Background
Blake Watters appealed the Ontario Review Board’s September 2, 2025 disposition under Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code. The Board had continued an existing detention order. Its reasons were issued on October 14, 2025.
Watters initially sought an absolute discharge at the Board hearing. After the evidence concluded, however, his counsel conceded that he continued to pose a significant risk to public safety and instead sought a conditional discharge.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Applying the reasonableness standard and according considerable deference to the expert Review Board, it held that the Board adequately applied the statutory significant-threat test in s. 672.5401 of the Criminal Code.
The Board’s finding was supported by the treating psychiatrist’s evidence that Watters posed the same degree of public-safety risk as at the time of the index offences, his refusal to take psychotropic medication for delusional beliefs, and the parties’ joint position that he remained a significant threat. The Court also held that the Board sufficiently explained why detention, rather than a conditional discharge, remained the least onerous and restrictive appropriate disposition: without medication, Watters could not meaningfully engage in programming or stabilize his symptoms, making expanded community privileges unwarranted.
Key Takeaways
- Review Board dispositions are reviewed for reasonableness and receive considerable deference.
- A Board may rely on clinical risk evidence, treatment refusal, and the parties’ position in finding a continuing significant threat to public safety.
- Where untreated symptoms prevent meaningful programming and stabilization, detention may remain the least onerous and restrictive appropriate disposition.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that appellate review of Review Board dispositions focuses on whether the Board’s reasons and result form a coherent, rational analysis grounded in the evidence and governing law. It also illustrates the significance of treatment refusal where a proposed conditional discharge depends on symptom stabilization and safe community management.