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 the serious injury a 43-year-old man (the “Complainant”) suffered.

Notification of the SIU

On August 6, 2021 at 3:27 p.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU and reported the following.

The Complainant was arrested by the OPP on June 13, 2021 and taken to the Lakeshore Detachment. While in custody, the Complainant advised that he was roughed up by the Subject Official (SO). As a result of the assault, he said he fell inside his cell and struck his head.

After the Complainant was released from custody he suffered from headaches, nausea, and blurred vision. On June 15, 2021, the Complainant attended a walk-in clinic and was medically diagnosed with a concussion.

The incident was reported to the OPP Professional Standards Branch (PSB) on July 22, 2021.

The OPP indicated that the Complainant was interviewed by the PSB and disclosed the concussion information. At that point, the OPP PSB halted their investigation and reported the injury to the SIU.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 08/06/2021 at 6:43 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 08/09/2021 at 9:30 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

The Scene

The scene was identified as the cell block area of the Lakeshore OPP Detachment, situated at 775 Notre Dame Street, Belle River.

On August 13, 2021, at 10:21 a.m., an SIU Forensic investigator attended the scene, photographed the cell block area, and prepared a scale diagram.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [1]

OPP – Cell Video

The OPP provided the SIU with video footage from the cell area inside the police detachment where the Complainant was held.

June 13, 2021 – 1st Cell Video

02:23 minutes into video
A police officer (now known to be the SO) enters the cell common area. The SO uses a door with a combination lock and leaves the area into the sally port. The sally port door is left ajar.

03:58 minutes into video
The Complainant, wearing shorts, enters the cell common area from the sally port. The SO is holding the Complainant with his right hand. The Complainant is handcuffed behind his back, and they walk to a cell door on the left side of the room. The SO opens the cell door while still holding onto the Complainant.

04:08 minutes into video
The SO removes the right handcuff from the Complainant. The SO removes an item from the left pocket of the Complainant’s shorts. The SO puts the item on the floor and then removes the left handcuff from the Complainant.

04:28 minutes into video
WO #1 enters the cell common area and watches the Complainant and the SO. The Complainant is facing the SO and appears to be speaking.

04:34 minutes into video
WO #1 leaves the common area. The Complainant is still speaking to the SO.

04:37 minutes into video
WO #1 returns to the common area.

04:47 minutes into video
The Complainant turns and walks into the cell. The SO has his left hand on the door.

04:50 minutes into video
The Complainant comes out of the cell to the threshold of the door. WO #1 leaves the common area briefly. The SO has his left hand on the Complainant’s right shoulder and his right hand on the Complainant’s left arm. The SO pushes the Complainant. The Complainant’s arms are by his sides.

04:55 minutes into video
The SO delivers a right elbow to the Complainant’s head. WO #1 has returned to the common area and he opens the cell door wider. The Complainant is on the floor with the SO on one knee.

05:03 minutes into video
The SO stands and then enters the cell. The Complainant is slid into the cell. WO #1 kicks an item from the cell area into the common area. The SO exits the cell, and WO #1 closes the door and locks it. The SO picks the item from the floor.

June 13, 2021 - 2nd Cell Video

00:45 minutes into video
The Complainant enters the cell and then turns back towards the doorway.

00:50 minutes into the video
The Complainant walks out of the cell.

00:59 minutes into video
The Complainant is lying face first on the cell floor with his hands under his body.

01:01 minutes into video
The SO enters the cell, grabs the Complainant under the arms, and slides him inside the cell.

01:07 minutes into video
The SO exits the cell.

01:11 minutes into video
The Complainant rolls onto his side.

01:21 minutes into video
The Complainant sits up.

01:32 minutes into video
The Complainant uses the sink to pull himself up to his feet. He goes to the cell door, turns, and urinates in the toilet while holding the sink with his right hand.

29:44 minutes into the video
WO #5 opens the cell door and enters with blankets. The Complainant is on his back on his bunk. WO #4 also comes into the cell and they all appear to be speaking.

31:43 minutes into the video
The Complainant points to the right side of his face.

32:06 minutes into video
WO #5 and WO #4 leave the cell. WO #5 appears to speak to the Complainant at the doorway and they shake hands.

34:38 minutes into video
The cell door opens, and someone is speaking to the Complainant.

49:11 minutes into video
The Complainant leaves the cell.

51:24 minutes into video
The Complainant returns to the cell.

54:03 minutes into video
The video ends.

OPP – Communications

The OPP provided the SIU with audio recordings of three 911 callers reporting assaults at the beach in Belle River, radio transmissions relating to the incident, and three telephone calls from the Provincial Communications Center in (PCC) in North Bay.

911 Callers – June 13, 2021

9:57:38 p.m.
CW #8 telephones to report being assaulted at the beach in Belle River. He provides a description of the males involved and also reports further assaults to females by the same males.

10:05:27 p.m.
A female telephones and reports being hit by a man. The female also tells the call-taker that her friend was trampled and that there was also a woman involved. Before hanging up from the call, the police are present at the scene.

10:01:20 p.m.
OPP make a call-back to CW #7, who reports a fight at the beach in Belle River. White men were reportedly jumping girls and terrorizing people.

10:04:11 p.m.
The OPP call-taker telephones the dispatcher and reports a large disturbance. A female had called and hung up. The female was believed to be CW #9.

10:06:47 p.m.
The OPP call-taker telephones the dispatcher to advise that there was a female on the line who had been assaulted at the beach. The female had hung up. She was called back, but no one answered.

Radio Communications

9:58 p.m.
The dispatcher asks an officer if a second unit is needed. WO #1 advises he is attending. The dispatcher upgrades the call to assault and indicates that there are two males assaulting females. WO #2 is noted to be attending. The SO advises he is on scene with two males. A male advises that he has a male in custody and is going to the detachment. An officer advises another person is also in custody, and they too are going to the detachment.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the OPP between August 11, 2021 and September 9, 2021:

• Officer Log On Codes;
• Cellblock Video Access Log – WO #3;
• Intergraph Computer-assisted Dispatch Events;
• Interview Synopsis – the Complainant;
• Involved Civilian List;
• Notes-the SEW;
• Notes-WO #2;
• Notes-WO #6;
• Notes-WO #4;
• Notes-WO #3;
• Notes-WO #5;
• Notes-WO #1;
• Officers’ Involvement;
• Prisoner Custody Form;
• Statement of CW #5;
• Statement of CW #2;
• Statement of CW #9;
• Statement of CW #6;
• Communication Recordings;
• Custody Video; and
• Training Record- the SO.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained and reviewed the following records from other sources:

• Medical Records – Walk-in Clinic; and
• Injury Photographs from the Complainant.

The following scenario emerges from the evidence collected by the SIU, which included interviews with the Complainant and an officer who witnessed the incident – WO #1. The investigation was also assisted by a video recording from a camera inside the OPP detachment in which the events at issue occurred. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU or authorize the release of his notes.

In the evening of June 13, 2021, several OPP officers from the Lakeshore Detachment were dispatched to a public disturbance at the Belle River Beach, Belle River. Beachgoers had contacted the police to report that a party, including the Complainant, his brother and wife, had accosted and assaulted other persons on the beach.

The SO was among the officers who arrived to investigate the complaint. Satisfied that the Complainant, and his wife and brother, had been the aggressors in the dispute between two camps, the officers proceeded to place them under arrest. The Complainant was placed in the SO’s vehicle and transported to the detachment.

At the detachment, the Complainant was escorted to a cell by the SO and his handcuffs were removed. The Complainant entered the cell briefly before he turned around, crossed back through the threshold of the open cell door, and confronted the SO face-to-face. The officer told the Complainant to return to the cell, and the Complainant replied in words to the effect, “Fucking make me.” The officer grabbed the Complainant’s right side and left arm to push him back into the cell. The Complainant stood his ground and was struck in the face by a right elbow delivered by the SO.

The strike immediately felled the Complainant. As he lay across the threshold of the cell door, the SO entered the cell, grabbed the Complainant under his arms, and pulled him fully into the cell. The officer then left the cell, closing the door behind him.

After a few seconds of lying motionless on the floor, the Complainant came to, picked himself up, and sat on the cell bench.

Following his release from custody the next day, the Complainant attended a medical clinic and was diagnosed with a concussion.

Section 25(1), Criminal Code -- Protection of persons acting under authority

(a) as a private person,

(b) as a peace officer or public officer,

(c) in aid of a peace officer or public officer, or

(d) by virtue of his office,

On June 13, 2021, the Complainant suffered a serious injury when he was struck in the head by an OPP officer. The officer – 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 Complainant’s injury.

Pursuant to section 25(1) of the Criminal Code, police officers are immune from criminal liability for force used in the course of their duties provided such force was reasonably necessary in the execution of an act that they were required or authorized to do by law.

The evidence does not reasonably establish that the Complainant’s arrest was unlawful. On the clear weight of the evidence, the officers had cause to believe that an inebriated Complainant had harassed, threatened and assaulted one or more persons on the beach. In the circumstances, I am satisfied in the validity of the Complainant’s arrest, first, for public intoxication, and, subsequently, for assault. Once in lawful custody, the officers were also entitled to control the Complainant’s movements to ensure he was safely dealt with accordingly to law, including his lodging in a police cell.

Though the elbow strike appears to have momentarily knocked the Complainant out, I am unable to reasonably conclude on the evidence that it fell afoul of the limits of justifiable force. The Complainant’s belligerence and hostility had been on full display moments prior at the beach. In the circumstances, the SO had reason to be concerned that the Complainant would turn violent on him when he defiantly exited the cell, approached the SO to within arm’s reach, and challenged the officer to force him into the cell. A strike delivered in these circumstances would not appear to have been disproportionate to the exigences at hand. In arriving at this conclusion, I am mindful of the common law principle that police officers who take action to defend themselves in potentially dangerous situations are not expected to measure their responsive force with precision; what is required is a reasonable response, not an exacting one: R v Nasogaluak, [2010] 1 SCR 206.

For the foregoing reasons, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO comported himself unlawfully throughout his engagement with the Complainant. Accordingly, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges.


Date: December 3, 2021


Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit