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 39-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On May 31, 2024, at 2:50 p.m., the Niagara Regional Police Service (NRPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On May 30, 2024, at 1:38 p.m., the Complainant was arrested for attempting to steal the purse of a woman in the lobby of the NRPS St. Catharines station. Officers attended the front of the building, where the Complainant was arrested. The Complainant was lodged in a cell pending a bail hearing. On the morning of May 31, 2024, the Complainant complained of pain in his right hand. He was taken to Greater Niagara General Hospital (GNGH) in Niagara Falls and diagnosed with a fracture of the 5^th digit of his right hand.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/05/31 at 3:43 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/06/03 at 9:20 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on June 4, 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 June 21, 2024.

The Scene

The scene was located on the sidewalk out front of the NRPS One District, 198 Welland Avenue, St. Catharines.

Figure 1 - Front entrance of the NRPS One District, 198 Welland Avenue, St. Catharines

[Source: Google Earth]

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Video Footage – NRPS

On May 30, 2024, at 1:36:58 p.m., the Complainant stood at a counter in the front lobby of the station speaking with a woman holding a purse in her left hand.

At 1:37:51 p.m., the Complainant lunged and grabbed the purse the woman held. She held the purse with both hands as the Complainant pulled her, hanging onto the purse by the purse straps. He moved backwards dragging the woman through the lobby.

At 1:38:00 p.m., the Complainant turned forcefully and grabbed the left arm of the woman with his right hand, after which they engaged in a push-pull motion.

At 1:38:06 p.m., at the front lobby vestibule door, the Complainant swung around, moved back, and pulled the woman ahead into the front vestibule.

At 1:38:11 p.m., the Complainant and the woman exited the front doors of the station where they fell, both still holding the purse, the Complainant landing closer to Welland Street. The Complainant stood up and began dragging the woman towards the stairs.

At 1:38:16 p.m., WO #1 ran outside, followed by the SO.

At 1:38:21 p.m., WO #1 stopped behind the woman as the SO ran around so he was positioned slightly ahead, and to the left, of the Complainant.

At 1:38:22 p.m., the woman let go of the purse and the Complainant continued down the stairs, falling at the bottom. The SO, positioned on the steps, grabbed the Complainant’s coat at the top of the neck and pulled him to the left, causing the Complainant to land on his right side, possibly on his right hand. The Complainant rolled onto his back, and then onto his left side, on the sidewalk. The Complainant resisted, trying to stand up as the SO was behind him.

As the SO tried to gain control of the Complainant, WO #1 attended along with other officers to assist. Part of the interaction could not be seen because of the camera angle and the number of NRPS officers blocking the view.

At 1:39:30 p.m., the Complainant remained on the sidewalk, positioned on his left side, handcuffed with his hands behind his body. The SO and two other NRPS officers were present, maintaining control of the Complainant.

At 1:45:41 p.m., the Complainant was brought to his feet and walked to cruiser #180, parked nearby. He was placed against the right rear of the cruiser and searched.

At 1:47:24 p.m., the Complainant was placed into the right rear seat of the cruiser.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the NRPS between June 4, 2024, and June 18, 2024:

• A list of involved officers;
• Occurrence and Arrest Reports;
• Video footage of police station entrance / lobby / custody area;
• A list of previous interactions related to the Complainant;
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report;
• Prisoner Custody Record - transport of the Complainant to GNGH; and
• Duty notes - WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between June 6, 2024, and June 18, 2024:

• The Complainant’s medical records from GNGH.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and a police eyewitness, and 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 early afternoon of May 30, 2024, the Complainant found himself in the front lobby at the NRPS station in St. Catharines. He was of unsound mind at the time. He was speaking with a woman when he suddenly reached for the purse she was holding and attempted to pull it away. She refused to let go. While holding the purse, the Complainant walked backwards towards the doors of the station, pulling the woman with him. In the area of the doors, the woman, clutching the purse straps, fell. She was dragged on her back by the Complainant, who was now outside and making his way towards a set of stairs leading to a sidewalk.

Alerted to the situation, the SO followed the pair outside and watched as the Complainant lost his footing and tumbled down the stairs. He descended the stairs and took hold of the Complainant’s jacket from the upper back as he was attempting to right himself. The officer forced the Complainant onto the sidewalk and kept him pinned there as other police personnel arrived to assist. The Complainant was shortly handcuffed behind the back and taken into custody.

The following day, while still in police cells, the Complainant complained of pain to his right hand. He was transported to hospital and diagnosed with a fractured small finger.

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 on May 31, 2024, while in the custody of the NRPS. 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 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.

The SO was within his right in moving to arrest the Complainant. While in a police station, the Complainant had attempted to steal a purse from a woman.

As for the force used by the officer in aid of the Complainant’s arrest, namely, a takedown, I am satisfied it was legally justified. When the SO first caught up with the Complainant, there was reason to believe he would physically resist arrest - he had just dragged a woman some distance in a determined effort to steal her purse. Forcing him to the ground would better position the officer to manage that resistance. In fact, the Complainant did resist arrest, at one point lifting himself partially off the ground before the SO forced him down again. No strikes were delivered, and the takedown itself was accomplished with moderate force.

It remains unclear when precisely the Complainant’s injury was incurred. As well as the takedown, the evidence suggests his finger could have been fractured during the tussle over the purse with the woman. Be that as it may, as there is no reason to believe that the SO comported himself other than lawfully during his engagement with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges. The file is closed.

Date: September 23, 2024

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit