Ontario Review Board
Re: Adeel Rahman
Hearing held on: Thursday, November 20, 2025
Place of Hearing: Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Hageraats
Members: Dr. S. Lessard
Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan
Ms. J. Fuller
Mr. A. Bouvier
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Adeel Rahman
Counsel: Mr. R. Guertin
Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. J. Gojer
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. M. Dufort
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 8, 2026)
Introduction
Mr. Adeel Rahman appeared in Court charged with criminal harassment, an offence contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. On September 17, 2025, the Court received expert psychiatric evidence establishing that Mr. Rahman was suffering from a severe mental disorder when he committed the offence. Based on that evidence, Mr. Rahman was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”).
Rather than render a disposition, the Court required Mr. Rahman to appear before the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) for the Board to render a disposition. On November 20, 2025, Mr. Rahman appeared before a Board panel at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre (“ROMHC” or “the hospital”). He was represented by counsel, Mr. Ronald Guertin.
Mr. Rahman arrived late for the morning hearing. Mr. Rahman advised that his mother had driven him from their home. Mr. Rahman was asked whether he wished to have his mother attend. He declined, stating she would be waiting outside the building.
At the hearing, the Board received direct testimony from Dr. Julian Gojer, forensic psychiatrist with the ROMHC. The following documents were filed in evidence:
Hospital Report to ORB dated November 3, 2025
Hospital Report NCR, dated July 31, 2025
Section 21 Mental Health assessment dated March 6, 2025
Court Information dated August 22, 2022
Undertaking to officer in charge, August 17, 2022
Assessment Orders re: criminal responsibility, dated May 28 and July 28, 2025
Criminal Record Inquiry
Release Order, dated March 28, 2018
Release Order, dated August 22, 2018
The issues to be considered by the Board are whether Mr. Rahman represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and, if so, to determine the necessary and appropriate disposition.
Positions of the Parties
The hospital representative, Dr. Gojer, suggested that an absolute discharge could be available, or, alternatively, if the Board did not agree, a conditional discharge could be considered.
Counsel for the Attorney-General, Ms. Dufort, reserved her position. Counsel speaking for Mr. Rahman, Mr. Guertin, asked the Board to consider an absolute discharge. Mr. Guertin also advised that if a conditional discharge was being considered, then everything the doctor had to say would be relevant.
For the reasons set out below, the Board decided that the issue of significant threat was established. Mr. Rahman was discharged, subject to conditions.
Psychiatric Diagnoses, Hospital Report dated November 3, 2025, p.52
- Bipolar Mood Disorder, in remission
- Mr. Rahman is treated with psychiatric medication, Lamotrigine 150 mg hs.
Index Offence
- The circumstances are described in the police documents and in the hospital report. The criminal harassment began in mid-April 2021. It continued for more than a year, ending in mid-June 2022. In summary:
Mr. Rahman and the victim of his criminal harassment, Ms. N., met online in late 2020. She was living in Windsor, Ontario, while he resided between Ottawa and Waterloo.
Both Mr. Rahman and Ms. N. were experiencing acid reflux/heartburn-like symptoms. This prompted them to join Facebook groups for people facing the same problem. Mr. Rahman and Ms. N. began communicating by text and on-line chat. They also spoke to each other on the phone. Their relationship was not romantic.
By February 2021, Ms. N. became uncomfortable with Mr. Rahman’s topics of conversation. She ended their calls. Over the following months, she received numerous unwanted texts and messages from him. She then blocked him online.
Thereafter, Ms. N. started to receive a very high volume of emails from Mr. Rahman. In March 2021, she reached out to the Windsor Police Service to file the first of at least three police reports submitted over an extended period. She made it clear to Mr. Rahman she did not wish any contact from him at all. The Windsor Police Service also communicated the same message to him.
Several of Mr. Rahman’s emails detailed his various trips to Toronto along with several trips he had made to Windsor in attempts to locate her. He described a separate trip to Dubai which he made trying to impress Ms. N.
Mr. Rahman would describe his genitalia and what he was doing to them. He made frequent suicide threats. On any given day, his emails numbered in the hundreds.
Mr. Rahman created several posts across social media. He went so far as to create “subreddits” under Ms. N’s name. He made use of her digital image with the word “killer” scribbled on her forehead. He made false allegations that she had murdered people and pushed others to commit suicide.
Ms. N. was extremely frightened when she learned Mr. Rahman had repeatedly come to Windsor looking for her. His harassing conduct persisted for more than a year. It became more extreme as time went on, making Ms. N. very fearful that Mr. Rahman was going to harm her. Ms. N. seriously considered changing her legal name as a protective measure.
Ms. N’s parents feared for their daughter’s safety whenever she had to go outside. They considered getting a security system for the home.
Following reports to the Windsor Police Service, the Ottawa Police Service became involved. On July 25, 2022, Constable Cook of the OPS contacted Mr. Rahman. He responded, and provided Constable Cook with an online “initial report”, accompanied by attachments.
Mr. Rahman’s report contained little detail other than to say that Ms. N. and he had entered into a business agreement which did not work out. Mr. Rahman wrote the officer claiming it was Ms. N. who had started harassing him, and that she had cost him thirty thousand dollars.
Mr. Rahman added how he suffered from multiple health and mental health issues which were aggravated by Ms. N.’s ‘abusing him’. He blamed Ms. N. and went on to say he was considering medically assisted suicide (MAID).
Constable Cook checked Facebook, where Mr. Rahman said the victim had originally contacted him. The officer discovered a disturbing page with her name. The Facebook profile contained disturbing references to the Quran and to killing non-believers. The profile picture carried a label, “The Suicide Killer”. More extensive details of this fake Facebook page are further described in the initial Assessment Report, dated March 6, 2025.
The fake Facebook page contained a link to a Reddit post and group. The Reddit moderator carried a username, “celestialsuicide”. No other individuals are known to have posted to the group site.
The Reddit user, “celestialsuicide”, had been online since January 13, 2016. A later set of fifteen postings were directed to Ms. N. Similar allegations were made naming her and claiming she had “manipulated a man to commit suicide”.
On August 17, 2022, Constable Cook had Mr. Rahman attend the Ottawa Police Station. Mr. Rahman was arrested and served with an Undertaking to appear in Court. Conditions of Release prohibited him from contacting the victim and from posting anything on the internet.
Personal Background
Mr. Rahman is thirty-one. As a single man, without dependents, he resides in Ottawa with his parents. The father is retired from a career as an economist with the Federal Government. His mother was a doctor in Pakistan and worked in the home in Canada. Mr. Rahman has no siblings. By earlier reports, he was close to his parents.
Mr. Rahman has no record of criminal convictions.
Mr. Rahman reported that his parents belong to a Muslim sect, the Ahmedis. For some time now, he feels they have been controlling him. He has difficulty relating to them over their religious views. Although Mr. Rahman respects his parents, he does not want to involve them in his medical care.
Mr. Rahman began school at the age of five in Toronto. He was a good student. The family moved to Ottawa when he was ten. He did well in school here, relating well to teachers and peers.
Mr. Rahman completed Grade 12. In 2020, he attended the University of Waterloo where he completed an English degree. In 2023, he went on to study at Carleton University where he completed most of the courses towards an MBA.
Mr. Rahman has worked at Nike and for Beavertails but has not had any more extended employment. At the present hearing, the panel learned that Mr. Rahman may have now completed his master’s degree. This is according to his recent report made to Dr. Gojer. Mr. Rahman also told Dr. Gojer he is now employed, although the location and circumstances were not clearly described.
For religious reasons, Mr. Rahman has not been dating. According to a clinical note, he was recently in a romantic relationship with a woman in Tunisia, which lasted for a year.
Mr. Rahman has struggled for years with several serious medical conditions. These have caused him considerable anguish and embarrassment. The diagnoses appear in the hospital report dated March 6, 2025.
Recent Adult Psychiatric History
Mr. Rahman feels that living with his family has caused him considerable trauma because of what he considers is their involvement in a cult. He feels he has not been treated properly. He has struggled to find a family doctor. He does have an internist, Dr. Anri Lange, who is investigating his pituitary problems.
Mr. Rahman is described as a somewhat guarded man.
When initially assessed in March 2025, he spoke relevantly and coherently. His mood was settled, with no evidence of mania, depression or anger. Cognitive functions were intact. He did not present with any intellectual deficits. Mr. Rahman was diagnosed as suffering from a Bipolar Mood Disorder, appearing to be in remission. The assessor added, “… whether he suffers from a Schizoaffective Disorder is unclear”.
Mr. Rahman reported that at the time of the index offence period in 2021 and 2022, his family doctor in Waterloo had prescribed a stimulant, Adderall. Were this true, the 2025 assessor noted, it likely would have triggered an elevated mood during the offence period.
Dr. Gojer’s attempts to obtain records from the Waterloo family doctor were not successful. It is noted that use of a stimulant can aggravate an underlying Bipolar Disorder or can independently cause manic and/or psychotic symptoms.
Dr. Gojer spoke with Mr. Rahman in greater detail in July 2025 when conducting the NCR assessment. Dr. Gojer learned that Mr. Rahman had initially entered a guilty plea to the index charge of criminal harassment.
Mr. Rahman reported having had problems with his memory and concentration. In 2021, he saw a Dr. Shaung Xu, a Waterloo psychiatrist. Mr. Rahman recalled that he started taking Adderall, as first prescribed by Dr. Xu, in February 2021. Mr. Rahman described to Dr. Gojer that within a few days to a few weeks his mood became elevated. He was sleeping less, had more energy and was spending more money. He felt he could take on any task and stopped going to school. For no reason at all, he moved to Toronto, bought a dog, and then flew to Dubai.
Mr. Rahman described having first met the victim in January 2021 through the Facebook Acid Reflux group. Mr. Rahman recalled how his mood was extremely elevated for several months after March 2021, and even more so later on when Dr. Xu increased the Adderall dose.
Mr. Rahman described travelling from place to place in Ontario. He could not care for his new dog and was staying in hotels. He moved from Ottawa to Mississauga, and then to Brampton where he lived in a storage unit. He would travel to Windsor and St. Catherines. He stopped studying and spent much of his time on the streets. He lost about 80 pounds.
Mr. Rahman described becoming fearful of Ms. N. He felt she was trying to harm him based on her messages. That said, Mr. Rahman did not dispute sending her numerous emails. He admitted his mood was very elevated at the time.
Mr. Rahman did not dispute having sent the victim as many as 1700 emails. He admitted having gone to Windsor twice by Uber. However, he denied going there to search for Ms. N., advising instead that he did not know where she lived. Mr. Rahman admitted creating posts across social media using images of the victim, with the word “killer” scribbled on her forehead. He admitted that he did post comments, alleging she had murdered and pushed people to commit suicide.
Mr. Rahman reported that, on January 1, 2022, he was admitted for a few days to a hospital in St. Catherines when in a manic state. He was still taking Adderall, was drinking energy drinks, sleeping less, and was elevated in mood. He was hypersexual and recalled feeling he wanted to have sex with the victim; while believing he loved her.
Within a month following his arrest at Ottawa in August 2022, Mr. Rahman saw an Ottawa psychiatrist, Dr. Asmat Khan. Dr. Khan took Mr. Rahman off Adderall and prescribed Lamotrigine. His mood settled very quickly. Dr. Gojer has not been able to obtain records from Dr. Khan, who is no longer practicing. Dr. Gojer believes that Mr. Rahman’s mood has been stable since then.
Earlier Psychiatric History
Mr. Rahman reported having had psychiatric problems in late 2014. He was admitted to the Queensway-Carleton Hospital for a few weeks and diagnosed with major depression.
In 2015, according to Mr. Rahman’s recollection, he was psychotic and suspicious of people wanting to harm him. He believed people were spying on him through his camera phone. He recalled throwing his phone in the toilet.
In 2016, Mr. Rahman was admitted to the Queensway Carleton Hospital for a manic episode. He was treated with medication and recovered fully.
Mr. Rahman has had other admissions to the Ottawa Civic Hospital, Humber River Hospital and a hospital in St. Catherines. By his recollection, Mr. Rahman estimates having had about ten admissions for episodes of depression and/or elevated mood. He would take his medication sporadically.
In 2018, a physical disturbance arose in the family home. Following arrest by the Ottawa Police on charges of assault, threats and forcible confinement, Mr. Rahman appeared in court, where he was released on an Undertaking given to a Justice. The document (Exhibit 8) is dated March 28, 2018. He was required to reside at 35 Waller Street, the Ottawa Mission. He was prohibited from associating or communicating in any way with his parents and from attending within 250 metres of their locations, including their places of residence and employment. A weapons’ prohibition was ordered.
About five months later, on August 22, 2018, the court provided Mr. Rahman with a revised Undertaking (Exhibit 9). He was allowed to reside at the parent’s residence in Ottawa while still prohibited from associating or communicating with them except with their written revokable consent filed in advance with the investigating police officer, Constable Gonzales. The weapons’ prohibition continued.
In 2018, Mr. Rahman ended up being seen by Dr. Ahmed at the Precision Medical Clinic. Dr. Ahmed prepared a report for the court. He prescribed medication for Mr. Rahman, Cymbalta. Mr. Rahman was followed by Dr. Ahmed for a year until 2020, when he was discharged with no follow-up.
The 2018 charges did not proceed to trial. Instead, Mr. Rahman entered a s. 810 Criminal Code Recognizance (Peace Bond) for a period of one year. He was required to keep the peace and be of good behaviour.
When he prepared the report on criminal responsibility in July 2025, Dr. Gojer was only able to gather limited information from Mr. Rahman’s parents. In a telephone interview with the father, it was learned that Mr. Rahman’s maternal grandmother had been diagnosed with a Bipolar illness. A sister in-law is also reported as maybe having a mental illness.
Dr. Gojer learned from the father that Mr. Rahman completed his English degree at Waterloo University. The father was unaware of his son’s dating as this is not part of their culture. According to the father, the family hoped the son’s marriage would be discussed within the family. The father told Dr. Gojer that his son suffered from depression as a young adult. He would have bouts of being withdrawn. Bouts of elevated mood were also described, with overactivity, spending excess money, and making unnecessary purchases.
The father confirmed that the police were called in 2018. The father told Dr. Gojer he thought the police may have ‘overreacted’ at the time by laying charges. He confirmed that in 2018, Adeel Rahman was not allowed home for a year.
Dr. Gojer’s report lists many medical and psychiatric problems.
Mr. Rahman has suffered from anxiety from a young age. Over time his anxiety worsened. (There is) a very conflicted relationship with his parents over religious views and the history of conflict in the family (which) seems to be minimized by his father. I was unable to explore these religious conflicts, but they appear to have left Mr. Rahman traumatized and contributed to his hypersensitive, mistrust, irritability and mood problems. Borderline traits in his personality are suspected. Mr. Rahman does not have a history of alcohol or drug use but there has been a concern at various periods of time when he used Aswaganda, a root which has psychotomimetic properties, and he became psychotic when using it.
- The July 2025 report also contains the following passage:
Mr. Rahman said that his manic episodes can last from a few weeks to up to a year. When elevated in mood, he has more energy, spends more money, becomes hypersexual, argumentative, threatening, and paranoid. When in manic states, he posts relevant but unrelated comments on the internet, behavior that was unusual for him.
When depressed he isolates himself, becomes suicidal, has cut his wrists once, and has no energy or motivation.
He feels that living with his family has caused him considerable trauma because of their involvement in a cult and desire to control his life. He also feels that he has not had proper treatment.
Dr. Gojer reviewed Mr. Rahman’s medical records from the Waterloo University Health Clinic. These relate to the time when Mr. Rahman saw Dr. Xu and others who were prescribing him with Adderall. The records did not identify any manic state or symptoms nor any psychosis.
However, from the records, Dr. Gojer noted – and as Mr. Rahman has stated - he was never seen face-to-face. Instead, interviews with the Waterloo doctors were short. These were done over the phone when the Covid-19 pandemic was underway. The notes suggest that Mr. Rahman may have been abusing his Adderall: he was asking for more prescriptions from different locations.
Dr. Gojer wrote in the report that Mr. Rahman does takes responsibility for his offending behaviour and has recognized that his actions caused the victim to fear him. Mr. Rahman has remained on the mood stabilizing drug, Lamotrigine, since September 2022. He has been in the community for more than three years, relatively unsupervised, and has not reoffended while taking his medication diligently.
Dr. Gojer notes that Mr. Rahman has good insight into his illness, the association between stimulants and a mood disorder, and his need to be on a mood stabilizer and abstain from medication that can trigger a mood disorder.
After his last Ottawa psychiatrist moved away, Mr. Rahman was able to continue getting his prescription refilled. He did find a family doctor and hopes to be referred to a community-based psychiatrist. He has not contacted the victim since being charged and has had no desire to contact her.
Dr. Gojer describes Mr. Rahman to be somewhat guarded. Mr. Rahman did not permit Dr. Gojer to obtain collateral information from the family. He is a private person and feels his family will likely talk about him to other people. He wants to keep them out of his personal matters.
Given the length of time that Mr. Rahman has been in the community, his proactive approach to having his illness treated, having stopped taking the offending medication Adderall, in the absence of a history of drugs or alcohol abuse, and with the present use of a mood stabilizer, Dr. Gojer feels that Mr. Rahman’s risk of reoffending is low.
Dr. Gojer would like to have had a psychological assessment done to engage Mr. Rahman in some counselling to address his feelings of being traumatized by his parents. These are secondary issues to his illness and did not directly contribute to his offending. In his last report, Dr. Gojer wrote that Mr. Rahman’s continuing risk was low. Dr. Gojer did not see Mr. Rahman as posing a significant risk to the public.
Evidence at the Hearing
The Board also received direct testimony from Dr. Julian Gojer, Forensic Psychiatrist and Acting Clinical Director of the Integrated Forensic Program at the ROMHC. Dr. Gojer is the author of the three hospital reports filed in evidence.
In the early part of his presentation, Dr. Gojer explained that there are limitations in his assessment. Dr. Gojer would have liked to have obtained more complete information from Mr. Rahman’s parents. He has very little information from them, nor does he have any information from Mr. Rahman’s collaterals.
Dr. Gojer does see that some risk is presented to the public having regard to Mr. Rahman’s longstanding diagnosis of depression involving multiple episodes of his Bipolar illness. The anxiety and depression are chronic in nature. Dr. Gojer stated that much of this relates to his relationship with the parents. Dr. Gojer added, this could be a risk factor considering that Mr. Rahman considers that his relationship with them is based on trauma.
Dr. Gojer described Mr. Rahman as “generally prosocial although, in the past, he had an episode where he cut his own wrist”. Dr. Gojer has a limited suspicion that this could relate to a possible, but more likely not, personality disorder.
Dr. Gojer explained that if Mr. Rahman were discharged on conditions, this would let him access additional services from a psychologist while a designated forensic patient. Mr. Rahman would be given greater priority to receive psychological services. Under an absolute discharge, he would have lower priority.
Dr. Gojer responded to a series of questions posed by counsel appearing for the Attorney- General, Ms. Dufort. Most of what he knows about Mr. Rahman is based on self-report. Dr. Gojer said it would be ideal if Mr. Rahman would consent to provide all the available information so that he could have a meaningful discussion with the family doctor.
Dr. Gojer noted that when Mr. Rahman stopped seeing Dr. Ahmed, it was felt that he had done as much as he could with the program at that time.
Responding to questions posed by Board members, Dr. Gojer confirmed that there are limitations in his assessment. He saw Mr. Rahman on three occasions starting with the initial assessment which began in the spring of 2025. Mr. Rahman has refused Dr. Gojer’s permission to speak with his parents. His contact with the family was limited to a brief phone conversation with the father and an email.
Mr. Rahman told Dr. Gojer that he supposedly will have a first meeting tomorrow with a family doctor. This appears to be a different physician from the family doctor who he had been dealing with up to now. Dr. Gojer did not have a name for either physician. He stated it could be important to get records from some of the sources involved with the patient’s earlier treatment.
Dr. Gojer stated that while the assessment is not complete, he does consider Mr. Rahman’s current mental state to be stable.
A Board member pressed Dr. Gojer on the issue of risk, asking whether it was too early to say that Mr. Rahman is not a risk to the public. Dr. Gojer did not dispute that Mr. Rahman is a risk. Dr. Gojer explained that he would want to push for Mr. Rahman to get access to psychological services and to deal with his trauma symptoms. Dr. Gojer again stated how he would like to obtain more records of Mr. Rahman’s previous medical involvement just as he would very much like to be able to talk to the parents. Faced with Mr. Rahman’s refusal to consent, (i.e. re the parents) Dr. Gojer cannot do much more.
Asked about a scenario involving an absolute discharge and the need for psychological counselling, Dr. Gojer responded, he would prefer Mr. Rahman to attend for psychological counselling but the priority would be less. Mr. Rahman would be left free to not engage and not follow-up.
The parties presented no further evidence.
Submissions of the Parties
On behalf of the hospital, Dr. Gojer submitted that the risk can be described as a “fluctuating risk”. Dr. Gojer referred to charges laid against Mr. Rahman regarding the 2018 incident with the parents that resulted in a Peace Bond. While it’s not possible to speculate about the circumstances giving rise to those charges, it does raise concerns in his mind.
Dr. Gojer noted that the events surrounding the Peace Bond were followed by further difficulties, leading to Mr. Rahman’s involvement in the index offence. Knowing that Mr. Rahman has now been treated with some success on prescribed Lamotrigine for the last three years, he has maintained stability. Dr. Gojer is quite happy to continue to support Mr. Rahman. Mr. Rahman continues to face stressors in the community. While he is a pleasant fellow to deal with, he can live on his own and get help.
Counsel for the Attorney-General, Ms. Dufort submitted that Mr. Rahman does present a significant threat. In her view, a conditional discharge would be appropriate. Among the many concerns listed in her presentation, Ms. Dufort highlighted ongoing conflict with the parents, the refusal to share information and a very unclear plan on Mr. Rahman’s part regarding just how he will manage his illness.
On behalf of his client, Mr. Guertin advised that he was instructed to have the Board consider granting an absolute discharge. Counsel went on to point out what he termed were ‘concerns the Board may have’.
Mr. Guertin commented that Mr. Rahman has his own reasons for not wanting the doctor to contact his family. Mr. Rahman is concerned about his privacy and is concerned that the parents are a cult who, if contacted by the hospital, would spread personal information out into the community.
Mr. Guertin noted that Mr. Rahman has no other supports in Ontario. Nobody else is here for him. His current job might provide access to psychological services given the only short-lived nature of the employment. (The Board received no more than passing mention of a ‘current job’; nothing at all was described, much less specified, by any of the parties.)
It was Mr. Guertin’s stated impression that access to psychological services through the employer would be provided for only a short duration. In such an event, Mr. Guertin added, Mr. Rahman would then have to find and deal with a new person to access psychological services.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Guertin expressed gratitude to Dr. Gojer for first being involved at the early stage of Mr. Rahman’s court case. It was Dr. Gojer who started to ask questions about Adderall upon noticing that Mr. Rahman had already entered a guilty plea to the index offence charge. Mr. Guertin said it was thanks to Dr. Gojer that Mr. Rahman was ultimately found not criminally responsible following the investigation into criminal responsibility. “Otherwise, Mr. Rahman would have been found guilty”.
Conclusions and Disposition: Significant Threat
- On the issue of significant threat, the Review Board is guided by principles set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Winko decision. These principles include the following:
A “significant threat to the safety of the public” means 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 the higher must be criminal in nature.
There is no presumption that the NCR accused poses a significant threat to the safety of the public. There is never any legal burden on the NCR accused to show that he or she does not pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.
The Court or Review Board may have recourse to a broad range of evidence as it seeks to determine whether the NCR accused poses a significant threat to the safety of the public. Such evidence may include the past and expected course of the NCR accused’s treatment, if any, the present state of the NCR accused’s medical condition, the NCR accused’s own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community, and the assessments provided by experts who have examined the NCR accused. This list is not exhaustive.
If the Court or Review Board concludes that the NCR accused is not a significant threat to the safety of the public, it must order an absolute discharge.
- In Mr. Rahman’s case, we make the following findings:
Mr. Adeel Rahman does present a significant threat to the safety of the public.
He suffers from a longstanding severe mental disorder which has greatly compromised his ability to function adequately and safely in the community. There is an extended history of recurring symptoms over the years preceding the index offence. Repeated admissions to several different hospitals left Mr. Rahman without any form of adequate continuous treatment.
During the extended period in 2021-2022 when the index offence arose, Mr. Rahman had no ability to understand the true nature of his unrelenting harmful actions.
The Board accepts that Mr. Rahman may not have been consciously abusing his prescribed Adderall. At the time, he had no ability to even start to understand how it was affecting his mental health and his ability to function in the community. While he now appears to be stable with the change of medication, the potential for relapse is still of great concern.
As admitted by Dr. Gojer, with an incomplete assessment, we are left with no meaningful information about Mr. Rahman’s course following his arrest in August 2022. As the hearing proceeded, there was no more than mere mention of ‘a family doctor’. No name was provided. Dr. Gojer needs to meet with that person. Mr. Rahman will not permit this.
Mr. Rahman has no supports in the community. We cannot assume that vague comments about a current job have any basis in substance.
Mr. Rahman needs careful psychiatric follow-up. His past course over the years before the index offence demonstrates a repeated pattern of refusal to seek or follow up with recommended treatment, including for psychological services.
In terms of his future plans, we cannot assume or rely on any suggestion on Mr. Rahman’s part that he will follow up with necessary treatment. Nothing has been presented to this panel to show how or whether he intends to do so.
Mr. Rahman continues to live in a problematic situation with his parents. He refuses to grant the hospital access to any meaningful information about family dynamics, much less regarding possible issues of physical safety for those living in the home.
By asking the Board to grant an absolute discharge, Mr. Rahman - not his counsel - puts the Board in the position of having to turn a blind eye to the events of 2018 when the police intervened, and which led to his removal from the home for a year.
The index offence saw serious psychological harm caused to others. It was prolonged and alarming, affecting not just the victim but her family as well. Despite repeated police communication, the behaviours only persisted.
The Necessary and Appropriate Disposition that is the Least Onerous and Least Restrictive
As set out in the Winko decision, if the Review Board concludes that the NCR accused is a significant threat, it has two alternatives. It may order that the NCR accused be discharged subject to the conditions that the Review Board considers necessary, or it may direct that the NCR accused be detained in custody within a hospital, again subject to appropriate conditions.
When deciding whether to make an order for a conditional discharge or for detention in the hospital, the Review Board must again consider the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, the mental condition of the NCR accused, their reintegration into society and their other needs, and make the order that is the least onerous and restrictive.
The Board finds there is no present need to order Mr. Rahman’s detention to hospital. It is neither necessary nor appropriate.
For three years, as was correctly pointed out, Mr. Rahman has achieved a certain, yet undefined, level of stability that sees him free of police involvement without the need for hospital inpatient care. However, there are at least two difficulties faced by Mr. Rahman in terms of an absolute discharge.
Firstly, Mr. Rahman’s risk is best described as a “fluctuating risk”. We agree with Dr. Gojer on this point. In previous years, going back more than a decade to the time when Mr. Rahman was still a teenager, there was significant repeated conflict with family members. More than once, as documented in the hospital report, he was forced to be hospitalized and kept for assessment and treatment. At the Queensway-Carleton Hospital, extensive efforts were made by that treatment team to recommend and provide follow-up including psychological counselling. Medication was prescribed. Mr. Rahman did not follow-up. He continued to fluctuate in his stability, leading to renewed and more serious problems in the following years.
Secondly, the Board finds that Mr. Rahman’s need for psychological counselling is long overdue and highly needed. Through all the years of his involvement with mental health services, he has remained completely untreated in terms of non-pharmacological interventions. In our opinion, the need for such treatment is critical. Without it, Mr. Rahman’s fluctuating course presents too much of a risk to members of the public, including to family members and any others with whom he may be associated.
It is to Dr. Gojer’s credit that he is happy to keep helping Mr. Rahman. However, short of external control, we have little faith in any intention, one which has never been declared by Mr. Rahman, that he would in fact stay engaged with Dr. Gojer or any other care provider.
Absent the Board’s oversight and if left to his own devices, Mr. Rahman is more than likely to carry on without adequate care or supervision. This would inevitably lead to a renewed cycle of alternating depressed mood and frantically obsessive behaviours, exposing members of the public to an unacceptable level of risk.
For these reasons, having regard to the primary protection of the public from dangerous persons, and balancing Mr. Rahman’s mental condition, his reintegration and other needs, he is discharged, subject to conditions which are set out in the disposition.
We thank Dr. Gojer and both counsel for their assistance.
DATED this 8th day of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Hageraats
Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board