CSC-PBC National Joint Board of Investigation

Official Title: National Joint Board of Investigation of Correctional Service Canada - Parole Board of Canada into the Release and Supervision of an Offender on Statutory Release who was Unlawfully at Large since May 24, 2022, and was involved in a series of tragic incidents in several locations in the Province of Saskatchewan that occurred on September 4, 2022, and were reported to Correctional Service Canada on September 5, 2022

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On September 4, 2022, the Saskatchewan Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) released the name of offender Myles Brandon SANDERSON (Finger Print Section (FPS) (REDACTED), as having been involved in mass stabbings that resulted in the death of 11 victims, and injuries to 17 other victims; which occurred during the early morning hours of September 4, 2022, in the James Smith Cree Nation (JSCN) and the village of Weldon, both located in the Province of Saskatchewan. On September 7, 2022, SANDERSON was apprehended by the RCMP, near the town of Rosthern, Saskatchewan, and it was reported that he later died while in police custody.

At the time of the incidents, SANDERSON was a 32-year-old Indigenous offender serving his first federal sentence of four years, four months and 19 days. His convictions included: Assault, Assault with a Weapon (x3), Assault Peace Officer, Robbery, Mischief in relation to other Property Crimes (x2), Utter Threat to Cause Death or Harm and Utter Threat to Destroy Property. SANDERSON was admitted to Saskatchewan Penitentiary (medium-security) on May 21, 2019. He was subsequently transferred to Willow Cree Healing Lodge (minimum-security) on February 11, 2021, and released on Statutory Release (SR) on August 26, 2021. His SR was suspended on November 3, 2021. SANDERSON was temporarily detained at the Saskatchewan Penitentiary (medium-security) until the suspension of his SR was cancelled by the Parole Board of Canada on February 2, 2022, and he was released once again. SANDERSON’s SR was suspended for a second time on May 24, 2022, and a Warrant of Suspension and Apprehension was issued; however, he remained Unlawfully at Large (UAL) until September 7, 2022, when he was apprehended by the RCMP.

On September 23, 2022, the Correctional Service Canada (CSC) and the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) convened a National Joint Board of Investigation (BOI) into the incidents to demonstrate accountability, responsibility and transparency, and to enhance their ability to contribute to the safety of the public, staff and offenders. On December 19, 2022, the Convening Order was amended to reflect a new report remittance date following the establishment of the BOI. The BOI was directed to specifically analyze investigation areas related to the case, and to provide the findings thereof along with any recommendations considered appropriate, and that may contribute to effective resolution or prevention of similar incidents in the future. To carry out this task, the BOI conducted a comprehensive review of SANDERSON’s file, and all documents used for decision-making. Specifically, the BOI analyzed:

• The offender’s profile and whether there were pre-incident indicators, precipitating events or contributing risk factors;

• The case preparation leading up to the release of the offender, including whether the Indigenous social history of the offender was considered in the decision-making process;

• The quality of the offender’s supervision in the community while on SR;

• The circumstances surrounding the suspensions of the offender's SR on November 3, 2021, and May 24, 2022;

• The communication and sharing of information among relevant individuals and agencies, leading up to the release, during the course of the supervision and while the offender was Unlawfully at Large; and

• Any other issues affecting the operations of CSC, which the BOI considered relevant to the understanding of the incidents.

Additionally, the BOI reviewed:

• The documented reasons for the PBC's decision to deny Day Parole (DP) and Full Parole (FP), and impose conditions for SR on February 11, 2021, the quality of the written decision, and the conduct and quality of the hearing held on February 11, 2021;

• The documented reasons for the PBC's decision to cancel a suspension of SR and change conditions of SR on February l, 2022, the quality of the written decision, and the conduct and quality of the hearing held on February 1, 2022;

• Any issues with respect to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, its Regulations, and the policies of the PBC;

• Any issues with respect to the quality and completeness of the information made available to PBC that had a bearing on its decision-making;

• Any issues or considerations that are specific to Indigenous Peoples having a bearing on PBC decision-making; and,

• Any other issues affecting the operations of the PBC, which the BOI considered relevant to the understanding of the incidents.

Below is a summary of the BOI Findings.

The BOI found there were no pre-incident indicators or precipitating events that were known to staff, or that staff could have acted upon to prevent this incident. There were contributing risk factors to this incident that included SANDERSON’s lengthy criminal history and his propensity for violence, along with his turbulent and often violent relationship with his common-law partner. The contributing risk factors were known to staff, and they were attempting to address them through SANDERSON’s Correctional Plan.

There was a failure during the intake assessment process at Saskatchewan Penitentiary (SP) to attempt to gather all relevant information as required in policy.

The overall case preparation leading up to the release of SANDERSON was both reasonable and appropriate, including the consideration of SANDERSON’s Indigenous social history in the decision-making process.

The BOI found that although SANDERSON was assessed and treated by Health Service’s staff and contractors on multiple occasions during his time in federal custody, there were some deficiencies in the manner that SANDERSON’s mental health was assessed and managed.

The quality of the supervision of SANDERSON while on SR, including the monitoring of the special conditions while SANDERSON was under supervision, was reasonable and appropriate. The Indigenous social history of SANDERSON was considered in the decision-making process.

SANDERSON’s SR was suspended on two occasions; once on November 3, 2021, for breaching a special condition "not to enter into intimate sexual and non-sexual relationships and friendships with females unless you have received prior written permission from your Parole Officer" and on a second occasion on May 24, 2022, for breaching a special condition "to have no contact with Vanessa Burns or your children except for what is necessary for parenting responsibilities and for counselling or programming related to domestic violence or parenting and with prior permission from your parole supervisor."

The communication and sharing of information among relevant individuals within CSC and within SANDERSON’s known social contacts was reasonable and appropriate. Contact with police agencies leading up to both the releases and during the course of the supervision were reasonable and appropriate. There was a significant amount of communication initiated by the Community Parole Officer (CPO), Community Security Intelligence Officer (CSIO), and Security Analyst with police and collateral contacts and while SANDERSON was UAL; however, from the perspective of CSC staff, there was limited feedback or useful information provided back to the CPO, CSIO, or Security Analyst from police or collateral contacts.

The BOI found the seemingly limited sharing of information from police agencies to be an Underlying Issue that prevented Parole Staff from potentially being more actively engaged in law enforcement efforts to locate SANDERSON while he was UAL.

The BOI found that SANDERSON’s history of domestic violence was a significant factor in his criminal history, and the documentation of how that risk affected his overall risk could have been better detailed by staff, at all levels, that were involved in making recommendations and decisions on lower security ratings or conditional release.

Based on the BOI’s findings, four recommendations were made to optimize CSC’s policies and practices to reduce the likelihood of a similar incident from occurring in the future:

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Assistant Commissioner, Health Services, develop policy to address the assessment of suicidality for offenders under community supervision and that the Integrated Mental Health Guidelines be updated to address mental health assessment of offenders with a history of suicide attempts upon release. The BOI recognizes that as per Commissioner’s Directive 800, Health Services, only select sites in the community are equipped to offer mental health services; but it is recommended that alternative means of administering mental health treatment by CSC clinicians, such as telepsychology, are considered when offenders with a history of suicide attempts are released to a site where mental health services are not readily available.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, consider the possibility of reinstating the Community Corrections Liaison Officer program.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, review the option of a standardized set of directions or training program for all staff involved in assessing risk level related to domestic violence, and to develop content guidelines that detail what factors are to be considered and how domestic violence factors are to be considered in making overall risk assessments.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Assistant Commissioner, Health Services, review and develop a standardized approach to ensure all Psychologists are trained on how to administer the most valid and reliable psychological measures for domestic violence.

The BOI found that the PBC hearing held on February 11, 2021, was conducted in a manner which complied with the Duty to Act Fairly and adhered to legislation and policy. The audio-recording of the hearing was of adequate quality allowing for a complete review of the proceedings.

The BOI found that the documented reasons for the PBC decision (written decision) to deny Day Parole and Full Parole, and impose conditions for SR on February 11, 2021, reflected an analysis and assessment of the relevant aspects of the case. The PBC Board members were qualified, trained, and experienced decision-makers. The decision was well written, flowed logically and complied with the principles of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, and the requirements of policy; however, the BOI identified discordant information between the actuarial assessments and the clinical judgment of the CSC psychologist, which was not addressed. The BOI found that a portion of the Decision-Making Policy Manual for Board Members, Policy 2.1, Assessment for Pre-Release Decisions (June 21, 2019) was unclear.

The Board of Investigation (BOI) observed a culture related to Parole Board of Canada (PBC) Board members’ use of their authority for rendering certain types of decisions. The BOI identified the need for clarity with respect to PBC Board members’ authority to decide whether or not they will review a decision, specifically to impose special condition(s) on Statutory Release, at the same time as a parole decision.

The BOI found that PBC Board members applied the criteria of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act when imposing special conditions on SR, and properly documented the reasons for imposing special conditions. However, the BOI identified that a rationale for the duration of the special conditions imposed was not provided in the documented reasons for the decision (written decision) as required by policy.

The BOI found that PBC documented reasons for the decision (written decision) to cancel a suspension of SR and change conditions of SR on February 1, 2022, reflected an analysis and assessment of the relevant aspects of the case. The PBC Board member who rendered the decision was a qualified, trained and experienced decision-maker. The decision was well written, flowed logically and complied with the principles and criteria of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and most requirements of policy; however, there was discordant information between the actuarial measures and the clinical judgment of the CSC psychologist which was not addressed in the documented reasons for the decision (written decision).

The BOI found that the hearing held on February 1, 2022, was conducted in a manner which complied with the Duty to Act Fairly and adhered to legislation and policy. Although the hearing was held by teleconference rather than videoconference, the BOI was satisfied that restrictions related to the COVID-19 outbreak at the time, prevented an in-person or videoconference hearing. The audio-recording of the hearing was of adequate quality allowing for a complete review of the proceedings.

At the conclusion of the hearing held on February 1, 2022, SANDERSON’s suspension of SR was cancelled with a reprimand and an additional special condition was imposed. The BOI identified multiple concerns specific to the issuance of a reprimand, including: its meaning, intent, adherence to legal criteria within the documented reasons for the decision (written decision), and a Policy Gap specific to the alignment of policy to the legal criteria for a issuing a reprimand. The BOI also found disparity between the decision delivered orally to SANDERSON at the hearing, and the information contained in the documented reasons for the decision (written decision).

The BOI found that PBC documented reasons for the decision (written decision) explained how the special condition imposed related to SANDERSON’s criminal behaviour. However, the BOI identified a Compliance Issue with legislation and policy in that the documented reasons for decision (written decision) did not cite the criteria for imposing the special condition, or the rationale for the duration of the special condition.

Although the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA) allows for an increase in quorum (number of PBC Board members that constitutes a panel as set out in the CCRA), the BOI found that there was no written policy, procedure or direction issued to PBC staff and Board members on the process, procedure and criteria for increasing quorum for any type of review.

The BOI found that post-suspension hearings are complex in nature and require additional effort, time and responsibility in case preparation for PBC Board members. From the BOI’s perspective, if an offender had failed to comply with a condition of their release in the community, it was just as important or perhaps even more so, than an offender who was applying to be released.

The BOI found that the PBC had most of the available and relevant information, or a summary of the information, that had a bearing on its assessment of risk; however, there was a failure to gather all relevant information during the intake assessment process and throughout the offender’s sentence. This information included police reports, court documentation and official sources of information related to criminal offending outside of SANDERSON’s index offences.

The BOI found the documented reasons for the decision (written decision) rendered on February 1, 2022, to cancel SANDERSON’s suspension, outlined his Indigenous social history; however, a Compliance Issue was identified as the written decision only partially demonstrated the PBC Board member’s consideration of systemic or background factors that may have contributed to SANDERSON’s involvement in the criminal justice system.

The BOI found the conduct of the hearings held on February 11, 2021, and February 1, 2022, demonstrated that PBC Board members turned their minds to considerations specific to Indigenous offenders. The BOI found that all PBC Board members involved in the decision-making in SANDERSON’s case received multiple national and regional training sessions specific to Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous offenders. Further, the BOI found that PBC policy was aligned with its legal responsibilities in regard to Indigenous Peoples within the Canadian Criminal Justice System.

Following the media release of SANDERSON’s name in relation to the mass stabbing event, multiple requests were made through the PBC Registry of Decisions by media outlets for copies of the most recent post-suspension decision dated February 1, 2022. Subsequent to the release of the decision, (REDACTED) PBC offices also received threat(s). PBC staff documented the information and police were notified. A plan was developed for enhanced security measures as the situation was unfolding.

The BOI found that there was insufficient guidance for PBC Regional Communications Officers in relation to the release of decisions through the PBC Registry of Decisions (REDACTED).

The BOI recognized the appropriate and timely action by the management team in supporting the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) staff and Board members in responding to the community incident within the PBC Regional office. The BOI found that there was no (REDACTED) in place that would guide senior management on (REDACTED).

The BOI found that considerations for additional training for PBC Board members on current and empirically derived information on incorporating domestic violence into the overall assessment of risk should be considered.

The Board of Investigation (BOI) identified an Underlying Issue with respect to the allocated study time for the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) Board members. The BOI found evidence during the course of the interviews to support the claim that there was a discrepancy between the allocated time on the PBC Board members’ schedule to study a case, and the actual time PBC Board members utilized and needed to prepare for hearings and complete the documented reasons for the decision (written decision) thereafter. The BOI concluded this underestimated allocated study time could impact PBC Board members’ abilities to thoroughly review cases before hearings. Time constraint pressures were identified consistently and presented a theme, which appeared to have become normal and an acceptable work culture.  

Based on the BOI’s findings, ten recommendations were made to enhance PBC policies, practices, and the spirit/mission of conditional release:

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) review the wording in Policy 2.1, Assessment for Pre-Release Decisions, paragraph 7, of the Decision-Making Policy Manual for Board Members (June 21, 2019).

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) review its procedures and training to ensure PBC Board members’ authority on case readiness is understood by PBC staff and Board members, specifically for the decision to impose special condition(s) on Statutory Release at the same time as the parole-deny decision. Clear direction will help reiterate and reinforce PBC Board members’ responsibility as decision-makers and remind them that issues of a logistical nature lies with scheduling procedures.

• The Board of Investigation (BOI) recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) expand its guidance on reprimands. Furthermore, the BOI recommends that PBC initiate an informative discussion with Correctional Service Canada (CSC) on the subject matter of reprimands, so that CSC can review and assess whether any modifications to community supervision and/or case management policies are warranted.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada document and communicate procedures or guidance to address requests for increasing quorum, pursuant to Subsection 152(3) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, for all types of reviews.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) increase the quorum for the post-release suspension class of cases to be greater than the number fixed by the Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations; to a minimum of two PBC Board members to constitute a panel.

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada review the list of minimum required documents that are to be submitted by the Correctional Service Canada for decision-making to include official documents, such as police reports and court information (including historical), for offenders with lengthy criminal histories or for past offences with violence.

• The Board of Investigation found there is presently no (REDACTED) to guide (REDACTED) Parole Board of Canada (PBC) staff, Board members and senior management. It is recommended that PBC review the need for such a procedure to be available to senior management (REDACTED).

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) review existing procedural guidance related to the application of Subsection 144(2) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, (REDACTED).

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) consider implementing PBC Board members’ training specific to domestic violence that is empirically derived and incorporates history, as well as risk and propensity for domestic violence, to contribute to quality decision-making. Further, it is recommended that PBC work with Correctional Service Canada (CSC) in the application of this recommendation (related to Correctional Service Canada - Recommendation 3 (Investigation Area F)).

• The Board of Investigation recommends that the Parole Board of Canada review the scheduling guidelines to include specific time for decision writing after a panel hearing.

In addition to this CSC and PBC National Joint BOI, the Chief Coroner of Saskatchewan will be holding two Public Inquests into these incidents commencing in January 2024. One will examine the events leading up to the death of the 11 victims and their medical cause and manner of death, while the other will examine the events leading up to the death of SANDERSON and his medical cause and manner of death.