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 39-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU [1]

On March 1, 2023, at 4:50 p.m., the London Police Service (LPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

Sometime around 2:00 p.m., the Subject Official (SO) and Witness Official (WO) #4 were on foot patrol near the downtown London Public Library when they learned of a reported assault committed by the Complainant. The officers located the Complainant and a struggle ensued when they attempted to arrest him. The Complainant was taken into custody and transported to the LPS detention unit. He subsequently complained of chest pain and was sent to the London Health Sciences Centre, Victoria Hospital, where he was diagnosed with three fractured ribs on the right side.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 03/01/2023 at 7:31 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 03/01/2023 at 7:40 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

The Scene

The events in question transpired just outside the front entrance of the London Public Library, Central Library, 251 Dundas Street, London.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [3]

London Public Library Video Footage

On March 3, 2023, at 12:17 p.m., the SIU obtained from the LPS pertinent video footage captured by a London Public Library camera.

Starting at about 1:23:35 p.m., March 1, 2023, CW #1 was seen outside from the main library doors. The Complainant crossed Dundas Street and spoke with CW #1 in front of the library.

Starting at about 1:26:50 p.m., the SO and WO #4 crossed Dundas Street towards the library and approached the Complainant. The Complainant was immediately grabbed and directed to the door of the library. The SO was on the Complainant’s left side, and WO #4 on the right. The Complainant’s hands were positioned beside or just above his head. Each LPS officer brought an arm behind the Complainant’s back, the SO with more difficulty. The Complainant turned towards the SO, and the officer delivered a left knee strike to the Complainant’s left side. The SO put his left arm around the Complainant’s neck area and began to pull him backward. WO #4 maintained his grip on the right arm. The Complainant resisted being moved backward and remained on his feet. The SO positioned himself in front of the Complainant, with his left arm still around the neck and shoulder area. WO #4 kept hold of the right arm. The SO delivered three punches with his right hand to the upper left side of the Complainant. With two hands on the shoulder area of the Complainant, the SO began to pull him away from the building and towards the ground. The SO had to reposition his grip, after which he and WO #4 brought the Complainant to the ground on his back. The Complainant had a hold of the door handle but lost his grip. Another two right-handed punches were delivered by the SO, but where the punches landed was blocked by WO #4’s body. The SO delivered a right knee strike, but where it struck could not be seen.

WO #3 arrived in an unmarked white SUV. He pulled up on Dundas Street and went to the scene of the arrest. The physical handcuffing process was not captured due to the number of people in the camera’s view causing an obstruction. Two LPS plainclothes officers had also arrived.

Later in the footage, the Complainant could be seen face down on the sidewalk handcuffed behind the back.

The material events in question, clear on the evidence collected by the SIU, may briefly be summarized. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did provide his notes and a statement.

In the early afternoon of March 1, 2023, the SO and WO #4 responded to a 911 call from a store on Dundas Street, London. The caller reported that a male – the Complainant – was yelling obscenities in front of a business and had pushed another male into a snowbank. The officers spoke with the 911 caller and then approached the Complainant on the other side of the street, in front of the London Public Library.

Told by the officers that he was under arrest and pushed up against the front doors of the library, the Complainant refused to surrender his arms to be handcuffed. WO #4 and the SO, standing to the Complainant’s right and left side, respectively, grabbed an arm. While WO #4 was able to wrestle the right arm behind the Complainant’s back, the SO had difficulty doing the same with the left. The officer delivered a knee strike into the Complainant’s left side, and followed by wrapping his arms around the Complainant’s neck in an effort to force him to the ground. The Complainant held onto the handle of a door and resisted the officer’s efforts to take him down. Following a series of punches to the head and upper body delivered by the SO, the Complainant was pulled away from the door onto the ground where the altercation continued for a short time. The SO punched at the Complainant twice more and struck him with a knee, after which the officers handcuffed him behind the back.

Following his arrest, the Complainant was taken to the police station and then to hospital where he was diagnosed with three right-sided rib fractures.

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 seriously injured in the course of his arrest by LPS officers on March 1, 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 injuries.

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.

The SO and WO #4 were within their rights in seeking to arrest the Complainant. Having interviewed an eyewitness, they had reasonable grounds to believe that the Complainant had just assaulted another male.

With respect to the force used by the SO in the Complainant’s arrest, I am unable to reasonably conclude that it was unlawful. From the outset, the Complainant resisted the officers’ efforts to take him into custody by refusing to give up his arms to be handcuffed. When, after a period, the SO was not able to pry the Complainant’s left arm behind the back, the officer was entitled to escalate his force to effect his purpose. It would not appear that the knee strike and punches delivered at this stage were disproportionate to the task at hand, particularly as the Complainant continued to grasp the door handle even after the punches had been struck. There followed a takedown to the ground, a reasonable tactic given the Complainant’s fight to that point; once on the ground, the officers could expect to better manage any continuing resistance by the Complainant. The SO punched at the Complainant twice more on the ground and struck him again with a knee before the Complainant was handcuffed. That force does not give the appearance of being excessive given the nature of the struggle unfolding at the time.

In the result, while I accept that the force used by the SO is responsible for fracturing the Complainant’s ribs, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the officer comported himself other than lawfully throughout their engagement. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges. The file is closed.


Date: June 23, 2023

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit