Ontario Review Board
Re: G. (R.)
ORB File No: 6440
Hearing held on: Monday, March 2, 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: G. (R.) Counsel: Mr. W. Glover
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Zamprogna
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. J. Huber
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated April 20, 2026)
Introduction
On November 27, 2013, Mr. G. (R.), then 17 years of age, was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”), on charges of attempted murder and assault with a weapon, both contrary to the Criminal Code and the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). He was most recently subject to a Decision and Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB” or “the Board”) dated March 20, 2025 ordering his detention at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, St. Joseph's Health Care London (“Southwest” or “the Hospital”), subject to a variety of conditions, with privileges extending to living in Southwestern Ontario in approved accommodation.
On Monday, March 2, 2026, a panel of the Board convened in person at the Hospital to conduct the annual review of Mr. G. (R.)’s Disposition. The issues for determination were whether Mr. G. (R.) 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. G. (R.) was present and represented throughout the hearing by his counsel, Mr. Glover.
The documentary evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated February 2, 2026 and a Rule 13 request dated February 12, 2026 from Mr. G. (R.)’s previous counsel seeking a transfer to the Forensic Program of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, West 5th Campus (“SJHH”). The oral evidence was that of Dr. J. Isoboye, a clinical fellow working under the supervision of Dr. N. Mokhber, Mr. G. (R.)’s attending psychiatrist. Dr. Mokhber was also present at the hearing.
The hearing proceeded on the basis of a mainly joint submission. At the outset, counsel for all parties agreed that Mr. G. (R.) represented a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate Disposition was a Detention Order, the only change from the previous Disposition to be the removal of the privilege of accompanied seven-day passes to travel to British Columbia or Prince Edward Island. The Hospital and Mr. Glover also sought an order that Mr. G. (R.) be transferred to SJHH. Counsel for the Attorney General took no position in relation to the requested transfer to Hamilton. The parties maintained their positions at the conclusion of the evidence.
For the following Reasons, the panel concluded that Mr. G. (R.) continues to present a significant threat to the safety of the public. The necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances is a continuation of the Detention Order in accordance with most of its existing terms. The privilege permitting accompanied travel passes was removed from the Disposition, and Mr. G. (R.) was ordered to be transferred to the Forensic Program at SJHH with conditions mirroring those in his Detention Order at the Southwest Centre. Modifications to Mr. G. (R.)’s community privileges following his transfer to Hamilton were made so that he could access the community within SJHH’s catchment area, including Wellington County.
The Index Offences
- Mr. G. (R.) was just under 30 years of age at the time of the hearing. The index offences occurred on May 13, 2023 when he was 17 years old. The circumstances of the offences are reproduced below, extracted from the Reasons for Decision and Disposition dated April 10, 2025:
"On May 12, 2013, the victim, who is the mother of the accused, attended her daughter’s condominium in London for a Mother’s Day movie night and sleepover with her daughter and son. At approximately 3:00 a.m. on May 13, 2013, her daughter and her daughter’s boyfriend heard the victim's screams. They attended her bedroom and observed the accused standing over his mother holding a large kitchen carving knife. The victim was still in bed and the accused was making thrusting motions toward her with the knife. When her daughter and the boyfriend stepped in to defend the victim the accused swung a knife toward her daughter's boyfriend, missing him. Mr. G. (R.) eventually dropped the knife and was pinned to the ground by the boyfriend. Police attended and arrested the accused for attempted murder. The accused suffered lacerations to his right hand, which required five stitches, and surgery for a severed tendon in the middle finger of his left hand. The victim suffered lacerations to her thumb, left cheek, behind her left ear, and on the middle finger of her right hand, while her daughter's boyfriend suffered a small puncture wound in his left shoulder, which required one stitch, and a laceration to his left forearm that required seven stitches.”
- Mr. G. (R.)’s early history and background prior to the commission of the index offences are set out in the Hospital Report. As the Report is in evidence, this information need not be summarized in detail in these Reasons. A brief overview, extracted from last year’s Reasons and provided below, will suffice:
He was raised in London, Ontario and has two older sisters. His parents separated when he was five years old. Mr. G. (R.) initially resided with his mother and sisters for three years before moving to live with his father when his mother remarried. Mr. G. (R.) was living with his father at the time of the index offences.
Mr. G. (R.) has a history of substance use beginning when he was 14 years old and was reported to be using substances regularly in the months leading up to the index offences. Prior to the index offences, Mr. G. (R.) had no criminal record. Subsequent to the index offences, in 2013 and 2016, he was convicted of assault.
Changes were noted to Mr. G. (R.)’s mental health when he started grade 11. He was experiencing anxiety and depression, with a notable decline in academic performance. His mother described him as isolative and withdrawn, and there was a clear deterioration in his hygiene. He was spending money excessively, and hoarding things in the home. His family suspected he was engaged in substance use on a regular basis.
Following the index offences, Mr. G. (R.) was placed at the Syl Apps Youth Centre (“SAYC”) where he was diagnosed with schizophrenia, cannabis abuse disorder, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Mr. G. (R.) was subsequently transferred to Southwest as an adult.
Course After the Index Offences and Under the Board’s Jurisdiction
- Mr. G. (R.)’s psychiatric diagnoses have changed during his years under the Board’s jurisdiction. He is currently deemed capable of making treatment decisions related to his mental illness and capable of managing his personal finances. His current diagnoses as identified in the Hospital Report are:
- bipolar I disorder; and
- substance use disorder.
As noted above, Mr. G. (R.) had no record of criminal convictions prior to the index offences. However, his course under the Board’s jurisdiction and in hospital since the NCR verdict has been challenging. During his earlier years, he engaged in oppositional, manipulative and rule-breaking behaviour at times, and he has engaged in various physically assaultive and defiant behaviours, though the frequency of these has decreased over time. Some of those assaults resulted in criminal convictions, and some caused physical injuries. His overall course, consistent with results of cognitive psychological testing conducted in January of 2021 (the results of which appear again in the section of the Hospital Report for the current reporting period), disclosed difficulties with authority and behavioural control along with limited interpersonal connections.
It is not necessary, for the purpose of these Reasons, to summarize the information regarding Mr. G. (R.)’s course since the index offences, as this is chronicled in the Hospital Report which is in evidence. The following details are provided for the purpose of illuminating the issues at the hearing.
By way of brief overview, Mr. G. (R.)’s course under the Board’s jurisdiction began with his detention at the Syl Apps Youth Centre (SAYC). He was transferred to the Southwest Centre after reaching adulthood. Following several incidents at the Southwest Centre, he was transferred to the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (Waypoint). He returned to the Southwest Centre in August of 2019 and has been under that Hospital’s care ever since.
As noted previously, the index offences were not his only violent incidents. Later in 2013, he assaulted a staff person at the Sprucedale Youth Centre. There were then several reported acts of physical aggression against staff in 2014 while at SAYC, including one occasion when he punched someone and caused the individual to bleed. On April 3, 2016, he punched a peer in the face at the Southwest Centre, resulting in his transfer to a different unit at the Hospital. He was convicted of this offence upon a plea of guilty on May 10, 2016.
In early December of 2016, following several days of dysregulated behaviour after a relapse into methamphetamine use, Mr. G. (R.) had a brief verbal exchange with another patient. Shortly thereafter, he approached the individual from behind and punched him in the head 27 times. The individual had to go to hospital due to open wounds on his face. Mr. G. (R.) was transferred to another unit to keep him away from the other patient.
Subsequently, while at Waypoint, Mr. G. (R.) jumped over a care desk, breaking it, and damaged a computer by drop-kicking it, because he was not being transferred to another unit as he had requested. He was placed in seclusion following the incident.
In the first two weeks of July of 2021 (while again at the Southwest Centre), Mr. G. (R.) developed mood symptoms without an apparent stressor or trigger. He presented as variably elated (with excessive energy, reduced need for sleep, and hyper talkativeness) and dysphoric (with low mood and anxious distress). Then, on July 16, he seriously assaulted a peer without any apparent trigger. He punched the peer in the face multiple times, breaking his nose; he also stabbed him in the flank multiple times with a homemade shank. He reported to staff that he had heard the peer speak about eating human flesh and heard voices, which motivated the assault. Notably, he and the peer had no known previous negative interactions and were often observed to be friendly with each other on and off the unit. Mr. G. (R.) was placed in seclusion, where he continued to demonstrate disorganized behaviour and was observed responding to internal stimuli.
Despite ongoing treatment, he continued to struggle with mood and psychotic symptoms through September of 2021. The treatment team observed a pattern of internal preoccupations and distress and impulsive, aggressive, and self-harming behaviours. Mr. G. (R.) requested and completed a course of ECT treatments. With those treatments and adjustments in his medication, his symptoms improved and eventually attenuated.
Following a period in a rehabilitation unit, Mr. G. (R.) demonstrated appropriate engagement with his treatment team, remained abstinent from substances and showed negative drug screens. In late August of 2022, he began a transition to a Forensic Supportive Housing Program (FSHoP) supported apartment. He was discharged to the care of the Forensic Outreach Team in November of 2022. He appeared more settled in the community and obtained employment. He used his indirectly supervised and approved person privileges appropriately. Through 2023, it was reported that he was managing independent living reasonably well. He obtained his G1 driver’s license, completed college courses, and made some healthy friendships. He had an affinity for animals and adopted a pet cat.
However, by December of 2023, he had started consuming alcohol and cannabis and eventually admitted that by early November, he had stopped all his oral medications. His psychiatrist at the time increased the dosage of his long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication.
Mr. G. (R.) requested an admission to the Hospital on October 23, 2024. He was admitted overnight and discharged to his home. On November 25, 2024, Mr. G. (R.) again requested admission to the Hospital. He was admitted and remained an inpatient at the Hospital until the date of the hearing. His indirectly supervised access to the community was restored on December 15, 2024. Mr. G. (R.) requested admission because he was struggling in his community apartment, and felt he needed stabilization. He was not coping well with stressors in the community including financial difficulties, difficulty with a neighbour, and symptoms of his major mental illness. He said that he wanted to give up his apartment and move in with his mother. He had not reached out to his treatment team before he packed up his apartment, gave items away, found a home for his cat, and quit his job in anticipation of being admitted to the Hospital. He later informed his team that he had consumed three beers and a joint of cannabis on the day prior to his admission.
Mr. G. (R.) reported having suffered the deaths of an elderly grandfather, an aunt, a family friend, and a cousin (the latter by suicide) in 2024, but denied needing assistance from the treatment team during these times, reporting that he already had appropriate supports.
At some point in 2025 (the precise date is not disclosed in the Hospital Report), Mr. G. (R.) returned to living in his FSHoP apartment in St. Thomas. At the time of last year’s hearing on March 3, 2025, Mr. G. (R.), his mother, and the treatment team were discussing the possibility of him living with her in Harrow in Southwestern Ontario; however, she subsequently moved to Guelph.
Evidence for the Current Reporting Year and at the Hearing
The Hospital Report describes Mr. G. (R.)’s course over the period under review as marked by cycles of relative stability punctuated by acute mental health and substance related deteriorations. On September 5, 2025, the Outreach team received notification from FSHoP staff with concerns about his presentation and being overwhelmed by multiple stressors, including a health crisis involving his mother, a friend’s pregnancy after he had engaged in sexual activity with her, and an increase in his consumption of alcohol. He stated that his increased drinking was making him feel very ill, but that he had asked for extra support from his Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) sponsor and had been sober for two weeks. He stated he was not feeling manic or depressed, but rather sad and overwhelmed.
It was reported that for a brief period, Mr. G. (R.) appeared to have regained control and stated that he felt better after talking to staff. He stated that he was safe, in control and had no plans to engage in any risky behaviours. He reported a more stable mood and stated that he was coping well and using his support system (reaching out to his family and AA sponsor). Mr. G. (R.) further stated that he had decided to quit drinking alcohol and using cannabis.
The Hospital Report states that on September 8, 2025, Mr. G. (R.) arrived at the hospital hours before his appointment with his psychiatrist, and displayed tangential, profane, and hyperverbal behaviour. He was informed that he needed to leave the hospital grounds and return at the correct time for his appointment, with which he cooperated. When he returned for his scheduled appointment, he informed the team that he was on a two week alcohol “bender”. Throughout the meeting, his presentation was marked by psychomotor agitation, a labile affect, circumstantial thought processes, misidentification of staff, and an elevated mood. Given his decompensated mental state, breach of his disposition (substance use), and the need for medication optimization (he had stopped taking his lithium in June of 2025), he was admitted for a period of assessment and stabilization. Lithium was restarted and titrated upward as he continued to exhibit an elevated mood, poor sleep, impulsivity, and thought disorganization. By September 30, 2025, he was discharged back to his apartment with reinforced recommendations for sobriety and ongoing AA engagement.
Unfortunately, Mr. G. (R.)’s stability in the community did not continue. The Hospital Report states that on October 13, 2025, he returned to the Hospital late at night requesting admission after an emotionally overwhelming day marked by concern for a hospitalized friend, financial strain, and difficulties with a neighbour. He acknowledged drinking several beers and ruminating anxiously about the potential consequences of relapses, including losing his apartment and cat. He described the onset of a “depression spell,” yet proactively contacted his AA sponsor, arranged care for his cat, and walked himself to the hospital. He was readmitted.
Subsequently, it was determined that independent FSHoP housing was no longer suitable for Mr. G. (R.) after his multiple readmissions, and discussions shifted toward alternatives such as group homes or returning to live with family, though the latter was not feasible at the time. Mr. G. (R.) showed willingness to attend residential treatment for alcohol use and expressed motivation for long‑term change.
Then, shortly after his admission to the Hospital, Mr. G. (R.) expressed a desire to stop all medications to “test” whether he truly had a mental illness. Given his history of significant instability and violence in such scenarios, he was transferred to a treatment unit and placed under Dr. Mokhber’s care.
Following the discontinuation of lithium in November of 2025, Mr. G. (R.) presented with episodes of rapid and disorganized thought processes. He appeared elated and highly talkative, demonstrated marked distractibility, and frequently approached multiple staff members to have his needs addressed. On December 17, 2025, Mr. G. (R.) expressed a desire to resume his lithium, stating that he wished to “get back with his life,” as he reported feeling stagnated. He further indicated that he hoped to reintegrate into the community and pursue his education. Consequently, lithium was restarted and was titrated up to a dose of 1200mg. per day.
There were two incidents of particular note in January of 2026. The first occurred on January 6, 2026, when Mr. G. (R.) requested instant coffee and was declined as a result of a ward rule. He then became agitated and threw the cup of coffee he had in his hand towards a nurse and started punching the wall of his room with his right fist. He sustained bruises on his knuckles and damaged the wall. Mr. G. (R.) walked into seclusion on his own and remained there overnight.
The second incident occurred on January 23, 2026. Mr. G. (R.) was scheduled to meet with a covering psychiatrist for evaluation following a recent increase in his lithium dosage. Before the interview began, he expressed an intention to harm himself or others, specifying that the potential target would be a staff member. He reported that his mood was “very bad” and that he was experiencing auditory hallucinations, though he was unable to discern what the voices were saying. He described feeling extremely hopeless related to the unit’s restrictions and his inability to have his needs met in the manner that he wished. He was unable to identify or discuss alternative strategies for resolving conflict. When asked about potential methods of self-harm or violence, Mr. G. (R.) stated that he had not formed a specific plan but might smash an inanimate object or strike someone on the head before subsequently harming himself. He noted that while his energy level was low and he did not feel capable of acting on these urges at that moment, he had “been stewing on the thoughts for a while” and would eventually act on them so that he could be transferred off the unit.
Dr. Isoboye, who said that he has been seeing Mr. G. (R.) weekly since December of 2025, gave evidence to supplement and update the Hospital Report. Referring to the medication list in the Report, he clarified that Mr. G. (R.) was not currently (as of the hearing date) taking either lithium or paliperidone. He experienced a significant resurgence of symptoms, including pressured speech, thought blocking, and disorganization that included poor coordination. In addition, his overall personality structure had gotten in the way of his ability to follow structure, and this had impacted his privilege level. Mr. G. (R.) had not consumed substances during his recent admission, though Dr. Isoboye noted that Mr. G. (R.) has been under extensive observation.
Dr. Isoboye opined that Mr. G. (R.)’s current refusal of medications is most likely the result of his maladaptive personality in the context of fluctuating insight in relation to his medication treatment. Whatever motivation he has for treatment is externally driven. It is evident that the medications are currently not optimized. The doctor stated that in terms of a treatment plan, the team is recommending psychoeducation, a behavioural specialist, and the engagement of a clinical psychologist, although Mr. G. (R.) currently refuses the latter.
Dr. Isoboye reviewed Mr. G. (R.)’s risk factors, insight across domains, the re-offence scenario and the HCR-20 v. 3 risk assessment, all of which are described in the Hospital Report, and expressed his agreement with those descriptions. The specific risk factor indicated by Mr. G. (R.)’s coping with stress was being addressed, as of the time of the hearing, by a combination of psychotherapy, the behavioural specialist, and Mr. G. (R.)’s contact with staff.
Dr. Isoboye adopted, as still applicable, the following paragraph (para. 47) of last year’s Reasons for Decision and Disposition:
“As noted in last year’s Reasons for Disposition, Mr. G. (R.) continues to require a great deal of support in the community to manage his risk to the safety of the public. For this reason, it is important for the Hospital to have the ability to approve his accommodation to ensure his medication compliance and support him in remaining abstinent from substances. Furthermore, given the rapidity with which Mr. G. (R.) can deteriorate and become violent, it is necessary for the Hospital to have the ability to readmit him at the first sign of decompensation. In these circumstances reliance on the MHA would increase Mr. G. (R.)’s risk to safety of the public.”
Dr. Isoboye confirmed that Mr. G. (R.) continues to be vulnerable to increased substance use in the absence of supervision, that it is a risk factor that had a role in the commission of the index offences, and that Mr. G. (R.) has fluctuating insight into the risk presented by his substance use. Asked whether Mr. G. (R.) is ready to attend a residential substance use treatment program such as Westover (in which he has in the past expressed interest), the doctor replied that Mr. G. (R.) is currently not stable enough for such a placement, and in any event would have to achieve Level 4 privileges (he was at Level 0 at the time of the hearing). Level 4 privileges provide indirectly supervised access to the Hospital and grounds, for half an hour, three times per day. Level 0 denotes unlimited off-unit staff escorted privileges within the Hospital.
Dr. Isoboye expressed the opinion that Mr. G. (R.) could possibly be ready for community living again in the coming year. He would, however, require a more supported living environment than he had at his previous residence, which in any event is no longer available. He confirmed the position that the Hospital would need to approve Mr. G. (R.)’s community accommodation.
With respect to the Hospital’s recommendation that the privilege of travel passes to British Columbia or Prince Edward Island be removed, Dr. Isoboye confirmed that Mr. G. (R.) had requested this removal, as he has no one to visit in those provinces.
Dr. Isoboye also confirmed his information that Mr. G. (R.)’s mother lives in Guelph and that there is other family in Hamilton. In response to a question from Mr. Glover, the doctor confirmed that the mother’s support for Mr. G. (R.) is not limited by the trauma that she suffered from the index offences. He also confirmed that both Mr. G. (R.)’s mother and his friend, G. (R.) Butts, are Approved Persons. His mother visits when she can, though the distance is an impediment to frequent visits. The most recent visit was on February 14, 2026. Later in the hearing, during submissions, Mr. Glover pointed out that the distance between the mother and the Hamilton hospital is approximately 55 kilometres, while the distance to the Southwest Centre is approximately 125 kilometres.
In response to a panel member’s questions, Dr. Isoboye confirmed that Mr. G. (R.) expresses remorse concerning the index offences, especially in relation to his mother. His insight in other areas continues to fluctuate.
Regarding the proposal for a transfer of Mr. G. (R.) to Hamilton, Dr. Isoboye confirmed that giving him a fresh start may be helpful. A panel member followed up by asking about the incident in January 23, 2026 and why Mr. G. (R.) was seeking to be transferred to another unit at that time. Dr. Isoboye stated that Mr. G. (R.)’s maladaptive traits entered into this, in that he has difficulty following rules and thought that the rules might be different on another unit.
Noting Mr. G. (R.)’s acceptance of hospital readmission, a panel member asked whether Mr. G. (R.) can identify his stressors and symptoms. The doctor replied in the affirmative and stated that in terms of his symptoms, Mr. G. (R.) can identify psychotic symptoms, elevation of his mood, and racing thoughts.
Noting the discontinuation of his medication by Mr. G. (R.), who is capable to consent to his psychiatric treatment, Dr. Isoboye confirmed that the treatment team is giving some consideration to re-assessing this capacity.
Dr. Isoboye agreed, in response to questions about the list of Mr. G. (R.)’s protective factors in the previous year’s risk assessment (p. 200 of the Hospital Report), that he does possess certain internal strengths and positive social supports that can assist him “if he can get through this bad patch”.
Dr. Isoboye was unable to answer questions from the panel about the nature of the wait list for a transfer to SJHH. When asked whether he was concerned that during a wait for such a transfer, Mr. G. (R.) might not participate in any programming, Dr. Isoboye alluded to the possibility of minimizing the wait through an exchange of patients between the two hospitals.
No further evidence was led following the questioning of Dr. Isoboye.
Analysis and Conclusions
The panel is satisfied that the evidence compels the conclusion that Mr. G. (R.) represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. Again, this matter was undisputed at the hearing. Mr. G. (R.) suffers from a major mental illness and a substance use disorder. Both these features of his mental condition are related to his significant history of assaultive behaviour, including the index offences and thereafter, as substance use and/or medication compliance and changes have demonstrated themselves to be connected to that behaviour.
Mr. G. (R.) continues to struggle. During the reporting period under review, he experienced numerous mood fluctuations and decompensations resulting in readmission to hospital. He also acknowledged auditory and visual hallucinations that intensified when his mood was elevated and displayed maladaptive personality traits that included avoidance, impulsivity, lack of follow-through, anxiety, and being passive-aggressive. He has demonstrated persistent affective, behavioural, and cognitive instability. Through his history since the NCR verdict, Mr. G. (R.) has had difficulty adhering to unit rules, which in the last reporting period culminated with violent conduct or ideation that prompted two seclusion episodes. He has expressed intent to harm himself or someone else (specifically staff) so that he would be transferred off his unit. In the past, he has engaged in assaultive conduct to achieve this goal.
The panel agrees with and adopts the Overall Clinical Assessment of Risk expressed at pp. 222-223 of the Hospital Report. That assessment is borne out by the evidence. The panel agrees that the risk scenario in the Hospital Report is entirely realistic and far from speculative. It states:
“Without the structure, oversight, and support provided through forensic supervision, Mr. G. (R.) would be highly likely to disengage from treatment and discontinue his medications. This would predictably lead to decompensation characterized by emotional instability, worsening psychotic symptoms, and significantly reduced capacity to manage everyday stressors. In such a state, he would be prone to reverting to maladaptive coping strategies, most notably substance use, consistent with his historical pattern, thereby increasing his risk of reoffending and future violence. Given his impaired judgment during episodes of mania or psychosis, he might misinterpret benign individuals or situations as threatening, potentially leading to violent behaviour similar to that observed in the index offence.”
Accordingly, the panel is satisfied that the evidence compels the conclusion that absent forensic system oversight, Mr. G. (R.) is likely to engage in criminal conduct that would result in serious physical or psychological harm to the general public.
Turning to the matter of disposition, the panel is satisfied that at this time, Mr. G. (R.)’s risk can only be safely managed under the terms of a Detention Order. Again, it was undisputed among all parties at the hearing that this is the necessary and appropriate Disposition. Notably, Mr. G. (R.) lost his independent apartment during this past reporting period and therefore has no stable housing. It is essential that the Hospital approve his housing in the community.
It is clear that the provision regarding seven-day accompanied out-of-province travel passes is redundant and therefore unnecessary at this time. It is removed from Mr. G. (R.)’s Disposition.
The panel adopted the recommendation of the Hospital and of Mr. G. (R.), not opposed by the Attorney General, that as part of his Disposition, Mr. G. (R.) should be transferred to the Forensic Program at St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton. The panel notes that no response to counsel’s Rule 13 Notice was received from that hospital. That is not, however, a barrier to the Board’s ability to order such a transfer.
In this case, such a transfer would accomplish at least two purposes, in the panel’s opinion, with the goal of fostering Mr. G. (R.)’s community reintegration and addressing his other needs. First, it would bring him geographically much closer to his mother, who now lives in Guelph and continues to be his major source of social support. He reportedly has other family in the Hamilton area as well. Secondly, it provides Mr. G. (R.) with the opportunity to make something of a fresh start with a new treatment team that can become engaged at the appropriate time in facilitating his transition to appropriate housing, a process that can consider all available options for bringing Mr. G. (R.) closer to his mother and potentially assess the appropriateness of living with her, should both he and his mother desire this.
The value of a fresh start in relation to Mr. G. (R.)’s treatment, risk management, and reintegration may be somewhat underscored by the history of this case. The panel would emphasize that Mr. G. (R.) has been subject to the Board’s jurisdiction since late 2013, well in excess of 12 years. Mr. G. (R.) has spent his late teen years and all of his 20s under the supervision of the forensic system, with most of that time having been spent under the care of various treatment teams at the Southwest Centre. Mr. G. (R.) is a young man with most of his life ahead of him. It is hoped that a new start with a new treatment team will build upon the work of the Southwest Centre and launch Mr. G. (R.) on a positive trajectory that includes the opportunity for even closer support from his mother and others.
In approaching this matter, the panel has considered the evidence through the lens of the factors in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
DATED this 20^th^ day of April 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Eric Siebenmorgen
Legal Member
____________________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board