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 33-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU

On December 18, 2021, at 12:13 p.m., the Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant.

The DRPS advised that on December 18, 2021, at around 9:40 a.m., police officers were requested to attend and assist paramedics at a residence near Garden Street and Rossland Road East in Whitby. The Complainant was observed to be demonstrating behaviour which led police to make a Mental Health Act (MHA) apprehension. The Complainant had made it known to police, paramedics, and family members that he had consumed a large quantity of anti-psychotic drugs.

The Complainant was transported by paramedics to Lakeridge Health Oshawa (LHO). Due to combative behaviour on board the ambulance, police handcuffed the Complainant pending arrival at the hospital. Upon arrival at hospital, the Complainant went into cardiac arrest, and was intubated and admitted to hospital in critical condition.

There was no other indication of force being deployed by the involved police officers.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 12/18/2021 at 1:46 p.m.

Date and time SIU responded: 12/18/2021 at 1:50 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

33-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on February 7, 2022.

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed
CW #2 Interviewed
CW #3 Interviewed
CW #4 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between December 19, 2021, and January 5, 2022.

The Scene

The scenes were a residence near Garden Street and Rossland Road East in Whitby, and the interior of a Durham Paramedic Services ambulance.

The address was a single-family home with a long driveway leading up to the residence.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [1]

911 Call

The recording was made on December 18, 2021, and was one minute and 22 seconds in duration. In summary:

At 9:37 a.m., CW #2 placed a call to 911 requesting an ambulance. CW #2 reported his brother, the Complainant, had taken 40 pills. The call was cut off and another call was initiated by the 911 call-taker. The 911 call-taker informed the dispatcher that the Complainant had taken 40 anti-psychotic pills, and was suicidal, aggressive, and swearing. The Complainant had a history of mental illness and had no weapons.

Communications Recordings

The recordings were made on December 18, 2021, and were at eight minutes and 51 seconds in duration. In summary:

On December 18, 2021, at 9:42 a.m., the dispatcher requested assistance for a call at a residence near Garden Street and Rossland Road East in Whitby involving a suicidal man [now known to be the Complainant].

At 9:43 a.m., the WO informed the dispatcher he would attend the call.

At 9:43 a.m., the dispatcher informed the WO that the Complainant had taken 30 anti-psychotic pills, was suicidal, and had a history of apprehensions under the MHA. The dispatcher informed the WO that the Complainant had no current charges pending.

The Complainant had a CNI (Criminal Name Index) and was known to be violent. He had multiple prior apprehensions under the MHA.
At 9:46 a.m., the SO requested to be placed on the call and the dispatcher confirmed.

At 9:55 a.m., the WO informed the dispatcher the call was going to be an apprehension.

At 9:57 a.m., the WO informed the dispatcher that the Complainant was being taken to hospital in a rush.

At 9:58 a.m., the SO informed the dispatcher he was travelling in the ambulance with the Complainant.

At 9:58 a.m., the SO informed the dispatcher that the Complainant had been apprehended in November.

At 10:07 a.m., the SO informed the dispatcher he had arrived at LHO.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

The SIU obtained and reviewed the following records from the DRPS:

• Communications recordings;
• Report of the WO;
• Detailed Call Summary Report;
• General Occurrence; and
• Policies regarding Arrest and Warrant Applied for, Police Use of Force, and Persons in Crisis and Attempted Suicide.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

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

• Ambulance Call Report-Durham Emergency Medical Services; and
• Medical Records – LHO.

The material events in question are clear on the evidence collected by the SIU, and may be summarized in short order.

In the morning of December 18, 2021, the Complainant consumed an overdose of his prescription medication. He did so with the intention of harming himself. The Complainant confided what he had done to his brother, who contacted 911. Paramedics and police officers were dispatched to the address – a house at a residence near Garden Street and Rossland Road East in Whitby.

Paramedics were the first at the scene, followed closely by the SO and WO, arriving in separate cruisers. The WO escorted the Complainant to the ambulance, and the Complainant placed himself on the stretcher. The Complainant cursed at the attending paramedics and officers, and began to peel off the medical equipment that had been attached to monitor his vital signs. The SO proceeded to handcuff the Complainant’s hands to the front, and then rode with him in the ambulance as it made its way to hospital.

By the time of the ambulance’s arrival at hospital, at about 10:10 a.m., the Complainant’s condition had markedly deteriorated – he was unconscious with an elevated heart rate. The SO removed the handcuffs and the Complainant was transferred into the care of hospital staff.

The Complainant was treated in the hospital ICU. He had suffered a drug overdose.

Section 215, Criminal Code - Failure to Provide Necessaries

(c) to provide necessaries of life to a person under his charge if that person

(i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, illness, mental disorder or other cause, to withdraw himself from that charge, and

(ii) is unable to provide himself with necessaries of life.

(b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (1)(c), the failure to perform the duty endangers the life of the person to whom the duty is owed or causes or is likely to cause the health of that person to be injured permanently.

Section 17, Mental Health Act -- Action by police officer

(a) has threatened or attempted or is threatening or attempting to cause bodily harm to himself or herself;

(b) has behaved or is behaving violently towards another person or has caused or is causing another person to fear bodily harm from him or her; or

(c) has shown or is showing a lack of competence to care for himself or herself,

(d) serious bodily harm to the person;

(e) serious bodily harm to another person; or

(f) serious physical impairment of the person,

On December 18, 2021, the Complainant fell into acute medical distress while in the custody of the DRPS. The SO, who had arrested the Complainant, 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’ condition.

The offence that arises for consideration is failure to provide the necessaries of life contrary to section 215 of the Criminal Code. As an offence of penal negligence, a simple want of care is insufficient to give rise to liability for the offence. Rather, what is required is negligence amounting to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised. In the instant case, the issue is whether there was any want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, in connection with the Complainant’ medical condition. In my view, there was not.

The Complainant had lawfully been apprehended by the SO under section 17 of the Mental Health Act. Given what he knew of the 911 call that had been received by police, detailing the Complainant’s suicidal ideation and his consumption of a large quantity of prescription medication, the SO had reasonable cause to be concerned that the Complainant was of unsound mind and a danger to himself.

As the Complainant’s apprehension was lawful, the SO was entitled to assert control over his movements and to exercise reasonable measures to that effect. The application of the handcuffs to the front of the Complainant, particularly in circumstances in which the Complainant was making it difficult for the paramedics to do their job, was a reasonable measure. It should be noted that the handcuffs were secured without incident, and that there is no evidence to suggest the Complainant’s condition was in any fashion causally connected to his restraint in handcuffs.

In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in his limited dealings with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges on this case. The file is closed.


Date: April 14, 2022

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit