Ontario Review Board
Re: F. (K. A.)
ORB File No: 8865
Hearing held on: Monday, March 30, 2026
Place of hearing: Brockville Mental Health Centre
Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. Flanagan
Members: Dr. Y. Alatishe
Dr. W. Loza
Ms. M. Chamberlain
Mr. S. Duffy
Parties Appearing:
Accused: F. (K. A.)
Counsel: Mr. J. Boss
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. A Adiele
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. K. Schultz
*Pursuant to s. 672.501(1) of the Criminal Code, the Ontario Review Board prohibits the publication, broadcasting, or other transmission of any information that could identify a victim in this matter or a witness who is under 18 years of age.
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated May 14, 2026)
Introduction
On September 17th, 2025, the accused, F. (K. A.), was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on a charge of sexual assault, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. At the time of the finding of not criminally responsible, the Honourable Court did not make a Disposition and referred the matter to the Ontario Review Board.
On March 30th, 2026, a panel of the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at the Brockville Mental Health Centre, hereinafter referred to as the Hospital, to conduct F. (K. A.)’s initial hearing pursuant to s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code. F. (K. A.) was not in attendance at his hearing but was represented by his counsel, Mr. J. Boss. At the outset of the hearing the panel was advised that due to security concerns F. (K. A.) would not be in attendance at his hearing. The Board excused F. (K. A.)’s attendance pursuant to s. 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code.
The following documents were entered as Exhibits:
CPIC Response Report
Warrant of Committal
Police Charge Sheet
Assessment Report dated August 10, 2025
NCR Report dated September 15h, 2025
Clerk Package
Hospital Report dated March 2026
Rule 13 Letter to Waypoint
- The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether F. (K. A.) represents a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, what was the necessary and appropriate disposition which was also the least restrictive and least onerous take into account the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
Position of the Parties
Dr. Adiele, on behalf of the Hospital, submitted that F. (K. A.) continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and recommended a detention order with the conditions as outlined on page 35 of the Hospital Report. The doctor updated the Board that, given recent events, the Hospital was also recommending a transfer to Waypoint Centre for Mental Health (“Waypoint”). The request for a transfer was made to Waypoint on Friday, March 27th and the Board did not receive a response before the hearing.
Mr. Shultz, on behalf of the Attorney General informed the Board that he was in agreement regarding the Hospital’s recommendation in the Hospital Report but wanted to hear the evidence before taking a position on the issue of a transfer to Waypoint.
Mr. Boss, on behalf of F. (K. A.), conceded the issue of significant threat and agreed that a detention order was appropriate. Mr. Boss also wished to hear the evidence from the Hospital prior to taking a position regarding a transfer to Waypoint.
Index Offence
- The circumstances of the index offence are set out in the Hospital Report and summarized as follows:
“Sexual Assault Section 271 CCC
Assault - Section 266 CCC
See below verbatim account authored by Cst David Doerksen of above index charges according to prosecution summary:
On October 21st, 2024, in the City of Ottawa, at approximately 8:30AM, the accused F. (K. A.) was at the Civic Hospital (1053 Carling Ave) after being apprehended under the Mental Health Act the day before. He was restrained to a hospital bed for erratic behavior in Observation Room #15.
[Victim], a nurse at the hospital, was attending to F. (K. A.). She was wearing PPE, including a medical gown and mask to protect herself from F. (K. A.) as he had been spitting when arriving at the hospital. While approaching F. (K. A.) to place equipment on his arm, F. (K. A.) proceeded to make a "come here" motion with one or some of his fingers between her thighs, making contact with her vulva.
The nurse was shocked and jumped back. F. (K. A.) proceeded to apologize. The nurse, still attending to her patient, continued to provide care. F. (K. A.) again reached out with one or some of his fingers and again made contact with her vulva by making a "come here" motion with his finger(s). (CC 271 Sexual Assault x 1 count). The nurse finished her assignment and informed her supervisors of the incident.
On the same day and at the same location, at or around 11:22AM, F. (K. A.) was being transported from the observation area to the psychiatric emergency section (PES) of the Civic Hospital. The same nurse was assisting in moving F. (K. A.). While being moved towards the secure access door, F. (K. A.) - who had water in his mouth - proceeded to spit said water and accompanying saliva at A. (A.), a security guard at the hospital. The water and spit landed in her face (CC Assault 266 x 1 count).
Constables from the Ottawa Police Service attend the Civic Hospital and formed reasonable grounds to charge F. (K. A.) with the above offences. F. (K. A.) was arrested at 4:32PM and issued his rights to counsel, caution and secondary caution.
Mischief property no set value Section 430(1)(a) CCC
Disturb occupants of a dwelling in apt. complex Section 175(1)(d) CCC
Make false fire alarm Section 437 CCC
See below verbatim account authored by Cst Ahed Khalilof above index charges according to prosecution summary:
On Wednesday July 30, 2025, at approximately 08:09AM the accused, F. (K. A.) was found by the property manager L. (P.) kicking doors and the accused pulled the manual fire alarm pull station.
The complainant asked the accused to return to his unit, which the accused refused to do so. Cst. KHALIL #2918 arrived at 400 Slater St. in the City of Ottawa, and arrested the accused for mischief to property, disturb occupants of a dwelling and make false fire alarm. The accused caused mischief to property, no set value. The accused pulled off two signs off the wall and broke a plastic triangle warning sign. The accused terrorized the tenants of the 21-story building and activated the fire alarm when there was no active fire in the building.
Cst. KHALIL read the accused his right to counsel and was transported to cell where he will be held for show cause to protect the public and prevent the reptation of the offence(s).
Accused spoke about topics that do not make sense or are disconnected from the current situation, making his communication difficult to follow. When spoken to, the accused did not respond appropriately to questions or instruction. Often accused ignoring what being said altogether.
Accused behavior suggests confusion, disorientation, and the accused seem unable or unwilling to engage in a meaningful conversation. Hold for mental health court.”
Current Diagnosis
Schizophrenia; and
Cannabis use disorder, moderate, in remission (while in a controlled environment).
Background History
Due to F. (K. A.)’s decompensated mental state, his medical records were relied upon for background history.
F. (K. A.)'s background history culled from Dr. Hwang’s fitness assessment dated August 10, 2025, notes the following:
“F. (K. A.) was born in Montreal. He had one brother and two sisters. His father was physically aggressive with his mother, his siblings, and him. His parents divorced in 1993, and his father moved to Chicago. F. (K. A.) moved from Montreal to Ottawa in 2015 to live with his sister. One of his sisters died in a car accident in 2016 and his mother died from lung cancer the same year.
F. (K. A.) attended Hillcrest High School from grades nine through eleven and completed his high school at Lisgar Collegiate Institute. He changed schools due to conflict with other students. He was previously employed as a dishwasher and worked in a movie theatre and in masonry construction. He worked in full-time positions from 2006 to 2010.”
- In 2010 in Gatineau Quebec, F. (K. A.) was charged with fail to comply with conditions of an undertaking.
Evidence at Hearing
The Hospital’s evidence was presented through its report as well as through the oral testimony of Dr. A. Adiele. This evidence is summarized below.
Dr. Adiele informed the Board that he had been F. (K. A.)’s doctor from when he arrived in October 2025 until Dr. Corona took over his care in February 2026. Dr. Adiele noted that F. (K. A.) had deteriorated since his arrival at the Hospital. In November, he stopped taking his full dose of prescribed medication and this led to a decompensation. Since November, F. (K. A.) has engaged in multiple incidents that are listed at page 22 of the Hospital Report.
Dr. Adiele informed the Board that since the Hospital Report was prepared on March 2, 2026, F. (K. A.) had engaged in further concerning incidents. On March 20th he stated that he was going to kill all Canadians, he was combative and verbally aggressive to Hospital staff and had to be restrained. During the incident, F. (K. A.) picked up a play station and broke it on a security staff member that was trying to assist the treatment team. F. (K. A.) was taken to seclusion and has been largely unresponsive to staff since. He was able to speak with Dr. Adiele just prior to the hearing, at which point he stated that he did not want to be transferred to Waypoint.
F. (K. A.) was recently found to be incapable to consent to treatment. He is contesting this finding and a CCB hearing has been scheduled for April 20, 2026. F. (K. A.) has informed the doctor that he does not want to take the medication that has been prescribed to him.
Dr. Adiele stated that F. (K. A.) has been in seclusion more than he has been out of it since arriving at the Hospital in October. He stated that, given the regular and increasing violence towards Hospital staff, a medium secure facility is not adequate to manage F. (K. A.)’s risk to the public.
Mr. Shultz asked the doctor what the longest duration F. (K. A.) had spent out of seclusion since arriving at the Hospital. Dr. Adiele could not say precisely when F. (K. A.) was in or out of seclusion but opined that the longest period out of seclusion would have been about a week or two. He stated that the level of aggressive behaviours has definitely not improved; rather, they seem to be getting worse. The incident on March 20th was the most problematic one. Prior to this, F. (K. A.) has attempted to grab staff and get their keys. He has also spit at staff members.
Dr. Adiele stated that, given the amount of time F. (K. A.) was spending in seclusion, it would be better for him to be in the more secure setting. Waypoint has more staff per patient and has larger seclusion rooms.
Currently F. (K. A.) does not have a substitute decision maker (“SDM”). Dr. Adiele stated that the Hospital is waiting until the hearing in April and if F. (K. A.) remains incapable, the treatment team will find a SDM for him. It will most likely be the Public Guardian and Trustee. F. (K. A.)’s sister has been his SDM in the past, however, she opposes injections so would likely not be considered at this time. Dr. Adiele noted that F. (K. A.) does have a cousin that could be considered for this role.
Dr. Adiele stated that if F. (K. A.) could receive treatment, his mental status would likely improve. F. (K. A.) has the capacity to do well if adequately treated. Even in his current state, he can be reflective and sorry for his violent outbursts.
Mr. Shultz noted that significant threat was not being contested but asked the doctor if the Mental Health Act would be sufficient to manage F. (K. A.)’s risk to the safety of the public. Dr. Adiele stated categorically that this would not be sufficient and that F. (K. A.) required the oversight of the Ontario Review Board.
In response to questions from Mr. Boss, Dr. Adiele agreed with the following:
F. (K. A.) was at Brockville as there had been no beds available in Ottawa.
F. (K. A.) would rather be in Ottawa because has he as relatives there.
F. (K. A.) had experienced one of the longest waits for an initial NCR hearing. Due to this, he has not had access to any privileges while at the Hospital.
For the first month that F. (K. A.) was at Brockville he was relatively stable and was taking his medication. Dr. Adiele clarified that F. (K. A.) had been on a low dose initially and that after a few weeks, he had become unwell and stopped taking most of his medication. His deterioration worsened after he reduced his medication intake.
Mr. Boss asked Dr. Adiele if he had any idea of what caused F. (K. A.)’s deterioration. The doctor stated that he could not say for sure but opined that the low dose may have been an issue. Dr. Adiele agreed that F. (K. A.) had been asking for privileges but couldn’t have them as he had not had his initial hearing and that this had caused him to become frustrated.
Dr. Adiele was asked if F. (K. A.) can call his lawyer from seclusion. The doctor testified that as long as he can do it safely, he is able to have access to a cell phone. F. (K. A.) has made some calls to his sister.
Regarding a transfer to Waypoint, Dr. Adiele agreed that, if F. (K. A.) was adequately treated, he could improve, and a transfer would not be necessary. The doctor noted, however, that even if he remains incapable after the CCB hearing in April, F. (K. A.) could appeal this decision and remain untreated. Dr. Adiele explained that there is concern that the staff may be hurt as F. (K. A.)’s risk keeps escalating. Dr. Adiele felt it would be better to move him to a higher secure facility where he could be better managed until such time as he is taking his medication. When F. (K. A.) was more stable, he could return to Brockville.
In response to questions from the Board, Dr. Adiele agreed that passes into the community (as requested in the Hospital Report) may not be feasible for the coming year but opined that it could give F. (K. A.) hope to do better. The doctor also noted that if he were to begin treatment, he could improve significantly in the coming reporting period.
Dr. Adiele agreed that the two recommendations from the Hospital seemed to be at odds with each other: one being detained at Brockville with passes into the community for up to 7 days and the other being transfer to the high secure unit at Waypoint. Dr. Adiele stated that he felt that a transfer to Waypoint would be more beneficial for F. (K. A.) and that, if he was transferred there, a number of the privileges recommended in the Hospital Report would not be appropriate. The doctor did note however, that if F. (K. A.) were to remain at Brockville, it would be possible for him to attain the recommended privileges if he was to take his medication. The CCB hearing in April will determine whether he is capable and he may start his medication. If he were to appeal the CCB decision, it could be months before he was adequately medicated.
Finally, Dr. Adiele was asked what the Hospital is doing to try to get F. (K. A.) out of his current period of seclusion. He testified that F. (K. A.) is in the process of coming out of seclusion. Currently, he was coming out for showers and would likely start coming out for meals in the next few days. The Hospital will then gradually allow him more time out of seclusion to see how he manages. This will continue until he is fully out of seclusion.
No other evidence was presented.
Submissions of the Parties
At the conclusion of the hearing the parties were asked if they wished to make closing submissions. Dr. Adiele stated that he had nothing to add to the evidence that he had just provided to the Board. He confirmed that the Hospital was seeking a transfer to Waypoint but, if the Board was not prepared to order the transfer, he recommended a detention order with the privileges and conditions as set out on the Hospital Report.
Mr. Shultz stated that the Crown joined the Hospital in its recommendation to the Board, including the requested transfer to Waypoint. Counsel noted that safety of the public included staff at forensic hospitals. F. (K. A.)’s CCB hearing was a few weeks away and he could appeal any decision which could cause a long period of time where he remained unmedicated. Mr. Shultz submitted that F. (K. A.)’s behaviour was decompensating and becoming worse. He felt that it would be better for F. (K. A.) and better for the public for him to be at Waypoint.
Mr. Boss stated that the parties had a joint position regarding F. (K. A.) remaining a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a detention order was appropriate for him. He did not agree that there was enough evidence to support a transfer to Waypoint at this time. Mr. Boss noted that the Hospital Report was less than a month old and a transfer had not been considered when if was authored. He noted that there had been no response from Waypoint as to whether they agreed with the transfer or what conditions they would like to see as part of a detention order at Waypoint. Mr. Boss felt that his client should have the opportunity to made submissions on any response from Waypoint and would like more information before determining his position on that issue.
Conclusion and Disposition
Having considered all of the evidence tendered at the hearing, and the submissions of the parties, the Board does find that F. (K. A.) continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code of Canada and as further defined in the Supreme Court of Canada decision Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute), 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.
According to R. v. Winko, a significant threat to the safety of the public means a real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the public that is serious in the sense of going beyond the merely trivial or annoying. The conduct giving rise to the harm must be criminal in nature. F. (K. A.) has experienced increasingly violent outbursts over his time at Brockville. He has stopped taking his prescribed medication and has become verbally and physically aggressive to Hospital staff and has required extensive periods of seclusion. It is clear that, at this time, F. (K. A.) remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.
Having determined that F. (K. A.) poses a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board must decide the necessary and appropriate disposition for him for the coming year. The Board agrees with the parties that a detention order is required. The evidence presented at the hearing was that if F. (K. A.) were treated, his mental status would likely improve, and he may reach the ability to have indirect passes into the community within the coming year.
F. (K. A.) has been found incapable to consent to treatment; a determination that he opposes. A CCB hearing has been set for April 20, 2026. After this hearing, if F. (K. A.) remains incapable and begins to take his medication, Dr. Adiele opined that he could improve and become quiet well. Therefore, the Board finds that a transfer the Waypoint at this time would be premature. Should F. (K. A.) continue to refuse treatment, and his behaviours continue or worsen, the Hospital could request an early hearing. At a future hearing, the board could have a response from Waypoint as to the appropriate privileges and conditions to attach to a detention order at that high secure unit.
Therefore, the Board finds that the necessary and appropriate disposition required to ensure the safety of the public is a detention order at Brockville with the following conditions:
a. Attend within or outside of the hospital for necessary medical, dental, legal or compassionate purposes;
b. Hospital and grounds privileges, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge;
c. Hospital and grounds privileges, indirectly supervised;
d. To enter the community within a 250-kilometre radius of the Brockville Mental Health Centre – Member of the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge;
e. Travel passes for up to 7 days, upon first obtaining approval of his itinerary by the person in charge of the Brockville Mental Health Centre – Member of the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group, or his or her designate, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge;
f. Passes for up to 7 days, to enter the community of Ontario, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge.
- We have taken into consideration the factors at s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code of Canada, namely the protection of the public, which is the paramount consideration, the mental condition of the accused, his reintegration into society and his other needs in coming to the unanimous finding that a detention order on the same terms and conditions remains necessary and appropriate and least onerous and least restrictive Disposition in all of the circumstances.
Dated this 14th day of May, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. M. Chamberlain
Legal Member
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board