Re: Johnney Corridon
ORB File No: 8424
Hearing held on: Friday, December 19, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Sections 672.48(1) and 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: Johnney Corridon Counsel: Mr. T. Luscombe
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. D. Blumenkrans
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Cressman
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 4, 2026)
Introduction
On September 7, 2023, Mr. Johnney Corridon was found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder on two charges of sexual assault, and two charges of sexual interference. These index offences occurred over a date range from May 2010 to May 2012 and also from May 2016 to June 2017.
Mr. Corridon is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated November 15, 2024, detaining him at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH”) with privileges up to living in the community in approved accommodation. The Disposition also provides a number of both prohibitions and privileges.
On December 19, 2025, the Board convened a hearing to conduct the annual review of Mr. Corridon’s fitness to stand trial and current Disposition.
At the hearing, the hospital was represented by Mr. D. Blumenkrans; the Crown by Ms. S. Cressman and Mr. Corridon by Mr. T. Luscombe. A Hospital Report dated November 30, 2025, was entered as Exhibit 1.
Initial Position of the Parties
- All parties agreed that Mr. Corridon remains unfit to stand trial. Mr. Blumenkrans submitted that the hospital wished to tighten the Disposition by adding various new conditions found at page 28 of the Hospital Report dealing with restricting Mr. Corridon from being around minors and, in addition, adding an abstention clause dealing with psychoactive substances and alcohol. The Crown supported the hospital’s position. Mr. Luscombe submitted that Mr. Corridon’s current Disposition was sufficient to manage his risk and, therefore, none of the restrictions were necessary or appropriate.
Background
Mr. Corridon is 42 years old. He was born in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. He came to Canada when he was in his 20s. He had been raised by his grandmother as his mother had immigrated to Canada earlier. His father passed away. Throughout his early years he was “on his own” without much guidance.
Mr. Corridon did not go beyond grade 12 in high school. He worked many different temporary jobs. He reported having had a long-term live-in relationship with a woman until the relationship ended in 2019 when he had a stroke. A daughter was born of that relationship in 2017. Mr. Corridon and his partner have an amicable relationship, and he continues to have contact with his daughter.
The stroke initially affected his right side; he required a cane in order to walk. He improved over a while except for weakness remaining in his right hand. The stroke also affected his ability to speak. He suffered from seizures and required multiple admissions to the hospital. Many of these seizures were caused by noncompliance with anti-epileptic medication. Mr. Corridon began to live at a shelter (Seaton House) sometime in 2019, and stayed there until February or March 2024. According to his case worker there, he did not have any conflicts with the residents.
On June 4, 2021, Mr. Corridon was arrested and charged with the outstanding offences. The outstanding charges involve allegations of inappropriate touching of a young girl who was between the ages of 5 and 7 years (between May 2010 and May 2012) and between 11 and 13 years old (between May 2016 and January 2017). Mr. Corridon was released on the same day that he was charged on an undertaking with conditions.
Mr. Corridon remained in the community after his initial ORB on bail until the court finding of unfitness, including continuing to live at Seaton House and, for a short time in early 2024, with his former partner and their daughter. The Hospital Report indicates that a Seaton House worker and his former partner say he was using cannabis regularly.
Mr. Corridon remained in the community after his initial ORB hearing in 2024 and could not be easily located by CAMH Forensic Outpatient Service. He was eventually admitted to the Psychosis Recovery and Treatment Unit after being brought to the emergency department at CAMH on a Form 49 by police in early September 2024. The emergency psychiatrist who assessed Mr. Corridon described him as evidencing symptoms consistent with psychosis associated with cannabis use. Days later he was transferred to a General Forensic Unit.
Evidence at the Hearing
The evidence at the hearing was given by Dr. D. Jaiswal, Mr. Corridon’s treating psychiatrist. The Board also had before it the Hospital Report dated November 30, 2025, as authored by Dr. Jaiswal.
In hospital, Mr. Corridon was able to maintain independence with basic activities of daily living and attended recreational groups including cognitive behavioural therapy and a cooking group. He has remained generally adherent to his prescribed anti-epileptic medication. In April 2025, he experienced a breakthrough seizure despite taking the medication. A neurological assessment supported treatment with valproic acid.
In September 2025, cannabis was found in Mr. Corridon’s backpack. In late October 2025, Mr. Corridon used cannabis outside the emergency department of the hospital while on an indirectly supervised pass. He admitted using cannabis on two consecutive days; this was also detected by a urine drug screen.
Although Mr. Corridon has advanced on the privilege ladder to Level 6 (indirectly supervised passes on hospital grounds and accompanied passes to the community), these privileges were reduced to Level 3 after the cannabis incident. By the time of the hearing Mr. Corridon’s pass level had increased to Level 4, which allowed him supervised access into the community.
As far as fitness to stand trial is concerned, Mr. Corridon was assessed for fitness most recently on Monday, December 15, 2025. The results were consistent with the Board’s finding last year and are set out in detail in the Hospital Report. Mr. Corridon continues to possess a basic understanding of the nature and consequences of a court proceeding but has limitations around his ability to participate because of his expressive aphasia. It is Dr. Jaiswal’s opinion that his understanding is at a rudimentary level and is compromised.
It is Dr. Jaiswal’s view that Mr. Corridon cannot communicate with counsel. He cannot find the words to communicate. His understanding of a complex legal proceeding would be limited. Dr. Jaiswal cannot, however, say, at this time, that Mr. Corridon is permanently unfit. Mr. Corridon’s speech therapist has suggested that a “communication intermediary” might be able to assist. In addition, visual aids might possibly be used to augment his understanding. When asked about these aids, Dr. Jaiswal could not be certain that either would help bridge the gap. Should these gaps in communication and understanding not be bridged, Dr. Jaiswal testified that he did not expect further gains.
The further additions to the Disposition as sought by the hospital are as follows:
- Refrain from living in a residence with minors;
- Refrain from attending a day-care, school yard, or playground, and refrain from attending a public park or public swimming area where minors are present, except in the company of staff or an adult; and
- Abstain from the non-medical use of drugs and alcohol and adhere to testing for abstinence.
Dr. Jaiswal testified that the additions to this year’s Disposition, as sought by the hospital, are necessary, as it is assumed that Mr. Corridon, in the upcoming year, will be exercising more flexible passes and the conditions will assist with managing risk.
In answer to questions from the Crown, Dr. Jaiswal stated that a “communication intermediary” had not yet been explored. He also stated that the team had not sought legal advice about whether a “communication” intermediary could be used at trial.
It is Dr. Jaiswal’s hope that Mr. Corridon will be able to attain level 7 passes in the coming year. This would allow the team to plan for Mr. Corridon’s reintegration into the community. The team would also be able to continue planning for future housing which would likely involve some form of supervision, to ensure that Mr. Corridon was not breaching conditions of the Disposition due to maladaptive or risk-enhancing behaviour.
Dr. Jaiswal confirmed that, other than the outstanding charges, there has been nothing in Mr. Corridon’s history that would point to inappropriate behaviour with children.
In answer to a further question from a Board member, Dr. Jaiswal stated that the benefits of providing Mr. Corridon with ongoing speech therapy are thought to be limited and that is why speech therapy has been discontinued.
In answer to another question from a Board member, Dr. Jaiswal agreed that it would be unlikely that Mr. Corridon would be living in the community with his former partner and his daughter in the coming year.
In answer to a further question from a Board member, Dr. Jaiswal stated that, although Mr. Corridon can understand day-to-day matters, anything complex, such as a trial, would be very difficult for Mr. Corridon. He would likely not understand what counsel would try to tell him. His ability to understand complex issues is compromised.
No further evidence was called.
Submissions
All parties maintained their initial positions on the issue of fitness – that is, that Mr. Corridon remains unfit, although not necessarily permanently unfit, to stand trial.
The hospital pointed to the recent case of R v Bhawani, 2025 SCC 26 and specifically paragraph 77 of the decision in submitting that Mr. Corridon, at this point in time, remains unfit to stand trial as he cannot effectively communicate his understanding of what is required to enable him to assist counsel and conduct a full answer and defence at trial. The Crown, in agreeing with the hospital, pointed out that Mr. Corridon cannot be expected, given his limitations, to participate in a trial. She submits that using a “communication facilitator” at trial is problematic in that there is room for a considerable error in interpretation with respect to anything Mr. Corridon might wish to convey. Also, the use of a communication intermediary may result in a problem with respect to solicitor and client confidentiality.
As far as the further conditions sought by the hospital are concerned, it is the hospital’s submission that it is necessary and appropriate to reduce risk by limiting Mr. Corridon’s contact with persons under the age of 16 years. Eventual access to the community will carry risk that the hospital wishes to eliminate or curtail.
As far as the condition ordering Mr. Corridon to abstain from the use of psychoactive substances and alcohol is concerned, the hospital submits that the evidence of Mr. Corridon’s use of cannabis and its impact on his mental state supports the order requested. It is Mr. Luscombe’s position that the current Disposition, which contains a clause stating that Mr. Corridon cannot be in the presence of a person under the age of 16 without the presence of another adult, is sufficient to manage his risk. He further submits that the conditions sought by the hospital and Crown, if made, would not be the least onerous and least restrictive conditions that ought to be made at this time. This is so given the length of time Mr. Corridon spent in the community without incident following his arrest. Mr. Luscombe submits that risk is purely speculative at this time.
Conclusion
Having heard the evidence, the Board agrees with the joint submission that Mr. Corridon remains unfit to stand trial, but not permanently so. Given his recent stroke and the diagnosis of expressive aphasia, the Board finds that, although Mr. Corridon has a rudimentary understanding of the Taylor questions, he cannot be expected to instruct counsel in a complex trial involving allegations of sexual assault. It is unlikely that he will be able to communicate his understanding of many of the issues necessary to enable counsel to conduct a full answer and defence. It is unnecessary, to reach a decision about a “communication intermediary” as that expert has not been involved or retained at this time. The Board also notes the issues about a “communication intermediary” that were raised by the Crown.
Having found that Mr. Corridon is unfit to stand trial but not necessarily permanently so, the Board must fashion a disposition for the upcoming year. The Board relies on the evidence contained in the Hospital Report at page 25:
“Considering Mr. Corridon’s static and dynamic risk factors, as well as protective factors, he was determined to be at low risk for future physical and sexual violence in the context of remaining under the auspices of the ORB. His risk for serious physical or psychological harm is moderate, and his risk of imminent violence is low. Response to this risk level can be best managed through continued screening for substance use, engagement with treatment specific to sexual offending risk, and implementation of a structured safety plan regarding supervised contact with his daughter. This risk estimate would increase to a moderate level in the event that he were discharged into the community without a structured plan for his supervision.”
As a result, the Board finds that the necessary and appropriate disposition to manage Mr. Corridon's risk should be the same as last year's Disposition.
In terms of the requested additional conditions, we agree with the Crown that a condition that specifically prohibits Mr. Corridon from living in a residence with minors is unnecessary. Mr. Corridon’s Disposition requires him to live in accommodation approved by the person in charge, and we expect that the hospital and the treatment team will carefully consider the outstanding charges in making any decision regarding appropriate housing.
In the Board’s view, the conditions sought restricting Mr. Corridon from attending places where children are likely to be on their own, is a valid request given the nature of the index offences. There will, therefore, be an order prohibiting Mr. Corridon from attending a daycare centre, schoolyard, or playground, or from attending at a public swimming area where persons under the age of 16 are present, except in the company of staff or another adult person.
As well, Mr. Corridon’s recent substance use, as set out in the evidence at paragraph 14 of these Reasons, together with his history of substance use, warrant a condition ordering him to abstain from the use of psychoactive substances and alcohol. Otherwise, last year’s Disposition with its conditions and privileges shall continue.
In arriving at our conclusion for the necessary and appropriate disposition, the Board has considered the paramount factor of the safety of the public, Mr. Corridon’s community reintegration, his mental condition, and his other needs, all as required by s. 672.54 of the Code.
DATED this 4th day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Hon. C. Nelson Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board