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:

• 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 Personal 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.

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 40-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On December 26, 2023, at 4:00 a.m., the Peterborough Police Service (PPS) notified the SIU of the death of the Complainant.

According to the PPS, on December 26, 2023, at 1:28 a.m., the Civilian Witness (CW) called PPS to report that her family member, the Complainant, was suicidal and located in his apartment at an address in Lakefield. The Subject Official (SO) attended and observed the Complainant outside his apartment holding a baseball bat. At 1:40 a.m., the Complainant hit the SO’s face with the baseball bat. The Complainant went back into his apartment, and other police officers arrived. Police officers were outside the Complainant’s apartment and heard loud banging noises. They attempted to communicate with the Complainant, but he did not respond or answer his cellular phone. At 2:03 a.m., Witness Official (WO) #1 breached the Complainant’s apartment door, and the police officers entered the apartment. At 2:06 a.m., they found that the Complainant had hung himself in the kitchen. At 2:07 a.m., the police officers began cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). At the same time, the Emergency Medical Services (EMS), who were on scene on standby, attended. The Complainant was pronounced deceased at 2:26 a.m.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2023/12/26 at 4:58 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2023/12/26 at 9:00 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

40-year-old male; deceased

Civilian Witness

CW Interviewed

The civilian witness was interviewed on March 12, 2024.

Subject Official

SO Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

WO #4 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness officials were interviewed on December 28, 2023.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around the Complainant’s apartment in Lakefield.

Physical Evidence

On December 26, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., a SIU forensic investigator arrived at the scene. The door to the apartment had been forced open. There were several dents in the door and the door frame was broken.

The body of the Complainant was located on the floor of the kitchen. A white blanket covered the body. When the blanket was removed, the Complainant was found on his back. There was a white rope underneath him. The rope was attached to an eyebolt with a screw tip. The eyebolt was also on the floor. There was no apparent injury to the deceased. There was a light impression of a ligature around his neck.

Next to the body was an open doorway. The head jamb of the open doorway had fresh damage. There appeared to have been several attempts at screwing the eyebolt into the head jamb. One of the penetrating screw holes had pieces protruding down, away from the head jamb. It appeared as if the eyebolt had been screwed into the head jamb, then forced downward, and broke free. The head jamb was approximately two metres above the ground.

The coroner attended. He viewed and examined the body before ordering a post-mortem at the Provincial Forensic Pathology Unit (PFPU).

A baseball bat leaned against the wall behind the entrance door. Another baseball bat was in a cupboard under the sink.

An iPhone, which was locked, was found on the kitchen floor.

At 11:25 a.m., the body bag was sealed before transport to the PFPU. The iPhone, the rope with eyebolt, and a piece of wrapping paper found next to the body were collected.

At 11:55 a.m., the scene was released to the PPS.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Police Communications Recordings

On December 26, 2023, at 1:27 a.m., PPS received a 911 call from the CW reporting her family member, the Complainant, was threatening suicide. He resided in an apartment in Lakefield. The Complainant had texted her and said he would hang himself. He had sent her a picture of a noose, and said he was alone. He suffered from mental health issues. The CW indicated she would be at his residence shortly with a key.

At 1:29 a.m., the SO was dispatched to the Complainant’s address. Another unit was also responding.

At 1:30 a.m., PPS called EMS and asked that they attend.

At 1:35 a.m., the SO advised EMS were on scene.

At 1:37 a.m., the SO said he had communicated with the Complainant, who closed the door in his face. The SO requested additional units and indicated the Complainant had a bat and that there was banging going on inside.

At 2:03 a.m., the door was breached and the SO performed CPR.

At 2:22 a.m., a sergeant received a phone call from the SO indicating that EMS were still working on the Complainant, but it was a possible ‘10-45’ (deceased). The family was present.

At 2:28 a.m., a male indicated that the Complainant had been pronounced deceased at 2:26 a.m. via telephone.

At 2:48 a.m., the sergeant received a phone call from an unknown police officer who stated the scene was inside the apartment and it would be held. The main door would be closed and a Centre of Forensic Sciences seal applied. The police officers involved were the SO, WO #2 and WO #1.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following materials from the PPS between December 27, 2023, and December 28, 2023:

• Training Records – the SO;
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report;
• Police communications recordings;
• Notes – the SO;
• Notes – WO #1;
• Notes – WO #2;
• Notes – WO #3;
• Notes – WO #4;
• List of Civilian Witnesses;
• General Occurrence Report;
• Policy - Police Response to Persons with a Mental Health Crisis and/or Chaotic Substance Use;
• Policy - Incident Response Training (formerly ‘Use of Force’);
• Officer call-signs; and
• The Complainant - Police History.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between December 28, 2023, and February 6, 2024:

• Ambulance Call Report;
• Preliminary Police Report from the Ontario Forensic Pathology Service (OFPS);
• Pathology records, including Preliminary Autopsy Findings, from the OFPS; and
• Text Messages from the CW.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with officers present at the time of the events in question, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

At about 1:30 a.m., December 26, 2023, the CW called 911 to report that her family member – the Complainant – was contemplating suicide. In a recent text exchange, the Complainant had talked about taking his life and sent her a picture of a noose. Officers were dispatched to the scene.

The SO was the first to arrive. The Complainant resided in an apartment. The SO approached the apartment door. The Complainant answered the door, told the officer to leave, and closed and locked the door behind him. The CW had arrived on scene at this time and was positioned in a parking area at the rear of the building. She provided the SO a key to the apartment. The officer unlocked and opened the door. The Complainant confronted him with a metal baseball bat, which he used to cross-check the officer in the face. The SO withdrew from the door and waited for additional officers to arrive.

WO #1 and WO #2 were shortly on scene. They discussed another approach and then proceeded in concert to the front door. The SO held a shield. WO #2 was armed with his CEW. And WO #1 had a ram, which he used to force open the door. WO #1 called-out to the Complainant without any response. The three entered the apartment and quickly found the Complainant lying supine in the kitchen. A rope was around his neck. The time was about 2:04 a.m.

The SO cut the rope off the Complainant’s neck and started CPR. Paramedics were quickly on scene and took charge of the Complainant’s care.

The Complainant was pronounced deceased on scene at 2:27 a.m.

The pathologist at autopsy was of the preliminary view that the Complainant’s death was attributable to ‘hanging’.

Sections 219 and 220, Criminal Code - Criminal Negligence Causing Death

219 (1) Every one is criminally negligent who

(a) in doing anything, or

(b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,

shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.

(2) For the purposes of this section, duty means a duty imposed by law.

220 Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and

(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

The Complainant took his life on December 26, 2023, in his home in Lakefield. As PPS was present outside the home at the time, the SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation. The SO was identified as 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.

The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing death contrary to section 220 of the Criminal Code. The offence is reserved for serious cases of neglect that demonstrate a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked and substantial departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. In the instant case, the question is whether there was a want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the Complainant’s death. In my view, there was not.

The SO comported himself at all times with due care and regard for the Complainant’s health and well-being. He arrived on scene quickly, did what he could to reach the Complainant by phone and text, encouraged him to refrain from hurting himself, and tried to intervene physically on several occasions. On the second such occasion, after the CW had provided him a key, the SO was assaulted by the Complainant. In the circumstances, the officer was right to wait for additional officers to arrive on scene before trying to enter again. In the meantime, he continued to text the Complainant. Once WO #2 and WO #1 had arrived, the officers acted with dispatch in formulating an approach plan. Finding the Complainant unresponsive in the apartment, they also acted with haste in rendering medical care.

For the foregoing reasons, I am satisfied that the SO and the other officers on scene did not transgress the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in their dealings with the Complainant. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges. The file is closed.

Date: April 24, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit