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 death of a 21-year-old woman (“Complainant #1”) and the serious injuries a 25-year-old man (“Complainant #2”) sustained.

Notification of the SIU

On November 5, 2021, at 3:07 a.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) notified the SIU of a vehicle collision at the intersection of Dixie Road & Sandalwood Parkway East, Brampton.

According to the OPP, a vehicle that an OPP officer had attempted a stop went through a red light and was involved in a motor vehicle collision. The OPP reported this was not a pursuit. One vehicle containing a female caught fire, and she was gravely injured. Another vehicle contained a man who was seriously injured.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 11/05/2021 at 3:31 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 11/05/2021 at 5:51 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 5

The Scene

The collision occurred in the intersection of Sandalwood Parkway East and Dixie Road, Brampton.

SIU arrived on scene at 5:51 a.m., on November 5, 2021. Dixie Road travelled in a north/south direction. Dixie Road was a paved, four-laned roadway with turn lanes at the intersection. The roadway surface was straight and level with markings in good condition and visible.

Sandalwood Parkway East travelled in an east/west direction and intersected at Dixie Road. Sandalwood Parkway East was a paved four-laned roadway with turn lanes at the intersection. The roadway surface was straight and level with markings in good condition and visible.

There was streetlighting present in the area and the intersection was controlled by traffic signals that appeared to be operating normally at the time of arrival.

Three vehicles were in the intersection: the SO’s OPP cruiser, a black Volkswagen Jetta, and a red Honda Civic.


Figure 1 – The scene


Figure 2 – Damage to the Jetta


Figure 3 – Damage to the Civic

Scene Diagram

Forensic Evidence

Analysis of Global Positioning System (GPS) Data

A SIU collision reconstructionist analyzed the GPS data from the SO’s OPP vehicle. The data covered a period from about 2:00 to 3:00 a.m., November 5, 2021.

The SO had driven northbound on Highway 410 in Brampton from Highway 403. The SO exited off Highway 410 at Sandalwood Parkway at 2:43 a.m., travelling at 58 km/h for a distance of about 28 metres from the stop line at the intersection at Sandalwood Parkway.

Between 2:43:35 to 2:43:51 a.m., the SO accelerated eastbound on Sandalwood Parkway East, where the speed limit was 60 km/h, through the intersection with Great Lakes Drive, at about 118 km/h.
Between 2:43:56 to 2:44:01 a.m., the SO continued eastbound on Sandalwood Parkway East from Great Lakes Drive to the entrance of Save Max Sports Centre. Speeds were recorded at 128, 131, 127, 128, and 124 km/h.

Between 2:44:02 to 2:44:13 a.m., the SO continued eastbound on Sandalwood Parkway East, east of Save Max Sports Centre, decelerating.

Between 2:44:19 to 2:44:31 a.m., the SO stopped in the bus stop pickup area about 50 metres west of the eastbound stop line for the intersection of Sandalwood Parkway East and Dixie Road.

At 2:44:33 a.m., the SO drove eastbound into, and across to the east side of, the intersection, where the vehicle remained stationary (0 km/h) in the same location for the duration of the GPS data points (to 3:00 a.m.).

The total distance from the Highway 410 off-ramp to the location of the collision was about 900 metres, during which a maximum speed of 131 km/h was captured between Great Lakes Drive and the entrance to Save Max Sports Centre.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [1]

SIU Route Video

The SIU video recorded the route that the SO was believed to have taken en route to the scene of the collision. It commenced on Highway 410 northbound at Bovaird Drive. Highway 410 was paved with two northbound lanes and a posted speed limit of 100 km/h. There was a raised concrete Jersey barrier separating the northbound and southbound lanes. The first exit was Sandalwood Parkway with two exit lanes. The posted ramp speed was 60 km/h. A traffic signal was located at the off ramp with Sandalwood Parkway with one left turn lane, a shared centre left / right turn lane, and a right turn lane.

Sandalwood Parkway East consisted of paved lanes in each direction and a posted speed limit of 60 km/h. There were overhead streetlights on both sides of the roadway. The first intersection east of Highway 410 was with Great Lakes Drive, controlled by traffic lights, followed by the entrance / exit driveway of Save Max Sports Centre (south side of the roadway), also controlled with traffic signal lights.

The conclusion of the route video was at the intersection of Sandalwood Parkway East and Dixie Road. The total distance travelled was 2.7 kilometres.

Video – Save Max Sports Centre

On November 5, 2021, a SIU investigator obtained video footage from the City of Brampton, Save Max Sport Centre, located at 1495 Sandalwood Parkway East. The video was from a fisheye camera which was externally affixed.

On November 5, 2021, at 2:43 a.m., emergency lighting could be seen in the area of Great Lakes Drive, heading eastbound. The SO travelled eastbound on Sandalwood Parkway East behind the Jetta. Eleven seconds later, the Jetta entered a T-intersection (Save Max Sports Centre) on a green light and accelerated toward Dixie Road.

At 2:44 a.m., the SO entered the same T-intersection with emergency lights deactivated. The Jetta continued to accelerate towards a set of red traffic lights and out of camera view, creating a significant distance from the SO’s OPP cruiser.

The SO slowed in the right turn lane some distance away from the intersection, and stopped 12 seconds later. Fourteen seconds later, he proceeded eastbound towards the intersection and went out of camera range.

The following scenario emerges from the evidence collected by the SIU, which included interviews with officers who arrived at the site of the collision and spoke with the SO. The investigation was also assisted by video recordings from security cameras along the pursuit route that captured the incident in parts. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

In the early morning hours of November 5, 2021, the SO was on patrol in a marked cruiser northbound on Highway 410 in the area of Sandalwood Parkway East when he came across a black Jetta. The vehicle had earlier been reported abandoned in that area. The officer followed the Jetta as it took the Sandalwood Parkway East off-ramp and watched as it turned right without stopping through a red light at the top of the ramp.

The SO decided to stop the vehicle for a traffic infraction and followed it eastbound on Sandalwood Parkway East. As he approached the intersection of Great Lakes Drive, the officer activated his emergency lights. The Jetta slowed momentarily before it accelerated away from the officer. The SO picked up his speed to match the Jetta and pursued the vehicle.

At times in excess of 100 km/h, the SO chased the Jetta eastbound for about 400 metres before deciding to discontinue the pursuit. The officer turned off his emergency lights as he cleared the entrance/exit intersection of the Save Max Sports Centre, and began to decelerate.
The Jetta continued at speed, entered the next intersection of Dixie Road on a red light, and broadsided a Honda Civic. The time was 2:44 a.m.

The Honda, operated by Complainant #1 with no one else in the car, had entered the intersection on a green light travelling north. The collision propelled the Honda in a northeast direction, where it came to rest off the roadway. The Jetta came to a stop in the westbound lanes of Dixie Road. The driver of the Jetta exited the vehicle and fled northbound on foot.

The SO had seen the collision and radioed what had occurred. Having brought his vehicle to a stop about 50 metres west of the intersection after terminating pursuit, the officer travelled to the intersection and rendered assistance to Complainant #1, administering CPR until paramedics and the fire department were on scene.

Complainant #1 had suffered catastrophic injuries. She was taken to hospital but could not be saved and died later that morning.

The passenger in the Jetta – Complainant #2 – was also seriously injured with multiple fractures.

Section 320.13 (1) Criminal Code – Dangerous operation causing bodily harm or death

Complainant #1 was killed and Complainant #2 seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision in Brampton on November 5, 2021. As an OPP officer was in pursuit of the vehicle in which Complainant #2 was a passenger moments before the collision, the SIU was notified and initiated an investigation. The SO was identified as a subject official. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the pursuit and collision.

The offence that arises for consideration is dangerous driving causing death contrary to section 320.13(3) of the Criminal Code. Simple negligence will not suffice to give rise to liability for the offence; rather, what is required, in part, is 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 on the part of the SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the collision. In my view, there was not.

The SO was in the lawful execution of his duties when he decided to stop and then pursue the Jetta. The officer had observed the vehicle travel through a red light without stopping – a clear traffic infraction. As he had not identified the vehicle or any of its occupants – the licence plate was fake and obstructed – the SO was also within his rights under O. Reg. 266 [2] of the Police Services Act to pursue the Jetta when it failed to stop.

Once engaged in a pursuit, the SO had an overriding obligation to discontinue the pursuit where the balance of public safety considerations were prohibitive, an obligation I am satisfied that he met. While the officer travelled well in excess of the 60 km/h speed limit - as high as 131 km/h at one point – he did so over a relatively brief period of time and distance. During that interval, there is no indication that third-party motorists were directly imperiled or had to take evasive action because of the officer’s speeds or the pursuit. In fact, given the time of day, there appears to have been little traffic on the roadway. Moreover, the SO’s emergency lights were on throughout his active pursuit, providing a measure of notice to the public of his speeds. About 200 metres west of Dixie Road, the officer, wisely, in my view, discontinued his pursuit – shutting off his lights and decelerating. It would have been clear by that time that the driver of the Jetta had no intention of stopping.

It is highly regrettable that the driver of the Jetta chose to operate their vehicle as recklessly as they did, resulting in the tragic loss of Complainant #1’s life and the serious injuries to the Jetta passenger. Be that as it may, I am unable to reasonably conclude on the aforementioned-record that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law with respect to his involvement in the events culminating in the collision. Accordingly, there is no basis to proceed with criminal charges against the officer, and the file is closed.


Date: March 4, 2022

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit