Re: G. (S.), 2026 CanLII 42160

Re: G. (S.)

ORB File No: 4920

Hearing held on: April 9, 2026

Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby, Ontario

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

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Weinstein Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. M. Kalia Hon. A. Sosna Mr. J. Cyr

Parties Appearing: Accused: G. (S.) Counsel: Ms. J. Boissonneault

The Person in charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald

Pursuant to section 110(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, no person shall publish the name of the accused, or any other information, if such publication would identify the accused as a person who was dealt with as a young person under the Youth Criminal Justice Act or the former Young Offenders Act.

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated: May 5, 2026)

Introduction:

1. On October 24, 2007 G. (S.) was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of fail to comply with undertakings (x8), threatening to cause bodily harm (x4), assault with a weapon (x5), and assault (x4), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).

2. Ms. G. (S.) is currently subject to the terms and conditions of a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“ORB”) dated April 30, 2025. Under her current Disposition, Ms. G. (S.) is detained at the Dual Diagnosis Service or the Forensic Service at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, 700 Gordon Street, Whitby, Ontario (“Ontario Shores”), subject to a number of terms, conditions and privileges.

3. On April 9, 2026 a panel of the ORB convened an in-person hearing at Ontario Shores. The issue at this hearing is whether G. (S.) is a significant threat to public safety, as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code. If so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances must be determined, bearing in mind the factors enunciated in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

4. Ms. G. (S.) was present at the hearing and was represented by counsel Ms. J. Boissonneault.

5. Dr. C. Harrigan, Ms. G. (S.)’s outpatient psychiatrist, testified at the hearing. Introduced into evidence was Exhibit 1, the Hospital Report dated March 12, 2026. Dr. Harrigan adopted the contents of the Hospital Report.

Position of the Parties:

6. At the commencement of the hearing, the parties were asked for their initial without prejudice positions.

7. Counsel for the Hospital submitted that Ms. G. (S.) is a significant threat to the safety of the public. Accordingly, the Hospital recommended a continuation of the present Detention Order.

8. Counsel for the Attorney General supported the Hospital’s position and sought a continuation of the present Detention Order.

9. Counsel for G. (S.) did not oppose the positions of the Hospital and Attorney General seeking a continuation of the present Detention Order.

10. In essence, counsel jointly recommended a continuation of the terms and conditions provided in the current Detention Order.

11. For the reasons set out below the Board concluded that Ms. G. (S.) continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board ordered the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the present Detention Order.

Current Diagnoses:

1. Intellectual Disability, Moderate

Tourette’s Disorder

ADHD

Index Offences:

13. The details surrounding the index offences are set out in the 2025 Reasons for Disposition.

“Assault #1

On March 23, 2007, at approximately 3:20 p.m., police were dispatched to assist a female on Queen Street in Tottenham. PC Shantz, PC Conner, and PC Smith attended Queen Street, Tottenham, Town of New Tecumseth, County of Simcoe, and spoke to the complainant, who advised that she was worried about the female out walking around in the Tottenham area, possibly entering a vehicle.

Further investigation revealed that the female in question was Ms. G. (S.), with an address of 6718 Concession 2, New Tecumseth, also known as the Cedar Heights Group Home. Police interviewed D. (A.), who is a resident support worker at the group home. During the interview, Ms. D. (A.) indicated that Ms. G. (S.) was a resident there and had been for approximately three years. Ms. G. (S.) took numerous medications to keep her personality in order. When she was off her medication, she could become violent.

Ms. D. (A.) stated that on the morning of the March 23, 2007, Ms. G. (S.) was in good spirits when she woke up. She went to school, and she was having some difficulties with the teacher. She started swearing at the teacher, and she raised her fist at the teacher as if she was going to hit her. She was asked to leave the classroom and take a time out, which she did. After that, she continued to swear and be inappropriate. Snack time came around, which was at approximately 10:30 a.m. When she was not allowed to get a snack out of the fridge, she became aggressive with Ms. D. (A.). Ms. G. (S.) struck Ms. D. (A.) with an open right hand in the arm area. Ms. G. (S.) left the kitchen area and attempted to leave the group home. Ms. D. (A.) blocked the door. At that time, Ms. G. (S.) struck Ms. D. (A.) twice cheek.

Ms. D. (A.) indicated that this behaviour was not out of the ordinary, and police records showed attempts to have Ms. G. (S.) formed under the Mental Health Act in the past proved unsuccessful.

At 4:00 p.m., PC Shantz and PC Conner arrested Ms. G. (S.) for assault and returned her to the Beeton Detachment of Nottawasaga OPP for processing.

Fail to Comply with Undertaking #1

On May 13, 2007, at approximately 18:18 hrs, Ms. G. (S.) left Cedar Heights Group Home without telling the staff members she was leaving. Ms. G. (S.) did not tell the staff members of the home where she was going, thereby breaking the rules of the Group Home. She was released on an undertaking dated April 12, 2007 out of the Provincial Court in Barrie, Ontario. One of her conditions was to follow the rules of the home and staff direction at all charged with failing to comply with her undertaking contrary to the Criminal Code Section 145(3).

Fail to Comply Undertaking #2

On May 22, 2007, at approximately 1730 hrs, Ms. G. (S.) left Cedar Heights Group Home without telling the staff members she was leaving. Ms. G. (S.) did not tell the staff members of the home where she was going, thereby breaking the rules of the Group Home. She was released on an undertaking dated April 12, 2007 out of the Provincial Court in Barrie, Ontario. One of her conditions was to follow the rules of the home and staff direction at all times. As a result of her leaving the home without consent of the staff members, Ms. G. (S.) was charged with failing to comply with her undertaking contrary to the Criminal Code Section 145(3).

On May 22, 2007, Police responded to a missing persons complaint at the Cedar Heights Residential home, located at 13150 Kennedy Road North in the Town of Stouffville. Upon arrival, police were informed by residential staff, M. (S), that two residents, Mr. C. (M) and Ms. G. (S.) had left the home without permission.

Police were further informed that both Mr. C. (M) and Ms. G. (S.) had missed their medication. As well, Ms. M. (S) stated that staff member Mr. Matt Granger had followed both residents to 13992 Kennedy Road North, but lost sight of them.

Police searched several areas where both residents were known to frequent while AWOL. Search results were negative.

At 22:15 police received a phone call from Mr. Granger who had located the missing residents at the corner of Wellington Street and Leslie Street, in the Town of Aurora. Police attended and transported the residents back to 13150 Kennedy Road North. Subsequent 2007.

Consequently, Ms. G. (S.) was then taken into custody and transported to 5 District, in the Town of Markham, where she was booked and lodged into cells.

Ms. G. (S.) was to be held for a show cause hearing on May 23, 2007.

On May 8, 2007, at approximately 0600 hrs, the accused, Ms. G. (S.), left Cedar Heights Group Home without telling the staff members she was leaving. Ms. G. (S.) did not tell She was released on an undertaking dated April 12, 2007 out of the Provincial Court in Barrie, Ontario. One of her conditions was to follow the rules of the home and staff direction at all times. As a result of her leaving the home without consent of the staff members, Ms. G. (S.) was charged with failing to comply with her undertaking contrary to the Criminal Code Section 145(3).

On June 1, 2007, at approximately 22:45 hrs., the victim, Ms. A-A. (O.) arrived at her place of employment, the Christian Horizon Group Home located at 172 Sunset Blvd., in Stouffville, where she was employed as a Support Worker.

The accused, Ms. G. (S.), a resident of the home, upon getting out of the shower, saw the victim and started yelling at her. Ms. G. (S.) uttered comments such as, “I don’t want any black person near me”, “Nigger”, “I’m going to kill you”, “I know where the sharp knives are”. Ms. G. (S.) then tried to follow the daytime staff out of the apartment.

The victim at this point was in fear for her safety, police were contacted, and attended the scene.

When police arrived on scene, Ms. G. (S.) was sitting on the front steps outside of the apartment with the victim on scene, waiting for police.

The victim was clearly shaken up by the threats she had received. After speaking with the victim, Ms. G. (S.) was arrested for uttering death threats. Ms. G. (S.) was given rights to counsel for a young person and cautioned.

Ms. G. (S.) was transported to 5 District Headquarters. The victim also attended 5 District for a written statement.

Ms. G. (S.) was paraded and searched by S/Sgt. Randle and placed in cell 5D1.

Police learned of conditions Ms. G. (S.) was on, one being to obey the house rules at her residence.

Ms. G. (S.) was charged with uttering death threats and fail to comply. She was to be held at 5 District where she would await a Show Cause hearing on June 2, 2007 held at 50 Eagle Street, Newmarket, at 0900 hrs.

Utter Threats to Cause Bodily Harm #1

Ms. G. (S.), on June 1, 2007 at approximately 2310 hrs at 172 Sunset Blvd., in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, did in person knowingly utter a threat to the victim A-A. (O.) to cause death to the victim to wit: Ms. G. (S.) told the victim that she was going to kill her, contrary to section 264.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Fail to Comply with Undertaking #3

Ms. G. (S.), on June 1, 2007, at approximately 2310 hrs at 172 Sunset Blvd., in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, and being detained by the order of a Justice, made on April 12, 2007, at the City of Barrie and being bound to comply with the direction of the said Justice, did fail without legal excuse to comply with the conditions of obeying the house rules to wit: by yelling and screaming, and threatening death to her guardian (victim), contrary to section 145(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Assault with a Weapon #1

Ms. G. (S.) was a ward of York CAS and she was under the care of Christian Horizons Toronto 32, a troubled youth care facility. The victim, Ms. H. (J.) was a social worker for this company.

On an occasion between June 18, 2007 and June 23, 2007, Ms. G. (S.) was not following the house rules being set out by Ms. H. (J.) in the facility located at 172 Sunset Blvd., in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville. Ms. G. (S.) became extremely aggressive and broke a plate. She then took a shard from the broken plate, held it to Ms. H. (J.), and stated that she was going to be assaulted. Ms. H. (J.) felt threatened by this, and believed Ms. G. (S.) was going to follow through, and Ms. G. (S.) was charged with Assault with a Weapon.

Assault with a Weapon #2, Utter Threats to Cause Bodily Harm #2 and #3, Assault with a Weapon #3,

Ms. G. (S.) was a ward of York CAS and was under the care of Christian Horizons Toronto 32, a troubled youth care facility. The victim, Ms. F. (E.), was a social worker for this company.

On June 27, 2007, Ms. G. (S.) was escorted by Ms. F. (E.) to the skate park located on Bullock Drive at McCowan Road, in the Town of Markham, in regards to possible EDP female.

Police met with the two known victims Ms. H. (J.) and Ms. F. (E.) in the parking lot of the skate park. They both were social workers for Christian Horizons Toronto 32. They were in charge of Ms. G. (S.). Ms. G. (S.) was required to have supervision 24/7. Ms. G. (S.) came with a long history of problems. It was suspected she suffered from Bipolar and Schizophrenia, but she was never diagnosed.

The workers took Ms. G. (S.) to the skate park that day and after a short time, Ms. G. (S.) became involved in a confrontation with the youths using the skate park. Ms. G. (S.) began to swear and threaten the youths. The workers came to take her away, and managed to get her in the car, but Ms. G. (S.) would not allow them to drive away.

When police arrived, Ms. G. (S.) was yelling and screaming from the middle seat of the open mini-van door. Many attempts were made to get her to go home calmly, but they were all unsuccessful.

Ms. G. (S.) pushed Ms. F. (E.). Ms. G. (S.) then threatened to kill both Ms. F. (E.) and Ms. H. (J.). Ms. G. (S.) then waved a jug of radiator fluid and said she was going to harm Ms. F. (E.) and Ms. H. (J.) with it.

Ms. G. (S.) was not rational. She said she had the power to do black magic and put a curse on people. She said that she cut herself. It appeared that she was suffering from a sort of mental illness. She was never diagnosed with anything.

It was obvious that day that she would do harm to herself and/or others because of her mental issues. At 2050 hours, Ms. G. (S.) was apprehended under the Mental Health Act, and she was transported to MSH.

On June 28, 2007, at 0030 hrs, after Ms. G. (S.) was examined by the crisis worker, Ms. Estelle decided that Ms. G. (S.) would not be formed. They all indicated that it was a behavioural issue, and not a mental issue. Police felt that they were wrong in this matter and that Police then made the decision to go ahead and lay the appropriate charges. Ms. G. (S.) was transported to 5DHQ, where she would be held for a show cause bail hearing for June 28, 2007, 50 Eagle Street courthouse.

Ms. G. (S.) refused to speak to a lawyer. CAS was notified of the charges and Mike would go to the courthouse in the morning to assist.

Assault with a Weapon #4, #5 and #6; Breach of Undertaking #3 and #4

On Thursday July 26, 2007, Ms. G. (S.) assaulted three staff workers at her group home located at 172 Sunset Blvd. in the town of Whitchurch-Stouffville.

Ms. G. (S.) was at Christian Horizons Group Home since the beginning of May 2007. At the time, she was on probation and she had multiple pending charges before the courts. Ms. G. (S.) suffered from a multitude of mental illnesses, including ADD, PDD, ODD, as well as multiple personality disorders. She was also known to be violent and unpredictable when upset.

On the above-mentioned date, Ms. G. (S.) had been upset for the better part of the day and slammed the door. Ms. G. (S.) began kicking her closed bedroom door, as her temper level increased.

Staff workers were forced to enter Ms. G. (S.)’s room in order to remove any breakable objects. At this point, Ms. G. (S.) attacked the staff workers verbally and physically. Ms. G. (S.) cursed, screamed and even spit at the staff workers.

Ms. G. (S.) threw a box of Alpo Dog Food at one of the staff workers, striking her and sprayed liquid air freshener in the face of another. She was restrained by the staff workers to avoid further escalation of the situation. Upon releasing Ms. G. (S.), she punched a third staff worker in the shoulder.

Ms. G. (S.) was restrained a second time and forced back into her room. She demanded to leave, but she was denied exit by the staff workers. Ms. G. (S.) returned to her room and exited the residence through a window. Her whereabouts was unknown.

Ms. G. (S.) was described as a white female, 5’4 110 lbs with a fair complexion and thin build. She had brown eyes, black hair, with blue highlights and pierced ears. She was wearing blue jeans, a black tank top, black shoes (with pink) and carrying a black purse.

Ms. G. (S.) had very limited access to money and no access to vehicles. Ms. G. (S.) was arrested for assault (x3) and breach of probation. Further police investigation was required.

On the July 31, 2007, at 2245 hrs, police were called to 2-172 Sunset Blvd., in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, in regards to a missing person.

The complainant was the staff at the residence of the missing person as the missing person lived in a group home. The complainant stated that Ms. G. (S.) was last seen approximately 15 minutes prior.

As police were on route to the residence another unit advised that they had the female and for a unit to bring staff by to talk to her.

Police arrived at the residence and spoke to staff and the project manager. There was no need to complete a search urgency chat. The project manager advised that she just wanted the missing/found youth brought back to the residence.

Police went to the skate park, where the youth was located with staff. The youth was physically fine. No injuries. She did not want to go to the hospital. She agreed to come home.

The youth was searched and put in a cruiser and transported to the residence. The youth was diagnosed with ADHD and she could be uncontrollable when she was off her medication.

At the house, Ms. G. (S.) was a lot calmer and said that she would not leave and that she would not cause any more problems.

No zone alert was needed as Ms. G. (S.) was located within minutes of her being reported missing.

Utter Threats to Cause Bodily Harm #3

On October 13, 2007, the youth and victim were at a group home residence located in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville. The victim was in the process of preparing the medication for the victim at this time.

Fail to Comply Undertaking #5

On July 31, 2007, the youth was placed on a recognizance at the Newmarket Court. One condition of that recognizance was to be in the company of the surety at all times which is the Children’s Aid Society or designate, staff from the group home “Christian Horizon”. On October 13, 2007, the youth refused to stay within the group home, and left he premise without staff from Christian Horizons, thereby breaching the said condition of her recognizance.

On Saturday, October 13, 2007, the youth was returning to her residence, located at 172 Sunset Blvd., in the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, with the victim (M. (P.)). As per the conditions of her release, the youth has a constant supervised curfew in effect, unless in the direct company of a staff member from Christian Horizons or Children’s Aid.

On the above-mentioned date, the youth became very agitated after being told by the victim not to touch a wild bunny for the possibility of rabies. The youth began to display poor behaviour by yelling, swearing, and hurling insults at the victim.

Upon returning to the residence, the youth threatened to kill the victim multiple times and continued to rant and rave wildly. The youth gathered a few belongings and proceeded to run out of the residence without her supervisors. The victim had no idea where the youth had disappeared to and notified police.

Upon arriving, officers found the youth in the building beside her residence, speaking with a family she spends time with. The youth as very confrontational with officers and only returned to her residence under the supervision of one of the neighbours. While within her residence, the youth continued to escalate her aggressive behaviour and unleashed a barrage of insults and curses at the victim as well as the officers.

The youth was placed under arrest for uttering threats and breach of her recognizance. The youth was read her rights to counsel, and a caution. The youth was then transported to 5DHQ where she was booked by Staff Sgt. Randle and searched by a female officer.

The youth spoke to duty counsel and she will remain at the station until appearing at a show cause hearing the following morning.

Background and Recent Procedural History:

14. In 2007 G. (S.), age 17, was charged with the above index offences under the Youth Justice Criminal Act. On October 24, 2007 she was found NCR by reason of a mental disorder. Pursuant to a Disposition of the ORB dated January 7, 2009, Ms. G. (S.) was transferred to Ontario Shores.

15. Ms. G. (S.) is presently 36 years old. She is single and has no dependants. She has no previous criminal record. She has no history of employment.

16. Ms. G. (S.) is in regular contact and communication with her grandmother and other family members including her mother and brother. She has telephone and personal visits with them. Her grandmother is her primary support, and currently her decision-maker for psychiatric treatment.

17. Ms. G. (S.) is financially supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) and receives additional support through Passport Funding via Developmental Services Ontario. She is incapable of managing her finances, with funds being managed by the Office of the Public Trustee. Ms. G. (S.) receives an allowance of $30.00 per week dispersed in small amounts to support her ability to purchase preferred items.

18. Ms. G. (S.) last appeared before the ORB on April 24, 2025. Two findings were made: (1) that Ms. G. (S.) posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, and the necessary and appropriate Disposition was a continuation of the present Detention Order, having regard to the circumstances set out in S. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, and (2) that Ms. G. (S.) had been readmitted to Ontario Shores on February 17, 2025, constituting a restriction of liberty, pursuant to s. 672.81(1) and s. 672.81 (2.1) of the Criminal Code. Hence the initial and ongoing restriction of liberty (ROL) was found to be necessary and appropriate, as set out in the May 27, 2025 Reasons for Disposition detailed below.

19. The findings were based on the following evidence: Ms. G. (S.) was readmitted to the Hospital, after the Vitra Group Home (where Ms. G. (S.) was housed) advised the Forensic Outpatient Service (FOS) that in the months of January and February 2025, Ms. G. (S.) activated the fire alarm in her living quarters on multiple occasions. This placed the other residents at risk since all locked doors in the group home were immediately deactivated after the fire alarm was set off. The false fire alarms resulted in the unnecessary and costly emergency attendance at the group home by police and fire department personnel. As a result of Ms. G. (S.) activating four false fire alarms, the group home was fined $500.00 for each activation.

20. In order to prevent Ms. G. (S.) from activating the fire alarm in her living quarters, staffing support was increased (2:1), whereby a staff member sat directly by the fire alarm to prevent her from engaging it. However, once the additional staff support was terminated due to the financial burden, a further false fire alarm was activated by Ms. G. (S.). The Vita Group Home concluded they could no longer safely staff Ms. G. (S.) to help prevent her from engaging in this behaviour, and Ms. G. (S.) was admitted to the general forensic unit (FCRU) on February 17, 2025.

21. Upon readmission, Ms. G. (S.) continued to be disruptive. She was intermittently verbally abusive to staff, agitated female patients, threatened to sleep with their boyfriends, and offered to pay one female patient to assault another female patient.

22. Ms. G. (S.)’s behaviours continued to the date of the April 24, 2025 hearing. Dr. Bhullar, Ms. G. (S.)’s psychiatrist, testified about a further incident that occurred on April 15, 2025. At that time Ms. G. (S.) was inappropriately dressed in the unit and exposed herself. The staff encouraged her to wear appropriate undergarments. Ms. G. (S.) became verbally and physically aggressive, hitting, spitting, and pulling papers off the walls. She was not responsive to verbal de-escalation and would not accept much-needed medication. She was put into seclusion and administered chemical restraints.

23. Dr. Bhullar testified there were no other community placements to which Ms. G. (S.) could be discharged, and therefore she was transferred to the general forensic unit (FCRU) on February 17, 2025.

Present Circumstances:

24. Dr. Harrigan, Ms. G. (S.)’s present psychiatrist, testified that while she was on FCRU, attempts were made to place Ms. G. (S.) on a highly structured behavioural therapy plan. However, there were numerous problematic behaviours despite use of the plan. At pg. 68 the Hospital Report summarizes that:

“Between November 14, 2025 and February 27, 2026, following Ms. G. (S.)’s transfer from DDS and whilst on FARU, a total of 150 behavioural incidents were documented through ABC data collection. Many incidents involved verbal outbursts (145). Additional interfering behaviours recorded included environmental aggression (15), spitting (10), physical aggression (10) and one incident of inappropriate touch (touching staff members’ buttocks/vaginal area). Of the recorded incidents, 32 required staff to redirect the patient to her room, and 22 incidents resulted in seclusion”.

25. The particulars in the above summary include the following at pgs. 64-69 of the Hospital Report:

“Ms. G. (S.) attempted to engage male peers in sexual activity and indicated that she wished to become pregnant. Ms. G. (S.) was intermittently compliant with her oral contraceptive medication, rendering it unreliable. At times Ms. G. (S.) would walk away on staff when out on passes. On multiple occasions she was threatening and abusive to staff. She also engaged in environmental aggression, and could become physically assaultive towards staff and security guards when they had to bring her back to the unit or place her into seclusion. In terms of Ms. G. (S.)’s medication management…her dose of Loxapine was increased from 25 mg twice a day to 25 mg four times a day in an attempt to reduce Ms. G. (S.)’s level of agitation and aggression. This was met with limited success….

On August 13, 2025, Ms. G. (S.) was transferred form FCRU to the DDS. The admission to DDS was limited to allow respite for the Forensic staff. While on DDS…her behaviours were described as characteristic of her intellectual disability and would not be managed with changes to her medication”.

Mental Status Examination:

26. “Ms. G. (S.) often presents [as] wearing revealing clothing and heavy makeup. Her behaviour fluctuates severely and frequently, from being calm and engaged to being verbally aggressive, using racial slurs, engaging in environmental and physical aggression towards patients, staff, and security guards. Her mood and affect are similarly labile. Her thought process is concrete. There is no evidence of psychotic symptoms. Her insight into her inappropriate and aggressive behaviour, and effect that it has on others, is chronically poor”.

Clinical Assessment of Risk:

27. At pg. 69 the Hospital Report in part sets out the following areas of concern:

Ms. G. (S.) does not have a diagnosis of a primary major mental illness, with the majority of her unpredictable disruptive and aggressive conduct being behavioural in nature and related to her intellectual disability;

She has a long history of behavioural dysregulation which has resulted in verbal, physical, and environmental aggression;

She has clearly stated her desire and intention to become pregnant. She frequently has to be reminded to dress in an appropriate fashion when outside her bedroom.

She will also engage in a sexually provocative manner when interacting with male co-patients, and will actively solicit sexual activity from male peers;

Ms. G. (S.) has a history of intermittent compliance with medication;

Her insight into her behavioural and affective stability, and the negative impact that it has on those around her, remains chronically poor.”

28. Last year’s Reasons for Disposition (May 27, 2025) held at para. 26; “Ms. G. (S.)’s risk for violent reoffending was assessed in the ‘low moderate range’ in the context of the current Disposition [Detention Order], and the high degree of structure provided within the framework”

29. In the past year, the Hospital Report notes that Ms. G. (S.) has been more settled in that she has remained largely compliant with her medications, and has benefitted from a highly consistent and structured behavioural plan that has somewhat mitigated the frequency and severity of her behavioural outbursts.

Analysis and Findings:

30. Ms. G. (S.) has had longstanding challenges, exhibiting behavioural dysregulation, property damage, and verbal and physical aggression. She has been non-compliant with her medications, thereby exacerbating her mental status. Her insight and judgement are described in the Hospital Report as being “chronically poor”.

31. Further, the Hospital Report notes: “At this time it remains challenging to manage [Ms. G. (S.)’s] behaviour on a Secure Forensic Unit even with a comprehensive behavioural plan in place. She benefits from significant structure and clearly communicated expectations and consequences to manage her aggression to others.”

32. As previously reviewed, given Ms. G. (S.)’s needs and challenges, VITA housing does not have the financial, infrastructural, and staffing resources to safely manage Ms. G. (S.) in the community. Higher level conversations are being held between the forensic management at Ontario Shores and the Ministry of Health in order to explore other high support community placements to accommodate Ms. G. (S.). The panel strongly encourages that those conversations provide a plan in the near future that addresses Ms. G. (S.)’s needs while protecting the safety of the public.

33. The panel agrees with the Hospital’s recommendation that in the interim, Ms. G. (S.) continue to be detained within the Forensic Program at Ontario Shores or the Dual Diagnosis Service (DDS) for periods of stabilization.

34. On all the evidence, the panel agrees with the joint submission of counsel and the unanimous opinion of the clinical team, that Ms. G. (S.) remains a significant threat to the safety of the public. The panel further finds the necessary and appropriate Disposition, which is also the least onerous, is a continuation of the current Detention Order within the Forensic Program, including a provision for community living in supervised accommodation approved by the person in Charge.

DATED this 5th day of May 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Alexander Sosna Legal Member

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board