Re: Melville Ince
ORB File No: 2558
Hearing held on: Monday, January 12, 2026
Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before: Alternate Chairperson: Ms. L. Banks Members: Dr. B. Sheppard Dr. L. O. Lightfoot Ms. C. Murray Ms. R. Chopra
Parties Appearing: Accused: Melville Ince Counsel: Ms. A. Szigeti
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. K. Dow
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated January 29, 2026)
Introduction:
On August 29, 1997, Melville Ince was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on charges of sexual assault x2, utter death threat, assault x2, and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada.
Mr. Ince is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board” or “ORB”) dated January 22, 2025, as amended by an ORB Order dated May 1, 2025, transferring him to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”). Pending his transfer to CAMH, Mr. Ince was ordered detained at the Forensic Program of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores” or the “hospital”) with privileges up to and including living in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital.
On January 12, 2026, a panel of the ORB convened a hearing to conduct Mr. Ince’s annual review pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Ince attended and was represented by his counsel, Ms. Szigeti.
The issues to be considered at this hearing are whether Mr. Ince is a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the determination of the necessary and appropriate Disposition, bearing in mind the factors enunciated in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
For the reasons set out below, this Board has concluded that Mr. Ince continues to pose a significant threat to public safety. It is our view that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is that he be transferred to St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (“St. Joseph’s”) on the terms and conditions set forth in his formal Disposition. Pending his transfer to St. Joseph’s, Mr. Ince shall remain detained at Ontario Shores on the terms set forth in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of his existing Disposition.
Index Offences:
- The details of the index offences are taken from the Hospital’s Report to the ORB dated January 6, 2026 (the “Hospital Report”) and are summarized as follows:
“On February 12, 1997, at 9:45 AM, Mr. Ince, who had been following the female victim and her friends, placed his hand in the area of her mouth and grabbed her about the body while she stood on the platform of the St. George subway station in Toronto. A scuffle ensued and she fell to the floor of the subway platform. The accused climbed on top of her and placed his pelvis against her thighs. He also grabbed her in the area of her breasts. Her sister attempted to help her, whereupon the accused tried to grab the sister in the area of her crotch and then kicked her in the same area. During the sexual assault, the accused threatened to kill the victim.
On the same day, when another individual witnessed the accused’s assault on the two young girls in the St. George subway station at 9:45 AM, the accused hit the other individual in the mouth with his fist. The victim took a stick from the accused, which he had been brandishing about. The stick was about 13 inches in length.
Later that evening at 8:35 PM, another victim was standing on the westbound platform of the Bay Street subway station in Toronto when the accused approached her from behind and grabbed her over her right eye. Two passengers came to her aid and she managed to escape, but received a small bruise over her right eye.”
Background and History:
Mr. Ince’s personal background, mental health history, criminal history, and his course in the hospital subsequent to his NCR finding are set out in considerable detail in the Hospital Report and need not be repeated here. Briefly summarized, Mr. Ince is presently 62 years of age. He was born in Montserrat, the fourth of five children. His parents divorced when he was six years of age and he was raised by his mother.
He moved to Canada in 1981 at the age of 18. His mother was very supportive of him but she died in 2011.
He completed Grade 12 and some Grade 13 courses, but dropped out of the University of Toronto after a few months. He later obtained a tractor/trailer licence at George Brown College in 1990.
He held a series of odd jobs in shipping and receiving, as a security guard, and as a correctional officer at the Toronto Jail. He was also employed as a seasonal construction labourer and a dish washer. Mr. Ince has not been formally employed since 1991.
Mr. Ince has never been married but has an adult daughter who was born in 1990 with whom he now is back in contact with by telephone.
Mr. Ince does not have an approved person. His sisters both reside in the Toronto area. He has regular telephone contact with them.
Mr. Ince has a history of substantial use of illicit drugs, primarily crack cocaine and cannabis.
Criminal History:
- Mr. Ince’s criminal record before being found NCR includes convictions between 1992 and 1998 for trafficking in a narcotic, assault, assault with a weapon, carrying a concealed weapon, and robbery.
Psychiatric History:
Previous psychiatric admissions include six admissions to Wellesley Hospital in 1985 and 1986 for atypical depression and a three-week admission to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) in 1992. The Hospital Report refers to his lengthy and problematic history of substance misuse, primarily involving cannabis and cocaine.
After his NCR finding in 1997, Mr. Ince was ordered detained at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH”) on February 26, 1998. In September 2013, he was transferred from CAMH to Ontario Shores. He remained at Ontario Shores until January 2015, when the ORB ordered his transfer to Waypoint Centre for Mental Health. In November 2015, the Board ordered his transfer to St. Joseph’s and he was transferred to St. Joseph’s in February 2016.
The Hospital Report identifies a series of discharges and readmissions to the hospital in the more than two decades Mr. Ince has been subject to the jurisdiction of the ORB. Mr. Ince has a history of poor compliance with psychiatric treatment. When untreated he becomes aggressive, argumentative, threatening, disorganized, paranoid, and grandiose.
Mr. Ince was discharged from St. Joseph’s on August 11, 2020 to reside in the community of Hamilton. He resided in an independent unit in a supported living apartment staffed by Good Shepherd for approximately 12 hours during the day on weekdays and 8 hours on weekends. Within a month, he required hospital readmission due to changes in his mental status and agitation. He remained detained at St. Joseph’s until April 9, 2021. Mr. Ince was readmitted again on July 15, 2021, after testing positive for THC in contravention of his ORB Disposition. He acknowledged using substances in the community. Mr. Ince remained detained at St. Joseph’s until he was discharged to 24/7 staff supervised accommodation at Emmaus Place in of Hamilton.
Mr. Ince was again readmitted to St. Joseph’s in January 2022 due to a mental status deterioration and suspicions of cannabis use in the community. He was again re-admitted to St. Joseph’s on March 7, 2022 due to suspicion that he had been using cannabis in the community. Mr. Ince was admitted to St. Joseph’s from July 19, 2022 to August 12, 2022 due to concerns about his drug use (i.e., cannabis) in the community and noted changes in his mental status.
There were a series of subsequent hospital readmissions due to a challenging interpersonal relationship with a co-resident (September 8, 2022) and positive urine drug screens detecting his use of cannabis (December 1, 2021 and July 19, 2022).
Mr. Ince was readmitted to St. Joseph’s on October 3rd, 2022 due to threats he made towards a co-patient and his feeling unsafe at Emmaus Place due to a serious incident with a co-resident. Further, Mr. Ince was admitted to the hospital following his admission that he had a knife under his keyboard in his bedroom at Emmaus Place. It was decided that Mr. Ince would remain detained in the hospital as he had breached his Disposition and presented with a high risk of causing harm to others. On March 23, 2023, Mr. Ince was informed by Good Shepherd housing of the termination of his residence due to an increase in his hospital admissions and his limited engagement in their programs and mental health monitoring.
Mr. Ince remained detained as an in-patient at St. Joseph’s until February 12, 2024, when he was transferred from St. Joseph’s to Ontario Shores.
Current Diagnoses:
- Mr. Ince’s current diagnoses are:
Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar type;
Cannabis Disorder, severe; and
Rule Out Antisocial Personality Disorder/traits.
Positions of Parties:
All parties were canvassed at the outset of the hearing as to their recommendations to the Board. Counsel for the hospital submitted that Mr. Ince continues to represent a significant risk to the safety of the public and that his existing Disposition insofar as it relates to his detention at Ontario Shores continues to be necessary and appropriate. The hospital took no position with regard to Mr. Ince’s request to be transferred to another forensic hospital.
Counsel for the Attorney General supported the hospital’s recommendations in all respects.
Ms. Szigeti indicated that she wished to hear the evidence before making Disposition recommendations to the Board. She was however able to indicate at the outset that her client was requesting that the prohibition on cannabis use be removed from his Disposition. She also indicated that her client was no longer requesting a transfer to CAMH.
At the conclusion of the evidence, Ms. Szigeti stated that her client was requesting a transfer from Ontario Shores to St. Joseph’s. Counsel confirmed that she would not be arguing the issue of significant threat at this hearing.
Counsel for both the hospital and the Attorney General maintained their respective initial positions in closing submissions.
Evidence at the Hearing:
Dr. J. Pytyck, Mr. Ince’s attending forensic psychiatrist since October 2025, testified at the hearing. She co-authored the Hospital Report with Dr. Alioglu, a PGY6 fellow, who is involved in Mr. Ince’s day to day care. Dr. Pytyck advised that she is well aware of Mr. Ince’s progress over the past reporting year. Dr. Pytyck adopted the contents of the Hospital Report and advised that there were no major updates thereto other than an additional urine drug screen (“UDS”) that returned positive for cannabis on January 8, 2026.
The Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Ince continues to be assessed as capable to consent to psychiatric treatment and he receives a long-acting intramuscular (“LAI”) injection of Paliperidone every 28 days together with daily oral doses of Olanzapine, Valproic Acid, and Clonazepam.
Mr. Ince has been adherent to his prescribed medications within the structured and supervised setting of the hospital. Despite medication compliance, Mr. Ince continues to display residual symptoms of schizoaffective disorder in the form of mild grandiosity. The doctor commented that when Mr. Ince engages in cannabis use, he typically presents with disorganized thought processes, intensified grandiosity, mood lability and low level paranoia, despite ongoing medication adherence.
The Hospital Report indicates: “His affect was variable, ranging from euthymic and bright to labile, with shifts toward anger or tearfulness. His thought processes were organized, with no overtly delusional content, although longstanding grandiose ideation persisted. No auditory or visual hallucinations were reported. Mr. Ince`s insight is limited and fluctuating. He has historically demonstrated impaired judgment and impulse control, particularly in the context of substance use. He denied suicidal, violent, or homicidal ideation.”
The Hospital Report indicates that Mr. Ince’s insight remains underdeveloped. He continues to deny both the index offences ever taking place and the ORB’s jurisdiction over him. His insight into his mental illness and the need for medication varies but it is generally quite limited. At times, he expresses the view that he should not have to take medication.
Over the past reporting year, Mr. Ince has remained an in-patient on the general forensic service on the Forensic Transition Unit.
Dr. Pytyck testified that Mr. Ince continues to chronically breach his ORB Disposition by engaging in cannabis use. Over the year in review, he has frequently tested positive for THC, an active ingredient in cannabis products. He has consistently expressed his belief that smoking marijuana is not an issue. He is unable to recognise his mood lability when he engages in cannabis use. The doctor stated that Mr. Ince can get quite agitated to the point of being verbally assaultive to hospital staff when confronted with his cannabis use as he believes it is his liberty to use this substance if he so chooses.
The Hospital Report details numerous instances of notable incidents of concern over the past reporting period. Many of these entries relate to the fact that Mr. Ince’s UDS returned positive for the presence of THC. Some of the reported incidents relayed to Mr. Ince refusing to provide a urine sample or providing urine samples that appear to have been diluted or otherwise tampered with. Several incidents of Mr. Ince engaging in verbally aggressive, verbally threatening, or in a rude, derogatory or sexually inappropriate manner to staff and/or co-patients followed incidents of cannabis use. Most often, Mr. Ince appears able to settle with staff intervention and re-direction. Other notable incidents relate to Mr. Ince smoking cigarettes on the unit where that is prohibited. On one occasion, on April 17, 2025, Mr. Ince’s UDS returned positive for fentanyl. In response to a question posed by a panel member, Dr. Pytyck stated that she believes Mr. Ince’s positive fentanyl was a result of his use of tainted cannabis.
Dr. Pytyck advised the panel that Mr. Ince most recently tested positive for cannabis use on January 8, 2026. In response to his cannabis use, the treatment team puts Mr. Ince’s privileges on hold for several days to a week at a time. This is intended to interrupt his ongoing use to prevent a more acute deterioration in his mental state.
Notwithstanding his variable course over the year in review, Dr. Pytyck confirmed that Mr. Ince did not resort to physical violence despite his threats. The doctor noted that Mr. Ince’s physical violence has historically occurred in the context of medication non-compliance and/or substance use. Dr. Pytyck commented that but for early staff intervention, Mr. Ince’s behaviours had the potential to escalate to physical violence to others.
The Hospital Report indicates that“Episodes of emotional and behavioural dysregulation were observed, particularly when he was under the influence of cannabis. During these periods, he becomes more disinhibited, which manifested as inappropriate or confrontational verbal interactions with staff and, at times, mildly sexually inappropriate behaviour.” Mr. Ince’s insight regarding the impact of cannabis use on his mental state is underdeveloped and he minimizes same.
Dr. Pytyck advised that Mr. Ince has used level 3 indirectly supervised privileges on hospital and grounds. The Hospital Report indicates that there was one occasion when he has returned late to the unit but there were no incidents of AWOL or attempts at absconding over the past year. Of note, Mr. Ince does not yet have an Approved Person but he is supported by his two sisters, both of whom reside in the GTA.
Dr. Pytyck testified that Mr. Ince has also been able to use staff accompanied passes into the community. The doctor advised that she believes he has also used level 6 indirectly supervised community passes, with his forensic transitional case manager (“FTCM”) As his FTCM is not in the employ of the hospital, these passes are considered to be indirectly supervised community passes. When Mr. Ince’s UDS return positive for substances of abuse, the doctor advised that both his level 3 and level 6 privileges are placed on a temporary hold.
Dr. Pytyck stated that the treatment team would not support the removal of the existing prohibition on cannabis use. In Dr. Pytyck’s opinion, when Mr. Ince engages in cannabis use, he often presents with heightened grandiosity, irritability, deteriorated insight, and is dismissive of, and at times, threatening to, hospital staff and is less willing to work cooperatively with his care providers. The doctor acknowledged that despite his ongoing cannabis use, Mr. Ince has not deteriorated to the point of acute psychosis, nor has he been observed to be responding to internal stimuli. Further, the doctor acknowledged that although Mr. Ince can present with heightened irritability and engage in yelling and physically intimidating behaviour following his use of cannabis, he has not engaged in physically assaultive behaviour over the year in review. Dr. Pytyck did comment that after cannabis use, Mr. Ince has made threats of physical violence to staff but he has not acted on these threats. Dr. Pytyck testified that at his baseline and in the absence of cannabis use, Mr. Ince presents as “calmer, more polite and not threatening.”
In the doctor’s opinion, Mr. Ince will not be considered an appropriate candidate for discharge to community living until such time as he can demonstrate a prolonged period of abstinence from cannabis use together with clinical stability. In response to a question posed by Ms. Szigeti, the doctor stated that both the hospital and housing providers would expect to see a 3 to 6 month sustained period of abstinence and clinical stability.
When asked by Ms. Szigeti if the treatment team would consider a harm-reduction approach to Mr. Ince’s cannabis use, the doctor replied in the negative as she did not believe that approach would be effective in reducing his cannabis use. The doctor stated that any cannabis use can result in Mr. Ince rapidly becoming decompensated. She also stated that if the cannabis prohibition were not included in his ORB Disposition, Mr. Ince would be likely to use even more frequently, with an ever greater negative impact on his mental state.
Dr. Pytyck advised that Mr. Ince had worked with a behavioural therapist at Ontario Shores for some time. The doctor stated that a behavioural plan was implemented with a resultant lessening in the frequency of his cannabis consumption. Over time, the behavioural therapist withdrew her involvement in Mr. Ince’s care. Subsequently, he relapsed more frequently to cannabis use. Dr. Pytyck agreed that it might be appropriate to re-engage Mr. Ince with the behavioural therapist. The doctor stated that if a referral was made, she was confident Mr. Ince would have behavioural therapy services available within a few weeks.
Dr. Pytyck also advised that Mr. Ince has been on the wait list for individual psychological counselling since January 2025. The doctor was hopeful that a psychologist’s services would be available within the next few months; however, she could not be certain as to the timing of same given the lack of resources in the hospital.
In response to questions posed by a panel member, Dr. Pytyck agreed that it might be appropriate to have a medication assessment conducted to determine whether there were any medications that might be effective in attenuating Mr. Ince’s cravings for cannabis. Further, the doctor advised that there is a psychiatrist at Ontario Shores who specializes in addiction and it might be possible to refer Mr. Ince to that specialist.
Dr. Pytyck advised that despite the treatment team’s ongoing encouragement over the past year, Mr. Ince has generally declined to participate in any formal group program or individual therapy offered to assist in his recovery. She did note that he had intermittently attended a few sessions of substance-abuse counselling but this had not been recent.
Dr. Pytyck commented that Mr. Ince needs to find internal motivation to become abstinent and then engage in therapeutic interventions available at the hospital to assist him to achieve that goal.
Dr. Pytyck expressed her opinion that in the absence of an ORB Disposition, Mr. Ince would be likely to continue to use cannabis as well as possibly other substances more frequently and in greater quantities. She expected that over time, his psychotic symptoms would exacerbate and he would experience more intense paranoid delusions, grandiose delusions, disorganization, and behavioural disinhibition, and possibly, physical and sexual aggression. In that context, he would be likely to pose a real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the community. The doctor commented that it is likely that the hospital’s close monitoring of his mental state and its intervention by intermittently withholding his indirectly supervised privileges has been critical to Mr. Ince not using more frequently and becoming more acutely decompensated.
Dr. Pytyck endorsed the Hospital Report’s conclusion that Mr. Ince continues to meet the significant threat threshold due to a number of active risk factors. His most salient historical risk factors are his history of violence, major mental disorder, substance use, and his response to treatment and supervision. Historically, when unwell, he has acted out with physically and sexually inappropriate behaviours. Clinically, over the past reporting year, Mr. Ince has continued to engage in regular cannabis use as well as one incident of confirmed fentanyl use. As well, Mr. Ince continues to express underdeveloped insight across all relevant domains. There have been persistent problems with treatment/supervision response, as well as behavioural instability. When he engages in cannabis use, Mr. Ince experience positive symptoms of his mental illness, including overvalued and longstanding grandiose ideation, paranoia and mood lability.
In terms of his eventual return to community living, the doctor advised that Mr. Ince is not presently on any housing waitlists.
Mr. Ince also testified at the hearing. Much of his testimony was difficult to decipher. He commented that he was in contact with the Privy Council and he would like to use his citizenship to leave Canada. He also spoke of the fact that many people complain about the volume of his music. He stated that he is a loud man at all times, whether he smokes cannabis or not. He stated that cannabis use calms him.
In response to a question from Ms. Szigeti, Mr. Ince confirmed that he has seen a behavioural therapist at Ontario Shores in the past. He was asked if he would be agreeable to working with a psychologist if one was available, but he did not directly answer that question.
Mr. Ince was told by his counsel that the hospital will not move him into the community unless he stops using cannabis. He indicated that he no longer wished to be transferred to CAMH but he would prefer to be transferred to St. Joseph’s.
No further evidence was called by the parties.
Analysis and Conclusion:
The Board has no difficulty in finding that Mr. Ince continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board relies upon the expert medical opinion of Dr. Pytyck that significant threat exists. Mr. Ince’s risk flows from his diagnosis of Schizoaffective Disorder which is compounded by a diagnosis of Substance Use Disorder. Over the year in review, Mr. Ince has, at times, following his use of cannabis, presented with more pronounced symptoms of his mental illness which have included irritability, mood lability, intensified paranoia and grandiosity. During this reporting period, he presented with a myriad of challenging behaviours, including being verbally aggressive, threatening, rude, and physically intimidating. He continues to engage in cannabis use which typically results in him becoming more disinhibited, rude, and dismissive towards hospital staff.
The Board notes that Mr. Ince has a significant criminal history which includes convictions for assault and assault with weapon. He continues to present with sub-optimal insight into his need for antipsychotic medication and the potentially negative impact of substance use on his mental stability. The expert evidence presented indicates that absent a Disposition of the ORB, Mr. Ince would be likely to become non-compliant with medication, relapse to even more frequent substance use and likely in greater quantities, and return to the activities which brought him into conflict with the criminal justice system at and prior to the occurrence of the index offences. For all of these reasons, the Board had no hesitation in finding that Mr. Ince continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.
After careful consideration of the evidence presented and the submissions of the parties, this Board finds that Mr. Ince’s existing Detention Order remains the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage the risk he poses. The Board notes the doctor’s evidence indicating that escalation of Mr. Ince’s aggression to physical violence has likely been significantly mitigated by the hospital’s proactive management of his behaviours under the authority of a Detention Order.
The panel considered whether Mr. Ince could be safely managed under a Conditional Discharge Disposition and we have determined that, at this juncture, he cannot. The hospital requires the authority of a Detention Order for two critical risk management reasons as discussed below.
First, when Mr. Ince is ready to be discharged to the community, it will be critical that the hospital have oversight regarding his community residence in order to ensure that his proposed residence will provide him with the support, supervision, monitoring and structure that he will require in order to safely manage his risk to others. Without that structure, including ensuring medication compliance, Mr. Ince would be likely to decrease or stop his medications with a resulting increase in his psychotic symptoms and disorganization and, in that state, he would be likely to act out violently.
A Detention Order is also necessary to enforce Mr. Ince’s expeditious return to hospital should he become unwell when residing in the community, whether as a result of medication non-compliance, relapse to substance use, breakthrough symptoms, or otherwise. The authority of the Detention Order has facilitated his prompt admission to the hospital when he was residing in the community of Hamilton between 2020 and 2023. Given Mr. Ince’s risk profile, public safety is not sufficiently protected by relying on Mr. Ince’s uncertain cooperation with a voluntary return to hospital. Further, it is also not sufficient from a risk management perspective to wait until Mr. Ince satisfies certification criteria under the Mental Health Act to effect a hospital readmission.
We have carefully considered the evidence and the submissions of the parties and we have concluded that it is necessary and appropriate that Mr. Ince’s Disposition include a prohibition on his use of cannabis. Despite the fact that Mr. Ince has remained medication compliant within the controlled environment of the hospital setting, the evidence indicates that when Mr. Ince uses cannabis, he often presents with disorganized thought processes, intensified grandiosity, mood lability, including increased irritability and low-level paranoia. At these times, he is often dismissive of staff direction and has been verbally threatening toward staff. The uncontroverted expert evidence of Dr. Pytyck indicates that Mr. Ince’s cannabis use directly results in an increase in his risk of mental decompensation and a resultant increase in his risk to the safety of the public.
In terms of Mr. Ince’s request that his care be transferred to St. Joseph’s, the panel considered several factors in making its decision, including the fact that Mr. Ince had successfully progressed up the privilege ladder at St. Joseph’s and was able to achieve discharge to community living for periods of time between 2020 and 2023. He resided in the Hamilton community at two supervised housing placements for some time although his numerous hospital readmissions were often triggered by his relapse to cannabis use. Regardless, he achieved a level of progress in his community reintegration at St. Joseph’s that he has not yet achieved at Ontario Shores and he now wishes to return to that forensic hospital. Neither counsel for the hospital nor counsel for the Attorney General opposed Mr. Ince’s request to return to St. Joseph’s and this panel sees no reason not to support his request in this regard.
Mr. Ince is aware that waitlists for approved accommodation within the catchment area of St. Joseph’s can be months to years’ long. He is also aware that any breach of his ORB Disposition, whether due to his use of cannabis or otherwise, will be likely to result in delays to his ability to progress within the privilege system at St. Joseph’s and achieve discharge to community living. He is still requesting a transfer of his care to St. Joseph’s. The Board is hopeful that upon his transfer to St. Joseph’s, Mr. Ince will seize the opportunity to work co-operatively with a new treatment team at St. Joseph’s to resume the progress he had made towards community reintegration prior to transfer to Ontario Shores.
Accordingly, the Board orders that Mr. Ince be transferred to St. Joseph’s to be detained in the Forensic Psychiatry Program at that hospital with privileges and conditions to include:
- hospital and grounds privileges, escorted by staff, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge of the hospital, or indirectly supervised;
- privileges to enter the community of Southern Ontario, escorted by staff, accompanied by staff or a person approved by the person in charge of the hospital, or indirectly supervised;
- passes for up to 7 days, within the catchment area of St. Joseph’s, indirectly supervised;
- the privilege to live in the community of the catchment area of St. Joseph’s in accommodation approved by the person in charge of the hospital;
- prohibitions on use of alcohol, drugs, or any other intoxicants and testing provisions with regard to use of same;
- weapons prohibition; and
- reporting obligations of not less than once a week.
Pending Mr. Ince’s transfer to St. Joseph’s, the Board orders that Mr. Ince remain detained at Ontario Shores on the terms of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of his existing Disposition. Pending his transfer, we are hopeful that Mr. Ince will avail himself of all programs, opportunities and resources available to him at Ontario Shores, including, his engagement with a behavioural therapist and psychological counselling. We are also hopeful that Dr. Pytyck will explore whether a medication assessment might be appropriate and whether Mr. Ince’s referral to the hospital’s psychiatrist who is an addiction specialist might be warranted.
In coming to our decision, we have taken into consideration the paramount need to protect the public from dangerous persons, the mental condition of Mr. Ince, his reintegration into society and his other needs.
DATED this 29th day of January 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. L. Banks Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board