Ontario Review Board
Re: Jeffery Weber
ORB File No: 4683/5033/6398/7041
Hearing held on: Wednesday, May 6, 2026
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. J. Weinstein Members: Dr. S. Chatterjee Dr. M. Green Hon. A. Sosna Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing: Accused: Jeffery Weber Counsel: Ms. M. Perez The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated May 26, 2026)
Introduction:
[1]. On January 24, 2007, Jeffery Weber was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, on charges of carrying a concealed weapon and possession of weapon for dangerous purpose, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (“Criminal Code”).
[2]. On February 22, 2008, Jeffery Weber was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, on charges of attempt abduction of a person under 14 and assault, all contrary to the Criminal Code.
[3]. On December 1, 2011, Jeffery Weber was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, in Kamloops, British Columbia, on charges of aggravated assault, unlawful confinement, assaulting a peace officer and robbery, all contrary to the Criminal Code.
[4]. On September 29, 2016, Jeffery Weber was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of aggravated assault and possession of weapon for dangerous purpose, all contrary to the Criminal Code.
[5]. Mr. Weber is subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated May 5, 2025, which ordered that he be detained at the General Forensic Unit of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores”).
[6]. On May 6, 2026, the Board convened a hearing at Ontario Shores to conduct the annual review of the current Disposition.
[7]. Mr. Weber was present at the hearing and was represented by his counsel, Ms. M. Perez.
[8]. A Hospital Report, dated April 1, 2026 (the "Hospital Report"), was entered as Exhibit 1.
[9]. The issues at this hearing were whether Mr. Weber is a significant threat to public safety, as defined in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code, and, if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances, bearing in mind the factors enunciated in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
[10]. For the reasons set out below and based on the expert evidence and opinions before it, the Board concluded that Mr. Weber continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board ordered that the necessary and appropriate Disposition in the circumstances is the continuation of the existing Detention Order.
Current Psychiatric Diagnoses:
[11]. Schizophrenia Panic Disorder Alcohol Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment Cannabis Use Disorder, in sustained remission, in a controlled environment
Index Offences:
[12]. The circumstances giving rise to the Index Offences are extracted from last year’s Reasons, as follows:
“The Index Offences of September 24, 2006 concerned an incident in which Mr. Weber became aggressive with a mother and daughter he encountered while casually taking a walk. The victims became fearful, locked themselves in their car, and called police, who tasered Mr. Weber when he resisted arrest. He was carrying a knife at the time.
Following his first NCR verdict he was detained at Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre.
The second set of Index Offences occurred in Toronto, on September 3, 2007 when Mr. Weber approached a 10-year-old female in a hotel lobby and led her past her mother to the elevators. After a period at CAMH on a Treatment Order, Mr. Weber was returned to the Royal Ottawa. He was discharged to the community on June 30, 2009 and was granted a conditional discharge on May 5, 2010. He was readmitted to hospital in December and after being discharged again fled to British Columbia in February 2011.
The third set of Index Offences occurred on February 7 and 8, 2011, in Kamloops BC, when he attacked a woman in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant. Once again, Mr. Weber resisted arrest. He was again found NCR and admitted to the Forensic Psychiatric Hospital in BC; Mr. Weber stayed there until he was returned to the Royal Ottawa in June 2012. He spent a year at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, from November 2012 to November 2013, returning again to the Royal Ottawa. At this point Mr. Weber did well, re-establishing contact with his sister Greta, committing to his medication, and planning a program of study. The Royal Ottawa discharged him to the Grove group home on October 1, 2014.
The fourth set of NCR Index Offences occurred on December 9, 2014, when Mr. Weber committed a random and violent attack with a hammer.
Mr. Weber was transferred from the Royal Ottawa to Brockville Mental Health Centre on December 22, 2016. On November 21, 2017 he was transferred again, from Brockville to Ontario Shores. The Reasons for Disposition dated June 19, 2017 are clear that Mr. Weber was transferred because of a lawsuit against Royal Ottawa (with which Brockville is affiliated), stemming from the December 2014 Index Offences."
Criminal Record:
[13].
| DATE AND LOCATION | CHARGE(S) | SENTENCE |
|---|---|---|
| 23-02-2001 Pembroke ON (Youth Court) |
Assault Fail to Comply with Recognizance |
9 months’ probation and 21 days presentence custody on each charge |
| 17-08-2001 Pembroke, ON (Youth Court) |
Personation with Intent Uttering Forged Document |
30 days on each charge |
| 08-12-2005 | Mischief Under $5000 | Conditional Discharge and 12 months’ probation |
| 08-06-2006 Sudbury, ON |
Fail to Comply with Probation | 1 day & Probation 12 months and 30 days pre-sentence custody |
| 08-06-2006 Sudbury, ON |
Fail to Attend Court | 1 day concurrent & probation 12 months concurrent |
| 08-06-2006 Sudbury, ON |
Fail to Comply with Recognizance Carrying a Concealed Weapon | 1 day & 30 days pre-sentence custody on each charge concurrent & 12 months’ probation) |
| 08-06-2006 Sudbury, ON |
Dangerous Operation of a Motor Vehicle Flight While Pursued by Peace Officer Possession of Property Obtained by Crime |
1 day and 4 months presentence custody & 12 months’ probation on each charge concurrent |
| 08-06-2006 Sudbury, ON |
Fail to Comply with Probation Order Assault with a Weapon | (time served (1 day) & 12 months’ probation on each charge concurrent |
Background and Personal History:
[14]. Mr. Weber's background and personal history are outlined in the Hospital Report, and they are accurately summarized last year’s Reasons:
“Mr. Weber's personal background and history are set out in detail in the Hospital Report and will not be repeated. Briefly summarized, Mr. Weber was born in North York, Ontario as a middle child with two sisters. He also has an older step-sister and older stepbrother. Following the passing of his mother when he was young he was placed into foster care. It is reported that Mr. Weber was the victim of significant sexual abuse by his foster mother and her children when he was five to six years old. This information was corroborated by a neighbour. At age 13, Mr. Weber left his foster home and at age 14 began residing with his older stepbrother before moving to a new foster care home. He resided there until age 18 when he joined the military. He was discharged from the military after 10 months due to non-disclosure of his previous criminal record.
Following his discharge from the military, Mr. Weber completed his grade 12 diploma in 2004 and then attended a course at Carlton University. He has only held short-term employment over the years, usually no longer than six to eight months. He has had no notable romantic relationships and has no children. Mr. Weber is supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).”
Position of the Parties:
[15]. Counsel for the hospital, for the Attorney General and for Mr. Weber advised that this was a joint submission. All were adopting the hospital’s recommendation of a continuation of the existing Detention Order.
Course Since Last Disposition:
[16]. Mr. Weber's course since his last Disposition is set out in detail in the Hospital Report. The following extracted paragraphs are relevant to this hearing:
“Mr. Weber has continued to experience frequent episodes of anxiety and occasionally what he would describe as panic attacks. Mr. Weber asks for help and reassurance during these times and prefers to stay in his bedroom listening to soft music and using his other coping strategies learned in individual therapy. Mr. Weber reports that he looks forward to his therapy sessions with Dr. Gibas.
Mr. Weber is currently working on his grade 12 Advanced Functions Math course. The course was quite time consuming and became stressful so he switched to correspondence where he can work at his own pace.
Mr. Weber used his indirectly supervised grounds and town privileges regularly. He is currently permitted up to four hours, five times daily indirectly supervised on hospital grounds. He also has up to four hour passes up to twice daily to the Whitby Shores Plaza and/or Abilities Centre. Mr. Weber also has up to 7 hour indirectly supervised passes into Oshawa and Whitby up to 4 times weekly.
Mr. Weber transitioned to a new therapist without issue and continues weekly therapy sessions to date. He remains highly engaged in CBT for anxiety (e.g., exposure exercises), continuing to use positive coping strategies for anxiety/panic management, with effect.
Over the course of the reporting year, Mr. Weber continued to experience anxiety symptoms and intermittent panic attacks. However, for the most part, he was able to manage these symptoms without as-needed medication. His panic attacks were often precipitated by community outings, uncomfortable somatic sensations, or self-imposed pressure. Mr. Weber remained notably somatically preoccupied. However, there was no evidence this year of his anxiety escalating into paranoia.”
Evidence at the Hearing:
[17]. The Board had available to it the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Exhibits, and oral evidence from Dr. Alioglou. Dr. Alioglou testified as follows:
a) Mr. Weber has remained fully adherent to his medication regimen and completes all blood work without difficulty.
b) Mr. Weber is psychologically stable, continues to work with a psychologist, and has made significant progress over the past reporting year. He continues to experience residual psychotic and anxiety symptoms; however, he manages them effectively and has demonstrated improved insight into his limitations.
c) Mr. Weber is currently second on the waitlist for DMHA complex care housing. The housing provider has indicated that the wait time is likely to exceed six months, as there are only four beds available.
d) If a bed became available immediately, Mr. Weber would not be discharged abruptly, because he has historically been highly sensitive to stress and change. The team would require a carefully planned transition period, typically three-to- six months, to ensure his stability. This transition period would include arranging 24-hour access to the group home, coordinating with community services, and preparing Mr. Weber for the move.
e) Mr. Weber does not require any further inpatient programming before the team would recommend a discharge to supervised housing. He continues to attend psychology sessions, working on coping strategies, and he has demonstrated meaningful gains in managing his anxiety.
f) Once discharged, Mr. Weber would be able to continue seeing his current psychologist as an outpatient. The complex care home will also have staff available to support him.
g) Overall, Mr. Weber had a good year, marked by progress, symptom management, improved coping abilities, and increased stability.
[18]. In response to questions from counsel for the Attorney General, Dr. Alioglou testified:
a) Mr. Weber’s past episodes of rapid decompensation were the result of stress and lack of structure and support.
b) Mr. Weber’s current medication regimen is appropriate and effective. No alternative medications are being considered at this time.
c) The supervised, structured nature of the complex care housing will itself serve as a protective factor against relapse, as it provides constant monitoring, support, and predictable routines.
d) The treatment team is confident that Mr. Weber can safely continue his progress in the community with a carefully planned transition and the supports available in the complex care housing.
[19]. In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Weber, Dr. Alioglou testified:
a) Psychological assessment services Mr. Weber receives in hospital can be maintained seamlessly in the community.
b) Mr. Weber has had a good year. He has used his indirectly supervised hospital and community access privileges without incident and has demonstrated no substance use.
c) Although the Board clarified the testing provision last year to allow testing when clinically indicated, no urine drug screens were required over the past year. There were no concerns about substance use and no change in Mr. Weber’s mental state that would have triggered the requirement for any testing.
d) Mr. Weber has remained non-reactive to peers who exhibit challenging or provocative behaviour on the unit. He has consistently been able to walk away from conflict, demonstrating improved behavioural control and emotional regulation.
e) Mr. Weber self-reported that he experienced over 160 anxiety attacks in the past year, and he managed all but one of them without PRN medication. This behaviour reflects a continuing, positive trend in his ability to use coping strategies rather than relying on medication.
f) Mr. Weber has developed greater confidence in managing his anxiety and has shown improved insight into his limitations and triggers.
[20]. In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Alioglou testified as follows:
a) Mr. Weber is currently exercising the highest level of indirectly supervised passes under his Disposition, and he uses them appropriately. He typically spends time in the community visiting friends at their homes and attending shopping centres and movie theaters.
b) Mr. Weber has a complex trauma history and continues to work with the psychologist on issues related to social anxiety.
c) Trauma-related symptoms, and their underlying causes, are being addressed in therapy, although a formal diagnosis of PTSD has not been made. Mr. Weber exhibits some trauma-related features, which are being managed clinically.
d) A question was raised about antisocial personality traits, given Mr. Weber’s PCL-R score of 20 and his historical clinical record. While he shows some antisocial traits, these behaviours are understood to have been driven primarily by delusional thinking at the time of the Index Offences. Mr. Weber does not meet the criteria for antisocial personality disorder, and the team has not observed traits that would independently elevate his risk.
e) Mr. Weber has no history of substance use issues during more than 10 years in hospital. The complex care home would contact the hospital if concerns arose that Mr. Weber was using substances. Testing could be arranged upon transition, although it should be based on clinical suspicion, rather than random screening.
[21]. No other evidence was called.
Analysis and Conclusions:
[22]. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence, as well as the submissions from the parties, the Board agrees with the joint submission: Mr. Weber remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.
[23]. In Winko, the Supreme Court outlined that, in coming to the conclusion on the issue of significant risk, a Review Board should closely examine a range of evidence, including: the circumstances of the original offence; the past and expected course of the accused’s treatment; the present state of the NCR accused’s medical condition; the NCR accused’s own plans for the future; the support existing for the NCR accused in the community; and most importantly, the recommendations provided by experts who examined the NCR accused. In coming to our conclusion in this matter, the Board relies on the uncontroverted expert evidence of Dr. Alioglou, in addition to the documentary evidence before us.
[24]. Mr. Weber’s insight into his illness remains limited. He continues to minimize the potential risk associated with his vulnerability to stress and resulting anxiety. His insight into his functional limitations is also underdeveloped, and he tends to overestimate his current abilities, setting goals which, while positive, are not realistic.
[25]. Mr. Weber’s major mental illness has historically been treatment-resistant and clinically brittle, with rapid decompensation observed when he has been afforded increased liberty, particularly in the context of even minor medication adjustments, periods of non-adherence or relapse to substance use. His insight into his illness remains limited, and his current stability appears to be closely linked to structured, supervised settings that support medication adherence.
[26]. Absent a Board Disposition, Mr. Weber would likely leave hospital, opt for unsupervised housing, resume using substances, and fall away from medication and treatment. He would rapidly decompensate back to a state of psychosis, and he would experience paranoia and disorganization of thought and behaviour, similar to the state in which he committed all of the Index Offences. He would then pose a serious risk of physical and psychological harm to members of the public.
[27]. The Board agrees with the hospital’s conclusions, set out on page 60 of the Hospital Report, that the necessary and appropriate Disposition continues to be a Detention Order at Ontario Shores, to ensure that Mr. Weber remains in hospital until suitable housing becomes available. The hospital needs to retain the authority to approve Mr. Weber's housing, to ensure that it meets his needs for supervision and support. Once Mr. Weber is discharged to suitable housing, the hospital will require the authority to readmit him immediately, if he should decompensate because of medication non-adherence, substance use, or other stressors.
[28]. In particular, the Board relies on the following extracted paragraphs from the Hospital Report as to why Mr. Weber remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and why a Conditional Discharge is not appropriate:
“Mr. Weber’s historical risk factors for violent recidivism, as outlined by the HCR-20V3, include at least partial evidence for a history of problems with violence, other antisocial behaviour, relationships, employment, substance use, major mental disorder, traumatic experiences, and treatment or supervision response, all of which are considered relevant to his risk.
Over the past reporting year, items considered partially present and relevant to Mr. Weber’s risk include recent problems with insight, symptoms of major mental disorder, instability, and treatment or supervision response. He continued to experience residual delusional beliefs, as well as frequent anxiety symptoms and panic attacks. Mr. Weber’s awareness of his current functional limitations, and of the risk associated with his vulnerability to stress, anxiety, and related psychotic symptoms, remained limited. He was often eager to move quickly toward future plans without fully recognizing the extent to which his anxiety continued to affect his daily functioning. Given Mr. Weber’s history of repeated re-offending, and the potential for increased risk even in the context of relatively minor stressors, particularly as minor life changes were present in each of his past re-offence incidents, it is evident that he continues to require intensive support.”
[29]. In consideration of all the evidence, submissions of the parties and criteria set forth in s. 672.54, the paramount consideration being the safety of the public, in addition to the mental condition of Mr. Weber, his reintegration into society and his other needs, the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the Detention Order.
DATED this 26th day of May 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Mr. J. Weinstein Alternate Chairperson Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board