Valerie Dawn Culp

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for uttering threats and criminal harassment.

The accused suffers from Huntington's Disease and a related psychotic disorder.

The parties presented a joint position that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and should remain subject to a detention disposition.

The Board accepted the joint position, finding that absent the disposition, the accused would likely decompensate and engage in aggressive behaviour.

The detention disposition was continued without changes.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review two restrictions of liberty imposed on the accused by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and personality disorders, was readmitted to the hospital twice due to escalating regressive behaviour, specifically lying down in common areas and refusing to leave, which jeopardized his community housing.

The Board accepted the treating psychiatrist's evidence and found that both restrictions of liberty were warranted, necessary, and appropriate for the safety of the public and the accused, representing the least restrictive interventions available.

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

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and has a history of violence and substance use.

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

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention disposition at the hospital, as a conditional discharge would be insufficient to manage her risk.

Ryan Pyziak was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault after stabbing a victim while experiencing delusions.

At his initial Ontario Review Board disposition hearing, the Board considered whether he remained a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence detailing his history of medication non-adherence, substance abuse, and violence, the Board found he remained a significant threat.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at CAMH and denied his request for a transfer to Ontario Shores, finding it premature and counter-therapeutic.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for several weapons and assault offences.

At the initial Review Board hearing, the Board considered whether the accused posed a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's schizophrenia, history of medication non-adherence, and housing instability presented a significant threat.

The Board concluded that a Detention Order was the necessary and appropriate disposition to manage the risk and ensure the accused's mental stability.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for exposure for a sexual purpose and indecent acts.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered psychiatric evidence indicating the accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

A Detention Order was issued with conditions including a weapons prohibition and a no-contact order regarding the victims.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for multiple unprovoked assaults.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, was residing in the community at a staffed residence.

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

A Detention Order to a General Forensic Unit was issued, allowing the accused to live in the community subject to conditions, including reporting to the hospital at least once every two weeks and an absolute prohibition on alcohol and substance use.

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

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Affective Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder, has remained stable but continues to decline psychotropic medication and minimizes the risks of his past cannabis use.

The Board accepted the treatment team's evidence that the accused remains vulnerable to rapid decompensation without medication.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order at a General Forensic Unit.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder, underwent an annual review of his Disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his history of violence, maladaptive personality traits, and challenging behaviours in the hospital.

Given his complex medical needs and a request to be closer to family, the Board ordered his transfer from CAMH to St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton under a Detention Order with specific conditions.

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

The hospital recommended maintaining the Detention Order but increasing reporting frequency and allowing passes up to 48 hours to prepare for community transition.

All parties agreed with this joint position.

The Board accepted the recommendations, noting the accused's relative stability and the sensibility of the transitional planning.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia, lacks insight into his illness, and has a history of medication non-compliance requiring a community treatment order.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety, as he would likely decompensate and become violent if he stopped taking his medication.

Concluding that a conditional discharge was insufficient to manage this risk, the Board issued a detention order with privileges up to community living in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the disposition for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for four counts of aggravated assault.

The hospital and the Crown supported an absolute discharge, noting the accused's excellent treatment year, full insight into his schizoaffective disorder, and compliance with a three-month injectable medication regimen.

The Board found that the accused's risk of decompensation was highly moderated by his insight, medication adherence, and strong community and family supports.

Concluding that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The hospital recommended continuing a detention order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, but with the addition of indirectly supervised community passes and a provision for community living in supervised accommodation.

The Attorney General opposed the community living provision.

Applying the Court of Appeal's decision in Re Simonic, the Board granted the hospital's requested privileges, noting that a community living clause allows the accused to be placed on a waitlist for appropriate supervised accommodation.

The detention order was continued with the new privileges and no-contact provisions.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an initial disposition hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for telecommunication with a person under 16 years.

The Board accepted the risk assessment evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to schizoaffective disorder and lack of insight.

Following a joint recommendation, the Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms including residence at the family home, reporting requirements, and a prohibition on contacting the victim.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault, uttering threats, and disarming a peace officer.

The hospital and the Crown recommended a conditional discharge, though the Crown requested that a specific residence be named.

The Board found that while the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his history of substance abuse and violent behaviour when unwell, his recent mental stability, abstinence from substances, and compliance with medication justified a conditional discharge.

The Board concluded it was not necessary to specify a residence in the disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and substance-use disorder, had experienced severe psychotic symptoms leading up to the index offence.

The Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

A detention order was issued with conditions, including a prohibition on substance use, weapons, and contact with specific individuals, while allowing for gradual, indirectly supervised passes into the community as treatment progresses.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Hospital and the Attorney General recommended a detention order with privileges, which the accused supported with a minor modification regarding possessing a lighter.

The Board reviewed the accused's history of schizophrenia, substance use, and non-compliance with treatment in the community.

The Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered a detention order with the recommended conditions, including the permission to possess a lighter for cigarettes.

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

The accused sought an absolute discharge, while the hospital and Crown recommended continuing the conditional discharge with a new travel privilege.

The Board accepted the treating psychiatrist's evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to schizophrenia, ongoing cannabis use, and lack of insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge, including a consent to treatment condition, with the addition of a discretionary two-week international travel pass.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review of his conditional discharge.

The hospital recommended an absolute discharge, noting the accused's sustained psychiatric stability, medication compliance, and solid plan to return to Nigeria with arranged psychiatric follow-up.

The Crown opposed, seeking a continuation of the conditional discharge.

Applying the framework from Winko v. British Columbia, the Board found that the accused no longer poses a significant threat to public safety due to his well-developed insight and numerous protective factors.

An absolute discharge was ordered.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review the hospital's decision to readmit the accused, who had previously been discharged to the community.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for arson, experienced a rapid decompensation in her mental status due to medication non-compliance and the stress of transition.

All parties jointly submitted that the readmission was necessary and appropriate.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding that the readmission and ongoing detention were the least restrictive alternatives available to the treatment team.