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 discharge of a firearm by police at a 26-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU

On August 10, 2022, at 9:03 a.m., the York Regional Police (YRP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

At 5:56 a.m., the YRP were called to a residence near Bathurst Street and McClellan Way in Aurora for an intruder [now known to be the Complainant] armed with a knife. Uniformed officers contained the area and the YRP Emergency Response Unit (ERU) were called out. The Complainant came out of the house and re-entered a few times, with the knife. At 7:59 a.m., an Anti-riot Weapon ENfield (ARWEN) and Conducted Energy Weapons (CEWs) were discharged. The Complainant was transported to Southlake Regional Health Centre.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 08/10/2022 at 9:45 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 08/10/2022 at 11:10 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

The Scene

This incident occurred at a residence near Bathurst Street and McClellan Way in Aurora.

A large knife was located directly in front of the garage, followed by one ARWEN round and shell casing near the driveway, on the front lawn. Three CEW cartridges were also within the vicinity of the lawn.

Physical Evidence

The following items were collected by the SIU:

Item	Description	Type of item
001	CEW Taser X2	Police Weapon
002	CEW Taser X2	Police Weapon
003	ARWEN Cartridge	Cartridge
004	CEW Cartridge	Cartridge
005	CEW Cartridge	Cartridge
006	CEW Cartridge	Cartridge
007	ARWEN Projectile	Projectile
008	CEW Wire	Misc.
009	CEW Wire	Misc.
010	CEW Blast Doors	Misc.
011	CEW AFIDs	Misc.

The ARWEN discharged by the SO was noted to have three of five total rounds loaded in the weapon. The SO was able to account for a missing round; he explained that he had removed the single low-energy round as he prepared his weapon for possible use in the incident.



Figure 1 – The SO’s ARWEN



Figure 2 – ARWEN projectile


Figure 3 – Knife held by the Complainant

Forensic Evidence

CEW Examination - WO #2

Data from WO #2’s CEW were downloaded with the following results:

• Event 821 – At 7:58:10 a.m., [1] the CEW was armed;
• Event 822 – At 7:58:10 a.m., a trigger pull was detected and probes from cartridge one were discharged. There was an electrical discharge totaling 3.00 seconds;
• Event 823 – At 7:58:13 a.m., the CEW was placed in safe mode;
• Event 825 – At 7:58:14 a.m., a trigger pull was detected, deploying probes from cartridge two. There was an electrical discharge totaling five seconds; and
• Event 826 – At 7:58:52 a.m., the CEW was placed in safe mode.

CEW Examination - WO #1

Data from WO #1’s CEW were downloaded with the following results:

• Event 4505 – At 7:58:50 a.m., the CEW was armed;
• Event 4506 – At 7:58:53 a.m., a trigger pull was detected; however, there was a poor signal to the cartridge, and it did not deploy;
• Event 4509 – At 7:58:57 a.m., a trigger pull was detected. Cartridge one deployed with an electrical discharge for five seconds;
• Event 4510 – At 7:59:03 a.m., a second trigger pull was detected and an electrical discharge from cartridge one was noted; and
• Event 4511 – At 7:59:05 a.m., the CEW was placed in safe mode.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]

911 Telephone Communications

The following is a summary of the 911 call made in connection with the incident.

CW #1 contacted YRP Communications via telephone and advised that a man was inside her residence. The man, the Complainant, had indicated that men with assault rifles were chasing him.

The Complainant attempted to retrieve a knife from inside a drawer while advising CW #1 that she needed to contact the police because she was in danger. The knives from the drawer had spilled onto the floor. CW #1 left her residence and awaited the arrival of police.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and the SO, and video footage that largely captured the events in question, gives rise to the following scenario.

In the early morning of August 10, 2022, the Complainant broke into a residence near Bathurst Street and McClellan Way in Aurora. The Complainant had lost touch with reality that morning – he was seeing and hearing things that were not there – and was suicidal. Once in the home, the Complainant barricaded the front door, believing “agents’ were after him with assault weapons, and told the homeowner – CW #1 – to call the police. The homeowner called 911 and left the home after the Complainant had retrieved knives from the cutlery drawer. The time was about 5:55 a.m.

Uniform officers arrived at the scene within minutes of the 911 call. They contained the home and attempted to communicate with the Complainant through the front door. Among them, Officer #1 repeatedly assured the Complainant that they were there to help him and asked him to exit the home. The Complainant was largely unresponsive. The decision was made to deploy the ERU.

ERU officers began arriving at the scene at about 7:30 a.m., including the SO. Officer #2, also a member of the team and a trained negotiator, joined with Officer #1 in his efforts to communicate with the Complainant. At one point, a naked Complainant emerged from a second-floor window onto the roof of the garage. He picked up a knife and made motions as if trying to stab himself in the abdomen. The Complainant ignored directions to drop the knife and surrender, instead returning within the home through the same window after about a minute. The time was about 7:50 a.m.

It was decided that the ERU officers would form several metres from the front door, each armed with a weapon at the ready, in the event the Complainant emerged from the home. The objective was to incapacitate the Complainant with the use of an ARWEN and CEWs, and safely take him into custody. The SO would be armed with the ARWEN. WO #2 and WO #1 would each have a CEW at their disposal. And the Acting Sergeant would have his firearm at the ready.

Shortly before 8:00 a.m., the Complainant decided he would exit the home and rush at the officers with a knife in hand.

On seeing the Complainant running towards them with a knife in hand, the SO fired his ARWEN in his direction at about the same time as WO #1 and WO #2 discharged their CEWs. The Complainant fell to the ground and, within seconds, was struck again by CEW discharges. Once on the ground, the ERU officers, and Officer #1, approached the Complainant and handcuffed him behind his back.

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,

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 August 10, 2022, the Complainant was struck by an ARWEN round fired by a YRP officer in the course of his arrest. The officer who fired the weapon – the SO – was identified as the subject official in the ensuing SIU investigation. 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 Complainant’s arrest and the use of the ARWEN.