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 an incident involving Toronto Police Service (TPS) officers on July 7, 2016 when they responded to a domestic incident at an apartment unit in Toronto and arrested a 58‐year‐old female. After her arrest, the female was taken to the hospital and diagnosed with a fractured nasal bone.

Notification of the SIU

The SIU was notified of the incident by the Toronto Police Service on July 8, 2016 at 4:19 a.m. TPS reported that on July 7, 2016, at 7:17 p.m., officers were called to an apartment unit for a report of the female causing damage to the apartment and death threats. The female became assaultive towards the police officers and was grounded by them. Following her arrest, the complainant was taken to the hospital and diagnosed with a fractured nasal bone.

The Team

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Complainant

58‐year‐old female, interviewed and medical records obtained and reviewed

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

Subject Officers

SO #1 Interviewed, and notes received and reviewed

SO #2 Interviewed, and notes received and reviewed

The Scene

The apartment is a large two-bedroom apartment with a kitchen, office area, dining room and living room. There are also two outdoor balconies. There was a can of paint and painting supplies on the floor at the entranceway to the dining room, with paint having spilled onto the floor. The two bedrooms occupy the southwest corner of the apartment. The master bedroom is in the southwest corner. On the carpet area at the entranceway was an area of bloodstaining. The bed is in front of the west wall. One pillow was on the bed and only a fitted sheet. Bloodstaining was visible to the side of the sheet. A bloodstained pillow and bedding are located in the hallway leading to the ensuite bathroom.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence

The SIU canvassed the area for any video or audio recordings, and photographic evidence, but was not able to locate any.

Communications Recordings

There is a communication recording of the 911 call made by CW #1 who reported that the complainant was yelling and assaulting him. The complainant can be heard in the background yelling and swearing.

CW #1 contacted 911 again and said the complainant was “totally wasted”, but was now in her bedroom.

There are further communication recordings requesting an ambulance for a woman with a bleeding nose but who was conscious and breathing.

Materials obtained from Toronto Police Service:

Upon request the SIU obtained and reviewed the following materials from the TPS:

• COMM summary of conversation,
• General occurrence,
• ICAD full version,
• ICAD-event details report,
• Notes for SO #1 and SO #2,
• Parade sheet reports,
• Procedure 1501‐Appendix a,
• Procedure 1501‐Appendix b,
• Procedure 1501‐Use of Force, and
• Use of force training record for SO #1 and SO #2.

Shortly before 8:00 p.m. on July 7, 2016, CW #1 called 911 with a domestic complaint regarding the complainant. SO #1 and SO #2 were dispatched to attend CW #1’s apartment. At the time, the complainant was subject to a recognizance prohibiting her from being at the apartment as a result of a previous allegation of domestic abuse.

When the officers arrived at the apartment, the complainant was in the bedroom and CW #1 was in the living room. SO #2 went to the bedroom to speak to the complainant. The complainant was on the bed at the time, either sleeping or unconscious. She was undressed. When the complainant awoke, she was aggressive with SO #2 and refused to cooperate. She was extremely intoxicated. The complainant remained on the bed. SO #1 entered the room, and both officers attempted to take hold of the complainant, one on each arm. In the course of this, the complainant hit SO #2 and pulled her own arm back, preventing SO #2 from taking hold of her. The officers struggled to take control of the complainant, who continued to actively resist. Shortly after, the complainant was lying face first on the floor.

Once the complainant was on the floor, the officers were able to handcuff her and get her dressed. At that time, the complainant was bleeding from her nose, so an ambulance was called. Paramedics arrived shortly after and the complainant was removed on a stretcher and taken to the hospital. The complainant was diagnosed with a fractured nasal bone.

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.

In the evening hours of July 7, 2016, SO #1 and SO #2 were called to respond to a domestic incident at the apartment that the complainant shared with CW #1, where he alleged that she had been drinking heavily and assaulted him. Both officers had had previous dealings with the complainant and CW #1, and knew that she was subject to a recognizance prohibiting her from being at the apartment. Accordingly, at the very least the complainant was subject to arrest for breaching her recognizance once the officers arrived. Both officers were also aware that the complainant had a history of being uncooperative and aggressive towards police when she had been drinking.

When the officers arrived at the apartment, the complainant was in her bedroom and CW #1 was in the living room. SO #2 went to the bedroom to speak to the complainant. The complainant was either asleep or unconscious at the time. When the complainant awoke, she was aggressive with SO #2 and refused to cooperate. She was extremely intoxicated. SO #1 entered the room, and both officers attempted to take hold of the complainant, one on each arm. The complainant hit SO #2 and pulled her own arm back, preventing SO #2 from taking hold of her. The officers struggled to take control of the complainant, who continued to actively resist. SO #2 stated that the complainant then fell to the floor in the course of the struggle on the bed. SO #1 stated that they pulled the complainant off the bed and she immediately went to her knees, stretched out on the floor face down and continued to thrash and struggle. Given the broken nose the complainant sustained, the small and contained blood stain on the carpet, the struggle occurring on the bed, and the complainant’s extreme intoxication, I believe SO #2’s recollection to be more accurate.

Pursuant to section 25(1) of the Criminal Code, police officers are entitled to use reasonable force in the execution of their duties. With the information that SO #1 and SO #2 received prior to entering the apartment, and the situation they observed upon entry, they had sufficient grounds to arrest the complainant at the outset for breaching her recognizance. In the course of executing this duty, the complainant struggled and fell off the bed, hitting her nose on the floor. There was no allegation made by any of the witnesses that SO #1 and SO #2 were anything but calm and professional throughout their dealings with the complainant. The officers’ efforts to take control of the complainant were reasonable in the circumstances, and I do not have reasonable grounds to believe that her injury was caused by their actions. Rather, the complainant’s broken nose appears to be accidental. Accordingly, there are no reasonable grounds to proceed with charges in this case.

Date: August 2, 2017

Original signed by
Joseph Martino
Acting Director
Special Investigations Unit