 |
| John L. Hill |
An Ontario Superior Court judge has stayed first-degree murder charges against Joseph Richard Whitlock, Kulvir Singh Bhatia and Karn Veer Sandhu after determining that their Charter rights were grossly violated at the Maplehurst Correctional Complex (MHCC) in Milton, Ont. Whitlock, 30, of Pickering, Ont., Bhatia, 25, of Calgary and Sandhu, 29, of Edmonton were charged in April 2023 with first-degree murder and attempted murder after events that occurred Aug. 19, 2022, in Oakville, Ont. None of the accused was on a form of release for violent crime at the time of the murder.
Justice Clayton Conlan ruled that the men were subjected to “torturous state actions” in December 2023, when a crisis intervention team responded to an assault on a correctional officer. This resulted in a strip-search of all inmates in Unit 8, restraining them with zip ties, and forcing them to sit in their underwear facing a wall, some for up to two days.
Conlan found that the team’s actions were not about safety or control but were “done for vengeance” and “retribution.” Despite the seriousness of the murder and attempted murder charges related to the fatal shooting of Arman Dhillon in Oakville, the judge
olonko: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
This is not the first time Justice Conlan, sitting in Milton, Ont., has spoken out critically about Maplehurst Institution. On July 3, 2025, the judge’s endorsement in R. v. A.B.C., 2025 ONSC 3978 criticized ongoing delays in transporting prisoners from the nearby Maplehurst Correctional Complex (and Vanier Centre for Women) to the courthouse.
On July 2, 2025, a prisoner arrived 2.5 hours late for a sentencing hearing, disrupting the court’s schedule. The following day, two other prisoners arrived over an hour late for another proceeding, leaving multiple lawyers waiting and causing additional delays.
The judge noted that these frequent late arrivals have been an ongoing problem despite the court’s continuous efforts to resolve them. The judge warned that such delays could breach the accused persons’ right to a full answer and defence and might also impact bail decisions under the Criminal Code. This situation has also led to a significant waste of court time, negatively affecting everyone involved in the justice process.
While the judge recognized the dedication of MHCC staff, they stressed that the issue, regardless of its cause, cannot be solved by further overcrowding the facility.
On June 9, 2025, the Ontario ombudsman, Paul Dubé, announced a formal investigation into the Ministry of the Solicitor General’s response to the December 2023 Maplehurst incident. The purpose of the inquiry was not to re-examine the discipline of individual correctional officers, but to review the ministry’s response, accountability measures, transparency and preventive safeguards to ensure such an incident does not happen again.
The ombudsman’s 2024-25 annual report highlighted a significant increase in complaints from correctional facilities across Ontario. Overall complaints rose by about 55 per cent year over year, reaching approximately 6,870 for the sector. The Maplehurst Correctional Complex stood out as a particularly problematic site. The ombudsman received nearly twice as many complaints from Maplehurst, increasing from 357 in 2023-24 to 722 in 2024-25. Many of these complaints involved poor living conditions, including frequent lockdowns, overcrowding and health care concerns.
The ombudsman highlighted the December 2023 incident at Maplehurst involving the institution’s Crisis Intervention Team and nearly 200 inmates. The report also pointed out health-related concerns, such as an outbreak of invasive Group A streptococcal disease at Maplehurst, which resulted in the deaths of two inmates. The ombudsman concluded that the situation at Maplehurst, and more broadly across Ontario correctional facilities, raised serious human rights and systemic issues, not just isolated incidents or inefficiencies.
The response from the Ministry of the Attorney General, which oversees correctional facilities, was disappointing. Brian Gray, a spokesperson for the ministry, told Law360 Canada in June that the ministry expects all correctional staff to uphold the standards of conduct as outlined in the Ontario Correctional Service Code.
The province of Ontario will likely find that staying serious charges such as murder is extreme. Yet it should be noted that the province has had ample warning that prison overcrowding and harsh living conditions can result in sentence reduction.
Toronto lawyer Jeffrey Hartman of the law firm Lockyer Zaduk Zeeh emphasized that leniency should be considered when the ministry overlooks deplorable prison conditions in two cases before the Ontario Court of Justice. Hartman contended that prison conditions should influence the severity of penalties in R. v. Dooley and R. v. Sanchez-Neria. Justice Mabel Lai of the Ontario Court of Justice noted that Hartman was not wrong in describing the conditions at Maplehurst as a suspension of the rule of law.
Critics will argue that staying a murder charge gives unelected judges too much power to ignore prosecution under laws made by democratically elected legislatures. Yet when the ombudsman is ignored and nothing is done when sentences are reduced, the “conversation” between the courts and the legislature must continue.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a JD from Queen’s and an LLM in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. His most recent book, Acts of Darkness (Durvile & UpRoute Books), was released July 1. Hill is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books) and The Rest of the (True Crime) Story (AOS Publishing). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.