Jacques Gallant covered the Jan 5, 2026 hearing in the Court of Appeal in the Toronto Star.
The article is available here:
For 20 years, this man has been locked in “seclusion”
For 20 years, this man has been locked in ‘seclusion’ at an Ontario psychiatric hospital. ‘Somebody has to care,’ his lawyer says
Camelot Hamblett has lived in near-total isolation in a locked room in a psychiatric hospital for nearly half his life.
Jan. 6, 2026
By Jacques GallantCourts and Justice Reporter
For the last 20 years — half of his life — Camelot Hamblett has lived in near-total isolation in a locked room in a psychiatric hospital.
Diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia and found not criminally responsible for a 2004 sexual assault, the 43-year-old Toronto man is never let out of his room at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care for more than two hours a day — some days much less, others not at all — and usually in restraints.
His case was met with alarm by a panel of judges at the Ontario Court of Appeal on Monday. Hamblett’s lawyer urged them to order an independent psychiatric assessment with the goal of finally getting Hamblett out of what is known in the medical world as “seclusion,” which the Canadian Psychiatric Association has said should only be used as an option of last resort in emergency situations to prevent immediate harm to the person or to others.
Hamblett has been detained at Waypoint, next to Georgian Bay in Penetanguishene, Ont., since 2005. He was arrested after chasing a stranger in the street, exposing himself to her and saying they were going to have sex, only to flee before doing so. He also punched two strangers in the face at a hospital. He was found not criminally responsible for those incidents.
“The situation is untenable and inhumane,” lawyer Anita Szigeti, an expert on mental health law, told the three-judge panel. She emphasized that her client is a Black man who has spent half of his life restrained and locked in isolation.
“Somebody has to care about what’s happening. He needs help.”
Justice Grant Huscroft said the court was “concerned about this situation,” and would deliver its decision shortly.
Szigeti was asking the court to overturn a decision made by the Ontario Review Board that found there was no treatment impasse in Hamblett’s case and therefore an independent assessment wasn’t required. The board, made up of doctors, lawyers, and laypersons, annually reviews the cases of people found not criminally responsible to determine, among other things, if they should be released from hospital and on what conditions.
The board concluded last year that Waypoint was still looking for different options to manage Hamblett’s risk and that his latest psychiatrist was open to suggestions. “There is a difference between a treatment impasse and a case that is difficult to treat,” the board said in its decision.
Crown attorney Samuel Mazzuca argued Monday that the board’s decision was reasonable given that Hamblett’s psychiatrist was planning to re-introduce some treatment options and implement new ones. Huscroft told Mazzuca he was being “granular” and missing the bigger picture: that a man has spent 20 years locked down in a hospital.
“And we’re quibbling over the reasonableness of that and whether there’s a plan that might work,” Huscroft said. “For myself, this is looking like ineffectual treatment from Waypoint. With the greatest of respect to all those involved, trying their best: It ain’t doing any good.”
There’s been no “substantial or sustained improvement” in Hamblett’s mental state since being detained at Waypoint 20 years ago, Szigeti and co-counsel Michael Schloss argue in written materials filed with the court. He’s been kept in locked seclusion the entire time due to “aggressive behaviours triggered by persistent auditory hallucinations.”
By the time of his latest review board hearing last May, Hamblett had only been permitted to leave his room twice in the previous month, both times in restraints, according to the written materials. His mental condition had also deteriorated further; he had stopped showering and his room was filled with garbage. The board’s finding that there was no impasse comes “despite decades without progress, indeed in the face of obvious regression and the devastating prognosis,” the lawyers wrote.
“Any reasonable member of the public, if told someone has been kept in what amounts to a small cell in a maximum secure psychiatric facility continuously for 20 years, would be alarmed and troubled,” wrote Szigeti and Schloss. “Every stone must now be overturned to find this man some hope of real relief. His suffering is not being alleviated, and arguably is exacerbated by inhumane conditions.”
Justice Sally Gomery said what bothered her about the board’s decision was the focus was on whether the latest treatment plan put forward by the hospital was reasonable. “The question is whether stepping back and seeing that this guy has been incarcerated in these conditions for 20 years — whether that’s reasonable,” Gomery said.
The judges questioned why Hamblett’s case, which is reviewed annually by the review board, had never come before the top court until now. Szigeti explained she only recently became Hamblett’s lawyer and needed to confirm his instructions.
“He’s a gentleman who has repeatedly told everyone, ‘get me back to jail,’” Szigeti said. “Here is someone who is clear that he wants out of Waypoint, he wants out of that room. For some lawyers, that’s sufficient instruction to try to get that to happen.”
Why psychiatric hospitals use ‘seclusion’
The Canadian Psychiatric Association describes restraint or seclusion as an “emergency intervention” that deprives people of their liberty and should only be used when all other alternatives have failed to stop the individual from harming themselves or others.
“All efforts should be expended to review incidents requiring seclusion or restraint, and intervention should take place to prevent further use,” says the association. “Ideally, no person should lose their right to liberty and freedom, but, unfortunately, acute mental illness may make that impossible, albeit for brief periods.”
It’s unclear whether Hamblett represents the longest amount of time someone has spent in seclusion in Ontario. Waypoint’s lawyer, Julia Lefebvre, conceded that his situation is not a “typical case.”
Seclusion is an order made by a doctor and is reviewed daily, Lefebvre said in court. It’s based on risk of bodily harm to the individual as well as to others.
She said there’s a “seclusion relief team” of staff members who will escort patients like Hamblett out of their room for a brief period of time each day, to engage in certain activities and to shower, with or without restraints. She said that on some occasions, there have been other patients on the unit when Hamblett was let out, though other times the unit was “locked up” due to risk issues, and there were no other patients present.
“Day to day, Mr. Hamblett has seen improvement in periods of time; that improvement has not resulted in a decrease in his psychosis or decrease in his risk such that he’s been able to come out of seclusion,” she said.
“It is unknown whether there will be changes that result in that occurring. It is a difficult case to treat. It does not mean that smaller improvements are not meaningful to him in terms of his quality of life, even if he remains in seclusion.”
Jacques Gallant is a Toronto-based reporter covering courts, justice and legal affairs for the Star. Reach him by email at jgallant@thestar.ca or follow him on Twitter: @JacquesGallant
anitaszigeti 