Ontario Review Board

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for flight from a peace officer and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizophrenia and Polysubstance Use Disorder, had remained stable and abstinent from substances during the reporting year but continued to have poor insight into his condition.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the evidence of the attending psychiatrist, finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order to allow for a gradual, supervised transition to living in the community with his father.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, was subject to an annual review by the Ontario Review Board.

The treatment team and all parties agreed that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety but had made positive progress over the past year, including maintaining employment and abstaining from substances.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge, adopting the joint position to remove the absolute abstinence condition to allow the accused to demonstrate internal motivation, while maintaining substance testing and other conditions.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder in 1979.

The accused sought indirectly supervised privileges into the community and a community living provision.

The hospital and the Attorney General argued that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the existing Detention Order should be maintained.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat due to his schizoaffective disorder, lack of insight, and recent sexually inappropriate behaviours towards hospital staff.

The Board concluded that a continuation of the existing Detention Order without additional privileges was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the accused's fitness to stand trial and his current disposition.

The accused, who has Autism Spectrum Disorder and an Intellectual Disability, was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of robbery and assault with a weapon.

Relying on psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial as he lacks a reality-based understanding of the legal proceedings.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, noting the need for intensive supports during his upcoming transition to specialized community housing.

The accused, who has Autism Spectrum Disorder and an Intellectual Disability, was previously found unfit to stand trial on sexual offences.

The Review Board held a hearing to review his fitness and disposition.

The Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial as he cannot meaningfully communicate with counsel or make reality-based decisions.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of a Detention Order with modifications to allow for discharge planning and expanded geographic area for community living.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for breaches of probation.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had made progress in the community but continued to experience residual psychotic symptoms and superficial insight into his illness.

The Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety.

On the joint submission of the parties, the Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order with amended privileges, including community living and expanded travel passes.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, continues to experience paranoia and cognitive deficits.

The hospital recommended continuing the detention order with community living privileges, while removing the abstinence clause.

The Crown and Amicus supported this recommendation.

The Board concluded the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the detention order with the recommended amendments, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson, was detained at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

Her liberty was restricted when she was admitted as an inpatient due to severe psychiatric decompensation and medication non-compliance.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty.

The Board concluded that the restriction was justified, necessary, and the least onerous option available to ensure public safety and address the accused's mental health needs.

The accused was subsequently stabilized and discharged back to the community.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for weapons offences and is subject to a conditional discharge.

The accused, diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, did not attend the hearing.

The hospital and Crown submitted that the current disposition was appropriate, and the accused's counsel conceded that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board accepted the joint submission, noting the accused's vulnerability to stressors and predictable instability during transitions, and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and uttering threats.

The accused suffers from bipolar disorder and a cannabis use disorder.

The Board found that the accused represents a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of decompensation and violence if he stops taking his medication or resumes substance use.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge.

While the parties jointly recommended omitting a substance use abstention clause, the Board rejected this submission, finding that a strict prohibition on intoxicants was necessary to manage the accused's risk and support his reintegration.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that the accused, who was subject to a disposition ordering his detention, had been placed in seclusion for a period exceeding seven days following an incident where he attempted to punch a staff member.

The Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of liberty.

The Board found that both the initial restriction and the continuing restriction until his discharge from seclusion were necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive options available to the hospital given the accused's history of assaultive behaviour, increase in symptoms, and refusal to accept medication.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault and other charges in 2023, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

The hospital and the accused jointly sought an absolute discharge, which the Crown ultimately supported.

The Board found that the accused, who is stable in supervised housing, medication compliant, and has improved insight, no longer poses a significant threat to the safety of the public.

An absolute discharge was ordered.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for murder due to schizophrenia.

The accused had recently eloped from the hospital and was found with cannabis, setting back his progress.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to community safety and ordered the continuation of his detention order at CAMH Forensic Services.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief and assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizoaffective disorder and autism spectrum disorder, did not attend the hearing.

Based on a joint submission and evidence from the treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with a modification to reduce reporting to no less than once per month.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberties hearing following the accused's readmission to the hospital.

The accused, who was previously living in the community, experienced a deterioration in his mental condition and an escalation in psychotic symptoms linked to crystal methamphetamine use.

The Board found that the readmission constituted a significant increase in the restrictions on his liberty, but concluded that the hospital's actions were warranted and justified to manage his increased risk to public safety.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and a major neurocognitive disorder, had a history of medication non-adherence in the community.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused's violent behavior was managed with medication and hospital structure, but he would likely discontinue medication without supervision.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered that he remain subject to a Detention Order with an added condition restricting his proximity to the victim.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for charges including advocating genocide and willful promotion of hatred after posting over 4,000 antisemitic messages on social media.

At his initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the panel found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his diagnosis of schizophrenia, pathological anger, and high risk of violent re-offending.

The Board ordered a detention order with discretionary privileges, including the potential for indirectly supervised passes in the community, and imposed strict conditions monitoring his access to the internet and social media.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for attempted murder, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual disposition review.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia complicated by excited catatonia and a cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, supported by the expert evidence of the attending psychiatrist, that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continued Detention Order with expanded geographical privileges for accompanied community passes to facilitate family visits, noting that the accused is not yet ready for indirectly supervised passes while medication optimization is ongoing.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and aggravated assault.

The accused's treating psychiatrist testified that the accused's mental state and insight had dramatically improved after resuming antipsychotic medication, though a significant threat to public safety remained.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties to maintain the current Disposition of a Detention Order with privileges, noting the accused's promising trajectory toward community living.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a Restriction of Liberty hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for robbery and using an imitation firearm.

The accused had been placed in locked seclusion after brandishing a pencil as a weapon and expressing violent intent towards staff while experiencing active psychosis and refusing medication.

The Board found that the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were warranted, necessary, and the least restrictive options available.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order.