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 of a 32-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU

On August 30, 2022, at 2:16 a.m., the Greater Sudbury Police Service (GSPS) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant.

According to the GSPS, on August 29, 2022, at about 10:37 p.m., police received a call of a stabbing at a residence (Residence #1) in Sudbury. The caller (Witness #1) advised he had been stabbed by the Complainant. Shortly after, GSPS took another call for an assault at a second residence (Residence #2). The Complainant had called police to say he was assaulted. GSPS officers were sent to both locations to investigate. The dispatcher told the Complainant to meet the police officers on his driveway with his hands empty. When GSPS officer arrived at Residence #2, they told the Complainant not to move and to keep his hands at his sides. When the police officers moved in to take control of the Complainant, he resisted and was taken to the ground. The Complainant had a laceration on his left thumb and was taken to Health Sciences North Hospital. While there, X-rays revealed a fractured knuckle on the Complainant’s right little finger. His hand was placed in a cast, and he was released back into the custody of the police. The Complainant was subsequently charged with multiple offences and held for a bail hearing.

The Scene

The scene was the driveway of the Complainant’s residence in Sudbury – Residence #2.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [1]

911 Call Made by the Complainant

The recording started on August 29, 2022, at 9:53:23 p.m. A summary of the seven-minute and four seconds-long recording follows.

The Complainant telephoned 911 to report another man breaking car windows at an address, Residence #1, in Sudbury. A man, Witness #1, was heard shouting in the background.

At 50 seconds into the call, Witness #1 yelled to the call-taker that the Complainant was smashing his windows and requested that police attend and arrest the Complainant.

The Complainant told the call-taker where he lived and that he had been pushed to the ground by Witness #1.

At three minutes and 29 seconds into the call, the Complainant requested an ambulance to check him over. The Complainant reported Witness #1 had punched him in the face.

911 Call Made by Witness #1

The recording was made on August 29, 2022. A summary of the four-minute and 28 seconds-long recording follows.

Witness #1 called police to attend at Residence #1 because the Complainant was breaking the windows of his car with a hammer. He stated the Complainant had been drinking. Witness #1 said the Complainant had also called police. By then, the Complainant had left and walked home.

At three minutes and 56 seconds into the call, the call-taker said a police officer would attend Witness #1’s residence.

Second 911 Call Made by Witness #1

The recording was made on August 29, 2022, beginning at 10:36:13 p.m. A summary of the ten-minute and 53 seconds-long recording follows.

Witness #1 requested that police attend his residence as he had been stabbed by the Complainant. He had locked the Complainant out of his residence and he was bleeding. Witness #1 was unsure if the Complainant was outside of the residence waiting. He said the Complainant had a knife and that the Complainant lived on the street next to Witness #1’s street. He indicated the Complainant had snuck up on him and stabbed him in front of his residence.

At ten minutes and 50 seconds into the call, a police officer – WO #1 – arrived at Witness #1’s residence.

Second 911 Call Made by the Complainant

The recording was made on August 29, 2022, beginning at 10:38:48 p.m. A summary of the one-minute and 35 seconds-long recording follows.

The Complainant requested police because he had been attacked. He was walking down the street when Witness #1 ran up and beat him. The Complainant requested an ambulance because he was bleeding from his thumb.

At one minute and four seconds into the call, a man [determined to be either SO #1 or SO #2] ordered the Complainant to put his hands out to his side. The Complainant said, “Okay.” The police officers then told him not to move.

A police officer asked the Complainant twice where the knife was. The Complainant said, “The knife is on my… it’s on my…” The police officer said, “Keep your hands out, don’t move.”

GSPS Booking Video

The video footage was made on August 30, 2022. It was time-stamped and began at 1:38:59 a.m., running to 2:15:33 a.m. A summary of the footage, which contained no audio, follows.

At 1:38:59 a.m., a police cruiser arrived inside the garage at the police station.

At 1:42:02 a.m., the Complainant was escorted from the police cruiser by a police officer into the booking hall.

At 1:56:06 a.m., the Complainant entered a room off the booking hall. He had a bandage over his right hand and right thumb.

At 1:57:29 a.m., the Complainant exited the room, and returned to the booking hall where he spoke to WO #2.

At 1:58:50 a.m., the Complainant went back into the room and, at 2:05:18 a.m., exited the room once more. At 2:07:33 a.m., the Complainant went back into the room with a police officer, who was holding an orange prisoner jumpsuit. At 2:09:51 a.m., the Complainant exited the room wearing the orange jumpsuit.

At 2:14:19 a.m., the Complainant was placed in a cell.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the GSPS between August 30, 2022, and September 29, 2022:

• Communications recordings;
• Civilian witness statement;
• Custody video;
• Photographs;
• Arrest Report;
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Details;
• Policy - Arrest;
• Policy - Use of Force;
• Notes- WO #1; and
• Notes- WO #2.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with an officer present at the time of the arrest, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, neither subject official agreed to an interview with the SIU, nor the release of their notes.

In the evening of August 29, 2022, the GSPS received several 911 calls involving the Complainant and Witness #1. The latter had called to report that the Complainant had attended at his residence, damaged his car, and stabbed him. The Complainant, in his 911 call, indicated he had been assaulted by Witness #1. Officers were dispatched to investigate.

SO #1 and SO #2 arrived at the Complainant’s residence. The Complainant was standing on the driveway of the property. Within moments, SO #1 forced the Complainant to the ground, after which the Complainant was handcuffed by SO #2.

The Complainant was taken to hospital following his arrest and treated for a fractured knuckle of the right hand.

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,

The Complainant was diagnosed with a serious injury following his arrest by GSPS officers on August 29, 2022. In the ensuing SIU investigation, the arresting officers – SO #1 and SO #2 – were named the subject officials. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that either subject official committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and 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.

I am satisfied that the Complainant was subject to lawful arrest by SO #1 and SO #2. The officers were aware of information indicating that the Complainant had just stabbed someone with a knife.

I am also satisfied that there is insufficient evidence to reasonably conclude either of the subject officials used excessive force in their dealings with the Complainant. There is little direct evidence about the details of the arrest. What little is known indicates that the Complainant pulled away from SO #1 as the officer took hold of him, after which he was forced to the ground and arrested. A takedown, per se, would appear a reasonable tactic given the Complainant’s resistance and the possibility of a knife on his person. In that position, the officers could expect to better manage the risks of an armed and uncooperative arrestee.

It remains unclear whether the Complainant’s injury was incurred in his confrontation with the subject officials or Witness #1. Be that as it may, as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that SO #1 or SO #2 comported themselves unlawfully throughout their engagement with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.


Date: December 28, 2022

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit