Re Dwayne A. McNeil, 2026 CanLII 12773

Re: Dwayne A. McNeil

ORB File No: 8271

Hearing held on: Monday, December 1, 2025

Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care

Pursuant to: Sections 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. J. Mills

Members: Dr. P.L. Darby

Dr. G. Kerry

Ms. A. La Viola

Ms. D. Smith

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Dwayne A. McNeil

Counsel: Mr. M. Jelassi

The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. M. Kraftscik

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated January 2, 2026)

Introduction

1. On April 3, 2023, Dwayne McNeil was found unfit to stand trial on charges of harassment (x2), utter threats to cause death or bodily harm, and repeatedly communicating directly or indirectly with person (x2), contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”). Mr. McNeil is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated October 22, 2024, detaining him at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) with privileges up to and including the ability to live in the community within the catchment area of CAMH in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital or his or her designate. Until such time as Mr. McNeil is transferred, authority remains with the Brébeuf Program for Regional Forensics, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint”).

2. On December 1, 2025, a panel of the Board convened to review Mr. McNeil’s disposition pursuant to s. 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. McNeil was present for his hearing and was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.

3. The issues to be determined are whether Mr. McNeil remains unfit to stand trial and whether he is likely permanently unfit. If likely permanently unfit, the Board must decide whether he is 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.

4. At the commencement of the hearing, the representative of the hospital submitted that Mr. McNeil remains unfit to stand trial and there should be no change to his current disposition, except that while remaining at Waypoint, he should be permitted passes to enter the community within 300 kilometers of the hospital escorted and/or accompanied by staff. The representative of the hospital also submitted that there should be a no communication or contact prohibition in Mr. McNiel’s disposition regarding the complainants. Counsel for the Attorney General agreed with the hospital’s recommendation. Counsel for Mr. McNeil took no position regarding fitness and agreed with his transfer to CAMH.

5. For the reasons set out below, the Board finds that Mr. McNeil remains unfit to stand trial and there should be no change to his current disposition, except as indicated above.

Evidence at the Hearing

6. The Board received documentary evidence in the form of a Hospital Report dated December 10, 2025, a fitness assessment dated October 24, 2025, and a further fitness assessment dated November 21, 2025, marked as Exhibits 1 through 3, respectively. The Board also heard viva voce testimony from Dr. Jones, Mr. McNeil’s treating psychiatrist.

Outstanding Charges

7. The circumstances of the outstanding charges are excerpted from last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:

“The summary of charges against Mr. McNeil covers a three-and-a-half-year period between December 2018 and June of 2023. The Hospital Report of April 20, 2023, describes the index offences as follows:

The accused, Dwayne McNeil, and the victim, PB were in an intimate partner relationship and had one child together. It is alleged that during the relationship McNeil was abusive towards PB. When the relationship ended McNeil left Windsor where they were living and returned to the Greater Toronto Area. The child remained in the home of PB. Over the period of three and a half years PB received numerous phone calls and communication from McNeil and from time-to-time attendance at her place of business. This behaviour continued notwithstanding requests that McNeil cease this action and police involvement. Additionally, the adult daughter, MB, was receiving voicemail messages from her father trying to get in contact with her and her mother. This conduct continued notwithstanding counts of criminal harassment laid by the Windsor police for three counts of criminal harassment.

Between April 28, 2022, and June 11, 2022, PB received 38 calls from the accused. In one of the voicemails he stated “I’m gonna murder you,” “murder you.” In a separate message, he also stated, “Murder you,” “Murder you,” “Murder you,” “Murder you”. On June 17, 2022 police attended Pearson Airport where McNeil was being held on the strength of his outstanding Windsor warrants upon his return from Jamaica.”

8. The Hospital Report outlines Mr. McNeil’s history and background and need not be repeated here in detail. In brief, Mr. McNeil is 49 years old. He was born in Scarborough and is the youngest of four siblings. Mr. McNeil finished high school and attended the University of Windsor in an Engineering Program but left in this second year due to the onset of his mental illness. Mr. McNeil has a minimal employment history and has been supported by the Ontario Government Support Program since he was approximately 25 years old. Mr. McNeil is single with one adult daughter.

9. Prior to the index offences, Mr. McNeil had a criminal record commencing in 2000, consisting of convictions for assault, uttering threats and carrying a concealed weapon (2005) and fail to comply with probation and assault (2006). Mr. McNeil is reported to have had further police contact in 2021, relating to charges of assault x2, unlawfully in dwelling, fail to return to court and criminal harassment (emanating from both Durham Region and York Region). Information received from the Barrie Crown Attorney’s Office, indicates that the assaults were dealt with by way of a 12-month Peace Bond which expired on March 22, 2022, and the charge of fail to appear was withdrawn. The criminal harassment charge was also resolved by way of Peace Bond, which expired on November 26, 2021. No further details are known.

10. Mr. McNeil’s first admission to hospital for psychiatric services appears to have been in 2015, at CAMH. Subsequently, Mr. McNeil has had multiple psychiatric admissions. Hospital records indicate a repeated a history of noncompliance with medication and no long-term psychiatric follow up.

11. Mr. McNeil was assessed by Dr. W. Komer on October 26, 2022, for a court-ordered assessment. On November 30, 2022, the court found him unfit and ordered a 60-day treatment order at Waypoint. He returned to court on February 2, 2023, and was again found unfit and a further treatment order was issued. On April 3, 2023, Mr. McNeil was again found unfit to stand trial and placed under the jurisdiction of the Board.

12. Mr. McNeil is currently diagnosed with Schizophrenia. He is incapable regarding treatment. The Public Guardian and Trustee is his substitute decision maker.

Evidence and Analysis

13. The Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bharwani 2025 SCC 26 has recently held that to be fit to stand trial an accused must be able to make reality-based decisions in the conduct of their defence and intelligibly communicate these decisions to counsel or the court. This requires a reality-based understanding of the nature or object and possible consequences of the proceedings, as well as an ability to understand the available options and their consequences, and to select between those options when making decisions. The accused is not required to make decisions in their best interests, but cannot be overwhelmed by delusions, hallucinations, or other symptoms of their mental disorder when making and communicating these decisions (para 77). The Court further stated that the key issue in most fitness hearings before the Board is whether the accused’s mental disorder prevents them from conducting a defence (para 33).

14. “Momentary” or “transient” symptoms that prevent an accused from making reality-based decisions will not render the accused unfit if the trial judge utilizes their inherent trial management powers to get the accused “back on track” (para 78). The Court also held that the fitness test is contextual (para 65). In Clayton (Re), 2025 ONCA 308, the Court of Appeal held that the nature of the charges and allegations is important context when applying the fitness test because, “the simpler the case is, the easier it is to understand, appreciate and talk about” (para 11).

15. Mr. McNeil’s presentation has not changed significantly over the year in review. He continues to present with significant thought disorder, tangentiality and loosening associations. He continues to have residual delusional beliefs about his past and in recent discussions with Dr. Jones auditory hallucinations were present. It is against this backdrop that Mr. McNeil has not been able to demonstrate a reality-based understanding of the nature or object and possible consequences of the proceedings, as well as an ability to understand the available options and their consequences, and to select between those options when making decisions.

16. The most recent fitness assessments were conducted on September 8, 2025, October 24, 2025, and November 21, 2025. On each occasion Mr. McNeil demonstrated a similar presentation. In the Board’s view, while the charges that Mr. McNeil is facing are not complex, Mr. McNeil’s symptoms of his mental illness are not momentary or transitory, they are ongoing and fixed and rob him of the ability to make reality-based decisions. Mr. McNeil’s delusions are such that he would have difficulty communicating effectively with counsel or the court and would not be able to participate meaningfully in his defence. For these reasons, the Board finds that Mr. McNeil remains unfit to stand trial.

17. Mr. McNeil has a lengthy history of schizophrenia complicated by repeated medication noncompliance. Mr. McNeil also has a history of aggression. Moreover, recently Mr. McNeil has also expressed his desire to leave the hospital on several occasions and travel to Toronto. Furthermore, absent a detention order and substitute consent for treatment it is very likely that Mr. McNeil will not take his antipsychotic medications. If Mr. McNeil discontinued antipsychotic medications, it is also very likely that his symptoms of mental disorder would worsen. This would significantly impact attempts to restore Mr. McNeil to fitness. When considered in the context of Mr. McNeil’s history of aggression and ongoing preoccupation with the complainants, the Board finds that a detention order remains the necessary and appropriate disposition.

18. Mr. McNeil is of Jamaican heritage. He was born in Scarborough. He has a connection to that community and while he equivocates on whether he wishes to be in Toronto or not, the evidence of Dr. Jones suggests that likely he would rather be in Toronto than at Waypoint. For these reasons, the Board finds that it remains necessary and appropriate for Mr. McNeil to transfer to CAMH with authority to remain at Waypoint until such time as that transfer takes place.

19. The Board is in agreement that it is appropriate to expand Mr. McNeil’s privileges while he remains at Waypoint, so that he has the ability to participate in community activities should the opportunity arise. This will provide Mr. McNeil with additional liberties and ultimately assist in furthering his reintegration. The Board is also in agreement that the non-communication prohibition currently in his disposition for CAMH should be included in his disposition whilst he remains at Waypoint. As indicated, Mr. McNeil continues to have a preoccupation with his ex-partner and daughter, and we find that the non-communication clause is necessary and appropriate.

20. Finally, the Board notes that Mr. McNeil is not a management problem. Although, he remains preoccupied with the complainants he has made no attempt to contact them this year. Mr. McNeil is described as pleasant and cooperative. The Board wishes Mr. McNeil well in the year ahead and hopes that the transfer to CAMH takes place within the next reporting year.

Disposition

21. For the above reasons, the Board finds that Mr. McNeil is unfit to stand trial and there shall be no change to his disposition, except as outlined in the formal disposition.

DATED this 2nd day of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.

Ms. J. Mills

Alternate Chairperson

__________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board