Stephen Fredrick Gehl

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine whether the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of aggravated assault, remained unfit.

The accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder and experiences fixed delusions regarding the court process, including beliefs that the trial judge was involved in a conspiracy against him.

Applying the Bharwani test, the Board found that the accused's delusions prevented him from having a reality-based understanding of the proceedings, rendering him unfit to stand trial.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, finding it to be the least restrictive and most appropriate disposition given the accused's need for treatment and anticipated resistance to medication.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for two counts of arson.

At the initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the Board considered whether the accused represented a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board found that the accused's major mental illness, history of noncompliance with treatment, and ongoing substance use posed a significant threat of serious criminality.

The Board concluded that a detention disposition was necessary and appropriate to manage the risk, allowing the hospital to respond quickly to any return of psychotic symptoms.

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

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and severe obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused requires a high level of support in a secure forensic setting and would likely disengage from treatment and violently reoffend if discharged.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of his detention at the high-secure forensic hospital.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for offences including uttering threats and assault with intent to resist arrest.

At his initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence established that his schizophrenia was well-managed in the community through long-acting injectable medication and a Community Treatment Order.

The Board found that the accused did not pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on the testimony of the attending forensic psychiatrist and the accused's sustained stability, treatment adherence, and lack of symptoms, the Board concluded the accused did not pose a real and substantial risk to the public.

An absolute discharge was granted.

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

The accused sought to remove conditions prohibiting cannabis use and requiring random drug screening, while conceding he remained a significant threat to public safety requiring a detention disposition.

The Board found that the accused's major mental illness, exacerbated by substance use, continued to pose a significant threat.

The Board concluded that a detention disposition remained necessary and that the abstinence and testing conditions were minimally intrusive and essential to ensure public safety, given the accused's history of rapid decompensation following substance use.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for assault by choking and was discharged on conditions.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the hospital's attending psychiatrist testified that the accused's schizophrenia and substance use disorder were in partial remission, he had strong community support, and he no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

The Crown and the accused supported the hospital's recommendation.

The Board unanimously accepted the psychiatric evidence, found the accused did not pose a significant threat to the safety of the public, and granted an absolute discharge.

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

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had previously choked his mother due to command hallucinations.

The treating psychiatrist testified that the accused's mental status had significantly improved and his medications were optimized, though he still required the structure of a hospital setting.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and ordered the continuation of the detention order with amended privileges, including the possibility of residing in approved accommodation in the community once transitioned.

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

The hospital and Crown recommended continuing the conditional discharge due to recent signs of the accused disengaging from treatment, despite his medication compliance and lack of violence.

The Board concluded that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety, citing his strong family support, medication adherence, and the willingness of his family physician to oversee his treatment.

An absolute discharge was granted.

The accused was charged with sexual assault arising from events that occurred in his bedroom after a high school prom on June 8, 2022.

The Crown alleged that the complainant was asleep and did not consent to sexual activity.

The defence contended that the sexual activity was consensual and that the complainant fabricated the allegation to counter the accused's allegation that she had been cheating on him.

The court found significant credibility issues with the complainant's evidence, including contradictions, inconsistencies, and conflicts with other evidence.

The accused's evidence, while containing some minor inconsistencies, was generally forthright and consistent.

The court found that the complainant's version of events could not be accepted beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the accused's evidence raised more than a reasonable doubt about whether the complainant was asleep and did not consent.

The accused was acquitted.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the hospital's decision to restrict the liberty of the accused, who had previously been found unfit to stand trial.

The accused had absconded during a community program, walked into traffic, and assaulted a staff member.

The Board found that the initial decision to withhold privileges and the ensuing restriction of liberty were necessary, appropriate, and represented the least restrictive measures available to manage the risk to public safety.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an 81-year-old accused found not criminally responsible for attempted murder.

The accused had cut his daughter-in-law's throat while experiencing delirium induced by a severe, treatment-resistant infection following hip surgery.

Accepting a joint submission supported by the treating psychiatrist's evidence, the Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his ongoing infection and cognitive decline.

The Board ordered a detention order with discretionary privileges, including the ability to reside in hospital-approved community accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences, was subject to a Conditional Discharge.

Due to recent medication non-adherence, increased substance use, and decompensation, the hospital recommended a Detention Disposition.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a Conditional Discharge was no longer sufficient to manage his risk.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care.

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

The hospital and the Crown jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety and should receive an absolute discharge.

The Board rejected the joint submission, finding that the accused's bipolar disorder remained unstable, his medication regimen required frequent adjustments, and his risk management relied heavily on the tenuous support of his common-law partner.

Concluding that the accused continued to pose a significant threat, the Board ordered a Detention Order.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for theft, was living in the community under an Ontario Review Board disposition.

He was evicted from his group home for distributing crystal methamphetamine to other patients and returned to the hospital, resulting in a restriction of his liberty.

The Board held a hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review the restriction.

The Board found that both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were justified, necessary, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive option available, given his substance use, anti-social personality disorder, and lack of insight.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining the current detention disposition at a high secure facility, while the accused sought a transfer to a medium security facility.

Relying on uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused remained volatile, frequently non-compliant with medication, and lacked insight, the Board found he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered his continued detention at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care with no changes to his privileges.

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of aggravated assault.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the hospital and the Crown submitted that the accused was now fit to stand trial and sought a keep fit order detaining him in hospital pending his return to court.

The accused agreed he was fit but opposed the keep fit order.

The Board found the accused fit to stand trial, noting his ability to answer the Taylor test questions and understand the proceedings.

Given his history of fluctuating fitness and the stabilizing effect of the hospital environment, the Board ordered that he be sent back to court without delay and remain subject to the Warrant of Committal in hospital to maintain his fitness.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to restrict the liberty of an accused previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and arson.

The accused had been living in the community but was readmitted to the hospital after police found him consuming alcohol and cannabis in violation of his disposition, following allegations of harassment.

The Board accepted expert psychiatric evidence that the accused was experiencing acute decompensation of a bipolar-related disorder exacerbated by substance use and suboptimal treatment.

The Board concluded that both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were warranted, necessary, and the least onerous interventions available to protect public safety.

The Board also approved joint submissions to amend the disposition to include specific no-contact provisions.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty (ROL) imposed on the accused, who had been living in the community but was readmitted to the hospital due to decompensation and substance use.

The hospital sought to stabilize the accused while awaiting a more supportive housing placement.

The Board found that the ROL was necessary and warranted to protect the public and prevent further decline in the accused's mental state.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current disposition, noting the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but supporting his transition to new supportive housing.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges including assaulting police with a weapon and dangerous driving.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizophrenia, continued to experience grandiose and persecutory delusions and believed his charges had been withdrawn.

Applying the contextual test for fitness, the Board found the accused remained unable to conduct a defence or instruct counsel due to his mental disorder.

Concluding that the accused posed a significant threat to public safety and lacked community supports, the Board ordered his detention in hospital with privileges for indirectly supervised entry into the community.