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 serious injury of a 22-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On January 17, 2024, at 5:04 a.m., the Cobourg Police Service (CPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On January 16, 2024, at 5:55 p.m., the CPS were asked to respond to the area of King Street and Division Street, Cobourg, in connection with a male reportedly yelling racial slurs, and threatening a woman and her children, and punching her vehicle. CPS officers arrived and arrested the Complainant without incident. He was subsequently transported to the CPS station and lodged in a holding cell. In the holding cell, the Complainant smashed his fist on the cell door. Approximately two hours later, the Complainant complained of pain to his right hand, and was transported to Northumberland Hills Hospital via Emergency Medical Services (EMS). He was diagnosed with two fractures to the right knuckles.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/01/17 at 9:22 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/01/17 at 10:00 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on January 17, 2024.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between January 29, 2024, and February 7, 2024.

Subject Official (SO)

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

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

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

The witness official was interviewed on February 2, 2024.

Service Employee Witnesses (SEW)

SEW #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

SEW #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The service employee witnesses were interviewed between February 7 and 29, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in a parking lot in the area of King Street and Division Street, Cobourg.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage – The SO

On January 16, 2024, starting at about 5:54 p.m., the SO drove south on Division Street and stopped his cruiser. He got out and walked towards the Complainant. The SO grabbed the Complainant’s left hand, put it behind his back and handcuffed him. The Complainant said CW #1 had attacked a woman in a vehicle. The SO told the Complainant to stop struggling. WO #1 arrived and took the Complainant’s left arm. Both officers walked the Complainant to the SO’s cruiser, and they told him that he was going to be searched. After the search, the Complainant was put in the back seat of the SO’s cruiser. The SO asked WO #1 to remain at his cruiser while he walked to CW #1, who told him what had happened. The SO returned to his cruiser and asked the Complainant to exit for a search. The SO told the Complainant that he was under arrest for assault, uttering threats and being intoxicated in a public place. The Complainant was searched and then returned to the rear seat of the cruiser.

BWC Footage – WO #1

Starting at about 5:56 p.m., WO #1 arrived at the parking lot, got out of her cruiser and walked towards the SO. The Complainant was handcuffed, and WO #1 and the SO walked the Complainant to the SO’s cruiser, where he was seated in the rear area. WO #1 told the Complainant that he was being detained and asked if he had any injuries. The Complainant did not complain of any injuries. The SO told the Complainant that he was under arrest for assault and asked him to get out of the cruiser. The Complainant was searched and returned to the rear seat of the cruiser.

CPS Custody Footage – Cells

In one video clip, the Complainant was captured standing near a cell door. After he was put in the cell, he favoured his right hand.

In a subsequent video clip, the Complainant was captured lying on the bench in the cell, holding his wrist. SEW #2 walked to the cell door and the Complainant placed his right wrist through the slot in the cell door, showing SEW #2 his wrist.

CPS Custody Footage – Booking Room

In the first clip, on January 16, 2024, starting at about 6:27 p.m., the Complainant entered the booking room with the SO and WO #1. The booking sergeant asked about the Complainant’s arrest. The Complainant told the booking sergeant that he had no injuries. He used both left and right hands and showed no favouritism with either hand. The SO said the Complainant had minor lacerations to his face.

Starting at about 6:42 p.m., the Complainant left the booking room and was placed in a cell. Moments later, the Complainant was heard banging and yelling.

In the second clip, starting at about 7:12 p.m., the Complainant was heard banging on the cell door. SEW #2 was heard speaking to the Complainant. During the conversation, SEW #2 was heard saying that he saw the Complainant’s wrists and hands, and would advise the sergeant.

In the third clip, starting at about 7:52 p.m., the Complainant said a police officer had caused his injury to his wrist. He also said a police officer had struck him in the face.

Starting at about 7:54 p.m., the Complainant requested medical attention.

Starting at about 7:56 p.m., SEW #2 told the Complainant that he had called a sergeant to attend the station, and he would call paramedics.

At 8:08 p.m., EMS arrived and, at 8:18 p.m., the Complainant left the station on a gurney.

Video Footage – The Parking Lot

On January 16, 2024, starting at about 5:52 p.m., the Complainant walked towards CW #4’s vehicle as she sat inside. CW #4 began to reverse and then stopped. The Complainant followed and, at 5:53 p.m., he punched the driver’s side window numerous times with his right fist. The Complainant stopped and walked to another vehicle that was parked near CW #4’s vehicle. The Complainant walked up to a man [CW #2] and started punching him.

Starting at about 5:55 p.m., the Complainant walked over to CW #1 and struck him once in the face. The Complainant then walked northbound on a sidewalk and CW #1 followed.

Starting at about 5:56 p.m., CPS officers arrived at the parking lot. A cruiser travelled north on Division Street, passed the parking lot, made a U-turn and stopped in front of the parking lot, where the Complainant stood. The SO arrived, got out of his cruiser and approached the Complainant. They both left the camera’s view. The video concluded.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following materials from the CPS between January 22, 2024, and May 6, 2024:

• Notes – SEW #2;
• Notes – SEW #1;
• Notes – WO #1;
• Notes – WO #3;
• Notes – WO #2;
• Event Details Report;
• Parking lot video;
• Custody video;
• BWC footage – the SO, WO #1 and WO #2;
• Arrest Procedure; and
• General Occurrence Reports involving the Complainant.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between January 22, 2024, and February 2, 2024:

• Ambulance Call Report – Northumberland Paramedics; and
• The Complainant’s medical record – Northumberland Hills Hospital.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and police and non-police witnesses, as well as video footage that captured the incident, 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 evening of January 16, 2024, police were called to the area of King Street and Division Street. A male – the Complainant – had reportedly punched at a vehicle, with a woman in it, in a parking lot. He had also assaulted two men who had intervened to assist the woman.

The SO arrived on scene, located the Complainant on the sidewalk by the parking lot, and took him into custody placing him in handcuffs. The Complainant was searched and transported to the police station where, following a stint in a holding cell, he was transported to hospital when he complained of pain in his right hand.

At hospital, the Complainant was diagnosed with fractures of the right hand.

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.

The Complainant was diagnosed with a serious injury following his arrest by CPS officers on January 16, 2024. 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 injuries.

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.

Given what he knew of the 911 call, and what he had gathered himself from speaking with witnesses at the scene, the SO was within his rights in first detaining and then arresting the Complainant for assault and uttering threats in relation to his conduct in the parking lot.

As for any force used in aid of the Complainant’s arrest, aside from the SO placing his hands on the Complainant to secure him in handcuffs and guide him into the rear seat of his cruiser, there was none. Any assertion that the Complainant’s injury is the result of being struck by the SO is belied by the BWC footage which establishes that did not occur. What the video footage from the parking lot and other evidence do make clear, however, is that the fractures are the likely result of the Complainant punching a vehicle or engaging in fisticuffs prior to police arrival.

For the foregoing reasons, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.

Date: May 16, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit