Ontario Review Board
Re: Mr. Victor Flemming
ORB File No. 5668
Hearing held on: Wednesday, January 14, 2026
Place of Hearing: Brockville Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. Y. Alatishe
Dr. P. Wright
Ms. R. MacIntyre
Mr. K. McKenna
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Victor Flemming
Counsel: Mr. M. Bird
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. R. Linthurst
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. C. Breault
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated February 25, 2026)
Introduction
Mr. Flemming was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) on July 22, 2010, for the Criminal Code offences of assault causing bodily harm (x2), assault with a weapon (x3), and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.
Mr. Flemming is currently subject to a detention order under a Disposition dated March 13, 2025, which detains him at the Brockville Mental Health Centre (“BMHC”) with privileges that extend to hospital and grounds escorted or accompanied by staff. Mr. Flemming was transferred from Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint”) to BMHC on August 20, 2025.
A panel of the Ontario Review Board (“the panel”) convened this annual hearing on January 14, 2026, to review the current Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Mr. Flemming attended the hearing with counsel.
At the commencement of the hearing, the Hospital recommended a continuation of the detention order with terms and conditions that included entering the community of Ottawa and Brockville indirectly supervised, and living in the community in approved accommodation. The complete list of terms and conditions recommended by the Hospital are listed on pages 93 and 94 of the Hospital Report which was entered as an exhibit.
The Crown supported the recommendations of the Hospital with the exception of community living. The Crown also indicated that it would not take a position until the end of the evidence with respect to entering the community of Ottawa and Brockville either accompanied by staff or person approved by the person in charge or indirectly supervised.
Counsel for Mr. Flemming supported the Hospital’s recommendation.
Prior to the evidence being heard, the panel advised the parties that a panel member, Dr. Wright, had assessed Mr. Flemming in 2010. The panel inquired if there were any concerns with proceeding with Dr. Wright on the panel. The parties each voiced no objection to proceeding with Dr. Wright on the panel.
After considering the evidence, the panel concluded that Mr. Flemming is a significant risk to the safety of the public, and that a continuation of the detention order is necessary and appropriate. The panel accepts the terms and conditions proposed by the Hospital save and except for the community living term. The panel does not find that it is appropriate to include a community living term in this Disposition.
Index Offences
- The facts pertaining to the index offences are taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition.
“On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, the accused was riding the subway in Toronto. A 76-year-old male was travelling on the subway with his female caregiver. Without warning, the accused struck the male on the side of the face with a glass bottle, and then attempted to hit the female caregiver. The accused was able to exit the train at the next stop.
TTC Special Constables were able to locate the accused on Broadview Avenue. As the constables were approaching the accused, they observed him with a glass bottle in his hand. They observed him to raise his hand as if to strike another person on the street. The constables arrested the accused and transported him into custody.
On November 9, 2009, the accused was in custody and had been transferred to the courthouse. A female court officer entered the accused’s cell to remove his handcuffs. Once the handcuffs were removed, the accused made a fist and punched the officer in the face causing her to fall to the ground and lose consciousness. The officer suffered a concussion, swelling to her face and nose area, ligament damage to her left hand, and cartilage damage to her nose.”
Evidence
The evidence at this hearing consists of the Hospital Report dated December 11, 2025, and the testimony of Dr. Linthurst, Mr. Flemming’s treating psychiatrist since this past October. The Hospital Report contains a detailed review of Mr. Flemming’s personal and mental health history.
Mr. Flemming is 36 years of age. He was born in Toronto, but from the age of two months until the age of 15 he lived with his mother in St. Kitts. He returned to Canada in 2005. In grade 10 Mr. Flemming began using marijuana and skipping school. His mother decided at that time to return to Canada.
When enrolled in school in Canada he robbed another student and was expelled. Thereafter, he supported himself through various jobs as a labourer.
Mr. Fleming was brought to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) by his child and youth worker after he experienced months of increased anxiety. He believed that people in the community were talking about him and ridiculing him. He also believed that there were people on the radio sending him messages. He stopped contact with the friends he believed were ridiculing him.
While at CAMH he punched a co-patient after being provoked. Following his release from CAMH, Mr. Flemming returned to St. Kitts. He ran out of medication and his symptoms worsened. He held his mother hostage at knifepoint for hours and threatened to kill her. Mr. Flemming was hospitalized in St. Kitts, and then returned to Canada to be treated at CAMH. He was discharged from CAMH in September 2008, with the diagnoses of schizophrenia-paranoid type, social anxiety disorder, and cannabis abuse.
On June 16, 2009, Mr. Flemming was arrested for the index offences. He was initially assessed to be unfit to stand trial and was transferred to Oak Ridge (now Waypoint) pursuant to a treatment order. Waypoint is Ontario’s high secure forensic hospital. He was seen by Dr. McDonald who made the following comments:
“Criminal Responsibility
This issue has not yet been raised, but I feel absolutely obliged to raise it given the nature of this man’s illness, its apparent oncoming chronicity, his near continuous use of destabilizing street drugs such as marijuana products, with no desire to change his lifestyle and no moral qualms whatsoever about his recurring ideas of wanting to hurt or kill other people including total strangers. This man is Certifiable under the Mental Health Act without any question and would be an obvious danger to the public should he be released at this time. He appears to be a potential candidate for a finding of Not Criminally Responsible and if the Court so wishes, he could be returned for further assessment of this issue. Alternatively, I have difficulty knowing what to suggest to control the potential danger this man poses to others.”
Following Mr. Flemming’s NCR finding on July 22, 2010, the Review Board ordered him detained at Oak Ridge. Mr. Flemming was transferred to Ontario Shores in Whitby on April 4, 2012. In 2014, he was granted a conditional discharge and was given permission to travel to St. Kitts for no longer than 14 days to visit with family. While in St. Kitts he was charged with the equivalent of assault causing bodily harm. He was kept in jail until being acquitted of the charge in January 2018. He returned to Canada and was arrested for breaching his Disposition. Mr. Flemming was taken to Ontario Shores, and the Review Board changed the conditional discharge to a detention order.
In November 2018, Mr. Flemming assaulted a patient at Ontario Shores who died from their injuries. A decision was made to not pursue criminal charges after an investigation by the O.P.P. Mr. Flemming was then transferred by the Review Board to Waypoint.
On April 6, 2021, Mr. Flemming was transferred from Waypoint to CAMH. He assaulted a co-patient and then a nurse on February 23, 2022. When asked the reason for the assaults, he simply stated that “he felt like punching someone in the face.” He was observed to be laughing and shadow boxing after the assaults. The Hospital Report describes a rapid and significant decompensation. Mr. Flemming at the time would not co-operate with taking his medication. On March 9, 2022, he was returned to Waypoint.
His condition at the time of his arrival at Waypoint was described as worsening. He would not engage with staff, including his treating psychiatrist, and displayed confusion, disorientation, and paranoia. There were occasions over the following year when Mr. Flemming displayed anger and aggressive outbursts and extreme hostility toward staff. He threatened his psychiatrist and refused his medication.
On October 28, 2023, Mr. Flemming assaulted a co-patient by striking him in the back of the head with a closed fist.
In January 2024, Dr. Hudson suggested to Mr. Flemming that he be prescribed clozapine. Mr. Flemming did not accept that his violent behaviour was related to psychosis, and he initially refused a change in medication.
Eventually, Mr. Flemming accepted clozapine. There was a noticeable improvement in his mental stability and behaviour. He became more engaged with staff and attended recreational activities and some therapeutic programs. Although, he still preferred to remain isolated in his room and avoid contact with peers to avoid trouble. He was able to exercise off-unit privileges independently but was still experiencing auditory hallucinations and responding to internal stimuli.
At Waypoint, for the year prior to his admission to BMHC, Mr. Flemming had not displayed any acts of violence or aggression, and he demonstrated fewer residual symptoms of schizophrenia. Dr. Hudson testified at last year’s Board hearing at Waypoint. He had previously questioned the antisocial personality disorder diagnosis, but testified, that since Mr. Flemming’s psychotic symptoms have improved, the signs of antisocial personality disorder are more evident. Mr. Flemming had continued to be quite adamant and assertive, and he lacked empathy. Dr. Hudson was now convinced that it was proper to include antisocial personality disorder in the diagnosis.
Mr. Flemming’s diagnoses is, therefore, Schizophrenia-paranoid type, Cannabis Dependence in remission in a controlled setting, and Antisocial Personality Disorder.
When Waypoint first discussed with Mr. Flemming a transfer to a less secure hospital he indicated a preference for Ontario Shores. Waypoint did not expect Ontario Shores to accept Mr. Flemming given his violent history at that hospital. Ontario Shores responded to the Rule 13 Notice, and predictably rejected the transfer of Mr. Flemming to their hospital. In its letter dated February 20, 2025, Ontario Shores highlighted Mr. Flemming’s long history of repeated assaultive behaviour, and the assault on the patient at Ontario Shores who died. Ontario Shores also suggested that, despite the improvements to his condition and behaviour with the introduction of clozapine, it was premature to consider transferring Mr. Flemming to a less secure hospital. BMHC agreed to accept the transfer to their hospital noting that his aggression has been under better control with clozapine medication and he has not had an incident of physical aggression since October 2023.
Mr. Flemming was transferred to BMHC in August 2025 under the care of Dr. Carefoot. She described Mr. Flemming as being stable at that time and experiencing intermittent auditory hallucinations. He responds to internal stimuli and is observed frequently to be shadow boxing. Dr. Carefoot also indicated in the Hospital Report that Mr. Flemming frequently requests his clozapine be discontinued and replaced with paliperidone.
In October 2025, Dr. Linthurst took over Mr. Flemmings’s care. He testified that Mr. Flemming over the past few months has become more engaged with staff and peers. Mr. Flemming still experiences some visual and auditory hallucinations such as flashes at his door, and he is able to discuss these episodes with the treatment staff. Dr. Linthurst advised that Mr. Flemming has attended some group programming without issue. Dr. Linthurst stated that Mr. Flemming’s psychotic symptoms are serious, but they’re currently being managed well with clozapine.
Dr. Linthurst acknowledged to the Crown that Mr. Flemming has demonstrated very violent behaviour both inside the hospital and in the community. The Crown made specific reference to the degree of violence exhibited in the index offences.
Dr. Linthurst advised that Mr. Flemming has not had privileges outside of the hospital while he has been at BMHC. Mr. Flemming has expressed to Dr. Linthurst a fear of problems arising when he is in the company of peers, so prefers to avoid the potential conflict by isolating himself for the most part. However, he has made positive steps in regard to group therapy. Dr. Linthurst responded to a question from the Crown by indicating that the treatment team is aware of Mr. Flemming’s difficulty coping in a group environment, and the Hospital sees their role as containing the risk.
Dr. Linthurst indicated, that if Mr. Flemming stopped taking his clozapine, there would be an immediate emergency assessment to determine an alternative form of treatment.
With respect to community living, Dr. Linthurst stated that it was highly unlikely that Mr. Flemming would be ready for community living this upcoming year. All privileges would be instituted cautiously and incrementally.
In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Flemming, Dr. Linthurst acknowledged that community living would only be permitted if the risk to public safety was being well managed. Dr. Linthurst said that Mr. Flemming is now more open with the team and has been on a positive trajectory the past few months. There have been no issues with respect to Mr. Flemming’s behaviour with staff. Dr. Linthurst anticipates hospital grounds passes being available for Mr. Flemming in the near future.
Regarding clozapine, Dr. Linthurst testified that Mr. Flemming finds it sedating, but accepts that he feels better taking clozapine. Dr. Linthurst also indicated that the psychotic symptoms are not affecting Mr. Flemming’s behaviour, but rather, the antisocial personality disorder symptoms have contributed to the aggressive behaviour in the past.
In answer to questions from the panel, Dr. Linthurst advised that he would consider a long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication if Mr. Flemming was living in the community. He indicated that the Hospital was recommending certain privileges, such as indirectly supervised passes into the community and community living, with the hope that Mr. Flemming would be motivated to become more engaged with treatment. He stressed that these privileges would be introduced incrementally, including hospital grounds indirectly supervised.
Dr. Linthurst expressed that currently Mr. Flemming is afraid of being provoked by other people, so these increased privileges would, not only be introduced slowly, but would be closely monitored by staff.
Dr. Linthurst also acknowledged that he has only been treating Mr. Flemming for 3 months, so he does not know if the increase in privileges would improve Mr. Flemming’s engagement with treatment. The existence of an antisocial personality disorder makes it difficult to predict Mr. Flemming’s response to increased privileges in the Disposition.
Dr. Linthurst stated that Mr. Flemming uses an avoidance strategy rather than dealing directly with the issues.
He indicated that the dosage of clozapine may be increased in the future.
Mr. Flemming told Dr. Linthurst within the past month that he knows he has benefitted from clozapine but would still prefer paliperidone.
Dr. Linthurst did not object to a suggestion that a community living term state 24 hour per day supervised housing.
Mr. Flemming has not had contact with any family member for a number of years Dr. Linthurst advised.
Submissions
The Hospital acknowledged in its submissions that it has been treating Mr. Flemming for a limited period of time. In the Hospital’s opinion, Mr. Flemming remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a detention order is necessary. He has a history of serious risk factors, and although doing better, he still experiences residual psychotic symptoms.
The Crown alerted the panel to an error in last year’s Disposition as detailed in the Hospital Report. The reference in the Hospital Report refers to Mr. Flemming having indirectly supervised passes into the community and community living in the Disposition. These terms are not included in last year’s Disposition.
The Crown referred to Mr. Flemming’s long history of violent behaviour as evidence supporting a detention order. Mr. Flemming has only been at BMHC a short period of time, and to increase the privileges to the extent suggested by the Hospital is inappropriate. Specifically, the Crown did not support either community living or passes into the community indirectly supervised. The Crown supported community passes accompanied by staff.
Counsel for Mr. Flemming maintained his support for the Hospital’s recommendations. He suggested that the Disposition should have a community living clause with the proviso that an early Review Board hearing be held before Mr. Flemming is discharged to live in the community to review the Hospital’s decision to discharge Mr. Flemming. He further suggested that having the community living term in the Disposition may positively impact Mr. Flemming’s trajectory.
Analysis
The panel agrees with the joint recommendation of the parties that Mr. Flemming remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a detention order is required. He has a lengthy history of serious violence inside and outside of the hospital. His psychotic symptoms are currently being well managed with the introduction of clozapine into his medication regimen, but he still experiences residual psychotic symptoms periodically. The Hospital now accepts that Mr. Flemming also suffers from antisocial personality disorder. This has been determined as a result of Mr. Flemming having demonstrated antagonistic, hostile, deceitful, suspicious, and callous attitudes. He has also demonstrated emotional distance, aloofness, and a lack of empathy, together with emotional intensity and lability.
It is noted in the Hospital Report, that historically, Mr. Flemming has become violent absent psychotic symptoms. It is quite likely, therefore, that his violent behaviour has often resulted from the antisocial personality disorder rather than psychotic symptoms.
The panel acknowledges that Mr. Flemming has improved with clozapine. He still, however, prefers to spend much of his time in his room and has little socialization with others. He does not report specific interpersonal conflicts on the unit but does believe that others will attempt to cause problems if he engages with them for long.
It is also concerning that Mr. Flemming has made repeated requests to change his medication from clozapine to paliperidone. The evidence is very clear that his risk of violence became much lower only after the initiation of clozapine, and that he had responded less well to paliperidone. These requests from Mr. Flemming reflect a limited insight into his condition, and the lack of appreciation for the benefits of clozapine.
Mr. Flemming has remained stable in his psychiatric and behavioural presentation since his transfer to BMHC. It is reported, however, that he denies experiencing psychotic symptoms and would decline to answer when asked about staff observations of him responding to internal stimuli. This evidence suggests that Mr. Flemming is less than forthright with the treatment team.
The Hospital Report refers to Mr. Flemming having a history of noncompliance with medication, and the need for staff to remain vigilant to ensure the medication is taken appropriately. The Hospital Report also indicates that the Hospital’s plan for this upcoming year, assuming a detention order, is to manage his risk by maintaining him on a secure unit with routine monitoring. It would only move Mr. Flemming to a less secure unit if he can demonstrate medication adherence and behavioural stability. It would appear, therefore, that the Hospital is not planning to move Mr. Flemming to a less secure unit at this time.
The Hospital has recommended that the Disposition include a term allowing indirectly supervised passes into the community. Mr. Flemming has remained stable at BMHC and has not engaged in any violent or aggressive behaviour. It is appropriate, therefore, to include the community passes indirectly supervised to reflect the improvements he has made, and on the understanding that the Hospital will increase the privileges incrementally and cautiously. The increase in privileges to this extent may have a salutary effect.
The panel will not include a term permitting community living in supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
The panel is aware of the Ontario Court of Appeal case of Sookram (Re) 2024 ONCA 823. In Sookram, the court directed that the Board must consider all the factors set out in s. 672.54 of the criminal code. That is, safety of the public, mental condition of the accused, reintegration of the accused into society and other needs of the accused. The Board’s disposition must be necessary and appropriate in the circumstances, namely, the least onerous and least restrictive of the accused’s liberty consistent with public safety and the other factors enumerated in 672.54.
The Board in Sookram, declined to include a community living clause in the Disposition. It was accepted by all the parties that there was little to no likelihood that Mr. Sookram would be discharged to the community in the upcoming year. The Crown took the position that a community living clause should only be included in a Disposition when the accused is actually ready to be discharged. The Court of Appeal disagreed. It stated, that when all the factors in s. 672.54 are considered, even where there is no potential for community living within the year, if there are factors such as, a long wait-list for supervised housing and the community living term in a Disposition will get the accused’s name on the waitlist, or there is a therapeutic benefit to having the term included, it should be included subject to also considering public safety.
With regard to Mr. Flemming, the panel accepts on the evidence that there is virtually no possibility that he will be ready for community living this year. This position is not challenged by the parties.
There is no evidence before this hearing that a lengthy waitlist for supervised housing exists in the Brockville area, and that it is necessary to include a community living clause in the Disposition to get Mr. Flemming’s name on a waitlist. There is evidence that Mr. Flemming becomes irritable when the treatment team declines to provide him with specific timelines around his progression through the forensic system and his discharge from the forensic system. On balance, it is quite likely that Mr. Flemming would become frustrated and more irritable if a community living term was in the Disposition and the Hospital did not discharge him. Mr. Flemming’s stability is somewhat fragile, and any increase in his frustration or irritability could lead to aggressive outbursts and behaviour which would put the safety of co-patients and/or staff at risk. There is also no specific evidence of a therapeutic benefit from the inclusion of this term. The panel makes the decision to omit the community living term after considering the factors in s. 672.54, the safety of the public, the mental condition of the accused, the accused’s reintegration in society, and the accused’s other needs, and the direction from the court in Sookram.
In conclusion, there will be a detention order with the terms recommended by the Hospital with the exception of community living.
Dated this 25^th^ day of February, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. K. McKenna
Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board