McLeod hasn’t been able to demonstrate that he is able to go into the community indirectly supervised. Due to his cognitive issues, Mr. McLeod will not be able to be indirectly supervised for the length of time necessary for a treatment program. Also, he would not benefit from such a program due to his cognitive issues. At the hospital, the treatment team has been able to adjust his treatment for addictions to his level of cognitive ability. The hospital will offer treatment as needed for his substance use disorder when Mr. McLeod is discharged to DD-TRHP. Dr. Le confirmed that the hospital has the resources to provide such treatment.

Analysis and Conclusions

16. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions of the parties, the Board independently finds that Mr. McLeod remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.

17. Mr. McLeod suffers from Schizoaffective Disorder, several Substance Use Disorders, and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. He has a history of aggressivity, violence, and threatening behaviours. He has an extensive history of violent criminal offences and was incarcerated for manslaughter in 2005.

18. Although Mr. McLeod’s insight is improving with respect to how substance use contributes to possible decompensation of his mental status, it is not known if he will be able to abstain in the community. He had a positive urine drug screen test for cocaine in April 2024.

19. As a consequence of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, Mr. McLeod has significant cognitive impairment resulting in challenges with behavioural regulation and impulse control. He tends to misperceive situations, in part, due to his cognitive impairment. This can result in outbursts and difficulty regulating his behaviours.

20. Mr. McLeod continues to require a high level of support and supervision from his treatment team. The treatment team is of the unanimous opinion that Mr. McLeod continues to pose significant risk of harm to the public.

21. Mr. McLeod would likely become non-compliant with his medications without the significant level of support he is receiving. This would likely lead to decompensation in his mental state. A decompensation in his mental state would lead to aggression and violence, which would place members of the public at significant risk of harm.

22. In light of the Board’s finding of significant threat, it is charged with shaping the Disposition for the coming year.

23. The Board accepts the joint submission of the parties and finds that a continuation of his Detention Disposition is necessary and appropriate based on the evidence before us. There is no air of reality to a Conditional Discharge at this juncture.

24. The Board agrees to remove clause 2(g) from the Disposition. It is clear from the viva voce evidence of Dr. Le that Mr. McLeod would fail to benefit from a residential rehabilitation program for substance use and he has not been able to demonstrate that he would be a candidate for indirectly supervised privileges for the length of stay required at a residential addictions’ treatment program.

25. The Board congratulates Ms. McLeod on the many gains he has made this year, and we wish him the best as he transitions to the community at DD-TRHP.

26. The Board finds that the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive Disposition is a Detention Order within the Forensic Programs at NBRHC on the terms set out in our formal Disposition.

DATED this 5th day of September 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. Christine Murray

Legal Member

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board