Re: Nathan Chin
ORB File No: 7357
Hearing held on: Tuesday, March 17, 2026
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg Members: Dr. R. Wood Hill Dr. S. Wiseman Ms. A. Israel Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing: Accused: Nathan Chin Counsel: Ms. L. Leinveer The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. S. Rosales-Zelaya Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. D. Brandes
REASONS FOR DECISION
(Dated March 30, 2026)
Mr. Chin is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated May 30, 2025. That Disposition directed that Mr. Chin be detained “at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto.”
By letter dated December 12, 2025, CAMH advised the Ontario Review Board of a Restriction of Liberty. It appears from the hospital letter that on November 30, 2025, Mr. Chin stopped taking his psychiatric medication and began exhibiting symptoms of decompensation. In addition, on December 2, 2025, Mr. Chin was involved in a code white incident after he became agitated and threatening towards co-patients. This resulted in Mr. Chin being placed in locked seclusion. The letter also noted that as of December 12, Mr. Chin remained in locked seclusion. The letter noted that in locked seclusion Mr. Chin has declined to engage with the treatment team.
By letter dated December 22, 2025, CAMH advised as follows:
“On December 12, 2025, Mr. Chin was transferred from the FGUA to the FSUA.”
- As a result of the two restrictions, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, at CAMH and conducted two Restriction of Liberty hearings.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Ms. Rosales-Zelaya appeared for CAMH. She advised of the hospital position that the first restriction of liberty was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital. Ms. Rosales-Zelaya noted that the hospital’s position is exactly the same with respect to the transfer from the General Unit to a Secure Forensic Unit. It is the hospital’s position that Mr. Chin should remain in the Secure Forensic Unit and that the continued stay on the Secure Forensic Unit is in fact the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital.
Mr. Brandes appeared for the Attorney General. Mr. Brandes agreed with the hospital’s position.
Ms. Leinveer accepts that the first restriction was warranted and was the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital during his continued stay in seclusion on the general unit.
Ms. Leinveer also accepts that the transfer from a General Unit to a Secure Forensic Unit was warranted and that for a period of time his continued stay in a Secure Forensic Unit was warranted but in Ms. Leinveer’s opinion his ongoing stay is no longer warranted and that accordingly Mr. Chin should be returned to a General Forensic Unit.
Evidence at the Hearing
Dr. Igoumenou appeared for the hospital. The Board also had a Restriction of Liberty Hospital Report. Mr. Chin had been living in the community in TRHP housing. Subsequently he was returned from TRHP housing to hospital. That resulted in an earlier Restriction of Liberty hearing and that Restriction of Liberty hearing concluded that the return to hospital was warranted and his ongoing stay in hospital was warranted.
The doctor noted that on December 2, 2025, Mr. Chin was involved in a code white after he became agitated and threatening towards co-patients. This resulted in a decision to place Mr. Chin in locked seclusion. Mr. Chin responded by refusing medication. At some point in time Mr. Chin accepted injectable medication that would be effective for three days. He did subsequently agree to a second dose of injectable medication. At some point Mr. Chin agreed to take clozapine. The doctor noted the necessity by December 12 to utilize mechanical restraints. There was very concerning behaviour when the hospital staff noted Mr. Chin placing a belt around his forehead. At the same time, roughly around December 19, Mr. Chin bit a security person. The doctor understands that the bite was on the security member’s hand. As indicated, Mr. Chin had been moved from the seclusion room on the General Unit to the seclusion on the Secure Forensic Unit. He continued on the Secure Forensic Unit seclusion room until December 24, 2025, at which point Mr. Chin was transferred to the south pod which the panel understands to be a part of the Secure Forensic Unit but with somewhat more staff involvement. Apparently on December 26 it was necessary to move Mr. Chin from the south pod to the seclusion room but that lasted only one day. Finally, the Board understands that on January 6, 2026, Mr. Chin was taken out of seclusion and placed on a Secure Forensic Unit.
On the Secure Unit Mr. Chin has progressed somewhat. On the one hand he was able to take the position in the hospital as a canteen operator. On the other hand, on February 9, 2026, Mr. Chin refused taking his injectable medication.
Subsequent to the occasion on February 9 when Mr. Chin refused his injectable medication, he has been progressing rather well.
At the present time, Dr. Igoumenou states her opinion that Mr. Chin is not yet ready to return to a General Forensic Unit. Dr. Igoumenou suggested that there are considerable benefits to Mr. Chin remaining on a Secure Unit and in particular, the greater staff-to-patient ratio that is found on the Secure Unit. Dr. Igoumenou believes that his ongoing stay in the Secure Unit is the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital. Finally, Dr. Igoumenou stated her belief that Mr. Chin might well be able to transfer to a General Forensic Unit over the next number of months. At the request of the Alternate Chair, the parties were able to find that Mr. Chin’s next annual hearing is set for June 1 of this year. Dr. Igoumenou was unable to opine whether he would be ready for a General Unit before June 1.
In response to questions from Ms. Leinveer, Dr. Igoumenou acknowledged that when Mr. Chin was living in the community, he attended church regularly.
Again, in response to a question from Ms. Leinveer, Dr. Igoumenou repeated that Mr. Chin came out of seclusion on January 7, 2026. There have been no inappropriate incidents since that date. He has been able to move up to level 3 with respect to his use of passes.
Dr. Igoumenou also noted that around February 9, the team discontinued any injectable medication and accordingly, the only medication is clozapine.
Ms. Leinveer asked the doctor her opinion about the differences between the secure and general unit. The doctor repeated that there is a greater staff-to-patient ratio on a secure unit, and the greater staff would be one factor to ensure appropriate conduct.
The doctor agreed with the suggestion by counsel that there has been no history of cannabis use and no history of AWOLs. The doctor also agreed with counsel’s suggestion that Mr. Chin would like to return to the community.
At the conclusion of the doctor’s evidence, Ms. Leinveer had a private meeting with her client and upon their return to the hearing room Ms. Leinveer advised that Mr. Chin wished to give evidence. Mr. Chin indicated that he had a great deal that he wanted to tell the panel. At an early point Mr. Chin stated that he should be receiving an Absolute Discharge and at another point Mr. Chin stated that he made a mistake by raising an NCR defence. When asked by the Alternate Chair whether he had a lawyer at the hearing, Mr. Chin acknowledged that he did and acknowledged that at that point he supported a finding of not criminally responsible. Mr. Chin stated his goal of being able to be gainfully employed and also to be able to attend church on a weekly basis. Mr. Chin repeated that he is happy with his role operating in a canteen. He also uses the gym at the hospital. Dr. Igoumenou had raised some concern about Mr. Chin apparently throwing punches inside of his room without anyone present. Mr. Chin explained that he was simply shadow boxing.
A question was raised about Mr. Chin’s use of clozapine and at that point Mr. Chin stated, “I’d rather be locked up in Penetang forever rather than taking medication.”
Mr. Chin also stated his belief that he is a victim of racism.
No other evidence was heard at this hearing.
Final Submissions
Ms. Rosales-Zelaya asked the panel to accept the doctor’s evidence that both restrictions of liberty were necessary and that Mr. Chin’s ongoing stay in seclusion with respect to the first ROL was warranted and was the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital.
Similarly, Ms. Rosales-Zelaya asked the panel to find that the second ROL (the transfer to the Secure Forensic Unit) was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital. Ms. Rosales-Zelaya reminded the panel of the doctor’s evidence that at the present time Mr. Chin needs to be detained in a Secure Forensic Unit and that hopefully at some time, perhaps before his next hearing date of June 1 or close to that date, Mr. Chin might be ready for a transfer to a General Unit.
Mr. Brandes agreed with Ms. Rosales-Zelaya’s submissions. He agreed that at the present time Mr. Chin needs to be detained on a Secure Forensic Unit and he is not yet ready for a transfer to the General Forensic Unit.
Ms. Leinveer agreed that the first ROL was necessary and appropriate. Ms. Leinveer accepted that the transfer from the General Unit to the Secure Forensic Unit was warranted. Ms. Leinveer submits, however, that Mr. Chin’s ongoing stay in the Secure Forensic Unit is not the least onerous and least restrictive decision. She urges the panel to make that finding, and if so, then Mr. Chin would have to be returned to the General Unit unless the Board made a new Disposition today.
Findings of the Board
The Board accepts that the first restriction of liberty was warranted. That of course was the restriction of Mr. Chin being placed in seclusion while he was on the General Forensic Unit.
The Board also accepts that Mr. Chin’s transfer to the Secure Unit was warranted. We have considered the real issue in this hearing and are satisfied that Mr. Chin’s ongoing stay in the Secure Forensic Unit is the least onerous and least restrictive decision consistent with public safety. We do not accede to the hospital request to amend the Disposition so that it reads “detained in the Forensic Program at CAMH.” We do not see any reason to do so. We accept Dr. Igoumenou’s evidence that at the present time detention on a Secure Unit is both necessary and appropriate. If at some point going forward the clinical team believes that Mr. Chin’s threat to public safety could be managed on a General Forensic Unit, we would expect that Mr. Chin would then be transferred to a General Unit. We repeat that we see no necessity at this time to change that portion of the Disposition.
In reaching our Disposition, the Board has taken into consideration public safety, Mr. Chin’s mental condition and his other needs, and Mr. Chin’s reintegration into society.
DATED this 30th 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