Re: Jevonne Pollard-Wilson
ORB File No: 8643
Hearing held on: Tuesday, January 20, 2026
Place of hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant to 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. R. Bigelow
Members: Dr. K. Patel Dr. P. Darby Ms. C. Murray Ms. D. Smith
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Jevonne Pollard-Wilson Counsel: Ms. Carla Whillier (via Zoom)
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. J. Thomson (via Zoom)
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DECISION
(Dated February 2, 2026)
Introduction
On October 1, 2024, Mr. Jevonne Pollard-Wilson was found unfit to stand trial in relation to a charge of fail to comply with an order made under s.490.012 of the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code").
Mr. Pollard-Wilson is currently subject to a Detention Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the “Board”), dated December 8, 2025, detaining him at the Secure Forensic Service of the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores”) with residual authority to the High Secure Provincial Programs of the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care (“Waypoint” or “the hospital”) until such time as he is transferred to Ontario Shores.
Pursuant to s. 672.56(2) of the Criminal Code, Waypoint notified the Board, by letter dated December 19, 2025, that Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s liberty had been restricted for a period of greater than seven days. He entered seclusion on December 9, 2025.
On January 20, 2026, a panel of the Board convened an in-person hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review the restriction of Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s liberty.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson was present at the hearing and represented by his lawyer, Ms. Carla Whillier, throughout.
The Board had before it a Restriction of Liberty (“ROL”) Hearing Report dated January 12, 2026, which was entered as Exhibit 1.
For the reasons outlined below, the Board finds that the restriction of Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s liberty from December 9, 2025, to January 19, 2026, was necessary and appropriate, and it represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure at the time it was imposed and throughout the period of restriction.
Positions of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing the parties were canvassed as to their without prejudice positions. Counsel for the hospital and Attorney General agreed that the restriction of liberty commencing December 9, 2025, and terminating January 19, 2026, was necessary and appropriate; it represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure at the time it was imposed, and it continued to be so throughout the period of restriction.
Counsel for Mr. Pollard-Wilson took the position that the restriction of liberty was not the least onerous or least restrictive measure at the time it was imposed on December 9, 2025, nor throughout the period of restriction.
The alternate chairperson raised that the schedule for the hearings included a review of fitness in addition to the ROL hearing. The parties all agreed that the matter of fitness was reviewed recently at Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s annual review hearing on November 25, 2025. The parties all agreed that there was no need for a further fitness review at this hearing and agreed that there is not a deemed fitness review at a hearing where the sole issue under review is a ROL. All parties agreed that the only matter proceeding before the panel was the review of the ROL.
Outstanding Charges
- The circumstances giving rise to the Outstanding Charges are set out in the Reasons for Disposition dated December 22, 2025, and are extracted as follows:
“On July 4, 2019, Jevonne Pollard-Wilson was convicted of sexual assault and was ordered to comply with the requirements of SOIRA (also known as Christopher’s Law) for ten years. He initially registered with the Peel Regional Police Sex Offender Registry on August 4, 2019, and last reported on January 5, 2021. His next due date for registration was extended to August 26, 2022. After his release from custody, he did not register as required.
As a result, a warrant for Mr. Pollard-Wilson's arrest was issued on November 7, 2022. On February 2, 2024, Halton Regional Police informed the Peel Regional Police that Mr. Pollard-Wilson was in their custody on unrelated charges. Peel Regional Police arrested him on the outstanding warrant.”
Reasons for Restriction of Liberty
- The ROL Hearing Report provides the in-depth rationale for the initial restriction of liberty on December 9, 2025. The relevant section of the ROL Hearing Report is extracted as follows:
“On December 9, 2025, staff documented Mr. Pollard-Wilson attended the laundry room at the same time that dining room had also commenced. Staff informed him that he needed to be fully clothed for dining room and was asked to retrieve a shirt from the laundry; Mr. Pollard-Wilson refused, and so staff directed him to return to his room if he was not going to dress. In the meantime, the servery door was closed, and he was informed that his meal would instead be provided in his room. Mr. Pollard-Wilson refused this option and became insistent that he would be going to dining room; he was unreceptive to health teaching, limit setting, and redirection strategies.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson suddenly became confrontational in presentation and began making verbal threats stating, "go ahead touch me, I will smash your face". The team attempted to re-establish limits, however he continued to be unreceptive and refused to cooperate. Staff then obtained a shirt from the clean linen room and attempted to provide it to him, however he refused; the shirt was subsequently placed in his room, and once informed it was there Mr. Pollard-Wilson proceeded in the direction of the care desk. Although it initially appeared he may head back to his room, he turned the other way and entered the laundry room; verbal de-escalation interventions resumed.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson then indicated he wanted to wash his laundry. Staff attempted to obtain a contract for his cooperation if this was facilitated, however he would not respond or acknowledge staffs' requests. He was provided laundry detergent and when requested to return to his room, he again refused and insisted that he would wait for the complete laundry cycle (washer and dryer) to finish before doing so. Verbal interventions continued while preparations were made for a planned room entry, and orders for a chemical restraint were also received. After a final attempt at verbal interventions were unsuccessful, five staff wearing personal protective equipment entered the room and restrained him; Mr. Pollard-Wilson was noted to be extremely resistive and combative during this process and was removed from the laundry room toward the seclusion suite. He was restrained against the wall in a CPI team control position and administered Haloperidol 5mg IM and Lorazepam 2mg IM, while he continued to forcefully resist. After the administration of the chemical restraint, Mr. Pollard-Wilson was moved into the room, where staff were then able to exit, and the door was secured. The duty doctor was contacted, and a seclusion order obtained.”
Evidence at the Hearing
The ROL report provides detailed information regarding the background of Mr. Pollard-Wilson and the circumstances surrounding the restriction of liberty. These are summarized below.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s diagnoses are Schizophrenia and Cannabis Use Disorder, moderate, in remission in a controlled environment.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson is 30 years old.
Prior to the restriction of liberty, Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s security level was C3, meaning that his privileges included on-unit access where he could attend the lounge areas, corridors, dining room, courtyard and he could socialize with co-patients. Level C3 privileges also permit independent off-unit access where he could attend the canteen and central recreation activities.
During Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s seclusion he was assessed for seclusion relief daily. Mr. Pollard-Wilson refused all 21 offers of seclusion relief from December 10 to December 27, 2025. He was noted to either ignore or dismiss staff or indicated his desire to stay in his room to listen to music. Between December 28, 2025, and January 12, 2026, he accepted seclusion relief 14 times. Mr. Pollard-Wilson was compliant with gradual waist/wrist Pinel restraint removal while exercising seclusion relief. Mr. Pollard-Wilson remained secluded until January 19, 2026.
On January 6, 2026, the duty doctor completed a 28-day seclusion consultation. He indicated that Mr. Pollard-Wilson continued to be selectively mute and would only engage with certain staff. His ARVS score continued to be high. On assessment, he only answered by nodding his head ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in response to questions and otherwise did not speak at all. He indicated that he was in no acute distress. He denied any auditory hallucinations or delusions. He denied having any violent ideations, intent, or plan. It was noted that Mr. Pollard-Wilson was refusing to participate in any debriefing regarding the seclusion, and that his selective mutism was a barrier to ending the seclusion.
On January 12, 2026, while engaging in seclusion relief Mr. Pollard-Wilson was argumentative and challenging when asked to hand out his hair pick. He was not receptive to staff when his protocol was reviewed. He scoffed at staff when they asked him to pull up his pants so his buttocks would not show. He was inappropriate with female staff.
Dr. Komer, Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s attending psychiatrist, provided oral evidence at the hearing to supplement the ROL report.
Dr. Komer testified that Mr. Pollard-Wilson was previously secluded from January 30 to August 6, 2025, after increasingly non-compliant and maladaptive behaviours. Dr. Komer stated that Mr. Pollard-Wilson had refused all oral medications since October 2, 2024. Despite refusal of medications, from August 2025 to December 9, 2025, Mr. Pollard-Wilson was out of seclusion because “there was no assessment that he was at risk of causing serious bodily harm to others” in the hospital.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson is incapable of consenting to psychiatric treatment and his mother acts as his substitute decision-maker (“SDM”). His SDM was reluctant to agree to injectable medication. Therefore, on October 23, 2025, a Form G application was completed pursuant to the Health Care Consent Act. The SDM reconsidered her position, and the Form G was rescinded. Mr. Pollard-Wilson started receiving injectable medication, Invega Sustenna, on November 20, 2025.
Dr. Komer testified that on December 9, 2025, it became necessary to seclude Mr. Pollard-Wilson for the safety of the staff and other patients. Throughout the period of seclusion nurses and duty doctors reviewed his seclusion regularly. The opinion of each of the duty doctors throughout the period of seclusion was that Mr. Pollard-Wilson needed to remain in seclusion for the safety of the staff and other patients. Nurses reviewed seclusion on a 24-hour basis. On each review during seclusion, it was the conclusion of the nurses that seclusion was necessary to prevent serious bodily harm to others. Their conclusions were informed by his history of aggression, the incident that led to seclusion, difficulty assessing his mental state, his selective mutism, and refusal to accept seclusion relief. To be released from seclusion, Mr. Pollard-Wilson would have to demonstrate control of his behaviour when on seclusion relief opportunities, an ability to follow staff direction, communication with staff, and there would need to be an assessment that he is no longer a risk of serious bodily harm to others in his environment.
Over the course of his seclusion, Mr. Pollard-Wilson eventually became more communicative with staff and accepted periods of seclusion relief. Dr. Komer stated that, although Mr. Pollard-Wilson was selectively mute and whispered when communicating, he met with Mr. Pollard-Wilson prior to this hearing and found him to be more communicative. Dr. Komer stated that medication is likely a factor in Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s increasing willingness to communicate. Mr. Pollard-Wilson remained unwilling to talk to Dr. Komer about the reasons for his seclusion.
Dr. Komer testified that Mr. Pollard-Wilson has not yet had time to rebuild his privileges because he was just released from seclusion the day prior to this hearing. He stated that he was not aware if Mr. Pollard-Wilson exercised his Level C3 privileges prior to his seclusion. He stated that, prior to the restriction, Mr. Pollard-Wilson would go out onto the unit though he preferred remaining in his room.
Dr. Komer supports the planned transfer to Ontario Shores. The morning of this hearing, Mr. Pollard-Wilson told Dr. Komer that he still wanted to go to Ontario Shores. Mr. Pollard-Wilson is number one on the waitlist from Waypoint to go to Ontario Shores.
Dr. Komer testified that Mr. Pollard-Wilson is on a lower dose of injectable medication than he would normally start patients. However, given that Mr. Pollard-Wilson has had three injections of Invega Sustenna to date and has shown improvement, he will keep him on this dose for the foreseeable future.
No other evidence was called.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties confirmed their initial positions.
Analysis and Conclusion
The Board finds that a significant increase in the restriction on Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s liberty had taken place during his period of seclusion pursuant to the factors set out in the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in R v MLC (2010 ONCA 843), as well as R v Campbell (2018 ONCA 141). The seclusion of December 9, 2025, to January 19, 2025, was a significant departure from his liberty norm to which he had become accustomed.
The Board accepts Dr. Komer’s testimony that the restriction of liberty was necessary and appropriate for the safety of the public and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure at the time the restriction was imposed and throughout the period of seclusion.
The panel considered the circumstances leading up to the seclusion and note that Mr. Pollard-Wilson had been unmedicated for a significant length of time. He was started on a low dose of Invega Sustenna as his SDM approved only a suboptimal dose. His behaviour leading up to the seclusion warranted his seclusion for the safety of staff and other patients. Upon securing Mr. Pollard-Wilson in his room, door locked, the duty doctor was contacted, and seclusion was ordered.
The Board relies on the ROL Report regarding the review of seclusion orders, extracted from page 4 as follows:
At Waypoint, seclusion orders are reviewed daily. To ensure objectivity, secluded patients are seen by an independent psychiatrist (not the patient’s most responsible physician) for review and assessment at the 72-hour post-seclusion mark, seven days post-seclusion, and every 28 days thereafter. All seclusion consultations have opined that Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s seclusion has been necessary to mitigate his risk.
Mr. Pollard-Wilson may have effectively extended his own seclusion because he refused to accept seclusion relief and was selectively mute with staff, thereby making it not reasonably possible to assess his mental state or assess his behaviours out of seclusion. Eventually, Mr. Pollard-Wilson began to accept seclusion relief and began communicating with staff, which, by January 19, 2026, resulted in an assessment that he was not a risk of serious bodily harm to others in his environment. The Board accepts the evidence that, despite the low dose of Invega Sustenna, medication was likely a factor in Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s eventual willingness to participate in seclusion relief and communicate with staff.
Considering all the circumstances, the Board finds that the significant restriction of Mr. Pollard-Wilson’s liberty from December 9, 2025, to January 19, 2026, was necessary and appropriate for the safety of the public. Further, the restriction was the least onerous and least restrictive measure at the time the seclusion was imposed throughout the periods of seclusion.
DATED this 2nd day of February 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Region of Toronto.
Ms. C. Murray Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board