Re Garry J. Matthews, 2026 CanLII 45690

Re: Garry J. Matthews

ORB File No: 5998

Hearing held on: Tuesday, April 7, 2026

Place of hearing: Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre

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

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg

Members: Dr. H. Bloom

Dr. P. Wright

Mr. M. Segal

Ms. R. Chopra

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Garry J. Matthews

Counsel: Mr. U. Agostino

Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Dr. E. Leinonen

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. R. Derouard

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated May 5, 2026)

Introduction:

1. On November 8, 2011, Garry J. Matthews was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorders on charges of assault, assault with a weapon, mischief endangering life, careless use of a firearm, unlawfully pointing a firearm, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, possession of a weapon while prohibited, unlawful possession of a firearm, unauthorized possession of a firearm with knowledge, break and enter and steal a firearm, and possession of a firearm or weapon.

2. Mr. Matthews is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated May 14, 2025, by which he was ordered to be detained at the Secure Forensic Unit of the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay (“the Hospital”) with a number of privileges and prohibitions including the privilege of living in the community in accommodations approved by the person in charge.

3. On Tuesday, April 7, 2026, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at the Hospital and conducted the annual review of Mr. Matthews’ disposition.

Position of the Parties:

4. At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.

5. Dr. Leinonen appeared on behalf of the Hospital. He advised of the Hospital position that Mr. Matthews remains a significant threat to public safety, and if the Board so finds, the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of a Detention Order with the exact terms set out in last year’s disposition.

6. Ms. Derouard appeared for the Attorney General via videoconference from her office in Kenora. She anticipated adopting the Hospital’s recommendations pending the outcome of the evidence.

7. Mr. Agostino acts for Mr. Matthews. Mr. Agostino advised of his position that he accepts that his client remains a significant threat to public safety as that term is used in the jurisprudence. He also accepts that a Detention Order is both necessary and appropriate. Mr. Agostino, however, is asking for one amendment to the disposition. The disposition permits, under paragraph 2(f), travel passes for up to one week within the region of Northwestern Ontario to visit family in Sioux Lookout subject to the prior approval of the person in charge of the hospital. Mr. Agostino noted that his client has a sister who lives in Red Lake. His client is asking for an amendment to clause 2(f) that would permit travel passes to both Sioux Lookout and Red Lake for up to one week and subject to the prior approval of the person in charge of the hospital or designate.

Index Offences:

8. The allegations giving rise to the index offences are set out in the hospital report as follows:

“On Sunday April 25, 2011 in the First Nations Territory of Fort Severn at approximately 1253 hrs, Nishnawbe-Aski Police constable Jason STORKSON #13659 received a complaint from Ron MATHEWS regarding a shot that had been fired into Frank KOOSTACHIN’s residence, an elder of the community. Police attended the residence at 1300 hrs and spoke to Frank KOOSTACHIN, he stated he had been laying on his couch under the living room window watching TV when a shot came through the window. Police noted the entry marks on the window and quickly found an entry and exit hole through the side wall of the home. The trajectory of the round also pointed to an area around Charlie MATTHEW’s residence.

Police went to investigate the area when they were stopped by Deputy Chief Wayne MATHEWS and Charlie MATTHEWS. Charlie has a limited knowledge of English, so Wayne MATHEWS spoke for him and stated that Garry MATTHEWS was tearing up his house and causing a disturbance. Police attended the residence and found Garry MATTHEWS inside along with Jessie MATTHEWS. Police asked if what was happening and Wayne MATHEWS stated that Garry had not been taking his medication for almost a week, which helps with his mental state, calming him. The occupants were ok and Garry seemed agitated and shifty.

Police took Garry MATTHEW out of the residence and asked if everything was ok and if anything was the matter. Garry MATTHEW stated that he hasn’t taken medication and it helps to calm him but could not give a reason why he wasn’t taking it. Police drove for a time with Garry MATTHEW and he seemed calm, Garry also showed no signs of intoxication or any other mind altering drugs, and because police have no lock up facilities in Fort Severn police brought back to residence. Police also watched the subject take his medication and he agreed to go to sleep at 1345 hrs. Charlie MATTHEWS showed police that his bedroom had been broken into and a rifle was missing. Police searched the house and the surrounding area but found nothing.

Police went back to the detachment to write up the occurrence and get some help to search for the weapon when an urgent complaint came from Bernadette KABESTRA at 1405 hrs, she stated that Garry MATTHEWS was going crazy and hung up the phone. Police arrived on scene at approximately 1409 hrs, and walked into Charlie MATTHEWs residence. Police called out “Police!, hello” and no response. Police continued inside the residence and turned the corner from the porch into the living room and saw Garry MATTHEWS standing with a rifle standing slightly bladed to police and the barrel pointed in the police’s general direction. When Garry MATTHEWS saw police he dropped the weapon to his right side and tried to conceal it. Police quickly closed the distance between the subject and themself and using tactical communication talked the subject into giving up the weapon, he did this by slowly bringing his right hand forward with the barrel of the weapon pointing to the floor and police grabbing his wrist and then the gun. Police retreated a step and checked the rifle and found it loaded with a round chambered. Police then quickly proved the weapon safe and placed it on the floor behind them and then police took Garry MATTHEWS into custody at approximately 1425 hrs. Police placed the ACCUSED into the police vehicle along with the rifle which was a Winchester 30-30 Model 94 XTR.

Police saw Darren MATTHEWS near the scene, he is the ambulance van driver and asked for him to alert the nurses at the clinic that police needed to have a subject assessed. Police arrived at the clinic at 1430 hrs and waited until Nurse Connie BARANYAI was able to see the subject. She did a brief physical examination and found that he was healthy with a slight fever but she could not assess him mentally. Garry MATTHEWS seemed to have his full faculties and was not under the influence of anything that police nor the nurse could tell.

Police brought back the subject to the detachment at 1440 hrs and read him his rights to counsel and caution. Garry MATTHEWS appeared to understand his rights and caution by answering yes verbally and nodding his head. He did not elect to have a lawyer called at this time. Police then started the occurrence and called Sgt. Loone, the on-call officer on duty at this time and made arrangements for the ACCUSED to be shipped out via prisoner flight transport charter, scheduled to arrive in Fort Severn from Sandy Lake at 1645 hrs.

Police then had Jessie MATHEWS attend the detachment with her step daughter Sherry KAKEKASPAN, who she used as an interpreter to give police a statement beginning at 1535 hrs. Police lodged the prisoner in the police vehicle during the interview. Jessie MATHEWS stated that she found the gun in Garry’s dresser drawer and was bringing it to her husband Charlie MATHEWS when she was physically thrown to the floor by Garry MATTHEWS and pinned down, Garry then pointed the weapon at her and began to load it but found he had no shells, at this point Ruth HUNTER tried to pull the gun away and he pushed her away as well, at this point Charlie MATTHEWS started to fight with Garry but he was pushed into the bathroom where he fell down. Garry MATTHEWs then went to get his shells for the rifle in his room and the elders in the house made a run for it, the ladies were about to run across the backyard when Garry MATTHEWS opened the rear window and fired three shots with the rifle, they were unsure of where he was shooting, so they turned around and went to a neighbor’s house. Shortly after this, the police arrived on scene. Police were also told that Garry MATTHEWS’ mother has a history of mental illness and that Garry exhibits many of the same symptoms but has never been diagnosed or assessed. Police believe this is an opportunity to have the subject professionally assessed and treated if needed.”

Evidence at the Hearing:

9. The Board admitted into evidence the hospital report dated March 9, 2026. As the Hospital Report was made an exhibit in this hearing, it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained in the Hospital Report in these reasons. The final documentary exhibit is a copy of Mr. Matthews’ CPIC.

10. In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. Leinonen. Dr. Leinonen first provided the panel with one update. This past March 17^th^, Mr. Matthews returned to hospital from a pass and brought with him a synthetic cannabis, namely Kush. It appears that Mr. Matthews shared some of his Kush with at least one co-patient. As a result, Mr. Matthews’ privileges were put on hold. The doctor advised that Mr. Matthews currently has supervised privileges but does not have any indirectly supervised privileges.

11. There is also a history of some rule breaking on the part of Mr. Matthews. Apparently, he would engage in smoking in his room, which is prohibited by the hospital regulations. The doctor noted, however, that there have been no acts of aggression for a considerable period of time. There has been a history of elopements, but once again, this has not taken place for many months.

12. In response to questions from Crown counsel, Dr. Leinonen advised that Mr. Matthews is no longer seeking to be transferred to another forensic program. It appears from the hospital report that Mr. Matthews’ main motivation for a transfer to another forensic hospital arose from significant problems that Mr. Matthews was having with local gangs in the Thunder Bay area.

13. In response to questions from Mr. Agostino, Dr. Leinonen acknowledged that as a result of the AWOL on March 17^th^, Mr. Matthews lost privileges. It is not clear when Mr. Matthews will be able to use any indirectly supervised community privileges. The doctor indicated that Mr. Matthews should be able to exercise indirectly supervised hospital and grounds privileges in the next few weeks.

14. Again, in response to questions from Mr. Agostino, Dr. Leinonen stated his understanding that Mr. Matthews has completed a substance abuse program at Dilico and possibly a second substance abuse program at Kenora.

15. Finally, in response to a question from Mr. Agostino, Dr. Leinonen stated his opinion that before supporting a Conditional Discharge, he would want to see Mr. Matthews having “a long period of stability.”

16. No other evidence was heard at this hearing.

Final Submissions

17. Each party maintained their original position, namely that Mr. Matthews remains a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a Detention Order with the exact terms as set out in last year’s disposition.

18. Ms. Derouard ultimately supported the request made on behalf of Mr. Matthews to be able to have passes for up to one week to travel to Red Lake where his sister lives. Ms. Derouard noted that this would be subject to the discretion of the Hospital and that the Hospital would only permit that pass if the Hospital was satisfied that public safety would not be put at risk.

Findings of the Board

19. The Board accepts the evidence of Dr. Leinonen and the evidence contained in the hospital report. The Board notes the parties’ joint recommendation that Mr. Matthews remains a significant threat to public safety and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is continuation of a Detention Order. In the Board’s unanimous opinion, the parties’ joint recommendation is well-founded. We accept the doctor’s testimony and the evidence contained in the hospital report that at the present time, Mr. Matthews represents a significant threat to public safety. We also accept that a Detention Order is both necessary and appropriate.

20. We have considered the request made by Mr. Matthews to add Red Lake as a potential place that Mr. Matthews could visit, with of course the prior approval of the person in charge of the hospital.

21. The Board, however, had a number of concerns arising from the hospital’s evidence at this hearing. There were a number of topics touched on in the hospital report and addressed through questioning of Dr. Leinonen that suggested informational deficits about key areas of interest and concern. For ease of communication, these are reviewed in bullet point format below:

• The hospital report reflects that a MOCA cognitive test carried out years ago yielded a notably low score of 21 out of 30. Dr. Leinonen indicated that the test has not been repeated and conceded that it should be.

• It appears that a Gladue “letter” was tendered at Mr. Matthews’ court proceedings in 2024. This came up in a discussion of whether there was a Gladue report either available or requested in Mr. Matthews’ case. Dr. Leinonen seemed quite uncertain about the status of this but agreed that a Gladue report would inform Mr. Matthews’ management and treatment plan.

• Reference is made in the hospital report about Mr. Matthews making sexually inappropriate comments to staff and co-patients and being found in a female co-patent’s room on two occasions, and on one of them, he appeared to be performing a sexual act. Dr. Leinonen appeared to have very little information about precisely what transpired, for example he didn’t know what sexual act was being engaged in and he had few details about this seeming cluster of sexually inappropriate behaviour.

• Reference was made in the hospital report to Mr. Matthews having gang involvement, an interest in being involved in a gang, and potentially being intimidated by a gang for monies owed. Unfortunately, there was no cohesive narrative explaining this area of considerable concern and it would need to be pursued;

• Although there was discussion about an indirectly supervised pass to Red Lake, in addition to the pass Mr. Matthews already has in his disposition to Sioux Lookout, there was no information about whether the family member who lives in Red Lake knew about his intention to visit there and was prepared to receive him.

22. In the result, the Board will issue a Detention Order. The Board will amend paragraph 2(f) that would permit potential travel passes to Red Lake. However, as indicated above, the panel would expect that the Hospital would conduct all of the necessary and appropriate investigations before approving any travel passes to Red Lake.

23. In reaching our disposition, the Board has taken into consideration the safety of the public, Mr. Matthews’ mental condition, his other needs, and his reintegration into society.

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

Mr. J. Goldenberg

Alternate Chairperson

___________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board