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 injury suffered by a 68-year-old female, discovered after her arrest on July 13, 2016 at approximately 11:15 p.m.

Notification of the SIU

The SIU was notified of the incident by the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) on August 9, 2016 at 1:00 p.m. The OPP reported that a complaint made by the Complainant to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) had been received by the Huronia West OPP Detachment in Wasaga Beach. In her complaint, the Complainant stated that her left arm had been broken during her arrest for public intoxication at her residence in Wasaga Beach on July 13, 2016.

The OPP reported that officers responded to the Complainant’s residence in Wasaga Beach on July 13, 2016 for a report of a neighbor dispute. The police officers arrested the Complainant for public intoxication and she was taken to the OPP detachment and lodged in a cell. The Complainant was released the following morning and attended the hospital where she was diagnosed with a broken left arm.

The team

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 2

Complainant

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

Civilian witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

CW #6 Interviewed

CW #7 Interviewed

Police employee witness

PEW Interviewed

Witness Officers

WO #1 Interviewed

WO #2 Interviewed

WO #3 Interviewed

Subject Officer

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

Communications recordings

OPP 911 Communication Recordings

The SIU investigators obtained and reviewed the OPP 911 Communications Centre recordings. The Complainant used the 911 emergency telephone services on four occasions on July 13, 2016. Her initial calls were made in the early evening and in these calls she was trying to identify an OPP officer who had called her telephone and left a message for her. The SO was dispatched to her home at 6:26 p.m. on July 13, 2016 and spoke to her about her inappropriate use of the 911 emergency telephone service. The SO reported the Complainant was intoxicated at that time.

The Complainant again called the OPP 911 emergency services telephone at 10:59 p.m. and reported her home was being attacked. Her speech was slurred and portions were inaudible. The Complainant reported her garden furniture had been damaged and scattered around her front lawn. She indicated she did not know the persons responsible and that they were intoxicated. The Complainant told the 911 call taker she herself had not had any alcohol to drink that day.

OPP 911 Radio Communications

The SIU investigators obtained and reviewed the OPP Communications Centre radio recordings. The Event Details Report obtained from the OPP is consistent with the communications radio recordings.

Ambulance call report

The Complainant was attended to by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) paramedics on July 13, 2016 while she was in custody at the Wasaga Beach Detachment. The Complainant, who was found to be under the influence of alcohol, only complained of having a minor abrasion, secondary to her having been handcuffed, to her left wrist. She was treated with a gauze bandage and she remained in police custody.

Materials obtained from Police Service

Upon request the SIU obtained and reviewed the following materials and documents from the OPP Huronia West Detachment:

• Background event chronology
• OPP 911 telephone calls
• OPP radio communications
• OPP Booking Hall and Cell - video recordings
• Disclosure Log-Oct 27, 2016
• Event Details reports
• notes for PEW
• notes for WO #1, #2 and #3, and
• Prisoner Custody Report - Complainant

During the evening on July 13, 2016, the Complainant returned to her home and believed the furniture on her front porch had been disturbed. At about 11:00 p.m., the Complainant called 911 to report that her home was under attack, and her garden furniture had been damaged.

Within a few minutes, the SO, WO #1 and WO #2 responded to the call. When the officers arrived, they did not locate any damaged property. The SO spoke separately with the Complainant and three women across the street that the Complainant accused of causing the damage. The SO then directed the Complainant to remain on her property or else she will be arrested for being intoxicated in public. All of the officers left the scene.

Within seconds of the SO and WO #2 leaving, the Complainant ignored the SO’s direction and crossed the street and attempted to resume arguing with her neighbors. The SO and WO #2 were still around the corner at the time, and saw the Complainant ignoring the SO’s warning. Consequently, the officers went back to the Complainant’s residence and arrested her for being intoxicated in public. The SO handcuffed the Complainant with her hands behind her back before placing her in the back of his cruiser. The Complainant did not resist in any way.

On her way to the police station, the Complainant complained of pain in her wrist. It appeared that her wrist had been caught in the handcuff and was bleeding. EMS attended the police station to assess the Complainant. The paramedics treated the cut on the Complainant’s wrist, and determined that she did not need to be taken to hospital. Upon release, the Complainant attended a hospital where she was diagnosed with a broken left arm.

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

1. as a private person,
2. as a peace officer or public officer,
3. in aid of a peace officer or public officer, or
4. 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.

Section 31(4), Liquor Licence Act – Intoxication

(4) No person shall be in an intoxicated condition,

1. in a place to which the general public is invited or permitted access;

Section 31(5), Liquor Licence Act - Arrest without warrant

(5) A police officer may arrest without warrant any person whom he or she finds contravening subsection (4) if, in the opinion of the police officer, to do so is necessary for the safety of any person.

On July 13, 2016, the Complainant was arrested for being intoxicated in a public place by a police officer from the OPP – Huronia West Detachment. Following her arrest, a suspected fracture of a bone in her left wrist was discovered. For the reasons that follow, I am satisfied that the arresting officer – the SO – did not commit a criminal offence in connection with the injury sustained by the Complainant.

In the evening on July 13, 2016, the Complainant returned home and noticed the furniture on her front porch had been disturbed. At about 11:00 p.m., the Complainant called 911 to report the damage[1].

The SO and WO #1 responded to the mischief call. When they arrived, they spoke separately with the Complainant and the three ladies across the street. WO #2 also arrived on scene to assist. The officers were unable to locate any damaged property. Several times, the SO told the Complainant to return to her own property and to stop confronting her neighbours across the street. WO #1 described her as angry, and verbally but not physically abusive. WO #2 and WO #1 both concluded from observing the Complainant that she was highly intoxicated. Prior to the officers leaving, the SO directed the Complainant to remain on her property or she would be arrested for being intoxicated in public. He also told the three ladies across the street to call the police if there were any further issues. The officers drove away.

The SO and WO #2 decided to wait around the corner to see if the Complainant complied with their warning. Prior to rounding the corner, they saw her walk across the street to the neighbour’s house again. They turned around and drove back. As the SO got out of his cruiser, the Complainant started to walk back towards her residence. WO #2 described seeing the SO grab the Complainant’s hands as she was halfway across the street, then remind her that he warned her not to leave her property and that she was now under arrest for public intoxication. He handcuffed her with her hands behind her back. By all accounts, the Complainant did not resist being arrested and there was no struggle. The Complainant alleged being injured when the SO pulled her arms behind her back and during the handcuffing process. To the contrary, witnesses recounted that the SO did not appear rough with her, did not use any force, and that she got into the back of the cruiser without issue.

En route to the station, the Complainant complained her wrist was sore. EMS attended the station and assessed her. Paramedics determined she did not need to be taken to hospital. Upon release the following morning, the Complainant was seen at the hospital. An x-ray of her left wrist revealed a suspected distal radius fracture and her arm was put in a cast.

Following a review of the evidence, it appears the Complainant’s arrest was lawful. Section 31(4) of the Liquor Licence Act (LLA) dictates that no one shall be in an intoxicated condition in a place to which the general public is invited or permitted access. Furthermore, a police officer can arrest without warrant pursuant to section 31(5) of the LLA any such person s/he finds committing this offence, if s/he believes it is necessary to do so for the safety of any person. Unfortunately, the SO’s perspective was unknown as he declined to provide an interview or copy of his notes, as was his legal right. Two of the responding officers, WO #2 and WO #1, described the Complainant as highly intoxicated, after observing her slurring her words and being unsteady on her feet. The Complainant refutes this. Additionally, the paramedics noted in the Ambulance Call Report that when they assessed the Complainant around midnight, she had the odour of alcohol on her breath, slurred speech and an unsteady gait upon standing. She also told them that she drank “a lot” of wine earlier in the evening. Paramedics observed the Complainant yelling at the police officers, being verbally aggressive and banging on a door while at the station.

WO #2 and WO #1 recalled the SO repeatedly instructing the Complainant to remain on her own property, and not to go over to speak with her neighbours or she would be arrested for being intoxicated in public. Almost immediately after the officers left, the Complainant went back across the street to interact with her neighbours. According to a number of witness accounts, the Complainant’s behaviour was confrontational. She was yelling, failed to disengage with her neighbours as directed by the police officers and appeared to be escalating the conflict. Despite the Complainant’s statement to the contrary, the overwhelming evidence was that she was intoxicated, being persistently confrontational with her neighbours, and was on the roadway when arrested and not on her own property. It is apparent that the SO exercised reasoned judgment and professionalism in his dealing with the Complainant. He provided her with multiple opportunities to return to her house in an attempt to deescalate the situation with her neighbours, and to avoid needing to arrest her for being intoxicated in a public place given the potential danger her hostile behaviour was posing to others. She did not comply.

Pursuant to section 25(1) of the Criminal Code, a police officer is entitled to use force in the execution of his or her lawful duty provided the force in question is limited to that which is reasonably necessary. According to WO #2 and the civilian witnesses present for the arrest, the only force employed by the SO was to handcuff the Complainant with her arms behind her back. There was no evidence that this was done in a manner that was unreasonable or that an excessive degree of force was used. Although an x-ray revealed the Complainant may have a broken bone in her left wrist, there was no evidence that any physical contact she had with the SO was the cause of this injury.

Based on the totality of the evidence, I am satisfied that the actions of the SO, in all likelihood did not cause the Complainant’s injury and fell within the limits prescribed by the criminal law. As a result, no charges will issue and this case will be closed.

Date: August 18, 2017

Original signed by
Tony Loparco
Director
Special Investigations Unit

Endnotes

• 1) [1] Previously that evening, around 5:40 p.m., the Complainant called 911 twice wanting to know how to contact an officer who left her a voice message without his contact number. The OPP Event Details report revealed that the SO responded at about 6:17 p.m. and met with her. As she did not need to speak with police, he cautioned her about calling 911 unnecessarily and noted that she was intoxicated. [Back to text]