Re Robin Garth Bowes, 2026 CanLII 2099

Re: Robin Garth Bowes

ORB File No: 7356

Hearing held on: Tuesday, December 9, 2025

Place of hearing: Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg

Members: Dr. G. Chaimowitz

Dr. G. Eayrs

Hon. E. Kruzick

Mr. S. Duffy

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Robin Garth Bowes

Counsel: Mr. U. Agostino

The Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Dr. P. Schubert

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. A. Bell

REASONS FOR DECISION

(Dated January 14, 2026)

Introduction

1. On May 1, 2018, Robin Garth Bowes was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) by reason of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon, theft under, utter threat to cause death or bodily harm (3x), and mischief not exceeding $5000, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”).

2. As a result, Mr. Bowes is currently under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “Board”) pursuant to a Disposition dated August 14, 2025, whereby he is detained subject to conditions and living in the community in approved accommodation. On October 15, 2025, Mr. Bowes was admitted to the Emergency Room of the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre (“TBRHSC”). On October 16, 2025, he was admitted to Forensic Inpatient Unit.

3. On October 30, 2025, the TBRHSC informed the ORB of a significant increase in the restrictions on the liberty (“ROL”) of Mr. Bowes. The ORB responded on November 3, 2025, informing the TBRHSC that an ROL hearing, pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code, would be convened.

4. On December 9, 2025, the Board convened an in-person ROL hearing. Mr. Bowes was present and represented by his counsel, Mr. Agostino. At the date of the hearing, Mr. Bowes continued to be restricted to the inpatient unit of the TBRHSC.

Issues at the Hearing

5. The issues at this hearing are to determine if there was an increase in restriction of Mr. Bowes’ liberty on October 15, 2025, and if so, whether the restriction was the least onerous and least restrictive measure in the circumstances.

Position of the Parties

6. Dr. Schubert expressed the position of the hospital that there was a restriction of Mr. Bowes’ liberty and that it was warranted and in the circumstances was the least onerous and least restrictive. Counsel for the Attorney-General agreed with the hospital.

7. Mr. Agostino, counsel for Mr. Bowes, took no position.

Findings

8. For the Reasons that follow, the panel found that there was an increase in restrictions on Mr. Bowes’ liberty on October 15, 2025, continuing to the date of this hearing and that it was the least onerous and least restrictive measure in the circumstances.

Index Offences

9. The allegations giving rise to the index offences are set out in last year’s Disposition as follows:

On January 31st, 2018, the complainant Kimberly CALDWELL called 911 to report that a male commonly-known as Robin BOWES was at the Rendezvous located at 1201 Idyllwild Drive in the Town of Fort Frances and was damaging property and threatening staff. The complainant advised P.C.C. that he had damaged the area around the front desk. He threw a computer monitor on the ground, pulled the TV off the wall, and damaged a door which entered the hallway to the motel. Bowes is commonly known to police to suffer from mental health issues. At 7:48 hrs, police arrived on scene and observed several items scattered around the floor area of the lobby of the Rendezvous Hotel. There was a damaged TV on the floor, the computer monitor was knocked over as well as the door to the entrance of the actual hotel was damaged. The complainant advised that the male was in the hallway. Upon speaking to the victim Bonnie DAW she advised that Bowes stated to her that he was god and that he was going to kill her. Bowes repeatedly stated to DAW that he was going to kill her, which caused DAW to fear for her safety and lock herself into the hotel office lobby. Police entered the hallway and at 8:00 a.m. located Robin Bowes laying on his stomach.

Background Information

10. The Hospital Report dated November 4, 2025, was filed as an exhibit at this hearing. The Hospital Report contains extensive background information regarding Mr. Bowes. As the report was made an exhibit to the hearing, the information contained within the report is therefore not repeated in these reasons.

11. Briefly, Mr. Bowes lived in Fort Frances, Ontario, before coming to Thunder Bay. The index offences involve conduct that took place in 2018 in Fort Frances.

12. On February 12, 2018, Mr. Bowes was admitted to the Forensic Inpatient Unit of the TBRHSC and remained hospitalized until his discharge on March 9, 2018. When admitted to the hospital, Mr. Bowes was in a manic state, being floridly psychotic. He demonstrated pressured speech, loose associations, and a flight of ideas. Mr. Bowes went from being calm to being very loud. He was noticeably agitated and became physically aggressive towards staff.

13. Mr. Bowes returned to the Forensic Inpatient Unit of the TBRHSC on May 2, 2018, after being found NCR on the charges originating in Fort Frances.

14. Pursuant to an ORB hearing on June 8, 2021, the Detention Disposition then made, Mr. Bowes had discretionary privileges including living in the community of Northwestern Ontario in approved accommodation. On July 26, 2021, Mr. Bowes moved into the Salvation Army residence in Thunder Bay, where he resided until his most recent admission into hospital on October 15, 2025.

15. As set out in the referred to Report, while residing at the Salvation Army residence, Mr. Bowes has had difficulties abiding by the rules of the residence due to his oppositional behaviours and was temporarily evicted because of his conduct.

Current Diagnoses

16. Mr. Bowes’ current diagnoses is set out in the ROL hearing report dated May 9, 2025, are as follows:

• Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type

• Intellectual Disability - Borderline /Mild

Evidence

17. As the ROL Hospital Report dated November 4, 2025, was made an exhibit at this hearing, it is only referred to briefly. Dr. Schubert, who co-authored the ROL report, testified and adopted the contents of the Report.

18. Following Mr. Bowes’ last ORB annual hearing, he continued to reside at the Salvation Army, a supportive housing complex in Thunder Bay. Dr. Schubert confirmed that Mr. Bowes had been residing in the community under the ORB since August 25, 2020. Dr. Schubert testified to Mr. Bowes’ long-term behavioural difficulties at the residence and his numerous evictions for refusing to abide by the rules.

19. On July 16, 2025, the Salvation Army called the hospital, informing the hospital that Mr. Bowes was smoking in his room and yelling and screaming at the residence’s staff. He made homicidal threats and demonstrated increased delusional thinking. Mr. Bowes was refusing to take his medications. Because of his behaviour and the staff’s safety concerns, Mr. Bowes was removed from the property and taken to hospital. Once settled Mr. Bowes returned to the residence.

20. On October 14, 2025, the Salvation Army called Mr. Bowes’ case manager at the hospital, reporting that Mr. Bowes was again smoking in his room, confrontational, and making threats to the staff to the point where the police were called.

21. On October 15, 2025, Mr. Bowes was brought to the Emergency Room of the TBRHSC and admitted to the Adult Mental Health Unit under the Mental Health Act (“MHA”) as there were no beds available in the Forensic Inpatient Unit.

22. The October 16, 2025, admission summary completed by the admitting psychiatrist reads as follows:

“The patient was brought to the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre by the police from the Salvation Army. Staff from the Salvation Army called police after the patient was lighting cigarettes in the building, becoming a fire hazard. Mr. Bowes became quite irritated with staff with re-direction to put out his cigarette. At this time, he was seen to be yelling at staff and making inappropriate remarks that he was going to hit them. In speaking with staff at the Salvation Army, he is not welcome to return there until he is further stabilized, and the plan was placed with the involvement of their manager.

The psychiatric assessment was extremely limited due to Mr. Bowes’ disorganization, speaking further about CBC News, morphine, and his sister having legal charges against her. Furthermore, he shared with me that he is part of the Royal Family. On questioning regarding any psychiatric symptoms, the patient became extremely irritated, requesting to see Dr. Fotheringham, and firmly told me to 'get out' of the assessment room. In speaking with Dr. Exley in the Emergency Department, the patient did become quite agitated with delivery of the Form 42 and having his belongings removed, ultimately requiring sedation.”

23. Once a bed became available, Mr. Bowes was transferred to the Forensic Inpatient Unit and hospitalized pursuant to the ORB Detention Disposition.

24. Mr. Bowes gained privileges of up to 7 passes for one hour per day to access hospital grounds, primarily to smoke cigarettes. On November 2, 2025, while exercising a privilege, Mr. Bowes went to the Salvation Army residence on an unauthorized leave of absence, stating it was to access some of his belongings. He was returned to the Forensic Inpatient Unit by the police.

25. On November 3, 2025, Dr. Schubert assessed Mr. Bowes and noted the following:

“Patient was assessed in the common area. On approach, he is laughing and giggling and talking to himself. Patient was utilizing smoking privileges when he left the hospital (ULOA) November 2, 2025, x 2 hours. He apparently took a cab to the Salvation Army and states they called police. He was returned to the inpatient unit. He reports delusional thought process regarding the incident, stating ‘I made a mistake, I went to Salvation Army to get my Will which has been doctored by my sisters.’ He then accused staff at Salvation Army of stealing his money and that he ‘needs to speak with the owner’ stating ‘I rent a room there, I'm allowed to smoke cigarettes. No one can kick anyone out in the winter. I want her (staff at Salvation Army) charged. I'm calling the RCMP to have her federally charged.’”

26. Dr. Schubert testified that the Salvation Army residence will not accept Mr. Bowes’ return and that, currently, there is no approved housing available in the community to meet Mr. Bowes’ special needs.

27. Dr. Schubert opined that the hospital’s significant restriction of Mr. Bowes’ liberty on October 15, 2025, was pursuant to the MHA. On October 16, 2025, the transfer to the Forensic unit was warranted to protect the safety of the public. Furthermore, under the circumstances, Mr. Bowes continued detention remains warranted and is the least onerous and the least restrictive decision that could be made. Dr. Schubert testified that the hospital recommends that the existing Disposition remain in place with Mr. Bowes remaining at the hospital as it is simultaneously necessary, appropriate, and least restrictive.

28. In response to a question from counsel for the Attorney General, Dr. Schubert confirmed that the Salvation Army refuses to accept Mr. Bowes and that despite the efforts of the hospital team, there are currently no viable housing option for Mr. Bowes.

29. In response to a question from counsel for Mr. Bowes about a transfer to Andras Court, Dr. Schubert indicated that it is not an option. That facility is transitional, and Mr. Bowes’ needs are for more permanent housing. Dr. Schubert expressed that the hospital team is investigating options and will be investigating the St. Joseph’s Care Group as a possibility. Mr. Bowes has very specific needs and, with those needs in mind, the hospital team will be looking for a long-term care group home.

30. In response to a question from the Board, Dr. Schubert clarified that Mr. Bowes was initially brought to the TBRHSC by police and admitted under the MHA because there were no beds available for Mr. Bowes in the Forensic Unit. Subsequently, Mr. Bowes was admitted, pursuant to the Detention Disposition, which then triggered the hospital to inform the ORB of Mr. Bowes’ restriction of liberty.

31. No other evidence was called.

Submissions

32. When canvassed for submissions, all counsel maintained the positions expressed at the outset of the hearing.

Analysis and Conclusion

33. The Board carefully reviewed the evidence at this hearing and unanimously concluded that the hospital’s notice of the increased restriction of Mr. Bowes liberty was appropriately made once Mr. Bowes was admitted to the Forensic Unit of the TBRHSC.

34. We find that the person in charge was required to give due regard to Mr. Bowes’ liberty in light of the twin goals of public safety and treatment and to ensure that the conditions the hospital imposed met the least onerous and least restrictive standard pursuant the Court Appeal decision in Chaudry (Re), 2015 ONCA 317.

35. We accept the evidence that the Salvation Army residence was not able to deal with Mr. Bowes’ conduct, which posed a threat to the safety of the other residents and the staff. Unable to manage Mr. Bowes, the residence called the police on October 15, 2025. Regrettably, Mr. Bowes decompensated, and he then refused to abide by the structured standards of the residence.

36. We accept the evidence of Dr. Schubert that Mr. Bowes exhibited concerning and irritable conduct with staff at the Salvation Army which they were unable to control. The conduct put the staff and other residents at risk. We accept the evidence that the community residence will not accept Mr. Bowes’ return given his repeated and then his most recent conduct. Mr. Bowes’ history of numerous temporary evictions did not serve him well.

37. We also accept the evidence that Mr. Bowes remains delusional in his thinking. We also accept the evidence that on November 2, 2025, Mr. Bowes refused to take some of his anti-psychotic medication. That same day took an unauthorized leave of absence from the hospital and had to be returned to the hospital by the police.

38. The Board has a duty to treat vulnerable NCR patients with the utmost of dignity: Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), 1999 2 S.C.R. 625. We carefully considered the evidence in this case.

39. In considering the evidence, the panel unanimously finds that given Mr. Bowes’ serious mental illness, the decision to impose more restrictive measures was necessary to manage the risk Mr. Bowes posed to others and himself when unsupervised. We are satisfied that this was the least onerous and restrictive measure in these circumstances.

40. Mr. Bowes finds himself in the unfortunate position where he has special needs and where the hospital team is endeavouring to find the most suitable housing for him under the current Detention Disposition. We encourage the hospital to continue in that pursuit.

DATED this 14th of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. E. Kruzick

Legal Member

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board