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 injuries of a 26-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU [1]

On February 8, 2023, at 6:04 a.m., the Toronto Police Service (TPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

Earlier that day, at 12:45 a.m., uniform officers responded to a domestic disturbance at an apartment on Ellesmere Road, Toronto. Upon arrival, officers announced their presence and heard yelling within the apartment. A woman [CW #2] partially opened the door with the security chain engaged. She told the officers that a man - the Complainant – was inside, and he was armed with a knife. CW #2 closed the door and officers forced it open. At that time, the Complainant went onto the apartment balcony and tried to escape but lost his grip and fell to the ground. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responded and transported the Complainant to the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (SHSC) with serious internal and spinal cord injuries.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around an apartment. The address was a high-rise apartment building on Ellesmere Road in Toronto. The front entrance faced onto Ellesmere Road. All apartments had balconies that were connected to the interior of the unit via a lockable door. Each balcony was covered with nylon-netting to keep birds out.

The ground around the building was partially grass-covered and soft due to the mild winter. There were several pieces of clothing on the ground that appeared to have been cut away from the Complainant’s body by EMS. Next to the clothing was a small area of blood and pieces of the balcony netting.

The west section of the balconies to three apartments revealed a large hole in the netting.

The interior hallway door to the apartment revealed no signs of damage or forced entry.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]

Police BWC Footage

On February 8, 2023, TPS provided the SIU with the footage from the BWCs of WO #1, WO #2, WO #4 and WO #3. The video, date and time-stamped, was of good quality. The following is a summary of the cumulative footage.

On February 8, 2023, starting at about 12:54 a.m., WO #1 and WO #2 arrived at the door to the apartment. They were accompanied by CW #3 and CW #4. The officers listened to what sounded like a commotion inside the apartment. The Complainant could be heard yelling at CW #2.

WO #2 knocked on the door and announced, “It’s the police.” CW #2 responded, “Hi, how can I help you?” WO #2 asked, “Can you open the door, please?” CW #2 asked, “For what reason?” WO #2 replied, “There is a 911 call for this address.” CW #2 requested a few minutes so she could get her inhaler as she was having a bout of asthma. WO #2 asked if the Complainant was with her and CW #2 said he was not. At that time, TPS WO #4 and WO #3 arrived.

Starting at about 12:57 a.m., CW #2 opened the door with the security-chain in place and was asked who was with her. She said, “Nobody,” despite an obvious male voice. WO #2 pressed her about hearing a male voice and CW #2 responded that there was nothing going on. WO #2 told her that they needed to enter to make sure that everything was okay, and CW #2 requested a few more minutes to put herself together. She then closed and locked the door.

A few minutes passed and CW #2 opened the door and TPS officers entered. On the living room floor was blood and CW #2 admitted that it was hers. WO #4 went to the balcony and called out, “Where are you at?” He did not get a response and returned inside. TPS officers searched the unit. CW #4 then went out onto the balcony.

Starting at about 1:00 a.m., WO #4 and WO #1 returned to the living room and CW #4 told them, “He’s outside, he jumped down. He’s over here. He made a hole there, and he jumped down. He probably broke his leg. He’s on the floor.” Officers went to the balcony and looked down to the Complainant. They expressed shock and rushed down the stairway to the ground, while WO #1, and CW #4 and CW #3, remained in the apartment with CW #2.

Starting at about 1:01 a.m., WO #1 reported the situation on his police radio. He went onto the balcony to meet CW #2, who looked downward to the ground.

WO #4 requested EMS. A TPS officer transmitted on his radio that the Complainant was conscious and breathing, and that he had fallen from the sixth-floor balcony.

The material events in question, clear on the evidence collected by the SIU, may briefly be summarized.

In the early morning of February 8, 2023, TPS officers were dispatched to apartment on Ellesmere Road in connection with a domestic disturbance. A tenant in another apartment had contacted authorities about shouting from the apartment and a woman she could hear yelling, “Stop.”

The first TPS officers – WO #1 and WO #2 – arrived at the door of the apartment at about 12:55 a.m. CW #2 answered the door, opening it partially with the security chain still engaged. She told the officers she was okay and that the Complainant was not there. When the officers insisted they would have to enter, CW #2 fully opened the door.

Aware that police officers were at the door, the Complainant had fled to the balcony where he planned to scale down balcony netting to avoid apprehension. In the process, the Complainant fell and landed on the ground below. The Complainant was already on the balcony attempting to escape, and may have even fallen, by the time of the officers’ entry into the apartment.

Officers entered the apartment, searched it, and eventually came to learn that the Complainant had fallen.

The Complainant was transported to hospital and diagnosed with multiple internal injuries.

On February 8, 2023, the TPS contacted the SIU to report that a male - the Complainant – had earlier that day suffered serious injuries while attempting to evade arrest. The SIU initiated an investigation, which is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any police officer committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s injuries.

The officers who attended at CW #2’s apartment were engaged in the lawful course of their duties at the time of the Complainant’s fateful decision. A police officer’s foremost obligation is the protection and preservation of life. Hearing of the domestic disturbance inside the apartment, and then personally observing CW #2’s condition when she partially opened the door, the officers were duty bound to attend at the address and attempt to gain entry to do what they could to prevent harm from materializing.

Having arrived at the apartment, there is no evidence that any of the attending officers failed to comport themselves with due care and regard for public safety. They knocked on the door, spoke with CW #2, convinced her to open the door, and then promptly searched the residence before learning that the Complainant had fallen. In fact, there is every possibility that the Complainant’s fall occurred prior to the officers’ entry into the apartment. On this record, there is no question of any want of care on the part of the police causing or contributing to the Complainant’s injuries.

In the final analysis, aside from being the impetus for the Complainant’s reckless decision to attempt to scale down the building’s balconies, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any of the officers who attended at the apartment transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.


Date: June 8, 2023

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit