Re: Mabel A. Toman-Harvey, 2026 CanLII 18264

Re: Mabel A. Toman-Harvey

ORB File No: 8904

Hearing held on: Tuesday, January 13, 2026

Place of hearing: North Bay Regional Health Centre

Pursuant to: Sections 672.47(1) & 672.48(1) of the Criminal Code

Before:

Alternate Chairperson: Mr. P. Hageraats

Members: Dr. J. Watts

Dr. G. Stones

Ms. M. Chamberlain

Ms. C. Plyley via video conference

Parties Appearing:

Accused: Mabel A. Toman-Harvey

Counsel: Mr. C. Bracken

Person in charge of Hospital: Representative: Ms. J. Doyon Counsel Mr. P. Trenker

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. L. Van Gorder

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated February 23, 2026)

Introduction:

1. Ms. Mabel A. Toman-Harvey appeared in court charged with offences under the Criminal Code of Canada: harassing communication (x2), mischief by interfering with lawful use of property (x2), fail to comply with undertaking (x5), and fail to comply with terms of release order.

2. On October 22, 2025, based on expert psychiatric evidence provided to the court, Ms. Toman-Harvey was found mentally unfit to stand trial (‘unfit’’).

3. Upon the court’s finding, rather than order a disposition, the court required Ms. Toman-Harvey to appear before the Ontario Review Board (ORB or “the Board”) for the Board to render a disposition.

4. On January 13, 2026, the Board convened at the North Bay Regional Health Centre – Forensic Programs (NBRHC or ‘‘the hospital’’), to conduct an initial hearing under section 672.47 of the Criminal Code. Ms. Toman-Harvey was present when the hearing began. She was represented by counsel, Mr. Chad Bracken. At the request of Mr. Bracken, an order was made appointing him as counsel.

5. Documents were filed in evidence at the hearing. These include the most recent Hospital Report, dated December 19, 2025, along with a Crown Application Record and the Police Synopsis.

6. Shortly after the evidence portion of the hearing began, Ms. Toman-Harvey had difficulty following the proceeding. She kept interrupting and laughing. She was not responsive to suggestions that she should let others speak. At one point, Ms. Toman-Harvey stated she would like to go back to her room and have a brownie. While Ms. Toman-Harvey was still present, the Board consulted with Mr. Bracken and the other parties. Counsel agreed that Ms. Toman-Harvey should be allowed to leave. As provided by section 672.5(10) (a) of The Criminal Code, the balance of the hearing proceeded in her absence.

Positions of the Parties:

7. Counsel for the Hospital, supported by counsel for the Attorney General, advised that Ms. Toman-Harvey remains unfit. They recommended a detention order with conditions that are set out in the Hospital Report. As counsel for Ms. Toman-Harvey, Mr. Bracken advised he found it difficult to get instructions. He did not have a position but would be asking some questions.

8. For the reasons set out below, the Board found that Ms. Toman-Harvey is presently unfit to stand trial. A detention order was provided with terms as requested.

Current Psychiatric Diagnoses, Hospital Report p. 1:

• Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar type

• Intellectual Disability

• Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

• Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, by history

• Autism Spectrum Disorder, by history

9. Ms. Toman-Harvey is being treated with psychiatric medications.

• Aripiprazole 400mg IM every 21-days

• Divalproex Sodium 500mg po in the morning and 750mg po at bedtime

• Clopixol 200mg IM every 14-days

• Olanzapine 10mg po bid

• Lithium 300mg po tid

• Melatonin 3mg SL at bedtime

• Other PRN (as needed) medications are provided as well.

10. Ms. Toman-Harvey is presently capable to consent to treatment of her mental illness. She remains deemed financially incapable. Currently, Indigenous Services Canada oversees her finances. She receives financial support from the Ontario Disability Support Program. Her father provides supplementary financial assistance. She also receives funding from Developmental Services Ontario (“DSO”).

Alleged Offences:

11. These are described in the Police Synopsis and the Hospital Report. In summary:

In 2025, Ms. Toman-Harvey was living alone in an apartment in Sault Ste. Marie. Social agencies were highly involved in attempting to support her to live independently. She was well known to the health care system for her Pervasive Developmental Delay, Schizoaffective Disorder – Bipolar type, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, and ADHD.

She had had several admissions to hospital and a history of noncompliance with prescribed medications.

Ms. Toman-Harvey had been repeatedly warned to stop making multiple phone calls to the local police department. Police and Court diversion programs had made several attempts to have her avoid criminal prosecution. These attempts failed to prevent her from attracting new charges. On this background, Ms. Toman-Harvey is alleged to have committed the following offences.

On March 23, 2025, the dispatcher with the Cocoa Beach Police Department in Florida contacted the Sault Ste. Marie Police Service to have Ms. Toman-Harvey warned to not contact them. Her repeated calls to Cocoa Beach were interfering with their police work, taking them away from dealing with serious police-related calls.

That same day, Sault Ste. Marie Police officers warned Ms. Toman-Harvey to not contact the Cocoa Beach Police as she did not have any matters to discuss with them.

Following the warning, Ms. Toman-Harvey did not stop calling. Instead, she went on to place four more calls to the Cocoa Beach Police. Charges were laid by the Sault Ste. Marie Police.

On the following day, March 24, local police officers attended at Ms. Toman-Harvey’s apartment. In the presence of her support workers with Community Living Algoma, she was advised of her arrest and released on an undertaking with conditions to not contact Cocoa Beach Police.

On April 9, Ms. Toman-Harvey made 68 calls to the Sault Ste. Marie Police 911 service. None of the calls were for a legitimate purpose. On 911, she discussed things of a personal nature, such as her fondness for the Wizard of Oz, her acting career, and a pet bird. These communications wasted valuable emergency service resources.

On May 2, Ms. Toman-Harvey was arrested at her apartment. The charges were explained to her. She was released by way of an undertaking, again with conditions requiring she not contact the Sault Ste. Marie Police except in the case of a legitimate emergency.

On May 12, Ms. Toman-Harvey phoned the Sault Ste. Marie Police. She stated she cannot be charged for calling because she is a professional with Sault College. She hung up. She called again to say she was staring at the green Grinch.

On May 13, she placed another call. She stated that Mr. McDonald is ruining her education and he needs to go to jail.

On May 30, Ms. Toman-Harvey phoned the Sault Ste. Marie Police asking the police to attend. She claimed people were jealous of her scooter. In a second call, she said her scooter was broken and that she needed police. She placed four calls in all on the same subject. Later that day, officers arrested Ms. Toman-Harvey. She was transported to the local police station to later attend at a bail hearing before the Justice of the Peace.

On May 31, the bail court released Ms. Toman-Harvey. She was ordered to not contact the Sault Ste. Marie Police except in the case of a legitimate emergency.

On July 13, Ms. Toman-Harvey phoned the Sault Ste. Marie Police. She said that she is famous and wanted to go to jail. She placed seven calls in all that day, repeating the same thing. Later that evening, the police arrested Ms. Toman-Harvey at her apartment. She was released, yet again, on an undertaking.

By August 26, Ms. Toman-Harvey’s involvement with the Sault Ste. Marie Police had amounted to 280 documented occurrences.

On August 26, she made further calls to the Sault Ste. Marie Police 911 service. Five calls were placed at mid-day within the same half hour. She was speaking nonsense without expressing any form of legitimate complaint. Officers came to her apartment that afternoon and arrested her. After reading her rights to counsel and a caution, they released her on an Appearance Notice.

On September 10, 2025, the court made an assessment order to determine whether Ms. Toman-Harvey was mentally fit to stand trial.

On September 16, Ms. Toman-Harvey was seen by Dr. Jean-Guy Gagnon, forensic psychiatrist. Dr. Gagnon provided his report dated September 23, 2025. In his opinion, Ms. Toman-Harvey was unfit to stand trial. Dr. Gagnon found it unlikely she could be made fit to stand trial within 60 days. Dr. Gagnon added that a Treatment Order was not warranted as it would likely take months to make her fit through coaching and medications, if at all.

Background History:

12. Ms. Toman-Harvey is 28, unmarried and without children. While residing in the Sault Ste. Marie community, Ms. Toman-Harvey received extensive support from Community Living Algoma, the Canadian Mental Health Association (“CMHA”), and Developmental Services Ontario (“DSO”). She has also been under the care of community psychiatrists.

13. Before her admission to the NBRHC, Ms. Toman-Harvey was detained at the Algoma Treatment and Remand Center. She was placed primarily in segregation due to her difficulty tolerating standard inmate housing. While in custody, she was frequently withdrawn, displayed poor personal hygiene, and would periodically vocalize her delusions.

14. Ms. Toman-Harvey is of Indigenous descent. According to records, she has made inconsistent reports about her parents’ status. Ms. Toman-Harvey has a complex psychiatric and behavioural history. Psychological testing was done when she was 16. There is a longstanding pattern of frequent emergency department visits for suicidal and homicidal ideation. She has shown self-harming behaviours, including striking herself and banging her head. Several admissions were related to decompensation following nonadherence to medication. Earlier attempts were made with pharmacological treatment, resulting in only marginal improvement.

15. Earlier treatment with psychiatric medications was complicated by side effects, including extrapyramidal symptoms from Clozapine, requiring several changes of medication.

16. In December 2020, Ms. Toman-Harvey was involved in a physical assault on a healthcare provider. In September 2025, she reportedly showed poor insight into her illness and was resistant to her treatment regimen. She was exhibiting persistent delusional beliefs, including the conviction that celebrities refer to her in social and traditional media.

Course in Treatment, October 28, 2025, to January 13, 2026:

17. Ms. Toman-Harvey was admitted to the hospital from the Algoma Treatment and Remand Centre on October 28, 2025. Her current treatment plan has been complex, requiring frequent adjustments and supportive interventions to manage both psychiatric symptoms and medication-related side effects. She has no history of alcohol or substance use. When asked about this, she replied she “would never use anything like that.”

18. Dr. Stephanie Le is her attending forensic psychiatrist. Ms. Toman-Harvey presents with poor insight, disorganized thinking, and persistent delusional beliefs, particularly involving celebrity figures and her own perceived fame. She makes delusional statements about Jennifer Lopez, claiming that various persons, including police, envy her status.

19. Ms. Toman-Harvey’s accounts are hard to follow. She is difficult to redirect, shows pressured speech and is nonsensical when agitated. Behavioural outbursts with agitation, ongoing delusional content, and self-harming behaviours - such as head banging - continue. To manage her agitation, PRN medications and, at times, seclusion have been required.

20. Despite this, there are some recent indications of progress, including a reduction in impulsivity and improved engagement with recreational and occupational therapy. The Hospital Report documents a series of notable incidents involving Ms. Toman-Harvey’s displays of significant agitation and anger.

21. Since December 6, 2025, Ms. Toman-Harvey has resided on the flex-unit of Deer Lodge. The intention is to provide her with a more stable environment and greater opportunities to engage in meaningful activities. The flex-unit houses patients who are more predictable and stable.

22. Ms. Toman-Harvey keeps up video visits, twice weekly, with Community Living Algoma. She has some communication with an aunt. Interactions with her father are variable and can be a source of agitation and anxiety.

Evidence at the Hearing:

23. The Board also received direct testimony from Dr. Stephanie Le. Dr. Le recently tried to assess Ms. Toman-Harvey’s fitness. When Dr. Le saw her both this week and in the previous week, Ms. Toman-Harvey had difficulty answering questions. Ms. Toman-Harvey does not believe she has any charges. She does not understand why she is in hospital. She believes she will be moving to the United States where she will live in a mansion. When she is asked and told that this is not the case, she will get aggressive.

24. Dr. Le testified that Ms. Toman-Harvey’s unfitness is tied to her intellectual capacity. It is hoped that hospital staff on the Dual Diagnosis Unit will be able to work with her on her fitness. Intellectual disability, Dr. Le advised, is the biggest contributing factor in her unfitness. Ms. Toman-Harvey will likely not be able to learn and retain education on the “Taylor” test questions. Dr. Le suspects she may well be permanently unfit.

25. Dr. Le testified that Ms. Toman-Harvey has been physically aggressive with staff. She has kicked them and punched at them, in addition to throwing medication cups and medication at staff. Self-harming behaviour has been seen, including punches to the face and head and hitting her head against the wall. Ms. Toman-Harvey’s troubling emotions and cognitive disability make it difficult for her to understand or deal with emotions leading to these behaviours. The hospital behavioural therapist will be working with her.

26. Dr. Le hopes there will be no further assaultive events. When she first arrived at North Bay in late October 2025, Ms. Toman-Harvey was more unwell. Slight changes of medications have resulted in small improvement. She still responds to auditory hallucinations.

27. Dr. Le responded to questions from counsel appearing for the Attorney General and for Ms. Toman-Harvey. Dr. Le is hoping there will be future improvement and that the biggest improvement will come from the behavioural therapist. Dr. Le noted that Ms. Toman-Harvey was triggered by having to appear before the Board. In the coming days or weeks, she may have more issues.

28. Asked whether Ms. Toman-Harvey might benefit from travel to visit family in Sault Ste. Marie, Dr. Le is concerned that, while on the journey, Ms. Toman-Harvey would assault hospital staff. Her relationship with her father is tricky. Often following phone calls with the father, Ms. Toman-Harvey’s behaviour is problematic for the rest of the day. Dr. Le added that the father does not appear to understand the forensic system and that he may have his own separate issues.

29. Dr. Le confirmed that Ms. Toman-Harvey has not assaulted other patients. However, she expresses a delusion about being sexually assaulted by a co-patient. The Hospital takes these reports seriously. They have checked video monitor footage. It reveals no activities of concern. Dr. Le explained that most of Ms. Toman-Harvey’s struggles are with authority figures.

30. Responding to questions from Board members, Dr. Le advised, it is difficult to assess the most significant factor contributing to the patient’s unfitness, whether this be from psychosis or intellectual disability. With treatment, Dr. Le hopes, the picture may become clearer.

31. Dr. Le was asked if a Gladue report was done. Dr. Le does not see how this would add any value to Ms. Toman-Harvey’s case. While Ms. Toman-Harvey was living in the community, none of the agencies involved in her care had requested a Gladue report.

32. Asked about Cocoa Beach, Dr. Le confirmed, Ms. Toman-Harvey has no connection to that community. Ms. Toman-Harvey believes that Jennifer Aniston lives there. Calls to Cocoa Beach will likely resume if she has an opportunity to call. The hospital continues to monitor her phone access very closely.

33. Asked about possible access to Community Housing and DSO funding, Dr. Le noted that Ms. Toman-Harvey was quite destructive when earlier placed in social housing. Current hospital co-patients complain about her behaviours. The hospital social worker and behavioural specialist can investigate options. However, Dr. Le added, the process of getting admitted to community-based housing can take years. Community agencies will not even consider processing someone’s application until such time as the patient’s condition is stabilized.

34. The parties presented no further evidence.

Submissions of the Parties:

35. Counsel for each of the parties confirmed their joint submission on the outstanding issues.

Conclusions and Disposition:

36. Ms. Toman-Harvey remains unfit to stand trial. This was not in dispute and is well supported by the evidence and testimony provided.

37. The Board cannot yet determine whether Ms. Toman-Harvey is permanently unfit. The hospital is making active efforts to stabilize her mental condition. Further inquiries into the patient’s fitness to stand trial will continue.

38. For the short time that Ms. Toman-Harvey was present at the hearing, the Board observed a noticeable level of psychotic disorganization in her thinking, with much inappropriate affect, including spontaneous laughing. The Board is hoping her condition might improve, to the point that she will achieve greater ability to participate at her next ORB hearing.

39. For the coming twelve months, it is not realistic to anticipate that Ms. Toman-Harvey will be a candidate for community living. One cannot yet say what her future level of functioning will look like. That said, the Board expresses hope that the Hospital will investigate the process of applying for suitable supervised housing in the Dual Diagnosis sector, preferably sooner rather than later.

40. Given Ms. Toman-Harvey’s mental condition, she is not ready to be discharged from hospital. At this point, a detention order is the only realistic option that can be considered.

41. Nevertheless, the hospital may find it helpful to offer Ms. Toman-Harvey some form of controlled access to the community in the coming year. This is assuming her mental state may improve to the point of her becoming clinically appropriate for any outings. Accordingly, we are prepared to include certain privileges in the disposition, up to and including: to enter the catchment area of the NBRHC accompanied by staff, community agency or a person approved by the person in charge of the hospital.

42. For these reasons, considering the primary need to keep the public safe, while balancing the patient’s mental condition, her reintegration and other needs, a detention order will issue. Terms and conditions are set out in the formal disposition.

43. We thank the parties and counsel for their assistance.

DATED this 23rd day of February 2026 at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. P. Hageraats

Alternate Chairperson

__________________

Office of the Registrar

Ontario Review Board