Ontario Review Board
Re: Harrison Mantalas
ORB File No: 7724
Hearing held on: Wednesday, December 17, 2025
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. MacIntyre, KC Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. M. Kalia Mr. J. Goldenberg Mr. R. Rainboth
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Harrison Mantalas Counsel: Mr. C. Hynes
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. A. Marshall
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 21, 2026)
Introduction
On April 24, 2020, Harrison Mantalas was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon (x2), carrying concealed weapon, failure to comply with probation order (x3) and failure to comply with condition of judicial release, all contrary to the Criminal Code.
Mr. Mantalas is currently subject to an Ontario Review Board Disposition of November 21, 2024, which detains him at the Secure Forensic Unit of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores”) with privileges up to and including to live in the community in accommodation approved by the Person in Charge of the hospital.
Mr. Mantalas was not present at the commencement of his hearing. His counsel, Mr. Hynes, explained that he was experiencing stress about attending the hearing and has given Mr. Hynes instructions to proceed in his absence. With no objection from the hospital or Crown counsel an order was made to proceed in Mr. Mantalas’ absence further to s. 672.5(10) of the Criminal Code.
The parties initially presented their without prejudice positions. The hospital asks for a Detention Order to the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores (the current Disposition reads detention at the Secure Forensic Unit of Ontario Shores). The hospital also requests that the privilege of community living be removed from his Disposition for the coming year. The hospital’s alternative position is that the Board order a continuation of his current Disposition with no change.
The Crown Attorney supports a Detention Order with the accused to be detained in the hospital’s Secure Forensic Unit. Ms. MacDonald agrees that community living should not be included as a privilege and also submits that a new disposition should not contain passes up to 12 hours to enter the community indirectly supervised.
Mr. Hynes submits that any disposition that would allow his client to transfer to a less secure unit is agreeable to him. He reserves his position on the Crown’s suggested pass deletion.
Index Offences
- Last year’s Reasons for Disposition outlined the circumstances surrounding the index offences as follows:
“On Sunday March 30, 2019 at approximately 4:45 PM, the accused, Mr. Harrison Mantalas, entered the lobby of 438 University Avenue, in the City of Toronto. The building was not open to the public at this time. Security guards spoke with Mr. Mantalas and asked him to leave the premises. Mr. Mantalas refused to do so. He instead laid down on the bench seat inside the lobby. Security guards again asked him to leave. Mr. Mantalas instead stood up and walked toward the Bank of Montreal entrance. Security asked him to leave again. This is when Mr. Mantalas partially took out a stainless-steel butter knife from his left jacket pocket, exposing it to show the security guards.
Security backed away from Mr. Mantalas out of fear for their own safety and called the police. Mr. Mantalas then left the premises. Police attended and located Mr. Mantalas inside the Mr. Sub restaurant located within the building of 438 University Avenue and arrested him. A search incident to arrest revealed the butter knife and also a pocketknife located inside his hooded sweater pocket.
At the time of the alleged incident, Mr. Mantalas was subject to several probation orders and was on bail with a condition not to possess any weapons, so he also incurred charges for FTC Probation x3 and FTC Recognizance.”
Background
A Hospital Report of November 25, 2025, was filed as an exhibit and contains considerable information regarding Mr. Mantalas’ history and should be referred to for additional detail.
Mr. Mantalas suffers from treatment resistant schizophrenia; stimulant use disorder, in remission in a controlled environment; alcohol use disorder, in remission in a controlled environment; antisocial personality traits and rule out intellectual disability.
Mr. Mantalas has a considerable history of involvement with the criminal justice system commencing in youth court in 1998. His record of convictions and discharges include assaults, possession of weapons, robbery with violence and uttering threats.
Mr. Mantalas had a number of admissions to various hospitals over the years. Substance use, noncompliance with prescribed medication, bizarre behaviour, persecutory delusions, verbal and physical aggression and elopements marked his history. At last year's Review Board hearing, the panel heard evidence that when Mr. Mantalas used his indirectly supervised passes for the first time, he eloped, eventually being found in downtown by police. This event followed a change from clozapine to Haldol medication. Following his elopement and return to hospital he was again treated with clozapine. During the time of his elopement, he was without prescribed medication for about one month.
Mr. Mantalas has been founded incapable of consenting to psychiatric treatment and his mother is his substitute decision maker. His insight is poor and he believes medication is unnecessary.
Evidence
The hospital’s evidence consisted of Dr. Harrigan's oral testimony and the contents of the November 25, 2025, Hospital Report. Dr. Harrigan explains that the hospital’s proposal to detain Mr. Mantalas in its Forensic Program, which includes both secure forensic units and general forensic units, is to provide the hospital with flexibility to move Mr. Mantalas ahead to a General Forensic Unit when the hospital team feels he is ready to do so.
Although Mr. Mantalas’ Disposition has included a privilege of indirectly supervised community access, it has yet to be extended to Mr. Mantalas, who has always perceived this level of privilege to be a motivating goal. Furthermore, he has been told that the stability of his clozapine level is important to move him ahead to community living, thus providing him with the motivation to adhere to his medications.
Dr. Harrigan states that Mr. Mantalas is not ready for a General Forensic Unit at this time. Neither will he be deemed ready to exercise community passes earlier than the end of the upcoming reporting year. In supporting Dr. Harrigan’s opinion in this regard, she cites Mr. Mantalas’ impulsivity, poor frustration tolerance and verbal and environmental aggression.
Mr. Mantalas has a history of cheeking his medications, although Dr. Harrigan has not seen this since she became his treating psychiatrist in February of 2025. Mr. Mantalas smokes cigarettes which impact his clozapine levels. When his clozapine levels are less than his therapeutic clozapine dose, there is a noticeable decline in his regulation, impulsivity and frustration tolerance. Although Dr. Harrigan has not observed any frank psychotic symptoms in the past year, when Mr. Mantalas uses racial slurs it is an indication to the hospital team that his psychotic symptoms are emerging.
Mr. Mantalas’s progression with his occupational therapist has been slow, though it is observed that he remains engaged in behavioural therapy and is receptive to feedback and motivated to work, particularly towards a General Forensic Unit and indirectly supervised privileges.
Dr. Harrigan is of the view that removing the community living clause would not bother Mr. Mantalas. She states that the goal of indirectly supervised privileges in the community is motivating enough for him. This, along with no likelihood that he would achieve community living in the coming year, supports the hospital's recommendation to remove that privilege from a new Disposition.
Dr. Harrigan points out that a psychological assessment of Mr. Mantalas was done in 2022, but a full diagnosis could not be achieved with respect to ruling out an intellectual disability. Dr. Harrigan observes that now that Mr. Mantalas is on clozapine and more cooperative, he might be able to participate better in a psychological assessment. He is number 13 on the list for such an assessment.
Submissions
In submissions the hospital maintained its initial recommendation to detain Mr. Mantalas in the hospital’s Forensic Program and remove the community living provision as being unrealistic.
Ms. MacDonald asserted that it is unlikely that Mr. Mantalas would be transferred to the General Forensic Unit in the coming year, pointing out that even smoking a single cigarette lowers his clozapine level. It follows that if not transferred to a general unit, it is unlikely that he would qualify for community living and that privilege should not be included in his Disposition.
Furthermore, Ms. MacDonald submits that without a transfer to a General Forensic Unit, Mr. Mantalas would not be able to exercise indirectly supervised passes into the community, therefore that privilege should also not be included in this year’s Disposition.
Mr. Hynes does not agree that the community living provision be removed. He indicates that that has been in Mr. Mantalas’ Disposition for some years and suggests that it is a motivating factor and accordingly, it should be kept in his Disposition.
Analysis and Decision
It has been conceded at this hearing that Mr. Mantalas constitutes a significant threat to the safety the public. The Review Board independently agrees with this and adopts the elements of risk to support that conclusion as outlined by Dr. Harrigan and contained in the Hospital Report.
There is a partial joint submission with respect to the type of disposition Mr. Mantalas should receive for the coming year. The hospital and Crown Attorney agree that it should be a Detention Order which provides for his placement in a Secure Forensic Unit but with discretion by the hospital to transfer Mr. Mantalas to a General Forensic Unit when it deems, he is fit for this. Although Ms. MacDonald expressed skepticism that a move to a general unit could take place in the coming year, there is sufficient evidence presented by the hospital that this could happen and accordingly, the Board considers the least onerous and least restrictive disposition would be to craft a disposition that permits this.
Mr. Hynes also wishes an order that would allow his client to move to a general unit in the coming year, but he disagrees with the hospital and the Crown Attorney regarding the removal of the community living clause.
The Board finds that Mr. Mantalas should be detained in a Secure Forensic Unit at this time. He is in a Secure Forensic Unit now and the evidence supports that he will stay there until the hospital considers he is clinically ready for transfer to a general unit. The Board finds that there is sufficient evidence to support that a transfer to a general unit is possible in the coming year. In any event, it is clear that moving himself ahead to a general unit and the additional privileges that this brings is a definite goal of Mr. Mantalas and the opportunity for that to happen should be accorded him through a least onerous and restrictive order.
The Board agrees that the wording of the Disposition should read that he be detained in the hospital’s Secure Forensic Service with discretion given to the Person in Charge to transfer Mr. Mantalas to the General Forensic Service should the Person in Charge conclude that he has clinically improved to the extent of justifying this transfer. While he is on the secure unit, the goal is to move Mr. Mantalas forward to successfully exercising indirectly supervised hospital and ground privileges. To progress to indirectly supervised community privileges, the hospital hopes to transfer Mr. Mantalas to a General Forensic Unit where this level of privilege can be exercised.
Mr. Mantalas’s Disposition will contain privileges up to and including indirectly supervised privileges in hospital and on hospital grounds and in the community as being the least onerous and least restrictive disposition and one that is necessary and appropriate in all circumstances. Based on the evidence as a whole, the Board agrees that it is unrealistic to consider that Mr. Mantalas could be discharged into the community in the coming year. Accordingly, the Board agrees with the submissions of the hospital and Crown Attorney in that regard and his Disposition will not include that privilege.
DATED this 21st day of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Mr. C. MacIntyre, KC Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board