SIU Director’s Report - Case # 23-OCI-342
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 25-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 25-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).
The Investigation
Notification of the SIU [1]
On August 22, 2023, at 3:36 a.m., the Brantford Police Service (BPS) notified the SIU of an injury. According to the BPS, on August 22, 2023, at approximately 12:30 a.m., the BPS received a 911 call regarding a male and female fighting inside a vehicle in the area of an address on Peel Street. The male had left the area on the arrival of police. Officers attempted to arrest the female – the Complainant - for having care and control of a motor vehicle while intoxicated; a struggle ensued. The Complainant was eventually taken into custody with what appeared to be a fractured left arm. She was subsequently transported to hospital by paramedics and diagnosed with a left mid-shaft fracture.
The Team
Date and time team dispatched: 08/22/2023 at 9:52 a.m.Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 08/22/2023 at 12:46 p.m.
Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1
Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):
25-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewedThe Complainant was interviewed on August 22, 2023.
Civilian Witnesses
CW #1 InterviewedCW #2 Interviewed
CW #3 Interviewed
CW #4 Interviewed
CW #5 Interviewed
CW #6 Interviewed
The civilian witnesses were interviewed between August 22 and August 24, 2023.
Subject Official
SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal rightWitness Officials
WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewedWO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed
WO #3 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed
WO #4 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed
The witness officials were interviewed between August 22 and September 6, 2023.
Evidence
The Scene
The events in question transpired in and around a vehicle that was parked in the area of Peel Street, Brantford.Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]
Video Footage – Peel Street
The SIU received video footage from three separate cameras related to this matter. The combined footage shows that, starting at about 12:12:30 a.m., August 22, 2023, the Complainant’s vehicle was captured arriving and parking on Peel Street. She was eventually approached by several police officers. The Complainant exited the passenger side door and proceeded around the front of her car while yelling at a police officer [now known to be WO #3] to get away from her vehicle. WO #3 said, “Don't touch me,” and a scuffle ensued. The Complainant was seen on the ground. She was subsequently brought to her feet. She complained of not being able to breath, needing an inhaler, and sore wrists, and said, “You broke my arm.”
Video Footage - Residence #1
Starting at about 12:08:34 a.m., the Complainant’s vehicle arrived on Peel Street and parked. No one was seen exiting the vehicle. The Complainant’s vehicle headlights turned off.
Starting at about 12:32:54 a.m., police vehicles arrived in the area.
Starting at about 12:42:22 a.m., a lot of activity occurred in the middle of the road along the driver’s side of the Complainant’s vehicle and between a couple of the police vehicles. The distance of the camera and headlight glare made the specific actions of any individual indiscernible.
Video Footage - Residence #2
Starting at about 00:00 minutes into the recording, the Complainant’s car was captured parked on a street. A marked police cruiser drove by from right to left on the screen.
Starting at about 01:37 minutes, a second marked police cruiser drove by in the same direction, followed by the arrival of an unmarked police cruiser. A police officer exited a cruiser with a flashlight in hand and approached the Complainant’s parked vehicle.
Starting at about 02:54 minutes, a fourth police cruiser arrived on scene. Three police officers were captured along the passenger side and front of the Complainant’s vehicle.
Starting at about 09:18 minutes, a female was heard saying, “Bullshit.” The Complainant exited her vehicle and walked from the passenger side around the front and out of view, saying, “Get away from my, get the fuck away from my car.”
Starting at about 09:55 minutes, a male was heard to say, “Don’t fucking touch me.” The Complainant yelled again, “Get away from my car.”
Starting at about 10:22 minutes, the Complainant said, “Why are you trying to hurt me? Why did you just throw me to the ground, I never threatened anybody.” The Complainant said, “I’m yelling because I can’t breathe, I have asthma, I need my inhaler.” A male replied, “Just relax.”
Starting at about 11:05 minutes, the Complainant was captured yelling and crying. She repeatedly said, “I didn't do anything wrong.” A male said, “Grow up.” The Complainant yelled, “My wrist.”
Starting at about 13:17 minutes, the Complainant said, “Let go of my arm.”
Starting at about 13:55 minutes, police officers and the Complainant came back into view; police officers were escorting or carrying her to one of the marked police vehicles.
Starting at about 14:05 minutes, the Complainant said, “You broke my arm.”
Private Residence #3
Between time mark 00:09 and 01:11 minutes, four police vehicles arrived on scene, including three marked cruisers and one unmarked.
At time mark 01:18 minutes, officers approached the Complainant’s vehicle on foot, one to the passenger side and one to the driver side.
At time mark 02:29 minutes, the Complainant exited the passenger side door and went around the front of her vehicle.
At time mark 02:33 minutes, a scuffle began which was difficult to see because of headlight glare.
At time mark 02:53 minutes, the scuffle continued with the Complainant on the ground in the middle of the roadway.
At time mark 03:09 minutes, the Complainant was escorted by several officers to a police vehicle.
Police Communications Recordings
On August 22, 2023, starting at about 12:29 a.m., the BPS received an anonymous complaint [now known to be made by CW #2] of a woman and a man fighting in a parked car out front of her home on Peel Street. The vehicle had been parked there for approximately five minutes.Starting at about 12:30:24 a.m., CW #2 indicated that she had seen the man punch the woman in the face.
Starting at about 12:32 a.m., the woman was said to be lying down on the passenger side.
Starting at about 12:34 a.m., BPS officers arrived on scene.
Starting at about 12:37 a.m., the Complainant indicated she was alone.
Starting at about 12:46 a.m., emergency medical services (EMS) was summoned to the scene for the Complainant. It was noted she had an injured left arm.
Materials Obtained from Police Service
Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from BPS between August 22 and August 25, 2023:- Communications recordings;
- General Occurrence Report;
- Supplementary Reports;
- Intoxilyzer results;
- Policies: Arrest, Security, Prisoner Care and Control, and Use of Force;
- Information from computer-assisted dispatch;
- Notes: WO #1, WO #2, WO #3, and WO #4; and
- Witness statement – CW #2.
Materials Obtained from Other Sources
The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between August 22 and August 25, 2023:- Brantford EMS Ambulance Call and Incident Reports;
- Video footage - Civilian #1;
- Video footage - CW #5;
- Video footage - Civilian #2; and
- The Complainant’s medical records - Brantford Community Healthcare System.
Incident Narrative
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and officers who participated in her arrest, and video footage that captured the incident in parts, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU or the release of his notes.
In the early morning hours of August 22, 2023, BPS officers were dispatched to Peel Street in Brantford. A 911 call had been received from an occupant of a residence on Peel Street of an altercation in a vehicle parked outside the home. A male sitting in the driver’s seat of the vehicle had reportedly punched a female in the front passenger seat.
The Complainant was the female sitting in the front passenger seat. There was no one occupying the driver's seat. When asked by responding officers about scratches to her face, the Complainant explained that her dog had caused them. She denied any assault. The Complainant became increasingly belligerent with the officers. When one of them – WO #3 – shone a flashlight into her vehicle, the Complainant exited, approached the officer, and pushed him in the chest. WO #3 pushed her away.
Observing what had just occurred with WO #3, the SO and WO #4 intervened and grabbed a hold of the Complainant. The Complainant struggled with the officers and was eventually grounded. She was placed under arrest and handcuffed to the front. With the SO at her left side and WO #1 by her right, the Complainant was escorted to a cruiser several metres away. She refused to walk and had to be carried by her arms. As they reached the cruiser, the Complainant’s left hand had managed to slip out of the handcuff, and she complained that her left arm was broken.
An ambulance attended the scene and transported the Complainant to hospital where she was diagnosed with a fractured left arm.
In the early morning hours of August 22, 2023, BPS officers were dispatched to Peel Street in Brantford. A 911 call had been received from an occupant of a residence on Peel Street of an altercation in a vehicle parked outside the home. A male sitting in the driver’s seat of the vehicle had reportedly punched a female in the front passenger seat.
The Complainant was the female sitting in the front passenger seat. There was no one occupying the driver's seat. When asked by responding officers about scratches to her face, the Complainant explained that her dog had caused them. She denied any assault. The Complainant became increasingly belligerent with the officers. When one of them – WO #3 – shone a flashlight into her vehicle, the Complainant exited, approached the officer, and pushed him in the chest. WO #3 pushed her away.
Observing what had just occurred with WO #3, the SO and WO #4 intervened and grabbed a hold of the Complainant. The Complainant struggled with the officers and was eventually grounded. She was placed under arrest and handcuffed to the front. With the SO at her left side and WO #1 by her right, the Complainant was escorted to a cruiser several metres away. She refused to walk and had to be carried by her arms. As they reached the cruiser, the Complainant’s left hand had managed to slip out of the handcuff, and she complained that her left arm was broken.
An ambulance attended the scene and transported the Complainant to hospital where she was diagnosed with a fractured left arm.
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 in the course of her arrest by BPS officers on August 22, 2023. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, naming one of the arresting officers – the SO – 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 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, including the SO, were lawfully placed throughout their engagement with the Complainant. Having been dispatched to the scene of a reported assault, the officers were duty bound to speak with the Complainant to ensure she was okay and investigate a potential offence. Thereafter, when the Complainant pushed WO #3, the officers were within their rights in arresting her for assault.
I am also satisfied that the force used by the SO and the other officers in aid of the Complainant’s arrest was legally justified. When the Complainant struggled with the officers as they intervened following her assault on WO #3, they were entitled to resort to a measure of force to press their objective. They did so, it seems to me, in a proportionate way – wrestling to take control of the Complainant and taking her to the ground where they could expect to better manage her continuing resistance. No strikes of any kind were delivered by the officers.
It remains unclear exactly how the Complainant’s left arm was broken given the nature and extent of the force used by the officers. It may be that the injury was the product of the officers having had to manipulate her arms to drag her to a waiting cruiser and a pre-existing condition that made her more susceptible to fractures. Be that as it may, as there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that the SO or any of the other involved officers comported themselves other than within the limits of the criminal law in their dealings with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: December 20, 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, including the SO, were lawfully placed throughout their engagement with the Complainant. Having been dispatched to the scene of a reported assault, the officers were duty bound to speak with the Complainant to ensure she was okay and investigate a potential offence. Thereafter, when the Complainant pushed WO #3, the officers were within their rights in arresting her for assault.
I am also satisfied that the force used by the SO and the other officers in aid of the Complainant’s arrest was legally justified. When the Complainant struggled with the officers as they intervened following her assault on WO #3, they were entitled to resort to a measure of force to press their objective. They did so, it seems to me, in a proportionate way – wrestling to take control of the Complainant and taking her to the ground where they could expect to better manage her continuing resistance. No strikes of any kind were delivered by the officers.
It remains unclear exactly how the Complainant’s left arm was broken given the nature and extent of the force used by the officers. It may be that the injury was the product of the officers having had to manipulate her arms to drag her to a waiting cruiser and a pre-existing condition that made her more susceptible to fractures. Be that as it may, as there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that the SO or any of the other involved officers comported themselves other than within the limits of the criminal law in their dealings with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: December 20, 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.