Re: Dinel Amankwah Dene (a.k.a. Daniel Dene)
ORB File No: 7812
Hearing held on: Tuesday, February 24, 2026
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg
Members: Dr. R. Wood Hill
Dr. M. Green
Hon. B. Durno
Mr. T. Wall
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Dinel Amankwah Dene
(a.k.a. Daniel Dene)
Counsel: Mr. T. Whillier
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. R. McMaster
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. D. Brandes
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated March 9, 2026)
On December 3, 2020, Dinel Amankwah Dene (a.k.a. Daniel Dene) was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of assault (x2), assault with a weapon (x2), assault causing bodily harm, and mischief not exceeding $5,000 (x2). Mr. Dene is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated March 26, 2025, by which he was ordered to be detained at the General Forensic Unit at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health with certain privileges and prohibitions.
On Tuesday, February 24, 2026, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at CAMH and conducted the annual review of Mr. Dene’s Disposition.
Positions of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Dr. McMaster appeared as the hospital’s representative as well as being Mr. Dene’s most responsible physician. Dr. McMaster advised of the hospital position that Mr. Dene remains a significant threat to public safety, and if the Board so finds, the hospital is requesting a continuation of the Detention Order with the exact terms set out in last year’s Disposition.
Mr. Brandes appeared for the Attorney General. Mr. Brandes supported the hospital’s recommendation in its entirety.
Mr. Whillier appeared for Mr. Dene. Mr. Whillier advised that his client was seeking an Absolute Discharge.
In response to a question from the Alternate Chair, Mr. Whillier advised that in the event his client did not receive an Absolute Discharge, Mr. Whillier agreed that the necessary and appropriate Disposition would be a continuation of a Detention Order with the exact terms set out in last year’s Disposition.
Index Offences
- “(a) December 20, 2018: Mr. Dene was on a TTC bus. As he went to exit the bus at Humber College, he grabbed an overhead handrail and swung with both feet and kicked a seated woman in the head. He then left the bus and fled the scene. The victim suffered redness and soreness to her head, but medical assistance was not sought.
(b) December 26, 2018: The female victim was exiting a store on Albion Rd. in an Etobicoke mall. She held the door open for Mr. Dene, assuming he was about to enter the store. When Mr. Dene did not enter, after a few moments, she let the door close. Mr. Dene struck her in the face with a closed fist, then walked away. The victim experienced soreness to her neck, likening it to “whiplash,” but no medical treatment was sought.
(c) December 29, 2018: Mr. Dene was in a Dollarama store in the same mall on Albion Rd. As he approached the cash register, without provocation, he threw a 398 ml. can of fruit at the cashier, striking her in the head and causing her to lose consciousness. It is not known whether medical treatment was required.
(d) January 25, 2019: Mr. Dene was in a grocery store at 1701 Martin Grove Rd. in Etobicoke. He approached the cashier and threw two canned food items, one at a time, at the cashier. The first can hit the victim in his arm, and the second narrowly missed his head. Mr. Dene again walked away.
(e) January 25, 2019: A woman was sitting in her car, parked in a designated parking spot in the rear lot of an apartment building at 1905 Martin Grove Rd. in Etobicoke. Mr. Dene approached the car, produced a bladed weapon, and slashed the tires on the driver side of her car. Later that day in the evening, Mr. Dene is seen on video approaching the same vehicle parked in the rear parking lot of the apartment where he lived. This time, he slashed the tires on the passenger side of the same car, then used a blunt object to smash the vehicle’s windows before walking away.
The owner of the vehicle had never met Mr. Dene and had no idea what had provoked the vandalism of her car.
Damage to the motor vehicle was estimated at approximately $2500."
Evidence at Hearing
The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated January 8, 2026. The Hospital Report provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. Dene, his personal history, his mental health history, details of the index offences, details of prior criminal convictions and Mr. Dene’s course in hospital and in the community subsequent to the date of the NCR finding. As the Hospital Report was made an exhibit in this hearing it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained in the Hospital Report in these Reasons. We do note, however, the stated diagnosis of schizophrenia.
In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. Robert McMaster. Dr. McMaster first noted that Mr. Dene moved into TRHP housing on December 10, 2025. It was at that point that Dr. McMaster became Mr. Dene’s most responsible physician. Dr. McMaster, however, reviewed the position of Mr. Dene’s previous psychiatrist and clinical team. Dr. McMaster noted that at the TRHP residence there are staff on site 24 hours per day. Dr. McMaster noted that Mr. Dene is settling quite well. Mr. Dene remains cooperative with staff in TRHP housing. Dr. McMaster noted that Mr. Dene keeps “a low profile” at the residence. Dr. McMaster understands that Mr. Dene is looking for a job or potentially looking to go back to school. Dr. McMaster understands that Mr. Dene works one day a week at the Trinity Square Restaurant.
Dr. McMaster stated that Mr. Dene remains “very vague” about the index offences.
Dr. McMaster stated his opinion that without the type of support that Mr. Dene is receiving at his current residence, he would likely fall away from treatment and thereafter he would likely become symptomatic, and likely to engage in physically violent conduct. Dr. McMaster noted a significant history of violent conduct, including conduct that resulted in a significant jail sentence. Dr. McMaster stated that even in hospital Mr. Dene has acted out in a violent manner.
Dr. McMaster noted that Mr. Dene had been on parole but for reasons that are not perfectly clear, Mr. Dene’s parole was revoked, and Mr. Dene was returned into custody.
In response to questions from Mr. Brandes, Dr. McMaster stated that Mr. Dene has some insight with respect to his symptoms and the benefit of medication but simply does not connect those symptoms with the events of the index offence. Dr. McMaster stated that overall Mr. Dene’s insight is “not fulsome.” Dr. McMaster stated that if Mr. Dene would decompensate it is likely that he would once again act out in a violent manner.
Dr. McMaster made it clear that Mr. Dene has enjoyed a good year. Dr. McMaster noted that the move to TRHP housing was a significant step forward and that should not be ignored by the panel. Dr. McMaster noted that the team is still unanimous in its view that Mr. Dene remains a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of a Detention Order.
In response to questions from Mr. Whillier as to where Mr. Dene would live should he receive an Absolute Discharge, Dr. McMaster noted that Mr. Dene said that he would find his own housing in Scarborough or possibly move in with his sister.
Then in response to questions from Mr. Whillier, Dr. McMaster acknowledged that Mr. Dene has enjoyed a positive year. Mr. Whillier drew Dr. McMaster’s attention to the following statement in the Hospital Report:
“Absent ORB involvement and in the context of an Absolute Discharge, his risk for violent re-offending falls in the high range.”
Dr. McMaster agreed with the above statement entirely.
Dr. McMaster confirmed that Mr. Dene is capable of making treatment decisions. In particular, Dr. McMaster agreed with the conclusion of Mr. Dene becoming a high risk for violent conduct should he decompensate and the likelihood that he would cease medication should he receive an Absolute Discharge.
In response to a question from a panel member, Dr. McMaster noted that the last act of violent conduct appears to have been in December of 2023. Dr. McMaster is of the opinion that Mr. Dene would not voluntarily come back to hospital. Dr. McMaster emphasized that a Detention Order is necessary both so that the hospital will have the right to approve housing and so that the hospital would have the ability to return Mr. Dene to hospital at the earliest signs of any problematic behaviour. Dr. McMaster emphasized that this patient absolutely requires the type of assistance and follow-up that he is receiving from the clinical team.
In response to questions from another panel member, Dr. McMaster stated that there is no air of reality to Mr. Dene being able to live successfully on his own at this time.
In response to a question from another panel member, Dr. McMaster repeated the absolute necessity for a Detention Order. Dr. McMaster does not accept that at the present time Mr. Dene’s threat to public safety could be safely managed with a Conditional Discharge. Finally, Dr. McMaster advised that the current hospital’s opinion is a unanimous one involving both the previous clinical team and the team that came into place on the occasion of Mr. Dene’s move into the community.
No other evidence was heard at this hearing.
Final Submissions
Dr. McMaster again acknowledged that his patient has enjoyed a very good year and acknowledged the unanimous opinion that Mr. Dene remains a significant threat to public safety. Dr. McMaster noted the very serious nature of the index offences and a history of violent conduct.
Mr. Brandes agreed with Dr. McMaster’s submissions.
Mr. Whillier asked the panel to find that Dr. McMaster’s evidence should be considered as “merely speculative.”
Findings of the Board
The Board accepts the evidence of Dr. McMaster and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report. We do acknowledge that Mr. Dene has made considerable progress over the last 12 months. We accept, however, that he achieved that progress with the assistance of his previous clinical team and the current clinical team.
The panel notes and relies on the decision in Winko v British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625, and in particular paragraph 61:
“It follows that the inquiries conducted by the court or Review Board are necessarily broad. They will closely examine a range of evidence, including but not limited to the circumstances of the original offence, the past and expected course of the NCR accused’s treatment if any, the present state of the NCR accused’s medical condition, the NCR accused’s own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community and, perhaps most importantly, the recommendations provided by experts who have examined the NCR accused.”
As noted, this is the unanimous opinion of two clinical teams. We have no hesitation in accepting “the recommendations provided by experts who have examined” Mr. Dene.
We do note the very serious nature of the index offences. We do note a history both in and out of hospital of assaultive behaviour.
Accordingly, we find that Mr. Dene remains a significant threat to public safety. We are satisfied that there is no air of reality to consideration of a Conditional Discharge. We accept that the hospital needs the ability to return Mr. Dene to hospital at the earliest signs of any problem. We also accept that the hospital needs the ability to approve any housing.
As a result, the Board will issue a Detention Order with the exact terms set out in last year’s Disposition.
In reaching our Disposition, the Board has taken into consideration public safety, Mr. Dene’s mental condition and his other needs, and Mr. Dene’s reintegration into society.
DATED this 9^th^ day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. J. Goldenberg
Alternate Chairperson
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board