Re Mason Witzing, 2026 CanLII 34264

Ontario Review Board

Re: Mason Witzing

ORB File No: 8652

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.L. Darby

Dr. A. Gibas

Ms. C. Murray

Ms. B. Little

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Mason Witzing

Counsel: Mr. C. Hurley (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)

Overview

1. On October 18, 2024, Mason Witzing was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) on account of mental disorder on a charge of aggravated assault, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”).

2. Mr. Witzing is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) dated April 22, 2025, which discharges him subject to conditions including, inter alia, reporting to the person in charge of Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, Penetanguishene (“Waypoint” or “the hospital”) not less than once every four weeks or as requested, and abstaining absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant including cannabinoids.

3. On Tuesday, March 31, 2026, this panel of the Board convened a hearing at Waypoint to review Mr. Witzing’s Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Witzing was present for the hearing and represented by counsel, Mr. Hurley.

4. A Hospital Report dated February 22, 2026, was entered as Exhibit 1. In addition to the documentary evidence, Mr. Witzing’s attending psychiatrist, Dr. P. Ismail, gave viva voce evidence at the hearing.

5. The issues to be decided at the hearing were whether Mr. Witzing continues to represent 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 to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

Position of the Parties

6. At the outset of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions. On behalf of the hospital, Ms. Newman took the position that Mr. Witzing remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that a Conditional Discharge with the same terms and conditions as last year remained necessary and appropriate. Ms. Curry, on behalf of the Attorney General, supported the position of the hospital.

7. Mr. Hurley took the position that Mr. Witzing is no longer a significant threat to the safety of the public and should be absolutely discharged.

Findings

8. For the reasons set out below, the Board found that Mr. Witzing continues to pose a significant threat to public safety. The Board concluded that the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive in the circumstances, is a continuation of the Conditional Discharge without change.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses

9. Schizophrenia;

Hallucinogen- and Cannabis-Induced Psychotic Disorder

Hallucinogen Use Disorder, in sustained remission

Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission

Index Offence

10. The index offence is taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:

“On Saturday the 10th of September 2022 at 7:07 am, PC Pecchia #2188, PC Armstrong #2596, PC Pye-Finch #2532 and A/Sgt #1745 responded to [address in Richmond Hill, ON] in regard to an Injured Person. Preliminary information from the complainant advised that he had been stabbed in the back and required police and ambulance.

Upon arriving on scene PC Pecchia located the complainant, later identified as Michael WITZING, standing on the front porch talking on the phone with call-takers. Michael was holding a black t-shirt to his back and bleeding. He was escorted away from the residence and CPR was administered until EMS arrived. Michael had a two-inch laceration on his mid-right back which appeared consistent with an edged weapon.

PC Armstrong and PC Pye-Finch contained the residence until additional resources arrived on scene. Michael advised that he was stabbed by his son, Mason WITZING, while he was sleeping. Michael was transported to Sunny Brook [sic] Hospital by EMS Unit #3471. The victim was treated in the trauma unit and accessed by Dr TILLMANN who subsequently advised that the injury was non-life threatening, however, the weapon used in the offence appeared to slightly puncture the right lung and he would be kept overnight for observation.

Michael was sent for a CT scan then relocated to the Blue Zone room 6. While in the treatment unit, Michael explained that Mason returned home on the evening of September 9, 2022 and appeared agitated. Michael was unable explain why Mason was upset however, he noticed that Mason was chain smoking cigarettes. Mason proceeded to leave the residence to purchase more cigarettes then returned home two hours later. After returning home, Michael stated that there was nothing in particular that was discussed amongst them and he had put dinner aside for his son, then both parties went to bed at 11:00 pm. At approximately 7:00 am, Michael was sleeping in the basement and was woken by his son who had stabbed him once on the right side of his back. Mason gave Michael a blank stare then walked away. The victim then managed to walk outside to the front porch and called for emergency services. Michael elaborated stating that his son Mason, has been diagnosed with [ADHD] and suffers from depression. He is dependent on cannabis, has had suicidal thoughts in the past and has been a subject of a mental health apprehension. The family has been struggling with trying to get him help and Mason has been prescribed lithium which he no longer takes on a regular basis.

Officers maintained containment on the residence until ERU and K9 arrived on scene. 2CIB was engaged and a Feeny Warrant was prepared as Mason had locked himself in the residence and refused to surrender to police. After numerous communication attempts, Mason surrendered and was arrested at 11:06 am for Attempt Murder then held for a bail hearing.

Mr. Witzing informed police that he had been unable to sleep because his father “touches him inappropriately.” He believed that a rash on his chest was due to his father urinating on him, and he believed that his parents were not his “real biological parents.”

Background Information

11. The Hospital Report details Mr. Witzing’s history and background. Briefly, Mr. Witzing is a 23-year-old single man with a high school education. He has had employment in a mechanic shop. He left his job in March 2022 due to increasing paranoia and anxiety. He also worked at a warehouse for two to three months while on bail for the index offence.

12. At the age of nine or ten, Mr. Witzing sustained a concussion with loss of consciousness for a few minutes.

13. Mr. Witzing has no prior criminal history.

14. Mr. Witzing was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in grade 2. He reported taking Adderall until grade 11 but discontinued its use in high school due to increased cannabis use. Mr. Witzing began using cannabis in grade 10, which he used continuously until the index offence, never going more than a few days without it. He reported experiencing heightened anxiety and paranoia when he used cannabis in larger quantities. In 2024, Mr. Witzing denied experiencing auditory hallucinations except when using “magic mushrooms” or cannabis.

15. Mr. Witzing had two psychiatric admissions to Mackenzie Richmond Hill Hospital in 2018. On discharge, there were no diagnoses of psychiatric disorders other than ADHD. In February 2019, he presented to the emergency department endorsing active suicidal ideation. The diagnostic impression was intermittent explosive disorder in the context of ADHD. In January 2022, Mr. Witzing was taken to the emergency department when he was sent home from work in a reported state of catatonia. He endorsed agitation, delusions, and psychotic behaviour. The following day he disclosed that he used approximately “15 bongs” of cannabis per day. At that point, there was no evidence of active psychosis, and he was discharged.

16. Mr. Witzing was affiliated with Dr. Mulder and the Early Psychosis Intervention Program until August 2025. His care was transferred from the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences to Waypoint in May 2025 (after last year’s initial hearing) as Waypoint is closer to his home. Throughout the past reporting year, Mr. Witzing continued to reside with his parents. His mother provides him with his medication every night and he reports being fully compliant with his medication regimen. However, paliperidone was not detected in six out of his eight urine drug screens. In the first week of February 2026, Mr. Witzing was provided with a requisition for blood work to check for the presence of his medication. As of the date of this hearing, he had failed to complete the requisite blood work.

Oral Evidence at the Hearing

17. Dr. Ismail testified at the hearing as follows:

a. This reporting year Mr. Witzing has not exhibited violent behaviour, hallucinations, or delusions.

b. Mr. Witzing provides urine samples every month, which shows no indication of substance use. However, with respect to his psychiatric medication (paliperidone), the results of his urine screens have been inconsistent. In June and July 2025, the urine drug screen showed that he was taking paliperidone. From September 2025 through February 2026, his urine screen was negative for paliperidone. No other patients had a false negative result in their drug screens during that time, which raised a concern that Mr. Witzing is not taking his medication as he reports. Dr. Ismail was not aware of any other reason for the metabolite not to appear in the urine drug screen, especially since it had appeared in Mr. Witzing’s urine previously. Therefore, blood work was requisitioned to further explore the compliance concern. However, Mr. Witzing has not followed through with the bloodwork to date, though he did attend at the incorrect lab once. This is very concerning to the treatment team because Mr. Witzing lives with the victim of the index offence. The treatment team is of the opinion that there is more work to be done to assist Mr. Witzing to gain better insight into the need for compliance with his medication.

c. Mr. Witzing superficially understands that remission from his illness is treatment dependent. He says he understands that he needs to take his medication. Despite him likely not having taken the medication for several months, there was not a resurgence of psychotic symptoms.

d. While Mr. Witzing’s mother reports giving the medication to Mr. Witzing every night, no one observes Mr. Witzing taking his medication.

e. If Mr. Witzing was to receive an Absolute Discharge, his care would be carried over to the regular Mobile Treatment and Support Team (MTST), which would be a non-forensic team. His engagement with this team would be voluntary. He has no other identified community supports.

f. In response to questions from Ms. Curry, Dr. Ismail testified that Mr. Witzing appears to be taking his oral paliperidone again given the recent urine test results. If he was to receive an Absolute Discharge, he could simply stop taking his medication, as it appears he did for several months. If he stopped taking his medications it is likely that decompensation would be slow based on that fact that he was non-compliant from September 2025 to February 2026 and did not exhibit symptoms. Decompensation in his mental status would be risk enhancing and especially concerning because he is living with the victim of the index offence. Insight would likely be lost during decompensation, and he would likely not seek out psychiatric help. It is likely he would return to the use of substances if he decompensated.

g. If Mr. Witzing receives an Absolute Discharge his family physician would need to refer him to a psychiatrist in the community for follow-up.

h. In response to questions of Mr. Hurley, Dr. Ismail testified that Dr. Mulder considered whether Mr. Witzing should be weaned off his antipsychotic medication. However, Dr. Ismail and Dr. Mulder both determined Mr. Witzing should remain on medication due to his diagnosis of schizophrenia. It is recommended that Mr. Witzing remains on paliperidone for life. Based on Mr. Witzing’s past history, Dr. Ismail is confident that Mr. Witzing has schizophrenia. There are times when he did not use substances and continued to have symptoms of psychosis.

i. It can take six to twelve months to access a psychiatrist in the community. Waypoint is able to provide time-limited supervision if Mr. Witzing receives an Absolute Discharge.

j. In response to questions of the Board, Dr. Ismail testified that urine screens are done randomly, approximately bi-weekly. In September 2025, the treatment team discussed with Mr. Witzing that the urine screens were negative for paliperidone. The request for the bloodwork was made shortly after this discussion. The most recent available urine screen report is from March 5, 2026, for the urine screen conducted on February 25, 2026, which indicates that he is now taking his paliperidone again (note: this information was provided by caseworker, Connor McMahon, present at the hearing). Dr. Isamail stated that the half-life of paliperidone is short. It is possible he was taking the paliperidone intermittently from September 2025 to February 2026. If taken intermittently, paliperidone is not sufficient to prevent slow decompensation of his mental state.

k. Mr. Witzing has completed his mechanics course and will be returning to work at the mechanic shop soon. He does not qualify for Ontario Disability Support Program.

l. Dr. Ismail has not met with Mr. Witzing’s parents. The treatment team has met with them. Mr. Witzing intends to continue living with his parents.

m. Mr. Witzing is open to attending substance use relapse prevention programs in the community.

n. The hospital currently does not have the resources to conduct a PCLR, VRAG-R or HCR-20V3. Dr. Ismail said he would make the request for these to be conducted in the next year. He agreed that the risk assessments would be helpful to the Board in evaluating Mr. Witzing’s risk.

Submissions

18. In submissions, Ms. Newman highlighted the positive aspects of Mr. Witzing’s recovery this year, including excellent family support, adherence to the Disposition, and abstinence from substances. However, along with the positives, full compliance with medication is necessary to move forward in the forensic system. The issue of risk to the public due to non-compliance with medication is heightened by the fact that Mr. Witzing is living with the victim of the index offence.

19. Ms. Curry supported the hospital’s submissions and added that Mr. Witzing would be at risk of decompensation of his mental state if he resumes use of substances or stops taking his medications. There is a real potential for serious violence if he decompensates.

20. Mr. Hurley submitted that Mr. Witzing is not a risk to the safety of the public. He has remained mentally stable for a long time. He submitted that Mr. Witzing is medication compliant and has completely stopped substance use.

Analysis and Conclusion

21. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as submissions from the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Witzing remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.

22. Mr. Witzing enjoyed clinical stability this year and, to his credit, did not engage in substance use. Mr. Witzing reported adherence to paliperidone, denied side effects, and stated that he would not discontinue medication without medical advice. However, six of eight toxicology screens from September 2025 to February 2026 have shown the absence of the metabolite of paliperidone. Mr. Witzing did not submit to the bloodwork requisitioned by the treatment team, which was to clarify the situation. It is clear to this Board that Mr. Witzing was not adherent to his medication regimen.

23. Mr. Witzing’s mental stability remains contingent on medication compliance. His remission from symptoms is dependant on consistent adherence to treatment and continued abstinence from substances. Mr. Witzing’s risk arises from his diagnosis of schizophrenia and substance use disorders. While experiencing symptoms of his illness, he committed a very serious and violent index offence against a family member.

24. In light of the Board’s finding of significant threat, it is charged with shaping a Disposition for the coming year.

25. Mr. Witzing’s current stability occurred in the context of some antipsychotic treatment and the structured oversight of his treatment team and the ORB. He requires further psychoeducation to support medication compliance. The concerns regarding his risk due to non-adherence to medication is heightened because he lives with the victim of the index offence and intends to continue doing so. Proximity to the victim elevates the potential consequences of decompensation. For these reasons, an Absolute Discharge would be premature at this time. The panel agreed with the clinical team’s opinion that a consistent presence of medication in urine screens and blood serum levels, greater autonomy with taking medication, and a longer period of stability are required before sustained risk mitigation can be assured and an Absolute Discharge could be considered.

26. Mr. Witzing has been well-managed with his current Disposition. There will be no changes to the Disposition.

27. The Board notes that a formal risk assessment should be arranged in the coming year and Dr. Ismail has stated that he would make the request for this.

28. The panel would like to ensure Mr. Witzing that we have noticed his commitment to abstinence from substances, and we commend the significant gains he made this year. We hope for another positive year ahead. Additionally, the Board acknowledges the attendance of Mr. Witzing’s parents at this year’s hearing and the support they provide to their son.

DATED this 14th day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Ms. C. Murray

Legal Member

__________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board