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 death of a 45-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU [1]

On November 6, 2023, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On October 13, 2023, police officers from the OPP South Georgian Bay Detachment in Midland became involved in a gun call involving two men. When one of the men fled, a Critical Incident Command (CIC) was established, and police service dogs (PSDs) were called to assist. At some point, one of the involved men was caught and bitten by a PSD during his arrest. The SIU was not notified as the involved police officers believed the injury was superficial. The man – the Complainant – was detained at the Central North Correctional Centre in Penetanguishene. On November 5, 2023, the Complainant died from a blood infection believed at the time to have been from the dog bites. It was reported to the OPP that the Complainant had been seen on a several occasions by medical staff; however, no details were available when the OPP reported the incident.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2023/11/06 at 12:29 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2023/11/06 at 1:22 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 2

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

45-year-old male; deceased

Subject Official

SO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

Witness Official

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

The witness officials were interviewed on November 29, 2023.

The Scene

The events in question transpired inside an apartment on William Street in Midland.

Physical Evidence

N/A

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence [2]

Police Communications Recordings

Telephone Calls

On October 13, 2023, at 2:28 p.m., the OPP received two separate calls from women reporting that a man had pulled a gun on another man before fleeing in a black Ford SUV with a woman.

In one call, a woman shopping in “The Liquigator” reported that a man had flashed a gun while threatening another man in the parking lot. The man and his wife fled in a small, black Ford SUV. The caller provided the vehicle licence plate marker and a physical description of the man, and said store staff recognized the woman as a regular customer. The caller further advised she did not know if the gun was real; it appeared to her to be “shaped like a handgun but it looks more like a BB gun or something”.

In another call, a woman reported the same occurrence of a man pulling a gun on another man. The call-taker advised they were aware of the situation. Sirens were heard in the background during the call.

Recordings of calls within the OPP captured the Communications Supervisor’s call to the SO to consult on the next steps that should be taken. The SO made further inquiries and later called the Communications Supervisor to advise the investigation had revealed that a woman was in the apartment with the Complainant and that the Complainant was believed to be armed with a handgun. She further advised the Emergency Response Team (ERT) had been dispatched and she was working on the Tactics and Rescue Unit (TRU) being dispatched.

Crisis Negotiator (CN) Telephone Calls

The call recordings captured only dialogue between the CNs during attempts to connect with the Complainant and the woman. All such attempt failed.

Radio Communications

Radio communications captured officers being dispatched to a report of a man who was “flashing a gun” in a parking lot in Midland before fleeing in a black Ford SUV driven by his wife.

The dispatcher further advised the vehicle was registered to a woman with a residence on William Street who was known to possess firearms and had been previously charged with ‘possession for the purpose of trafficking’. She later advised of additional information that the male was believed to be the Complainant, who was the registered owner of three firearms.

Responding officers subsequently found the unoccupied vehicle at the building.

Subsequent transmissions related to officers’ responses to the scene and arrangements for support services.

Tactical Radio Transmissions

The recordings captured the ERT members’ response and deployment for containment on the building’s fourth-floor and their plan for the Complainant’s surrender.

WhatsApp Chat – OPP ERT

The WhatsApp group was created on October 13, 2023, at 5:04 p.m., before the ERT members arrived at the scene.

In the communications, the ERT members were provided with information about the situation and the Complainant.

A message at 10:18 p.m. indicated a warrant was issued. A subsequent message at 10:33 p.m. indicated the Complainant’s apartment was opened, that it was announced the police had a search warrant, and that the Complainant was directed to go to the door. No response was received. At 10:36 p.m., an announcement was made to the Complainant about the PSD but, again, no response was received. One minute later, it was reported the ‘TIC’ [Tactical Integrated Canine] was “engaged”. Another minute later, it was reported the Complainant was in custody and that his left forearm was bitten.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the SO, gives rise to the following scenario.

In the afternoon of October 13, 2023, at about 2:30 p.m., the OPP received two 911 calls from citizens indicating that the Complainant had pulled a firearm at another male in the course of a quarrel in the parking lot of a liquidation shop on Bay Street. The Complainant had fled the scene in a SUV with a female. One of the callers had ascertained the licence plate marker of the vehicle and provided that information to the police. A search of that licence plate was subsequently associated with an apartment on William Street. Officers were dispatched to the William Street address. Attempts to have the Complainant surrender went unheeded.

About a half-hour later, at about 3:00 p.m., the SO was advised of the situation and asked to assume the role of the CIC. As she made her way to the scene, the SO began to coordinate the deployment of resources, including ERT and TRU officers, crisis negotiators and police dog handlers. She arrived at the command post at about 5:10 p.m. By this time, ERT officers were in place containing the apartment.

Over the course of hours, multiple attempts to reach the Complainant inside the apartment were unsuccessful. These included phone calls, text messages and communiques with a loudhailer. At about 6:15 p.m., TRU officers took over from the ERT team in positions around the apartment. At 7:10 p.m., a woman exited the apartment through the front door and was taken into custody without incident. She advised police that the Complainant was asleep.

At about 10:00 p.m., the SO authorized entry into the apartment. The plan was to send in a drone to ascertain the Complainant’s location. The tactic failed when the drone malfunctioned. The next attempt to enter the apartment would be by way of a police dog. Once located, the dog would bite and hold the Complainant pending the arrival of TRU officers to effect his arrest.

A search warrant to enter the apartment was secured at about 10:20 p.m. At about 10:36 p.m., the PSD was sent in through the apartment door. The dog searched through several rooms before entering a bedroom and finding the Complainant on the bed. The PSD latched onto the Complainant’s left arm as he screamed in pain. TRU officers entered the apartment and took the Complainant into custody. The PSD’s handler, WO #3, released the dog’s bite from the Complainant.

The Complainant was examined by paramedics at the scene and transported to hospital where he was treated for a dog bite to the left arm. He had suffered tendon damage and was referred to a plastic surgeon before being released into the custody of the OPP with a prescription for antibiotics and pain.

Back at the OPP detachment, the Complainant spent time in a cell and was subsequently remanded into the custody of the Central North Correctional Centre in Penetanguishene. On October 17 and 18, 2023, the Complainant was transported from the correctional centre to hospital for treatment of infection to the dog bite wounds. On October 23, 2023, he was again taken to hospital because of odd behaviour. Medical diagnosis at the time suggested the Complainant’s symptoms “seem to be more behavioural than medical”. On November 4, 2023, the Complainant attended hospital for the last time, still in the custody of the correctional centre. It was noted that the infection to the left arm was getting worse and he was admitted. His condition deteriorated and, on November 5, 2023, the Complainant was found by his attending nurse hypoxic and pulseless. He was pronounced deceased at 10:48 p.m.

The cause of the Complainant’s death remains pending at this time.

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,

On November 6, 2023, the OPP notified the SIU of the passing of the Complainant on November 5, 2023, and the possibility that his death was connected to a police dog bite on October 13, 2023. The SIU 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 death.