Ontario Review Board
Re: David Jardine
ORB File No: 6654
Hearing held on: Tuesday, January 13, 2026
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks
Members: Dr. R. Sheppard Dr. L. O. Lightfoot Ms. C. Murray Ms. R. Chopra
Parties Appearing:
Accused: David Jardine
Counsel for the Accused: Mr. M. Schloss
Representative for the person in charge of hospital: Mr. K. Dow
Counsel for the Attorney General of Ontario: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated February 23, 2026)
Introduction:
On October 22, 2014, David Jardine was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of robbery – steals using threats of violence or violence, theft not exceeding five thousand dollars, and breach of recognizance, all contrary to the Criminal Code.
Mr. Jardine is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“the Board” or “ORB”) dated January 22, 2025, whereby he is detained at the Forensic Program at Ontario Shores for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including community living in supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital (“PIC”).
On January 13, 2026, a panel of the Board to conduct Mr. Jardine’s annual review, pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Jardine attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Mr. M. Schloss.
The Hospital Report dated December 16, 2025 (the “Hospital Report”) was marked as Exhibit 1 at the hearing. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Jardine’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. A. Wang gave evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Jardine continued to meet the test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition, bearing in mind the four factors in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons that follow, the panel found that Mr. Jardine continues to represent a significant threat to public safety. The panel concluded that the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive in the circumstances, is that Mr. Jardine be discharged on conditions, all as set forth at the conclusion of these Reasons.
Position of the Parties:
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed for their without prejudice recommendations to the Board. Counsel for the hospital submitted that Mr. Jardine meets the significant threat threshold and that a continuation of the existing Disposition with no changes was the appropriate and necessary Disposition.
The hospital’s position was adopted by the Crown.
Mr. Schloss advised that his client was seeking a Conditional Discharge Disposition with terms to include:
- a s. 672.55 Criminal Code consent to treatment condition (“treatment condition”),
- a Young condition requiring upon notice of the PIC, Mr. Jardine’s attendance at hospital for psychiatric assessment and admission;
- residency at his current location at Skene House at 611 Kent St. in Whitby, ON; and
- reporting not less than once every two weeks, or as required.
Mr. Schloss indicated that he would not be arguing the issue of significant threat at this hearing.
- All parties maintained their respective recommendations in closing submissions.
Index Offences:
- The index offences are set out in detail in the Hospital Report (at pages 2-3) and are summarized as follows:
On September 5, 2014, Mr. Jardine stole a can of Coke from a gas station in Ajax. He returned to the gas station and punched the clerk in the stomach while stealing a package of cigarettes. At the time he was on a peace bond under s. 810 of the Criminal Code. He was also listed on the Ontario Sex Offender Registry and was required to update his address. He was listed as having an address on Eglinton Avenue in Toronto; however, he advised the police that he is currently of no fixed address.
Background:
Mr. Jardine’s personal and psychiatric history are set out in the Hospital Report and will not be repeated in detail here. In summary, Mr. Jardine is a 39-year-old man who grew up in Ajax with his parents and two sisters. His mother passed away in 2016. Mr. Jardine’s parents sought professional help for Mr. Jardine when he was six years old as he had poor impulse control and got into numerus physical altercations while at school. His performance in school declined as he increased his used drugs use.
The Hospital Report stated that at age 15 Mr. Jardine was asked to leave his parent’s home due to drug use. He lived in shelters and other transient housing, but was frequently kicked out due to his drug use and difficult behaviours. He was homeless at the time of the index offences as he had been previously evicted from a rented room.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Jardine completed his grade 12 education at the age of 23 with the help of the John Howard Society. He had worked several jobs including working at a grocery store, working at McDonald’s, and owning his own snow shovelling business.
Mr. Jardine is single with no dependents. He is supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).
Criminal History:
- Mr. Jardine has a lengthy criminal offence history since 2007 as outlined in the Hospital Report (at page 4), with offences of assault peace officer, fail to comply, mischief under $5000, utter threats, invitation to sexual touching under 16 years of age (3 charges), communicate for purpose of prostitution, and assault. As stated, Mr. Jardine is listed on the Ontario Sex Offender Registry.
Psychiatric History:
Mr. Jardine’s involvement with the mental health system dated back to when he was a child and he was diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Conduct Disorder. He had hospital admissions in 2002 and 2005, and then again in 2013 when he exhibited paranoid, grandiose and bizarre behaviours on multiple occasions. Mr. Jardine became increasingly paranoid in 2014 and endorsed beliefs that the Illuminati were putting computers in his head and he was receiving messages from the television. He was admitted to Ontario Shores where he continued to express paranoid and grandiose delusions and was physically aggressive. Mr. Jardine also attended hospital a few months prior to the index offences but was not found to be certifiable under the Mental Health Act (“MHA”).
Mr. Jardine has a significant history of substance use.
Mr. Jardine’s current diagnoses are:
Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Subtype,
Substance Use Disorder (primarily cannabis, remote history of alcohol problems), in sustained remission, and
Antisocial Personality Traits.
Evidence at the Hearing:
Dr. Wang testified at the hearing to supplement the documentary evidence before the parties. He advised that he has been Mr. Jardine’s out-patient psychiatry since Mr. Jardine was discharged to the community on September 13, 2023.
Mr. Jardine resides at Skene House within the Durham Mental Health Services program. This group home provides 24-hour supervision including oversight of medications and support with activities of daily living. It is considered high support housing and it provides Mr. Jardine with meals, medication supervision, and assistance with hygiene and ADLs. He requires 24/7 staff supervision for his safe management. Skene House is transitional housing and the intention of the housing providers is to move its residents on to more permanent housing.
Dr. Wang updated the Hospital Report and advised that Mr. Jardine’s current housing provider has recommended that he be transitioned to more permanent housing. To that end, he has been referred to an intake interview with the Community Homes for Opportunity (“CHO”) program and his initial interview will likely be held in the next few weeks. At that interview, there will be an assessment of Mr. Jardine’s suitability and readiness for transitioning him to permanent CHO housing. Dr. Wang advised that there are several CHO facilities and their ratio of staff to patient varies considerably from facility to facility. Dr. Wang stated that Mr. Jardine requires intensive supports and will likely continue to require the same level of staff supports going forward. Dr. Wang also advised the parties that Mr. Jardine has been referred to the CHO program in the past but he was declined.
Since his discharge to the community, Mr. Jardine has been supported by the Forensic Outpatient Service (“FOS”). Over the past reporting year, Mr. Jardine attended all appointments occurring on a weekly basis. He was initially supported by the FOS Forensic Transitional Case Manager (“FTCM”); however, this support ended naturally this year. Mr. Jardine was initially quite engaged with his FTCM on a 1:1 basis for outings that were of interest to him; however, the services of his FTCM were discontinued some time ago. Mr. Jardine tolerated this change well despite the strong therapeutic relationship he had shared with his FTCM.
Dr. Wang testified that Skene House is a highly supervised home with just a few residents. Mr. Jardine requires a fairly intensely supervised housing placement as this is a critical risk-management factor. The doctor stated that in his opinion, the hospital must retain the ability to have oversight with regard to Mr. Jardine’s housing.
The Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Jardine remains incapable to consent to psychiatric treatment and his father continues to be his substitute decision-maker (SDM”). Mr. Jardine is prescribed the oral antipsychotic medication, Clozapine (at a relatively high dose), as well as an oral mood-stabiliser, Divalproex Sodium. There have been no concerns about non-adherence within the supervised setting of his residence where staff directly oversee medication administration for the residents. Mr. Jardine attends at Ontario Shores for his monthly Clozapine bloodwork
Over the past reporting year, Mr. Jardine’s mental status has remained stable; however, he continues to experience ongoing residual psychosis, including mild auditory hallucinations, grandiosity, and bizarre statements. He also continues to have significant negative symptoms of his illness, including amotivation and flat affect. Dr. Wang stated that his current presentation is likely his best baseline. It was noted that Mr. Jardine presents as a treatment resistant individual with below-average cognitive functioning. In response to a question posed, the doctor testified that he considered Mr. Jardine’s treatment to be presently optimized. He commented that his presentation had been fairly stable and consistent since 2017.
Dr. Wang testified that Mr. Jardine did not require readmission over the past year in review. The doctor commented that, at times, he can struggle with following staff direction and requires reinforcement.
Mr. Jardine’s hygiene and unhealthy diet remain a focus of clinical care. He is recently diagnosed with a dental infection and requires treatment with antibiotics. He has been encouraged to follow up with the dentist. Over the upcoming reporting year, the treatment team will encourage and support Mr. Jardine to assume more agency with respect to his physical and mental health care.
Mr. Jardine’s insight into his illness, the need for treatment, and the index offences remain poor and underdeveloped. He has remained compliant with his prescribed medications but he requires the oversight and structure provided by housing staff, the FOS team and his current Disposition.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Jardine continued to make progress over the past year and had not relapsed into any substance use. He has cooperated with the collection of urine samples for drug screening and all test results have been negative for the presence of illicit substances.
To Mr. Jardine’s credit, the Hospital Report indicates that there have not been any notable incidents of concern or any aggression over the year in review and he tolerated his transition to community living well.
Unfortunately, Mr. Jardine did not attend any formal psychosocial groups or education despite encouragement from his treatment team. He is quite solitary in his daily activities. The doctor commented that this may be a manifestation of the negative symptom of his illness and that it is difficult for the team to effect sustained change in this regard.
Mr. Jardine is well supported by his father with whom he enjoys regular monthly visits. He also occasionally has visits from his sister and other extended family members.
The 2024 Empirically-Based Assessment of Risk concluded that Mr. Jardine’s risk for future violence was estimated to be in the “low-moderate” range under a Detention Order but “moderate or higher” in the context of a Conditional Discharge. This is stated in the Hospital Report to be “…due to his extensive history of violence (i.e. assaultive behaviour, verbal threats, sexually inappropriate behaviour), poor insight into his illness, and residual psychosis.” In response to a question posed by a panel member, Dr. Wang advised that if a proposed Conditional Discharge specified that Mr. Jardine reside at his current residence at Skene House then, he would assess his risk to be much closer to “low-moderate” as would be the case if he were subject to a Detention Order Disposition.
In terms of the clinical assessment of risk, the Hospital Report states:
“Mr. Jardine’s risk for violence continues to flow, primarily from his underlying mental disorder, which continues to persist and present with active symptoms. There has been no meaningful change or improvement in his clinical condition over the course of this year, and he has continued to exhibit active symptoms of psychosis, though he often denies any subject of concern. Some additional medication (cariprazine) was added this year in an effort to target his pronounce negative symptoms, but there has not been any notable improvement. He has continued to reside in the community, in a highly supervised and supportive setting, and would likely experience significant difficulty managing independently. His insight remains very limited and his engagement with the team has also been fairly limited. To his credit, he has not required re-admission to hospital and there have not been any concerns regarding substance use.”
In response to questions posed by panel members, Dr. Wang stated that staff supervised housing with medication oversight is critical to Mr. Jardine’s safe management in the community. The doctor commented that Mr. Jardine is content at his current residence and would be unlikely to independently gravitate to new housing without the team’s involvement. Having said that, Dr. Wang also advise that Mr. Jardine does not have a well-developed appreciation for the intense level of staff supervision he requires in the community and his perception is that he could function well independently.
Dr. Wang reiterated the hospital’s position that a Detention Order remains necessary and appropriate, as well as least restrictive and least onerous, as the hospital requires the ongoing ability to approve Mr. Jardine’s community placement to ensure that he is adequately monitored supervised and supported in the community in order to safely manage his risk. Further, the doctor testified that a Detention Order is necessary in order to allow the hospital to promptly effect Mr. Jardine’s rapid readmission should he present with any decompensation in his mental state whether as a result of noncompliance with medication, breakthrough symptoms, relapse to substance use, or otherwise.
Dr. Wang stated that given that Mr. Jardine suffers from ongoing active positive and negative symptoms of his mental illness, he would expect that if he became medication non-compliant, Mr. Jardine would be at risk of a rapid and acute decompensation with a likely return to aggressive and sexually inappropriate behaviours thereafter.
Dr. Wang was uncertain how Mr. Jardine would react to the stressor of changing residences and dealing with new housing providers and new co-residents. Dr. Wang stated that in his view, it would be critical that Mr. Jardine continue to be intensely supervised in his housing placement. The doctor also agreed to that and during any period of transition to a new residence, the FOS team would increase their contact with Mr. Jardine to more closely monitor his mental state and support him.
When considering a possible Conditional Discharge Disposition, Dr. Wang stated that any absence from Mr. Skene’s residence for over 24 hours would raise serious concerns about his medication compliance. The doctor stated that presently, Mr. Jardine only ventures into the local neighbourhood for a few hours at a time. If under a Conditional Discharge Disposition, Dr. Wang stated that Mr. Jardine’s safe management would require that he receive the prior approval of the PIC if he wished to be absent from his residence for over 24 hours. This would allow the hospital to review his proposed itinerary and approve his plans to ensure Mr. Jardine’s ongoing medication compliance.
With regard to the proposal for a Conditional Discharge, Dr. Wang stated the hospital expects that Mr. Jardine is likely to move from Skene House to a different more permanent residence which might or might not be within the CHO program. He was also unable to give any timeline for such a possible change of residence. At this point, the doctor stated that it is unclear what Mr. Jardine’s next housing placement might be. He stated that this was essentially the main reason for the hospital’s recommendation for a Detention Order. Mr. Jardine’s level of independent functioning is quite limited and he requires intense supervision.
If his current residence were identified in a Conditional Discharge Disposition, and Mr. Jardine was later accepted to a different housing placement, then the doctor acknowledged that an early ORB hearing could be called to reflect a change his residency. In response to a question posed by Mr. Schloss, the doctor was not certain whether a change in a patient’s residency condition could be implemented administratively by the ORB’s head office.
Dr. Wang stated that if Skene House were identified in the Disposition for Mr. Jardine, then if he were to be transitioned to a more permanent community residence over the upcoming year (whether through CHO or another housing provider), the hospital would have to call an early ORB hearing to amend his residency condition to specify his new proposed housing placement. The doctor stated that the FOS team would try to work collaboratively with the proposed housing provider to ensure that Mr. Jardine’s housing placement would not be compromised before his Disposition could be amended.
Dr. Wang testified that even with a Young condition, he thinks that there would still need to be reliance on Box B of the MHA to effect Mr. Jardine’s readmission to hospital. The doctor was uncertain as to whether or not Mr. Jardine might consent to a voluntary readmission. The doctor also expressed uncertainty with regard to the hospital’s ability to maintain Mr. Jardine in hospital for an extended readmission were he not to agree to a voluntary admission.
No further evidence was called by the parties.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The panel carefully considered the evidence and submissions before it and concluded that Mr. Jardine continues to represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. This issue was not challenged by any of the parties at the hearing.
Mr. Jardine continues to suffer from residual positive symptoms of psychosis despite treatment with the gold-standard antipsychotic medication, Clozapine. His illness, Schizoaffective Disorder, is considered to be treatment-resistant and when unwell, Mr. Jardine has engaged in significant violence towards other people and to property. Mr. Jardine carried out the index offences while actively psychotic. Further, his criminal record notes offences which involve physical violence in addition to sexual offences.
His presentation is complicated by his below average cognitive functioning, poor frustration tolerance, and limited problem-solving skills. Mr. Jardine also has a significant history of cannabis use and, historically, when intoxicated from the substance, he has suffered increased psychotic, and/or manic symptoms. In addition, Mr. Jardine has poor insight into his major mental illness and substance use disorders, as well as his need for medication in perpetuity.
If he was not closely supervised in the community and subject to an ORB Disposition, Mr. Jardine would be likely to become non-compliant with prescribed treatment and, over a relatively short period of time, experience a resurgence of his psychotic symptoms. Over time, his experience of psychotic symptoms would be likely to result in significant escalation in his risk to the public, which would be criminal in nature and would be likely to cause serious physical and/or psychological harm. For all of these reasons, the panel finds that Mr. Jardine continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.
Having come to a finding of significant threat, we are tasked with determining the necessary and appropriate, as well as least restrictive and least onerous Disposition. We have carefully considered whether or not Mr. Jardine’s risk to the public can be safely managed under a less restrictive Conditional Discharge Disposition at this time.
In coming to our decision, we are mindful that Mr. Jardine has continued to progress over the past reporting year in several key areas. He has successfully resided in the community and has not required hospital readmission over the past year. He has not engaged in any notable incidents of concern over the year in review, and specifically, he has not engaged in any verbal threats of violence, physical violence, or sexually inappropriate behaviours.
Mr. Jardine has remained medication compliant, albeit under close staff supervision at his community residence. Further, Mr. Jardine has successfully abstained from any use of alcohol and other substances of abuse and this has been objectively confirmed by urine drug screening. To Mr. Jardine’s credit, he has complied with all scheduled reporting obligations.
Unfortunately, Mr. Jardine continues to suffer from severely underdeveloped insight, specifically, with respect to the importance of continuous compliance with his prescribed medications. Given that he requires treatment with Clozapine and would be likely to rapidly decompensate within days of non-adherence, we agree that the inclusion of a treatment condition is reasonable and necessary and in Mr. Jardine’s best interest. His counsel advised that Mr. Jardine consented to the inclusion of a treatment condition were he to be subject to a Conditional Discharge.
With regard to the issue of community housing, it appears that Mr. Jardine’s housing provider is proposing that he be transitioned to more permanent supportive housing. It is not presently known what specific staff supported residences are being considered. It is also not known what the likely timing for such a transition to new housing might be. These are early days in that process and, as at the hearing date, Mr. Jardine had not yet attended any housing intake interviews.
The hospital’s evidence was clear that Mr. Jardine is currently well-placed at Skene House where he receives intensive staff supports on a 24-hour a day basis, including oversight of his medication administration. Should, over the course of the upcoming reporting year, he be accepted for placement in a permanent staff supervised community residence, then the hospital can call for an early ORB hearing to allow his Disposition to be amended to reflect that new residence. The expert evidence indicated that the treatment team would endeavour to work closely with the new housing provider to ensure that the new placement would not be jeopardised while awaiting an ORB early hearing.
Further, Dr. Wang advised that if a proposed Conditional Discharge specified that Mr. Jardine reside at his current residence at Skene House then, in the doctor’s opinion, Mr. Jardine’s risk would be assessed as closer to “low-moderate” as would be the case if he were subject to a Detention Order Disposition.
In response to submissions made by Mr. Jardine’s counsel, we are of the opinion that, except in extraordinary situations which require immediate intervention, the Board will not administratively implement a substantive change to a residency condition in a Disposition without convening an early ORB hearing. That is precisely the process that was adhered to and is referenced in Colquhoun (Re), 2025 CanLII 84094 (ON RB). Furthermore, in this case where it is critical that any new residence provide Mr. Jardine with intensive staff supports, the Board finds it imperative that a newly constituted ORB panel hear evidence about the proposed housing change in order to determine its suitability from a risk management perspective.
With regard to the condition that absences from Mr. Jardine’s residency in excess of 24 hours shall require the prior approval of the PIC, the hospital’s evidence indicates that in the absence of such a condition, Mr. Jardine’s medication compliance cannot be safely managed. The panel will not mandate a requirement that when exercising such passes Mr. Jardine must be accompanied or escorted, rather, we shall rely on the hospital to liaise with Mr. Jardine and his housing provider to implement a pass plan that will ensure his ongoing medication compliance while affording him maximum liberty.
The Board finds that with the inclusion of a treatment condition, a Young condition, and a residency condition, together with reliance on the MHA and/or 672.93(2) of the Criminal Code, the hospital will have sufficient avenues of redress to return Mr. Jardine to the hospital should he suffer a deterioration in his mental state as a result of medication noncompliance, substance use, stressors, or for other reasons.
We note that in August 2024, Mr. Jardine was cooperative with a readmission to the hospital albeit, at that time, he was subject to a Warrant of Committal by virtue of being under a Detention Order. It remains a reasonable possibility that he might voluntarily return to hospital on request even if under a Conditional Discharge. Further, if he were not cooperative with a voluntary readmission, then it is possible that Mr. Jardine could be involuntarily detained in hospital if he were able to satisfy Box B criteria under the MHA.
Finally, the combined operation of the Young condition and s. 672.93(2) of the Criminal Code should act to mitigate risks associated with Mr. Jardine’s potential refusal to agree to a voluntary re-hospitalization if directed by the hospital. In Ramos (Re), 2025 ONCA 820, the Court stated that if an accused failed to comply with a Young condition included in a Conditional Discharge, that accused could be arrested for breaching his Disposition and then ordered detained in hospital by a justice under section 672.93(2) of the Criminal Code.
Without comprehensively analysing the viability of the Criminal Code’s breach provisions in ss. 672.91 to 672.93, we note that these provisions leave substantial discretion to peace officers and justices with regard to their enforcement. It cannot be definitively asserted that an accused arrested for breaching a term of a Conditional Discharge (even in cases where hospital admission is clearly indicated for risk management), will ultimately be detained under a section 672.93(2) Criminal Code order.
Finally, the panel notes that another option available to the hospital for the safe management of Mr. Jardine’s risk should he not be successfully returned to hospital or detained in hospital long enough to restabilize him, would be to request that the ORB convene an early hearing to consider whether his risk requires that he be managed under a Detention Order Disposition.
Having considered all of the evidence and the oral and written submissions of the parties, the panel finds that the necessary and appropriate Disposition, as well as the least restrictive and least onerous Disposition is that Mr. Jardine be discharged on the following terms and conditions:
- he reside at Skene House at 611 Kent St., Whitby, ON;
- he report to the PIC, or his/her designate, not less than once every two weeks, or as required;
- he consents to psychiatric treatment as prescribed by the PIC, or his/her designate, pursuant to s.672.55 Criminal Code;
- upon the request of the PIC, or his/her designate, Mr. Jardine will attend at the hospital for psychiatrist assessment and, upon notice of the PIC, or his/her designate, attend for admission to the hospital;
- he abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
- he submit samples of his/her urine and/or breath to the PIC for the purpose of analyzing whether Mr. Jardine has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant;
- he refrain from having in his possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer; and
- he obtain pre-approval of his itinerary from the PIC, or his/her designate, for any absence from his residence in excess of 24 hours.
- In making this Disposition, the panel reviewed the provisions of section 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Mr. Jardine’s mental condition, his reintegration into society, and his other needs.
DATED this 23rd day of February 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. L. Banks
Alternate Chairperson
______________________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board