Re: Gloria A. Konadu
ORB File No: 8322
Hearing held on: Friday, November 28, 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: Gloria A. Konadu Counsel: Mr. M. Schloss
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. D. Blumenkrans
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. S. Hobson
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 21, 2026)
Introduction
On June 13, 2023, Ms. Konadu was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder on a charge of arson with disregard to human life, contrary to the Criminal Code.
Under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“the Board”) was convened on Friday, November 28, 2025, at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH or the Hospital”) to review Ms. Konadu's threat to public safety and the appropriate disposition under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Ms. Konadu’s existing disposition dated December 9, 2024, provides that she be detained at the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to residing in approved accommodation in the community. Ms. Konadu seeks amendments to the existing travel privilege at clause 2(h) of the disposition which permits passes to enter the community for up to 24 hours, within 250 km of CAMH upon first obtaining approval of her itinerary by the person in charge of the Hospital.
The Hospital takes the position that Ms. Konadu should continue to be detained at the General Forensic Service at CAMH on the existing terms. The Hospital indicated however that it is not adverse to considering the amendments to travel if appropriate safeguards are in place before the trips. The Hospital submits that caution should be exercised regarding approval of the itinerary and approved person and posits that verification of ongoing psychiatric follow up and medication administration while away must be confirmed in advance of any such trip.
The Crown advanced a common position with the Hospital that Ms. Konadu continues to pose a significant threat to the public and that a detention order should be maintained on the amended terms if appropriate safeguards are in place before the trip.
Ms. Konadu seeks a conditional discharge on the existing conditions except she seeks amendments to the travel clause which extends the privileges based on her particular requests as set out in detail later in this decision.
Disposition
- For the reasons set out below the Board concludes, under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, that Ms. Konadu continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order requiring Ms. Konadu to be detained at the General Forensic Service at CAMH on the existing terms with the travel clause 2(h) amended as detailed below.
Current Diagnoses
- Ms. Konadu’s current diagnoses are schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, with a differential diagnosis of borderline personality disorder.
The Evidence
- The Board has before it the Hospital Report dated November 5, 2025, which contains an account of Ms. Konadu’s personal and psychiatric background which need not be repeated in detail here. The Board also has the oral evidence of Dr. Maryana Kravtsenyuk, a co-author of the Hospital Report. The Board also heard the oral evidence of Ms. Konadu.
Index Offence
The circumstances of the index offence are described in the Hospital Report and are summarized as follows:
On June 5, 2021, police and the Brampton fire department responded to an active fire in the city of Brampton. The fire was extinguished, and no one was injured. On arrival police were advised that all five residents in the home were accounted for. Police spoke with one of the residents who indicated that Ms. Konadu had intentionally set fire to the house. Ms. Konadu had shouted to one of the residents that she is starting a fire and they needed to get out. She then started a fire. The smoke alarms went off and the residents exited the house. Ms. Konadu was arrested for arson with disregard for human life. She said at the time that she was upset with her mother and believed the neighbours were trying to steal her cure for cancer. There was approximately $200,000 in damage to the house.
Criminal History
- There is no record of a criminal history recorded for Ms. Konadu before the index offence.
Substance Use
- There does not seem be a significant history of misusing alcohol or other substances. Ms. Konadu indicated she tried cannabis once when she was 19 years old and engaged in occasional alcohol use. She denied being intoxicated at the time of the index offence.
Ms. Konadu’s Personal and Psychiatric History
Before the Current Reporting Year
Personal History
Ms. Konadu is a 41-year-old woman born in Ghana, the only child of her biological parents. She resides in a house in Brampton with her mother and 14-year-old son. She immigrated to Canada from Ghana in August 1995 at age 11. Her parents, who arrived in Canada at different times a few years before Ms. Konadu, divorced when she was a child.
After graduating from high school Ms. Konadu attended a nursing program at Humber River College and was unsuccessful in completing the program. Subsequently she completed a medical office administration program at George Brown College.
Ms. Konadu held a number of part-time positions in fast food restaurants while attending George Brown. After she completed that program, she held a position in medical administration at a hospital for one year which she quit claiming she was being bullied by co-workers. She then obtained a position with William Osler Health System which she left in 2012 never to return to any employment thereafter.
Before Ms. Konadu was married, she had a few short-lived relationships. She had a son in 2000 with one of her partners. They resided together for a while and separated due to a claim by Ms. Konadu of infidelity against that partner. In 2015, Ms. Konadu met and married a man in Ghana. They did not have any children together. She remained in Ghana for a few years but was unwell during this time. Ms. Konadu returned to Canada when she found her husband cheated on her and impregnated another woman.
Psychiatric History
Ms. Konadu has had a long history of involvement with psychiatric services that began some time after the birth of her son in 2000.
Ms. Konadu was brought to the emergency department at Toronto Western Hospital on January 30, 2012, due to her “bizarre behaviour”. She had travelled to Ghana for six weeks and admitted to being non-compliant with her medication. She was euphoric, talking about love and inappropriately giggling.
Ms. Konadu was admitted to several hospitals in 2020 to 2021 before the index offence that occurred on June 5, 2021: Sunnybrook Hospital, Mount Sinai, CAMH, Toronto General Hospital, William Brampton Civic Hospital and Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (Ontario Shores). She presented variously at those hospitals with “bizarre behaviour”, suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts, paranoid and grandiose delusions, manic/depression, religious preoccupation and sleep deprivation.
Ms. Konadu was preoccupied for example by delusions that her body was being used by others to deliver their babies; that she possessed the ability to time travel and grant it to others; that she was writing a book about her African spirituality; that someone was trying to turn her into a lesbian; and that voices were coming through her own mouth.
Ms. Konadu did not accept the schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type diagnosis. She did at points endorse chronic auditory hallucinations, experiences of spirits talking through her and at other times she did not endorse any symptoms in keeping with mania, depression or psychosis. She was however agreeable with continuing her anti-psychotic and mood stabilizing medications.
Following the index offence the police brought Ms. Konadu to Brampton Civic Hospital. She reported religious preoccupation and grandiose and paranoid delusions that the tenants living in the basement of the house were “stealing her cancer regression theory.” Although the anger and aggression subsided during the hospitalization there were still present the psychotic symptoms of hearing voices and feeling that voices were coming from her tongue. Ms. Konadu stated that she attempted to burn her mother’s house down because the Goddess Kali asked her to. She said she regretted setting the house on fire.
Another feature of Ms. Konadu’s illness, repeated throughout her medical records, is that she at times speaks in different voices with different accents. There were two or more seemingly distinct personality states during hospital attendances and the not criminally responsible assessments. Ms. Konadu had some awareness of this, and it appeared that the personality states served a purpose during periods of heightened emotional states or distress. The Hospital Report indicates that Ms. Konadu’s symptoms were not consistent with a diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder and concludes rather that her patterns of behaviours and interactions with other individuals would suggest dysfunctional personality traits.
In addition to being admitted and discharged from Brampton Civic Hospital several times after the index offence, Ms. Konadu was also admitted for assessment and discharged from Ontario Shores, Toronto General Hospital, North York General Hospital and the Mental Health and Justice Outpatient Clinic at CAMH.
Ms. Konadu has engaged in risky and impulsive acts when unwell. Her ex-husband indicated he has seen Ms. Konadu jump out of moving vehicles on multiple occasions. She has disrobed in public and impulsively without warning moved from her mother’s home to a shelter. Of course, the most impulsive and dangerous act was the index offence, lighting her mother’s home on fire risking the lives of her family and basement tenants.
From February 2023 to August 2023, Ms. Konadu was under the care of Dr. Muhammad Ghalib while she was an inpatient and outpatient at Brampton Civic Hospital. She continued to exhibit hallucinations and daily feelings that she was being controlled by external agents. She voluntarily attended the hospital indicating that she was being controlled by spirits emotionally and physically and heard the spirits say they were going to “kill [her] and [her] family.” Ms. Konadu continued to experience voices that “come through her tongue.” She indicated at times her body is possessed by these voices. During this period, adjustments to her medications and attendance at a psychosis program while an inpatient appeared to benefit her.
Throughout most of 2023 Ms. Konadu remained in the community, living at her mother’s home with her son, and at times with her grandmother. She was followed by the Forensic Outpatient Service (“FOPS”) under the care of Dr. Paul Benassi until August 2024 and thereafter by Dr. Juliette Dupré. She saw her caseworker weekly. Ms. Konadu showed improvement in some regards. She attended all appointments and had a positive relationship with her outpatient team. She had a singular two-week admission to the Hospital in the fall of 2024.
Ms. Konadu continued to have episodes of fluctuating affective lability, auditory hallucinations and feelings she was inhabited by spirits. She had two instances of change in her mental status. On March 17, 2024, she presented to the emergency department of Brampton Civic Hospital with increased mood lability, tearfulness and auditory hallucinations after receiving a birth control injection. And on September 9, 2024, the police brought her to Brampton Civic Hospital emergency department after a suicidal gesture. She was admitted with mania with psychotic features including paranoia, grandiose delusions and auditory hallucinations. Her antipsychotic and mood stabilizing medications were increased. She remained in contact with FOPS.
Subsequently, in September 2024, Ms. Konadu was admitted to CAMH. By September 18, 2024, her suicidal and violent ideation had decreased; she had some insight into her symptoms; she remained preoccupied with paranoid beliefs but to a lesser degree than previously; she was capable of consenting to her psychiatric treatment; she showed insight into the index offence associating her behaviour with her illness and medication non- compliance; and she had support from her mother and a good relationship her mother and son. Also, on the positive side Ms. Konadu did not use any drugs or alcohol during the previous year in that all urine drug screens tested negative. There were no instances of missed medication.
The Current Reporting Period – October 2024 to November 2025
Ms. Konadu has shown exceptional progress during the current reporting year. From the spring of 2025 she has lived independently in the basement of her mother’s home where she has received support from her mother when needed. She was followed by FOPS under the care of Dr. Juliette Dupré until July 2025 and thereafter by Dr. Maryana Kravtsenyuk. Ms. Konadu has been seen by her case manager at least once per month and has attended weekly individual psychotherapy sessions with a social worker with the Forensic Consultation and Assessment Team (“FORCAT”). Ms. Konadu receives biweekly injections of her antipsychotic medication.
There are many factors that favour Ms. Konadu during this reporting year for example: she demonstrates insight into her illness as reflected in her ability at times to identify triggers; she demonstrates consistent medication adherence and insight into her treatment needs; there have been consistently negative urine tests; she continues to benefit from strong supports from her mother, grandmother, son and extended family in Canada and Ghana; her cousin became an approved person for travel requests until November 2025; she maintains positive and cooperative relationships with her support network and treatment team; she is open to increased integration into the community, seeking voluntary work and employment as well as involvement with CAMH arts programs, the CAMH patient council and FORCAT programming.
Ms. Konadu maintains independence in all activities of daily living. Following through from the previous reporting year Ms. Konadu did not use any drugs or alcohol, all urine drug screens were negative and there were no instances of missed medication.
The Hospital Report at page 29 provides the following assessment of risk:
Ms. Konadu continues to meet the threshold for significant threat as defined in Section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code. At her baseline and while fully treated, Ms. Konadu has residual symptoms of psychosis. She also experiences rapid decompensations in her mental status that can occur during pregnancy, following medication non-adherence, exposure to stressors, or without any clear provoking factor. When unwell, she experiences hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thoughts and behaviours such as suddenly moving into the shelter system or jumping out of moving vehicles, disrobing in public, suicidal and homicidal ideation, impulsivity, aggression, and irritability. During one such period of decompensation, she set her mother’s house on fire causing significant damage. Ms. Konadu has continued to evidence psychotic symptoms, despite reported compliance with antipsychotic medication.
Oral Evidence of Dr. Maryana Kravtsenyuk
Dr. Kravtsenyuk, who took over as psychiatrist on Ms. Konadu’s clinical team in August 2025, provided some important updates to the Hospital Report prepared on November 5, 2025, involving changes that have some impact on her travel and other plans and possible prospects.
There has been a change in circumstances regarding Ms. Konadu’s approved person. Her cousin had undertaken that role and can no longer do so. To date there is no alternative person under consideration. Especially with regard to Ms. Konadu’s travel requests, any such person would require clear approval by the person in charge of the Hospital.
Ms. Konadu requests 72-hour local trips with family and a lengthier trip to the US for seven days with a church group. The doctor indicated that her church is an important element in her recovery. Ms. Konadu also requests a trip to Ghana for six weeks to visit family. The loss of the approved person is disappointing to her since these trips require her to travel with and be supported by an approved person as a safeguard to manage her risk away from home.
With regard to trips with her church Dr. Kravtsenyuk testified that it might be easier to obtain an approved person from among other congregants travelling to the conference, someone who is familiar with Ms. Konadu and her mental illness and medication regimen. Ms. Konadu testified there is a congregant whom she could approach about this. Regarding the 72-hour local trips the plan is that she will be travelling with her family including her mother who is an approved person.
Travel to Ghana poses a more complicated situation. It is not without its complexities to obtain an approved person for this. The person must be familiar with Ms. Konadu’s medical condition, meet the approval of and be confirmed by the person in charge of the Hospital before the trip, be capable of managing Ms. Konadu’s care and be able to spare the time for a six-week trip. The Hospital must also approve Ms. Konadu’s itinerary and ensure before approval is given, that appropriate provision is made in Ghana for psychiatric intervention in the event of decompensation.
The other very disappointing change to her life was learning over the last two weeks that she had lost her immigration appeal for her husband to move to Canada. She has no intention of moving to Ghana to be with her husband and consequently she has started the process of applying for a divorce. This has been very upsetting to her.
Dr. Kravtsenyuk praised Ms. Konadu’s response to the disappointment she felt at the dismissal of her immigration appeal application and the anticipated end of her marriage. Dr. Kravtsenyuk described her reaction to this bad news as a healthy expression of sadness. She cried out of sadness but did not decompensate.
Dr. Kravtsenyuk responded to questions about the appropriateness of a conditional discharge.
The doctor indicated she had just taken over Ms. Konadu’s care in August 2025, so she had not witnessed Ms. Konadu in a decompensated state. She gathered information from Ms. Konadu’s record to inform herself of Ms. Konadu’s psychiatric history.
Dr. Kravtsenyuk testified that a conditional discharge would be premature, and she would not recommend this at this juncture. While the doctor acknowledged the significant improvements in Ms. Konadu’s mental stability, her medication compliance, participation in therapeutic programming and her improved insight, in the treatment team’s opinion Ms. Konadu has not displayed this level of stability for a sufficient length of time.
Dr. Kravtsenyuk noted that in spite of medication compliance Ms. Konadu continues to display residual symptoms of her mental illness. The doctor endorsed the Hospital Report’s opinion that Ms. Konadu has a fragile and treatment resistant mental illness. Of special concern when considering a conditional discharge is the fact that her psychotic symptoms emerge rapidly, and Ms. Konadu has been unable to identify the early warning signs. Given the rapidity of her decompensation, it is Dr. Kravtsenyuk’s opinion that the Mental Health Act would be inadequate to respond expeditiously enough to manage Ms. Konadu’s instability.
As an example, Dr. Kravtsenyuk referred to the stressful experience Mr. Konadu had two weeks ago with the decision to end her marriage. The point Dr. Kravtsenyuk made was that Ms. Konadu benefited from the support of the clinical team to manage the stress and prevent decompensation in that situation.
Before a conditional discharge can be allowed Ms. Konadu has to have a more sustained period of stability. The doctor pointed out that going forward, once Ms. Konadu has demonstrated sustained stability and has successfully used increased liberties, the treatment team will have those observations to add to future assessments of her suitability for a conditional discharge.
Ms. Konadu’s Oral Evidence
Ms. Konadu spoke about the nature of her mental illness confirming some of the behaviour patterns described in the Hospital Report and Dr. Kravtsenyuk’s oral evidence. The Hospital Report indicates that Ms. Konadu at times would not know she had been unwell until after she received treatment. Confirming this Ms. Konadu told the Board that when she is ill, she often does not know she is ill and has to rely on others to tell her. She testified that for that reason, she would rather follow the guidance of her doctors to identify when she is ill and to direct what she should do when she decompensates. Ms. Konadu stated that while in Ghana, were she to decompensate, she would voluntarily check herself into hospital.
Ms. Konadu’s counsel inquired about the possibility of a person who resides in Ghana being assigned as an approved person during Ms. Konadu’s visit there. Ms. Konada named several members of her extended family and a psychiatrist whom she believes could potentially be approved.
The Parties’ Positions
The Crown and Hospital maintained their joint position that under the circumstances Ms. Konadu continues to be a significant threat to public safety and that detention at the General Forensic Service at CAMH with privileges up to living in approved community accommodation is the necessary and appropriate disposition that protects public safety.
Counsel for Ms. Konadu maintains the position that she meets the requirements for a conditional discharge given her improvements over the current reporting year. Counsel submits Ms. Konadu has been medication compliant, shown insight into the nexus between her medication and the alleviation of her symptoms and has increased her involvement in therapeutic and educational programming. Counsel also pointed to the fact that she communicates well and is cooperative with the treatment team and alerts them to when she has problems and has a supportive home where her mother and other family members assist in her care.
On the question of admission to hospital on a conditional discharge, counsel submitted that a Young clause (name from the case CAMH v. Young (2011, 2011 ONCA 432, 278 O.A.C. 274 (CA)) could be put in place which would allow Ms. Konadu to be taken to hospital in the event of decompensation.
With regard to the six-week trip to Ghana, all parties agreed that the amendments to the travel clause Ms. Konadu requests are appropriate if the safeguards the Hospital requires are firmly in place before the trip. The parties also accept Ms. Konadu’s request to take 72-hour local trips with her family including her mother, her approved person, and the seven-day trip to the United States if she obtains an approved person before the trip.
The Board’s Conclusion
Based on the evidence before us the Board unanimously accepts the opinion, as stated in the Hospital Report, that Ms. Konadu remains a significant threat to public safety within the criteria outlined 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. Konadu’s community re- integration, her mental condition and her other needs.
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 for Ms. Konadu to be detained at the CAMH General Forensic Service with privileges up to residing in approved community accommodation, with amendments to clause 2(h) travel clause. The Board also accepts the amendments as requested for 72-hour local trips with family, a seven- day trip to the United States and a six-week trip to Ghana provided the strict safeguards required by the Hospital are confirmed in place before any trips.
The Board arrives at that decision for the following reasons.
The Board acknowledges the significant strides Ms. Konadu has made during the current reporting year among them being her growing insight into her mental illness, treatment needs and the triggers to decompensation; her receptiveness to psycho-educational, therapeutic and community programs; her supportive home environment; her consistently negative urine tests; and her positive relationship with her treatment team.
However, the Board is cognizant of Ms. Konadu’s vulnerabilities being her rapid and unpredictable decompensation and her inability at this point to sufficiently understand and respond to the triggers. She confirmed in her testimony the treatment team’s observation that she does not know when she is ill and has to rely on others to alert her to this. This can be very problematic if the Hospital does not have control over her accommodation and she were to decide to move from her mother’s home to an unsupported environment. The need for CAMH to approve Ms. Konadu’s accommodation and to intervene early in the event of decompensation is essential to obviate the threat to the public she poses when she is mentally unstable.
We agree with the Hospital that the Mental Health Act would be wholly inadequate to speedily respond to Ms. Konadu were she to decompensate unsupervised in the community given the rapid nature of her decompensation. The evidence shows that she requires a high degree of support and supervision. The danger to the public and her family was made clear four years ago when in a state of mental instability, she lit her family home on fire risking the lives of several family members including her mother and son and the tenants.
Regarding the trip to Ghana the Board considered the practical ramifications of putting the suggestion in place for a person residing in Ghana to be the approved person, given that would mean Ms. Konadu would be travelling alone.
The Board takes notice of the stress most people feel travelling, the experiences in the airport and on the plane, especially on long trips, all the more challenging if there are layovers on route or unexpected delays. The Board finds it crucial that an approved person accompany Ms. Konadu not only throughout her stay in Ghana but also on the way to and from the destination. In the circumstances, given the volatile nature of Ms. Konadu’s mental illness, travelling without support would likely instigate decompensation putting public safety and Ms. Konadu’s stability in jeopardy. It is simply not feasible for Ms. Konadu to travel without the support of an approved person.
What is promising looking forward is that Ms. Konadu, in combination with other positive factors, is receptive to therapeutic, educational and recreational programs and community volunteer work, all of which bodes well for her progress through the pass levels, and during the next reporting year, depending on her progress, possibly being able to meet the objective of a conditional discharge.
The Board recognizes Ms. Konadu’s progress and takes particular note of the improvements in her capacity to manage her reactions when recently disappointed by the loss of her approved person and the decision to end her marriage. This shows some improvement in her ability to recognize and respond appropriately to emotional triggers.
Based on the Hospital Report and the evidence added in Dr. Kravtsenyuk’s testimony the Board concludes, under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, that Ms. Konadu 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 to maintain the existing disposition.
The existing disposition, with the amendments to clause 2(h), as set out in paragraph 55 of this decision, satisfy the paramount criterion under s. 672.54 of protecting the safety of the public, and further, meets Ms. Konadu’s interests in community re-integration, supports her mental health and her other needs.
DATED this 21^st^ day of January, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
The Hon. B. Allen Legal Member
___________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board