Director's Report Details

The Special Investigations Unit is a civilian law enforcement agency that investigates incidents involving an official where there has been death, serious injury, the discharge of a firearm at a person or an allegation of sexual assault. Under the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019 (SIU Act), officials are defined as police officers, special constables of the Niagara Parks Commission and peace officers under the Legislative Assembly Act. The SIU’s jurisdiction covers more than 50 municipal, regional and provincial police services across Ontario.

Under the SIU Act, the Director of the SIU must determine based on the evidence gathered in an investigation whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that a criminal offence was committed. If such grounds exist, the Director has the authority to lay a criminal charge against the official. Alternatively, in cases where no reasonable grounds exist, the Director cannot lay charges. Where no charges are laid, a report of the investigation is prepared and released publicly, except in the case of reports dealing with allegations of sexual assault, in which case the SIU Director may consult with the affected person and exercise a discretion to not publicly release the report having regard to the affected person’s privacy interests.

Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019

Pursuant to section 34, certain information may not be included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following: 

Pursuant to section 15 of the SIU Act, the SIU may investigate the conduct of officials, be they police officers, special constables of the Niagara Parks Commission or peace officers under the Legislative Assembly Act, that may have resulted in death, serious injury, sexual assault or the discharge of a firearm at a person.

A person sustains a “serious injury” for purposes of the SIU’s jurisdiction if they: sustain an injury as a result of which they are admitted to hospital; suffer a fracture to the skull, or to a limb, rib or vertebra; suffer burns to a significant proportion of their body; lose any portion of their body; or, as a result of an injury, experience a loss of vision or hearing.

In addition, a “serious injury” means any other injury sustained by a person that is likely to interfere with the person’s health or comfort and is not transient or trifling in nature.

This report relates to the SIU’s investigation into serious injuries sustained by a 69-year-old woman (“Complainant #1”), a 12-year-old boy (“Complainant #2”), and a 30-year-old man (“Complainant #3”).

Notification of the SIU

On March 7, 2021, at 10:05 p.m., the Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS) reported a vehicle-related injury. Reportedly, at 7:52 p.m., DRPS officers responded to Valiant Storage Units (VSU) located at 1580 Victoria Street in Whitby for a report of a suspicious person. While the officers were investigating at VSU, a man [known to be Complainant #3] stole a police vehicle and a pursuit was initiated. The stolen police vehicle was involved in a T-bone collision with a civilian vehicle at the intersection of Garden Avenue and Highway 2 in Whitby. A 69-year-old woman [known to be Complainant #1] in the civilian vehicle had a broken pelvis and a 12-year-old boy [known to be Complainant #2] in the same vehicle suffered a fractured leg. Complainant #3 was taken to the hospital with possible internal injuries. All parties were at Oshawa General Hospital – Lakeridge Health Oshawa.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 03/07/2021 at 10:25 p.m.

Date and time SIU responded: 03/07/2021 at 11:10 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 5

The Scene

The collision scene was located at the intersection of Dundas Street East and Garden Street in Whitby, Ontario.

Scene Diagram

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence¹

Petro Canada CCTV

The gas station was located at the northwest corner of Garden Street and Dundas Street East. On March 7, 2021, the SIU received a copy of footage from the security cameras. The footage had three different camera views from channels 1, 9 and 10.

Channel 1:

The recording was from 7:36:40 p.m. to 7:51:19 p.m. The camera view was of the gas pump area and looked out to westbound Dundas Street east, just west of Garden Street. The view of the street was very dark, although the gas pump was well illuminated, and it did not capture the actual intersection of Garden Street and Dundas Street East.

At 7:38:02 p.m., there was a vehicle totally engulfed in flames that travelled quickly past the gas station, westbound on Dundas Street East in the passing lane. There was a large amount of debris, and a smouldering automobile engine flew into the gas station from Garden Street and Dundas Street East. The engine struck the gas pump and rested against the gas pump.

At 7:38:52 p.m., there was flashing blue and red emergency lights reflecting off the gas pumps.

At 7:39:08 p.m., three police vehicles drove west on Dundas Street East from Garden Street. Their emergency lights were activated. About 30 seconds later, an additional three police vehicles with their emergency lights activated followed the first three police vehicles.

Channel 9:

The recording was from 7:34:58 p.m. to 7:41:13 p.m. The camera view was looking south toward Dundas Street East and captured the intersection of Garden Street and Dundas Street East. The lighting was good. At 7:37:57 p.m., the traffic lights were green for north and south traffic on Garden Street and red for the traffic east and west on Dundas Street.

At 7:38:02 p.m., a maroon vehicle was southbound on Garden Street and entered the intersection at Dundas Street East. The vehicle was struck on the driver’s side by a police vehicle, driving westbound at a very high rate of speed. The police vehicle entered the intersection on a red light. The police vehicle did not have the emergency lights activated but the white alley lights on the roof bar were illuminated. Due to the collision, the maroon vehicle spun around and struck the centre island on the west side of the intersection, knocking down the steel traffic signal pole. The maroon vehicle came to rest, pointing in a northeast direction. Due to the collision, the police vehicle instantly burst into flames and was engulfed in sparks and smoke, as it continued westbound on Dundas Street East in the passing lane and out of camera view.

At 7:38:49 p.m., a police vehicle arrived on scene. The police vehicle drove westbound on Dundas Street East from east of Garden Street. The emergency lights were not activated. The police vehicle stopped beside the damaged maroon vehicle and activated the emergency lights.

At 7:39:08 p.m., two police vehicles with their emergency lights activated arrived from westbound Dundas Street East and slowed down as they passed the collision scene, then accelerated westbound on Dundas Street East out of camera view. Numerous police vehicles arrived at the collision scene and, about one minute later, four more police vehicles arrived with their emergency lights activated. The four police vehicles passed the collision scene and continued westbound on Dundas Street East out of camera view.

Channel 10:

The recording was from 7:34:56 p.m. to 7:42:20 p.m. The camera was located on the roof of the Petro Canada gas station. The view of the camera captured the north and east portions of the intersection of Dundas Street East and Garden Street.

At 7:37:40 p.m., a maroon vehicle approached the intersection southbound on Garden Street at Dundas Street East. At the intersection, there was a left turn lane, a right turn lane and two through lanes. The maroon vehicle was in the curb lane of the through lanes. There was a vehicle in the passing lane, to the left of the maroon vehicle on southbound Garden Street. Both vehicles stopped at the red traffic light at the stop line. There was a red traffic light for southbound Garden Street at Dundas Street East. The maroon vehicle was the first vehicle at the stop line and stopped for the red traffic light.

At 7:37:59 p.m., the traffic light turned green for southbound Garden Street and red for the traffic on Dundas Street. A distance east of the Garden Street and Dundas Street East, there was a police vehicle traveling at a very high rate of speed in the passing lane, westbound on Dundas Street East. The police vehicle did not have the emergency lights activated but the alley lights were illuminated. The vehicle beside the maroon vehicle began to enter the intersection but braked before entering the intersection. The maroon vehicle entered the intersection on the green traffic light, then drove out of the camera view. As the maroon vehicle drove out of camera view, the police vehicle entered the intersection at a very high rate of speed and drove out of camera view.

At 7:38:02 p.m., a large amount of debris scattered across the gas station lot from south to north and in the area of the intersection.

At 7:38:55 p.m., several police vehicles with their emergency lights activated arrived at the collision.

St. Louis Bar & Grille CCTV

The SIU received a copy of the CCTV from four cameras located outside the restaurant. Cameras 12, 13, 14, and 15 provided exterior views.

The stolen police vehicle had roof flood lights activated. At 7:32:04 p.m., the stolen police vehicle entered the plaza from the north driveway from westbound Bond Street West. The stolen police vehicle travelled westbound at the rear of the plaza around the patio of St. Louis Bar & Grille, then eastbound along the front of the plaza toward Stevenson Road. About seven seconds later, a white DRPS SUV followed the stolen police vehicle, then several DRPS SUVs and police vehicles with their emergency lights activated pursued the stolen police vehicle.

Communications Recording – 911 Calls

The DRPS provided a copy of 911 calls on March 7, 2021.

At 7:05 p.m., a caller reported that there was a man trying to enter an office and a vehicle at VSU. The caller asked Complainant #3, “How can I help you?” Complainant #3 was surprised and said he was looking for food. He walked into the site.

The DRPS operator asked if Complainant #3 was still there and the caller said she did not see Complainant #3 leave the site. The operator advised there was an officer on the way. The operator asked if Complainant #3 was on foot or if he had a vehicle. The caller said he was on foot and came from the GO transit parking area.

Communication Recording – Radio Transmissions

The DRPS provided a copy of the radio transmissions from March 7, 2021. There were no time stamps on the recording.

DRPS communicator advised units that there was a suspicious person at 2001 Victoria Street in Whitby at VSU. A man [known to be Complainant #3] tried to open the office door, and said he was looking for food, after which he walked into the site. Complainant #3 had a bag with him and was still in the mini storage. The caller had not seen him leave. Several units were responding to the call.

The canine officer was doing a drive through. He spoke to the caller and she did not see him leave yet. The officers found an open door and were going to look. The canine unit advised that WO #2’s police vehicle had been stolen by Complainant #3. A sergeant asked if the officers knew Complainant #3’s direction of travel. The communicator said the stolen vehicle was on the train tracks on Stevenson and Gibb, northbound on Stevenson. A sergeant told all the officers responding that the stolen vehicle had weapons inside it.

The communicator advised that Complainant #3 was mapping at Stevenson and King, and asked units to respond. A sergeant asked if Air 1 was available and communicator said Air 1 was not logged on. The stolen police vehicle was now eastbound on King approaching Park. WO #3 asked to be put on the call. The communicator said the vehicle was now going northbound on Park crossing over Bond. It was now westbound on “Bona Vista” approaching Gibbons. The SO said, “I have it.” The communicator said the police vehicle was southbound on Gibbons approaching King and repeated that the vehicle had weapons. A police unit said they were at Park and King and the police vehicle was going the wrong way on King Street. The vehicle was going westbound on King. WO #3 said the police vehicle was northbound on Stevenson.

WO #3 said the police vehicle was now westbound in the plaza, westbound on Bond. The vehicle was in the island by the snake shop and back on the street. A sergeant said he was driving at a high rate of speed at 102 km/h. The traffic was light. A sergeant said he was through Thornton and heading west. The officer said the stolen vehicle was the only vehicle on the road right now and, “He’s flying.” The officer said the stolen police vehicle did not seem like he was going to stop, and he was losing him.

The communicator asked if there were any officers that could get permission from WO #3 to get a unit with a spike belt. The officer said, “He’s way ahead now.” WO #3 advised the officers to give Complainant #3 some rope and let him go because the officers had GPS on him. The officer said, “Yeah, let’s back off because he’s really motoring here.” WO #3 asked for an update and the communicator said the police vehicle was westbound on Dundas at Bowman Avenue passing Anderson and going 171 km/h.

The sergeant directed the units behind him to turn their lights off. WO #3 directed all the officers to shut their lights down and let him run, speculating that perhaps Complainant #3 would “dump” the vehicle. He directed that officers stay out of his sight and track him by GPS, so he could be pinned somewhere.

An unknown unit advised there was a vehicle crash at Garden. The communicator repeated there was a crash at Garden. An unknown unit directed the officers to get to Garden and requested an ambulance attend fast. The communicator asked who was injured. An officer advised there were two people in a vehicle, and they were alert. The police vehicle was on fire and the officers got him out. A sergeant said the officers needed two EMS and to shut down the street west and eastbound. Another sergeant said shut down all lanes. An unknown unit advised the suspect, Complainant #3, was in custody. He was in handcuffs, breathing and conscious.

The sergeant directed all the officers to shut down the street and indicated that they needed fire. The engine rolled over to the Petro Canada gas station lot. The officers needed the fire department for the police vehicle on fire and to get the people out.

A constable said there were shot gun shells going off in the police vehicle. The constable asked whose police vehicle was stolen and the communicator said WO #2’s. The constable asked if there was a rifle or shotgun in the vehicle. WO #2 advised that a rifle with a full magazine was in the passenger seat.

Expert Evidence

Reconstructionist Report and Analysis

Road Layout
Dundas Street East was a four-lane paved asphalt road with two lanes eastbound and two lanes westbound for traffic. A solid yellow paint mark delineated the opposing lanes. An intermittent white paint mark delineated the lanes permitting travel in the same directions. Approaching Garden Street there was an additional left turn lane delineated with a solid white paint line and white paint left turn arrows. At the approach to Garden Street, the opposing lanes were delineated by a 1.6-metre-wide concrete median. The total width of Dundas Street Aast was 15.6 metres with the lanes ranging from 3.5 to 4.1 metres wide. The road was straight.

Garden Street intersected with Dundas Street East at near right angles. It was a four-lane paved asphalt road with two lanes for northbound traffic and two lanes southbound traffic. The intersection was controlled by traffic and pedestrian signals, as well as painted pedestrian crosswalks and stop bars located at the intersection.

The roads were bordered by concrete curbs, boulevards and sidewalks. There were functioning streetlights located on the north side of Dundas Street East and the west side of Garden Street.

The posted speed limit was 50 km/h on both Dundas Street and Garden Street.

Scene Evidence
A 2021 white Ford Explorer [known to be the SO’s police vehicle] was unoccupied facing west in the eastbound left turn lane of Dundas Street East, west of the intersection. There was no damage to this vehicle. The approximate centre of mass was located 8.8 metres west of the west edge of the pavement of Garden Street and 11.3 metres south of the north edge of the pavement of Dundas Street East.

A 2015 white Ford Taurus [know to be WO #2’s police vehicle – stolen police vehicle] was unoccupied facing northeast in the passing eastbound lane of Dundas Street East, west of the intersection. This vehicle was severely damaged and burned out. The approximate centre of mass was located 123.2 metres west of the west edge of the pavement of Garden Street and 8.3 metres south of the north edge of the pavement of Dundas Street East. The complete front end was crushed from top to bottom with the greatest crush on the right front. 

• AVL Data;

• DRPS Computer-assisted Dispatch (x2);

• DRPS Policy-Arrest_and_Warrant;

• DRPS Policy-Motor_Vehicle_Collisions;

• DRPS Policy-Police_Vehicle_Operation_and_Safe_Arrival;

• DRPS Policy-Suspect_Apprehension_Pursuit;

• DRPS-General Occurrence;

• DRPS-Record about Complainant #3

• DRPS 911 Calls to Police;

• DRPS Communication Recordings;

• DRPS Scenes of Crime Officer Photos;

• Narrative of WOs; and

• Notes of WOs.

• Petro Canada Closed-circuit Television (CCTV) footage;

• Rush Trucking Centres of Canada CCTV footage;

• St. Louis Bar & Grille CCTV footage; and

• Wildfire Steakhouse CCTV footage.

The events in question are clear on the evidence collected by the SIU, and may be briefly summarized. At about 7:05 p.m. on March 7, 2021, the DRPS received a 911 call regarding a storage facility on Victoria Street in Whitby. The caller reported that there was a male on the premises who had tried to enter the office. When confronted, the male said he was looking for food and then walked away in the direction of the storage units. The male was Complainant #3. Police were dispatched to investigate.

WO #2 and WO #4 made their way to the business in separate cruisers. They spoke with the caller, and then set about looking for Complainant #3. WO #2 located Complainant #3 and left his cruiser running and unattended to pursue him on foot. After a further period of searching, including with WO #4 in his vehicle, WO #2 returned to his cruiser to find that it was gone. Complainant #3 had driven off in it. The officers radioed that the cruiser had been stolen.

Because the cruiser was equipped with a GPS system, the police service was able to track its movements. Hearing that the cruiser was traveling northbound toward his location, the SO turned onto southbound Stevenson Road off of Rossland Road to intercept it. He spotted the cruiser in the distance, tracked it eastward across some side streets, and came across it again on Gibbons Street. The cruiser executed a U-turn on the roadway ahead of the SO and accelerated south toward King Street West, where it turned right and travelled west against the one-way flow of eastbound traffic. The SO followed suit.

Complainant #3 continued west until Stevenson Road where he turned to travel north and then west again on Bond Street West. With the SO and other cruisers behind him, Complainant #3 turned into the Island Plaza parking lot where he circled the mall before emerging back onto Bond Street, colliding with a police cruiser in the process. Complainant #3’s stolen cruiser was also struck from behind as he exited the plaza parking lot by the SO’s vehicle in a failed attempt by the officer to disable it.

A procession of police vehicles chased after Complainant #3 west on Bond Street West until the roadway became King Street West and then Dundas Street East. The pursuit continued at highspeed with Complainant #3 and the SO, who overtook another cruiser in the area of Thornton Road South to lead the police convoy, topping out at speeds upwards of 170 km/h. The speed limit on the roadway was 50 km/h.

Shortly after the SO travelled past Thornton Road South, WO #3 came on the radio to order that the pursuing officers disengage. The SO and the other officers did so.

Complainant #3 continued westward at speed. He entered the intersection of Dundas Street East and Garden Street against a red light traveling in excess of 100 km/h and rammed into a vehicle proceeding south on a green. The collision sent the vehicle – a Chevrolet Malibu – rotating westward into a traffic light pole before it came to rest in the westbound passing lane of Dundas Street East, just west of the intersection. Complainant #3’s stolen police vehicle burst into flames upon impact and travelled further west more than 100 metres before coming to a stop.

The SO, who had continued on Dundas Street East after slowing down and turning off his emergency equipment, was the first officer to come upon the scene of the collision. He quickly radioed for paramedics and attended at the Malibu to render assistance to its occupants.

With the arrival of other officers on scene, Complainant #3 was removed to safety from the cruiser he had stolen, which was engulfed in flames.

Complainant #3 and the occupants of the Malibu, Complainant #1 and Complainant #2, were taken to hospital where they were diagnosed with various fractures and other injuries.

Section 320.13, Criminal Code – Dangerous operation of motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft

Section 128, Highway Traffic Act -- Rate of speed

On March 7, 2021, Complainant #1 and Complainant #2 were seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision in Whitby, as was the driver of the vehicle that crashed into them – Complainant #3. As Complainant #3 had been pursued by police before the collision, the SIU opened a file and commenced an investigation. The lead officer in pursuit of Complainant #3 – the SO – was identified as the subject official for purposes of the SIU investigation. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the collision.

The offence that arises for consideration is dangerous driving causing bodily harm contrary to section 320.13(2) of the Criminal Code. The offence is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. In the instant case, the issue is whether there was any of want of care in the manner in which the SO operated his cruiser that caused or contributed to the collision and/or was sufficiently egregious as to attract criminal sanction. In my view, there was not.

The SO was in the lawful execution of his duties when he initiated a pursuit of the stolen cruiser with the objective of taking Complainant #3 into custody. He had reason to believe that Complainant #3 had just stolen the vehicle. In the circumstances, Complainant #3 was clearly subject to arrest.

Thereafter, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law. He did operate his cruiser the wrong way on a one-way street – King Street between Gibbons Street and Stevenson Road – attempting to keep pace with Complainant #3. That stretch of road, however, was very short – about 400 metres – and there is no evidence of any third-party motorists having had to take evasive action to avoid a collision with the officer’s vehicle.

Of more concern, in my view, was the SO’s speeds while west on King Street West and Dundas Street East. As the officer approached Thickson Road, his velocity reached 173 km/h. At more than three times the speed limit of 50 km/h, I am satisfied that the officer was operating his cruiser dangerously at that time. However, there were a number of extenuating considerations that rendered the SO’s conduct something less than a marked departure from a reasonable standard of care.

For starters, it is important to note that police officers engaged in the discharge of their duties are exempt from the speed limitations pursuant to section 128(13)(b) of the Highway Traffic Act. While this does not mean that police officers may speed as they wish regardless of public safety considerations, it is a mitigating factor in the reasonableness analysis.

There was also some urgency in attempting to stop the cruiser as quickly as possible. Contained in the vehicle was a fully loaded C8 rifle and spare ammunition. Not knowing Complainant #3’s intentions, the SO and the other officers had cause to be seriously concerned with what Complainant #3 might do with the weapon if he were to get away.

The SO’s top speeds occurred over a relatively short distance, in the course of which it does not appear that other motorists were actually placed in immediate jeopardy. The high-speed pursuit itself, from the moment it started in earnest in and around the intersection of Bond Street and King Street West until it was called off east of Thickson Road, was only about 1.7 kilometres. The SO’s upper end speeds occurred over the final fraction of that distance just before the pursuit was called off by WO #3. Thereafter, the evidence indicates that the SO deactivated his emergency equipment and reduced his speed.

Lastly, there is no indication that the SO was ever very close to the stolen cruiser such that it might be said that he unduly pushed Complainant #3. In fact, the SO was about two kilometres from the Garden Street and Dundas Street East intersection when the collision occurred. Complainant #3 had every opportunity to slow down and resile from his reckless course had he been so inclined.

For the foregoing reasons, though the SO’s speed was a cause for concern as he briefly pursued Complainant #3, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the officer comported himself other than lawfully in the course of this incident. Accordingly, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case, and the file is closed.

Date: July 5, 2021


Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit