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 injury of a 48-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU [1]

On October 11, 2023, at 7:43 a.m., the Timmins Police Service (TPS) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant.

According to the TPS, on October 10, 2023, at 9:13 p.m., they responded to a residence in the area of Father Costello Drive, Timmins, where the Complainant was arrested for domestic assault. He was transported to TPS Headquarters and lodged in a cell shortly after 9:23 p.m. Though reported under the influence of alcohol, he was observed in good health at 10:00 p.m. At approximately 10:20 p.m., the Complainant was observed on cell video cameras to be hanging from his T-shirt, which was wrapped around his neck and attached to the cell door. The cell officer responded, and the T-shirt was cut and removed to allow for entry into the cell area. The Complainant was found with vital signs absent and emergency medical services (EMS) were summoned to respond. The Complainant was transported by EMS to Timmins and District Hospital (TDH) where he was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. He was reportedly on a ventilator and unresponsive.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 10/11/2023 at 9:10 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 10/11/2023 at 7:15 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

The Scene

This incident occurred in the TPS cell blocks. The cell contained a concrete bench and a latrine, and was encompassed by concrete block walls and secured by a sliding, barred door.


Figure 1 - The cell where the Complainant was lodged

The Complainant was arrested for assault in the evening of October 10, 2023. Officers called to a residence in the area of Father Costello Drive, Timmins, in relation to a domestic disturbance had taken the Complainant into custody.

The Complainant was intoxicated and emotionally distraught. While en route to the police station, he made a comment to the transporting officer – WO #1 – that he wanted to die.

At the station, WO #1 conveyed the Complainant’s comment to the booking officer – the SO. The SO asked about the remark and the Complainant explained that he would place his head under the wheel of a transport truck if his girlfriend did not return to him.

The Complainant was lodged in a cell at about 9:36 p.m. Some four minutes later, he fashioned a ligature with his T-shirt and wrapped it around the cell bars. The CW, the detainee in an adjacent cell, noticed what the Complainant was doing and convinced him to stop. The SO had also seen it via video monitor. He attended the cells and cautioned the Complainant he would be stripped of his clothing if he tried it again. The Complainant told the SO he wanted to die but stated he would “behave” himself. The officer left.

At about 10:20 p.m., the Complainant again wrapped his T-shirt around the cell bars and twisted his head through an opening in the shirt, after which he allowed his body to drop into a seated positioned. His back was to the cell bars. He remained in that position for about five minutes before the SO re-appeared.

The SO had noticed the Complainant’s peculiar position on video monitor and gone to the cells to check on him. Quickly realizing the Complainant was hanging, the officer cut the T-shirt from the cell bars and entered to render aid.

Paramedics arrived on scene within minutes and took charge of the Complainant’s care. He was taken to hospital and treated for brain injury.

Section 215, Criminal Code - Failure to Provide Necessaries

(c) to provide necessaries of life to a person under his charge if that person

(i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, illness, mental disorder or other cause, to withdraw himself from that charge, and

(ii) is unable to provide himself with necessaries of life.

(b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (1)(c), the failure to perform the duty endangers the life of the person to whom the duty is owed or causes or is likely to cause the health of that person to be injured permanently.

Sections 219 and 221, Criminal Code -- Criminal Negligence Causing Bodily Harm

(a) in doing anything, or

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

(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years; or 

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

The Complainant was seriously injured while in the custody of the TPS on October 10, 2023. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation naming 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 matter.

The offences that arise for consideration are failure to provide the necessaries of life and criminal negligence causing bodily harm contrary to sections 215 and 221 of the Criminal Code, respectively. Both require something more than a simple want of care to give rise to liability. The former is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. The latter is premised on even more egregious conduct that demonstrates a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is not made out unless the neglect constitutes a marked and substantial departure from a reasonable standard of care. In the instant case, the question is whether there was any want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently serious to attract criminal sanction, that endangered the Complainant’s life or contributed to his injury. In my view, there was not.

There are no issues in the evidence with respect to the lawfulness of the Complainant’s arrest. It appears he was legally taken into custody for a domestic-related incident and appropriately lodged in cells.

With respect to the care the Complainant was afforded during his brief time in cells, I am satisfied that the SO comported himself with due regard for his health and safety. The SO had inquired about the suicidal comment the Complainant made while en route to the station and satisfied himself he was not at immediate risk of self-harm. That judgment, in my view, is entitled to some deference. That might not have been the case had the SO known of the Complainant’s history of suicidal ideation, including an incident in the very same police cells the month before, but the evidence indicates he did not know that history, nor had the prior incident been flagged in the Complainant’s record. The same might be said of the officer’s conduct after first confronting the Complainant in cells about the initial suicide attempt. In retrospect, the officer would have been better served to take additional steps to prevent a further suicide attempt at that time – he was now aware of the comment in the cruiser and an actual act of attempted self-harm. He chose, instead, to caution the Complainant and rely on his assurance that his behaviour would stop. Whatever the merits of that judgement, I am unable to reasonably conclude that it rendered the SO’s conduct a marked departure from a reasonable standard of care. In arriving at that conclusion, I am mindful that the officer, despite being occupied with other duties, was alert to the Complainant’s predicament in fairly short order and thereafter acted quickly to cut the ligature and provide care.

For the foregoing reasons, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case against the SO. The file is closed.


Date: February 7, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit