Re: Brent Samuel
ORB File No: 7944
Hearing held on: Tuesday, March 31, 2026
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Clapp
Members: Dr. P. Darby Dr. A. Gibas Ms. C. Murray Ms. B. Little
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Brent Samuel Counsel: Ms. C. Francis (via Zoom)
Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Newman
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated April 14, 2026)
Introduction:
On September 13, 2021, Brent Samuel was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge of attempt murder, contrary to the Criminal Code. He is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or the “Board”) dated April 3, 2025, whereby he is discharged from the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or the “hospital”) with conditions that include residing at his parent’s home, reporting to the hospital once per month, abstaining from substance use, refraining from possessing weapons, and consenting to psychiatric treatment. There is also a no-contact provision and a Young clause.
On March 31, 2026, a panel of the Board convened at Waypoint to conduct Mr. Samuel’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Samuel attended the hearing and was represented by counsel, Ms. Francis, who appeared by Zoom. Mr. Samuel’s parents also attended the hearing.
The Hospital Report dated March 2, 2026, was marked as Exhibit 1. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Samuel’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. P. Ismail, gave evidence.
The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Samuel continues to meet the test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public as set out in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and if so, what is the necessary and appropriate Disposition, taking into account the four factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Positions of the Parties:
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Newman stated that it was the opinion of the hospital that Mr. Samuel no longer represented a significant threat to the safety of the public and should therefore be absolutely discharged.
Ms. Curry stated that she wanted to hear the evidence before taking a position on behalf of the Attorney General. After hearing the evidence, she supported an Absolute Discharge.
Ms. Francis agreed with the position of the hospital that Mr. Samuel is entitled to an Absolute Discharge. Therefore, following the hearing of the evidence there was a joint submission before the panel.
Findings:
- For the reasons that follow, the panel concluded that the evidence did not establish that Mr. Samuel continues to pose a significant threat to public safety. Accordingly, pursuant to section 672.54(a) of the Criminal Code, Mr. Samuel was granted an Absolute Discharge.
Index Offence:
- The circumstances of the index offence are set out in the Hospital Report at pages 3-4 and can be summarized as follows. Mr. Samuel lived with his aunt and cousin in Brampton for approximately ten years. On March 10, 2020, there was an altercation during which time Mr. Samuel, while actively psychotic, struck his cousin in the head and hand with a hammer. The victim was able to escape the residence but sustained two depression skull fractures and a broken finger.
Background:
Mr. Samuel’s personal history is outlined in the Hospital Report in detail and will not be repeated here. In summary, Mr. Samuel is a 37-year-old single man who lived with his parents and sister growing up. He had a positive relationship with his parents and was described as a healthy and confident child. Mr. Samuel’s behaviour started deteriorating in his early twenties, which coincided with extensive cannabis use. This strained familial relationships. When his parents moved in 2011, Mr. Samuel began residing with his aunt and cousin in Brampton.
Mr. Samuel graduated from high school and worked in various labour-intensive jobs. He was last employed four months prior to the index offence. He has been supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program since 2020.
Mr. Samuel has a history of substance use, including regular use of cannabis, alcohol, and cocaine.
Criminal History:
- Mr. Samuel’s criminal history is set out at pages 5-6 of the Hospital Report. He had charges related to a driving incident in 2015 which were resolved by way of a conditional discharge and probation. Ms. Curry confirmed at the hearing that Mr. Samuel does not have a criminal record.
Psychiatric History:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Samuel had no inpatient psychiatric admissions prior to the index offence, but he had received psychiatric care. In 2018, he attended the General Assessment Clinic at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (”CAMH”) through a referral from his family physician as a result of mania and psychosis in the context of two months of abstinence from heavy substance use. Mr. Samuel was then connected to the Cleghorn Early Intervention Program (“Cleghorn”) at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Hamilton in 2019 for psychiatric follow-up. Mr. Samuel maintained regular virtual visits with Cleghorn and received a long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication (“LAI”) from his mother’s family physician in Huntsville.
Mr. Samuel was admitted to hospital from March 10 to 23, 2020 following the index offence. He was religiously preoccupied and noted as having delusional thinking patterns. He had some insight into his situation and was agreeable to treatment. Mr. Samuel responded well to treatment and accepted recommendations to discontinue substance use. He was discharged with diagnoses of: Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type; Cannabis Use Disorder; and Cocaine Use Disorder.
Following the NCR finding, Mr. Samuel lived with his parents in Huntsville. He received his LAI from his family doctor, was adherent with treatment, and abstinent from substances. The symptoms of his illness were well controlled. The Forensic Outpatient Team at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (“SJHCH”) took over Mr. Samuel’s care from Cleghorn in April 2022. In January 2024, Mr. Samuel began volunteering with Habitat for Humanity.
Mr. Samuel’s care was transferred to Waypoint under a Conditional Discharge following last year’s Disposition as it is closer to his home in Huntsville.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Samuel’s diagnoses are Schizophrenia; Cocaine Use Disorder, in sustained remission; and Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission. He is capable of consenting to treatment and managing his finances.
Evidence at the Hearing:
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Samuel continues to reside with his parents and sister in Huntsville and has very strong support from them. While Mr. Samuel had considered a move to independent living, he is settled in Huntsville and plans to remain there living with his parents.
The Hospital Report stated that Mr. Samuel’s Schizophrenia is psychiatrically stable, and his compliance with supervision is described as “exemplary.” He demonstrates behavioural and cognitive stability and maintains employment at Walmart and volunteering with Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Samuel completed Waypoint’s Action Over Inertia group with full attendance and meaningful participation. He has been accepted into the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) Crisis Outreach and Support Team (COAST) program and continues to meet monthly with a clinician independent of the forensic system.
Dr. Ismail’s Clinical Assessment of Risk dated March 1, 2026, is detailed and comprehensive, and as a result, much of it is repeated here (at pages 28-30 of the Hospital Report):
“During the current review period, he has demonstrated sustained psychiatric stability, consistent treatment adherence, and meaningful community integration. Based on a structured assessment of dynamic risk domains, including insight, violent ideation, psychiatric symptoms, instability, and treatment responsiveness, he no longer meets the threshold for a significant threat to the safety of the public.
Mr. Samuel demonstrates good and well-established insight into his diagnosis of schizophrenia and its management. He acknowledges his illness and understands the role that untreated symptoms and substance use played in his past difficulties. He has accepted psychoeducation regarding schizophrenia, is waitlisted for Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for psychosis, and has expressed a clear understanding of the importance of ongoing treatment. There is no evidence of denial, minimization, or resistance to acknowledging his illness. His insight is reflected not only in his statements but also in his behavior.
He further demonstrates insight into violence risk. He understands the factors that contributed to his index offence and recognizes that medication adherence and abstinence from substances are central to maintaining stability and reducing risk. He has remained fully abstinent from substances, as confirmed by repeated negative toxicology screens, and he complies with all monitoring requests. He reports that others in his residence use cannabis but does not find this triggering and continues to maintain sobriety. There is no evidence of hostile attribution bias, externalization of blame, or minimization of past harm. He acknowledges his responsibility and demonstrates behavioral consistency with this understanding.
Mr. Samuel shows strong insight into the need for ongoing treatment. He is prescribed Invega Trinza 350 mg every 12 weeks and expresses satisfaction with this regimen. He independently orders the medication, retrieves it from the pharmacy, and arranges for administration through his family physician’s office. This process has been managed reliably for years without issue, and administration has been confirmed. He denies side effects and understands the protective role of medication in maintaining stability. There are no concerns regarding treatment resistance or ambivalence.
Protective factors are substantial and durable. He resides with his parents and sister in Huntsville, where he benefits from strong family support. He has stable housing, financial stability through ODSP and employment income, meaningful occupational and volunteer engagement, and independent medical follow-up through his family physician, who is aware of his psychiatric and legal history and prepared to oversee his care in the community. He has expressed a desire to continue community supports even if discharged, viewing them as beneficial in maintaining recovery gains.
In summary, Mr. Samuel does not currently exhibit dynamic risk factors associated with violent recidivism. He demonstrates sustained insight, psychiatric stability, absence of violent ideation, strong treatment adherence, community integration, and a robust support network. There is no evidence of instability, treatment resistance, or emerging risk indicators. His risk has reduced to a level consistent with that of a well-managed individual living successfully in the community with a chronic mental illness. It is therefore my opinion that Mr. Samuel no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and an Absolute Discharge is clinically appropriate and consistent with his sustained recovery trajectory.”
Dr. Ismail testified that Mr. Samuel was transferred to his care from SJHCH last year and reiterated many of the points set out in his Clinical Assessment of Risk. Mr. Samuel has done everything he has been asked to do since being under the jurisdiction of the Board and there have been no symptoms, substance use, or incidents. Mr. Samuel receives his LAI from his family doctor in Huntsville every 12 weeks. This provides him with “lots of coverage” and there have been no instances of noncompliance. The family doctor is aware of Mr. Samuel’s history and has no concerns about an Absolute Discharge.
Dr. Ismail described Mr. Samuel’s insight into his mental illness, risk factors for violence, and need for treatment as “excellent.” He is able to identify his symptoms, and his family is as well. Mr. Samuel is very close to his parents, he listens to them, and they understand his illness and what led to the index offence. Dr. Ismail stated that Mr. Samuel’s parents also think that he is ready for an Absolute Discharge.
Dr. Ismail was satisfied that Mr. Samuel now has appropriate psychiatric supports in Huntsville. He is stable and tolerates the medication well. It is unlikely that he will experience breakthrough symptoms. His family doctor will continue to follow him. He has been accepted by COAST and is on a waitlist for their services. A psychiatrist could be accessed through COAST with a referral if required.
When asked about the no-contact provision with the victim of the index offence that is in the current Disposition, Dr. Ismail stated that unfortunately the victim passed away. Mr. Samuel had not had an opportunity to apologize to her, and this was a source of stress and regret for him.
No further evidence was called by the parties.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Based on the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. Ismail, the panel concluded that Mr. Samuel no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. Mr. Samuel is therefore granted an Absolute Discharge.
In coming to this conclusion, the panel carefully considered the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625 (“Winko”). In that case, the Court stated that a significant threat to the safety of the public must be: more than speculative in nature and supported by the evidence; significant, in the sense of there being a “real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the public that is serious in the sense of going beyond the merely trivial or annoying”; and the conduct giving rise to the harm must be criminal in nature. Further, the Court stated that there must be a positive finding of a significant threat to the safety of the public in order to support restrictions on an NCR accused’s liberty. Anything else, for example uncertainty, cannot suffice.
In the Winko case, the Supreme Court of Canada also stated that in coming to a conclusion on the issue of significant threat, a Review Board should closely examine a range of evidence including the circumstances of the original offence, the past and expected course of the accused’s treatment, the present state of the NCR accused’s mental condition, and the NCR accused’s own plans for the future, the support services existing for the NCR accused in the community, and the recommendations provided by experts who have examined the NCR accused.
The evidence was clear that Mr. Samuel has made consistent and sustained progress during the six years since the very serious index office and while under the jurisdiction of the Board. He has taken his medication without issue, remained entirely abstinent from substances, and has exhibited no symptoms of Schizophrenia. His insight into his mental illness, the need for treatment, and his risk for violence is described as “excellent”, and this is supported by his consistent follow through with all recommendations. He is now set up in Huntsville with a support system that will continue to ensure his stability and be able to respond if any symptoms emerge. His family doctor has been administering the LAI for some time and Mr. Samuel has been accepted by COAST.
Mr. Samuel’s family is a very important part of his support system, and it is clear that they are educated, aware, and very supportive. Mr. Samuel lives with his parents, and they will be able to observe him and assist with seeking help in the event of any decompensation. Mr. Samuel is involved with work and volunteering and has plans for his future. He also feels remorse for the index offence. For these reasons, the panel agreed with the joint submission of the parties that all of Mr. Samuel’s risk factors are well managed in the community, and he is no longer a significant threat to the safety of the public.
It was clear to the panel that Mr. Samuel has worked very hard on his recovery over the years, that he values his stability in the community, and that he will continue with his treatment and supports going forward. The panel wishes Mr. Samuel all the best as he moves forward with his life.
DATED this 14th day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. S. Clapp Alternate Chairperson
__________________ Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board