Re: K. (J.)
ORB File No: 3591
Hearing held on: Friday, May 8, 2026
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Capelle
Members: Dr. R. Kunjukrishnan (by Zoom) Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Ms. C. Murray Ms. M. McKinnon
Parties Appearing:
Accused: K. (J.) Counsel: Mr. T.R. McIver
Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. M. Kraftscik
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Armenise
*Pursuant to section 110(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, no person shall publish the name of the accused, or any other information, if such publication would identify the accused as a person who was dealt with as a young person under the Youth Criminal Justice Act or the former Young Offenders Act.
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated June 10, 2026)
Introduction
[1]. On June 21, 2002, K. (J.) was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on two charges of assault (x2), uttering threats (x2), assault with a weapon, mischief, and possession of weapon, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Code"). K. (J.) is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the "Board") dated May 7, 2025, detaining him at the All-Male Unit at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH”) with privileges up to live in the community in 24 hour a day supervised accommodation approved by the person in charge.
[2]. On May 8, 2026, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (the "ORB" or the "Board") convened a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Code.
Preliminary Matter
[3]. K. (J.) was not present when the hearing began. His counsel, Mr. McIver, advised that he had spoken to K. (J.) by phone in the hours prior to this hearing. Mr. McIver has instructions to proceed in his client’s absence. As a result, K. (J.)’s presence was excused per s. 672.5(10)(a) of the Code.
Without Prejudice Position of the Parties
[4]. The Hospital continues to support a transfer to CAMH. The terms and conditions as recommended are contained at page 162 of the Hospital Report with residual authority to remain with Waypoint pending the transfer. Ms. Kraftscik for the hospital advised that K. (J.) remains a significant threat. He is currently number seven on the inter-provincial transfer list to CAMH.
[5]. Ms. Armenise, on behalf of the Attorney General, joined in the Hospital’s position and recommendation.
[6]. Mr. McIver advised that his client consents to the hospital recommendations and that significant threat would not be contested. K. (J.) continues to wish to be transferred to CAMH.
Background and Index Offences
[7]. K. (J.) was born in Medicine Hat, Alberta on June 29, 1984, and adopted when he was three weeks old. His birth mother was reportedly 17 years old at the time and is believed to have been a dancer who used drugs and possibly alcohol during the pregnancy. No information is available about his biological father. K. (J.) was his adoptive parents' only child. His adoptive mother passed away on January 7, 2013.
[8]. K. (J.) had difficulty fitting in at school. Due to behavioral problems, he was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and prescribed Ritalin, which was effective in managing his symptoms. In Grade 9, his behaviour and academic performance declined significantly. He was eventually expelled from high school. During this period, his classroom behavior included the use of racial slurs and sexually inappropriate comments, with no apparent awareness of their meaning or effect on others.
[9]. K. (J.) has never held paid employment and currently receives financial support through the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP).
[10]. The circumstances of the index offences are taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:
“Briefly, the court finding of not criminally responsible due to mental illness was based on the fact that K. (J.) was living in a group home, on both May 6, 2001 and July 2, 2001 when he was 18 years old, and he assaulted staff, threatened suicide, threw objects, threatened to kill staff, threatened to rape staff, threw a rock at a car, waved butcher knives at staff, kicked a car, spat at staff, attempted to bite staff, and had to be physically restrained. All the victims were staff at the group home.”
Current Diagnoses
Unspecified Psychotic Illness,
Intellectual Disability,
Autism Spectrum Disorder,
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
Evidence at Hearing
[11]. Dr. Ismail stated he has read and agrees with the contents of the Hospital Report. His March 29, 2026, Clinical Risk Assessment is contained at pages 159 to 161. Overall, K. (J.) has had another good year. He achieved the C-5 level of activity which allows for off-ward unaccompanied access for up to four hours. K. (J.) continues to refuse to participate in hospital grounds walks outside the secure perimeter.
[12]. There has been no physical aggression or seclusions during the clinical year which indicates that he continues to be appropriate for transfer to CAMH. K. (J.) has been well managed since being placed on clozapine in 2017.
[13]. Responding to questions from Ms. Armenise, Dr. Ismail advised that K. (J.)’s absence from today’s hearing which began at 10:30 a.m., speaks to him not being a morning person. Dr. Ismail also described K. (J.) as impulsive. The Doctor added that when he spoke to K. (J.) earlier in the week, K. (J.) was looking forward to attending and showcasing how well he has done.
[14]. Mr. McIver referenced page 156 of the Hospital Report which indicates that K. (J.) has no relationship with his father. Dr. Ismail responded that this was incorrect and would be changed. The doctor added that K. (J.)’s father remains a consistent support and that there are Zoom calls and in-person visits.
[15]. A panel member referenced an excerpt at page 161 of the Hospital Report reproduced below for ease of reference:
“While there has been meaningful improvement, including the absence of physical aggression, improved redirectability, and the ability to maintain higher levels of security privilege, these gains remain highly context-dependent. His progress has occurred within a structured, supportive environment with consistent staff intervention, and there is limited evidence that these gains would generalize to a less supervised setting.”
[16]. Dr. Ismail responded that his patient’s behaviours are longstanding and explainable by his autism spectrum disorder. The doctor added that the existing crisis prevention plan is to be followed closely at CAMH, and this requirement will be addressed with the CAMH team when K. (J.) is transferred. As K. (J.) has a history of becoming fixated on female staff, only CAMH’s all-male unit was considered appropriate.
[17]. Reference was made to an excerpt from an assessment performed by Dr. Ahmed in 2010 at the Brockville Mental Health Centre, reproduced below for ease of reference.
"Since Mr. K (J.)’s range of disruptive behaviors versus the spectrum of social activities including sexual activities including sexual behaviors, it is my opinion that with a functioning mental age of 10 and his extreme social limitations even with his hypersexual preoccupation, he does not meet the criteria for a paraphilia disorder. It is my recommendation also that he not be subjected to stimuli necessary to conduct a full sexual behaviors assessment, especially given his gullibility and suggestibility.”
[18]. It was noted that K. (J.) is on a Developmental Services Ontario (“DSO”) housing waitlist for a group home anywhere in Ontario. When a suitable group home is available, his annual Passport funding of $19,000, will make him more attractive as a resident candidate.
Closing Observations
[19]. The Hospital maintained its initial position which the Attorney General continues to support as does Mr. McIver. Mr. McIver highlighted considerable behavioural improvements seen during the reporting year are set out at pages 150 to 160 of the Hospital Report.
Analysis and Decision
(a) Significant Threat
[20]. Ongoing significant threat to the safety of the public cannot be speculative. It must entail a real risk of serious physical or psychological harm arising from conduct that is both serious and criminal in nature.
[21]. In determining whether K. (J.) continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public the Board carefully analyzed the evidence as it relates to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Winko, 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.
[22]. The Board unanimously finds that K. (J.) continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In arriving at this determination, the Board considered the joint position of the parties and accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Ismail that K. (J.) continues to pose a significant threat. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report and more specifically Dr. Ismail’s previously referenced Risk Assessment. A key excerpt, extracted from page 161 is reproduced below for ease of reference:
Overall, K. (J.)’s risk to public safety remains high if he were to be placed in an unstructured or insufficiently supervised environment and is currently managed but not eliminated within the existing forensic framework. His risk is driven by impaired insight into behavioural consequences, impulsivity, poor frustration tolerance, affective and behavioural instability, executive functioning deficits, and a reliance on external structure and supervision. While protective factors are present, including medication compliance, engagement in programming, and improved behavioural stability, these are fragile and contingent upon the current level of support.
[23]. Given the foregoing and following its independent analysis, the Board accepts that absent an ORB Disposition, K. (J.) would likely become non-compliant with prescribed medications which would lead to decompensation, the use of substances and the re-emergence of behaviours similar to those seen at the time of the index offences. We are satisfied that absent an ORB Disposition, it is likely that K. (J.) will cause serious physical or psychological harm to members of the public and such conduct will likely be criminal in nature.
(b) Disposition
[24]. Flowing from the Board’s finding that K. (J.) continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public it must shape a Disposition for the year ahead. Its paramount consideration in doing so must be the safety of the public while also considering K. (J.)’s needs pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
[25]. The necessary and appropriate disposition for K. (J.) provides him as much freedom as possible without subjecting the community to a real risk of dangerous behaviour.
[26]. In considering K. (J.)’s needs, this panel was attentive to the continuation of the transfer recommendation to an all-male unit at CAMH due to a historical fixation with female staff. Buttressing the appropriateness of the transfer to a medium secure forensic facility is Dr. Ismail’s uncontroverted expert evidence that his patient has been well managed on clozapine since 2017 and the considerable behavioural improvements as identified by Mr. McIver in his closing submissions. Further, during this reporting year, no physical aggression was reported, and no seclusions were required. The panel would nevertheless highlight the ongoing requirement for a Crisis Prevention Plan so as to maintain K. (J.)’s current mental stability. The Panel wishes him continued success in his rehabilitation and recovery.
Conclusion
[27]. Therefore, the Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat K. (J.) poses to the safety of the public while still meeting his needs remains a Detention Disposition and transfer to an all-male unit at CAMH.
[28]. In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Ismail and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, K. (J.)’s mental condition, his reintegration into society and other needs.
DATED this 10th day of June 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Capelle Alternate Chairperson
__________________ Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board