Re: James J. Vanwel
ORB File No: 7126/7767
Hearing held on: Thursday, January 22, 2026
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to: Section 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. J. Mills
Members: Dr. P. Darby Dr. K. Patel Ms. C. Murray Ms. D. Smith
Parties Appearing:
Accused: James J. Vanwel Counsel: Mr. D. Embry (via Zoom)
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Ms. M. Kraftscik
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. J. Armenise
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated February 4, 2026)
Introduction:
On March 27, 2017, James Vanwel was found unfit to stand trial on charges of arson (damage to property), arson (disregard for human life), fail to appear or to comply with appearance notice, and fail to comply with conditions of a judicial release order, contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code"). On August 11, 2020, Mr. Vanwel was again found unfit to stand trial on charges of assault x 3, and assault with a weapon, contrary to the Criminal Code.
Mr. Vanwel is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”) dated October 28, 2024, detaining him at the High Secure Provincial Forensics Program at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or the “hospital”), with privileges up to and including the ability to access the hospital and grounds beyond the secure perimeter escorted by staff.
On January 22, 2026, a panel of the Board convened to review Mr. Vanwel’s disposition pursuant to s. 672.48 (1) and 672. 81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Vanwel was not present for his hearing and was permitted to be absent pursuant to. 672.5(10)(a) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Vanwel was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings. Mr. Vanwel’s sister joined the proceedings by videoconference.
The issues to be determined are whether Mr. Vanwel is fit to stand trial, and if not, whether he is permanently unfit. If permanently unfit, the Board must determine whether he is a significant threat to the safety of the public. The Board must also determine what is the necessary and appropriate disposition having regard to the criteria set out in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
At the commencement of the hearing, the representative for the Hospital submitted that Mr. Vanwel remains unfit to stand trial and that he no longer requires detention at a high secure forensic hospital and should be transferred to the medium secure Southwest Centre for Mental Health Care (“Southwest Centre”). Counsel for the Attorney General agreed with the Hospital’s submission. Counsel for Mr. Vanwel anticipated agreeing with the hospital’s submission. At the conclusion of the hearing all parties submitted that Mr. Vanwel is unfit to stand trial and should be transferred to the Southwest Centre, with authority to remain with Waypoint until such time as Mr. Vanwel is transferred.
For the reasons set out below, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwel remains unfit to stand trial and that he should be transferred to the Southwest Centre, with authority to remain with Waypoint until such time as Mr. Vanwel is transferred.
Evidence at the Hearing:
- The Board received documentary evidence in the form of a Hospital Report dated January 5, 2026, a letter from Waypoint to the Southwest Centre pursuant to Rule 13 and a response to that letter from the Southwest Centre to Waypoint, marked as Exhibit 1to 3, respectively. The Board also heard viva voce testimony from Dr. Bouskill.
Outstanding Charges:
- The circumstances of the outstanding charges are excerpted from last year’s Reasons as follows:
"On October 6, 2015, Mr. Vanwel contacted the police requesting assistance to be taken to hospital due to his mental health difficulties. He expressed delusional and suicidal thoughts. He was assessed at his residence by police and members of the CMHA, who determined that Mr. Vanwel had de-escalated, that his prescribed medication was “settling in,” and that he was not at risk of harm to himself or others. Follow-up arrangements were made for the following morning. Two hours later, Mr. Vanwel allegedly set fire to his residence by placing a gym bag on the stove, because no one had taken him to hospital during his dealings with the police and members of the CMHA earlier that day. Mr. Vanwel was apprehended under the Mental Health Act and taken to the Chatham-Kent Health Alliance, where he was admitted. He was also charged with the two arson offences.
The second set of index offences arose out of allegations that in September 2019, February 2020 and May 2020, Mr. Vanwel assaulted co-patients (at the Southwest Centre) by shoving, punching and/or kicking them and, on one occasion, by throwing the television remote controls at a patient and striking him.”
Mr. Vanwel’s history and background are outlined in the Hospital Report in detail and need not be repeated here. In brief, Mr. Vanwel is 55 years old. He is of Indigenous descent. Mr. Vanwel has four siblings, one of whom died by suicide. Mr. Vanwel has a grade 10 education. He has a limited employment history and has been supported by social assistance for many years. Mr. Vanwel’s family lives in and around Windsor and Walpole Island. His relationship history is unknown.
Mr. Vanwel has a history of alcohol and substance use beginning when he was 13 years old and a lengthy criminal record commencing in 1988. Mr. Vanwel has not been convicted of any offences since 2006.
Mr. Vanwel’s first contact with psychiatric services was in 1989 when he was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Thereafter, he frequently exhibited psychotic symptoms, physical aggression, and suicidal ideation, leading to numerous admissions to hospital between 1994 and 2020, both before and after the events that led to the outstanding charges.
On November 25, 2015, Mr. Vanwel was found unfit to stand trial on the initial outstanding charges. Mr. Vanwel was admitted to the Southwest Centre pursuant to a treatment order. Subsequently, Mr. Vanwel was found fit to stand trial and on March 30, 2016, he was released on bail. Thereafter, he was arrested on two occasions for breaching his bail and failing to appear in court. In June 2016, Mr. Vanwel was admitted to the Toldo Neurobehavioural Institute of Hotel-Dieu Grace Healthcare in Windsor (“Toldo”), a specialized healthcare facility for individuals with complex mental health needs.
In December 2016, a further assessment of Mr. Vanwel’s fitness in respect of the first set of outstanding charges was undertaken and on March 27, 2017, Mr. Vanwel was found unfit to stand trial. Following that finding, Mr. Vanwel continued to reside mostly at Toldo, until July 18, 2019, when he was admitted to the Southwest Centre as a result of significant decompensation in his mental state and an escalation of his antisocial and risk-related behaviours. While at the Southwest Centre, Mr. Vanwel exhibited paranoid and grandiose delusions and bizarre behaviours, as well as repeated assaultive behaviours. The second set of outstanding charges arose during this time.
After an early hearing in June 2020, Mr. Vanwel was ordered transferred to Waypoint and on July 30, 2020, was transferred to the High Secure Provincial Forensic Programs. Since his arrival at Waypoint Mr. Vanwel has primarily resided on the highly structured and supervised Beckwith program.
Mr. Vanwel continued to reside on the Beckwith program during the year in review. His care was transferred in December 2024 to Dr. S. Bouskill. Mr. Vanwel is diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia, substance use disorder, in remission in a controlled environment, and antisocial personality disorder. Mr. Vanwel is incapable regarding psychiatric treatment.
Evidence and Analysis:
The Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bharwani 2025 SCC 26 has recently held that to be fit to stand trial an accused must be able to make reality-based decisions in the conduct of their defence and intelligibly communicate these decisions to counsel or the court. This requires a reality-based understanding of the nature or object and possible consequences of the proceedings, as well as an ability to understand the available options and their consequences, and to select between those options when making decisions. The accused is not required to make decisions in their best interests, but cannot be overwhelmed by delusions, hallucinations, or other symptoms of their mental disorder when making and communicating these decisions (para 77). The Court further stated that the key issue in most fitness hearings before the Board is whether the accused’s mental disorder prevents them from conducting a defence (para 33).
“Momentary” or “transient” symptoms that prevent an accused from making reality-based decisions will not render the accused unfit if the trial judge utilizes their inherent trial management powers to get the accused “back on track” (para 78). The Court also held that the fitness test is contextual (para 65). In Clayton (Re), 2025 ONCA 308, the Court of Appeal held that the nature of the charges and allegations is important context when applying the fitness test because, “the simpler the case is, the easier it is to understand, appreciate and talk about” (para 11).
Mr. Vanwel’s presentation has not changed significantly over the year in review. He continues to experience auditory and visual hallucinations and a delusional thought system notable for themes of affluence and judicial injustice. He does not believe he has a mental illness and does not believe that he requires treatment.
Dr. Bouskill testified that she has attempted to conduct fitness assessments every month and that the unit psychometrist met with Mr. Vanwell on average twice each month for the same purpose. These attempts were met with, “avoidance, distress, escalation and destabilization.” Mr. Vanwel consistently asserts that he is not facing charges and that, “the charges have expired.” Dr. Bouskill testified that while Mr. Vanwel does not lack an understanding of the legal process, he believes that he is not subject to the Canadian legal system, and that he is being unlawfully detained.
Dr. Bouskill further testified that due to symptoms of his psychotic illness, Mr. Vanwel is unable to tolerate clinical interactions for more than 10 minutes at a time and when discussions surrounding his legal predicament are attempted, he will not engage. Dr. Bouskill is of the view that, given Mr. Vanwel’s presentation and his inability to engage in discussions regarding his legal predicament, Mr. Vanwel would be unable to participate in court proceedings.
In the Board’s view, while the charges that Mr. Vanwell is facing are not complex, Mr. Vanwel’s treatment refractory illness robs him of the ability to have a reality-based understanding of the nature and object and possible consequences of the proceedings. Due to his primary thought disorder and his view that court proceedings are irrelevant to him, he would be unable to meaningfully participate in his trial or to instruct counsel. Furthermore, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwel’s symptoms have not changed significantly since the findings of unfit to stand trial in 2017 and 2020. They are not momentary or transient symptoms but are ongoing and fixed and it is not reasonable to believe that accommodations could be made to assist him throughout the trial process. For these reasons, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwell remains unfit to stand trial.
While the Hospital Report indicates that there have been few significant gains regarding Mr. Vanwel’s treatment refractory illness, Mr. Vanwel has exhibited some improvement as it relates to impulse control and anger management. His ability to maintain behavioural control has improved and he has been generally redirectable with only two brief periods of seclusion required during the year in review (October 18-19, 2024, and May 29-June 2, 2025). Mr. Vanwel has not aggressed against others or himself in several months and incidents of aggression over the preceding three years have become less frequent. Moreover, Mr. Vanwel has been compliant with his medication, he has maintained unaccompanied off unit passes appropriately and his engagement, self-care and independence have improved. When these factors are considered in totality, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwell no longer requires the structure and support of a high secure forensic hospital and that a transfer to the medium secure Southwest Centre is necessary and appropriate. Notably, in the letter, dated October 29, 2025, and marked as Exhibit 3, the Southwest Centre agreed that Mr. Vanwel can likely be managed at their hospital.
Mr. Vanwel’s family, who have remained supportive of him, live in closer proximity to the Southwest Centre and such a transfer will assist in facilitating contact with Mr. Vanwel should he so choose. The ability to maintain contact with family members will act as a protective factor for Mr. Vanwel going forward and is to be encouraged.
While Mr. Vanwel has progressed this year, he has been living in a very structured environment; substance use remains a concern and Mr. Vanwel will need supervision and support to maintain his progress. For these reasons, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwel shall be permitted privileges up to and including the ability to access the community of Elgin County or Middlesex County accompanied by staff or a person/delegate approved by the person in charge. Until such time as Mr. Vanwel is transferred to the Southwest Centre he shall remain at Waypoint with no change to his current disposition.
Disposition:
- For the above reasons, the Board finds that Mr. Vanwel is unfit to stand trial and that he shall be transferred to the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, with privileges and conditions as outlined in the formal disposition. Until such time as Mr. Vanwel is transferred, he shall remain at the High Secure Provincial Forensics Program at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, with no change to his current disposition.
DATED this 4th day of February 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. J. Mills Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board