SIU Director’s Report - Case # 23-PCI-029
Warning:
This page contains graphic content that can shock, offend and upset.
Contents:
Mandate of the SIU
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.
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.
Information Restrictions
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:- The name of, and any information identifying, a subject official, witness official, civilian witness or affected person.
- Information that may result in the identity of a person who reported that they were sexually assaulted being revealed in connection with the sexual assault.
- Information that, in the opinion of the SIU Director, could lead to a risk of serious harm to a person.
- Information that discloses investigative techniques or procedures.
- Information, the release of which is prohibited or restricted by law.
- Information in which a person’s privacy interest in not having the information published clearly outweighs the public interest in having the information published.
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Pursuant to section 14 (i.e., law enforcement), certain information may not be included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:- Confidential investigative techniques and procedures used by law enforcement agencies; and
- Information that could reasonably be expected to interfere with a law enforcement matter or an investigation undertaken with a view to a law enforcement proceeding.
- The names of persons, including civilian witnesses, and subject and witness officials;
- Location information;
- Witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation provided to the SIU in confidence; and
- Other identifiers which are likely to reveal personal information about individuals involved in the investigation.
Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004
Pursuant to this legislation, any information related to the personal health of identifiable individuals is not included.Other proceedings, processes, and investigations
Information may also have been excluded from this report because its release could undermine the integrity of other proceedings involving the same incident, such as criminal proceedings, coroner’s inquests, other public proceedings and/or other law enforcement investigations.Mandate Engaged
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 46-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).
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 46-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).
The Investigation
Notification of the SIU [1]
On January 25, 2023, at 5:48 p.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information. Earlier in the day, at about 12:14 p.m., OPP officials from the Orangeville Detachment attended a residence in Orangeville. Grounds existed to arrest the Complainant for assault. The Complainant was asked to put her right arm behind her back but did not comply. When officials took control of the Complainant’s right arm, she dropped to her knees, at which time officials heard a loud snap and suspected the Complainant’s arm was broken. The Complainant was transported to Headwaters Health Care Center where a fracture was confirmed.
The Team
Date and time team dispatched: 01/26/2023 at 8:54 a.m.Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 01/26/2023 at 9:30 a.m.
Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0
Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):
46-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewedThe Complainant was interviewed on January 26, 2023.
Civilian Witness (CW)
CW Interviewed The civilian witness was interviewed on January 26, 2023.
Subject Official (SO)
SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal rightWitness Officials (WO)
WO #1 Interviewed WO #2 Interviewed
The witness officials were interviewed between February 3, 2023 and March 1, 2023.
Evidence
The Scene
The Complainant sustained her injuries while inside her residence located in Orangeville. The scene was not examined by the SIU. Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]
Police Radio Communications
On January 25, 2023, at 12:14:59 p.m., the dispatcher informed police officers via broadcast that a ‘domestic’ had occurred at a residence in Orangeville. The CW had called regarding his girlfriend, the Complainant. She had reportedly struck and choked him. He declined Emergency Medical Services (EMS). A woman was yelling in the background. WO #2 dispatched himself to the incident.
One of the police officers informed the dispatcher that the Complainant was in custody.
WO #2 requested a call from the Provincial Communications Centre sergeant. The Complainant was transported to Headwaters Health Care Centre by EMS, followed by the SO and WO #1.
Materials Obtained from Police Service
Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the OPP between February 7 and 13, 2023:- Arrest Report;
- Record of computer-assisted dispatch;
- Communications recordings;
- Witness statement - the CW;
- General Report;
- Domestic Violence Risk Management Report;
- Involvements Report;
- Supplementary Report;
- WO #2 - Notes; and
- WO #1 - Notes.
Materials Obtained from Other Sources
The SIU obtained and reviewed the following records from other sources:- Headwaters Health Care Centre - Medical Records – the Complainant.
Incident Narrative
The weight of the evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and a police officer present at the time of the events in question, WO #1, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU or authorize the release of his notes.
At about 1:15 p.m. of January 25, 2023, the SO and WO #1 arrived at the Complainant’s residence in Orangeville. They had been dispatched following a call to police from one of the residents of the home – the CW – reporting that he had been assaulted by the Complainant. The officers spoke to the CW outside the home and satisfied themselves there were grounds to arrest the Complainant for assault.
The officers were allowed into the home by the Complainant, at which time the SO advised her she was under arrest. The Complainant objected to her arrest, put her arms up and walked away from the officers towards the kitchen entrance. The SO caught up with the Complainant, took her by the right arm, and pinned her front-first against a wall. The Complainant attempted to free herself from the officer’s hold. Unable to do so, the Complainant dropped herself to the floor - the SO still holding her arm behind her - fracturing her right arm in the process.
An ambulance was called and the Complainant was taken to hospital where her injury was diagnosed.
At about 1:15 p.m. of January 25, 2023, the SO and WO #1 arrived at the Complainant’s residence in Orangeville. They had been dispatched following a call to police from one of the residents of the home – the CW – reporting that he had been assaulted by the Complainant. The officers spoke to the CW outside the home and satisfied themselves there were grounds to arrest the Complainant for assault.
The officers were allowed into the home by the Complainant, at which time the SO advised her she was under arrest. The Complainant objected to her arrest, put her arms up and walked away from the officers towards the kitchen entrance. The SO caught up with the Complainant, took her by the right arm, and pinned her front-first against a wall. The Complainant attempted to free herself from the officer’s hold. Unable to do so, the Complainant dropped herself to the floor - the SO still holding her arm behind her - fracturing her right arm in the process.
An ambulance was called and the Complainant was taken to hospital where her injury was diagnosed.
Relevant Legislation
Section 25(1), Criminal Code -- Protection of Persons Acting Under Authority
25 (1) Every one who is required or authorized by law to do anything in the administration or enforcement of the law
(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,
is, if he acts on reasonable grounds, justified in doing what he is required or authorized to do and in using as much force as is necessary for that purpose.
Analysis and Director's Decision
The Complainant was seriously injured while being arrested by OPP officers in Orangeville on January 25, 2023. One of the officers – 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 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 officers were lawfully placed, having been invited into her home, and were within their rights in seeking to arrest the Complainant. Based on the information they had received from the CW, there were grounds to reasonably believe that she had committed an assault.
I am also satisfied that the SO used no more force than was necessary in the course of the Complainant’s arrest. The Complainant attempted to prevent her arrest by moving away from the officers. In the circumstances, the SO was entitled to take firm hold of her right arm and place it behind her back as he pinned her to the wall and prepared to place the Complainant in handcuffs. Regrettably, the Complainant continued to resist arrest and ultimately dropped her weight to the floor. The countervailing forces inherent in that action with the SO still holding the Complainant’s arm behind the back is what appears to have resulted in the fracture, not any excessive or unwarranted force on the part of the officer.
The Complainant’s rendition of events is one which remains insufficient to reasonably give rise to potential criminal liability. Her account is belied by the eyewitness evidence of WO #1 and utterances made by the SO to a superior officer later that same day, each asserting that the broken bone happened when the Complainant, of her own volition, dropped to the floor. On this record, the Complainant’s evidence is no more likely than that of the officers’ to be closer to the truth and falls short of justifying criminal charges.
In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO comported himself other than lawfully in his engagement with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: May 25, 2023
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
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 officers were lawfully placed, having been invited into her home, and were within their rights in seeking to arrest the Complainant. Based on the information they had received from the CW, there were grounds to reasonably believe that she had committed an assault.
I am also satisfied that the SO used no more force than was necessary in the course of the Complainant’s arrest. The Complainant attempted to prevent her arrest by moving away from the officers. In the circumstances, the SO was entitled to take firm hold of her right arm and place it behind her back as he pinned her to the wall and prepared to place the Complainant in handcuffs. Regrettably, the Complainant continued to resist arrest and ultimately dropped her weight to the floor. The countervailing forces inherent in that action with the SO still holding the Complainant’s arm behind the back is what appears to have resulted in the fracture, not any excessive or unwarranted force on the part of the officer.
The Complainant’s rendition of events is one which remains insufficient to reasonably give rise to potential criminal liability. Her account is belied by the eyewitness evidence of WO #1 and utterances made by the SO to a superior officer later that same day, each asserting that the broken bone happened when the Complainant, of her own volition, dropped to the floor. On this record, the Complainant’s evidence is no more likely than that of the officers’ to be closer to the truth and falls short of justifying criminal charges.
In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO comported himself other than lawfully in his engagement with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: May 25, 2023
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
Endnotes
- 1) The information in this section reflects the information received by the SIU at the time of notification and does not necessarily reflect the SIU’s finding of facts following its investigation. [Back to text]
- 2) The following records contain sensitive personal information and are not being released pursuant to section 34(2) of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019. The material portions of the records are summarized below. [Back to text]
Note:
The signed English original report is authoritative, and any discrepancy between that report and the French and English online versions should be resolved in favour of the original English report.