SIU Director’s Report - Case # 21-OVI-194
Warning:
This page contains graphic content that can shock, offend and upset.
Contents:
Mandate of the SIU
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.
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.
Information Restrictions
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:- The name of, and any information identifying, a subject official, witness official, civilian witness or affected person.
- Information that may result in the identity of a person who reported that they were sexually assaulted being revealed in connection with the sexual assault.
- Information that, in the opinion of the SIU Director, could lead to a risk of serious harm to a person.
- Information that discloses investigative techniques or procedures.
- Information, the release of which is prohibited or restricted by law.
- Information in which a person’s privacy interest in not having the information published clearly outweighs the public interest in having the information published.
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Pursuant to section14 (i.e., law enforcement), certain information may not be included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:- Confidential investigative techniques and procedures used by law enforcement agencies; and
- Information that could reasonably be expected to interfere with a law enforcement matter or an investigation undertaken with a view to a law enforcement proceeding.
Pursuant to section 21 (i.e., personal privacy), protected personal information is not included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:
- The names of persons, including civilian witnesses, and subject and witness officials;
- Location information;
- Witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation provided to the SIU in confidence; and
- Other identifiers which are likely to reveal personal information about individuals involved in the investigation.
Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004
Pursuant to this legislation, any information related to the personal health of identifiable individuals is not included.Other proceedings, processes, and investigations
Information may also have been excluded from this report because its release could undermine the integrity of other proceedings involving the same incident, such as criminal proceedings, coroner’s inquests, other public proceedings and/or other law enforcement investigations.Mandate Engaged
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 apparent serious injuries sustained by a 49-year-old male (the “Complainant”).
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 apparent serious injuries sustained by a 49-year-old male (the “Complainant”).
The Investigation
Notification of the SIU
On June 24, 2021 at 6:21 p.m., the Windsor Police Service (WPS) notified the SIU of the Complainant’s injury.The WPS advised that on June 24, 2021, at 4:25 p.m., a WPS police officer noticed a motorcyclist traveling at a high rate of speed. The police officer, the Subject Official (SO), attempted to stop the motorcyclist, the Complainant. The Complainant fled from the SO. A short pursuit ensued, and the Complainant lost control of his motorcycle.
The scene was identified as Milloy Street and Tourangeau Road.
The Complainant was transported to the Windsor Regional Hospital Ouellette Campus and examined. At the time of the initial call it was believed that the Complainant had minor injuries; however, a subsequent computerized tomography scan was performed. At 9:09 p.m., the WPS contacted the SIU and advised that the Complainant had sustained a broken toe and a fractured pelvis.
The Team
Date and time team dispatched: 06/25/2021 at 12:30 a.m.Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 06/25/2021 at 2:15 a.m.
Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1
Number of SIU Collision Reconstructionists assigned: 1
Originally, one SIU investigator was assigned but did not respond to the scene. The lead investigator was assigned at 7:08 a.m., June 25, 2021.
The Complainant refused to give the SIU a statement or sign a medical release.
Two witness officials and five civilians were interviewed.
Surveillance video of the pursuit was obtained from five different sources.
The SO refused to give the SIU a statement or supply a copy of his notes; however, the SIU received a General Occurrence Report authored by the SO.
Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):
49-year-old male, refused interviewCivilian Witnesses
CW #1 Interviewed CW #2 Interviewed
CW #3 Interviewed
CW #4 Interviewed
CW #5 Interviewed
The civilian witnesses were interviewed between June 28, 2021 and July 29, 2021.
Subject Officials
SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal rightWitness Officials
WO #1 InterviewedWO #2 Interviewed
The witness officials were interviewed on June 28, 2021.
Evidence
The Scene
On June 25, 2021, at 2:15 a.m., an SIU Forensic Investigator arrived at the scene of this collision on Tourangeau Road between Milloy Street and Alice Street, Windsor. Tourangeau Road ran in a general north / south direction, and the area was residential with predominantly single-family residences. The roadway was paved with raised concrete curbs on either side of the roadway. There were no lane markings on the roadway, and parking was restricted to the west side of the roadway.
North of the intersection with Milloy Street were a series of tire-marks, scrapes, gouges, and motorcycle parts that continued in a northerly direction to the involved motorcycle.
Figure 1 - Orange evidence markers indicating the tire-marks, scrapes, gouges, and motorcycle parts on Tourangeau Road.
On approaching the intersection with Alice Street, tire-marks led to the east curb. A “No Parking” sign on the east boulevard was struck and furrows were caused in the grass heading in a northerly direction. Continuing north across the intersection were a series of gouge and scrape marks to the final resting spot of the motorcycle.
Figure 2 - Gouge and scrape marks leading to the resting spot of the motorcycle.
The motorcycle was a 2003 Suzuki. The motorcycle was oriented in a southerly direction on its right side on the east side of the road and partially in the driveway of a residence on Tourangeau Road, which was north of the intersection with Alice Street. The motorcycle had sustained extreme collision damage.
Figure 3 - The Complainant's 2003 Suzuki motorcycle.
At 4:05 a.m., the scene was photographed, and measurements were taken.
Scene Diagram
Physical Evidence
The police vehicle was examined and photographed at the WPS at 3:15 a.m. The police vehicle was a 2021 Ford Police Interceptor-Explorer, which was a sports utility vehicle (SUV). This was an unmarked, grey-coloured police vehicle, with concealed emergency lighting and siren. It had external emergency lighting, which included front bumper and headlight assembly, and white take-down lights in the front grill. Emergency lights were located on the sides of the vehicle in the mirror housing and “B” and “C” pillars, and the rear taillight assembly. An orange strobe light bar was in the upper rear window, and white take-down lights were in the upper front windshield. A radar head was on the front dash, and on the left rear window. The radar control unit was mounted on the driver’s side of the front dash. The exterior of the vehicle had no apparent collision damage visible. Photographs were taken.
The vehicle’s emergency lighting and siren were checked and appeared to function as designed.
Forensic Evidence
Global Positioning System (GPS) Data for the SO’s Vehicle:
The SO travelled eastbound on E. C. Row Expressway.The SO continued northbound on Central Avenue across the E. C. Row Expressway. At 4:23 p.m., at Temple Drive, he travelled at 107 km/h. He continued northbound on Central Avenue and, in the area of the railway tracks, at 4:23 p.m., he travelled at 103 km/h.
The SO turned right onto Plymouth Drive and continued eastbound to Grand Marais, where he turned left. The SO turned left to proceed northbound on Tourangeau Road. At St. Julian Street at 4:24 p.m., the officer travelled at 95 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. He then turned left onto Somme Avenue and travelled westbound to George Street, turning right to travel north. Between Somme Avenue and Yrpes Street on George Street, at 4:25 p.m., he travelled at 86 km/h.
The SO turned right onto Tecumseh Road East and travelled eastbound for a short distance, thereafter, turning left to travel northbound on Tourangeau Road at 4:26 p.m., with a speed of 21 km/h. In that area it was determined from a video surveillance camera that the SO activated his emergency equipment. Tourangeau Road had a speed limit of 50 km/h.
On Tourangeau Road between Guy Street and Milloy Street, at 4:26 p.m., the SO’s speed was 58 km/h. The SO travelled northbound on Tourangeau Road. About four houses north of Milloy Street, at 4:26 p.m., his speed was 59 km/h. The SO passed the scene of the collision and continued to Alice Street, where he turned left and continued westbound on Alice Street to George Avenue, where he stopped. This was the scene of the arrest.
Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[1]
Video Footage - Tecumseh Road East, Windsor
The video footage was recorded on June 24, 2021, from 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.The camera was located on the corner of the building and captured the intersection of Tourangeau Road and Tecumseh Road East, as well as the intersection of George Avenue and Tecumseh Road East. Tourangeau Road was offset to the east of the intersection at George Avenue by 22 metres and ran north from Tecumseh Road East.
At 3:27:25 p.m., a motorcycle [now known to have been operated by the Complainant] was observed northbound on George Avenue and stopped for the red light at Tecumseh Road East. At 3:27:59 p.m., the Complainant started to roll to his right and looked to merge into Tecumseh Road East traffic.
At 3:28:02 p.m., a grey Ford Explorer [now known to have been operated by the SO] was observed northbound on George Avenue and it passed two stopped vehicles on their right side. The emergency equipment on the Ford Explorer was not activated. The Ford Explorer could be seen to bounce as if it came down off a curb. George Avenue was only one lane wide, each way.
At 3:28:04 p.m., the Complainant rode diagonally across Tecumseh Road East toward Tourangeau Road. The SO’s vehicle was at the corner of George Avenue and Tecumseh Road East. At 3:28:06 p.m., the SO’s vehicle was approximately six to nine metres behind the Complainant having made the right turn onto Tecumseh Road East. Both vehicles were angled toward Tourangeau Road. No left turns were allowed from Tecumseh Road East onto Tourangeau Road.
At 3:28:08 p.m., the Complainant made a left turn onto Tourangeau Road and the SO activated his red/blue emergency lights in the front window, grill and on the side mirrors of his vehicle. At 3:28:11 p.m., both vehicles turned onto Tourangeau Road with the SO six to nine metres behind the Complainant. Both vehicles then accelerated out of view.
The road and weather conditions throughout the sequence were good. There was a medium volume of traffic on Tecumseh Road East and no vehicle/pedestrian traffic was observed at this time on Tourangeau Road.
Video Footage - Tourangeau Road, Windsor – Camera #1
Security camera footage from Tourangeau Road was collected by members of the WPS on June 26, 2021. There was audio with the video footage but no time code. The times mentioned were taken from the elapsed time counter on the playback system.At 01:54 minutes into the recording, a siren could be heard being activated in the distance and it appeared to come from a southernly direction. At 01:55 minutes into the recording, the sound of a motorcycle engine accelerating with very high RPMs could be heard. At 01:58 minutes into the recording, the Complainant was seen to pass south to north in front of the residence at a high rate of speed. At 02:00 minutes into the recording, the SO was observed northbound on Tourangeau Road and his vehicle appeared to travel at a normal rate of speed, with the siren turned off. The WPS vehicle had no markings and there were no visible emergency lights illuminated on the vehicle.
Video Footage - Tourangeau Road, Windsor – Camera #2
The video showed the movements of the Complainant and the SO as they travelled past a residence at Tourangeau Road. On Channel 1, at 4:26 p.m., the Complainant was observed northbound on Tourangeau Road. At 4:26 p.m., the SO was on Tourangeau Road, heading towards the Complainant, and there were no illuminated emergency lights visible on the sides or rear of the vehicle. The vehicle had no WPS markings and a subdued lighting package. The vehicle appeared to travel at an appropriate speed for the roadway. Three brake lights illuminated on the rear of the SO’s vehicle. The SO’s vehicle was in approximately the same location as the motorcycle operated by the Complainant when the motorcycle was observed at 4:26 p.m., and the SUV was about ten seconds behind the motorcycle. The police vehicle’s brake lights were still illuminated, and it slowed.
On Channel 3, at 6:26 p.m., the front tire of the Complainant’s vehicle reached the south side of the tree on the front lawn of an address on Tourangeau Road. The front headlight of the blue motorcycle was on. The Complainant wore a full motorcycle helmet and a jacket. There were no emergency red/blue lights visible on the front or driver’s side of the SO’s vehicle. The front head lights were illuminated.
Video Footage - Tourangeau Road, Windsor – Camera #3
The road conditions were clear and dry, and it was a bright sunny day. There appeared to be little to no vehicular traffic on Tourangeau Road, and light pedestrian traffic.On recording 3, at 4:27:09 p.m., the Complainant travelled north on Tourangeau Road and came into view. The front tire of the motorcycle was vertical above the rear tire and the rider has been ejected from the vehicle. The rider [known to have been the Complainant] was observed in a somewhat seated position, with his helmet on, as he slid approximately three metres behind the motorcycle, at the same speed as the motorcycle, northbound on Tourangeau Road. At 4:27:31 p.m., the SO was northbound on Tourangeau Road with no emergency lights activated.
On recording 8, at 4:27:09 p.m., the Complainant and his motorcycle could be seen sliding and tumbling northbound on Tourangeau Road at a high rate of speed towards Alice Street. At 4:27:31 p.m., the SO passed the front of the residence at an average speed. Only the lower half of the vehicle was visible.
Video Footage - Tourangeau Road, Windsor – Camera #4
Two video files were retrieved from a residence at Tourangeau Road, Windsor. In the first video file, at 02 seconds into the recording, the motorcycle and the Complainant could be seen tumbling end over end, northbound in the centre of the roadway. The camera viewed southeast across Tourangeau Road. When the motorcycle first came into view it was directly west of a sewer grate that was at the side of the east curb by an address located midway between Alice Street and Milloy Street. The second video file had no investigative value.Video Footage - Tourangeau Road, Windsor – Camera #5
The SIU received two video files, which had been retrieved from a residence on Tourangeau Road. The first was 43 seconds in length. The times listed were from the elapsed time counter of the media player.In the first video, at 01 seconds, the motorcycle could be seen tumbling end over end at a high rate of speed northbound toward the northeast corner of Alice Street and Tourangeau Road. The Complainant had been ejected from the motorcycle and could be seen tumbling northbound, following the motorcycle. At 05 seconds, the Complainant’s right leg collided with the east curb of Tourangeau Road and he came to rest. At 06 seconds, the Complainant stood up, ran west across the road, and attempted to remove his helmet. He then fell onto the west sidewalk. He got back up and ran west on the south side of Alice Street. At 26 seconds, the SO came into view northbound on Tourangeau Road, at the same location as the Complainant was seen at 01 seconds. The front headlights of the police vehicle were illuminated, but no red/blue emergency lights were activated.
The second video showed the intersection of Alice Street and George Avenue. At 11 seconds, the Complainant could be seen at the west end of the side yard fence of a residence on George Avenue. At 15 seconds, the Complainant walked southwest across the driveway of the residence on George Street towards the front door. At 16 seconds, the WPS Ford Explorer operated by the SO was westbound on Alice Street. At 20 seconds, the SO turned left and pulled up in front of the residence on George Street where the Complainant could be seen standing in the area of the sidewalk. The Complainant then dropped out of sight behind a van in the driveway.
Police Communications Recordings
At 4:25:23 p.m., on June 24, 2021, a complaint from an unknown citizen was received on the WPS non-emergency line regarding the driving of a WPS police officer. The reporter stated: “You have an officer in a grey undercover Durango driving erratically, speeding with no lights, no sirens, switching in and out of lanes with no turn signal. Driving northbound on Central Avenue coming from E. C. Row Expressway.”At 4:26:49 p.m., an unknown citizen telephoned 911 and requested an ambulance at Tourangeau Road for a motorcycle collision. At 4:27:13 p.m., CW #2 telephoned 911 and requested police, fire, and ambulance for a motorcycle collision at Tourangeau Road. CW #2 reported that he had seen the motorcycle travel at a high rate of speed.
At 4:27:22 p.m., multiple police officers were dispatched to attend the area, not including the SO.
At 4:27:59 p.m., a man called 911 and requested police and ambulance regarding a motorcycle collision at Tourangeau Road and Alice Street. He stated: “The guy got clipped pretty good on the motorcycle … He started running down the road. He’s sitting down right now … I guess the male who was on the motorcycle was doing over 100 kms down the road… He’s sitting on the lawn.”
At 4:29:31 p.m., the SO advised over the radio he was at the motorcycle crash. He requested an ambulance, a sergeant, and additional police members to attend. He advised he was with the driver of the motorcycle.
At 4:35:22 p.m., the SO called a dispatcher on a cellular telephone. The dispatcher stated: “I just didn’t want to go over the air. So, were you involved in this accident?” The SO replied, “No, ah I had lit him up. He then took off on me. I, I shut all the lights off, then he crashed like two blocks down cause he’s doing a million miles an hour, so, he just, he just wiped out on his own, so, I just want the sergeant here so they can go, ‘cause there was a bunch of witnesses here that saw it so, they saw. I just want them to confirm I had my lights and stuff off.”
Materials Obtained from Police Service
The SIU obtained and reviewed the following records from the WPS:• Computer-assisted Dispatch Records (x2)
• Civilian Witness Statement (x3)
• The SO’s Training Record as of June 25, 2021;
• Initial Officer Report - the SO;
• Initial Officer Report-WO #2;
• Motor Vehicle Accident Report;
• Notes of WOs;
• Photographs of suspected drugs at scene;
• Property Report-WO #2;
• Supervisor Report-WO #1;
• Videos - Tourangeau Road and Tecumseh Road East;
• WPS communications recordings;
• WPS GPS Data;
• WPS Policy-Suspect Apprehension Pursuits; and
• WPS-List of Possible Civilian Witnesses.
Materials Obtained from Other Sources
In addition, the SIU obtained the Ambulance Call Report from the paramedic service. Incident Narrative
The following scenario emerges from the evidence collected by the SIU, which included interviews with civilian eyewitnesses, a review of GPS data associated with the SO’s cruiser, and video footage that captured the incident in parts. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU or authorize the release of his notes.
In the afternoon of June 24, 2021, the Complainant was operating a motorcycle on the streets of Windsor when he came to the attention of the SO. At the sound of the SO’s police siren behind him on Tourangeau Road, just north of Tecumseh Road East, the Complainant accelerated to breakneck speeds, estimated to be as fast as 175 km/h. The Complainant travelled past the stop sign at Milloy Street without stopping and lost control of his motorcycle. He was thrown from the bike, which continued northward end-over-end until it came to rest on the northeast corner of the Tourangeau Road and Alice Street intersection.
The SO had first spotted the Complainant while on patrol traveling east on the E. C. Row Expressway. As the rear licence plate appeared to be improperly mounted, the officer had decided to pull the Complainant over for a possible traffic infraction. Following the Complainant off the highway at Central Avenue, the SO accelerated to close the distance between his cruiser and the motorcycle. By the time the cruiser was north on George Street waiting to make a right-hand turn onto Tecumseh Road East, the Complainant was just in front of him. The vehicles travelled in succession a short distance east before turning north onto Tourangeau Road. It was here that the SO activated his emergency equipment to signal the Complainant to stop.
When the Complainant failed to stop and sped northward, the SO quickly deactivated his emergency lights and siren, and continued north at or about the speed limit. The officer was upwards of 20 seconds behind the motorcycle when the Complainant lost control of his vehicle and crashed.
Coming upon the collision scene, the SO located the Complainant and placed him under arrest. The Complainant had fled westward along Alice Street but, hobbled, had not made it very far when he was taken into custody.
The Complainant was transported from the scene in ambulance to hospital, where he was diagnosed with a fractured toe and pelvis.
In the afternoon of June 24, 2021, the Complainant was operating a motorcycle on the streets of Windsor when he came to the attention of the SO. At the sound of the SO’s police siren behind him on Tourangeau Road, just north of Tecumseh Road East, the Complainant accelerated to breakneck speeds, estimated to be as fast as 175 km/h. The Complainant travelled past the stop sign at Milloy Street without stopping and lost control of his motorcycle. He was thrown from the bike, which continued northward end-over-end until it came to rest on the northeast corner of the Tourangeau Road and Alice Street intersection.
The SO had first spotted the Complainant while on patrol traveling east on the E. C. Row Expressway. As the rear licence plate appeared to be improperly mounted, the officer had decided to pull the Complainant over for a possible traffic infraction. Following the Complainant off the highway at Central Avenue, the SO accelerated to close the distance between his cruiser and the motorcycle. By the time the cruiser was north on George Street waiting to make a right-hand turn onto Tecumseh Road East, the Complainant was just in front of him. The vehicles travelled in succession a short distance east before turning north onto Tourangeau Road. It was here that the SO activated his emergency equipment to signal the Complainant to stop.
When the Complainant failed to stop and sped northward, the SO quickly deactivated his emergency lights and siren, and continued north at or about the speed limit. The officer was upwards of 20 seconds behind the motorcycle when the Complainant lost control of his vehicle and crashed.
Coming upon the collision scene, the SO located the Complainant and placed him under arrest. The Complainant had fled westward along Alice Street but, hobbled, had not made it very far when he was taken into custody.
The Complainant was transported from the scene in ambulance to hospital, where he was diagnosed with a fractured toe and pelvis.
Relevant Legislation
Section 320.13, Criminal Code – Dangerous operation of motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft
(2) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public and, as a result, causes bodily harm to another person.
Section 128(13)(b), Highway Traffic Act – Police vehicles and speeding
128 (13) The speed limits prescribed under this section or any regulation or by-law passed under this section do not apply to,
(b) a police department vehicle being used in the lawful performance of a police officer’s duties
Analysis and Director's Decision
On June 24, 2021, the Complainant suffered serious injuries in a motorcycle crash in Windsor. As a WPS officer had attempted to stop the Complainant moments before the collision, the SIU was notified and initiated an investigation. The officer in question – the SO – was identified as a subject official. 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 premised, 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 a want of care in the manner in which the SO engaged with the motorcycle that contributed to the collision and/or was sufficiently egregious as to attract criminal sanction. In my view, there was not.
I am satisfied that the officer had lawful grounds to seek to stop the Complainant as the evidence indicates that the rear licence plate was improperly mounted on the vehicle, making it difficult to read.
I am also satisfied that in the brief time between the collision and the point at which the SO was right behind the Complainant, the officer comported himself with due care and regard for public safety, including the Complainant’s safety. Though he did follow the motorcycle onto Tourangeau Road from Tecumseh Road East in contravention of a no-turn sign, there is no indication that any third-party motorists or pedestrians in the area were put in harm’s way. In fact, there was little to moderate traffic on the roadways at the time. And, as soon as the motorcycle took off on him after the officer activated his lights and siren, the SO, wisely, in my view, discontinued pursuit. Given the inherent vulnerability of motorcyclists, particularly at high speeds, it would not have been worth the risk to continue the engagement any further. Thereafter, the SO continued north at reasonable speeds.
Of greater concern is the SO’s driving that preceded the final stages of his engagement with the Complainant, but here too I am unable to reasonably conclude that the officer transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law. The officer did exceed the speed limit at points, traveling upwards of 100 km/h, for example, on Central Avenue. He did so in an unmarked police vehicle and without the use of his emergency lights and siren. Indeed, the officer’s driving was sufficiently disconcerting to another motorist that he called 911 to complain about what he had observed. That said, it should be noted that officers engaged in the execution of their duties are exempt from the speed limitations pursuant to section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act. While the section does not give officers free rein to speed as they wish without regard for public safety, the evidence falls short of establishing that the SO exceeded the remit of the provision, particularly as one would expect a degree of speed over the speed limit as the officer was attempting to catch up to the motorcycle. On this record, I am not satisfied on balance that the SO’s indiscretions, if they be such, were of a magnitude to attract criminal liability.
For the foregoing reasons, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO conducted himself other than lawfully through his engagement with the Complainant. Accordingly, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case, and the file is closed.
Date: October 22, 2021
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
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 premised, 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 a want of care in the manner in which the SO engaged with the motorcycle that contributed to the collision and/or was sufficiently egregious as to attract criminal sanction. In my view, there was not.
I am satisfied that the officer had lawful grounds to seek to stop the Complainant as the evidence indicates that the rear licence plate was improperly mounted on the vehicle, making it difficult to read.
I am also satisfied that in the brief time between the collision and the point at which the SO was right behind the Complainant, the officer comported himself with due care and regard for public safety, including the Complainant’s safety. Though he did follow the motorcycle onto Tourangeau Road from Tecumseh Road East in contravention of a no-turn sign, there is no indication that any third-party motorists or pedestrians in the area were put in harm’s way. In fact, there was little to moderate traffic on the roadways at the time. And, as soon as the motorcycle took off on him after the officer activated his lights and siren, the SO, wisely, in my view, discontinued pursuit. Given the inherent vulnerability of motorcyclists, particularly at high speeds, it would not have been worth the risk to continue the engagement any further. Thereafter, the SO continued north at reasonable speeds.
Of greater concern is the SO’s driving that preceded the final stages of his engagement with the Complainant, but here too I am unable to reasonably conclude that the officer transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law. The officer did exceed the speed limit at points, traveling upwards of 100 km/h, for example, on Central Avenue. He did so in an unmarked police vehicle and without the use of his emergency lights and siren. Indeed, the officer’s driving was sufficiently disconcerting to another motorist that he called 911 to complain about what he had observed. That said, it should be noted that officers engaged in the execution of their duties are exempt from the speed limitations pursuant to section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act. While the section does not give officers free rein to speed as they wish without regard for public safety, the evidence falls short of establishing that the SO exceeded the remit of the provision, particularly as one would expect a degree of speed over the speed limit as the officer was attempting to catch up to the motorcycle. On this record, I am not satisfied on balance that the SO’s indiscretions, if they be such, were of a magnitude to attract criminal liability.
For the foregoing reasons, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO conducted himself other than lawfully through his engagement with the Complainant. Accordingly, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case, and the file is closed.
Date: October 22, 2021
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
Endnotes
- 1) The following records contain sensitive personal information and are not being released pursuant to section 34(2) of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019. The material portions of the records are summarized below. [Back to text]
Note:
The signed English original report is authoritative, and any discrepancy between that report and the French and English online versions should be resolved in favour of the original English report.