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 a serious injury sustained by a 37-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU [1]

On November 15, 2023, at 6:07 p.m., the Niagara Regional Police Service (NRPS) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant.

According to the NRPS, on November 15, 2023, the NRPS was asked to assist the York Regional Police (YRP) with executing an arrest warrant for the Complainant, a resident in the Niagara Region. The NRPS’s Emergency Task Unit (ETU) was tasked with the arrest. A plan was developed to take the Complainant into custody away from his residence after he was followed to a business located on Drummond Road, Niagara Falls. At 10:18 a.m., three ETU officers arrested the Complainant and he was taken to the ground. When the Complainant was stood up, he indicated that he had sustained a knee injury. As Emergency Medical Services were already on scene, they examined the Complainant and transported him to the Greater Niagara General Hospital (GNGH) where he was diagnosed with torn tendons in his knee.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2023/11/16 at 9:00 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2023/11/16 at 9:30 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

37-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on November 21, 2023.

Subject Official

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

Witness Official

WO #1 Interviewed
WO #2 Interviewed
WO #3 Interviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on December 1, 2023.

The Scene

The events in question transpired on the parking lot by the southwest side of a business on Drummond Road, Niagara Falls.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]

Video Footage – Business on Drummond Road

On November 15, 2023, starting at about 10:18:00 a.m., the Complainant was captured leaving the business. He was wearing a grey T-shirt and dark shorts with sandals. He had a bag strapped over his right shoulder. The Complainant walked out the front door towards his parked vehicle – a black Mercedes C300. The vehicle was parked towards the backend of the parking lot. Six cars east of the Complainant’s vehicle was a dark grey Dodge Caravan.

Shortly after 10:18:15 a.m., ETU officers – the SO, WO #3, WO #2 and WO #1 – exited the Dodge Caravan. The Complainant was tackled by the SO, who bear-hugged his legs with both his arms and brought him down onto the ground. WO #3 placed his knee on the Complainant’s right shoulder blade and held his C8 rifle pointed to his head. Immediately thereafter, a white Ford pick-up truck appeared from Drummond Road with three ETU officers and another white truck with additional ETU members travelled behind the building and faced Drummond Road. The Complainant was no longer visible as he was hidden out of view by the white Ford pick-up truck with a white cab. A NRPS marked SUV pulled-in behind the white Ford pick-up truck with a uniformed police officer inside.

A small blue vehicle pulled-up alongside the white Ford pick-up truck containing two plainclothes officers wearing police vests. They exited the vehicle and approached the takedown area, which was behind all the stopped vehicles.

The NRPS SUV and the white Ford pick-up left the area. Four ETU officers and two plainclothes officers remained with the Complainant, who was laying on the ground next to his vehicle. A paramedic arrived on scene and tended to the Complainant.

A white unmarked YRP cruiser drove up from Drummond Road and parked in front of the scene. The Complainant was assisted to his feet, placed against the YRP cruiser and searched.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

The SIU obtained the following records from the NRPS and YRP between November 21, 2023, and November 27, 2023:

• NRPS Policy General Order 100.9-Powers of Arrest; and
• NRPS Policy General Order 053.2-Use of Force;
• Memo Book Notes – WO #1 (NRPS);
• Memo Book Notes – WO #2 (NRPS);
• Memo Book Notes – WO #3 (NRPS); and
• Situation, Mission, Execution, Administration, Command and Control Report (YRP).

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources on November 29, 2023:

• The Complainant’s medical records from the GNGH.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and officers who participated in his arrest, as well as video footage that captured the incident in parts, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU or the release of his notes.

In the afternoon of November 15, 2023, a team of four NRPS ETU officers, including the SO, were set up in an unmarked police minivan waiting to arrest the Complainant. They had information that the Complainant was at a business on Drummond Road and had parked in the lot south of the establishment to wait for his exit. The SO was the team leader and sitting in the front passenger seat of the van, several parking spaces to the east of the Complainant’s Mercedes. Seeing the Complainant crossing the rear of their minivan and walking towards his car, the SO gave the takedown signal.

Earlier that morning, the ETU officers had attended a briefing at which YRP detectives informed them that the Complainant was wanted for first-degree murder in relation to a homicide in Aurora in June 2023. Two persons had been shot in a residence, one of whom died. The firearm had not been recovered.

The team exited the van and walked quickly towards the Complainant from behind, the SO deploying a distraction device as they advanced. The device did not deploy but it did catch the attention of the Complainant. As he neared the driver’s side of his vehicle, the Complainant turned and noticed the tactical officers approaching. The SO was the first to physically engage the Complainant. The officer wrapped his arms around the Complainant’s legs and tackled him to the ground. The other three officers – WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3 – were right behind the SO and assisted in pinning the Complainant to the ground. In short order, the Complainant’s hands were secured behind the back.

The Complainant complained of right knee pain after his arrest. Paramedics attended and transported him to hospital where he was diagnosed with a torn right knee tendon.

Section 25(1), Criminal Code -- Protection of Persons Acting Under Authority

(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,

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by NRPS officers on November 15, 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 Complainant’s arrest and injury.

Pursuant to section 25(1) of the Criminal Code, police officers are immune from criminal liability for force used in the course of their duties provided such force was reasonably necessary in the execution of an act that they were required or authorized to do by law.

I am satisfied that the ETU officers were within their rights in seeking to take the Complainant into custody. They had been briefed by YRP officers regarding their investigation of a homicide in which they came to believe that the Complainant was the perpetrator.

I am also satisfied that the evidence falls short of any reasonable suggestion that excessive force was brought to bear against the Complainant by either the SO or other members of the ETU. The takedown executed by the SO was warranted. The officers had reason to believe that the Complainant had shot and killed someone several months prior and might still be in possession of a firearm. They were entitled, in the circumstances, to immediately bring the Complainant to ground to minimize the risk of him accessing a weapon. The takedown itself would not appear to have been conducted with undue force. Thereafter, no strikes were delivered by the officers before the Complainant was restrained. There is some evidence that the Complainant’s injury occurred when an officer took the Complainant’s right foot and twisted it from side to side. It is entirely possible that in the need to restrict the Complainant’s movements on the ground an officer grabbed the Complainant’s foot and manipulated it to some extent. That said, I am unable to reasonably conclude that such conduct, if it occurred, was gratuitous or out of bounds. The situation was a dynamic one and there is no indication that the officer continued to wrench the Complainant’s foot once he voiced-out his objections.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injury was incurred in the altercation that marked his arrest, whether the takedown or some twisting of his foot, it was not attributable to any unlawful conduct on the part of the ETU officers. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges. The file is closed.


Date: February 29, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit