Christina L. Bertrand (Re), 2026 CanLII 4244

Ontario Review Board

Re: Christina L. Bertrand

ORB File No: 5049

Hearing held on: Tuesday, December 16, 2025

Place of hearing: Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences 700 Gordon Street, Whitby

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. C. MacIntyre, KC Members: Dr. K. Hand Dr. M. Kalia Mr. J. Goldenberg Mr. R. Rainboth

Parties Appearing: Accused: Christina L. Bertrand Counsel: Mr. M. Schloss

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Mr. K. Dow

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Ms. N. MacDonald

AMENDED REASONS FOR DECISION

(Dated January 21, 2026)

Please see underlined change to original reasons made January 27, 2026.

Introduction

1On March 11, 2008, Christina Bertrand was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of assaulting a peace officer, and failure to comply with probation order, all contrary to the Criminal Code. Ms. Bertrand is currently subject to an Ontario Review Board Disposition of August 11, 2025, which detains her within the General Forensic Service at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences with privileges up to and including to live in the community in accommodation approved by the Personal in Charge.

2On October 29, 2025, the Clinical Forensic Coordinator of Ontario Shores Hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that after having several relapses with substance use, and in particular on Oct. 21, 2025, Ms. Bertrand was admitted to hospital from the community on Oct 22, 2025, and that this constituted a significant restriction of her liberty for a period exceeding seven days.

3Accordingly, on December 16, 2025, the Ontario Review Board convened at Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (“Ontario Shores”) to conduct a hearing pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to determine whether Ms. Bertrand’s liberties were significantly increased and to make a decision therefrom. Ms. Bertrand had been returned to the community on December 3, 2025.

4At the outset of the hearing, all parties agreed that Ms. Bertrand’s admission to hospital between October 22, 2025, and December 3, 2025, was necessary and appropriate. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Review Board agreed with the joint submission of the parties.

Index Offences

5The Ontario Review Board Disposition of August 11, 2025, summarizes the index offences as follows:

“Assault Peace Officer (Correctional)

On January 18, 2008, the accused, Christina BERTRAND, was remanded in custody at the Central East Correctional Centre (CECC) serving a sentence for convictions of Assaulting a Peace Officer, Failing to Comply with Probation and Failing to Attend Court. At approximately 0845 hrs, she was in the shower area of the unit, when she became agitated and aggressive (for unknown reasons). When this occurred, staff attended and asked her to remove herself from the shower.

She complied, but when staff opened the door, she immediately struck Correctional Officer Paul WHITE twice in the face with her fist.

While the officers were trying to restrain her, she was successful in biting Correctional Officer WHITE in the lower left leg.

Although the injuries sustained by Officer WHITE were relatively minor, the accused did break the skin when she bit him. This caused Officer WHITE to be subjected to a number of tests to ascertain whether he had been subjected to any communicable diseases. At the time of the writing of this Crown Brief, it was unknown if he had been exposed to any such diseases.

Fail to Comply Probation

At the time of the commission of the above-noted offence, the accused was bound by six separate probation orders, all with the statutory condition that she keep the peace and be of good behaviour. By committing this assault, she has failed to comply with this condition."

Background

6Ms. Bertrand is now 42 years of age. She suffers from:

Schizoaffective Disorder, bipolar type Alcohol Use Disorder, moderate Cocaine Use Disorder, mild Cannabis Use Disorder, severe Unspecified Personality Disorder was antisocial and borderline traits.

7Ms. Bertrand has been detained at Ontario Shores since her NCR finding in early 2008. She has a lengthy history of substance abuse, beginning with alcohol at the age of 13 and cocaine at 19. She also has a lengthy criminal record.

8Throughout her hospital stay, Ms. Bertrand often indulged in cannabis use in the community. In a six-month period between August 2024 and February 2025, Ms. Bertrand tested positive on six occasions for cannabis. She voluntarily disclosed her use to the clinical team yet purporting a wish to remain free of substances and focus on her recovery.

9On May 5, 2025, Ms. Bertrand was discharged to the CREATE (Collaborative Residence Enabling Assisted Transitional Engagement), Byron House in Whitby where she remained as a resident until her return to hospital on October 22, 2025.

Evidence

10A December 4, 2025, Hospital Report dealing specifically with the period of Ms. Bertrand’s restriction of liberties is filed as Exhibit 2 to this hearing. The report is authored by Dr. Darmant Bhullar, who provided testimony for the hospital.

11At the group home Ms. Bertrand is supported by the hospital’s Forensic Outpatient Service. This includes working with the hospital’s concurrent disorder counsellor. On July 7 and 21 and on September 24, 2025, she tested positive for cannabis.

12Significantly, on October 22, 2025, Ms. Bertrand emailed her concurrent disorder counsellor to advise that she had consumed alcohol and smoked cannabis the day before.

13The day before, Ms. Bertrand had attended her regular concurrent disorders session at 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon. After this, she then participated in a neighbour’s backyard get-together where she drank five tallboys of beer and later in the evening, consumed another three cans of beer and smoked about a gram of marijuana.

14Ms. Bertrand expressed that this was an impulsive act by her and acknowledged that alcohol use had historically led to crack use. She was willing to, and perhaps even wanted to, come back to hospital.

15On admission, Ms. Bertrand was unable to explain her motivation for her relapse. She denied feeling stressed but did indicate that she had had thoughts of drinking over the past week. She was unable to explain why she could not share these thoughts when she met with her concurrent disorder counsellor within hours or less before she relapsed that day.

16Dr. Bhullar testified that Ms. Bertrand did not want to come into hospital but reluctantly accepted this when the hospital indicated its wish to return her. Dr. Bhullar emphasized that for Ms. Bertrand, cannabis is a gateway drug to crack cocaine and this recent event was a more serious relapse. Dr. Bhullar viewed that her use of alcohol and cannabis on October 21 was not impulsive but was planned. Even her partner advised her against it at the time.

17During her hospital stay, Ms. Bertrand met and cooperated with her Outpatient and Concurrent Disorders counsellors to review and develop coping strategies and explore what triggers her behaviour in returning to substances. She was free of substances while in hospital and used her community day passes appropriately and maintained treatment and medication compliance. She was returned to her group home on December 3, when she was deemed suitable by the hospital

18In their final submissions, all counsel agreed with their original joint submission that Ms. Bertrand’s readmission to hospital was necessary and appropriate for the time period between October 22 and December 3, 2025.

Decision

19The Review Board concurs with the joint submission of the parties that Ms. Bertrand’s admission to hospital on October 22 was prompted by a significant relapse into use of substances. This was all the more serious because she had actually had a meeting with her concurrent disorders counselor on the 21st of October and did not disclose any indication of her desire to take substances. Furthermore, even when advised against the use of alcohol by her partner she ignored this and consumed eight beers plus a gram of cannabis.

20The Hospital Report notes that during previous relapses she had “either planned to meet individuals who use substances or actively sought them out”.

21The Review Board agrees that the relapse episode on October 21 was an escalation of her use of substances and the need to return her to hospital to treat this was necessary, reasonable and appropriate. Her stay in hospital to be treated and returned to the community within a five-week period was the least onerous and least restrictive situation for her in all the circumstances.