Ontario Review Board
Re: Robert Whitehouse
ORB File No: 3810
Hearing held on: Tuesday, January 27, 2026
Place of hearing: St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus 100 West 5th Street, Hamilton
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Clapp
Members: Dr. H. Bloom Dr. A. Kerry Hon. A. Sosna Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Robert Whitehouse Counsel: Mr. L. Dimitry
Person in charge of the hospital: Counsel: Ms. L. Barney
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. C. Gzik
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 3, 2026)
Introduction:
On July 16, 2003, Robert Whitehouse was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on one charge of assault and two charges of breach of probation, contrary to the Criminal Code. Mr. Whitehouse is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) dated January 29, 2025 whereby he is discharged from St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus (“SJHCH” or the “hospital”) subject to a number of conditions, including that he live in any facility in the Hamilton area owned or operated by Indwell, and report to the hospital not less that once every three months. While there is a condition that Mr. Whitehouse abstain from substance use, there is also a condition that he restrict his consumption of alcohol to a maximum of one beer per day with a total consumption not to exceed two beers per week.
On January 27, 2026, a panel of the Board convened at SJHCH for the annual review of Mr. Whitehouse’s Disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Whitehouse attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Mr. Dimitry. Two of Mr. Whitehouse’s sisters were also present.
The Hospital Report dated January 5, 2026 was marked as Exhibit 1. The panel also had a letter written by Mr. Whitehouse’s two sisters dated January 20, 2025 as part of the Record (submitted at last year’s hearing). In addition to the documentary evidence, Dr. Yedishtra Naidoo, Mr. Whitehouse’s attending psychiatrist, gave evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Whitehouse continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and, if so, what is the necessary and appropriate disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Positions of the Parties:
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. Ms. Barney on behalf of the hospital took the position that Mr. Whitehouse remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a continuation of the existing Conditional Discharge was necessary and appropriate. Ms. Gzic supported the position of the hospital on behalf of the Attorney General.
Mr. Dimitry stated that Mr. Whitehouse sought an absolute discharge. In the alternative, if significant threat was found, he supported the position of the hospital.
The parties maintained their positions in closing submissions.
Findings:
- For the reasons set out below, the panel found that Mr. Whitehouse continues to meet the threshold of 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 a continuation of the existing Conditional Discharge.
Index Offences:
- The circumstances of the index offences were outlined in the Hospital Report (at pages 6-7) and can be summarized as follows. On November 27, 2002, Mr. Whitehouse exited a store and bumped into the victim who was walking on the sidewalk with his wife. When the victim asked Mr. Whitehouse what he was doing, Mr. Whitehouse attacked the victim, scratched his face, and knocked him to the ground. Mr. Whitehouse continued scratching at the victim’s face while he was on the ground. Passersby had to pull Mr. Whitehouse off the victim. The victim suffered minor scratches to his face and his glasses were broken, but no medical attention was required. At the time, Mr. Whitehouse was on a two-year Probation Order requiring him not to attend the area where the assault happened and to keep the peace and be of good behaviour.
Background:
The Hospital Report contained detailed information about Mr. Whitehouse’s background and will not be repeated here. It was noted that Mr. Whitehouse’s history is remarkable for the length and severity of his Schizophrenia, which led to a significant decline in both his socio-economic status and his cognitive abilities. Substance use (primarily alcohol), legal offences, and noncompliance with antipsychotic medication complicated his course.
In summary, Mr. Whitehouse is a 74-year-old single man who completed two years of university before the symptoms of his mental illness and substance abuse derailed his course. Mr. Whitehouse has not been employed since the 1970s and has spent most of his life living in shelters or homeless. He threatened and assaulted his family repeatedly when he was unwell and became estranged from them for many years.
Mr. Whitehouse’s parents are both deceased, however he continues to have the support of his sisters. He receives financial support through Old Age Security and the Canada Pension Plan.
Criminal History:
- Mr. Whitehouse’s extensive criminal record was set out at pages 5-6 of the Hospital Report. His record of convictions spans 22 years from 1980 to 2002 (just weeks before the index offences). The offences include numerous assaults, mischief, fail to appear, forgery, indecent assault, and break and enter.
Psychiatric History:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Whitehouse’s first psychiatric admission was in 1971 to the Homewood Psychiatric Institute. He was diagnosed was Paranoid Schizophrenia, and his persecutory delusions responded well to treatment with antipsychotic medications. However, repeated admissions to various hospitals followed as a result of noncompliance with medication and alcohol use.
The treatment team did not have all the records of Mr. Whitehouse’s psychiatric hospitalizations given the length of his illness; however, there were records for 30 hospitalizations most of which were to forensic facilities or were involuntary admissions under various provincial mental health acts. None of the hospitalizations led to any follow-up of consequence, as Mr. Whitehouse never agreed to it.
Mr. Whitehouse’s last hospitalization prior to the index offences was at McMaster University Medical Centre in 2002, after he damaged his apartment at Mathias Place and threatened both staff and co-residents. The police brought him to the regional psychiatric emergency facility rather than charging him. When his certificate of involuntary admission expired, Mr. Whitehouse once again left the hospital with no follow-up.
Following a Treatment Order, Mr. Whitehouse was found fit to stand trial and then NCR. Approximately a year after he came under the jurisdiction of the Board, he was discharged into the community under the Community Schizophrenia Service. The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge in July 2005, and the Forensic Outpatient Service (“FOPS”) became involved in 2007.
Mr. Whitehouse moved into an independent apartment at the Indwell Perkins Centre in January 2013 and remains living there. The provision permitting Mr. Whitehouse to consume alcohol but limiting it to a maximum of one beer per day with a total not to exceed two beers per week was added to his Disposition in February 2016.
During his years under the jurisdiction of the Board, Mr. Whithouse has been adamant that he does not have a mental illness and therefore does not need medication. Mr. Whitehouse was noted to have a “profound lack of insight”; however, he has been compliant with treatment and engaged with the treatment team. In more recent years, Mr. Whitehouse has expressed that his Schizophrenia should be gone because he has been taking medication for so long. He has consistently stated that he would not take antipsychotic medication if he was granted an Absolute Discharge.
Mr. Whitehouse’s long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication was changed to Invega Trinza in May 2017 and is administered every three months.
The Hospital Report indicated that the treatment team had made attempts to connect Mr. Whitehouse to non-forensic follow up services in the community without success. He was not accepted into the Schizophrenia Outpatient Clinic nor the Hamilton Program for Schizophrenia. He had a period between 2021 and 2022 where he was working with a case manager through the Hamilton Mental Health Outreach Program; however, the program was discontinued.
There were statements in the Hospital Report that Mr. Whitehouse would be referred to a Geriatric Outreach Program for community follow up as early as 2019, and this was also mentioned in the Reasons for Disposition from at least the last two hearings. It does not appear that this has happened.
Mr. Whitehouse was involved in an accident in June 2023 and broke his leg. He required hospitalization and rehabilitation, but maintained his mental health stability.
There have been only a few concerns about substance use over Mr. Whitehouse’s lengthy time under the jurisdiction of the Board. In 2012, he spent a night in the hospital because he was intoxicated; however, his mental status remained stable. In May 2023, there were reports that Mr. Whitehouse was drinking a tall-boy of beer and appeared intoxicated, but this was not confirmed with testing. In April 2024, Mr. Whitehouse tested positive for cannabis. He admitted smoking cannabis with his friend and did not realize that it was prohibited by his Disposition. There was no change in Mr. Whitehouse’s mental status and he has not tested positive for cannabis since then.
The Hospital Report stated Mr. Whitehouse’s diagnoses as Schizophrenia and Alcohol Use Disorder, in sustained remission in a controlled environment. He is capable of consenting to treatment and managing his finances.
Evidence at the Hearing:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Whitehouse had a positive reporting period overall. He continued to reside at the Perkins Centre where staff are on-site during business hours from Monday to Friday. He is responsible for maintaining his own apartment, completing his laundry, and preparing his meals. He has maintained positive relationships with his sisters and friends in the community. Mr. Whitehouse’s judgment is generally intact; however, he occasionally demonstrates poor decision-making regarding his peers, such as giving them money or allowing them into his apartment despite being banned from the building.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Whitehouse has been compliant with his medication regimen and cooperative with his Disposition. Although he continues to demonstrate limited insight into his mental illness and the need for ongoing treatment, he remains adherent to his prescribed medications, and self-administers his oral medications. His long-acting antipsychotic medication is administered by nursing staff at the Forensic Outpatient Clinic every 12 weeks and has been effective in managing psychotic symptoms. His alcohol use is monitored through regular and random urine drug screens, breathalyzer testing, and liver enzyme assessments every six weeks.
Despite these positive factors, the Hospital Report stated that the treatment team had a number of ongoing concerns as follows (at page 69):
“Mr. Whitehouse continues to exhibit limited insight into his psychotic illness and his need for ongoing treatment. He has continued to maintain that he would discontinue medication were he not required to continue it. He expressed an understanding that he once had psychotic symptoms, though that those were unlikely to recur. On further discussion, he lacked insight into his past violent actions and prior psychotic beliefs, despite engagement in some cognitive restructuring techniques. It was also notable that he continued to allow homeless individuals into his home who then refused to leave, and who caused damage to his property. As such, he had jeopardized his accommodation on more than one occasion over the current reporting period. Historically, prior to his ORB involvement, Mr. Whitehouse had a lengthy criminal record, he had engaged in numerous violent actions and he had a long history of treatment discontinuation.”
Dr. Yedishtra Naidoo testified that he has been Mr. Whitehouse’s attending psychiatrist for four years. He stated that Mr. Whitehouse’s clinical course was unchanged over the past year. Dr. Naidoo reiterated that Mr. Whitehouse lives independently at the Perkins Centre and manages all of his activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living. He attends to his hygiene, does his groceries, navigates the community with public transit, visits friends and family, and has a busy recreational schedule. Mr. Whitehouse’s symptoms of psychosis remain in remission, and he has managed his alcohol addiction for many years. He attended appointments with the FOPS every two weeks all year.
Dr. Naidoo testified that the team continues to work on Mr. Whitehouse’s insight, which remains limited to absent. Mr. Whitehouse still believes that his symptoms will not come back, he does not have a mental illness anymore, and the medication is not providing any purpose. It was Dr. Naidoo’s opinion that Mr. Whitehouse’s treatment would “fall apart altogether” without the ongoing supervision of the FOPS because of his lack of insight. Mr. Whitehouse continues to express his desire to discontinue taking antipsychotic medication, and he has been refractory to Dr. Naidoo’s efforts to work with him on his insight. Dr. Naidoo stated that it is unlikely that Mr. Whitehouse’s insight will develop any further, and he was “certain” that Mr. Whitehouse would stop his medication if he was not under the jurisdiction of the Board.
When asked why Mr. Whitehouse continues to meet the threshold for significant threat, Dr. Naidoo stated that although Mr. Whitehouse is very cooperative and among the higher functioning patients with Schizophrenia, there are a number of ongoing risk factors. Due to his limited insight, it is highly likely that absent the supervision of the Board Mr. Whitehouse would stop medication and resume maladaptive coping mechanisms including substance use. Even as a senior, this is highly likely to result in criminally violent acts to those around him, especially in light of his long history of diverse criminality. Mr. Whitehouse would also likely disengage from family and jeopardize his housing. Dr. Naidoo testified that the potential targets of Mr. Whitehouse’s violence would be people close to him, but also indiscriminate members of the public.
Dr. Naidoo did not think that the civil mental health system was a realistic option to manage Mr. Whitehouse, and noted that he would not qualify for a Community Treatment Order (“CTO”). Dr. Naidoo emphasized that Mr. Whitehouse is a rule follower and his Disposition holds authority for him.
Dr. Naidoo was asked what would happen if the provision restricting Mr. Whitehouse’s beer drinking was removed from the Disposition (with the abstain provision remaining). He responded that relatively recently Mr. Whitehouse was consuming more than the Disposition allowed for, and this led to the introduction of Naltrexone for cravings, as well as monitoring of biomarkers related to alcohol abuse. Dr. Naidoo stated his opinion that if the provision was removed, Mr. Whitehouse would increase his alcohol use within one week. Dr. Naidoo did not think it made sense to remove the provision in order to “test” Mr. Whitehouse because he currently lacks insight regarding increased alcohol use and the impact on his mental health and the external controls and limitations imposed by the Disposition are the only reasons he is not consuming excessive alcohol.
Dr. Naidoo testified that Mr. Whitehouse would likely stay at the Perkins Centre if he was granted an Absolute Discharge.
Analysis and Conclusions:
After carefully considering the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. Naidoo, the panel was satisfied that Mr. Whitehouse continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public on a balance of probabilities.
Mr. Whitehouse has been under the jurisdiction of the Board for over 22 years, and has been subject to a Conditional Discharge for 20 years. He has been living in the community for the majority of his tenure under the Board, and has been living in the same stable housing for more than 12 years. There has been no significant decompensation in his mental status or excessive alcohol use. He is cooperative, compliant with medication, and largely independent in the community. While the index offence was unprovoked and concerning, the victim suffered minor injuries. Mr. Whitehouse is now 74 years old. It is in this context that the panel considered the issue of significant threat, but ultimately concluded that the threshold had been met at the current time.
The panel accepted Dr. Naidoo’s evidence that the oversight of the Board is what has kept Mr. Whitehouse stable and well all of these years. He respects and benefits from the structure and supervision that the FOPS and his Disposition require. Unfortunately, Mr. Whitehouse’s insight into the nature and severity of his mental disorder and need for treatment remains limited, if not entirely absent, and he continues to express his intention to stop taking antipsychotic medication if he is granted an Absolute Discharge. Although Mr. Whitehouse is commended for his honesty, this is a concerning statement, as his history has shown that without appropriate treatment for his severe mental illness Mr. Whitehouse decompensates to a significant degree such that the public and Mr. Whitehouse himself are at risk. Mr. Whitehouse has an extensive history of noncompliance with medication and numerous criminal convictions which included assaultive behaviours. For these reasons, the panel found that it was likely, based on his current circumstances, that absent the supervision of the Board Mr. Whitehouse would stop his medication, return to unfettered alcohol use, and pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.
In these circumstances, the panel accepted that a continuation of the existing Conditional Discharge was the necessary and appropriate, and least onerous and least restrictive Disposition for Mr. Whitehouse at this time.
Having said that, the panel was concerned that the treatment team has not taken further steps to find Mr. Whitehouse supports in the community so that the FOPS and the Board could eventually disengage. Although Mr. Whitehouse was not accepted to a number of outpatient programs, efforts to find other potential supports appear to have stalled. As was noted above, a referral to a Geriatric Outpatient Service was mentioned a number of times since 2019, but has not been pursued. It also did not appear that addiction or relapse prevention programs in the community have been explored.
Mr. Whitehouse does not qualify for a CTO, but there may be other services that could monitor Mr. Whitehouse and provide effective “rules” for him to follow in the community. Although Mr. Whitehouse lacks insight into his mental illness and the need for treatment, the panel specifically noted Dr. Naidoo’s comments that Mr. Whitehouse is a rule follower and is able to develop strong therapeutic relationships. These are encouraging statements, and support the view that further efforts should be made to find appropriate civil supports and supervision for Mr. Whitehouse. The panel was also aware that a lack of insight alone should not necessarily be a barrier to an Absolute Discharge.
While the panel understood and appreciated the treatment team’s and Mr. Whitehouse’s sisters’ concern for his best interests, the panel was not satisfied that all efforts had been made to try and manage Mr. Whitehouse’s risk in the community such that he would no longer pose a significant risk to the safety of the public. It is hoped that more concerted efforts will be made on this front in the coming year.
DATED this 3rd day of March 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. S. Clapp Alternate Chair
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board