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 52-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On August 12, 2024, the Chatham-Kent Police Service (CKPS) notified the SIU of an injury to the Complainant.

According to the CKPS, on August 10, 2024, at 3:40 a.m., CKPS officers responded to a call involving a domestic disturbance at a residence in the area of Wedgewood Avenue and Tweedsmuir Avenue West, Chatham. The Complainant resisted arrest and officers responded with knee strikes to subdue him. The Complainant was taken to the Chatham-Kent Health Alliance following his arrest where he was diagnosed with a fractured rib.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/08/13 at 9:09 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/08/15 at 1:10 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on August 15, 2024.

Civilian Witness (CW)

CW Interviewed

The civilian witness was interviewed on August 24, 2024.

Subject Officials (SO)

SO #1 Interviewed, but declined to submit notes, as is the subject official’s legal right

SO #2 Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed

The subject official was interviewed on September 26, 2024.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on August 26, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired inside a bedroom of a home in the area of Wedgewood Avenue and Tweedsmuir Avenue West, Chatham, and out front of the same home.

Physical Evidence

Investigators attended the scene on August 16, 2024, and were shown by the CW where the interaction took place in the bedroom.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

In-car Camera (ICC) Footage – WO #1 and WO #2’s Cruiser

The footage captured activities in the rear passenger side secure compartment of the vehicle and activities in close proximity to the open door.

The Complainant was seen being led to the vehicle by two officers - SO #2 and WO #2. He became actively resistant as officers asked him to have a seat inside the vehicle. The Complainant continued to resist efforts to push him into the vehicle when the right knee of one of the officers [known to be SO #2] came up in the direction of the Complainant’s abdomen from his right side. The Complainant let out an audible gasp and buckled slightly at the waist, after which he was pushed into the vehicle.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the CKPS between August 23, 2024, and September 19, 2024:

• Policy - Use of Force;
• Policy - Arrest / Release / Court;
• Event History;
• Notes - WO #3;
• Notes - WO #2;
• Notes - WO #1;
• Notes - SO #2;
• Will-say Report - SO #2; and
• ICC recording.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical records from Chatham-Kent Health Alliance on August 15, 2024.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant, SO #1 and other police witnesses, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, SO #2 did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

In the early morning of August 10, 2024, CKPS officers were dispatched to a residence in the area of Wedgewood Avenue and Tweedsmuir Avenue West, Chatham. A female – the CW – had called police to report being threatened by a male – the Complainant – in her home.

Arriving at the residence at about 3:50 a.m., officers, including SO #1 and SO #2, met with the CW. She explained that the Complainant had choked her and provided the officers permission to enter the home to search for him. SO #2 and WO #3 located the Complainant attempting to conceal himself in the closet of a bedroom. Joined by SO #1, the officers took hold of the Complainant and attempted to arrest him. The Complainant resisted, spraying beer from a can he was holding onto the officers, and was grounded by SO #2. On the floor, following two or three knee strikes to the lower right abdomen by SO #1, the Complainant was handcuffed.

The Complainant was taken out the house to a cruiser where he resisted as officers attempted to place him in the rear seat. SO #2 delivered a single knee strike to the Complainant’s midsection, after which the officers were able to push him into the cruiser.

At hospital following his arrest, the Complainant was diagnosed with a fracture of the lateral right eighth rib.

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 seriously injured in the course of his arrest by CKPS officers on August 10, 2024. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation naming SO #1 and SO #2 subject officials. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that either subject official committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and 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.

SO #1, SO #2 and the other CKPS officers were within their rights in seeking to arrest the Complainant. Having spoken to the CW, they had grounds to believe that he had assaulted her and, further, that he was in violation of a term of a release order, namely, a curfew. Once in their lawful custody, the officers were also entitled to control the Complainant’s movements to ensure he was processed according to law.

I am satisfied that the force used by the officers in their dealings with the Complainant was lawful. The evidence establishes that the Complainant physically resisted arrest upon being discovered in the closet by spraying officers with a can of beer he was holding and refusing to release his arms to be handcuffed. The takedown performed by SO #2 made sense in the circumstances as it would deter the Complainant’s assaultive behaviour without the use of weapons, while better positioning the officers to manage any continuing resistance. After a period of further struggle on the ground, during which SO #1 was unable to wrestle control of the Complainant’s right arm, the use of knee strikes by the officer seems a reasonable escalation of force. It proved effective, too, as the officers were thereafter able to handcuff the Complainant behind the back. For the same reasons, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the knee strike delivered by SO #2 by the cruiser was excessive.

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

Date: December 9, 2024

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit