Hung Van Nguyen (Re), 2026 CanLII 12796

Re: Hung Van Nguyen

ORB File No: 6091/6418

Hearing Held On: Thursday, December 4, 2025

Place of Hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health

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

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley Members: Dr. R. Sheppard Dr. G. Kerry Ms. A. La Viola Ms. D. Smith

Parties Appearing: Accused: Hung Van Nguyen Counsel: Ms. M. Perez Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated January 28, 2026)

OVERVIEW

1Hung Van Nguyen was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on March 29, 2012, on a charge of indecent act, contrary to the Criminal Code. In addition, on October 15, 2013, Mr. Nguyen was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on a charge of invitation to sexual touching under 14 years, contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated October 10, 2024, detaining him at the Forensic Service – Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario. The terms of his detention order include hospital and grounds privileges, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge. Until such time as he is transferred to CAMH, he continues to be detained at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care – High Secure Provincial Forensic Program, Penetanguishene, Ontario. The terms of his detention order at Waypoint include hospital and grounds privileges, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff.

ISSUES

2On December 4, 2025, the Board convened at Waypoint for a hearing further to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code to review the disposition. The Board was asked to determine whether Mr. Nguyen represented a significant threat to the safety of the public at the time of the hearing, and further, what the necessary and appropriate disposition is in the circumstances according to the factors set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

3At the outset of the hearing, the Representative for the Hospital, Counsel for the Attorney General, and Counsel for Mr. Nguyen submitted that in their respective views – Mr. Nguyen continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public – all agreeing that he does not require the high secure forensic setting at Waypoint. And further, the current disposition orders his detention at CAMH, and all parties continue to support the transfer to the less secure forensic hospital setting.

FINDINGS

4The Board found that Mr. Nguyen continues to pose a significant threat to public safety based on his criminal history, psychiatric admissions, and potential for impulsivity should he cease compliance with treatment. However, the evidence demonstrates that he has made considerable progress in managing his mental health, as evidenced by his compliance with medications and improved behaviour. Despite these positive developments, Mr. Nguyen has not yet been transferred to the less secure setting at CAMH as previously ordered. The Board determined that this transfer remains both necessary and appropriate, as it aligns with the principles of the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, while supporting Mr. Nguyen’s rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The ongoing delay in the transfer raises concerns that must be addressed to facilitate his continued progress and successful return to the community.

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

5The Hospital Report dated September 22, 2025, was entered as an exhibit at the hearing. The following background information, including the events surrounding the index offences has been taken from the Hospital Report, summarized here as follows.

6On September 6, 2011, the victim was cycling near a school when he spotted Mr. Nguyen, walking with his pants around his knees, exposing his bare buttocks. The victim continued north but turned back to see Mr. Nguyen’s hands under his jacket near his genitals. He reported the incident to the police. Police observed Mr. Nguyen with his pants down, actively masturbating. Upon noticing the police, Mr. Nguyen pulled up his pants and was subsequently arrested, and he was charged with committing an indecent act.

7Further, on January 1, 2012, the 10-year-old victim was at a Tim Horton's Restaurant with an adult family friend when Mr. Nguyen began watching her from a short distance. He whispered to her to go to the washroom approximately 9-10 times while gesturing towards the rear of the restaurant. Mr. Nguyen then approached her, standing less than a foot away, and made a gesture towards her buttocks without making contact, as the victim moved between her companion and him to avoid him. After leaving the restaurant, the victim informed her family friend about the incident, and they reported it to a security guard at a nearby mall. Mr. Nguyen was subsequently identified, and arrested, and charged.

8Mr. Nguyen is 53 years old, born in Vietnam as the eldest of four siblings in a troubled family environment characterized by separation and violence. His parents divorced in 2002, with his mother in Toronto and father in Montreal. After fleeing to Canada, his mother needed surgery due to domestic abuse. He faced a challenging upbringing, marked by poverty and trauma from living in a war-affected area, and a refugee camp.

9Educationally, Mr. Nguyen completed grade 2 in Vietnam, but he struggled in Canada, repeating grades 9 and 10 due to poor focus and absenteeism, while historically denying any suspensions. His aggressive behaviour labeled him a ‘troublemaker’ in elementary school, leading to poor grades and detentions. In high school, he was often disciplined for fighting and he eventually dropped out in grade 10.

10In adulthood, Mr. Nguyen has held two jobs, working in a kitchen cabinet factory and manufacturing car bumpers, but he expressed no desire to continue working. He has never married or cohabitated, and he reportedly has a son born in 1997. A stable relationship in 2000 ended after he attempted to ignite his girlfriend’s gas tank, coinciding with a decline in his mental health. Also, records show a history of marijuana, ecstasy, and crack cocaine use, as well as suggestions of heroin abuse.

11A check of the Canadian Police Information Centre database shows that Mr. Nguyen has a history of multiple charges and convictions. In 1990, he was convicted for possession of a weapon. In 1992, he was convicted for possession of an unregistered restricted weapon. Further convictions in 1993 included five counts of robbery, three counts of forcible confinement, and use of a firearm during an offence, leading to a significant sentence, followed by statutory release in 1997. In 2002, he was convicted for assault, mischief under $5000, possession of incendiary material, and theft under $5000. Numerous additional charges occurred over the years, including many that were withdrawn.

PSYCHIATRIC BACKGROUND

12Mr. Nguyen’s current psychiatric diagnoses are Schizophrenia, Antisocial Personality Disorder and Unspecified Other Substance-Related Disorder. He has been found incapable of making decisions about his medical treatment, and incapable of managing his finances. His sister is his substitute decision maker. He is financially supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program.

13Mr. Nguyen’s psychiatric background reveals a significant history of mental health issues, including schizophrenia and polysubstance dependence. His first assessment occurred in 1999 for problematic gambling, during which he also reported a history of heroin trafficking. Despite claiming to have ceased heroin use, he experienced multiple hospital admissions beginning in 2004, often due to severe psychotic symptoms marked by incoherence, hallucinations, and periods of wandering. Throughout various assessments, Mr. Nguyen demonstrated a consistent pattern of aggressive and inappropriate behaviours, sometimes prompting police intervention. His treatment included various antipsychotic medications, with varying degrees of adherence and effectiveness, often complicated by his refusal to engage in discharge planning or follow up with prescribed care.

14As his history progressed, Mr. Nguyen faced multiple admissions to hospitals, frequently exhibiting catatonic behaviour and psychological deterioration. Several assessments further found him unfit to stand trial due to mental health complications, and at times he was deemed fit following treatment. Of note, he often absconded from hospital care, refusing treatment. Throughout his hospitalizations, there were multiple incidents of inappropriate sexual behaviour and other disruptive conduct.

EVIDENCE AT THE HEARING

15The evidence included comprehensive testimony from Dr. Hudson regarding the current mental health status and behaviour of Mr. Nguyen, indicating that he continues to do relatively well compared to previous years and maintains compliance with all prescribed medications.

16Dr. Hudson stated that Mr. Nguyen poses a significant threat to public safety primarily if he were to become non-compliant with his medication. He explained that a return to non-compliance would likely lead to a resurgence of Mr. Nguyen’s psychosis and an exacerbation of his impulsivity, which could increase the risk he poses to others. However, he clarified that currently, the risk is diminished due to his adherence to the prescribed medications.

17Dr. Hudson also noted that Mr. Nguyen is in a secure setting, which contributes to this low risk level. He emphasized that while Mr. Nguyen is housed in the most privileged unit, he is also capable of managing off-ward privileges effectively, often leaving the unit for extended periods, without incident. Mr. Nguyen’s current compliance with treatment and the structured environment significantly reduce the potential threat he poses to the public.

18Notably, Mr. Nguyen has recently agreed to assessment for anti-androgen therapy, a topic discussed with him multiple times. The preparation for this therapy has already begun, pending bone mineral examination results, and Dr. Hudson anticipates readiness within a week. He plans to consult with a colleague, Dr. Mitchell, regarding the medications to be used for the therapy. Although Mr. Nguyen’s symptoms remain well-managed with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, Dr. Hudson noted ongoing issues with infringing on others’ personal space, however, this is not viewed as significantly problematic.

19In response to further inquiries, Dr. Hudson described Mr. Nguyen’s positive interactions with staff, stating that he is usually calm, cooperative, and exhibits a pleasant demeanor. Issues with medication adherence that had previously been a concern are no longer present, and routine blood work for clozapine is conducted monthly, which monitors both side effects and compliance. He confirmed that Mr. Nguyen has maintained privilege levels allowing him to leave the unit frequently and has shown significant improvements in his behaviour, including no instances of verbal or physical aggression.

20With respect to insight, Dr. Hudson emphasized that Mr. Nguyen’s agreement to anti-androgen therapy reflects an internal motivation to change. He acknowledged that this is a notable development, as it is only the second time in his career that a patient has voluntarily agreed to this kind of therapy. Furthermore, Dr. Hudson reassured that the initiation of anti-androgen therapy is likely to further mitigate any risks associated with Mr. Nguyen’s behaviour, allowing him to transition to a less secure environment with ease.

21Dr. Hudson also expressed concern regarding the ongoing delay in Mr. Nguyen’s transfer to CAMH, noting that it has hindered his progress towards community reintegration. Both Dr. Hudson and Mr. Nguyen view this transfer as essential for his continued improvement, and the lack of movement in this process is concerning to the treatment team. Dr. Hudson reiterated their commitment to supporting Mr. Nguyen during this waiting period and emphasized the importance of maintaining stability in his current treatment plan.

SUBMISSIONS

22The Hospital expressed concern about the length of the delay in Mr. Nguyen’s transfer to CAMH – he is currently in a maximum secure environment despite the treatment team believing he no longer needs such security. The transfer is crucial for Mr. Nguyen’s community reintegration and emphasizes the importance of addressing the delays. Counsel for the Attorney General acknowledged the situation, mentioning that the lack of movement in the transfer process has implications for Mr. Nguyen’s progression toward community living. Counsel for Mr. Nguyen voiced concern about the ongoing delay in the transfer as well, underscoring the importance of treatment continuity and indicating that he is working well with Dr. Hudson. Counsel also pointed out that despite the challenges, there is optimism regarding Mr. Nguyen’s future, with a focus on facilitating his transition to less secure living conditions in the future.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION

(a) Significant Threat

25. The Board must first determine whether Mr. Nguyen continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in the seminal case of Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625. Based on the totality of the evidence, including the testimony of Dr. Hudson, recent clinical findings, and the risk assessment results, the Board concludes that Mr. Nguyen continues to meet the legal threshold for a finding of ‘significant threat’.

26. Mr. Nguyen has a documented criminal history that includes serious offences such as robbery, forcible confinement, and possession of weapons, alongside significant psychiatric issues. The nature of his index offences raises grave concerns about public safety, particularly given the sexual context in which these occurred. Compounding this risk is Mr. Nguyen’s pattern of hospital abscondment, where he has demonstrated tendencies to leave secure facilities without permission, thereby indicating a potential inability to manage his condition independently. His history of multiple psychiatric admissions further underscores the unpredictable nature of his mental health and behaviour.

27. While there have been improvements in Mr. Nguyen’s management of his condition – illustrated by his compliance with medications like clozapine, and his willingness to pursue anti-androgen therapy – the potential for future non-compliance remains a serious concern. Should Mr. Nguyen cease to adhere to his medication regimen, the risk of psychosis and impulsivity returning could significantly elevate the danger he poses to others. Given his past episodes of violent behaviour, including those stemming from a lack of treatment compliance, the Board cannot overlook the substantial threats presented by his mental health history and criminal background.

28. Additionally, while Mr. Nguyen’s current risk has been mitigated due to his stable condition, and the secure environment at Waypoint, the possibility of future non-compliance cannot be discounted. The history of Mr. Nguyen’s mental health, characterized by episodes of psychosis, impulsive behaviour, and past violent incidents, further supports the assessment of him as a significant threat. Given these factors, along with the secure setting that currently contains him, the Board recognizes that Mr. Nguyen’s progress should not overshadow the inherent risks associated with his mental health condition.

29. In light of these considerations and the evidence provided, the Board finds that Mr. Nguyen’s potential for reoffending remains a significant concern, justifying the conclusion that he continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

(b) Necessary and Appropriate

30. The Board must next determine the disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances. The disposition must embrace the principle of the ‘least onerous and least restrictive’ outcome, with due consideration given to Mr. Nguyen’s liberty interests, which must also be consistently weighed together with concerns for public safety, taking into account his mental condition, and his reintegration into society, as required by s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

31. The Board finds that Mr. Nguyen has made significant strides in managing his mental health, demonstrating compliance with his medication regimen and improving his interactions with staff. He exhibits a calm and cooperative demeanor, indicating a notable reduction in previous behavioural issues. In addition, he has maintained high privilege levels, allowing him to leave the secure unit frequently for extended periods without incident. These developments suggest that he no longer requires the high secure setting at Waypoint, which is designed for individuals presenting more acute risks. The treatment team has noted that Mr. Nguyen’s ongoing engagement in therapeutic programs and willingness to enter anti-androgen therapy are strong indicators of his progress and motivation for recovery.

32. Moreover, the transfer to CAMH is necessary not only for Mr. Nguyen’s rehabilitation but also for enhancing his quality of life and social reintegration. The less secure environment at CAMH would offer structured programming that is better aligned with community reintegration goals, such as opportunities for skill development, family engagement, and social interaction. This setting is essential for fostering a smoother transition back into society. The compounded benefits of being closer to his family, who reside in Toronto, further support his reintegration process by providing necessary emotional and social support.

33. In contrast, remaining in the high-security setting at Waypoint may hinder his therapeutic progress and deny him the opportunities that are suitable for his current condition. His current stability and the absence of aggressive or impulsive behaviours suggest that continued detention in a highly restrictive environment is unnecessary and could result in feelings of frustration or lack of progress. Given these considerations, the Board finds that transferring Mr. Nguyen to a less secure setting at CAMH is not only appropriate but essential for promoting his ongoing recovery while respecting his liberty interests. Ultimately, this move would facilitate a more effective path toward reintegration into the community, reinforcing the treatment team’s belief in his potential for positive change.

34. While the Board acknowledges the significant risks that Mr. Nguyen poses to public safety, it is also important to consider the principle of ‘least onerous and least restrictive’, as articulated in Shortt (Re), 2020 ONCA 651 – where the Court emphasized the need to respond meaningfully to forensic patient needs and facilitate transition to a more appropriate setting. On this point, the Board notes with considerable concern that it has previously ordered Mr. Nguyen’s transfer to a less secure forensic hospital setting, CAMH, and to date, he continues to be on an interprovincial waitlist, while he remains detained at Waypoint.

35. Notably, continued high secure detention is not only failing to promote Mr. Nguyen’s long-term rehabilitation but, after an extended period, may actually begin to undermine his progress and be detrimental to his overall well-being. This is particularly concerning, highlighting that high-security detention is not the least onerous, least restrictive disposition for Mr. Nguyen.

36. However, the Board understands that delays in implementing clinical recommendations or transitioning forensic patients to less restrictive environments are often the result of systemic constraints, not a lack of due diligence on behalf of the forensic hospitals, or their staff. Reasonable delays should be understood within that context, in that they reflect the challenges of balancing individualized care with broader system demands.

37. Further, the Board is mindful of the Court’s decision in Tobin (Re), 2025 ONCA 489, where the Court found that the Board erred in failing to include a term in its disposition requiring the exercise of due diligence in pursuing the ‘least onerous, least restrictive’ outcome. In other words, the Board has an obligation to provide a remedy, and that must be reflected in the Board’s order, not simply a suggestion in its reasons.

38. On that basis, the Board requires both Waypoint and CAMH to take concrete steps to facilitate Mr. Nguyen’s transfer no later than April 30, 2026. Failing the completion of this transfer by that date, the parties are ordered to attend a pre-hearing conference with a representative from CAMH to explain the reasons for the further delay (if any), and to establish a firm timeline for the transfer. Also, an early review hearing to be scheduled at the prehearing conference referred to above to ensure accountability and to address any ongoing barriers to Mr. Nguyen’s transfer.

39. The Board commends the treatment team for their continued diligence and support of Mr. Nguyen’s recovery and rehabilitative process. We also commend Mr. Nguyen’s commitment to recovery efforts, and his steadiness and patience as he awaits his transfer to CAMH.