Re: T. (D.)
ORB File No: 8195
Hearing held on: Friday, March 6, 2026
Place of Hearing: Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, 401 Sunset Drive, St. Thomas
Pursuant to: Section 672.81 (1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. T. Mann
Members: Dr. R. Chandrasena Dr. A. Kerry Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Ms. B. Little (via videoconference)
Parties Appearing:
Accused: T. (D.) Counsel: Mr. C. Dobson
The Person in Charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. J. Huber
*Pursuant to s. 672.501(1) of the Criminal Code, the Ontario Review Board prohibits the publication, broadcasting, or other transmission of any information that could identify a victim in this matter or a witness who is under 18 years of age.
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated April 15, 2026)
Introduction
On December 7, 2022, Mr. T. (D.) was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”), on charges of sexual assault and sexual interference, both contrary to the Criminal Code. Mr. T. (D.) was most recently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) dated March 24, 2025 pursuant to which he was ordered detained at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, St. Joseph's Health Care London (“Southwest” or “the Hospital”), subject to a variety of terms and conditions, including the privilege of community living in Hospital-approved supervised accommodation.
On Friday, March 6, 2026, a panel of the Board convened in person at the Hospital to conduct the annual review of Mr. T. (D.)’s Disposition. The issues for determination were whether Mr. T. (D.) represented a significant threat to the safety of the public within the meaning of s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, what was the necessary and appropriate Disposition having regard to the criteria in s. 672.54 of the Code. Mr. T. (D.) was present and represented throughout the hearing by his counsel, Mr. Dobson.
The documentary evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report, dated January 20, 2026 (Exhibit 1). The panel also heard oral evidence from Dr. A. Ardani, Mr. T. (D.)’s attending psychiatrist. Dr. Ardani attended the hearing via Zoom videoconference technology.
The hearing proceeded on the basis of a joint submission. At the outset, counsel for all parties agreed that Mr. T. (D.) represented a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition was a Detention Order with no changes from the previous Disposition.
For the following Reasons, the panel accepted the parties’ joint submission and found, independently on the evidence, that Mr. T. (D.) represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. The necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances is a continuation of the existing Detention Order, without changes, also in accordance with the parties’ joint recommendation.
The Index Offences
- There is a ban on the publication of information that would identify the victims of the index offences, pursuant to s. 672.501(1) of the Criminal Code. The following extract from last year’s Reasons dated April 14, 2025 sets out the circumstances of the index offences (with the victims’ names omitted):
"The accused in this matter is T. (D.) (1990-01-05) and the victims in this matter are victim 1 and 2. All parties are not known to one another prior to this incident.
On the 13th of May 2022 at approximately 6:12pm victim 1 and her friend victim 2 were out front of the Pet Smart located at Northland Mall, 1275 Highbury Avenue London Ontario.
At this time the two were approach[ed] by the accused who subsequently reached out and started squeezing victim 1‘s buttocks. Victim 1 immediately shouted and backed away. The accused then walked further down the plaza.
At approximately 6:15 pm the accused then approached victim 2. He reached out and started rubbing her stomach and breast area. Victim 2 backed away and the accused turned and attempted to flee the area.
While fleeing the area the accused was caught and grounded by Micheal Kubicki, a good Samaritan that had watched everything transpire. Kubicki also called police.
At 6:18pm police arrived on scene and arrested the accused. The accused was provided with his rights to counsel and cautioned to which he advised he understood. The accused identity was confirmed via London Police mug shot.”
Self-Report of History and the Index Offences
Mr. T. (D.) stated that he began to struggle with his mental health around the time that he first “broke the law” in approximately his early 20s. He stated that his cannabis use began to negatively affect him, stating, “My body didn’t get along with marijuana and my mind didn’t get along with it.”
Mr. T. (D.) recalled that around this time, he was kicked out of his parents' home for fighting with his siblings and his poor attitude toward the household. He became homeless and used the shelter system. After approximately one year, he returned to his parents' home and then began living independently in apartments owned or rented by them. He was living alone in one such home on the date of the index offences.
Mr. T. (D.) stated that while living alone in his parents' apartment his “mental health became bad...I was wondering about my neighbours, the people around me. I had a couple of voices back then, jokey voices, Egyptian voices, telekinesis. It was positive, a religion was brought to me, satanism. I thought I was magic...I thought I was being brought into something magic.”
Mr. T. (D.) was asked to describe a typical day in the month prior to the index offences. The Hospital Report states:
“Mr. T. (D.) described his daily routine, ‘wake up 9:00 or 10:00 in morning, I have a cigarette then something to eat and drink and play video games. Then I stop for lunch, I have three meals a day and then I clean the home...vacuum, brooming, spot cleaning, cleaning the toilet.’ Mr. T. (D.) stated that he would typically eat microwave meals and play video games for the remainder of the day. At times during the day, he left the home to go to Tim Horton’s to get a coffee and/or get fast food and go to the local Dollarama. Mr. T. (D.) stated that he often called his parents to top up his bank account online so he could buy fast food. He stated that he would often go to bed at midnight. When asked about his mental health, Mr. T. (D.) replied that it was ‘pretty good, hardly any voices, happy go lucky. It was ok, sometimes I would get paranoid thinking if people were out to get me.’ As well he recalled attending his psychiatric appointments to receive his anti-psychotic injection which he described as ‘needle appointments’ at London Health Sciences Centre; he would get to the hospital via the city bus or by walking. When asked about drug use, Mr. T. (D.) stated that he was using approximately one gram of cannabis per month. When asked why he was using less than previous years, Mr. T. (D.) stated, ‘just getting older, in my 30’s, in the back of my mind I was think thinking it was dangerous, overdosing, with any drug, everything in moderation’. Mr. T. (D.) denied any other drug use.”
- Mr. T. (D.) was asked to give his account of the day prior to and the day of the index offences. The Hospital Report includes the following, extracted from his account:
“When asked about May 12, 2022 (day prior to the alleged offences), Mr. T. (D.) stated, ‘just having fun, regular day, not knowing what the future would bring, still happy go lucky. Mr. T. (D.) stated that he was unsure if he left the home on May 12, 2022, and potentially recalled using cannabis on May 12, 2022, ‘might have used cannabis...maybe like one gram’. When asked he stated that around May 12, 2022, he was consuming approximately one gram of cannabis, two to three times a week, via two to three joints per day.
On May 13, 2022, [the] day of alleged offences, Mr. T. (D.) stated that he woke up around 10:00am or 11:00am, and later than usual, ‘when I smoke weed, I sleep in’. He described having a typical day as noted above. Mr. T. (D.) stated that he recalled leaving the home in the early afternoon, after lunch, to go to the mall near his home. ‘Then I went to Dollarama, I was listening to voices in my head...they were saying that I owned the world...ownership. Then I thought since I owned it (the World), I could do what I wanted, I could touch women.’ Mr. T. (D.) stated that he went to the Dollarama to get some snacks at which point he ‘touched one to two women inside the store...I looked at them, and walked closer to them, and then I touched them on their butt, body.’
Mr. T. (D.) recalled leaving the Dollarama, ‘outside I had the same thoughts that I owned the world...I have ownership of all these people who I saw. I just did it by my likes, what was attractive to me, this woman was attractive to me, she was very young, my age, I think she was a white woman, with brown hair, she was wearing all black, black shirt, multicolour pants. I touched her butt, she got confused, I walked away from it...I wanted to stop touching them, to leave the scene safely...I could get in trouble...I’m always a safety-oriented person. Then I walked by Walmart on Highbury Avenue, then I got arrested.’”
Background Information
- Mr. T. (D.) is now 36 years of age. His personal/family, substance use, criminal, and prior psychiatric histories are detailed in the Hospital Report, which is in evidence and need not be thoroughly summarized here for the purpose of these Reasons. A helpful summary of this information was, however, prepared in the Reasons for Disposition following his disposition hearing in 2024, and was reproduced as follows in last year’s Reasons for Disposition, dated April 14, 2025:
“Mr. T. (D.) was born in Fredericton, New Brunswick and moved to London, Ontario in grade one with his family. He has two sisters and one brother, and he is the middle sibling. Mr. T. (D.)’s parents and family are a strong source of support for him. His childhood was described as happy and fulfilled with pleasant family times.
Mr. T. (D.) has a substance use history which involves significant cannabis use in his twenties. He also experimented briefly with cocaine and crack cocaine during this period. The drug use worsened Mr. T. (D.)’s auditory hallucinations. He only drinks alcohol on special occasions and only in moderation.
Mr. T. (D.) has a psychiatric history that dates to his teenage years. He was seen by the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychoses (PEPP) in 2010. He was followed by a psychiatrist with PEPP. He was also assigned a case manager and received psychotherapy. His case manager was female and due to inappropriate sexual behaviours, a male case manager was reassigned to him. He exhibited aggressive behaviours while associated with PEPP.
Mr. T. (D.) had multiple admissions to hospital over several years due to decompensation in his mental status. In August 2017, he was admitted to hospital under police escort after he assaulted a pregnant woman. He was psychotic at the time and on admission was aggressive towards staff. He continued to struggle with his mental health in his twenties. He was intermittently hearing voices. His health records noted at least three mental health admissions to London Health Sciences Centre in 2017, 2019, and 2020.
Mr. T. (D.) has been under the care of a psychiatrist, Dr. Ngungu, since 2017. He was maintained in the community for a long period, but he continued to experience symptoms of his illness. He responded to internal stimuli, was labile, and difficult to understand and disorganized.
Mr. T. (D.) attended elementary school. He used cannabis in grade eight. He described his high school years as “pretty good” and said he had grades between 70 and 80 percent. The family moved to the Ottawa area when Mr. T. (D.) was in grade 11 and he found the transition difficult. In his late teens he obtained his grade 12 education through online classes with the support of his mother.
Mr. T. (D.) does not have an employment history of note. He worked odd jobs in high school but since his early 20s he has been supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program benefits (ODSP). He may have also worked some construction jobs in his 20s.
Mr. T. (D.) has a criminal record which includes two sexual assault convictions in 2021. Mr. T. (D.) received a suspended sentence and probation for 12 months for these offences. He also has a finding of guilt for assault in May 2013, receiving a conditional discharge. Mr. T. (D.) is registered with the sex offender registry, both for the 2021 convictions and the index offences.
Mr. T. (D.) was admitted to the assessment unit at the hospital on May 30, 2022, pursuant to [a] treatment order after being found unfit to stand trial on May 18, 2022, just five days after the commission of the index offences. He returned to court on July 13, 2022, and was found fit to stand trial after a successful course of treatment. Mr. T. (D.) was then assessed for criminal responsibility pursuant to an assessment order of the court dated July 20, 2022. [H]e was admitted to the hospital on September 8, 2022, for this assessment. . . .”
Some elaboration on aspects of the foregoing overview is warranted. At the outset, it is noted that while attending the PEPP clinic, Mr. T. (D.) at times appeared to try to incite conflict with other PEPP patients and was observed acting in an aggressive manner. He connected his aggressive behaviour to alleged acts by other patients that he perceived as sexual in nature.
Mr. T. (D.)’s February 2019 admission was precipitated by a visit to the mental health outpatient clinic at London Health Sciences Centre. He presented as disorganized, sexually inappropriate, labile, religiously preoccupied, and with pressured speech. He was eventually admitted on Form 3 under the Mental Health Act (MHA). During his admission, Mr. T. (D.) was noted to be very psychotic and disorganized, repeatedly screaming and talking to himself. He was unable to answer questions, and his behaviour was generally bizarre. Over the ensuing days, he remained psychotic but started to improve slowly on his medications. By the end of the first week, he was beginning to appear to be more at his baseline.
The Hospital Report states that while Mr. T. (D.) was maintained in the community for a long time prior to the index offences, he continued to experience symptoms of his illness. Contact notes involving nursing, social work, and psychiatry reported that he continued to respond to internal stimuli and was at times labile, difficult to understand, and disorganized.
In the months prior to the index offences, Mr. T. (D.) attended an outpatient clinic for monthly injections of two antipsychotic medications (paliperidone 150 mg and aripiprazole 400 mg). He was reportedly anxious and mumbling nonstop when he attended on March 31, 2022 for his injections, and when he attended for his next injections on May 5, 2022 (eight days before the index offences), he was noted to have poor eye contact, was mumbling to himself, and had an anxious affect. He was nevertheless pleasant and cooperative, and his thought processes appeared organized.
The Hospital Report details Mr. T. (D.)’s presentation and course at the Southwest Centre during his criminal responsibility assessment. In sum, on a daily basis he was observed to be experiencing psychotic symptoms, e.g., mumbled, low volume and fast rate of speech, responding to unseen stimuli, pre-occupation with delusional thoughts, illogical thoughts, fluctuating between being irritated/angry, and then laughing in response to his internal stimuli, and presenting at times as being watchful. He reported a variety of auditory hallucinations, attaching specific names to each. His notable incidents consisted of inappropriate sexual behaviours, chronicled as follows in the Hospital Report:
“On September 26, 2022, a female nurse knocked on Mr. T. (D.)’s room door to deliver his bedtime medications. When asked to come to the door to receive his medications, Mr. T. (D.) removed the blanket that was covering him, pointed, and exposed his penis, then covered himself up with the blanket.
On September 27, 2022, a female nurse was delivering bedtime snacks and medications. Mr. T. (D.) was noted to be looking up at the ceiling and turning his head side to side. When asked what he was doing he stated, ‘well you’re very good looking but if there are cameras, I can’t act on you.’ Mr. T. (D.) was also looking at the female nurse’s breasts during this interaction.
On October 8, 2022, Mr. T. (D.) was noted to be sitting beside a female staff then purposefully put his hand on the staff’s buttocks. He then moved his hand and then went to touch the staff’s leg.
On September 30, 2022, Mr. T. (D.) was noted to be having an angry/irritated response to his psychotic symptoms and was speaking about needing a sword to fight for his life and then stated that he had touched the nurse’s breast the night prior.
On October 20, 2022, Mr. T. (D.) approached the unit’s female cleaning staff and stated, ‘You have nice breasts.’”
Mr. T. (D.) continued to be actively psychotic, experiencing both hallucinations and delusions, throughout his first year under the Board’s jurisdiction. Due to his unstable mental state, his ability to participate in hospital programs was limited. During his second reporting year, despite some slight improvements, Mr. T. (D.) remained impacted by his psychotic symptoms, which are considered treatment resistant. On a daily basis, he was observed talking out loud to himself in response to unseen stimuli, and presenting as preoccupied most of the time due to his hallucinations. At times when he was more impacted by his symptoms, his speech became pressured, and he was noted to ramble on nonsensically. He often looked depressed and sullen at times when he was being tormented by his psychotic symptoms. Nevertheless, no anger issues or self-destructive behaviour were observed or reported.
Mr. T. (D.) presented with symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder and was quite anxious and paranoid when struggling with these. He often reported the belief that he was in danger of being contaminated or poisoned by stains on bed sheets, rust on his security bracelet or glue adhesive on his skin. He spent excessive time washing his hands or showering, trying to eliminate the danger. Noted improvement in these symptoms was observed following the initiation of medication in July of 2024.
Evidence for the Current Reporting Year and at the Hearing
- Mr. T. (D.)’s diagnoses are listed in the Hospital Report as follows:
schizophrenia;
cannabis use disorder in sustained remission in a controlled environment; and
obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Mr. T. (D.) continued to reside on a treatment unit, under Dr. Mokhber’s care, for the first portion of the current reporting period. He moved to a rehabilitation unit on May 22, 2025, at which time he was transferred to Dr. Ardani’s care. Dr. Ardani advised at the hearing that this transfer occurred so that Mr. T. (D.) could have access to the community for smoking purposes. In Dr. Ardani’s opinion, he was not yet ready to live on a rehabilitation unit.
Mr. T. (D.) continued to experience active symptoms of his major mental illness, including hallucinations, delusional thinking, and formal thought disorder. His clinical picture was characterized by periods of stability, during which he was able to manage the impact of the psychotic symptoms on his level of functioning, as well as frequent episodes of decompensation, with an increase in his auditory hallucinations, significant formal thought disorder, and affective and behavioural instability, during which he required staff intervention in the form of offering as-needed medications. It was noted that he returned to his baseline more quickly during the reporting period, although there was no pattern around when his periods of decompensation arose. It was noted, however, by way of example, that while being driven to and from his community passes, he often responded to his hallucinations. His participation in unit and hospital-wide programs varied based on his mental health presentation. Dr. Ardani stated at the hearing that currently, Mr. T. (D.)’s symptoms intensify approximately weekly.
When unwell, Mr. T. (D.) presented with nervousness and was observed to be pacing. Also, an increase in symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) would occur, such as frequent handwashing and perseverating on the same topics. When asked about the interaction between Mr. T. (D.)’s psychotic illness and his OCD, Dr. Ardani thought they were two separate conditions, citing a situation when it was necessary to discontinue his antipsychotic medication for about a week. Dr. Ardani observed that during this period, while Mr. T. (D.)’s psychosis worsened, his OCD did not.
Mr. T. (D.)’s insight into his illness, need for treatment, and risk of violence was rated as underdeveloped. However, Dr. Ardani said that when Mr. T. (D.) is symptomatic, he loses his limited insight entirely.
Despite Mr. T. (D.)’s active symptoms, he demonstrated no violence or any inappropriate sexual behaviour during the reporting period. He also maintained his abstinence from alcohol and cannabis, and all drug screens tested negative for substances. He has now maintained his abstinence for some three years. During the reporting year, he exercised over 20 passes, of 24-48 hours’ duration, to his parents’ home and was able to refrain from consuming cannabis despite his father’s use of the substance. Dr. Ardani stated that as of the hearing date, Mr. T. (D.) had three weekly approved person passes.
The Hospital Report stated that in August 2025, Mr. T. (D.) returned early from a 48-hour pass due to mental health decompensation, and that since then, the majority of his passes have been for 24 hours. Asked by a panel member to elaborate on this incident, Dr. Ardani explained that Mr. T. (D.) requested to return early and enlisted his parents’ assistance. On arrival at the Hospital, he was given an as-needed medication. After this incident, the parents were given access to this medication so that they could give it to him if needed on future passes.
Mr. T. (D.) was engaged in psychology services to learn strategies for coping with his auditory hallucinations and OCD symptoms; however, he noted that he sought comfort in the voices and did not want them resolved. During the reporting period, he was also engaged for the second time in a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) for Psychosis group and an Action-Based Cognitive Remediation group. His engagement in groups, as detailed in the Hospital Report, has been positive. However, Dr. Ardani explained that Mr. T. (D.) loses his ability to use the learned skills due to his instability. While substance use is a risk factor that historically exacerbates his symptoms, Mr. T. (D.) cannot yet meaningfully engage in substance use treatment.
As is detailed in the Hospital Report, the treatment team worked during the reporting period on adjusting and optimizing Mr. T. (D.)’s medications, including by titrating his clozapine dosage. However, this produced minimal effect. It was thought that Mr. T. (D.)’s cigarette smoking contributed to lowered serum clozapine levels. He is taking a low-dose medication (fluvoxamine) specifically to prevent the metabolism of his clozapine. At a higher dose of this medication, his clozapine level became toxic. Mr. T. (D.)’s medication is still not considered to be optimized. During the previous year, his treatment team wanted to try amisulpride, but the medication was not then available. Dr. Ardani said that it now can be available, but the team wishes to first optimize Mr. T. (D.)’s clozapine dose. Mr. T. (D.) can consent to his psychiatric treatment, and to this point, he has agreed with medication changes or recommendations from his treatment team.
In addition to Mr. T. (D.)’s receptivity to treatment recommendations, Dr. Ardani commented that his strengths include his general cooperative and respectful attitude, his pleasant and empathetic demeanour when not actively unwell, and his strong family support. The Hospital Report notes that Mr. T. (D.)’s goals include discharge from the Hospital, obtaining employment and live with his parents in London, or on his own, close to his family. In terms of employment, he has expressed an interest in returning to farm work that he historically did, working in retail, or working at a restaurant.
Dr. Ardani was questioned by Mr. Dobson about Mr. T. (D.)’s smoking. In response, he said that Mr. T. (D.) had attempted vaping instead, but this was unsuccessful. He has reduced his smoking to 10-15 cigarettes per day, and between two and three when out on passes. Dr. Ardani agreed that it would be best if the treatment team could help a person stop smoking, but they also want to be realistic and consider that in a potential group home or other community living setting, Mr. T. (D.) would be able to smoke outside.
Despite continuing to experience active symptoms and instability of his mental condition, Mr. T. (D.) used his privileges appropriately. In December of 2025, he was granted indirectly supervised privileges in the community to attend the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) - Talbot House. There, he participated in activities such as baseball games, mindfulness hikes, and karaoke. As noted above, he also entered the community to visit his family on leaves of absence (LOAs). He receives good support from all his family members, and his father is an Approved Person. However, his parents were reportedly not aligned with the treatment team in relation to Mr. T. (D.)’s antipsychotic treatment, particularly in relation to clozapine.
During the hearing, a panel member asked Dr. Ardani about evidence at last year’s hearing that while Mr. T. (D.)’s parents were both opposed to psychotropic medication for him, they did not actively try to prevent him from taking it. Dr. Ardani stated that more recently, the parents have expressed agreement with the treatment plan.
In 2024, Mr. T. (D.) started to see Dr. M. Scanavino, a psychiatrist who specializes in severe mental illness, sexual behaviour, and sexual disorders, due to the concerns regarding his index offence involving minors. Mr. T. (D.) also saw Dr. Scanavino four times during the current reporting period, in March, May, June, and September 2025. He underwent many standardized assessments. It was concluded that Mr. T. (D.) did not exhibit signs of hypersexuality, significant dysfunction, compulsive sexual behaviour disorder, or paraphilic disorder. It was concluded that the index offences were likely committed under the influence of major mental illness and lack of social skills, particularly with respect to communication with females. The treatment plan was to explore interpersonal and romantic relationship skills. Dr. Ardani updated the panel and the parties by stating that Mr. T. (D.) works with Dr. Scanavino on a sporadic basis. In response to a panel member’s questions, Dr. Ardani confirmed that Dr. Scanavino is working with Mr. T. (D.) on his social skills, and the treatment team supports this arrangement.
Dr. Ardani agreed with the HCR-20 v. 3 risk assessment and the re-offence scenario set out in the Hospital Report. He stated that while the treatment team was readying Mr. T. (D.) for living in the community, this move was unlikely to occur during the coming reporting year. He confirmed that the Hospital would need to approve Mr. T. (D.)’s eventual community accommodation and stated that further occupational therapy assessment work needs to be done. Mr. T. (D.) has tried to engage in these assessments but was unable to complete them sufficiently.
In response to Mr. Dobson’s question as to the ongoing necessity of a clause prohibiting Mr. T. (D.) from having contact with the victims of the index offences, Dr. Ardani stated that he could not confidently answer whether Mr. T. (D.) would recognize the victims in the community. He noted from the history that they were strangers to Mr. T. (D.).
A panel member raised with the parties, prior to concluding Dr. Ardani’s evidence, the question of whether, in view of the index offences, there was a need to restrict Mr. T. (D.)’s access to places where children may congregate, such as parks, schools, playgrounds and community pools. Counsel for the Attorney General initially expressed support for such a restriction, while counsel for Mr. T. (D.) disagreed, stating there was no evidentiary foundation for such a restriction and, further, that no restraint of this sort had been placed on him while his matter was before the court. Dr. Ardani was then asked about this. He observed that since at this point, no occupational therapy assessment has been completed, the imposition of such a restriction could impact Mr. T. (D.)’s ability to engage in therapeutic recreational activities, which Dr. Ardani characterized as a cornerstone of his rehabilitation.
No further evidence was led following that of Dr. Ardani.
Analysis and Conclusions
Dealing first with the matter of “significant threat”, the panel is satisfied that Mr. T. (D.) represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. Notably, all parties agreed on this issue. Mr. T. (D.) suffers from a serious mental illness, schizophrenia. His symptoms are demonstratively resistant to treatment, and remain active, causing periods of mental instability throughout the most recent reporting period. He also suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder, the symptoms of which can be distressing for Mr. T. (D.), especially when the active symptoms of his schizophrenia worsen.
The evidence supports a finding that the index offences are related to the symptoms of Mr. T. (D.)’s major mental illness, as well as his consumption of cannabis. Mr. T. (D.)’s background includes two earlier convictions for sexual assault, in respect of which he was on probation until just before the index offences. In addition, it is noteworthy that during a period when Mr. T. (D.) was actively demonstrating psychotic symptoms following his initial admission to the Hospital, he engaged in highly inappropriate sexual behaviour, including an incident of sexual assault upon a female nurse.
The assessments by Dr. Scanavino, as reported in the Hospital Report and confirmed by Dr. Ardani in his evidence, strengthen the association between Mr. T. (D.)’s mental illness and his risk of acting out in a sexually assaultive manner when symptomatic.
Societal recognition of the serious harm occasioned by the violation of a person’s sexual integrity, particularly where that person is a child, has deepened, and it is now well-known that sexual offences carry with them an inherent risk of serious psychological harm.1
The panel adopts, in finding that Mr. T. (D.) represents a real risk of engaging in criminal conduct that likely will result in serious harm, the list of risk factors in the Clinical Summary of Risk in the Hospital Report and finds itself in agreement with the re-offence scenario in that Report, which states:
“Mr. T. (D.) has a major mental disorder which has not responded to medications. He often experiences active symptoms of psychosis, which adversely impact cognitive functioning, for example, decision-making, problem-solving, time-awareness, etc. Without ongoing psychiatric supervision and treatment, Mr. T. (D.) would unlikely be able to identify the symptoms of decompensation, take his medications on a time-sensitive fashion, and seek help from professionals. He would experience severe anxiety and distress, for which he would likely return to historical coping strategies, such as substance use. This would result in his symptoms intensifying further. Given his fragile mental health, his judgment would likely become impaired, and in response to his active psychotic symptoms, he would likely engage in behaviours which place the public at risk, similar to the violent behaviours at the time of the index offence.”
Turning to the matter of disposition, the panel agrees with the parties’ joint position that the necessary and appropriate Disposition continues to be a Detention Order. There is simply no air of reality to a Conditional Discharge at this juncture, and no party suggested that this could be an appropriate Disposition.
The panel concluded, in accordance with the joint submission, that there should be no changes to the Disposition. The current Disposition provides a necessary and appropriate envelope of privileges for the support of the protection of the public, while maximizing Mr. T. (D.)’s liberty and supporting his reintegration into the community and other needs and personal goals.
Although questions were raised during the hearing about restricting Mr. T. (D.)’s access to places like public parks, schools, or swimming pools where children might be expected to be present, the panel concluded that the evidence does not currently support the necessity of such a restriction. There is no evidence that Mr. T. (D.) suffers from a paraphilia, and by all accounts, he was unaware of the age of the victims of the index offences. In addition, Dr. Ardani’s evidence indicates that the imposition of such a restriction could be detrimental to Mr. T. (D.)’s rehabilitation and successful reintegration into the community.
The panel also decided not to remove the “victim safeguard” clause in Mr. T. (D.)’s Disposition, which requires him to refrain from direct or indirect contact or communication with the victims of the index offences. Counsel for the Attorney General advised the panel that he had made a note to the effect that this matter should be the subject of follow up by his office, so that appropriate inquiries can be made and input from the victims sought prior to the next review of Mr. T. (D.)’s Disposition.
In concluding these Reasons, the panel wishes to commend Mr. T. (D.) on his positive working relationship with his treatment team, his adherence to recommended medications, and his demonstrated commitment to abstinence from the use of prohibited substances. He is encouraged to continue to work collaboratively with his team as they continue to optimize his treatment and seek to prepare him to live successfully in the community.
DATED this 15th day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Eric Siebenmorgen
Legal Member
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board
Footnotes
- R. v. Friesen, 2020 SCC 9, at paras. 50-51, 55-57; R. v. McCraw, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 72 at p. 81, 1991 CanLII 29.