Re Harley Mitchell, 2026 CanLII 53899

Re: Harley Mitchell

ORB File No: 8984 Hearing held on: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 Place of hearing: St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton West 5th Campus, 100 West 5th Street

Pursuant to: Section 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley Members: Dr. A. Iosif (via Zoom) Dr. M. Kalia Mr. E. Siebenmorgen Ms. K. McMillan

Parties Appearing: Accused: Harley Mitchell Counsel: Mr. P.R. Boushy

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. S. O’Brien

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. McKenzie

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated June 3, 2026)

Introduction

1On March 25, 2026, Harley Mitchell was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCR) on charges of Advocating Genocide, Willful Promotion of Hatred, Willful Promotion of Antisemitism, Uttering Threats and Failure to Comply with a Probation Order, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. The Honourable Justice Garg declined to make a disposition and referred Mr. Mitchell to the jurisdiction of the Ontario Review Board (ORB/the Board). Mr. Mitchell was transferred to St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (St. Joseph’s/the hospital) by way of a Warrant of Committal dated March 25, 2026.

2On May 19, 2026, the Board convened a hearing to conduct Mr. Mitchell’s initial hearing pursuant to s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Mitchell was present with his counsel, Mr. Boushy.

3At the outset of the proceedings, all parties were canvassed as to their positions on the two issues to be determined by the Board: whether Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the necessary and appropriate disposition having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

4Mr. O’Brien, on behalf of the hospital, submitted that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order with discretionary privileges up to and including the ability to exercise passes in the community indirectly supervised. Ms. McKenzie, on behalf of the Ministry of the Attorney General, concurred in the hospital’s positions but for indirectly supervised passes in the community. In her submission, accompanied passes should represent the most liberal discretionary passes available to Mr. Mitchell.

5Mr. Boushy conceded that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. Initially he was in agreement with the hospital in terms of the necessary and appropriate disposition, including the recommended terms and conditions. However, at the conclusion of the evidence, Mr. Boushy indicated that Mr. Mitchell would be agreeable to a disposition that did not include indirectly supervised passes in the community.

Findings

6The panel found that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and the necessary and appropriate disposition is a detention order with the terms and conditions as recommended by the hospital. In addition, the panel ordered that Mr. Mitchell not possess or use any electronic device that has access to the internet and social media except with prior approval of the person-in-charge. In addition, upon such use, Mr. Mitchell will advise the person-in-charge or his delegate of any use or creation of any new social media accounts and provide his username and password.

The Evidence

7The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated May 8, 2026 (ex. 1), a Joint Community Impact Statement (ex. 2), an Executive Summary of the Community Impact Statement and the attached appendix, Police-reported Hate Crimes Statistics (ex. 3), and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Tan, one of Mr. Mitchell’s current Most Responsible Physicians.

The Index Offences

8On September 26, 2024, the Hamilton Police Service received a request from Interpol to locate Harley Mitchell. Over the course of the previous weeks, Mr. Mitchell had posted on X more than 4000 social media posts containing antisemitic slurs, denying the Holocaust and repeated messages advocating violence against, including killing, Jews. In one he stated, “IM GOING TO KILL SO MANY ZIONIST RATS”.

9Mr. Mitchell’s posts repeatedly referred to a timeline of two weeks in which he had booked a flight from Toronto to Oslo, Norway.¹ On September 23, 2024, he posted “Untermensch² your betrayals were a blessing. Now watch in abject horror as I slaughter Zionists in about two weeks.”

10These messages caused the community, in particular the Jewish community, to be fearful and experience significant psychological distress.

11At the time of these offences, Mr. Mitchell had been subject to a probation order issued on October 3, 2022, requiring him to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. He had been convicted of uttering threats, mischief under and assault in October 2022 and, in recognition that he had served 30 days pretrial custody, received a suspended sentence with probation for three years and a weapons prohibition for 10 years.

Background Information

12The Hospital Report contains details about Mr. Mitchell’s personal background and psychiatric history and need not be reviewed in detail in these reasons beyond the following material facts.

13Mr. Mitchell is a 33-year-old man who was born and raised in Hamilton, Ontario. As a youth he exhibited compulsive lying behaviour and experienced persistent social difficulties. There are also reports of him bullying and being physically aggressive towards his younger brother. He was asked to leave the family home when he was 19 after he physically attacked his brother. His mother described Mr. Mitchell as becoming very angry and aggressive within a short period of time.

14Education records indicate that Mr. Mitchell was involved in frequent physical altercations with peers. He reportedly experienced significant racism and bullying. He also was the perpetrator of bullying. Mr. Mitchell participated in anger management programming during middle school.

15Mr. Mitchell joined the Canadian Armed Forces Army Reserves in 2015 at the age of 23. He told the assessment team that he joined in order to investigate the murder of his high school girlfriend. He believed she had died at the hands of someone who had joined the military. He also told the team that during his time with the Reserve he had been deployed to Syria and Afghanistan.³ During the course of his training with the Reserve, Mr. Mitchell was trained in gunnery and marksmanship. Mr. Mitchell was discharged from the Armed Forces in 2020 following multiple altercations with a fellow Reserve member.

16Following his discharge, Mr. Mitchell lived in community shelters and on the streets of Hamilton. From 2021 to 2024 he was financially supported by Ontario Works. Since 2024, Mr. Mitchell has been supported by the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).

17Mr. Mitchell’s October 2022 convictions related to an attack upon the former Reserve member and that member’s grandmother, on February 4, 2020. The victims were walking toward the John Sopinka Courthouse in Hamilton, where the male victim was seeking to apply for a peace bond against Mr. Mitchell due to the previous altercations. Mr. Mitchell approached the male victim from behind, grabbed and spun him around, and swung at his head with a closed fist. The victim was able to evade contact and backed away. His grandmother asked Mr. Mitchell what he was doing to the victim, to which Mr. Mitchell replied that he was going to kill him. The grandmother called police on her cell phone and Mr. Mitchell wandered away. While awaiting police arrival, the grandmother saw Mr. Mitchell approaching again and yelling. As she took out her phone to take a picture of Mr. Mitchell, he grabbed her phone and threw it against the court building, causing it to come apart.

18In 2023, Mr. Mitchell told his mother of his intention to go to Russia to serve in the military. He became highly agitated when his mother challenged this plan and threw a cup of coffee at her, at which time she asked him to leave her home.

19In addition to the convictions noted above from 2022, Mr. Mitchell was convicted of assault with a weapon and uttering a threat to cause death or bodily harm arising out of an incident in July 2024, shortly before his arrest on the index offences. On July 22, 2024, Mr. Mitchell was sleeping in a park. When the victim’s dog approached him, he pulled out a knife and swung at the dog. Later that morning the victim identified Mr. Mitchell to her boyfriend who tried to detain him for police. Mr. Mitchell yelled, “I’ll kill you, you fucking nigger” and threatened to use a knife, while attempting to reach inside of his bag. Police arrived and arrested Mr. Mitchell. After his NCR verdict on the index offences, Mr. Mitchell pleaded guilty to the above offences and received a sentence of one day (in recognition of 90 days pretrial custody) and probationary conditions including no contact with the victims and not to possess any weapons.

20Mr. Mitchell reported first using cannabis at approximately 16 years of age and continued regular use thereafter. He described both feeling “chilled out” and also an increased sense of paranoia. Mr. Mitchell last used cannabis during the summer of 2024, proximate to the time of the index offences. Mr. Mitchell began consuming alcohol at the age of 16 and, when he was 22, his intake increased significantly.

21Prior to his arrest on the index offences, Mr. Mitchell had no admissions to hospital for psychiatric care. Family members had identified unusual behaviour including a fixation on military involvement in Russia as well as a claim that he was married to a musician.

22On October 15, 2024, Mr. Mitchell was transferred from the Hamilton Wentworth Detention Centre to St. Joseph’s pursuant to a Form 1 under the Mental Health Act. While at the detention centre, he had expressed persecutory beliefs, including that the CIA was pursuing him. Upon admission to hospital, he continued to present with prominent delusional ideation, including that he was married to Princess Ingrid of Norway and claimed familial ties to the Norwegian royal family. Mr. Mitchell was treated with a long-acting antipsychotic and antidepressant medications. Mr. Mitchell appeared to respond well to treatment, with a reduction in both the frequency and intensity of his delusional thought content. However, it was noted that Mr. Mitchell continued to demonstrate “prominent negative symptoms”. On December 16, 2024, Mr. Mitchell was transferred back to the detention centre.

23Following the NCR verdict, Mr. Mitchell was admitted to St. Joseph’s on April 1, 2026. Mr. Mitchell’s current diagnoses are Schizophrenia, Cannabis Use Disorder and Alcohol Use Disorder. He is considered marginally capable of making decisions in respect of antipsychotic treatment.

24Dr. Tan testified before the panel. He is a Post Graduate Year 6 resident working under the supervision of Dr. Wu, a forensic psychiatrist. In addition to his role as a member of Mr. Mitchell’s current treatment team, Dr. Tan assisted in a previous risk assessment for Mr. Mitchell ordered by the Court pursuant to the Mental Health Act, as well as the NCR assessment.

25Dr. Tan reported that since his recent admission to hospital, Mr. Mitchell has remained compliant with treatment. However, he disagrees with the diagnosis and disagrees with the necessity of his prescribed medications. Mr. Mitchell is quite reclusive with limited interaction with the other patients on the unit. He spends most of his time watching television. There has been no violence or aggressive behaviour.

26In the previous risk assessment conducted for the Court, a psychologist, Dr. Sheridan, tested Mr. Mitchell using the Anger Disorder Scale (ADS), an instrument designed to evaluate the intensity of subjective anger and patterns of anger expression. Dr. Sheridan found that the “[r]esults from the ADS indicated that pathological anger is a serious and pervasive problem in Mr. Mitchell’s life. Those who score similarly experienced anger that interferes with their lives on an almost daily basis.” ⁴ In Dr. Sheridan’s opinion, Mr. Mitchell’s risk for violent re-offending is considered high. Dr. Tan testified that what was described as Mr. Mitchell’s pathological anger is a serious and pervasive problem in Mr. Mitchell’s life.

27Dr. Tan testified that many of the incidents exemplifying Mr. Mitchell’s anger occurred during the time that Mr. Mitchell was not yet diagnosed and therefore untreated. He likely would have been experiencing psychotic symptoms. Yet at the same time, Dr. Tan identified that Mr. Mitchell demonstrated issues with anger management during grade school which would have preceded any mental illness.

28Once Mr. Mitchell receives a disposition, he will be moved from the Forensic Assessment unit to one of the rehabilitation units. Absent a disposition, Mr. Mitchell would return to the community. He would quickly fall away from treatment, would have no supports, and would be homeless. Mr. Mitchell has stated that he does not feel that he needs antipsychotic medication. As a result, Mr. Mitchell would be in the same circumstances as the time of the index offences. He would represent a significant threat to the community.

29Dr. Tan testified that over the next clinical year, Mr. Mitchell’s new treatment team would focus on two areas. They will want to optimize his psychiatric treatment, either by way of an increase in his existing dosage or exploring other medications. While some of Mr. Mitchell’s delusions have been treated, others have continued and have not resolved with his current medication. Therapeutic programming would also be available to him once he transitions to a rehabilitation unit.

30Secondly, Mr. Mitchell would begin to exercise a very gradual introduction of passes. He has remained in custody or in a secure forensic unit since his arrest. These passes would allow the team to monitor Mr. Mitchell’s ability to tolerate stress and maintain his abstinence. The potential for indirectly supervised passes is recommended as the ceiling for his discretionary passes. Before those were approved, Mr. Mitchell would have to demonstrate successful exercise of privileges allowing for directly escorted and accompanied passes on hospital grounds, and escorted and accompanied passes in the community. It would be a very gradual and incremental process.

31In response to questions posed by Ms. McKenzie, Dr. Tan reiterated that Mr. Mitchell disagrees with his diagnosis of schizophrenia and does not believe that he is at risk of any reoccurrence of psychosis even if he were not to take any medications. In Dr. Tan’s opinion, it is likely that Mr. Mitchell was undiagnosed and untreated for at least 8 years. Since he has commenced treatment the intensity of his psychotic symptoms has decreased and some continue to persist, including those involving the Jewish community.

32Dr. Tan indicated that if Mr. Mitchell’s medications are optimized, he has a good response to treatment and successfully exercises his passes, there is a possibility he would be recommended for time-limited indirectly supervised passes in the community. The possibility would be something for Mr. Mitchell to work towards. It would also serve as a motivator to continue to engage in treatment and work cooperatively with the treatment team.

33In response to questions from the panel, Dr. Tan reported that Mr. Mitchell’s intelligence testing was conducted while Mr. Mitchell was experiencing active psychotic symptoms. Following treatment with medication, his overall functioning appears to fall within the average range. There is no indication of a primary intellectual deficit. Dr. Tan agreed that description in the Hospital Report identifying “modest intellectual functioning” as a protective factor would not be accurate given the updated opinion suggests intellectual functioning within the average range. Dr. Tan noted that average intellectual functioning may instead be considered a protective factor.

34When asked about whether, within the next year, there was a possibility that Mr. Mitchell would be ready to be placed on a waiting list for housing, Dr. Tan testified that there are a number of aspects that the treatment team will have to take into consideration beyond the waiting lists. Those considerations will have to be addressed prior to any consideration of a referral to assess appropriate community housing. At this time, it would be premature to include a community living clause in Mr. Mitchell’s disposition.

35Dr. Tan testified that the treatment team will make best efforts to monitor Mr. Mitchell’s access to the internet, keeping in mind that he could use another patient’s phone unbeknownst to the team.

36Ms. Sydney Waxman, a representative of the Jewish Community and member of the Hamilton Jewish community, read an executive summary of the Community Impact Statement. The statement underscored the significant emotional and psychological harm that was experienced and continues to be experienced by the community resulting from Mr. Mitchell’s posts on social media.

37At the conclusion of the evidence the hospital and the Ministry of the Attorney General maintained their initial positions. Once again, the Ministry of the Attorney General was not supporting the inclusion of the discretionary passes allowing for indirectly supervised passes in the community.

38Mr. Boushy indicated that Mr. Mitchell was not opposed to the requirement that any passes in the community be limited to directly supervised.

Analysis and Conclusion

39The panel carefully considered the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. Tan and unanimously concluded that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public. The concession that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public is well-founded. The conduct behind the charges was extremely serious. He willfully promoted hatred by calling for violence towards members of the Jewish community. Notably, he took steps to act on those delusions by purchasing a plane ticket to Oslo.

40Mr. Mitchell’s diagnosis of schizophrenia and his delusions with respect to that community, among other delusions, have resulted in his vitriolic and hateful posts. His pathological anger is a serious and pervasive problem that remains. Mr. Mitchell’s risk for violent re-offending is considered high.

41The impact of Mr. Mitchell’s barrage of over 4000 posts has been immeasurable. The Jewish community, in particular, was subjected to racial slurs, incitement of violence, and derision, disdain and disrespect. As reflected in the Community Impact Statement, members have had to alter their day-to-day activities, forced to anticipate and plan for attacks emotionally, physically and financially. Mr. Mitchell’s actions amplified the vitriol on social media, encouraging and affording others on the platform to further disseminate hate speech. Should Mr. Mitchell not be subject to a disposition of the ORB, he is at high risk to re-offend violently, perpetrating significant psychological harm. As such, he is a significant threat to the community, particularly the Jewish community writ large.

42Having found that Mr. Mitchell represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, the panel must consider the necessary and appropriate disposition taking into consideration the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, which includes the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, the mental condition of the accused, the integration of the accused into society and the other needs of the accused.

43A detention order is the necessary and appropriate disposition. Mr. Mitchell has been experiencing symptoms of his psychosis for years and he is in the early stages of treatment. Fortunately, some improvements have been noted. When he is moved to a rehabilitation unit, his new treatment team will thoroughly assess his needs and a treatment plan formulated. It remains to be seen whether, with sustained treatment for his major mental illness, his pathological anger score will continue to be high.

44After careful consideration, the panel unanimously found that the condition allowing for indirectly supervised passes in the community are to be included in the disposition. It is by no means assured that Mr. Mitchell will be in a position to exercise those passes within the next year. There are a number of hurdles that have to be overcome. Mr. Mitchell must demonstrate the ability to exercise passes successfully before moving to the next level. The panel accepted Dr. Tan’s evidence that including such a term will serve to be a motivator for Mr. Mitchell to engage in treatment and work cooperatively with the treatment team.

45The panel further found that, at this early stage, there needs to be careful and close monitoring of Mr. Mitchell’s access to the internet. He will need the hospital’s prior approval before accessing the internet and, should he create or access a social media account, he is to provide the treatment team with his username and password.

46In arriving at this conclusion, the panel has considered the paramount factor of the safety of the public, Mr. Mitchell’s community reintegration, his mental condition, and his other needs as required by s. 672.5 of the Criminal Code.

Footnotes

1. 1Mr. Mitchell had actually purchased a ticket to Oslo departing October 7, 2024.
2. 2The evidence at the hearing was this is a derogatory term meaning “sub-human” or “inferior to human” in German.
3. 3His family advised that he was never deployed. Further, his girlfriend at the time had not been murdered but rather had left him to return to a previous boyfriend.
4. 4Hospital Report at p.13