Re Skylar Thomas Oliveira, 2026 CanLII 18238

Ontario Review Board

Re: Skylar Thomas Oliveira

ORB File No: 8206

Hearing held on: Monday, January 19, 2026

Place of Hearing: Providence Care Hospital

Pursuant to: Sections 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Hanbidge

Members: Ms. K. Weisbaum
Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan
Dr. W. Loza
Mr. A. Bouvier

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Skylar Thomas Oliveira
Counsel: Mr. C. Carter

Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. T. Tom
Representative: Dr. M. Chan

Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. A. R. Scott

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated February 4, 2026)

Introduction, Issues, Positions of the Parties

1. On December 21, 2022, Mr. Oliveira was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder ('NCR') on a charge of manslaughter. He is currently subject to an Ontario Review Board Disposition, dated February 10, 2025, which detains him at the Secure Forensic Unit of Providence Care Hospital ('Providence Care') with privileges which include living in the community in 24-hour supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.

2. On January 19, 2026, the Board convened at Providence Care to conduct the annual Disposition review for Mr. Oliveira

3. The evidence at the hearing included a Hospital Report dated December 19, 2025 (the 'Hospital Report'), and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Michael Chan.

4. The issues to be decided were whether Mr. Oliveira presents a significant threat to the safety of the public at this time, and if so, what disposition is necessary and appropriate for him for the coming year. In deciding the second issue, the Board is required by s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code to consider four factors, being the safety of the public, as the paramount consideration, and Mr. Oliveira's mental condition, reintegration into society, and his other needs.

5. Ms. Tom, on behalf of the hospital, submitted that Mr. Oliveira continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition of the Board for the upcoming reporting period be a continuation of Mr. Oliveira's current Detention Order Disposition without any changes. Mr. Andrew Scott, on behalf of the Attorney-General, supported the hospital’s recommendations. Mr. Chad Carter, on behalf of Mr. Oliveira, also agreed with the position taken by hospital counsel, without exception. Essentially, the Board was being presented with the joint position of the parties.

Index Offence (August 22, 2020)

6. The circumstances of the index offence are set out in the Hospital Report (pgs. 2-4), and have been summarized in previous Reasons for Disposition, essentially as follows:

On August 22, 2020, Belleville police and ambulance services attended at the home of Mr. Oliviera and his mother, Ms. Sandy Oliveira, after he called reporting that his mother had stabbed him. Upon their arrival, he said she had stabbed him, and he did not know where she was. After a lengthy search, they located her on the front porch of a nearby house, suffering from numerous stab wounds in her chest area. She was transported by ambulance to hospital, where she died from her injuries.

Meanwhile, Mr. Oliveira was discharged from hospital after receiving care for a minor stab wound to his left shoulder. He said he and his mother had become engaged in a verbal argument which had escalated, and that: His mother had grabbed a knife, so he grabbed a knife. She left the residence, and he followed her. She stabbed him in the shoulder so he retaliated. He did not know how many times he stabbed her. After that, he returned home. He rinsed off the knife and laid in bed for five to fifteen minutes, and then decided he should call the ambulance for himself due to his shoulder.

Psychiatric Diagnoses, from the Hospital Report

7. Mr. Oliveira's current psychiatric diagnoses are:

(1) Autism Spectrum Disorder, and

(2) Attention Deficit and Hyperactive Disorder ('ADHD'), by history.

While he has impaired vision due to a congenital condition, which has raised concerns about his own vulnerability, it is not seen to play a role in his index offence or his reoffence risk.

Prior Personal Background

8. The Hospital Report should be referred to for an extensive account of Mr. Oliveira's personal history relevant to the issues on this hearing. As that Report is an exhibit, its detailed contents need reductions not be reiterated here, but the following points are briefly noted.

9. Mr. Oliveira is a 29-year-old single man. At six years old, he was identified as having ADHD and symptoms of pervasive developmental disorder. At the age of ten, he was diagnosed with what is now called Autism Spectrum Disorder ('ASD'). He grew up in an abusive and traumatic environment, with his mother who had her own mental health, anger, and behavioural challenges. She was prone to mood swings, and to verbal outbursts which became physical and were directed at her son from a young age and throughout his childhood. His aunt and her husband attempted to intervene and, at various times, were able to offer him accommodation and support.

10. At school, Mr. Oliveira had difficulty concentrating and forming relationships with his peers. He was bullied throughout elementary school due to behaviours related to his ASD. Despite, this, he graduated from high school and was able to attend one semester of post-secondary school at Loyalist College. He worked part-time in the family hardware store from about eighteen to twenty-two years old, where he had difficulty interacting with customers and co-workers. By his self-report, he first drank alcohol and used cannabis at nineteen years old, and his alcohol use escalated to the point where he occasionally binge-drank rum; however, his aunt has advised that she had not known him to drink alcohol or to be interested in it.

11. In 2018, at about twenty-two years old, he moved into his aunt and uncle's home, and then with their assistance to a motel, as his mother decided he was no longer able to live with her. However, late that year, his mother moved him back into her home. There continued to be verbal and physical threats and fights between them. Despite their serious conflict, there were also times when each expressed positive feelings towards the other, and when his mother sought professional help for her son from various mental health facilities.

12. In March 2020, Mr. Oliveira was noted to exhibit odd behaviours, which his aunt and uncle believed to be the start of a psychotic episode. The fighting between his mother and him continued to escalate in 2020. In May, it led to police involvement, but his mother did not wish to proceed with charges against him for an alleged assault. In August, it culminated in the index offence. Mr. Oliveira later said he had been intoxicated from drinking alcohol at the time. He also said he had not been taking medication had not seen a doctor in quite some time. Following his arrest, he was released on bail conditions allowing him to reside with his aunt and uncle, Mrs., and Mr. Bacon.

13. Mr. Oliveira has no prior history of involvement in the criminal law system, other than in the police attendance in May. He is financially supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program ('ODSP'), based on his developmental diagnosis and his congenital visual impairment.

Course in Hospital, from the Hospital Report

14. Mr. Oliveira has been an inpatient at PCH as an NCR accused for the past three years. He is unique in the Hospital’s forensic program in that Mr. Oliveira does not suffer from major mental illness or a psychotic disorder. Rather he has autism spectrum disorder with a history of ADHD. As reported in the Hospital Report, it was poor conflict resolution skills that resulted in the attack on his mother resulting in her death.

15. For the calendar year 2024, Mr. Oliveira continued his slow progress and engagement with the psychotherapeutic activities offered to him.

16. Mr. Oliveira was not on any regular psychiatric medications including antipsychotics, as medications of this sort were considered to be of limited benefit overall. The current Hospital Report notes, however, that Dr, Chan, Mr. Oliveira's current treating psychiatrist will be seeking a consult around medication questions.

17. He achieved full community access with passes on his own. That year, he preferred to walk rather than take public transit.

18. The emphasis of the treatment team at that time was to prepare a written report of Mr. Oliveira’s adaptive functioning for an application to Developmental Services Ontario (“DSO”) for specialized funding. Without specialized funding Mr. Oliveira could not be placed in the community because he requires a unique setting that can meet his needs with the right level of support. He is not capable of independent living.

19. The Hospital Report further notes, however, that Mr. Oliveira was not viewed by DSO as intellectually disabled although he has slow cognitive processing needs. So, making the case for limitations in adaptive functioning will be important in classifying Mr. Oliveira as developmentally disabled in the future.

20. Emotional regulation, especially how Mr. Oliveira copes with frustrating circumstances, and his ensuing behavioural responses, will be an important learning curve for him to function in the community. Mr. Oliveira can become easily frustrated when things change on him. This is his cognitive rigidity at play.

21. In addition, the Hospital Report notes that Mr. Oliveira is substantially visually impaired, such that, when he gets very close to objects to examine them, his behaviour can create problems with people.

22. Overall Mr. Oliveira’s treatment team envisaged continued focus on psychotherapeutic activities, including socialization engagement, general coping with people, and emotional regulation, to assist Mr. Oliveira with his deficits.

23. During Mr. Oliveira’s most recent previous reporting period from December 2024 to December 2025, the Hospital Report notes that, despite the successful efforts of the Hospital to persuade the Board to include in last year’s Disposition a provision permitting Mr. Oliveira the ability to live in the community in 24-hour supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge, the Hospital has not been able to make any headway on this matter. Unit psychologist Dr. Douglas applied for Mr. Oliveira's DSO status but has been rejected repeatedly. DSO does not view Mr. Oliveira as intellectually disabled even though functioning wise he struggles. Given that the Hospital continues to assert that Mr. Oliveira ought to be labelled as developmentally disabled, Dr. Douglas is contemplating various appeal processes.

24. While Mr. Oliveira had wide access to the community on his own, with him enjoying walking everywhere during warmer months, at the present time (with cooler weather) he stays very close to the hospital.

25. Mr. Oliveira has not been able to engage with any community programming because, according to the Hospital Report, it is non-existent. He also does not participate on the unit with groups. As noted earlier in these Reasons, his significant visual impairment condition requires him to get very close to see.

26. Mr. Oliveira finds living on the forensic unit at PCH challenging with the various rules and regulations. In the mornings, Mr. Oliveira has been demanding staff take him off the unit to purchase foodstuffs, but when needs are not responded to immediately Mr. Oliveira becomes agitated. Therefore, Mr. Oliveira has poor emotional regulation and impulse control, as noted by Dr. Rose who completed Mr. Oliveira's risk review in 2023. Mr. Oliveira is cognitively rigid given his autism diagnosis. Mr. Oliveira has tended to get into minor spats with security staff checking him in when going through their procedures. Thus, it is his interaction with the environment around him which can create tension from time to time. And with such dissonance can cause emotional dysregulation or frustrations for Mr. Oliveira.

27. Mr. Oliveira longstanding individual therapist left earlier in the year and another team member, a behavioural therapist, took over the role. The new therapeutic interaction has been uneventful, with them spending time off the unit working on Mr. Oliveira's coping skills. But it is very slow going for Mr. Oliveira to learn better ways of functioning or problem solving.

28. Mr. Oliveira continues to demonstrate behavioural stability, to a degree that is in keeping with his ASD diagnosis. Mr. Oliveira's treatment team is of the view that Mr. Oliveira has shown improvement in the following areas: increased insight into social interactions, greater sharing of emotional experience during psychotherapy, increased ability to regulate emotions, and greater community engagement.

29. Despite the above-noted changes, it remains the opinion of the treatment team and Dr. Rose, that Dr. Rose’s 2023 psychological risk assessment of Mr. Oliveira, with its risk conceptualization of Mr. Oliveira and recommendations for his treatment, remains unaltered and continues to be valid for purposes of supporting the decision-making for this year’s Board’s Disposition review.

30. The prior risk assessment revealed that Mr. Oliveira's risk for future violence was low should he be subject to a Detention Order (with community living added). His risk would be considered high should he be subject to a Conditional Discharge Disposition or granted an Absolute Discharge.

31. As summarized in this year’s Hospital Report, the relevant risk factors identified in the 2023 assessment include:

• Cognitive rigidity associated with Mr. Oliveira's diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder;

• Poor emotional regulation and impulse control;

• Use of alcohol and/or cannabis;

• Mr. Oliveira's living environment;

• History of antisocial behaviour (i.e. disregard for social norms and societal norms, preference for ego-centric views of the world).

32. The Hospital Report concludes by noting that, at the present time, Mr. Oliveira continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public given that he will require considerable resources and supports to function well.

33. The role of Mr. Oliveira's living environment in term of risk management is of vital importance. At this juncture, it is essential for the Hospital to have the ability to approve housing as part of a Detention Order Disposition of the Board. The Hospital needs time to undertake comprehensive discharge planning required for Mr. Oliveira.

34. Accordingly, the Hospital and treatment team are recommending a continuation of Mr. Oliveira's current Board Disposition without any changes.

Viva Voce Evidence of Dr. Chan

35. Dr. Chan has been Mr. Oliveira's treating psychiatrist since September 2023, is the author of the Hospital Report, and adopted its contents, including his opinion on the issue of Mr. Oliveira’s continued significant threat to public safety.

36. Dr. Chan referenced a series of factors that supported his professional opinion that Mr. Oliveira’s continues to represent significant threat to public safety. In particular, Dr. Chan testified that Mr. Oliveira’s continued significant threat depends on the circumstances. Mr. Oliveira has poor emotional processing skills which can lead to him “lashing out,” as was his behaviour exhibited at the time of commission of the index offence.

37. Dr. Chan also agreed that the summary of risk factors noted by Dr. Rose, clinical psychologist, following Mr. Oliveira’s formal Risk Assessment conducted in 2023, remain ongoing risk factors for Mr. Oliveira at this time. These risk factors are noted on page 49 of the Hospital Report, as referenced in more detail in paragraph 31 of these Reasons.

38. According to Dr. Chan, given the nature of Mr. Oliveira’s developmental diagnosis, this determines how Mr. Oliveira interacts with the world around him at any given time.

39. There are no issues with Mr. Oliveira being exposed to and/or consuming alcohol, cannabis, or other intoxicants, given his current structured setting at PCH.

40. However, Mr. Oliveira finds living in such a structured environment as thought to be irritating, including influencing his interaction with security staff when he needs to go in and out of the unit. As well, Mr. Oliveira always demanding to go off the unit with staff accompaniment to obtain his breakfast meals, even though this is generally a busy time for the staff.

41. Nevertheless, according to Dr. Chan, structure is very important for Mr. Oliveira in order for him to avoid frustration.

42. Dr. Chan reported that Developmental Services Ontario (“DSO”) is the provincial agency which provides funding for Ontario’s developmentally disabled population. Dr. Chan advised that, to date, DSO has not recognized Mr. Oliveira as being developmentally disabled, because he is not seen as intellectually disabled, in order to be entitled to funding for his developmental rehabilitation and accommodation needs. According to Dr. Chan, PCH’s current psychologist, Dr. Douglas, has exhausted various attempts to secure such funding from DSO for Mr. Oliveira, yet will continue with these efforts. If Mr. Oliveira is unsuccessful in obtaining DSO funding, unless another government funding source is available, Mr. Oliveira will be considered ineligible for obtaining accommodation in the community at the Dual Diagnosis Transitional Rehabilitation Housing Program (“DD-TRHP”) community home (i.e. a newly established 24-7-staff supervised, highly-structured and accessible house in the Kingston community, for providing daily living support for residents with dual diagnoses, that is, with developmental disabilities and also other mental health concerns and under forensic system oversight).

43. Dr. Chan added that Mr. Oliveira requires this form of specialized housing if eventually permitted community living, as the care and structure offered at such a setting would help mitigate Mr. Oliveira’s risk to public safety. Otherwise, according to Dr, Chan, Mr. Oliveira will continue to be faced with dissonance and friction points in his daily living routine.

44. Dr. Chan added that, in the upcoming year, there is a new colleague at PCH who has developmental disability expertise, and who apparently knows how to better manoeuvre the DSO system, in order to assist with securing Mr. Oliveira’s much needed DSO funding.

45. Dr, Chan reported that, given the state of Mr. Oliveira’s privileges, he currently has wide access to the community even though he resides at the hospital. In the summer he prefers to go walking and attend the local beaches.

46. Dr. Chan also noted that Mr. Oliveira is visually impaired, requiring him to get very close to look at things. Mr. Oliveira prefers to not use a white cane while walking at or near intersections.

47. As for upcoming treatment expectations for Mr. Oliveira, Dr. Chan hopes that Mr. Oliveira engages in more socialization, as well as have more active participation with his assigned behavioural technician (mindful that Mr. Oliveira had previously preferred to engage more so with his behavioral therapist who has since left PCH’s employment) to learn more distress tolerance skills in stressful situations.

48. Dr. Chan testified that, given Mr. Oliveira’s diagnoses and circumstances, he cannot live independently.

49. In response to questions posed by Mr. Scott, on behalf of the Attorney General, Dr. Chan acknowledged the continued applicability of the selected excerpt from the Board’s last year’s Reasons for Disposition, dated March 21, 2025, at page 4, stating:

“The opinion that Mr. Oliveira presents a significant risk rests primarily on how he relates to other people and the struggle he has with that, especially if he feels he has been intruded upon or treated badly; his history of emotional dysregulation, and the risk that his behaviour would escalate to physical action if he could not handle a verbal interaction.”

50. Dr. Chan added that, should a number of Mr. Oliveira’s needs not be met, he gets frustrated. If his emotions get out of control, he cannot cope. Accordingly, Mr. Oliveira’s environment serves as an important aspect of his risk mitigation, as evidence by his previous living arrangement with his mother that proved problematic, if not tragic.

51. Mr. Oliveira continues to have limited insight into his index offence. Mr. Oliveira continues to demonstrate an inability to properly read/access an emotionally charged situation and take the necessary and appropriate evasive actions to lessen or avoid such a situation. Mr. Oliveira needs to engage in a modified reaction approach to cope with stressful situations, unlike the situation with his mother that led to the catastrophic consequences following the introduction of knives during their argument.

52. In response to questions posed by Mr. Carter, on behalf of Mr. Oliveira, Dr. Chan confirmed that Mr. Oliveira has wide access to the community. He also confirmed that there have been no concerns with Mr. Oliveira using illicit substances as he is monitored very carefully.

53. Dr. Chan was asked to provide a further understanding of an excerpt of his writings in the Hospital Report, specifically noted at page 47, which states: “I see his failure to mentalize as being related to his egocentric world view.” Dr. Chan testified that the word “mentalize” in this context meant Mr. Oliveira’s understanding and appreciation of the mental states of other people. According to Dr. Chan, given Mr. Oliveira’s diagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder, Mr. Oliveira has large deficits which prevent him from reading other people and, instead, has him more focused on himself. He needs to look at issues from other persons’ perspectives.

54. While at PCH, Mr. Oliveira’s lack of empathy towards others culminates in him slamming doors when angry, but he has not exhibited any violence towards staff or other persons.

55. The treatment approach for the upcoming reporting period is to have Mr. Oliveira work closely with his behavioral technician/therapist concerning Mr. Oliveira’s behaviour during his daily interactions with others.

56. Dr. Chan confirmed that, given Mr. Oliveira’s current presentation, the hospital cannot offer anything less than 24 hr./daily, locked, inpatient supervision. If we ever offered an unlocked forensic program setting at PCH (which does not exist at present at PCH), Dr. Chan indicated that Mr. Oliveira would qualify for that option. Furthermore, if at some point Mr. Oliveira is able to transition to specialized community living (as noted earlier in these Reasons), he will initially require ever more supervision at first, followed by less supervision as time goes by.

Closing Submissions

57. Counsel for all parties maintained their joint position as outlined at the commencement of the hearing, as noted previously in paragraph 5 of these Reasons.

Analysis and Conclusions of the Board

58. On the first issue, this panel of the Board find that Mr. Oliveira presents a significant threat to the safety of the public at this time. This was not contested, and the finding is well supported by the evidence.

59. The term “significant threat” is defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code as “a risk of serious physical or psychological harm to a member of the public … resulting from conduct that is criminal in nature but not necessarily violent.” A significant threat finding must be guided by the principles of law established in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625, as applied and elaborated in numerous judicial decisions since then. To state this jurisprudence in only a nutshell: A finding of significant threat cannot be speculative; it must be based on evidence. It requires positive findings, supported by the evidence, that the threat that a person would engage in criminal conduct is a “real” threat, and that the harm this conduct would cause would be “serious”. Both findings are required: Neither a miniscule risk of grave harm, nor a high risk of trivial harm, is sufficient to find a real threat of serious harm.

60. The evidence is that Mr. Oliveira has a diagnosis of severe autism spectrum disorder ('ASD'), with features or deficits that include cognitive rigidity, extremely slow cognitive processing, low frustration tolerance, very poor emotional regulation, and a poor grasp of interpersonal and social norms, and have led to a history of antisocial behaviour reflecting these deficits, and a self-reported history of cannabis and/or alcohol use. These ASD features have made challenges in interactions with others very difficult for him to manage, and they resulted, in the course of a very challenging conflict with his mother, in his serious violence in the index offence. While Mr. Oliveira has made clear progress in this work in the past year (noted below), it has been slow (as would be expected in keeping with these ASD features) and his risk assessment has not changed from last year.

61. Dr. Chan's 'Summary of Risk and Conclusions' is set out in the Hospital Report, at page 50, as follows:

“[Mr. Oliveira] is viewed as a significant risk given the need for extensive supports to help him function. This approach needs to be replicated in the community in the right housing setting. Any mental health setting will not set him up for success, given his unique needs. The fit has to be right.

In addition to the autism spectrum disorder there is also an ADHD previous diagnosis. I am seeking a consult around medication questions as he is not on any regular psychiatric medications.

The team is of the unanimous opinion in recommending no changes to his current Disposition.”

62. At the hearing, Dr. Chan confirmed and elaborated on that opinion. Based on all the evidence, we have no hesitation in finding that, if Mr. Oliveira were not under the Board's jurisdiction for the coming year, there is a real risk that he would not be able to manage his risky behaviour on his own, and in particular that his difficulty in verbal interactions with others would escalate to his physical behaviour and serious criminal conduct, such as happened in the index offence and in his previous assaultive behaviour.

63. On the second issue, we agree with the parties that a Detention Order remains the necessary and appropriate Disposition for Mr. Oliveira for the coming year. There is no evidence or argument to support a Conditional Discharge Disposition at this point, and no dispute that to protect the public and ensure his ongoing treatment, risk management, and wellbeing – including steps forward towards Mr. Oliveira being able to transition to specialized community living arrangements, assuming DSO funding is made available – will require ongoing close oversight and support from his hospital treatment team.

64. With respect to the terms of the new Detention Order, we also agree that all the current terms should continue this year, including the privilege to live in the community, in approved 24-hour supervised accommodation, and a requirement to report as requested and not less than once per week while doing so.

65. The question of an appropriate approved community residence for Mr. Oliveira was a particular focus of this hearing. Dr. Chan testified that Mr. Oliveira has overall had a good year. He has been exercising his passes into the community and has been working closely with his behavioral technician therapist, in individual therapies and community orientation. He is noted in the Hospital Report to have continued to be stable and to slowly improve in the very structured and predictable hospital setting. Ongoing progress is expected to be slow, again in keeping with his autism features, but it appears that, in the right environment, it could be expected to be steady.

66. The difficulty is in finding and putting in place that necessary environment for Mr. Oliveira. This will require a residence which continues to provide a very structured, stable, and secure environment, with full-time residence staff well trained in the skills of working with residents such as Mr. Oliveira. It will require support for his individual and group work in individual therapies and community socialization, to help him continue his progress of the past year and go further. It will require funding to support these necessary treatment and community initiatives for Mr. Oliveira, to enable him to move forward towards a safe and secure life in the community.

67. In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the joint position of the parties, the evidence of Dr. Chan, and the contents of the Hospital Report entered as an exhibit at the hearing and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of sections 672.54 and 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons (with the public’s safety being the Board’s paramount consideration), Mr. Oliveira’s mental condition, and his reintegration into society and his other needs.

68. We wish all the best to Mr. Oliveira in this year ahead, in his work with his treatment team, and in his time with his supportive family members, which have clearly been strengths for him.

DATED this 4th day of February 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. J. Hanbidge
Alternate Chairperson

__________________

Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board