Director's Report Details

• The name of, and any information identifying, a subject official, witness official, civilian witness or affected person. 
• Information that may result in the identity of a person who reported that they were sexually assaulted being revealed in connection with the sexual assault. 
• Information that, in the opinion of the SIU Director, could lead to a risk of serious harm to a person. 
• Information that discloses investigative techniques or procedures.  
• Information, the release of which is prohibited or restricted by law.  
• Information in which a person’s privacy interest in not having the information published clearly outweighs the public interest in having the information published. 

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act

Pursuant to section 14 (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 that 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 (i.e., personal privacy), protected personal information is not included in this report. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following: 

• The names of persons, including civilian witnesses, and subject and witness officials; 
• 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

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

Other proceedings, processes, and investigations

Information may also have 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.

 
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on December 6, 2023.

Civilian Witness (CW)

CW Interviewed

The civilian witness was interviewed on November 27, 2023.

Subject Official (SO)

SO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The subject official was interviewed on January 19, 2024.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed
WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between December 11 and 22, 2023.

TPS Radio

Starting at about 1:55 p.m., TPS dispatch requested that officers attend an apartment near Linkwood Lane for a person in crisis [the Complainant], who suffered from mental health issues. The Complainant was throwing things around the apartment, and the CW was afraid and had locked herself in a closet. The Complainant was believed to be intoxicated or on drugs. The SO and WO #1 advised they would attend. WO #2 also advised he would attend the call.

Starting at about 2:10 p.m., WO #2 advised TPS dispatch that they were inside the apartment and all was in order.

 
Starting at about 2:23 p.m., the SO requested additional officers to his location as the Complainant was being combative.

 
Starting at about 2:25 p.m., WO #2 advised that all officers could slow down and that the Complainant was restrained, but bleeding from his nose. Paramedics were requested. WO #2 advised that the Complainant was in leg restraints, and that once additional officers arrived, he would be brought downstairs.

 
WO #2 subsequently requested that the ambulance be cancelled, and indicated that the Complainant would be transported to MGH by officers. The SO and WO #1 had the Complainant in their police cruiser and departed for MGH.

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage - The SO

On November 24, 2023, starting at about 2:10 p.m., the SO arrived at the residence and entered the apartment along with WO #2 and WO #1. The SO was greeted by the Complainant, who stood in the living room.

 
Between 2:10 p.m., and 2:20 p.m., the SO stood in the doorway of the apartment at the entrance to the living room with WO #1, and he had a conversation with the Complainant. The Complainant stood in the middle of the living room with his hands behind his back. The Complainant refused to move his hands to the front but did display they were empty. During the conversation, the Complainant appeared paranoid. He believed that his family member [the CW] had applied spyware to his computer.

 
Starting at about 2:15 p.m., the SO asked the Complainant if he had any mental health concerns. The Complainant denied this but stated a doctor had diagnosed him with psychosis and that he took medication for such. The Complainant expressed a desire to self-harm with thoughts of hanging himself, both currently as well as in the past. The Complainant also mentioned harming others, as well as fighting with police and being shot. The Complainant advised that he had these thoughts every day. The Complainant indicated he had an upcoming appointment with a doctor.

Starting at about 2:17 p.m., the SO told the Complainant that his mindset was to ensure the Complainant’s safety. He told the Complainant that the medication did not seem to be working and they should not wait for his appointment, suggesting he see a doctor sooner. The Complainant questioned why his family member had called the police and he was told that she was concerned for his safety. The Complainant sat on a couch in the living room.

Starting at about 2:19 p.m., the Complainant advised that he had been treated at a hospital, but it had not helped. The SO asked if the Complainant would go to MGH. The Complainant would not allow the officers to go into his bedroom to obtain his health card. He advised that there were items in the bedroom that could be used to harm them, such as dumbbells. The SO advised the Complainant that he would be uncomfortable if he entered the bedroom as he had expressed thoughts of harming others.

Starting at about 2:21 p.m., the SO told the Complainant that they were going to take him to the hospital and the Complainant refused. The SO advised that because the Complainant had expressed an intention to harm himself and others, they had to take him. WO #1 expressed concern that the Complainant had planned to self-harm by hanging. The SO told WO #2 that they were going to take the Complainant to the hospital as he had expressed a desire to self-harm and to harm others, and that the Complainant did not want to go. WO #2 walked into view of the BWC and the Complainant rose quickly and entered the kitchen. The SO grabbed the Complainant’s right arm with both hands. The Complainant turned towards him and pushed him into a closed pantry door. WO #1 entered the view of the BWC, and the Complainant was forced onto his back on a couch. The Complainant flailed his arms and appeared to be making kicking motions with his right foot. The Complainant rolled off the couch and onto the floor. The SO and WO #1 struggled with the Complainant. A male voice [believed to be WO #2] was heard repeating the word “stop” six times followed by, “Just watch his hands guys, I’ve got his body, but he has my flashlight.”

WO #1 appeared to attempt to remove an illuminated flashlight from the right hand of the Complainant. The SO delivered three strikes to the area of the Complainant’s face while repeating, “Let go.” The Complainant continued to struggle and refused to release the flashlight.

 
Starting at about 2:23 p.m., WO #1 pressed the priority transmit button on his police radio causing an audible alarm to sound. He asked for additional officers to provide assistance and stated that the Complainant was being combative. A male voice [believed to be WO #2] was heard saying, “Stop.” The SO instructed the Complainant to, “Give me your hand,” several times, and WO #2 stated, “We don’t want to hurt you.” The Complainant held his left hand to his forehead, and his right hand was not visible. WO #2 instructed the Complainant to just let go and put his hands behind his back. The Complainant appeared to be struggling and the SO appeared to deliver one closed fist strike to the area of the Complainant’s face. The Complainant replied, “Okay,” but continued to struggle. The SO delivered three strikes to the area of the Complainant’s face. The Complainant yelled, “Okay, fine, fine,” and a male voice [believed to be WO #1] said, “One handcuff on.” The Complainant then stopped struggling and said, “I’m completely relaxed.” WO #1 applied the second handcuff. The Complainant was handcuffed with his hands behind his back. WO #2 looked at the Complainant’s face and it was bleeding, while the SO stated he had been kicked in the head twice by the Complainant.

 
WO #2 requested Emergency Medical Services attend for the Complainant. The Complainant stated, “You guys don’t know how to fight,” and was told, “We got you into handcuffs, that’s all that matters.” A paramedic supervisor was requested to administer sedation should the Complainant become violent again.
The Complainant complained that his wrists hurt, and he was completely relaxed. The SO replied that he did not trust him as he had kicked him in the head twice and expressed a desire to harm himself and others. The Complainant replied, “No shit, what am I supposed to do?” The SO stated, “We are just trying to help you,” and the Complainant replied, “My ass.”

WO #1 searched the Complainant, and he again complained of pain in his wrists. WO #2 asked the SO if he required an ambulance. The SO replied that he did not. The SO knelt beside the Complainant with his left hand on the Complainant’s back.

 
Additional officers arrived at the apartment. WO #2 told them that the Complainant had assaulted them, and was to be taken downstairs, then to the hospital. WO #2 told the SO that he had scratches on his face, and the SO replied that the Complainant had kicked him in the face twice. The SO declined medical treatment.

At about 2:31 p.m., the Complainant was helped to his feet, advised not to play any games, and taken downstairs by elevator. The SO told the CW that the Complainant was being taken to MGH.

 
At about 2:34 p.m., the Complainant was placed into the rear of a TPS cruiser.

BWC Footage - WO #1

The BWC footage from WO #1’s camera was consistent with the SO’s footage.

BWC Footage - WO #2

WO #2 entered a bedroom and spoke with the CW. He learned she had called 911 to request police assistance because she was afraid of her family member, the Complainant. The Complainant had mental health issues, was bipolar and a user of marihuana and psilocybin. On November 24, 2023, the Complainant had experienced an incident where he had yelled, thrown items around the apartment, and hit himself in the head and face area. WO #2 provided advice to the CW about the process for obtaining both a Form 1 and a Form 2 under the Mental Health Act. The CW had hoped that the officers would take the Complainant to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH). He told the CW that the police could not force the Complainant to go to CAMH. The CW advised that the Complainant’s mental health had deteriorated and that she was afraid of him.

 
WO #2 left the bedroom and entered the living room where WO #1 and the SO were speaking with the Complainant. The remainder of the footage was consistent with the footage from the SO’s and WO #1’s BWCs.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the TPS between November 25, 2023, and December 5, 2023:

• Computer-assisted dispatch information;
• Occurrence Report;
• Policy – Emotionally Disturbed Persons;
• Policy – Arrest;
• Policy – Use of Force;
• Memo Book Notes – WO #1;
• Memo Book Notes – WO #2;
• Memo Book Notes – the SO;
• Communications recordings;
• BWC footage – the SO;
• BWC footage – WO #1;
• BWC footage – WO #2; and
• In-car camera system footage.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources on December 18, 2023:

• The Complainant’s medical records from MGH.

In the early afternoon of November 24, 2023, the SO and his partner, WO #1, together with WO #2, arrived at an apartment near Linkwood Lane, Toronto. A female resident of the apartment – the CW – had called 911 to report that her family member – the Complainant – was acting up and she was concerned for her safety.
The Complainant suffered from bipolar disorder and was experiencing a psychotic episode. He was angry and yelling at the CW, whom he had come to believe had installed spyware on his computer.

The Complainant opened the door to the officers and watched as one of them – WO #2 – walked past him towards a bedroom in which the CW was located. The other two officers entered the apartment and from a position beside the doorway engaged the Complainant in conversation. The Complainant spoke about plans to hurt himself and others. After about ten minutes, the SO decided that the Complainant should be apprehended under the Mental Health Act.

 
Advised that the officers would be taking him to hospital, the Complainant objected. He walked away from the officers in the direction of the kitchen. The SO grabbed his right arm and the Complainant pushed him away. WO #1 took hold of the Complainant from behind and forced him onto a sofa. In the course of the ensuing struggle, the Complainant kicked the SO in the head and managed to dispossess WO #2, who had returned from the bedroom, of his flashlight. The SO punched the Complainant’s face three times as the fight moved to the floor. He punched him again four times before the officers took control of his arms and handcuffed them behind the back.

 
Following his arrest, the Complainant was taken to hospital and diagnosed with a broken nose.

25 (1) Every one who is required or authorized by law to do anything in the administration or enforcement of the law

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.

17 Where a police officer has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a person is acting or has acted in a disorderly manner and has reasonable cause to believe that the person,

and in addition the police officer is of the opinion that the person is apparently suffering from mental disorder of a nature or quality that likely will result in,

and that it would be dangerous to proceed under section 16, the police officer may take the person in custody to an appropriate place for examination by a physician.

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.

There is little doubt that the Complainant was subject to apprehension under section 17 of the Mental Health Act. Based on the information they had received of the 911 call and what they personally gathered having spoken to the Complainant in the apartment, the officers had reason to believe that he was a danger to himself and others because of mental disorder.

I am also satisfied that the officers and, in particular, the SO, used no more force than was necessary to take the Complainant into custody. Their approach was scaled and proportionate. The officers had attempted to secure the Complainant’s peaceful cooperation before resorting to force. Once the physical altercation was engaged, the Complainant proved a formidable challenge. The takedown by WO #1 was a reasonable tactic. By that time, the Complainant had pushed the SO and it was clear he would physically resist his arrest. Forcing him off his feet would better position the officers to deal with the struggle ahead. As for the punches, the first set of strikes by the SO occurred after the Complainant had kicked the officer in the head. In the circumstances, the officer was entitled to escalate his force to deter further assault by the Complainant. The second set of strikes occurred when the Complainant refused to release his arms to be handcuffed and assisted in bringing the struggle to an end.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s broken nose was the result of one or more of the punches delivered by the SO, I am not reasonably satisfied that the injury was attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of the officer. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: March 22, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit