Re: Thomas A. Prendergast, 2026 CanLII 8803

Re: Thomas A. Prendergast

ORB File No: 8186

Hearing held on: January 15, 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: Ms. Laura Banks (Via Zoom) Members: Dr. R. Sheppard Dr. L.O. Lightfoot Ms. C. Murray Mr. R. Chopra

Parties Appearing: Accused: Thomas A. Prendergast Counsel: Mr. A. Rai

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald (Via Zoom)

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated February 3, 2026)

Introduction

1On November 25, 2022, Thomas Prendergast was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCR”) on a charge second-degree murder, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the “Criminal Code”).

2On January 15, 2026, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (“Board” or “panel”) convened to review Mr. Prendergast’s current Disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. At the time of the hearing, Mr. Prendergast was ordered detained within the Forensic Service at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores” or the “hospital”), with privileges up to and including passes for up to 6 hours to enter the community within a 50-kilometre radius of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, indirectly supervised.

3Mr. Prendergast was present for his hearing. He was represented by counsel, Mr. Rai, throughout the proceedings.

4A Hospital Report dated January 5, 2026, was entered as Exhibit 1.

5The issues to be determined are whether Mr. Prendergast continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, and if so, the necessary and appropriate Disposition to manage that risk having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

6For the reasons set out below and based on the evidence and opinions before us, the Board found that Mr. Prendergast continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board finds that a Detention Disposition within the Forensic Service of Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, with no change to the current terms with the exception of the deletion of term 4(d), is the necessary and appropriate Order having regard to the safety of the public, which is the paramount concern, and also having regard to Mr. Prendergast’s mental health, reintegration into society, and his other needs.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses

[7] Treatment Resistant Schizophrenia Substance Use Disorder (in remission in a controlled environment)

Position of the Parties

8At the commencement of the hearing, the parties were canvassed for their without prejudice positions. The hospital, supported by counsel for the Attorney General, took the position that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of the Detention Order at the Forensic Service at Ontario, with the deletion of term 4(d) due to the death of Mr. Prendergast’s father.

9Counsel for Mr. Prendergast, Mr. Rai, did not contest the issue of significant threat. He was in agreement with the recommendations of the hospital.

10There was, therefore, a joint submission on all issues.

Index Offences

11The details of the index offences are included in the Hospital Report at pages 2 and 3. In brief, on September 24, 2015, Mr. Prendergast lived in a residence in Blackstock, Ontario with his mother (Rita), father (Gerald), and sister. Police were called to this home by a neighbour who heard a woman screaming for help. On arrival, the police found the front door open. Mr. Prendergast exited shirtless. He was observed to be perspiring, his hands were shaking, and his eyes were described as large and extremely excited. He had blood on his upper wrists and forearms and on the bottom of his pants. On entering the home, the police observed Rita lying on her side at the top of the stairs on a blanket, partially wrapped around her. She had suffered stab wounds to her stomach and arms. She was transported to hospital where she was pronounced dead.

Background and History

12The Hospital Report contains extensive information regarding Mr. Prendergast’s background and history, the entirety of which need not be repeated here in detail. However, the following particulars are noteworthy.

13Mr. Prendergast is a 35-year-old man born in Toronto.

14Mr. Prendergast has a high school education. He started working at a grocery store at the age of 16. He later worked as a labourer in various construction-related jobs. He worked in a warehouse at Hyundai for five weeks. He found it difficult to maintain a job in the years leading up to the index offence.

15Mr. Prendergast started using alcohol at 16 years of age. He reported using cannabis regularly, at times daily, from age 16 to 21, according to his self-report. He began to use cocaine powder at the age of 20 and acknowledged feeling “paranoia, schizophrenia” and felt that was when his illness started. He denied using cannabis or cocaine within the six months leading up to the index offence.

16Mr. Prendergast does not have any convictions prior to the index offence.

17Mr. Prendergast had psychiatric admissions and interventions commencing in November 2012. In May 2014, Mr. Prendergast was seen at Lakeridge Health Oshawa in the Early Psychosis Intervention Outpatient Clinic, where he was strongly encouraged to be compliant with his oral antipsychotic medication, which consisted of olanzapine 20mg per day. Mr. Prendergast disagreed that he had schizophrenia.

18Mr. Prendergast is supported by Ontario Disability Support Program (“ODSP”).

Course Since Last Disposition

19Mr. Prendergast was a patient on the secure Forensic Assessment Rehabilitation Unit (“FARU”) at Ontario Shores at the time of his last annual hearing. He has been an inpatient at the hospital since 2016.

20Mr. Prendergast was started on a trial of clozapine. Unfortunately, he was diagnosed with asymptomatic mild left ventricular systolic dysfunction on May 27, 2024, despite being on a moderately low dose of clozapine. It was opined that this cardiac issue was, at least in part, due to his treatment with clozapine. Therefore, he was tapered off the clozapine. The dose of his new depot medication, Zuclopenthixol Decanoate was again optimized. He did not experience decompensation of his mental state during the course of these medication changes. His treatment is augmented with a mood stabilizer and oral antipsychotic medication.

21Mr. Prendergast was compliant with his medications and requested as needed prn medications to manage his chronic auditory hallucinations.

22Mr. Prendergast was successfully transferred to the General Forensic Community Reintegration Unit (“FCRU”) on July 18, 2024. Mr. Prendergast’s father passed away suddenly around this time and, as his father had been acting as the substitute decision maker (“SDM”), Mr. Prendergast’s sister took over the role of SDM.

23Mr. Prendergast continues to show limited insight into his chronic auditory hallucinations, despite clear evidence that he is responding to internal stimuli. He remains solely externally motivated to comply with treatment and has, from time to time, asked for reductions in the dosages.

24Mr. Prendergast has used his privileges without incident. He was granted indirectly supervised privileges on hospital grounds for up to one hour, with a 30 minute in person check in, five times per day. He had one hold on his privileges for being five minutes late on November 14, 2024.

25There have been no incidents of physical, verbal, or environmental aggression during this reporting period.

26Mr. Prendergast has attended programming and groups. In October 2024, he was referred to Concurrent Disorders Services. He completed seven individual sessions between October and December 2024.

Evidence at the Hearing

27The Board had available to it the evidence and documents forming the Record, the Hospital Report, and oral evidence of Dr. Clare Harrigan, Mr. Prendergast’s psychiatrist and author of the Hospital Report.

28Dr. Harrigan testified that she has no updates to the Hospital Report.

29Mr. Prendergast is currently using privileges up to accompanied on hospital grounds and community. His privileges are due to be reassessed on January 16, 2026, and privileges will likely increase at that time.

30Mr. Prendergast has not had indirectly supervised privileges since December 2025. Prior to that there were numerous consecutive incidents of his testing positive for cannabis and other substances of abuse. Mr. Prendergast tested positive for cocaine in February 2025, amphethamines in April 2025, cannabis in July, September, October, and December 2025.

31Dr. Harrigan testified that the plan moving forward is for Mr. Prendergast to continue to work with his concurrent disorders counsellors. These counsellors have recently given positive feedback that Mr. Prendergast has put a lot of effort into his engagement in the program. Mr. Prendergast is in the early stages of building rapport with his treatment team.

32In response to questions of Mr. Rai, Dr. Harrigan testified that Mr. Prendergast has remained on a general forensic unit throughout the reporting period. He has been compliant with medication and has not exhibited any aggression. Mr. Prendergast will attend the CBT for psychosis group once he builds rapport with the psychologist.

33Dr. Harrigan stated that Mr. Prendergast’s indirectly supervised privileges have varied between a half hour to a full hour. He has not achieved a full hour without relapsing. She will be meeting with him tomorrow to talk about reinstating his half hour indirectly supervised grounds privileges.

34When Mr. Prendergast tests positive for substances, the team notices that he is medically unwell. He becomes slightly more irritable and bothered by the hallucinations proximal to the positive drug screens. However, he has not exhibited violence.

35Mr. Prendergast continues to experience residual auditory hallucinations that he calls “microphones”. He does not identify the microphones as a symptom of his schizophrenia.

Analysis and Conclusions

Significant Threat

36The parties did not contest a finding of significant risk to the safety of the public. Despite this, the Board makes its own finding of significant risk based on the oral evidence, the documentary evidence, Winko and its related authorities. Having heard and considered the entirety of the evidence as well as the submissions from the parties, the Board finds that Mr. Prendergast remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.

37Mr. Prendergast has a diagnosis of Schizophrenia and Substance Use Disorder. He committed an unprovoked violent lethal index offence while suffering from active symptoms of his major mental illness. Despite treatment, Mr. Prendergast continues to suffer from chronic auditory hallucinations. Substance use has recently continued to be a challenge for him when he exercises unsupervised privileges.

38The Board accepts the joint submission and finds that Mr. Prendergast continues to present a significant risk to the public.

Necessary and Appropriate Disposition

39In light of the Board’s finding of significant risk, it is charged with shaping a Disposition for the coming year.

40Mr. Prendergast has transitioned well to a general forensic unit. He has utilized his privileges appropriately to date. He is still building up his privileges. Given the extremely violent index offence, his progression through the privileges must be slow and implemented with caution.

41Mr. Prendergast continues to suffer from symptoms of his mental illness and is solely externally motivated to take comply with his medication regime.

42Mr. Prendergast’s access to substances has been limited when he does not access indirectly supervised passes. He will benefit from further programming and risk-mitigating therapeutic interventions to address this issue.

43Mr. Prendergast is not ready for community living at this time. His medications are not yet optimized. His insight is limited. He continues to work toward building his privileges.

44The Board finds that the necessary and appropriate, least onerous and least restrictive Disposition accords with the joint submission; a Detention Disposition within the Forensic Service at Ontario Shores, as per the formal Disposition.

45We wish the best for Mr. Prendergast in the coming year.