SIU Director’s Report - Case # 23-OVI-232
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 serious injuries sustained by a 24-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 serious injuries sustained by a 24-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).
The Investigation
Notification of the SIU [1]
On June 18, 2023, at 12:09 p.m., the Peel Regional Police (PRP) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant. According to the PRP, on June 18, 2023, at 4:46 a.m., the Subject Official (SO) attempted to stop a vehicle that the Complainant was a passenger in. The vehicle, driven by Civilian Witness (CW) #1, fled the traffic stop. The SO stopped before continuing in the direction of CW #1’s vehicle. Approximately 2.5 kilometres away, the SO located a motor vehicle collision involving CW #1’s vehicle and a second vehicle driven by CW #3. CW #1 was taken to PRP 12 Division and all others went to Trillium Health Partners - Mississauga General Hospital (MGH). The Complainant was transferred to Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (SHSC) with spinal and rib fractures and a lacerated liver.
The Team
Date and time team dispatched: 06/18/2023 at 12:40 p.m.Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 06/18/2023 at 2:17 p.m.
Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1
Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):
24-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewedThe Complainant was interviewed on June 24, 2023.
Civilian Witnesses (CW)
CW #1 Interviewed CW #2 Interviewed
CW #3 Interviewed
The civilian witnesses were interviewed between June 18, 2023, and June 22, 2023.
Subject Officials (SO)
SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal rightWitness Officials (WO)
WO #1 Interviewed WO #2 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #3 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #4 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #5 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #6 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #7 Not interviewed; interview deemed unnecessary
WO #1 was interviewed on July 4, 2023.
Evidence
The Scene
The events in question transpired over a stretch of Dixie Road, Mississauga, beginning in the area of the roadway’s intersection with Mid-Way Boulevard and terminating in the area of the roadway’s intersection with Shawson Drive.SIU attended the scene beginning at 2:17 p.m. The traffic light-controlled multi-lane intersection consisted of Dixie Road running north/south and Shawson Drive running east/west. The area was a mix of industrial and commercial properties.
Physical Evidence
CW #3’s 2015 Hyundai SFT
The SO’s Police Vehicle
2015 Audi S5T
Forensic Evidence
Event Data Recorder Data - 2015 Audi S5T
The data downloaded from the Audi’s Event Data Recorder yielded the following information:- At five seconds prior to impact, the vehicle was travelling at 223 km/h.
- At four seconds prior to impact, the brake was off and the vehicle was travelling at 218 km/h.
- Between 3.5 to 0.5 seconds prior to impact, the brake was applied, and the vehicle slowed from 217 to 160 km/h.
- At impact, the brake was applied, and the vehicle was travelling at 159 km/h.
GPS Data - the SO’s Police Vehicle
The GPS data associated with the SO’s police vehicle yielded the following information:
Cross-referencing the GPS data with Google Earth yielded the following results:
- At about 4:37 a.m., the SO was stationary on Derry Road at Dixie Road.
- Between about 4:38 to 4:39 a.m., the SO was southbound on Dixie Road, south of Derry Road.
- Between about 4:41 to 4:43 a.m., the SO was stationary on Dixie Road north of Mid-Way Boulevard.
- At 4:44 a.m., the SO was southbound on Dixie Road.
- At 4:47 a.m., the the SO was stationary on Dixie Road south of Shawson Drive, the location of the motor vehicle collision.
Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]
Video Footage - 5890 Dixie Road
The camera was located approximately 270 metres north of the intersection of Dixie Road and Shawson Drive. At 3:45:16 a.m. (per the recording’s time-stamp), CW #1’s vehicle was captured southbound on Dixie Road at a high rate of speed.
Figure 4 - Screenshot from the video footage depicting CW #1's vehicle travelling southbound
At 3:45:41 a.m., the SO’s police vehicle was southbound on Dixie Road at a much slower speed and at a speed consistent with other vehicles.
Figure 5 - Screenshot from the video footage depicting the SO’s police vehicle travelling southbound
Video Footage - 5850 Dixie Road
At 4:44:10 a.m., CW #3 was captured westbound on Shawson Drive approaching Dixie Road at a speed consistent with other vehicles. At 4:44:14 a.m., CW #3 entered the intersection at Dixie Road on a green light.
At 4:44:15 a.m., CW #1 was southbound on Dixie Road at a high rate of speed.
At 4:44:17 a.m., CW #1 entered the intersection of Dixie Road and Shawson Drive and impacted CW #3’s vehicle. CW #1’s vehicle spun and struck a traffic light standard on the southwest corner before disappearing out of camera view.
At 4:44:39 a.m., the SO was southbound on Dixie Road, at a speed consistent with other vehicles, and approaching Shawson Drive. The SO turned on the emergency flashing lights as he arrived at the collision scene.
Communications Recordings
At 4:45 a.m., the SO reported a motor vehicle collision at Dixie Road and Shawson Drive. He requested an ambulance and reported one female in the back seat passed out, one female in the front seat with injuries, and CW #1 was taking off.
At 4:47 a.m., the SO had CW #1 in custody.
Telephone
At 4:46 a.m., PRP Communications Centre called Peel Region Paramedic Services and requested two ambulances.
Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage
The BWC videos were reviewed and determined to be of no evidentiary value as they did not capture the events that form the subject of this investigation. Materials Obtained from Police Service
The SIU obtained the following records from the PRP between June 19, 2023, and July 25, 2023:- Occurrence Report;
- Involved Officers - Names and Roles;
- Witness List;
- Incident History;
- Incident Details;
- Person Details Report- CW #1;
- Person Details Report- the Complainant;
- Police Vehicle GPS data;
- Motor Vehicle Collision Report;
- Video footage;
- Communications recordings;
- Policy-Suspect Apprehension Pursuit; and
- BWC footage.
Materials Obtained from Other Sources
The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources:- Video footage – Dixie Road;
- The Complainant’s medical records from MGH, received July 7, 2023; and
- The Complainant’s medical records from SHSC, received July 17, 2023.
Incident Narrative
The evidence collected by the SIU, including an interview with the Complainant and video footage that captured the incident in parts, 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.
In the early morning hours of June 18, 2023, CW #1 was operating a stolen Audi vehicle southbound on Dixie Road. With him in the front passenger seat was CW #2 and, in the rear passenger side seat, the Complainant. Just north of Mid-Way Boulevard, their vehicle was pulled over by a police officer operating a marked PRP cruiser.
The SO had observed the Audi speeding southbound on Dixie Road in the area of Derry Road and decided to stop the vehicle to issue a speeding ticket. The Audi came to a stop and remained stopped for a short period before it fled southbound on Dixie Road away from the officer. The SO accelerated after the Audi but quickly realized he was not gaining on the vehicle and began to slow down.
CW #1 travelled at incredibly high speed, at times north of 200 km/h, as he continued south on Dixie Road. About two-and-a-half kilometres from Mid-Way Boulevard, he entered the Shawson Drive intersection on a red light and collided with a westbound vehicle. Both vehicles came to rest in and around the intersection. The time was about 4:44 a.m.
Between 20 and 30 seconds after the collision, the SO, who had continued south on Dixie Road at moderate speed, arrived at Shawson Drive. He observed CW #1 walking away from the scene but was able to catch up to him and take him into custody.
The Complainant was the only person to have sustained serious injuries in the collision: a spinal fracture, multiple rib fractures, and a liver laceration.
In the early morning hours of June 18, 2023, CW #1 was operating a stolen Audi vehicle southbound on Dixie Road. With him in the front passenger seat was CW #2 and, in the rear passenger side seat, the Complainant. Just north of Mid-Way Boulevard, their vehicle was pulled over by a police officer operating a marked PRP cruiser.
The SO had observed the Audi speeding southbound on Dixie Road in the area of Derry Road and decided to stop the vehicle to issue a speeding ticket. The Audi came to a stop and remained stopped for a short period before it fled southbound on Dixie Road away from the officer. The SO accelerated after the Audi but quickly realized he was not gaining on the vehicle and began to slow down.
CW #1 travelled at incredibly high speed, at times north of 200 km/h, as he continued south on Dixie Road. About two-and-a-half kilometres from Mid-Way Boulevard, he entered the Shawson Drive intersection on a red light and collided with a westbound vehicle. Both vehicles came to rest in and around the intersection. The time was about 4:44 a.m.
Between 20 and 30 seconds after the collision, the SO, who had continued south on Dixie Road at moderate speed, arrived at Shawson Drive. He observed CW #1 walking away from the scene but was able to catch up to him and take him into custody.
The Complainant was the only person to have sustained serious injuries in the collision: a spinal fracture, multiple rib fractures, and a liver laceration.
Relevant Legislation
Section 320.13, Criminal Code – Dangerous operation causing bodily harm
320.13 (1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.
(2) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public and, as a result, causes bodily harm to another person.
Analysis and Director's Decision
The Complainant was seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision on June 18, 2023. As the vehicle she was in had been briefly pursued moments prior to the collision, the SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation. The SO was identified as the subject official. 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 collision.
The offence that arises for consideration is dangerous driving causing bodily harm contrary to section 320.13(2) of the Criminal Code. As an offence of penal negligence, a simple want of care will not suffice to give rise to liability. Rather, the offence is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have observed in the circumstances. In the instant case, the issue is whether there was a want of care in the manner in which the SO operated his vehicle, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the collision. In my view, there was not.
There is nothing to suggest that the SO’s decision to stop the Audi for speeding was unlawful. Though the officer did not come in for an interview or authorize the release of his notes, he authored an occurrence report in which he indicated as much, and there is no conflicting evidence on the matter.
With respect to the manner in which the officer operated his cruiser throughout his engagement with the Audi, I am satisfied that the SO comported himself with due care and regard for public safety. Though the SO reached very high speeds himself after the Audi took off from the traffic stop, he quickly thought better of it and began to slow down, disengaging from active pursuit. CW #1 was accelerating at breakneck speed and the officer’s continued engagement would have only added to the danger on the roadway without any real prospect of catching up to the Audi. During the officer’s period of acceleration of no more than one or two minutes, in which he topped out at about 152 km/h, there is no evidence that any traffic on the roadway was directly imperiled. In fact, traffic was light given the time of day. Moreover, there is no suggestion that the SO unduly pushed CW #1 or left him no real opportunity to scale down his speeds. The evidence indicates that the officer was well back of the Audi at the time of the collision, and had been so for at least the last kilometre before the Shawson Drive intersection.
In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in his brief pursuit of CW #1 and the Audi, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: October 16, 2023
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
The offence that arises for consideration is dangerous driving causing bodily harm contrary to section 320.13(2) of the Criminal Code. As an offence of penal negligence, a simple want of care will not suffice to give rise to liability. Rather, the offence is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have observed in the circumstances. In the instant case, the issue is whether there was a want of care in the manner in which the SO operated his vehicle, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the collision. In my view, there was not.
There is nothing to suggest that the SO’s decision to stop the Audi for speeding was unlawful. Though the officer did not come in for an interview or authorize the release of his notes, he authored an occurrence report in which he indicated as much, and there is no conflicting evidence on the matter.
With respect to the manner in which the officer operated his cruiser throughout his engagement with the Audi, I am satisfied that the SO comported himself with due care and regard for public safety. Though the SO reached very high speeds himself after the Audi took off from the traffic stop, he quickly thought better of it and began to slow down, disengaging from active pursuit. CW #1 was accelerating at breakneck speed and the officer’s continued engagement would have only added to the danger on the roadway without any real prospect of catching up to the Audi. During the officer’s period of acceleration of no more than one or two minutes, in which he topped out at about 152 km/h, there is no evidence that any traffic on the roadway was directly imperiled. In fact, traffic was light given the time of day. Moreover, there is no suggestion that the SO unduly pushed CW #1 or left him no real opportunity to scale down his speeds. The evidence indicates that the officer was well back of the Audi at the time of the collision, and had been so for at least the last kilometre before the Shawson Drive intersection.
In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in his brief pursuit of CW #1 and the Audi, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: October 16, 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.