Ontario Review Board
Re: Geraldine Strang
ORB File No: 8405
Hearing Held On: Tuesday, December 2, 2025
Place of Hearing: Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care
Pursuant To: Sections 672.48(1) and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. J. Mills
Members: Dr. P. L. Darby
Dr. G. Kerry
Ms. A. La Viola
Ms. D. Smith
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Geraldine Strang
Counsel: Mr. V. Zenobio
Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. T. Murdock
Attorney-General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. S. Curry
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated February 20, 2026)
OVERVIEW
- Geraldine Strang was found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder on October 17, 2023, on charges1 of failure to comply with probation order, break and enter, and mischief under $5,000, all contrary to the Criminal Code. Ms. Strang is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated December 23, 2024, detaining her at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care – Brébeuf Program for Regional Forensics, Penetanguishene, Ontario. The terms of her detention order include the ability to reside in the community anywhere in the Province of Ontario, in accommodation approved by the person in charge.
ISSUES
On December 2, 2025, the Board convened at Waypoint for a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code to review the disposition. The Board was asked to determine whether Ms. Strang remained unfit to stand trial pursuant to s. 672.48(1) and if so, to determine the appropriate disposition in the circumstances, ensuring the least onerous and least restrictive outcome, consistent with public safety, according to the factors set out in s. 672.54.
At the outset of the hearing, the parties all submitted an initial position. Ms. Strang remained unfit to stand trial at the time of the hearing, and the necessary and appropriate disposition is a continuation of the current detention order, under the same conditions and privileges, with the addition of a clause allowing for her to enter the community, within 100 km of the approved accommodation, accompanied by community agency staff, with an approved itinerary. At the conclusion of the hearing, all parties maintained their initial positions, and a joint submission was put forward for the Board’s consideration.
FINDINGS
- The Board found Ms. Strang continues to be unfit to stand trial and is likely permanently unfit. The Board also considered her history of substance use, prior aggressive behaviour, repeated hospitalizations related to intoxication, and her vulnerability when homeless or non adherent with medication. For these reasons, the Board further found that Ms. Strang represents a significant threat to the safety of the public and a detention order remains the necessary and appropriate disposition at this time.
BACKGROUND
The Hospital Report dated October 14, 2025, and Inpatient Progress Notes were entered as exhibits at the hearing. The following background information, including the allegations of the events surrounding the charges has been taken from the Hospital Report, summarized here as follows.
At the time of the outstanding charges, Ms. Strang was subject to a probation order that contained several terms and conditions, which she breached as a result of the following events. On July 7, 2023, Ms. Strang was observed by witnesses standing outside the Dollarama throwing large rocks at the glass doors to the building, resulting in shattered glass. Shortly afterwards, she entered the Dollarama and began walking around the store. The store was closed, and no employees were on scene. While inside, Ms. Strang took items off the store shelves, and she left the building.
Ms. Strang is 39 years old, born in the Sioux Lookout, and is from the Poplar Hill Reserve. An indigenous background report indicates that she has seven brothers and four sisters, all were placed in foster care. Records indicate that her grandparents and parents attended Residential Schools, suffering from multi-generational trauma.
Ms. Strang was placed in 11 different homes with the last one located in Barrie, Ontario when she was 16 years old. She has been supported by the Barrie Native Friendship Centre in accessing programs and basic needs support for many years. Ms. Strang is noted to have two children, one son passed away, and the other lives with her former partner’s family. In 2022, the father of her son passed away suddenly and tragically, which escalated her alcohol consumption.
It appears that Ms. Strang was homeless at the time of the alleged offences. Reports indicate that she had previously found some stability staying at the Lucy’s Place shelter until she assaulted a staff member and was no longer allowed to reside there.
Ms. Strang has had a number of hospitalizations dating back to 2018, often involving unresponsiveness due to alcohol intoxication. Her hospital admissions have been described as due to altered level of consciousness, acutely intoxicated from alcohol, and on one occasion her discharge diagnosis was opioid overdose.
A check of the Canadian Police Information Centre database showed that Ms. Strang has a criminal conviction for an assault charge in 2022. Other charges were withdrawn. The events surrounding the charges as outlined above, remain before the court.
Following the alleged offences, Ms. Strang was found unfit to stand trial on August 24, 2023, and was subsequently admitted on a treatment order to the Brébeuf Program at Waypoint, where she has remained throughout the reviewing period.
Ms. Strang’s current psychiatric diagnoses are Schizophrenia, Intellectual Disability, Severe Substance Use Disorder (including alcohol abuse, opioid abuse, and use of cocaine, stimulants, and cannabis), and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. She has been found capable of making decisions about her medical treatment, and capable of managing her finances.
CURRENT COURSE
Ms. Strang meets with the Aboriginal Healer from Waypoint every week. She does not have family or friends support at this time. She receives a personal needs allowance from the Ontario Disability Support Program. Ms. Strang is also a recipient of Passport Program funding through the DSO.
Ms. Strang was assaulted by a male co-patient who attempted to choke her in November 2024. She was taken to hospital, where a CT scan showed no concerns. After the incident, she reported feeling fearful and had thoughts of running away, so additional support and precautions were provided. Ms. Strang had three positive cannabis tests (one was later confirmed to be a false positive).
Ms. Strang uses her indirectly supervised privileges for walks on hospital grounds, and community passes when accompanied by staff or her Passport worker. She feels anxious about using community passes and did not use them during this review period. Overall, she manages her privileges well, but they were briefly put on hold twice after the positive cannabis test results.
It was determined that Ms. Strang would benefit more from behavioural and social skills training, and relaxation strategies, rather than trauma-focused therapy. She has since received individual occupational therapy support, and she continues to participate in select therapeutic groups, which include indoor farming work, cooking, and yoga.
According to the progress note, on November 21, 2025, Ms. Strang was seen for follow up, which suggested that Ms. Strang’s insight is slightly improving, but it remains limited. At that time, her fitness to stand trial was assessed and found that she demonstrated significant deficits in understanding the charges she faces and the specific court roles. During the fitness test, she became anxious, and she struggled to retain information. It was determined that she is unable to meaningfully instruct counsel or participate in her defence, and as a result she was deemed unfit to stand trial.
EVIDENCE AT THE HEARING
Ms. Strang’s attending psychiatrist is Dr. A. Jones. The treatment information for this reporting year is noted in the Hospital Report, along with updated information provided at the hearing.
Dr. Jones agreed with the Hospital’s recommendations, stating that these reflected the view of the treatment team. Ms. Strang remains unfit to stand trial, and her most recent assessment of her fitness was documented in a progress note dated November 21, 2024. During that assessment, despite extensive fitness coaching provided by Dr. Jones, and other staff, Ms. Strang’s understanding of the court process and her legal circumstances remained significantly impaired and appear to have plateaued.
Dr. Jones explained that Ms. Strang was unable to identify or understand her current charges and was not receptive to information about them. Discussions about her charges and the prospect of returning to court consistently provoked anxiety, which further interfered with her ability to process information. She expressed persistent fears about being released into the community, relapsing into substance use, and experiencing harm similar to past incidents. Her understanding of the roles and rules of the court was also inadequate, and she demonstrated misconceptions about having already “done her time,” which is incorrect.
Attempts to address Ms. Strang’s anxiety through therapy and structured community exposure have had limited success, largely due to comprehension difficulties rather than generalized anxiety. Trauma-focused therapy was attempted but was unsuccessful for this reason. While visual aids and simplified explanations have been used in the past to explain court processes, these efforts did not result in meaningful or sustained improvement in her understanding.
Further, Ms. Strang has significant deficits in her ability to receive, retain, and apply information relevant to her legal situation. Attempts to explain legal concepts increased her anxiety without improving comprehension. As a result, she would be unable to meaningfully instruct counsel, follow court proceedings, or participate in her defence. Dr. Jones further noted that at a prior court appearance, Ms. Strang reported sitting silently, not understanding who was speaking, and not paying attention, reinforcing the view that she would have much difficulty understanding proceedings.
In the doctor’s opinion, Ms. Strang is likely permanently unfit and continues to pose a significant risk both to herself and others. When not taking medication, when homeless, or when using substances, she has been vulnerable to victimization and has also displayed aggressive behaviour. The current plan includes placement in a DSO staffed group home, recognizing that wait lists are lengthy. Such a placement would provide the structure needed to support Ms. Strang’s medication adherence, abstinence from substances, and management of her psychiatric and medical conditions.
After further inquiries, Dr. Jones explained that the request for expanded community privileges is to allow Ms. Strang to participate in supervised outings with staff from a group home that may be located outside the geographic limits of her current disposition. Dr. Jones confirmed that there is no foreseeable date for housing availability, though staff continue their efforts, including expansion of the geographic search area.
Regarding medication, Dr. Jones stated that clozapine was considered, but it has not been pursued due to the risk of neutropenia, particularly given Ms. Strang’s concurrent use of methimazole for hyperthyroidism, which carries a similar risk. Her endocrinologist is being consulted regarding potential treatment options that could allow discontinuation of methimazole and possible future reconsideration of clozapine. In the meantime, an increase in paliperidone has resulted in good control of her psychotic symptoms, and her unfitness is attributed primarily to intellectual disability, rather than active psychosis at this time.
Finally, Dr. Jones emphasized that Ms. Strang requires a staffed, supportive living environment because she lacks the independent life skills necessary for independent or minimally supported housing programs. The doctor stated that if Ms. Strang were released into the community under a conditional discharge, the Hospital would be unable to adequately manage her risk, particularly given the increased likelihood of substance relapse and impulsive decision making. A detention order allows the hospital to approve housing and intervene proactively to protect her safety and the safety of others.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
(a) Fitness to Stand Trial
The Board’s obligation under s. 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code is to determine whether the accused is fit to stand trial as of the day of the hearing, as defined under s. 2 of the Criminal Code. In making this determination, the Board considered the Hospital Report, the Inpatient Progress Notes, and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Jones, Ms. Strang’s attending psychiatrist.
The Board applied the legal test for fitness to stand trial as clarified by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Bharwani, 2025 SCC 26. The inquiry is to determine whether Ms. Strang presently possesses a basic, reality based ability to understand the nature and object of the proceedings, to understand the possible consequences, and to communicate with counsel in a manner that permits her to participate meaningfully in her defence.
The evidence showed that Ms. Strang was unable to answer any of the questions posed during the fitness test. With respect to the specific criteria, the Board found that despite repeated fitness coaching and the use of simplified explanations and visual aids, Ms. Strang continues to exhibit significant deficits in her understanding of her charges, court roles, and legal processes. These deficits appear to be static, and Ms. Strang remains unfit to stand trial, and it is not likely that she will ever become fit to stand trial.
The Board placed particular weight on the most recent fitness assessment. During that assessment, Ms. Strang demonstrated marked difficulty retaining information, became anxious when legal concepts were discussed, and was unable to meaningfully answer questions related to her legal circumstances. She was unable to identify or understand the charges she faces and could not explain the roles of court participants. Ms. Strang’s anxiety significantly interferes with her ability to process and apply information, and that attempts to explain legal concepts increased her distress without improving comprehension.
The Board also considered evidence of Ms. Strang’s intellectual disability, which Dr. Jones identified as the primary driver of her unfitness at this time, rather than active psychosis. While her psychotic symptoms are currently well controlled on medication, her cognitive limitations continue to prevent any meaningful engagement with the court process. Based on this evidence, the Board found that Ms. Strang is likely permanently unfit to stand trial.
(b) Necessary and Appropriate
The Board must next determine the disposition that is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances. The disposition must embrace the principle of ‘least onerous and least restrictive’ with due consideration given to Ms. Strang’s liberty interests, which must also be consistently weighed together with concerns about public safety, her mental condition, and her reintegration into society, as required by s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
The Board has determined that Ms. Strang requires a detention order to manage her level of risk at this time. This decision is grounded in several key factors, considering Ms. Strang’s history of substance use, prior aggressive behaviour, repeated hospitalizations related to intoxication, and her vulnerability when homeless or non adherent with medication. The evidence establishes that when these factors are present, Ms. Strang is at risk both of harming herself, and of engaging in behaviour that poses a significant risk to the safety of others.
Ms. Strang is likely permanently unfit to stand trial and requires a structured, staffed living environment to support medication adherence, abstinence from substances, and management of her psychiatric conditions. A conditional discharge would not allow the Hospital to adequately manage these risks, particularly in light of the lack of available DSO housing and Ms. Strang’s limited independent living skills.
While the Board acknowledged Ms. Strang’s engagement in therapeutic programming and her generally appropriate use of privileges, it also noted evidence that she experiences severe anxiety about community exposure, and she has been unable to consistently utilize community passes during the review period. This further supports the conclusion that she requires the continued structure and oversight provided by a detention order.
Balancing Ms. Strang’s liberty interests with the paramount concern of public safety, the Board is satisfied that a detention order remains necessary and appropriate. The continuation of the current disposition, with the existing conditions, along with the carefully structured expansion of supervised community access, represents the least onerous and least restrictive disposition available in the circumstances.
DATED this 20th day of February 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. A. La Viola
Legal Member
__________________
Office of the Registrar
Ontario Review Board