Re: Taha Ereken
ORB File No: 6592
Hearing held on: Friday, February 13, 2026
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Sections 672.81(1) and 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley
Members: Dr. A. Iosif
Dr. M. Kalia
Hon. C. Nelson
Mr. J. Cyr
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Taha Ereken
Counsel: Ms. L. Leinveer
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. P.L. Darby
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. M. Feindel
REASONS FOR DECISION AND DISPOSITION
(Dated February 24, 2026)
Introduction
On August 19, 2014, Taha Ereken was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of assault with a weapon, and forcible confinement, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. Mr. Ereken is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB/the Board”) dated October 2, 2024, detaining him at the Forensic Service of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH/the hospital”), with discretionary privileges up to and including the ability to reside in the community of the Greater Toronto Area in supervised accommodation.
The Board was made aware of Mr. Ereken’s readmission to hospital from August 18, 2025, to October 21, 2025. In addition, the hospital notified the Board by way of letter dated December 30, 2025, of Mr. Ereken’s readmission to hospital from December 24, 2025, to January 8, 2026. Given that both admissions resulted in restrictions on Mr. Ereken’s liberty and exceeded seven days, the Board ordered a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.
On February 13, 2026, the Board convened a panel for a review of both the restrictions of Mr. Ereken’s liberty and for the annual review of Mr. Ereken’s disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Ereken was present and represented by his counsel, Ms. Leinveer.
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to positions on the issues to be determined by the Board: whether Mr. Ereken remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, the necessary and appropriate disposition having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code. The panel also had to determine whether there was a significant increase in the restrictions on Mr. Ereken’s liberty and, if so, were they necessary and appropriate, as well as the least restrictive and least onerous measures available to the hospital.
Dr. Darby, on behalf of the hospital, submitted that Mr. Ereken remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order with some amendments. He recommended that the panel remove the requirement that Mr. Ereken’s accommodation be supervised. He also recommended the inclusion of a travel pass for up to two weeks, both within Canada and internationally, with the prior approval of an itinerary. With respect to the two restrictions of liberty, Dr. Darby submitted that they both were necessary and appropriate at the time and throughout their duration.
Mr. Feindel, on behalf of the Ministry of the Attorney General, ultimately concurred in the hospital’s positions. Ms. Leinveer took no position with respect to the two restrictions of liberty. She agreed with the hospital that Mr. Ereken continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order with the amendments as proposed by the hospital.
Findings
- For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Ereken remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order with the two changes as recommended by the parties. The panel also found that the readmissions from August 18, 2025, to October 21, 2025, and from December 24, 2025, to January 8, 2026, represented significant restrictions of Mr. Ereken’s liberty. Both readmissions were necessary and appropriate, initially, and up to the date of his discharges back to his residence.
The Evidence
- The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated October 14, 2025 (ex. 1), the Restriction of Liberty Report dated January 19, 2026 (ex. 2), and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Darby, Mr. Ereken’s Most Responsible Physician.
Index Offences
- The circumstances giving rise to the index offences are taken from last year's Reasons for Disposition, as follows:
“Mr. Ereken and his family are followers of Muslim beliefs. According to Mr. Ereken's mother, the family also held some beliefs about a character named “Jin” which appeared in both male and female forms.
At the time of the index offences, Mr. Ereken was living in a two-bedroom apartment with a roommate. The victim had been staying as a guest of the roommate for approximately one and a half weeks.
On March 10, 2014, the victim was asleep in the roommate's bedroom. The roommate had left earlier to go to work, and the victim had locked the door behind him. She had heard Mr. Ereken yelling over the course of the morning and afternoon, but assumed he was yelling at the landlord.
At approximately 2:10 p.m., the victim was awakened when Mr. Ereken forcibly opened the bedroom door. He entered the bedroom, turned on the lights, and began to hug the victim. He closed the door behind him and locked himself and the victim inside the room.
Mr. Ereken then began to unplug all of the computer cables in the room and searched for the modem and laptop. He had two large knives in his hands from the kitchen.
The victim texted a friend to tell him what was happening. She begged her friend to come help as she was extremely fearful.
When Mr. Ereken saw that the victim had a cell phone, he placed one of the knives against her throat. He demanded the cell phone from her, and she complied. He told her that there was to be no communication with the outside world and began to dismantle her cell phone. He removed the battery and SIM card, as well as the battery from a second, non-functioning cell phone the victim had.
Mr. Ereken repeatedly told the victim that he was God and that everyone else in the world was Satan. He repeatedly asked the victim, while pointing knives at her, if she were on his side. He told her that if she wasn't with him then she was against him like all the others, and that he was going to kill them all.
Mr. Ereken told the victim that he was God and that she was his sister. He began to hug her and hold her tight while occasionally kissing her arm. He told her that he would not let them take them.
As Mr. Ereken paced in the bedroom, he would often rub the two knives together in a sharpening motion. He told the victim that the blood of the innocents would be shed. He told her that he would kill anyone who came into the bedroom and would stay all day and all night. He told the victim that he was thirsty and wanted to stick his teeth into someone.
When police arrived, they attempted to make verbal contact with Mr. Ereken. He refused to exit the premises or follow the officers' directions. When police learned of the victim's presence in the bedroom with Mr. Ereken, they began to call out to her. With the knives pointed at the victim, Mr. Ereken controlled her responses when answering questions from police. He would not allow the victim to say her name or tell police that she wanted to come out.
Mr. Ereken told the victim that he was no longer taking his medication because "they" were trying to control him and that she should stop taking hers as well.
As the Emergency Task Force approached the door to the bedroom, Mr. Ereken, with knives in both hands, moved to the side of the door. The victim believed that he did this in order to ambush the first police officer who came through the door. Mr. Ereken then moved to the centre of the bedroom while still holding two knives. The victim moved away to the wall, as Mr. Ereken stood armed in the room, waiting for officers to enter.
Officers entered the room and arrested Mr. Ereken.
Mr. Ereken was on two separate Peace bonds at the time of the incidents in question.
Prior to the index offences, Mr. Ereken began experiencing increasingly psychotic, religiously preoccupied thoughts. These included feeling that he had been chosen by God to defeat demons, seeing demons when he closed his eyes, and being directed by the voices of Jin. When Mr. Ereken saw the victim lying on the bed, he was initially concerned that she was a Jin. When she convinced him that she was not, he thought that he needed to protect both of them from the demons by holding her in the bedroom with a knife and disconnecting all of the electronic devices in the room."
Background Information
The Hospital Report contains significant information as to Mr. Ereken’s personal history and psychiatric treatment and need not be reviewed in these Reasons beyond the following material facts.
Mr. Ereken is a 34-year-old single man who was born and raised in Turkey. When he was 12, he, his mother and younger brother moved to Canada to join his father. Mr. Ereken began to smoke marijuana on a daily basis in grade 12 and often skipped school. As a result, he failed to complete Grade 12. Although Mr. Ereken started a course at Centennial College in police foundations, he did not complete it and left in order to get a job in the construction industry. He worked periodically in construction until his index offence.
Prior to the index offences, Mr. Ereken was charged on several different occasions with criminal offences including criminal harassment, assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace, carrying a concealed weapon and failing to comply with a recognizance. He was deemed suitable for Mental Health Diversion. All of the outstanding charges ultimately were resolved by way of common law peace bonds.
Mr. Ereken was diagnosed with schizophrenia and treated by his family doctor. He was referred to CAMH by his doctor in June 2013 for a consultation. At the time, Mr. Ereken reported tactile and auditory hallucinations.
Course Since the NCR Finding
Following his NCR verdict, Mr. Ereken was admitted to CAMH in September 2014. He was determined to be capable of making treatment decisions and, pursuant to his request, antipsychotic medications were discontinued. Mr. Ereken’s mental status was closely monitored. Over the course of the following year, Mr. Ereken’s mental status deteriorated. He was found incapable of consenting to treatment and, with the consent of his mother as his substitute decision maker, treatment with antipsychotic medication was commenced. With treatment, his behaviour improved. In March 2016, Mr. Ereken was discharged to transitional housing in the community.
In April 2017, Mr. Ereken expressed a desire to stop his antipsychotic medication. He did not like the side effects and felt that he did not need medication. This request was supported by his mother. She withdrew her consent to continue medication. By October, Mr. Ereken’s family noted a deterioration in his mental status and an increased focus on his religious beliefs. Given his history, a readmission to hospital was deemed necessary. At this point, Mr. Ereken’s family were no longer prepared to act as his substitute decision maker so consent for treatment was provided by the Public Guardian and Trustee. With treatment, Mr. Ereken slowly improved and was discharged back to his residence on February 6, 2018.
A month later, Mr. Ereken became involved in a physical altercation with his brother. At the time, he was experiencing distressing auditory and visual hallucinations. Mr. Ereken was readmitted to hospital. While in the emergency department of the hospital, he was threatening and required chemical restraint and seclusion. Mr. Ereken remained in hospital until his mental status returned to baseline. He was eventually discharged back to his residence in the community.
Mr. Ereken had another readmission from December 2018 to June 2019 after experiencing intense psychotic symptoms, similar to those at the time of the index offences. His medications were once again adjusted. Once he was stabilized, he was discharged back to his residence.
Upon his return to the community, Mr. Ereken began to consume cannabis. He reported heavy, regular consumption in December 2019 and January of 2020. All 23 urinalyses conducted between December 27, 2019, and March 18, 2020, were positive for cannabis. However, Mr. Ereken did not report experiencing any psychotic symptoms and none were observed.
Following his annual hearing in July 2020, Mr. Ereken sent a message to his case manager stating that he was no longer in Canada, and he was not coming back. He had “had enough of the ORB.” Mr. Ereken was in Turkey. He remained there until May 6, 2022. When he returned to Canada, he was detained at the airport and ultimately transferred to CAMH and admitted pursuant to his Warrant of Committal. Mr. Ereken had been away for 683 days. He remained an inpatient at CAMH until his discharge back into the community on January 16, 2024. He came under the care of Dr. Darby and the Forensic Outpatient Service.
In October 2024, Mr. Ereken experienced a dramatic deterioration in his mental status. Early signs included poor sleep and a heightened religious preoccupation, including fixating on the Quran. There were no concerns of substance use or medication non-compliance. He was admitted to hospital and treatment with Clozapine was commenced in November. Mr. Ereken became calmer, less agitated, and fewer psychotic symptoms were noted. He was discharged back to his residence on December 2, 2024.
Course Since the Last Disposition
Mr. Ereken’s current diagnoses are: Schizoaffective Disorder, bipolar type, and Cannabis Use Disorder. Mr. Ereken has continued to reside at LOFT, a high support residence in the community. The residence includes LOFT community services with staff on site twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Mr. Ereken has a bachelor apartment with his own bathroom and appliances and is responsible for his own meals. Mr. Ereken continues to be financially supported by the Ontario Disability Support Plan (“ODSP”).
Mr. Ereken sees a community nurse practitioner for assistance with any physical health concerns. He has raised specific concerns about his insomnia. Notwithstanding this concern, Mr. Ereken has continued to engage in late-night video gaming for extended periods, contrary to clinical recommendations.
Mr. Ereken tested positive for cannabis over the past reporting year. He admitted to using cannabis to help him with relaxation and sleep. He also claimed cannabis use enhanced his feelings and he “got more interaction, feels more real" when he watched movies.
Restriction of Liberty – August 18, 2025, to October 21, 2025
In August 2025, Mr. Ereken became increasingly abusive and made veiled threats towards staff. Given this sudden and acute decompensation, Mr. Ereken was admitted to CAMH on August 18, 2025. On readmission, he presented with disorganization of thought, grandiose and paranoid bizarre delusions, and religious preoccupation. He told staff that he had thoughts of going AWOL and just living "in the TTC tunnels". He also reported an increase in hallucinations and delusions. Results of his urine drug screens suggested that he likely had missed a number of doses of clozapine. When confronted with the results, he admitted that he had been “cheeking” clozapine once weekly for a while.
With the restoration of his regular administration of clozapine, Mr. Ereken’s mental status showed steady improvement after a period of weeks. He did not appear to be experiencing any psychotic symptoms and was able to show some insight into the fact that these symptoms had been part of his illness. Mr. Ereken was agreeable to housing staff supervising the administration of his clozapine. He also agreed to refrain from any further use of cannabis. Mr. Ereken was discharged back to his residence on October 21, 2025.
Restriction of Liberty – December 24, 2025, to January 8, 2026
On December 16, 2025, Mr. Ereken asked his case manager if he could consume alcohol. He was reminded about the substance restriction clause in his disposition. Mr. Ereken also advised his case manager that he had resumed smoking cannabis and had smoked roughly a gram each day since December 12, 2025. He indicated that he felt "better", "alive", and able to enjoy food and life in general.
Mr. Ereken acknowledged that smoking cannabis in the community was against the rules of his housing and also contrary to his disposition. Mr. Ereken was dismissive of the treatment team’s concern and indicated that he felt "in control" of the situation. Two days later, when the case manager continued to express her concerns, he became quite defensive and irritable. He spoke vehemently about the positive effects of cannabis and was not open to any feedback to the contrary. As he was becoming increasingly irritable, the case manager terminated the interview.
When seen by Dr. Darby on December 24, Mr. Ereken continued to be irritable and defensive. He again spoke of feeling "more alive" since smoking cannabis and indicated he was not willing to stop. When Dr. Darby attempted to discuss the concern about the behaviour and the prohibition on his cannabis use, Mr. Ereken became more defensive.
Given the history of elopement and the noted rapid deterioration in Mr. Ereken’s mental status, Dr. Darby and the treatment team felt that Mr. Ereken needed to be readmitted to the hospital to further assess his mental state and to afford him the opportunity to achieve a period of stabilization. Mr. Ereken was admitted to CAMH on December 24, 2025, and remained on a non-forensic unit during the course of his stay. By early January, Mr. Ereken appeared to have returned to his baseline. He again was cautioned about ongoing use of cannabis when he returned to his residence. He was discharged back to his residence on January 8, 2026.
Dr. Darby testified before the panel. He indicated that Mr. Ereken is a very high-functioning individual whose mental fragility has led to a number of decompensations and readmissions to hospital. Mr. Ereken can become very psychotic very quickly with no obvious triggers. The doctor referred to the December 2024 admission as another recent example of Mr. Ereken’s sudden deterioration in the absence of any precipitating event. His change in mental status could happen within a matter of days. Although Mr. Ereken reported that he had not slept for five days, that alone may not explain his dramatic decompensation. Similarly, in the doctor’s opinion, cannabis use on its own is not the root cause of such a rapid decompensation.
In August 2025, Mr. Ereken became extremely disorganized, tangential, circumstantial and expressed a number of grandiose and bizarre delusions. This represented a precipitous decline. Again, within months of being discharged back to his residence, Mr. Ereken’s mental status deteriorated, although not as severely. Given the fragility and pattern of quick decompensation, the hospital determined that another readmission was necessary to stabilize Mr. Ereken and prevent further deterioration and related increased risk to public safety.
Dr. Darby advised that since Mr. Ereken returned to his residence on January 8, 2026, he has secured employment moderating video games. It is full-time virtual employment that he enjoys.
Of concern is Mr. Ereken’s ongoing use of cannabis. Although there has been no noted change in his mental status, cannabis use remains a significant risk factor. It was present at the time of the index offences and historically has been a contributing factor in the emergence of psychotic symptoms. The team continues to reinforce the current prohibition in his disposition.
Mr. Ereken has been compliant with his medication. He gets along well with the staff at the residence and the treatment team. In Dr. Darby’s opinion, within the next clinical year, Mr. Ereken may not require the level of supervision and support offered at his current residence. There is another LOFT residence nearby that offers semi-independent living. In the doctor’s opinion, a move to that residence is a realistic goal for Mr. Ereken. Given his two recent decompensations, such a move would be considered later in the year.
Dr. Darby testified that the hospital requires the ability to readmit Mr. Ereken to hospital very quickly. As such, reliance on the Mental Health Act would not be sufficient to manage Mr. Ereken’s risk to the public.
With respect to approving any travel plans, Dr. Darby indicated that the approach by the hospital would differ depending on the nature of the request. Three days at a cottage in Ontario would be treated differently than two weeks in Turkey. The doctor agreed that starting with shorter more local trips would be advisable.
At the conclusion of the evidence, all parties maintained their positions.
Analysis and Conclusion
The panel has carefully considered the two Hospital Reports and the evidence of Dr. Darby and unanimously concluded that Mr. Ereken remains a significant threat to the safety of the public. The index offences were extremely serious and involved holding a woman at knifepoint over an extended period of time. It required the Emergency Task Force to intervene. Mr. Ereken has a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder which includes psychotic symptoms in the form of auditory hallucinations and delusions. His deterioration has been repeatedly shown to be rapid and significant, with no obvious triggers. Cannabis use and nonadherence with treatment continue to be significant risk factors. As such, he remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.
Having found that Mr. Ereken represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, the panel must consider the necessary and appropriate disposition having regard to the criteria found in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code. The panel accepts Dr. Darby’s opinion that the provisions of the Mental Health Act would not be sufficient to manage his risk to the safety of the public. Over the past year and a half, there have been three occasions that necessitated his readmission to hospital following a rapid deterioration in Mr. Ereken’s mental status.
Further, the panel finds that the hospital requires the ability to approve Mr. Ereken’s accommodation to ensure that he receives the support and supervision that he requires at any given time. Staff are currently administering and monitoring his medication to ensure that he remains adherent to treatment. Further, given his continuing problematic cannabis use, close monitoring of his mental status is required. Whether that close supervision continues to be necessary will be for Dr. Darby and the treatment team to determine based on Mr. Ereken’s compliance, or lack thereof, with his treatment and his disposition, and mental stability.
Mr. Ereken is a bright, articulate and high-functioning individual who is currently living independently in the context of a highly supervised residence. It remains possible that a move to a less supervised residence will be sufficient to a mange his risk in the community. As such, the condition allowing the hospital to approve his residence will no longer require that any such accommodation be supervised.
Restrictions of Liberty
Pursuant to the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Regina vs. M.L.C. (2010 ONCA 843), the Board must consider not only the reason for the restriction and the initial decision to impose a restriction but also the ongoing circumstances of the accused for the period of time that the restriction remained in place. Both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty must be the least onerous and least restrictive necessary for public safety.
The panel found that Mr. Ereken’s admission to hospital on August 18, 2025, represented a significant increase in the restrictions on his liberty and was necessary and warranted at the time. It was the least intrusive and least restrictive action available to the hospital to ensure that Mr. Ereken’s risk to the public was managed. He had been non-adherent to medication and was exhibiting psychotic symptoms including disorganization of thought, grandiose and paranoid bizarre delusions, and religious preoccupation. In the circumstances, he presented as a heightened risk to the safety of the public. Treatment with clozapine was resumed and he slowly and steadily improved. Once he had returned to his baseline, he was discharged back to his residence.
The panel similarly found that the decision to admit Mr. Ereken from December 24, 2025, to January 8, 2026, was necessary and appropriate. That intervention, at the time and throughout its duration, was the least restrictive and least intrusive measure available to the hospital in all the circumstances. Mr. Ereken had resumed consuming cannabis contrary to his previous assurances, a significant risk factor. He became increasingly irritable and defensive with the treatment team, necessitating his case manager to terminate an interview with him. Given his past decompensations, the treatment team moved quickly to readmit him to assess his mental status and prevent a further deterioration. Once he returned to his baseline, he was discharged back to the community.
Since his return to his residence, Mr. Ereken has remained stable. He has secured full-time employment which he is enjoying. He continues to have good working relationships with Dr. Darby, the treatment team, and staff at the residence. He has been treatment adherent. Should he demonstrate continued stability and compliance with his disposition, in particular abstaining from substance use, he is likely to be considered for a transition to a less supervised, more independent residence within the next year.
In conclusion, the panel found that the two restrictions of liberty, from August 18 to October 21, 2025, and December 24 to January 8, 2026, were significant but also necessary and appropriate and the least onerous and least restrictive measures available to the hospital. Further, Mr. Ereken remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the detention order with the changes as recommended by the parties. In arriving at our conclusion, the panel has considered the paramount factor of the safety of the public, Mr. Ereken’s mental condition, his community reintegration, and his other needs, all as required by s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
DATED this 24th day of February, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. C. Finley
Alternate Chairperson
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board