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 death of a 19-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU

On September 9, 2023, at 8:00 p.m., the Niagara Parks Police Service (NPPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

At 7:07 p.m., September 9, 2023, WO #1 and his recruit, the SO, were searching for a reportedly suicidal male, the Complainant, who was from Toronto. WO #1 and the SO located the Complainant at River Road and Hiram Street, Niagara Falls. The officers attempted to engage the Complainant in dialogue, but he jumped over a barrier and fell into the Niagara gorge.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 09/09/2023 at 8:22 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 09/09/2023 at 10:00 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

The Scene

The events in question transpired on the east side (river side) of River Road just north of Hiram Street, Niagara Falls.

On September 9, 2023, SIU forensic investigators arrived at the scene at about 10:00 p.m. The scene was protected by NPPS and Niagara Regional Police Service (NRPS) police officers. The road was closed, and pedestrians were directed around the scene.

River Road was a winding north-south road with one lane of traffic in each direction. The road followed the Niagara River on the east. There was a hotel – the Travelodge – along the west side of the road with balconies overlooking River Road.

Information was received that the Complainant’s body had been recovered from the escarpment by local firefighters. The Niagara River was at the bottom of the escarpment and the bank ascended to River Road. The bank was a combination of long straight drops and steep embankments. It was estimated to be over 30 metres to the river. The body of the Complainant had been placed on the northbound lane of the roadway and covered with a blanket. The coroner was on scene.

At approximately 10:10 p.m., the coroner examined the body, and photographs of the body were recorded. The body was that of a male of approximately 20-years-old. He wore dark pants, a dark shirt and running shoes, and had short dark hair. There were numerous scrapes and bruises to his body and head. A wallet was in his right front pant pocket and contained identification in the Complainant’s name.

There was one police vehicle reportedly involved in the incident and it was parked in the northbound lane north of the body. The vehicle was a fully marked NPPS Ford Explorer. The position of the vehicle was photographed.

Firefighters indicated the area where they descended down the escarpment to recover the body. This area was a few metres north of the intersection of Hiram Street and River Road. There was a white, over-ear, wireless set of headphones on the sidewalk at this location. The sidewalk was raised approximately .28 metres from the roadway. There was a one-metre-high stone wall between the east sidewalk and the gorge. Someone climbing over the wall would find a landing area on the other side varying from an immediate drop to two metres. The landing area was covered with vines and brush.

The scene was photographed capturing the overall location and the gorge on the other side of the wall.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [1]

Video Footage – Travelodge – 5599 River Road, Niagara Falls

At four minutes and 51 seconds into the video, a marked police vehicle [now known to be a NPPS vehicle operated by WO #1] stopped in the northbound lane of River Road, near the Travelodge Hotel.
At four minutes and 57 seconds, a man [now known to be the Complainant] was captured walking southbound away from the police vehicle.
At four minutes and 59 seconds, the Complainant took off a pair of headphones and ran southbound.
At five minutes and one second, the Complainant disappeared from the camera frame as the SO ran southbound into the camera frame. WO #1 exited the police vehicle and ran southbound out of the camera frame.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with a police and non-police eyewitness, and video footage that captured the incident in parts, gives rise to the following scenario. As was her legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU. She did authorize the release of her notes.

In the evening of September 9, 2023, the NPPS, acting on information provided by the NRPS, were on the lookout for the Complainant. Earlier that day, the Complainant’s father had contacted police to report he had found a suicide note at his son’s residence in Toronto. The police had pinged the Complainant’s cell phone and found it to be in Niagara Falls.

The SO and her partner and coach officer at the time, WO #1, were among the officers searching for the Complainant. Following additional pings of the Complainant’s phone indicating he was in the vicinity of River Road and Hiram Street, the officers travelled to the area and located him. He was walking south on the east sidewalk (river side) of River Road. WO #1 drove north and stopped the police cruiser beside the Complainant. From the passenger seat, the SO asked the Complainant for his name. He replied by providing a false name. Satisfied the individual was, in fact, the Complainant, the SO exited the cruiser to speak with him. As she did so, the Complainant immediately ran south away from the officer.

The Complainant ran a short distance towards the metre-high retaining wall that separated the sidewalk from the steep escarpment that fell to the Niagara River below and jumped over. The SO yelled at him as he ran to stop but was no closer than about two to three metres when the Complainant disappeared over the wall.

A NPPS rappel team were quickly on scene and made their way down the escarpment. The Complainant was discovered vital signs absent. With the assistance of firefighters, the Complainant was lifted to the surface. He was subsequently pronounced deceased at the scene.

Sections 219 and 220, Criminal Code -- Criminal Negligence Causing Death

(a) in doing anything, or

(b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,

220 Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and

(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

The Complainant passed way when he jumped down the Niagara River escarpment on September 9, 2023. As NPPS police officers briefly interacted with him moments before his jump, 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 Complainant’s death.
The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing death contrary to section 220 of the Criminal Code. The offence is reserved for serious cases of neglect that demonstrate a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked and substantial departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. In the instant case, the question is whether there was a want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the Complainant’s death. In my view, there was not.

The SO was lawfully placed when she spoke with the Complainant and exited her cruiser to approach him. The officer, whose foremost duty was the protection and preservation of life, was duty bound to do what she reasonably could to locate the Complainant and ensure no harm came to him.

I am also satisfied that the SO comported herself with due care and regard for the Complainant’s well-being throughout their brief engagement. The SO had only just satisfied herself that the Complainant was the person they were searching for when the Complainant, leaving the officer no opportunity to intervene, bolted towards the retaining wall and climbed over. While it may be true that the officer’s overtures might have been the final impetus for the Complainant’s fateful act, that alone is far from enough to attract liability in this case. Given what the officer knew of his suicidal ideations, non-action in the moment might just as likely have risked harm coming to the Complainant.

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 her dealings with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case. The file is closed.



Date: January 5, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit