Re: Brandon Haine
ORB File No: 8719
Hearing held on: Tuesday, May 5, 2026
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Sections 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. P.L. Darby Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Ms. C. Murray Ms. M. McKinnon
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Brandon Haine Counsel: Ms. C. Francis (via Zoom)
Person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 2, 2026)
Introduction
On February 5, 2025, Mr. Brandon Haine was found unfit to stand trial in relation to a charge of fail to comply with probation that occurred on or between August 11, 2023, and August 14, 2023, and charges of assault with a weapon, aggravated assault (x2), and fail to comply with probation committed on August 19, 2023, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code").
Mr. Haine is currently subject to a Detention Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”), dated May 22, 2025, detaining him at the High Secure Provincial Programs of the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including hospital and grounds privileges, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff.
On May 5, 2026, a panel of the Board convened an in-person hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code to conduct the annual review of Mr. Haine’s Disposition. The issues to be determined are whether Mr. Haine remains unfit as of the date of the hearing within the meaning of s.2 of the Criminal Code. If he remains unfit, but not permanently so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage his risk must be determined, bearing in mind the criteria set out in s.672.54 of the Criminal Code. If Mr. Haine is found to be fit, he must be sent back to court.
Mr. Haine was present at the hearing and represented by his lawyer, Ms. Francis, who attended by Zoom.
The Board had before it a Hospital Report dated March 26, 2026, which was entered as Exhibit 1. A Rule 13 Response from Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care (“Southwest”) dated April 24, 2026, was entered as Exhibit 2.
For the reasons set out below, and based on the evidence before us, this Board has concluded that Mr. Haine is unfit to stand trial. The Board found that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat posed to the public by Mr. Haine is a continuation of the Detention Disposition detaining him at Waypoint with no change to the conditions and privileges.
Positions of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing the parties were canvassed as to their without prejudice positions. Ms. Murdock stated that it is the hospital’s position that Mr. Haine remains unfit to stand trial. The hospital recommended Mr. Haine’s transfer to and Detention at the Forensic Programs of Southwest with the following privileges and conditions:
To attend within or outside of the hospital for necessary medical, dental, legal or compassionate purposes;
Hospital and grounds privileges escorted by staff;
Hospital and grounds privileges accompanied by staff;
To enter the catchment area of Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care escorted by staff;
To abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
To submit samples of his urine and/or breath to the Person-in-Charge of the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, or his or her designate, for the purpose of analyzing whether the accused has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant; and
To refrain from having in his possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer.
The Hospital recommended that residual authority remain with Waypoint with Detention of the accused pending transfer and, at the discretion of the Person in Charge, to implement the following privileges and conditions:
To attend within or outside of the hospital for necessary medical, dental, legal or compassionate purposes;
Hospital grounds privileges, beyond the secure perimeter, escorted by staff;
To abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of alcohol or drugs or any other intoxicant;
To submit samples of his urine and/or breath to the Person-in-Charge of Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, or his or her designate, for the purpose of analyzing whether the accused has ingested alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicant; and
To refrain from having in his possession any firearm, ammunition or other offensive weapon, or being in the company of any person possessing a firearm other than a peace officer.
Counsel for the Attorney General, Ms. Curry, supported the hospital’s position.
Counsel for Mr. Haine, Ms. Francis, did not take a position regarding Mr. Haine’s fitness to stand trial. Ms. Francis supported the Disposition recommendations proposed by the hospital.
Index Offences
- The circumstances giving rise to the Index Offences are set out in the Hospital Report in detail and are summarized as follows:
Mr. Haine received a sentence of two years less one day incarceration and three years’ probation on March 18, 2021, in relation to charges of aggravated assault (x3), break and enter a dwelling house and commit aggravate assault, assault peace officer causing bodily harm, break and enter and commit arson, cause damage by fire recklessly, assault bodily harm.
He was released from jail on August 12, 2023, but failed to report to probation. On August 19, 2023, while under a bail order not to possess weapons, he stabbed a stranger on the street in London. He then stabbed another stranger on the street on August 20, 2019.
Background Information
The Hospital Report details Mr. Haine’s personal background and history and will not be repeated extensively herein. Briefly, Mr. Haine is a 26-year-old father of one son who lives with his maternal grandmother. He was in and out of foster care as a child. Both of Mr. Haine’s biological parents have diagnoses of schizophrenia. Mr. Haine attended school up to grade 11. Mr. Haine engaged in substance use since approximately age 12. His substance use has included alcohol, cannabis, acid, cocaine, mushrooms, methamphetamine, MDMA, and sedatives. His adoptive mother reported that his substance use contributed to his behavioural and mental health issues. Mr. Haine has a lengthy criminal history commencing in January 2015, including convictions for property offences, assaults, and assaults with a weapon.
Mr. Haine’s diagnoses are Schizophrenia and Amphetamine-type Substance Use Disorder, Moderate.
Mr. Haine has difficulty retaining information. An intellectual disability could be present. He sometimes has difficulty communicating.
Mr. Haine is incapable of consenting to his psychiatric treatment. His mother is his substitute decision maker. At the outset of the reporting year, there were several instances where Mr. Haine refused oral medication or would throw it away. More recently he has demonstrated improved compliance. He is cooperative with injectable antipsychotic medication.
Mr. Haine was initiated on long-acting injectable Paliperidone 75 mg on May 12, 2025, with a second loading dose administered on May 20, 2025. The regimen was transitioned to every 28 days on June 9, 2025, and subsequently increased to 100 mg every 28 days on August 12, 2025. The injection was later adjusted to 100 mg every 21 days on September 30, 2025, which remains his current regimen. Mr. Haine has demonstrated gradual and clinically significant improvement of his mental status and behavioural regulation beginning approximately June 2025.
Mr. Haine resides on the Forensic Assessment Program at Waypoint. Early in the reporting period, Mr. Haine engaged in aggressive behaviours, including verbal threats, environmental aggression, and some physical aggression. Since consistently taking his medication, his mental status has improved. He is occasionally observed responding to internal stimuli.
Mr. Haine’s security levels have fluctuated throughout the year. He has been able to maintain independent security levels since mid-October 2025. Until his seclusion on the day prior to this hearing, he enjoyed a C5 security level and appropriately used his independent privileges, safely, within the secure perimeter.
During the reporting period, Mr. Haine required seclusion on three occasions: from July 30, 2025 to August 7, 2025 (for an unprovoked assault on a co-patient); from September 18, 2025 to September 29, 2025 (for an unprovoked assault on a co-patient); and from February 12, 2026 to February 18, 2026 (for an unprovoked assault on a co-patient). He engaged in a fourth assault on the day prior to this hearing.
Mr. Haine has been unwilling to engage in fitness coaching throughout the review period.
Oral Evidence at the Hearing
Dr. Komer, Mr. Haine’s attending psychiatrist, provided oral evidence at the hearing to supplement the documentary evidence.
Dr. Komer testified that Mr. Haine remains unfit to stand trial. Dr. Komer last assessed Mr. Haine on May 5, 2026, being the day of this hearing. For the first time in several months Mr. Haine agreed to answer questions about the court process. Mr. Haine was able to identify the aggravated assault charges and expressed a wish to plead not guilty to those charges. He did not know who would make the decision whether he was guilty or not guilty. Mr. Haine did not know what would happen if he was found guilty. He was able to understand that his lawyer would defend him. He did not know what an oath or perjury was. He did not know if he could go to jail. He exhibited thought disorder and would not be able to communicate with counsel nor meaningfully attend at trial. He has not been fit at any time over this review period. Mr. Haine has not had any formal fitness coaching yet. Dr. Komer stated that Mr. Haine was better able to answer fitness questions today than previously, yet he remains unfit. He is showing improvements in his fitness to stand trial and he may become fit.
Dr. Komer stated that Mr. Haine hit another patient the day prior to this hearing. Therefore, he is in seclusion now. Dr. Komer stated that, in fact, the unit staff were concerned how he would be able to attend at this hearing in restraints. Until his seclusion, Mr. Haine was doing much better and was going to school, had C5 privileges, attended computer lab, and had a Zoom visit with his mother. The incident that happened yesterday was unpredicted.
Details of yesterday’s assault are as follows. Mr. Haine was provoked by another patient who made comments to him. Mr. Haine took a swing at the other patient. The other patient hit Mr. Haine three times and kneed him. They made threatening statements to each other. This incident resulted in Mr. Haine’s seclusion. Generally, there have been no reports of Mr. Haine having problems with other patients until yesterday.
The day of this hearing, Mr. Haine presented as unwell. When Dr. Komer met with him, Mr. Haine was swinging his arms and was unable to remain seated when requested to do so. He was agitated and had trouble following direction today.
Mr. Haine is currently medication compliant, which is an improvement from his past history. Dr. Komer stated that Epival may be added to Mr. Haine’s medication regimen for the purpose of mood stabilization.
Mr. Haine currently resides on the Forensic Assessment Program (“FAP”). Dr. Komer anticipates that he will be moving to another unit and that a referral has likely already been made for this purpose.
Dr. Komer stated that Mr. Haine can be managed in a less secure setting. Other than an extended period of seclusion when Mr. Haine arrived at Waypoint, he has since had only short periods of seclusion. In reference to the Rule 13 Response from Southwest, Dr. Komer stated that Southwest does have the ability to seclude patients. He noted that Southwest stated they have only one seclusion space in its two treatment units. Dr. Komer stated that resources at Southwest may present an issue for the transfer. Dr. Komer recommends privileges at Southwest be escorted to limit concerns about Mr. Haine having access to substances. Dr. Komer stated that substances would destabilize Mr. Haine further.
Mr. Haine’s family and his child are in the Southwest region. He does not believe that Mr. Haine has active contact with his son.
In response to questions of the Board, Dr. Komer stated that something unknown happened to cause Mr. Haine’s deterioration of his mental state, which led to seclusion, yesterday. Dr. Komer ordered drug testing. The results have not returned yet. He also felt stress could be a factor in Mr. Haine’s decompensation. It is likely that the current decompensation in Mr. Haine’s mental state is a natural progression of his illness. Based on yesterday’s decompensation, Dr. Komer opined that Mr. Haine is not yet optimally treated.
Dr. Komer testified that one of the downsides of a transfer to Southwest would be that Mr. Haine could be more restricted at Southwest if there are resource issues. If Southwest does not have an ability to seclude Mr. Haine, there could be a negative impact on his privileges.
Dr. Komer stated that there may be a benefit to keeping Mr. Haine at Waypoint to further stabilize him. However, Dr. Komer anticipates that there is a waiting list at Southwest.
The Board asked Dr. Komer whether Mr. Haine would have the ability to abstain from substances if he had access to them at Southwest. Dr. Komer stated that Mr. Haine will use substances if he has access to them. There will be possible increased access to substances at Southwest. Supervision at Southwest will be important and substance use would be useful.
Mr. Haine has engaged in three assaults since September 2025. The assaults were unprovoked or in response to a perceived slight.
Dr. Komer was asked by a panel member if it is premature to transfer Mr. Haine to a facility where there will be greater access to substances, when it is known Mr. Haine will have difficulties staying away from substances. Dr. Komer stated that if drugs are available, it will be more of a problem for Mr. Haine.
Submissions
Given that there were joint positions at the outset of the hearing, the Board advised the parties that there may be problems with the appropriateness of a transfer to Southwest. The Board offered the parties the opportunity to provide further evidence and submissions in this regard.
The Hospital maintained its initial position that Mr. Haine is unfit to stand trial and he should be transferred to Southwest on a Detention Order with terms described initially. Ms. Murdock stated that there has been an overall improvement in Mr. Haine’s mental status over the course of the reporting period. Mr. Haine has not engaged in sexually inappropriate behaviour and has not used substances. The hospital recommended accompanied privileges at Southwest, which would be sufficient to mitigate substance use. The hospital has recommended conditions requiring Mr. Haine to abstain from substance use and submit urine and breath samples, which will allow Southwest to have oversight over Mr. Haine’s potential substance use. Southwest is able to provide seclusion, if necessary. The wait time for a transfer would allow for medication optimization prior to Mr. Haine’s transfer.
Ms. Curry submitted that Mr. Haine was on a positive trajectory for two months before the unexpected incident yesterday leading to seclusion. She expressed hope that this seclusion would be short-lived. Mr. Haine is motivated to go to Southwest to be closer to his family A transfer would be a good motivator for Mr. Haine to maintain good behaviour. His goal of going to Southwest to be closer to his family is an important protective factor. Ms. Curry stated that optimization of Mr. Haine’s medications will hopefully help to render him fit to stand trial. Ms. Curry submitted that FAP does not have programming for substance use, but this programming would be available at Southwest or at Waypoint’s Beckwith and Beausoleil programs.
Ms. Francis submitted that Mr. Haine’s family reside in the Greater London area. When Mr. Haine is fit to stand trial, he should reside closer to the location where his trial will be. Mr. Haine is currently residing on FAP, which is loud and chaotic. At Southwest Mr. Haine would be in the assessment unit briefly. Being removed from loud and chaotic assessment units will help Mr. Haine’s mental status and he may not be as likely to present with challenging behaviours. Ms. Francis offered that seclusion at Southwest looks quite different than it does at Waypoint. Ms. Francis did not take a position regarding fitness.
Analysis and Conclusion
FITNESS
- Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions from the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Haine is currently unfit to stand trial, based on the guidance as set out in the Supreme Court of Canada decision of R v Bharwani, 2025 SCC 26, at paragraph 6, as follows:
“[A]n accused is fit to stand trial when they are able to make and communicate reality-based decisions in the conduct of their defence or instruct counsel to do so. Conducting a defence includes making decisions that an accused must always make personally and those which relate to the exercise of their right to full answer and defence, such as decisions about pleas, the mode of trial, selection of counsel, whether to testify, whether to call or cross-examine witnesses, and closing submissions, among others. The capacity required to make those decisions is a reality-based understanding of the nature or object of the proceedings and their possible consequences, an ability to understand the available options and their consequences, and an ability to select between those options when making decisions. Fitness to stand trial does not require an accused to make decisions in their best interests. Rather, it requires making decisions based on an understanding of reality that is not overwhelmed by delusions, hallucinations, or other symptoms of their mental disorder. Transient mental health symptoms do not necessarily compromise an accused’s ability to conduct a defence. The focus is always on assessing the extent to which an accused’s mental disorder impairs their understanding of reality when making and communicating decisions in their defence.”
- The panel is aware of the serious consequences of a finding of unfitness to stand trial, including the loss of the accused’s liberty, and appreciates that such a finding must not be made lightly. The Board accepted Dr. Komer’s opinion that Mr. Haine would not be able to meaningfully participate in a trial at this time. It would appear that Mr. Haine’s ability to answer fitness questions is improving. However, applying the Bharwani principles, Mr. Haine clearly remains unfit to stand trial as of the date of this hearing. It is hoped that optimization of his medication will help Mr. Haine achieve fitness to stand trial. There is no evidence that Mr. Haine is permanently unfit.
NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE DISPOSITION
Having found Mr. Haine remains unfit to stand trial, but not permanently so, the Board must make a Disposition that is necessary and appropriate, considering the criteria delineated in s.672.54 of the Criminal Code.
The Board and parties are unanimous that a Detention Order is the necessary and appropriate Disposition. Mr. Haine was in seclusion on the date of the hearing for hitting another patient. There have been other behaviours requiring seclusion over the course of this reporting period. Although there have been modest improvements over time, Mr. Haine has experienced a significant decompensation in his mental state for reasons not yet known. He was, in fact, in seclusion on the date of this hearing.
The Board found that Mr. Haine is not appropriate for a transfer to Southwest. Mr. Haine has a pattern of assaultive behaviour with four significant incidents during the reporting period. Mr. Haine is experiencing decompensation in his mental status that is likely to result in an increase in assaultive behaviours. The cause of Mr. Haine’s decompensation is not yet known but it is known that Mr. Haine is not optimally treated.
It is anticipated that Mr. Haine will be moved from FAP to another unit within Waypoint. This will afford Mr. Haine greater access to necessary programs and possibly greater freedoms. There is concern that, if Mr. Haine was transferred to Southwest, he could be more restricted. If Southwest has an inability to seclude Mr. Haine, when necessary, there could be a negative impact on his privileges.
The Board takes notice of the fact that substances are generally more easily accessible in medium security hospitals, including Southwest. Dr. Komer was clear in his evidence that Mr. Haine will use substances if he has access to them. The Board does not believe that supervision alone will be sufficient to preclude Mr. Haine from obtaining substances at Southwest. Mr. Haine has not yet engaged in treatment for his substance use.
The psychometrist who authored the Risk Assessment Report noted the following in the Hospital Report at page 32, which is relied on by the Board:
“Substance Use: Mr. Haine has a current diagnosis of amphetamine-type substance use disorder. He reported initiating alcohol and cannabis use as early as age 12. His substance use has involved multiple substances over time, including methamphetamine, cannabis, sedatives, and MDMA. Other collateral sources indicate that he may also have used LSD, cocaine, mushrooms, and crack. His mother reported that his substance use became problematic during early adolescence and contributed to both behavioural and mental health difficulties. Notably, Mr. Haine has acknowledged that methamphetamine use exacerbated his auditory hallucinations and was associated with periods of psychiatric admission and criminal behaviour. Despite this, he has reported ongoing substance use while in custody and during hospital admissions. There have also been concerns regarding medication misuse, including suspicions that he has ground up and insufflated prescribed oral antipsychotic medication.”
It is noteworthy that Mr. Haine’s mother, his substitute decision maker, is of the opinion that Mr. Haine should remain detained at Waypoint.
The Board believes that it is likely that Mr. Haine will become non-adherent to his medication should he use substances. The Hospital Report notes (at page 34) that Mr. Haine has demonstrated past difficulties with treatment compliance, including inconsistent adherence to prescribed medication, which raises concerns about his ability to engage with treatment in a less structured environment. The Board finds that a transfer to a less secure setting may increase the likelihood of non-compliance as well as providing greater access to access illicit substances, which would further destabilize him.
It is important that Mr. Haine be afforded every opportunity to achieve fitness to stand trial while having the least onerous and least restrictive conditions imposed on him. Detention at Waypoint during this period of instability will ensure his adherence to medication and sustained abstinence from substances.
The Board appreciates that the parties put forward a joint submission that Mr. Haine be transferred to a less secure facility. The panel does not reject this joint submission lightly. As the Court of Appeal stated in Hassan (Re), 2011 ONCA 561, [2011] O.J. No. 3800 at para. 24, the Board “ought to tread cautiously” before making an order that restricts the accused’s liberty beyond that which the hospital and Crown believe is necessary. However, the panel relies on the court’s comments at para. 25, as follows:
“However, the Board does not necessarily err because it declines to follow a hospital’s or Crown’s recommendation. Automatically adhering to the position of a hospital or Crown would mean abdicating its own role. A review board is composed of medical and legal experts with specialized knowledge and experience in mental health and in risk assessment and management. Parliament has vested these boards with authority to make their own independent and often difficult determinations after weighing the package of factors in s. 672.54 of the Code.”
- For the above reasons, the Board finds that the necessary and appropriate, least onerous, and least restrictive Disposition is a continuation of the Detention Order at Waypoint on the same terms as last year, as set out in our formal Disposition.
DATED this 2nd day of June 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. C. Murray Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board