Re: Edith Frayne
ORB File No: 8429
Hearing held on: Friday, February 7, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. C. Finley
Members: Dr. S. Lessard Dr. L. Leong Mr. P. Capelle Mr. A. Bouvier
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Edith Frayne Counsel: Mr. N. Xynnis
The Person in charge of Hospital: Counsel: Ms. A. Feldstein
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. C. Coughlan
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated April 3, 2025)
Introduction
On October 5, 2023, Edith Frayne was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of attempt murder, aggravated assault, and assault (x2), all contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada (the "Criminal Code"). Ms. Frayne is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board (the "Board") dated December 21, 2023, detaining her at the Forensic Service of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH”), with privileges up to live in the community in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
On February 7, 2025, a panel of the Ontario Review Board (the "ORB" or the "Board") convened a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Ms. Frayne was in attendance and represented by her counsel, Mr. Xynnis.
Without Prejudice Position of the Parties
Ms. Feldstein, on behalf of the hospital, indicated that a renewal of the detention disposition was recommended with the addition of subparagraph 4(f) which reads as follows:
Abstain from alcohol and non-medically prescribed substances and submit random urine samples to assess for same;
To enter TTC subway stations indirectly supervised.
Mr. Coughlan, on behalf of the Crown, supported the renewal of the detention disposition but opposed the inclusion of the permission To enter TTC subway stations indirectly supervised.
Mr. Xynnis, on behalf of Ms. Frayne, also supported the renewal of the detention disposition and submitted that it may be appropriate to allow his client the use of buses and street cars indirectly supervised together with access to subways directly supervised.
Background and Index Offences
The Hospital Report provides a detailed account of Ms. Frayne’s history preceding the index offences and need not be repeated here. Briefly, Ms. Frayne, now 47, lived with her biological parents and younger sister until age 10 when her parents divorced. She then lived with her aunt for a period. She reported good relationships with both parents and their new partners. She was a happy child who succeeded academically, graduating from high school and later from the University of Toronto.
In 1999, Ms. Frayne experienced an accident that likely resulted in a head injury. According to both Ms. Frayne and her aunt, this injury caused significant changes to her mental state. Later, after giving birth to her daughter, she appears to have suffered from post-partum depression. Child protective services became involved, and her daughter has lived with Ms. Frayne's sister ever since. Ms. Frayne’s relationship with her child's father ended.
Ms. Frayne has a history of substance abuse including alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, and crystal methamphetamine. Multiple family members on her mother's side have schizophrenia.
Her documented mental health history began in 2016 when she was 29. During a criminal assessment, she was described as giving unclear answers, likely due to paranoid thinking. She appeared disorganized, talked to herself, and made inappropriate sexual comments. Doctors believed she had schizophrenia. Between 2016 and her 2022 index offense, she was hospitalized twice for psychiatric care—once when police found her with a knife and once when she believed someone was stalking her. Both times, doctors noted she had delusions about others being romantically obsessed with her.
Throughout these mental health system encounters, Ms. Frayne showed little awareness of her condition and didn't follow through with treatment after hospital discharge.
Her criminal record includes failing to comply with a court order in 2016 and criminal harassment in 2017.
The circumstances of the index offences are taken from last year’s Reasons for Disposition as follows:
“The Hospital Report includes information regarding the index offences that was generated by the police. As this was an initial hearing, the panel also received the trial judge’s Reasons for Judgment and the following summary of the index offences comes from those Reasons, as they are the facts that underlie the NCR verdict.
On the evening of April 17, 2022, Ms. Frayne was at the subway station at Yonge and Bloor Streets in Toronto. A man and a woman were near Ms. Frayne when she “shouldered” the woman and then attempted to kick her, before pushing the man. She then chased the woman before picking up and dragging a stanchion pole and punching another unknown passerby.
About twelve minutes later, Ms. Frayne was on the westbound platform of Line 2 when Shamsa Al Balushi arrived on the platform and stood behind the yellow line waiting for her train. She may have been singing. Ms. Frayne used her right shoulder and both hands to push Ms. Al Balushi onto the tracks. Ms. Frayne briefly watched her fall before walking away.
Within a few seconds of ending up on the tracks, Ms. Al Balushi rolled under the lip of the platform, such that when the train arrived, she suffered only a scraped nose, broken rib, and pain in her shoulder and back.
Many months later, after Ms. Frayne was being treated for psychosis, she was able to recount that she believed that Ms. Al Balushi had stolen her keys and was involved with her boyfriend. She was very angry. She was also high on crystal methamphetamine at the time.”
Through to May 8, 2024, Ms. Frayne was a patient in the Forensic Women's Secure Unit (WSFU). She was then transferred to the Women's General Forensic Unit (WGFU). Dr. I. Ray provided her care until August 2024, after which Dr. J. Dupré took over as her psychiatrist at the WGFU.
Current Diagnoses
Schizophrenia
Substance Use Disorder
Evidence at Hearing
Dr. Dupré gave evidence on behalf of the hospital. She testified that her patient’s daily dose of Mirtazipine, an anti-craving medication, was increased to 30 milligrams. Ms. Frayne is motivated to engage in substance use mitigation strategies although she continues to experience cravings for crystal methamphetamine.
Ms. Frayne has made impressive progress in the past reporting year. Positive symptoms of her illness are no longer present. She takes prescribed medications on her own consent and is motivated to progress in her treatment. Ms. Frayne has been using indirectly supervised passes on hospital grounds for several months without issue. The next step, according to Dr. Dupré is to allow Ms. Frayne to use the subway indirectly supervised, which increases her access to the community. Ms. Frayne’s risk flows from the disorganization associated with her mental illness and previous substance addictions. Dr. Dupré testified that there is nothing specific vis-a-vis subway use that increases her patient’s risk to public safety. Therefore, as long as Ms. Frayne is abstinent from substances and taking medication, she presents no higher risk to public safety on a subway platform. Limiting this access in no way impacts her risk and may restrict her access to possible community placements.
At present, Ms. Frayne is assessed each day prior to allowing her to an indirectly supervised pass on hospital grounds. The plan is to also implement passes To enter TTC subway stations indirectly supervised in a gradual way geared to increasing her autonomy while managing her risk.
Responding to questions from Mr. Coughlan, Dr. Dupré testified that “indirectly” means that a person is assessed before and after they are allowed community access. She added that for the first couple of indirectly supervised passes accorded to Ms. Frayne for subway use, she may be shadowed by hospital staff.
Mr. Coughlan noted that Ms. Frayne is described as impulsive in the Hospital Report. This includes the circumstances precipitating the index offence and more recently, attempting to independently identify future housing. Dr. Dupré responded that the index offence occurred when Ms. Frayne’s mental state was under the influence of crystal methamphetamine and grossly disorganized
Gradually exposing Ms. Frayne to the community and by association, the temptation of substances, constitutes part of her rehabilitative plan. Ms. Frayne has been abstinent from substances for the past two years. There is no information as to how quickly she may destabilize were she to use crystal methamphetamine again. However, because Ms. Frayne used that drug daily for many years Dr. Dupré opined that a one-time incident of crystal methamphetamine use is unlikely to precipitate a mental deterioration. Ms. Frayne has now seen people using and refrained from doing so herself for an extended period. She will likely be introduced to indirect community passes, including the subway, in a gradual, measured way. Asked how it would negatively impact Ms. Frayne if she were restricted to the use of buses and street cars Dr. Dupré noted that this could limit her patient’s housing options. Dr. Dupré reiterated that the use of the subway is an important element in this patient’s community reintegration. Dr. Dupré added that community placement is likely over the next reporting year.
A panel member inquired if indirectly supervised passes into the community would foster a change in her behaviour. Dr. Dupré responded that it would not. Ms. Frayne already goes on weekly outings with her behavioural therapist and there have been no concerns with her use of transit including the subway to and from these activities.
Closing Observations
Ms. Feldstein submitted that given the progress shown by Ms. Frayne over the past year. indirectly supervised passes enabling subway use do not present an elevated risk to public safety so long as her access to substances is closely monitored. This would represent a progressive step in her community reintegration.
Mr. Coughlan noted that this had been a largely positive year for Ms. Frayne. However, the index offence, which occurred in April of 2022, is still relatively recent and a similar re-offence scenario could be catastrophic. This is because of the consequential risk if she engages in a similar scenario to the index offence. There are unknowns to Ms. Frayne’s treatment trajectory given her ongoing cravings for crystal methamphetamine. Further, there is little information as to how fast she would decompensate were she to use substances while unmonitored in the community. It is therefore appropriate to see if she can manage transiting with the use of buses and street cars which should not overly impact her rehabilitation.
Mr. Xynnis submitted that the issue is not his client’s use of subway but doing so while using narcotics. He submitted that a reasonable compromise in light of Ms. Frayne’s upcoming discharge to the community might be that she be provided with accompanied access to the subway with indirect access to both street cars and buses.
Analysis and Decision
(a) Significant Threat
Ongoing significant threat to the safety of the public cannot be speculative. It must entail a real risk of serious physical or psychological harm arising from conduct that is both serious and criminal in nature.
In determining whether Ms. Frayne continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public the Board has carefully analyzed the evidence as it relates to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Winko, 1999 CanLII 694 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625.
The Board unanimously finds that Ms. Frayne continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. In arriving at this determination, the Board considered the joint position of the parties and accepted the uncontroverted evidence of Dr. Dupré that Ms. Frayne continues to pose a significant threat. The Board also relies on the Hospital Report and the most recent Re-Offence Scenario contained therein at page 25 in determining that Ms. Frayne suffers from Schizophrenia; a major mental illness complicated by Substance Use Disorder. That analysis is reproduced below for ease of reference:
In risk assessment, one of the best predictors of future violence is a patient’s history of violence. If Ms. Frayne were to re-offend, it would likely be in the context of treatment and medication non-compliance and psychotic symptoms exacerbated by impulsive relapse to substance use. In the absence of external monitoring, she will likely disengage with services, use substances and become non-compliant with medication, which will increase her risk of relapsing into a psychotic episode, similar to her mental state at the time of the index offence.
Given the foregoing, the Board accepts that absent an ORB Disposition, Ms. Frayne would likely become non-compliant with prescribed medications which would lead to decompensation, use of substances and the re-emergence of behaviours similar to those seen at the time of the index offences. We are satisfied that absent an ORB Disposition, it is likely that Ms. Frayne will cause serious physical or psychological harm to members of the public and such conduct will likely be criminal in nature.
(b) Disposition
Flowing from the Board’s finding that Ms. Frayne continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public it must shape a Disposition for the year ahead. Its paramount consideration in doing so must be the safety of the public while also considering Ms. Frayne’s needs pursuant to s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
The necessary and appropriate disposition for Ms. Frayne provides her as much freedom as possible without subjecting the community to a real risk of dangerous behaviour. The parties were at idem that a Detention Order constitutes the necessary and appropriate disposition for the upcoming year. The panel is prepared to accept that joint position. However when considering Ms. Frayne needs, the Board does not accept Dr. Dupré’s contention that subway usage is an appropriate advancement in Ms. Frayne’s rehabilitation and community reintegration. Notwithstanding that community placement is envisioned within the next 12 months this panel of the Board finds that it is premature to enable the inclusion of indirectly supervised subway usage in Ms. Frayne’s Disposition. The index offence, which fortuitously did not result in a death, occurred less than 3 years ago. While Ms. Frayne remains on a positive treatment trajectory and substance free for the past two years, the concern remains that the subway may prove to be an overstimulating environment if she is there on her own. Specifically, that her symptoms could be re-triggered by the unpredictability of events that occur in the vicinity of subway platforms. Further, she continues to experience cravings for crystal methamphetamine and it remains uncertain how quickly she might decompensate were she to relapse and use. This panel’s overall impression is that Ms. Frayne has not been sufficiently tested in the ‘real world’ to equip her to safely navigate Toronto’s subway system at this juncture.
Given the foregoing, Ms. Frayne’s indirectly supervised use of public transit will be restricted to buses and street cars for the 2025/2026 reporting year.
Conclusion
Therefore, the Board unanimously determines that the necessary and appropriate Disposition required to manage the threat Ms. Frayne poses to the safety of the public while still meeting her needs, is a Detention Disposition, adding a requirement that Ms. Frayne:
Abstain from alcohol and non-medically prescribed substances and submit random urine samples to assess for same;
and further specifying that while Ms. Frayne may be permitted to enter the community, indirectly supervised, she is prohibited from accessing a TTC Subway platform, unless accompanied by staff, or a person approved by the person in charge.
In making this Disposition, the Board carefully considered the positions and submissions of the parties and the evidence of Dr. Dupré and is satisfied that this determination is both necessary and appropriate. The Board reviewed the provisions of s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code and carefully considered the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, Ms. Frayne’s mental condition, her reintegration into society and other needs.
DATED this 3^rd^ day of April, 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. P. Capelle Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board