Re: Brennan G. Anderson, 2026 CanLII 32129

Re: Brennan G. Anderson

ORB File No: 8092

Hearing held on: Thursday, February 26, 2026

Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Maunder

Members: Dr. P.L. Darby Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Ms. M. Chamberlain Mr. J. Cyr

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Brennan G. Anderson Counsel: Mr. U. Agostino (via Zoom)

Person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. J. Thomson

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated April 8, 2026)

1. On June 15, 2022, Brennan Anderson was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon, aggravated assault (x2), failure to appear or comply with appearance notice (x3), failure to comply with probation order (x3), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada, (the “Criminal Code”).

2. Mr. Anderson is subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated March 13, 2025, which orders that he be detained at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care – High Secure Provincial Forensic Programs, Penetanguishene (“Waypoint”), with privileges up to hospital and grounds, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff.

3. On Thursday, February 26, 2026, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at Waypoint pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Anderson was in attendance and was represented by his counsel, Mr. U. Agostino.

Position of the Parties

4. Mr. Thomson, on behalf of the hospital, recommended no change to Mr. Anderson’s current Disposition. This position was supported by Ms. Curry, on behalf of the Attorney General. Mr. Agostino stated that he did not have instructions from his client but was willing to proceed with the hearing.

Index Offences:

5. The circumstances of the index offences are taken from the Hospital Report and summarized in the most recent Reasons for Disposition, as follows:

“On August 17, 2021, Brennan’s father, returned home after spending the evening with friends and consuming alcohol. As he entered his residence Brennan attacked him with a knife. His father was stabbed 3 times in the back of the neck. His father was able to push Brennan out the door with the help of two other family members. Brennan was arrested and released on bail.

On August 31, 2021, police became aware that Brennan’s father was at the hospital being treated for stab wounds again. He would not cooperate with the police, but other family members informed the police that Brennan had entered his father’s home and the two of them began to fight. During this altercation, Brennan stabbed his father twice in the neck area with a knife and also cut his brother’s arm.”

Background:

9. Mr. Anderson is a 30-year-old Indigenous man born at Kasabonika, Ontario. Both parents abused substances. Mr. Anderson was subjected to physical abuse by his father and has been described as receiving inconsistency of care throughout his childhood. It is reported that Mr. Anderson suffered a serious injury around the age of 17 when he was violently attacked by his father. There appears to have been a loss of consciousness and a fractured collarbone and some injury to his back from which he has suffered pain ever since.

10. In the context of substance use in his family, Mr. Anderson began using substances early, including alcohol and marijuana and eventually using Percocet and oxycontin products.

11. Although he seemed to do well in elementary school, his mother has reported episodes of physical violence and verbal outbursts in school leading to him being suspended on multiple occasions. This culminated in an incident when Mr. Anderson brought an axe to school while under the influence of substances.

12. Mr. Anderson has a history of attempted suicide during his teenage years. His family had observed him experiencing auditory hallucinations and bizarre thoughts and responses.

13. Mr. Anderson’s current diagnoses consist of the following:

• Schizophrenia
• Major Neurocognitive Disorder due to traumatic brain injury, with behavioural disturbance
• Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (rule out)
• Cannabis Use Disorder, Mild, in sustained remission in a controlled environment
• Alcohol Use Disorder, Mild, in sustained remission in a controlled environment
• Tobacco Use Disorder, Moderate, in sustained remission in a controlled environment

Evidence at Hearing:

14. The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated February 16, 2026, as well as the testimony of Dr. Bouskill.

15. Mr. Anderson’s progress since his last annual review is summarized in the Hospital Report as follows:

“Mr. Anderson has had a difficult year, marked by several instances of violence and the ongoing need for external interventions to protect himself and others from harm. He requires ongoing seclusion and use of physical restraint for seclusion relief. Over the year, Mr. Anderson has engaged in physical violence including physically striking nursing staff with his fists on two occasions (most recently May 2025) and spitting on staff once (October 2025). He has attempted to assault staff (near miss) at least 12 times and has engaged in threatening gestures through environmental aggression (punching or spitting at his window) and verbal threats at least five times. The vast majority of these events occur suddenly and without warning, with Mr. Anderson rapidly returning to his baseline mental state shortly after. This pattern is consistent with Mr. Anderson’s reported experiences, wherein he is directed by voices or motivated by concerns for his own safety. When driven by persecutory ideation, specifically the belief that staff are members of a gang intending to harm or kill him, he demonstrates little to no remorse for his actions, believing he had to act in order to protect himself. When responding to command hallucinations (namely from his brother), Mr. Anderson is quick to express his remorse and has apologized as well.”

16. Mr. Thomson called Dr. Bouskill to give evidence on behalf of the hospital. The doctor informed the Board that she is Mr. Anderson’s most responsible physician and that she agreed with the contents of the Hospital Report as well as the recommendation contained therein.

17. The doctor informed the Board that, on July 11, 2025, an external seclusion consultation was completed by forensic psychiatrist, Dr. K. De Freitas. Mr. Thomson asked Dr. Bouskill about the recommendations made by Dr. De Freitas as outlined in the Hospital Report.

18. At this juncture, Mr. Anderson, who attended the hearing in restraints, made a sudden movement forward. A member of the security team asked him if he was ok. He shook his head “no”. The security staff then asked him if he wanted to leave the hearing and he nodded “yes”. Mr. Anderson was taken back to his room and the hearing continued in his absence.

19. Dr. Bouskill resumed her testimony. She informed the Board that the hospital had reviewed the 13 recommendations made by Dr. De Freitas and provided the following information about how the Hospital was responding to them:

• The recommendation to explore alternative anti-psychotic medications was not being pursued as the Hospital continued to see improvement in Mr. Anderson with the addition of Epival to his regimen. The Hospital wanted to optimize this medication before attempting another. The Hospital was taking a cautious approach with medication changes.
• Regarding the recommendation for ECT, Dr. Bouskill stated that the Hospital had received the results of an MRI for Mr. Anderson that showed physiological changes in his brain for which ECT is contra-indicated. She stated that the Hospital would still consider ECT but would consider this once all other medication changes had been attempted. She stated that there would be additional risks associated with ECT for Mr. Anderson that would need to be considered before commencing this therapy.
• Dr. DeFreitas suggested a change in Mr. Anderson’s medication for depression if he continued to report experiencing a low mood. Dr. Bouskill stated that Mr. Anderson had experienced an improvement in his mood and was less depressed in the months leading up to January 2026. Unfortunately, Mr. Anderson’s brother died in early 2026 and this had been difficult for him to process. Prior to his brother’s death, Mr. Anderson had been more engaging with other patients and was not experiencing suicidal ideation.
• Mr. Anderson was no longer expressing concerns regarding insomnia so the recommendation to add a PRN to address this concern was not required.
• Regarding his back pain, Dr. Bouskill noted that Mr. Anderson had regular contact with his family doctor and was taking Tylenol as needed. She stated that the team regularly asked Mr. Anderson about his pain.
• Dr. Bouskill stated that the service team was waiting for Mr. Anderson to be better able to tolerate neurocognitive testing before proceeding with it. She stated that his ability to sit through testing was very limited, similar to what we experienced at the hearing when he could not tolerate sitting for an extended period of time.
• The treatment team agreed with Dr. De Freitas that they should be working to provide more trauma-informed care to Mr. Anderson. One example of this is the safety blanket that has been provided to Mr. Anderson. He sees this as a protection for him and finds it comfortable. Dr. Bouskill stated that the next step is to talk to Mr. Anderson about attempting a restraint lessoning program.
• The Hospital is working towards implementing the recommended skill training for Mr. Anderson. He is currently engaging with the behavioural therapist on the unit.
• In terms of recreational resources available to Mr. Anderson, Dr. Bouskill informed the Board that the treatment team is constantly updating Mr. Anderson’s care plan to assess what activities he would like to do. He attends the canteen and has access to TV to watch hockey games.

20. Dr. Bouskill testified that Mr. Anderson had been provided seclusion relief 251 times and had refused or had been deemed incapable of receiving seclusion relief 61 times in the past reporting period. Mr. Anderson is not offered seclusion when there is a concern that he is not doing well and is likely to harm staff. He can become distressed by hallucinations and concerned that staff members are part of gangs and trying to harm him. Mr. Anderson will take on a blank stare and become anxious. When this happens, seclusion relief is deemed inappropriate for Mr. Anderson.

21. In April and May 2025, Mr. Anderson was only out of seclusion for 4 hours, but this had improved over the past year and in the last month he was out of seclusion for 17 hours. The treatment team is hoping to continue this improvement in the coming year and begin to reduce the restraints used during seclusion relief.

22. Dr. Bouskill stated that Mr. Anderson continued to require seclusion and that, at another facility, like Thunder Bay, he would not be able to have the seclusion relief that was available to him at Waypoint.

23. Ms. Curry noted that Mr. Anderson had been in seclusion for over a year and asked the doctor what the Hospital’s plan was to ensure that he was able to have more seclusion relief and to ultimately get him out of seclusion. Dr. Bouskill stated that the Hospital was doing the following:

a. Working to optimize Mr. Anderson’s medications. b. Working towards a trauma-informed approach with Mr. Anderson. The doctor stated that his history of trauma is significant. It is difficult for Mr. Anderson to develop trust with the staff due to his psychosis as well as his cognitive issues, but he was beginning to establish rapport with some staff and was beginning to speak to them more. If this were to continue, it might be possible for Mr. Anderson to accept his circumstances and engage with psychotherapy.

24. In response to questions form Mr. Agostino, Dr. Bouskill agreed that:

• Mr. Anderson’s mental state had improved in the months leading up to the hearing. His emotional state had also improved, and he was more able to express how he was feeling to the Hospital staff.
• Generally, Mr. Anderson had been happier and able to engage with staff. He had started being able to identify specific staff who he has concerns about and was willing to work with the treatment team to avoid these staff.
• Mr. Anderson had experienced a decrease in his aggression and there had been no incidents of violence since May 2025 and no verbal incidents since November.
• Mr. Anderson has been able to ask to leave situations when he is uncomfortable. The staff have been working at not engaging with him when he is uncomfortable.

25. Dr. Bouskill was asked about Mr. Anderson’s use of seclusion relief. She noted that he is offered relief once each day for an hour or two. Mr. Anderson usually leaves his room for an hour and will often ask to return to his room after an hour. In November, Mr. Anderson began going off the unit with staff. Since the beginning of 2026, he has regularly gone off the unit twice each week. When off unit, he is in restraints and is escorted by three to five staff members. Mr. Anderson likes to go to the Hospital canteen and get a coffee.

26. The doctor was asked about Mr. Anderson’s hope that he could someday be transferred to Thunder Bay. Dr. Bouskill said that this was not a recommendation that the Hospital would be making in the next reporting period. She pointed to his need for seclusion as well as his limited insight into his risk factors and mental illness.

27. The Board questioned Dr. Bouskill about the decrease in Mr. Anderson’s aggressivity. She opined that it was primarily a result of the new medication introduced in May and was optimized in July of last year. The doctor stated that improvements can continue to be seen for quite a while after initiation and that the Hospital was still hopeful that there would be further improvement.

28. Dr. Bouskill stated that Mr. Anderson was now ready for the de-restraint process to begin. She noted that the last time this was attempted, it did not go well. Mr. Anderson had not been included in the planning, and he said that he thought he was being set up to be around staff that would harm him. The Hospital has since provided education to Mr. Anderson about the de-restraint process, and the next step will be to explore with him how the Hospital will proceed.

29. Dr. Bouskill said that it is possible for Mr. Anderson to get out of seclusion in the next year. He has maintained gains, and she expects that he will continue to move forward. He has had three successful periods where he has been out of seclusion with one limb free. In the coming year, the Hospital will begin the next steps towards having all the restraints removed and then Mr. Anderson could engage in some structured activities on his unit. Mr. Anderson is establishing positive relationships with some staff members. The Hospital ensures that these staff are present when he is attempting novel activities.

Final Submissions:

30. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties maintained their original positions. Mr. Thompson noted that Mr. Anderson was in a better place this year than he was at his last annual review. Ms. Curry, adopted the Hospital’s submissions. Mr. Agostino agreed with the Hospital and noted that Mr. Anderson had been compliant with medication and his time out of seclusion had increased. He has a supportive family and would eventually like to return to Thunder Bay once his behaviours have stabilized.

Findings of the Board:

31. The Board unanimously finds that Mr. Anderson continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In arriving at this determination, the Board considered the position of the parties and accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Bouskill. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report, which notes the following:

“Mr. Anderson’s fragile mental state coupled with globally impaired insight increases the likelihood of further episodes of violence in the future. Chronic persecutory delusions, command hallucinations, and cognitive impairment in the form of impulsivity and executive dysfunction contribute to difficulties in engaging in therapeutic intervention and creates a significant barrier to implementing many risk mitigation strategies. Absent the protections provided for by his current disposition under the ORB, Mr. Anderson would most certainly struggle to connect with support in the community and would likely stop his medication as he has in the past. He is likely to return to substance use. In either scenario, his mental state would rapidly deteriorate. In this state he is likely to reoffend in response to severe perceptual disturbances including persecutory delusions and command hallucinations. Violence is likely to occur in the form of physically assaultive behaviour of which a victim could be any person in his proximity, in response to perceived threat to his safety, poor impulse control and executive dysfunction, as it has in the past. For these reasons, it is the unanimous decision of the treatment team that Mr. Anderson continues to present a risk to the safety of the public.”

32. Dr. Bouskill testified that despite improvements observed during this reporting year, Mr. Anderson continues to remain in seclusion and is only able to experience seclusion relief in restraints.

33. The Board notes the significant improvement Mr. Anderson has made over the past year, specially, his ability to inform staff when he is uncomfortable in a situation so he can be removed and not engage in a violent incident. The Board observed this in the course of the hearing when Mr. Anderson asked to leave. The Hospital will continue to work with Mr. Anderson in the coming year with the realistic goal that he can come out of seclusion.

34. The Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat Mr. Anderson poses to the safety of the public while still meeting his needs, is a continuation of the existing Detention Disposition. Mr. Anderson is known by the staff at the Hospital and is making modest improvements.

35. In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Bouskill and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Mr. Anderson’s mental condition, his reintegration into society and his other needs.

DATED this 8th day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. M. Chamberlain Legal Member

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board