Re: Anthony S. Murdock
ORB File No: 3532
Hearing held on: Wednesday, December 17, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Kert
Members: Dr. T. Verny Dr. G. Nexhipi Hon. C. Nelson Mr. W. Apted
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Anthony S. Murdock Counsel: Mr. A. Rai
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. P. Darby
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. M. Yousuf
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 4, 2026)
Overview
On March 21, 2002, Anthony Murdock was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of sexual assault. He is currently subject to a Review Board disposition that detains him at the Forensic Service of CAMH, with privileges extending to living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On December 17, 2025, this panel of the Review Board convened a hearing at CAMH to review that disposition under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Murdock was present and represented by counsel.
The panel had to decide first whether Mr. Murdock continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and, if so, what is the disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances, considering the criteria in s. 672.54 of the Code.
CAMH and the Crown submitted that Mr. Murdock continues to meet the test for significant threat, and that the current detention disposition remains necessary and appropriate for the coming year. Mr. Murdock’s position was that he no longer poses a significant threat to public safety and should receive an absolute discharge.
Having considered the evidence, the submissions and the relevant caselaw, we find that the threshold test for significant threat continues to be met, and that the current detention disposition remains necessary and appropriate. These are our reasons.
Background and Index Offence
Mr. Murdock was 52 years of age at the time of the hearing. He was born in Jamaica and raised largely by his grandparents there. At the age of 16, he and his sister moved to Canada to join their mother. His father was murdered in Jamaica at around the time that he and his sister immigrated.
After his arrival in Canada, Mr. Murdock began demonstrating symptoms of mental illness. The first signs appeared when he was about 16 (disorganized thinking and behaviour), though his first psychiatric contact did not occur until much later, and it is likely his illness went untreated for many years. His first admission was to the Royal Ottawa Hospital in 1997 (at the age of 23), after his mother referred him there due to his disorganized and illogical conversations. In hospital, he admitted to using cannabis for one to two years. He was treated with olanzapine and follow-up was arranged, but it is not clear if he attended. During an admission to the Credit Valley Hospital in 2000 (when he presented with bizarre behaviour and complained of auditory hallucinations), it was noted that he had a history of non-compliance with antipsychotic medication.
Mr. Murdock also had an extensive history of involvement with the criminal justice system prior to the index offence, including a finding of guilt on a sexual assault charge (in 1998, relating to an assault on a female high school student in British Columbia), and a conviction for forcible confinement which related to him grabbing a young girl in a shopping mall, placing her on his shoulders and telling her that he was going to show her his favourite clothes in a store. He did not let go of the girl until her grandmother yelled at him to put her down. There were also charges of indecent act (in 1999 and 2001) and assault and criminal harassment charges (in 2000), but the results of these are not contained in the hospital report.
The index offence occurred on October 24, 2001, when Mr. Murdock attempted to engage a woman on the street in conversation. When the woman ignored him, Mr. Murdock went after her and grabbed her buttocks. When she moved away, Mr. Murdock followed her, made comments about her body, and grabbed her buttocks twice more. When questioned by the police shortly after his arrest, Mr. Murdock presented as sexually preoccupied, disinhibited, disorganized and psychotic.
Following the finding of NCR in March 2002, Mr. Murdock was detained at CAMH. His first few years as an inpatient were difficult; he continued to experience positive psychotic symptoms and engaged in some sexually inappropriate behaviour. Though he attended several groups and programs, some of the programming had to be modified due to his borderline intellectual functioning. He remained an inpatient on a secure forensic unit until his transfer to a general unit in November 2005.
Sometime in 2012, Mr. Murdock was discharged to live in an Ecuhome supported residence in Toronto. He remained an outpatient until November 2017, when he was readmitted to CAMH after a problematic year in the community. In March 2017, he was charged with committing an indecent act after masturbating in a public place on the University of Toronto campus. He also used cocaine during that clinical year. On November 6, 2017, he was readmitted to CAMH after being brought to the emergency department by police due to his agitated and threatening behaviour at his boarding home. By that time, he had also missed several appointments with the Forensic Outpatient Service (“FOPS”), including several doses of medication. On admission he presented as agitated and grandiose. Once stabilized and permitted to use passes, there were times when he used cocaine while exercising passes.
In January 2018, Mr. Murdock was transferred to an all-male general forensic unit after allegations by two female co-patients that he engaged in non-consensual sex with them. Mr. Murdock denied the allegations. There was no definitive finding of wrongdoing by staff and no charges were laid in respect of the allegations.
In August 2018, Mr. Murdock pled guilty to mischief (in relation to the March 2017 charge of indecent act) and was sentenced to a conditional discharge. In October 2018, he was discharged to live at SHIP housing in Brampton, a high support residence. At the time, his treatment team viewed this level of supervision as a good match for Mr. Murdock’s risk profile and needs, including staff administered medication. However, SHIP staff quickly noted that Mr. Murdock began spending time with other residents suspected of using drugs. In December 2018, he tested positive for cocaine and marijuana. His drug use continued, and other residents began to complain about his behaviour. Based on this, the SHIP program was not willing to have Mr. Murdock continue as a tenant. There were also concerns that his mental status was decompensating due to his substance use. As a result, in mid-January 2019, Mr. Murdock was readmitted to CAMH.
After his admission in early 2019, Mr. Murdock continued to display numerous behaviours of concern in hospital, including masturbating in the common areas and cocaine use. This culminated in a two-day AWOL from an escorted pass in late July 2019. While AWOL Mr. Murdock used cocaine and alcohol, though displayed no overt psychotic symptoms upon his return to CAMH.
In hospital, Mr. Murdock continued to masturbate openly. After a restriction of liberty hearing and the imposition of a hybrid detention disposition, he was transferred to a secure forensic unit in July 2020. With treatment with antipsychotic medication, he did not exhibit psychotic symptoms or discrete mood episodes, but did exhibit ongoing emotional lability and impulsive behaviour. These were judged to be more closely related to his developmental disability and personality characteristics than active psychotic symptoms.
In April 2021, Mr. Murdock was transferred back to a general forensic unit. He continued to struggle with verbal outbursts toward staff and some inappropriate sexual behaviours, but was able to use indirectly supervised passes without issue in the 2021-2022 clinical year. Beginning in August 2023, he was permitted (and used) extended family passes with his sister and was able to connect with his son, who lives with his sister (she has legal custody of his son). In October 2023, he gained longer indirectly supervised passes to the community contingent on him demonstrating no irritable, aggressive, or sexually inappropriate behaviour the prior week.
Despite this progress, Mr. Murdock’s insight into his mental illness remained stagnant. He frequently did not want to discuss his diagnosis, index offence, or need for medication. At times he said he did not have schizophrenia and had difficulty describing his symptoms. At other times, he was able to discuss his need for medications. When affectively regulated, he was able to describe effective coping skills and recognize some of his behaviours as sexually inappropriate. However, when acutely frustrated or irritable, he had poor insight into his dysregulation and risk of sexually inappropriate behaviours.
To facilitate Mr. Murdock’s further community reintegration, CAMH staff submitted multiple applications on his behalf for housing. His housing options were limited given the need for 24-hour support on-site and a male-only setting (due to his history of sexually inappropriate behaviour), though Mr. Murdock had little insight into this. In January 2023, he was offered housing at a LOFT residence but declined. In November 2023 he was offered a spot at a different LOFT residence, but again declined the placement.
Course Since the Last Hearing
At Mr. Murdock’s last annual ORB hearing in December 2024, his treatment team reported that he remained an inpatient on a general forensic unit and that his mental state was at baseline – with treatment there was no evidence of psychosis, but he continued to have periods of irritability and displayed limited coping skills due to his borderline intellectual functioning and personality structure. He also had several episodes of dysregulation and problematic behaviours over the clinical year.
The main challenge for the treatment team in the 2023-2024 clinical year was finding appropriate housing for Mr. Murdock. Several places declined his applications based on his history of inappropriate sexual behaviours, but by the time of the last hearing, Mr. Murdock had been re-accepted to a LOFT residence that he had previously rejected, and he was expressing regret for his prior refusal. The team was working toward his discharge in January 2025.
At the current hearing we received evidence from CAMH in the form of an updated hospital report, as well as oral testimony from Dr. Darby, Mr. Murdock’s FOPS psychiatrist since January 2025. That evidence revealed as follows: Mr. Murdock continued to reside on a general forensic unit until January 16, 2025, when he was discharged to a bachelor apartment at LOFT, a high support community residence with 24/7 staffing. Though he initially reported difficulty complying with house rules and felt that he’d been persuaded to accept the housing, after his concerns were acknowledged and with ongoing support, Mr. Murdock eventually settled in his apartment.
Since that time, Mr. Murdock has had a good few months. He has not required readmission to hospital, there have been no aggressive incidents, and he has not relapsed to substance use. He is polite and cooperative, though occasionally guarded, with the treatment team, who he sees regularly at his residence. Though he secured a job working part-time in a cleaning position, he reported difficulty managing the demands of the job and quit after a few days. He spends his time preparing meals, cleaning around his apartment building, and socializing with a few peers, but has declined further assistance with obtaining employment.
In August 2025, on two separate occasions, housing staff at LOFT observed Mr. Murdock staring towards a female staff member from the lounge while she was alone in the office. This behavior was described as prolonged, causing the staff member discomfort. Notably, the staring behavior stopped immediately upon another staff member’s arrival in the vicinity. When the concerns regarding his inappropriate staring were addressed with Mr. Murdock, he admitted the behavior, expressed understanding of the concern and apologized, stating that he would not repeat this behavior.
Mr. Murdock also testified at this hearing. He said that despite all the years that the Board had “demeaned” him and “tried to make me into a monster,” God loves him and that is why he has made it to where he is today. He advised that he is remorseful for what he did that was wrong, that he has corrected his mistakes with the help of the treatment team, and that his intention is to do well from here. He also said that he thinks he has earned an absolute discharge and that it is long overdue.
Analysis and Conclusions
Significant Threat
The evidence is that, overall, the past clinical year was a good one for Mr. Murdock. He was able to transition to community living at LOFT, an-all male high support residence. Since his discharge, there has been no evidence of substance use; in fact, Mr. Murdock’s last positive urine drug screen was in the summer of 2019. He has been compliant with his oral psychotropic medications (olanzapine and zuclopenthixol) that are administered by LOFT staff, was willing to work with Dr. Darby when he (Mr. Murdock) wanted to discontinue or reduce in his medication during the year, and is not experiencing psychotic symptoms. His insight into his major mental illness fluctuates, but he demonstrates some insight into his need for antipsychotic medication and psychiatric follow up. He gets on reasonably well with staff at LOFT and with some residents there, and has reengaged with his weekly music group at CAMH. He also has good support from his sister and his son.
All of this is, of course, positive. But as described by Dr. Darby, Mr. Murdock’s history is different. He has a significant history of relapse to drug use in the community, including while under a Board disposition. His index offence, the sexual assault of a complete stranger on the street, was serious. In the past he also has been charged with, found guilty and/or convicted of other sexually inappropriate behaviours, including an incident in March 2017 when he masturbated in public in a student lounge at the University of Toronto. At the time, his clinical team expressed concerns that Mr. Murdock may have been engaging in similar quasi-exhibitionist behaviours in other settings, since his actions were “in an environment where there were, by definition, predictable large numbers of young women congregated as potential stimuli, which he had stated in the past was a reason for attending at the U of T.” (hospital report, p. 30) His years in hospital were replete with incidents of inappropriate sexualized behaviour and comments toward staff, staring at staff, and openly masturbating in front of staff and other patients, with the apparent intention of having unsuspecting individuals witness his sexualized behaviour (consistent with his diagnosis of exhibitionistic disorder). Multiple assessments at the Sexual Behaviours Clinic indicate that Mr. Murdock also has a preference for coercive sexual interactions with females.
Despite this history, Mr. Murdock’s insight into the inappropriateness of his sexual behaviour remains limited. He will acknowledge his sexually disinhibited behaviour, will agree that it is inappropriate, and will say that he won’t do it again, but his pattern associated with his paraphilic disorders has persisted over many years. Although, as pointed out by Mr. Rai, Mr. Murdock’s last known episode of public masturbation was in December 2023, as recently as August of this year he demonstrated concerning behaviour toward female LOFT staff when they were alone in the office.
As outlined in the hospital report, Mr. Murdock’s risk is based upon his psychotic and paraphilic disorders, his risk of relapse in the context of non-adherence with medication, his risk of substance use relapse and his poor coping due to his low intellectual functioning. His history indicates that to ensure his ongoing medication adherence, abstinence from substances, and self-control, Mr. Murdock requires a significant amount of support, monitoring, and frequent psychoeducation from external sources, such as that provided by his forensic treatment team and LOFT staff (including medication administration) under a Review Board disposition.
Absent a disposition, however, there is a real risk that Mr. Murdock would not remain engaged for the long-term with the external supports that he requires to maintain his current level of wellness and moderate his risk to public safety. While Dr. Darby could continue to see Mr. Murdock for some limited period when he attends at LOFT, transitioning Mr. Murdock to a non-forensic team to ensure his ongoing psychiatric care would be extremely challenging, as the local hospital is not currently taking a number of LOFT patients. Second, while we accept that in the event of an absolute discharge Mr. Murdock would likely stay at LOFT for the short-term (he is more comfortable there now than he was in the first few months), Mr. Murdock can be quite impulsive and has very limited frustration tolerance and limited coping skills. As described by Dr. Darby, it is likely that at some point (it could be less than a year) there would be an incident at the residence with staff, or another tenant and Mr. Murdock would leave LOFT impulsively.
In the context of either of those scenarios, and absent medication supervision and/or psychiatric follow-up, it is likely that Mr. Murdock’s commitment to treatment would deteriorate, and he would become non-adherent with medication. His history illustrates this. When Mr. Murdock reoffended in a sexual fashion in March 2017, he was living in the community and was responsible for medication self-administration four days a week. His treatment team suspected he was only variably compliant at that time, with resulting problems of disorganization and reduced impulse control. More recently, in June 2025, Mr. Murdock reported concerns related to sexual functioning, which he believed was a side effect of his medications. He also expressed a desire to discontinue one of his antipsychotic medications, reporting that he thought he was taking too many.
Were he to stop his antipsychotic medication, Mr. Murdock’s mental state would likely decompensate, and he would become more disinhibited and disorganized. In that state he would very likely engage in sexually inappropriate conduct (as has been his pattern in the past), which would escalate to the point of criminal conduct that would put members of the public at risk of serious physical or psychological harm. There is also the risk of Mr. Murdock relapsing to substance use, which would only exacerbate his disinhibition and impulsivity. As such, we find that the threshold test for significant threat continues to be met.
Necessary and Appropriate Disposition
We also find that the current detention disposition remains necessary and appropriate for the coming year. There are a number of reasons for this. First, while we acknowledge that Mr. Murdock has lived in the community for several months, the process of getting him into an appropriate all-male residence, and of then getting him settled and comfortable there, was a lengthy one. We agree with the clinical team that given his history, before a lessening of Mr. Murdock’s disposition can be considered, a much longer period of stability and avoidance of difficulties in the community is necessary, including a lack of sexually inappropriate behaviour.
This is the first time that Mr. Murdock has lived in the community since his readmission in January 2019. He has had periods of stability in the community in the past, including an extended period of stability prior to March 2017. Despite that apparent stability, over the course of months (while under a conditional discharge), Mr. Murdock became non-adherent with treatment and follow-up, his drug use escalated, and his mental state worsened to the point where readmission was necessary after he presented as agitated and threatening at his group home. Based on this history, we agree that a very cautious and gradual approach to moving Mr. Murdock forward is necessary.
Second, Mr. Murdock’s current high support residence is an essential factor in managing his risk and maintaining his mental health – housing staff are on-site and/or available 24/7, they administer and supervise his medication compliance, they monitor his mental state and behaviour (and report any concerns to the FOPS), and they are closely connected to FOPS staff who are on-site at LOFT on a very frequent basis. As Mr. Murdock can be impulsive in his decision-making and behaviour, and in order to ensure that any place he is living has the appropriate level of support and supervision to meet his needs, the hospital continues to require the ability to approve his housing.
Third, it is not clear that the Mental Health Act (“MHA”) would be sufficient to return Mr. Murdock to hospital in a timely way, should that be necessary. As described by Dr. Darby, at times Mr. Murdock can become quite impulsive and frustrated. His frustration, particularly over limit setting or rules that he perceives as overly restrictive, can result in him displaying increased irritability and disinhibited behaviors. He is deemed capable to consent to treatment, and is not likely to be willing to return voluntarily to hospital. His lower end disinhibited/sexual behaviours (ie. staring or leering at female staff or members of the public for prolonged periods), although a possible indication of deterioration in his mental state, would not likely meet criteria for readmission under the MHA.
Put simply, we recognize that Mr. Murdock is frustrated by his lengthy tenure under the Board’s jurisdiction – it has been a very long time. However, in crafting an appropriate disposition we must consider not only Mr. Murdock’s liberty interest and his wish to be free of the Board, but also the protection of the public (which is paramount), Mr. Murdock’s mental condition, his reintegration into the community, his other needs and his history (as outlined above). Having carefully considered the evidence and the submissions, we agree that the necessary and appropriate disposition, which is also the least onerous and the least restrictive in the circumstances, is to continue the current detention disposition for the coming year.
DATED this 4^th^ day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. S. Kert Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board