Re Phuong Nguyen, 2026 CanLII 21142

Re: Phuong Nguyen

ORB File No: 8318

Hearing held on: Wednesday, November 26, 2025

Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley

Members: The Hon. B. Allen Dr. Y. Alatishe Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Mr. J. Cyr

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Phuong Nguyen Counsel: Mr. J. Kopman

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. D. Blumenkrans

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. V. Culp

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated March 6, 2026)

Introduction

1. On June 9, 2023, Ms. Phuong Nguyen was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder on a charge of aggravated assault, contrary to the Criminal Code.

2. Under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“the Board”) was convened on November 26, 2025, at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH or the Hospital”) to review Ms. Nguyen's threat to public safety and the appropriate disposition under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

3. Ms. Nguyen’s existing disposition dated November 20, 2024, provides that Ms. Nguyen be detained at the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to living in the community in approved accommodation.

4. Ms. Nguyen did not attend the hearing. Mr. Kopman indicated that Ms. Nguyen provided instructions for him to proceed in her absence. He indicated that Ms. Nguyen explained that she did not feel comfortable attending the hearing because she did not feel like travelling because of the weather and for personal reasons. Counsel indicated he would communicate with his client and advise her about the hearing. The other parties and the Board had no objection to Ms. Nguyen’s non-attendance. Pursuant to s. 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code the Board permitted the hearing to proceed in Ms. Nguyen’s absence.

5. The parties advanced a joint position at the start of the hearing and maintained it at the close of evidence that Ms. Nguyen continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and that detention at CAMH at the General Forensic Service with privileges up to community living in approved housing is an appropriate disposition.

Disposition

6. For the reasons set out below, the Board concludes, under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, that Ms. Nguyen continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is detention at the General Forensic Service at CAMH permitting privileges up to residing in approved accommodation.

Current Diagnosis

7. Ms. Nguyen’s current diagnosis is schizophrenia.

The Evidence

8. The Board has before it the Hospital Report dated October 10, 2025, which contains an account of Ms. Nguyen’s personal and psychiatric background which need not be repeated in detail here. The Board also has the oral evidence of Dr. Candice Kung, co-author of the Hospital Report.

Index Offences

9. The circumstances of the index offence are described in the Hospital Report at p.4 and are summarized as follows:

According to the Toronto Police Prosecution Summary, Ms. Nguyen lived in a bungalow at B[…] Street West in Toronto with her mother, Quy Tran, and father, Jose Carreiro. It was noted that “the accused has undiagnosed mental health issues which she has had intervention for in the form of a 72-hour mental health assessment.”

On Tuesday, June 22, 2021, Ms. Nguyen became argumentative with her stepfather and accused her stepfather of wanting to throw out a bed from the house. Her stepfather left the house to bring the bed to the garbage area. Ms. Nguyen “suddenly and without provocation, grabbed a pen and lunged at her mother, and stabbed her in the head and the side of the face, causing serious injuries and a tremendous amount of blood loss.” Police were called and they located her pacing around the front lawn.

Ms. Nguyen was unable to engage in any conversation regarding her charges and replied with “I don’t know” or “I don’t remember.”

Criminal History

10. There is no record of Ms. Nguyen having a criminal history before the index offence.

Substance Use

11. There is no history of Ms. Nguyen misusing alcohol, street drugs, or prescription medications.

Ms. Nguyen’s Personal and Psychiatric History

Before the Current Reporting Year

Personal History

12. Ms. Nguyen is 39 years of age. She was born in Vietnam and immigrated to Canada at age 14. Before her arrest Ms. Nguyen was residing with her mother and stepfather in a bungalow in Etobicoke. Her education, employment and relationship history are largely unknown. She reported once working in the “food” industry.

Psychiatric History

13. Ms. Nguyen’s mental condition, which was largely untreated, preceded the index offence. There is no record of past medical issues. Ms. Nguyen has displayed prominent negative symptoms including a lack of motivation, flat affect, and issues with self-care. She has demonstrated positive symptoms including paranoia and persecutory beliefs which cause her to be guarded. She has also exhibited poor insight into her illness.

14. Ms. Nguyen first encountered the psychiatric system at Vanier Centre for Women on June 23, 2021, after the index offence. She was referred to CAMH for assessment with the Forensic Early Intervention Services (“FEIS”) on June 24, 2021. She was diagnosed with psychosis not otherwise specified and prescribed anti-psychotic medication.

15. Ms. Nguyen was admitted to CAMH from October 2021 to February 2022 on an assessment order. She remained mute, guarded, paranoid and seclusive in her room. She was ultimately found unfit to stand trial by the Court and a 30-day Treatment Order was issued. She was treated with injectable anti-psychotic medication. She refused to take oral and injectable medications. She appeared incapable of understanding information related to her mental illness and need for treatment. She did not believe she needed to be in hospital or that she required any medication.

16. Ms. Nguyen’s fitness to stand trial was assessed on a weekly basis. She frequently terminated assessments as she claimed to be “too weak” to engage in treatment or conversation. She was asked the standard fitness questions, and she did not respond in any way or said, “I’m very weak,” “I don’t know,” or “I’m sleepy.” When asked what type of employment she was interested in she said, “I am going to be the future prime minister of Canada.” She wanted to “make Canada great again.”

17. Ms. Nguyen was returned to Court again on October 28, 2021, November 11, 2021, and November 26, 2021, and was found unfit to stand trial by the Court and placed on Treatment Orders. She was persistently non-compliant with her anti-psychotic medication and was found to be hiding her oral medication and refusing injections. Ms. Nguyen engaged in “bizarre” behaviours such as stuffing toilet paper in her ears and hoarding large containers of urine and feces under her bed. As such Ms. Nguyen was found incapable of consenting to treatment on February 14, 2022. Her cousin, Luke Tran, was appointed to act as her substitute decision maker.

18. On her fitness assessment on February 16, 2022, her ability to answer the standard Taylor questions improved such that this was the first time she was able to answer most questions. However, during a fitness assessment on February 17, 2022, Ms. Nguyen did not participate. On February 18, 2022, Ms. Nguyen was transferred from the Forensic Assessment Triage Unit (“FATU”) to the Women's General Forensic Unit (“WGFU”) under the care of Dr. Ipsita Ray.

19. Ms. Nguyen was found fit to stand trial on November 15, 2022, and returned to CAMH on a keep fit order. During Ms. Nguyen’s stay on the WGFU her fitness to stand trial was assessed weekly. She continued to end assessments claiming to be “too weak” to engage in conversation. As noted earlier, on June 9, 2023, Ms. Nguyen was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder.

20. While in WGFU it appeared that the anti-psychotic medication was positively affecting Ms. Nguyen’s mental status and behaviour.

21. For instance: Ms. Nguyen’s mood improved; she was more pleasant and cooperative with staff on the unit; her thought process was more organized; she was able to sustain her attention for longer; she began attending recreational programs on the unit with good participation; her privileges were approved and she started going out for walks to the courtyard in the building escorted by security staff and progressed to passes on Hospital grounds escorted by staff; for the first time, in the summer of 2024, she expressed an interest in living in an independent apartment; and she engaged in no incidents of aggression and had no periods of locked seclusion.

22. However on the less favourable side, Ms. Nguyen: showed poor insight into the symptoms of her mental illness and the index offence; did not acknowledge that she has a mental illness; did not appreciate the need for treatment with medication; was unable to identify a relationship between ongoing medication compliance and prevention of re-offence; had no contact with her parents; refused to speak to her cousin, Luke Tran, her substitute decision maker; remained somewhat paranoid and would quickly disengage from interviews; and she indicated she did not like attending therapy and therefore required support for ongoing attendance.

23. On September 5, 2024, Ms. Nguyen was transferred to the Forensic General Unit-A (“FGUA”). At the time of this Hospital Report Ms. Nguyen was residing in the community, having been discharged on October 6, 2025, to supportive housing.

The Current Reporting Period – October 2024 to October 2025

24. Ms. Nguyen made notable progress during the current reporting year.

25. There were no problematic incidents like absconding events, self-harm, or violence. Her mental status remained stable. There were no overt hallucinations. Although she consistently denied having those experiences, she retained her fixed and longstanding grandiose delusion about becoming prime minister of Canada. Ms. Nguyen did not believe she had a major mental illness and could not identify any symptoms of a major mental illness she was experiencing. On her insight into the index offence, Ms. Nguyen was adamant that she had no choice about her behaviour during the offence and does not regret her actions.

26. Ms. Nguyen began the current reporting year, prior to her discharge from the Hospital, with level 5 passes (indirect passes on hospital grounds for rehabilitation activities) and ended the year on level 8 privileges (indirect passes to the community for recreation and socialization purposes). There were no concerns about her use of her passes. As for participation in therapeutic and community engagement, Ms. Nguyen participated in some programs on the unit through the Therapeutic Neighbourhood at CAMH and began volunteering at a food bank assisting once a week for four hours with such tasks as packing eggs. Her attendance on shifts at the food bank was consistent and she enjoyed the work.

27. During the current review year, the clinical team sought housing in the community for Ms. Nguyen. She was selected for a housing vacancy at Madison Community Housing which is 24-hour, high support, permanent housing. She visited the housing and was satisfied with being discharged. As noted earlier she was discharged on October 6, 2025, to be followed by a Forensic Outpatient Services (“FOPS”) case manager and a psychiatrist.

28. Concerning contact with her family, in September 2025, she agreed with the social worker about communicating with her cousin, her substitute decision maker, to inform him about her discharge and her place of residence. But Ms. Nguyen continued to refuse contact with her family members.

29. Regarding potential risk and the appropriate disposition in Ms. Nguyen’s circumstances, the Hospital Report at p. 17 concludes:

Taken together, when weighing Ms. Nguyen’s pertinent risk and protective factors, her risk of any future violence would be low in the context of a Detention Order. Under a Conditional or Absolute Discharge, her risk of any future violence would be high given the degree to which her protective factors are externally derived.

Oral Evidence of Dr. Candice Kung

30. Dr. Kung indicated there are no significant updates in Ms. Nguyen’s case since the date of the Hospital Report, prepared on October 10, 2025.

31. Dr. Kung focused in her testimony on the major step Ms. Nguyen took transitioning on October 6, 2025, to 24/7 supervised permanent housing. The doctor indicated that it is still early days for looking at her progress in the housing. The doctor’s impression of Ms. Nguyen is that she has no issue with living in the community as she sees that arrangement as no different than being in the Hospital. Dr. Kung indicated that Ms. Nguyen likes her roommate.

32. Dr. Kung spoke about the fact that Ms. Nguyen tends to be shy, isolative, and not very communicative. She testified that in terms of follow up in the community Ms. Nguyen’s care is being handled by FOPS (“Forensic Outpatient Service”). The FOPS team is in contact with Ms. Nguyen three times a week and Dr. Kung, as her psychiatrist, once a month.

33. Ms. Nguyen made some progress as an inpatient with involvement in Hospital programming and volunteering at the food bank. The hope is that the outpatient team can encourage her to participate in the community in therapeutic and rehabilitative programs and gain an interest in recreational outings.

34. Contact with family is often a positive factor in patients’ lives. Ms. Nguyen has no contact with any family, including her cousin, who is her substitute decision maker. Ms. Nguyen does not have that support. She has not provided to either her inpatient or outpatient clinical teams any information or explanation for this.

The Parties’ Positions

35. As noted earlier the parties’ joint position is that Ms. Nguyen remains a significant threat to public safety and that the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances is detention in the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to residing in the community in approved accommodation.

The Board’s Conclusion

36. While mindful of the parties’ joint position the Board is required to come to an independent determination.

37. Based on the evidence before us, the Board unanimously accepts the opinion, as stated in the Hospital Report and in oral evidence by Dr. Kung, that Ms. Nguyen remains a significant threat to public safety within the criteria outlined by the Supreme Court of Canada in Winko v. British Columbia, 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 SCR 625 and as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code. The Board considered the criteria, as set out in s. 672.54, namely, the paramount criterion of the safety of the public and Ms. Nguyen’s community re-integration, her mental condition, and her other needs.

38. We accept, in accordance with s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, that the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances is a disposition detaining Ms. Nguyen at the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to living in approved accommodation in the community on the same terms as the existing disposition.

39. The Board arrives at that decision for the following reasons.

40. The Board has taken into account that Ms. Nguyen has only recently been discharged to the community. So, at this early-stage sufficient information is not available to determine the impact community living will have, going forward, on Ms. Nguyen’s mental stability and her ability to cope with stress, her mindset regarding medication compliance and the treatment recommendations, particularly in view of her limited insight into her mental illness.

41. The Board recognizes the significance of Ms. Nguyen’s progress, occurring as it did in a relatively short time while in the Hospital, and the importance of her willingness to move to the community given her socially reserved, guarded, and isolative demeanour and her residual psychotic symptoms. The Board draws some confidence in Ms. Nguyen’s continued progress from the high support she receives from the housing staff and the role of the FOPS team in providing monitoring, treatment, and support to address her risk management needs in the community.

42. The Board wishes to extend to Ms. Nguyen praise for her progress in the area of community engagement and encourage her to take more advantage of community programming going forward.

43. Based on the Hospital Report and the evidence added in Dr. Kung’s testimony the Board concludes, under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, that Ms. Nguyen remains a significant threat to public safety and that currently the necessary and appropriate disposition, that is the least onerous and the least restrictive to mitigate threat to public safety, is a disposition requiring Ms. Nguyen to be detained at the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to residing in approved accommodation.

44. This disposition is responsive to the paramount criterion under s. 672.54 of protecting the safety of the public and further meets Ms. Nguyen’s interests in community re-integration and supports her mental health and other needs.

DATED this 6^th^ day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

The Hon. B. Allen

Legal Member

__________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board