Re: Thomas F. Hall
ORB File No: 8061
Hearing held on: Tuesday, December 2, 2025
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Section 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: Thomas F. Hall Counsel: Mr. R.W. Browne
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 2, 2026)
Introduction
1On April 14, 2022, Thomas F. Hall was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of use firearm while committing an indictable offence, possession of firearm in a vehicle, possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition, utter threat to cause death or bodily harm (x2), and assault with a weapon, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code).
2Mr. Hall is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated December 24, 2024, detaining him at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, Brébeuf Program for Regional Forensics, with privileges up to and including the ability to live in the community within the catchment area of Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
3On December 2, 2025, a panel of the Board convened to hold a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Hall was present for his hearing and was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.
4The issues to be determined are whether Mr. Hall represents 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 s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
5At the commencement of the hearing, the representative for the hospital submitted that Mr. Hall continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and should be discharged with conditions. Counsel for Mr. Hall joined the hospital’s recommendation. Counsel for the Attorney General submitted that there should be no change to Mr. Hall’s current disposition. All parties maintained their respective positions in closing submissions.
6For the reasons set out below, the Board finds Mr. Hall continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and there should be no change to his current disposition, except that he should be permitted to travel to Alberta for up to 14 days upon first obtaining approval of his itinerary by the person in charge of the hospital or his or her designate.
Evidence at the Hearing
7The Board received documentary evidence in the form of a Hospital Report dated October 27, 2025, and marked as Exhibit 1. The Board also heard viva voce testimony from Dr. Ismail, Mr. Hall’s treating psychiatrist.
Index Offences
8On January 17, 2022, Mr. Hall was walking around the town of Shelburne, Ontario pointing a loaded rifle and yelling threatening comments at people. Mr. Hall tried to leave the scene, but the police managed to stop him and arrest him. In his car were found a prohibited shotgun and several shotgun shells. Subsequently, the police reached him home and found firearms of varying calibers.
9Mr. Hall’s history and background are outlined in the Hospital Report and need not be repeated here in detail. In brief, Mr. Hall is 45 years old. Mr. Hall was born in Alberta. When he was approximately three years old his parents separated, and Mr. Hall moved together with his mother and sister to Ontario. Mr. Hall was primarily raised by his mother and stepfather. During his early years, Mr. Hall’s mother reported a history of mood swings and environmental and physical violence. Mr. Hall completed high school and attended college, completing a police foundations course in 2007 (or 2008). Mr. Hall has a limited employment history. He is single and has one adult son who lives in Alberta.
10Mr. Hall began using marijuana in his teens and was smoking up to 2 grams of medical marijuana daily at the time of the index offences. Prior to the finding of NCR, Mr. Hall had no criminal record.
11Following his NCR finding, Mr. Hall was initially detained at the Forensic Psychiatry Program at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton. His disposition provided him privileges up to and including the ability to live in the community of Southern Ontario in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
12Subsequently, an early hearing was requested by St. Joseph's Hospital to recommend Mr. Hall’s transfer to a forensic hospital in the Orangeville jurisdiction where Mr. Hall wished to live. Ultimately, Mr. Hall was transferred to Waypoint’s Brébeuf Program for Regional Forensics with a disposition that provided for community living in the catchment area of Waypoint, which includes the community of Orangeville. Mr. Hall was discharged from hospital to his mother’s home (in Orangeville) on November 27, 2023. He is supervised by the Waypoint Forensic Mobile Treatment and Support Team (“FMTST”).
13Mr. Hall is diagnosed as suffering from bipolar disorder, type 1 and cannabis use disorder (in remission in a controlled environment). He is considered treatment capable.
Analysis
14The Board accepts the testimony of Dr. Ismail as supported by the Hospital Report and finds that Mr. Hall continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board notes that all parties were in agreement on this issue. Mr. Hall demonstrates partial insight into his illness and associated risk factors. While he acknowledges having a mental disorder and complies with treatment, his engagement in the therapeutic process is stated to be limited and largely passive. The Hospital Report indicates that his reluctance to accept staff recommendations for increased activity and social engagement suggests a limited appreciation of how inactivity and isolation may negatively influence his mental state. The Hospital Report goes on to indicate that limited insight leaves him vulnerable to deterioration in the context of psychosocial stressors.
15The Hospital Report also indicates that Mr. Hall continues to have anxiety and is vulnerable to misinterpretation of benign circumstances as threatening or punitive and that this underscores the need for continued therapeutic monitoring and reassurance. It is in this context, particularly the need for oversight and support, that the Board finds that Mr. Hall continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.
16Further, the Board finds that a detention order remains the necessary and appropriate disposition. The Board acknowledges that Mr. Hall has made good progress in the year in review, his urine tests have all been negative and he has been open with the treatment team regarding his mental state. However, Dr. Ismail testified that not much is known about Mr. Hall and his pattern of decompensation. The only information that the treatment team has comes from the index offences and his presentation at that time. As a result, the treatment team do not know what decompensation will look like for Mr. Hall, whether it is likely to be slow or rapid or whether decompensation will happen while he is medicated. While Mr. Hall has been under the jurisdiction of the Board since 2022 and has yet to experience a significant decompensation, the nature of Mr. Hall’s diagnosis is such that he will likely decompensate.
17In Dr. Ismail’s opinion, in the throws of decompensation, Mr. Hall would likely not come into the hospital voluntarily. Furthermore, Mr. Hall’s admission to hospital pursuant to the Mental Health Act could only happen at a point where he had decompensated to such an extent that his risk to public safety is significantly compromised. Mr. Hall is capable and in the absence of a significant decompensation he would have to present as being a danger to himself or being at risk of serious physical impairment. Dr. Ismail testified that if Mr. Hall decompensated significantly, he may reach the threshold of significant physical impairment, and his admission may become possible. However, in such a scenario it is evident that Mr. Hall’s risk to the safety of the public would have increased significantly. Accepting Dr. Ismail’s testimony and on considering the limitations of the MHA as it relates to Mr. Hall, the Board has concerns regarding Mr. Hall’s admission to hospital.
18When these concerns are considered in the context of Mr. Hall’s limited insight and vulnerability to stressors, the Board finds that Mr. Hall continues to need the robust support of the treatment team in maintaining wellness and to manage his risk to the safety of the public. In the Board’s view, part of that robust support is the ability to admit him to the hospital before he decompensates significantly. In coming to this conclusion, the Board is mindful that Mr. Hall’s recent loss of employment and ongoing difficulties securing new employment is a significant stress for him. The Hospital Report indicates that, “Employment-related difficulties have historically been destabilizing for him, and the current situation reinforces the need for structure and professional support to prevent relapse.
19The Board acknowledges that Mr. Hall lives at home with his family and that this allows for additional “eyes on” him. However, this does not change the treatment team’s ability to admit Mr. Hall to hospital expeditiously if he were subject to a conditional discharge. The Board recognizes that Mr. Hall’s illness will be lifelong, and the Board is confident that with the treatment team’s ongoing help he will learn to develop the tools to manage stressors and his illness safely. Mr. Hall has been reluctant to participate in programming and strategies to promote structure, socialization, and positive coping. The Board encourages Mr. Hall to participate in programming offered to him. Developing coping strategies will serve as protective for him going forward.
20Mr. Hall wishes to visit his son who lives in Alberta, and this should be encouraged. For this reason, Mr. Hall shall be permitted travel for up to 14 days within Canada upon first obtaining approval of the itinerary by the person in charge of the hospital or his or her designate.
Disposition
21In making a disposition, the Board must take into consideration the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, which is the safety of the public, which is the paramount consideration, the mental condition of the accused, the reintegration of the accused into society and the other needs of the accused.
22For the foregoing reasons, the Board finds that Mr. Hall continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that there should 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