Director's Report Details

The Special Investigations Unit is a civilian law enforcement agency that investigates incidents involving police officers where there has been death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault. The Unit’s jurisdiction covers more than 50 municipal, regional and provincial police services across Ontario.

Under the Police Services Act, the Director of the SIU must determine based on the evidence gathered in an investigation whether an officer has committed a criminal offence in connection with the incident under investigation. If, after an investigation, there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence was committed, the Director has the authority to lay a criminal charge against the officer. Alternatively, in all cases where no reasonable grounds exist, the Director does not lay criminal charges but files a report with the Attorney General communicating the results of an investigation.

Freedom of Information and Protection of Personal Privacy Act (“FIPPA”)

Pursuant to section 14 of FIPPA (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 whose release could reasonably be expected to interfere with a law enforcement matter or an investigation undertaken with a view to a law enforcement proceeding.

Pursuant to section 21 of FIPPA (i.e., personal privacy), protected personal information is not included in this document. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• subject officer name(s)
• witness officer name(s)
• civilian witness name(s)
• 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 (“PHIPA”)

Pursuant to PHIPA, any information related to the personal health of identifiable individuals is not included.

Other proceedings, processes, and investigations

Information may have also 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.

The Unit’s investigative jurisdiction is limited to those incidents where there is a serious injury (including sexual assault allegations) or death in cases involving the police.

“Serious injuries” shall include those that are likely to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim and are more than merely transient or trifling in nature and will include serious injury resulting from sexual assault. “Serious Injury” shall initially be presumed when the victim is admitted to hospital, suffers a fracture to a limb, rib or vertebrae or to the skull, suffers burns to a major portion of the body or loses any portion of the body or suffers loss of vision or hearing, or alleges sexual assault. Where a prolonged delay is likely before the seriousness of the injury can be assessed, the Unit should be notified so that it can monitor the situation and decide on the extent of its involvement.

This report relates to the SIU’s investigation into the serious injuries sustained by a 17-year-old girl and a 17-year-old boy during a motor vehicle collision on May 17, 2017.

Notification of the SIU

On May 18, 2017, at 12:01 a.m., Peel Regional Police (PRP) notified the SIU of multiple vehicle collisions involving a PRP vehicle at Main Street North in Brampton and a vehicle injury to Complainant #1.

PRP reported that on May 17, 2017, the Subject Officer (SO) was driving a PRP cruiser and was involved in a collision with two other vehicles at the intersection of Main Street North and English Street in Brampton. Complainant #1 and the SO were being treated at the hospital. PRP advised that Complainant #1 had been diagnosed with a fractured right wrist.

The team

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 5

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2

Number of SIU Collision Reconstructionists assigned: 1

SIU Forensic Investigators responded to the scene and identified and preserved evidence. They documented the relevant scene associated with the incident by way of notes, photographs, sketches and measurements.

Complainant #1

17-year-old female interviewed, medical records obtained and reviewed

Complainant #2

7-year-old male interviewed, medical records obtained and reviewed

Civilian witnesses

CW Interviewed

Witness officers

WO #1 Interviewed

WO #2 Interviewed

Subject officers

SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject officer’s legal right.

During the evening of May 17, 2017, Complainant #2 was driving his Volkswagen Jetta on Main Street North in Brampton. As he passed a plaza located at 370 Main Street North, a black sports utility vehicle (SUV) exited the plaza and cut off Complainant #2. In order to avoid a collision, Complainant #2 swerved into the common merge lane between the north and south bound lanes of Main Street North and collided with Complainant #1, who was in her Toyota 4Runner in the merge lane. Complainant #2 then struck the SO’s cruiser, which had been travelling southbound on Main Street North at the time.

The driver of the black SUV did not remain at the scene. Complainant #1 was taken to the hospital, and diagnosed with a fracture to her right wrist. Complainant #2 also attended the hospital, and was diagnosed with a possible fractured nose.

The scene

The collision scene was located at Main Street North located between English Street and Archibald Street in Brampton. Main Street North is a five-lane paved asphalt road that travels in a north-west and south-east direction with a posted speed limit of 50 km/h.

A common merge lane separates the north and south bound lanes of Main Street North which allows vehicular movement in and out of the two plazas located to the east and west of Main Street North.

An examination of the vehicles involved in the collision revealed extensive damage to the front left and right fender of the Volkswagen Jetta, damage to the front right bumper of the Toyota 4Runner, and extensive damage to the left rear fender, bumper, and the trunk of the police vehicle.

Scene diagram

Video/audio/photographic evidence

The SIU canvassed the area for any video or audio recordings, and photographic evidence. The SIU received closed circuit television (CCTV) video recordings from a Brampton Transit (BT) bus travelling north on Main Street North, and photos taken by the CW.

BT CCTV

The BT CCTV depicted the following events:

• At 7:30 p.m., the BT bus travelled on the northbound curb lane of Main Street North
• At 7:34:11 p.m., the Volkswagen Jetta [later identified as driven by Complainant #2] travelled in the passing lane of Main Street North. An unknown sports utility vehicle (SUV) exited a plaza located at 370 Main Street North and drove in front of the Volkswagen Jetta. A Toyota 4Runner [later identified as driven by Complainant #1] was stationary on the common merge lane between the north and south bound lanes of Main Street North
• At 7:34:12 p.m., the Volkswagen Jetta swerved to the left into the common merge lane and collided with the Toyota 4Runner and further collided with a police vehicle [later identified as driven by the SO] on the passing southbound lane of Main Street North, and
• At 7:34:20 p.m., the unknown SUV reversed back into the plaza from the roadway

Communications recordings

Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Report

The SIU reviewed the CAD report from PRP. The CAD data obtained from PRP was consistent with the CCTV recordings from the BT bus.

Expert evidence

SIU Collision Reconstruction Analysis

On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at approximately 7:34 p.m., Complainant #2 drove a Volkswagen Jetta in the northbound passing lane of Main Street North. The weather conditions were dry.

As Complainant #2 approached the entrance of the plaza located at 370 Main Street North, an unknown SUV exited the plaza and drove in front of the Volkswagen Jetta.

In order to avoid a head-on collision with the unknown SUV, Complainant #2 swerved his Volkswagen Jetta to the left from the passing lane. The Volkswagen Jetta collided with Complainant #1’s Toyota 4Runner that was waiting in the common merge lane to turn into the same plaza from which the unknown SUV exited.

The Volkswagen Jetta deflected into the southbound passing lane of Main Street North after colliding with the right bumper of the Toyota 4Runner and collided with a PRP vehicle operated by the SO.

The impact with the Volkswagen Jetta caused the PRP police vehicle to rotate counterclockwise about its vertical axis. The PRP vehicle later came to a rest after colliding with a utility pole located on the west sidewalk of the southbound lanes.

The Airbag Control Module (ACM) of the PRP vehicle was downloaded and reviewed. The pre-crash data indicated that the speed of the PRP vehicle was 55 km/h and the service brake light was applied when it first collided with the Volkswagen Jetta.

The collision with the utility pole occurred approximately 2.4 seconds after the first collision and the speed of the PRP vehicle decreased from 54 km/h to 14 km/h and the service light was deactivated. This is consistent with the times obtained from the video recordings from the BT bus.

There was no ACM data from the Volkswagen Jetta.

Materials obtained from Police Service

Upon request the SIU obtained and reviewed the following materials and documents from the PRP

• CAD / Event Chronologies, and
• Notes of WO #1 and WO #2

On May 17^th, 2017 at approximately 7:34 p.m., a three vehicle collision occurred on Main Street North, between English and Archibald Streets, in the City of Brampton. The three vehicles involved were a Volkswagen Jetta, operated by Complainant #2 with the CW as his passenger, a Toyota 4Runner, operated by Complainant #1, and a PRP police cruiser operated by the SO. Complainant #2 and Complainant #1 suffered injuries as a result of the collision; Complainant #2 sustained an injury to his nose, which was possibly broken, and Complainant #1 sustained a fracture of the dorsum of the triquetral bone located in her right wrist.

During the course of this investigation, three civilian witnesses were interviewed and, although the SO declined to be interviewed or to provide his memo book entries for review, as was his legal right, investigators had access to CCTV footage from a BT bus in the area at the time which captured the entire sequence of events leading up to the collision. There is no dispute nor any confusion as to the facts.

On May 17^th, 2017 at approximately 7:34 p.m., Complainant #2 was travelling northbound on Main Street North when a black SUV, operated by an unidentified driver, failed to yield the right of way to Complainant #2 as it exited the plaza at 370 Main Street North in an attempt to turn south. The SUV entered Main Street North directly in front of the motor vehicle of Complainant #2, forcing Complainant #2 to take evasive action in order to avoid colliding with the SUV. Complainant #2 then swerved to the left and his motor vehicle entered the common merge lane where Complainant #1 had her Toyota 4Runner stopped, waiting to make a left turn into the plaza. Complainant #2’s Jetta then struck Complainant #1’s Toyota and then travelled on, striking the SO’s police cruiser which had been in the southbound passing lane of Main Street North. The unidentified SUV then reversed back into the plaza and left the scene prior to the arrival of investigators.

On all of the evidence, and as is clearly confirmed by the BT CCTV video, as well as the statements of all three of the civilian witnesses, both Complainant #1 and the SO were the victims of an unfortunate motor vehicle collision directly caused by the failure of the driver of the unidentified SUV to yield the right of way to Complainant #2, forcing Complainant #2 to take split second evasive action, which resulted in his striking both Complainant #1’s Toyota and the SO’s police cruiser. There is no question that no fault whatsoever lies with either of Complainant #1 or the SO and there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any actions on the part of the SO contributed in any way to the collision or the subsequent injuries sustained by both Complainant #1 and Complainant #2. As such, there is no basis on this evidence to consider any criminal charges again the SO and none will issue.

Date: January 9, 2018

Original signed by

Tony Loparco
Director
Special Investigations Unit