SIU Director’s Report - Case # 24-OCI-405
Warning:
This page contains graphic content that can shock, offend and upset.
Contents:
Mandate of the SIU
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.
Information Restrictions
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.
Mandate Engaged
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 49-year-old man (the “Complainant”).
The Investigation
Notification of the SIU[1]
On September 21, 2024, at 10:23 p.m., the Waterloo Regional Police Service (WRPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.
On September 21, 2024, at 7:44 p.m., police officers were dispatched to an address in the area of Bleams Road and Strasburg Road, Kitchener, following a call in which it was reported that the Complainant had assaulted a delivery person and prevented him from leaving. Police arrived and attempted to arrest the Complainant at 7:57 p.m., in the course of which a struggle ensued. The Complainant punched one of the police officers and, in return, a police officer punched the Complainant, who fell to the ground and lost consciousness. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responded and transported the Complainant to the Grand River Hospital (GRH). At 10:00 p.m., the Complainant was diagnosed with a brain bleed.
The Team
Date and time team dispatched: 2024/09/23 at 6:50 a.m.
Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/09/24 at 10:00 a.m.
Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0
Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):
49-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed
The Complainant was interviewed on September 23, 2024.
Civilian Witness (CW)
CW Interviewed
The civilian witness was interviewed on October 2, 2024.
Subject Official (SO)
SO Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed
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 between September 27, 2024, and October 11, 2024.
Evidence
The Scene
The events in question occurred on and around the roadway out front of a residence in the area of Bleams Road and Strasburg Road, Kitchener.
Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]
In-car Camera System (ICCS) Footage – The SO’s Cruiser
On September 21, 2024, at 7:47 p.m., the SO was captured driving off a shopping plaza lot, and activating his emergency lights and siren.
At 2:48 minutes into the video, a police officer - WO #1 - told the responding police officers to slow down.
At 6:04 minutes, the SO arrived on scene and parked behind a fully marked police vehicle [now know to be operated by WO #2]. About 12 metres in front of the SO on the sidewalk was a police officer - WO #1 - speaking to a man - the Complainant. About six metres away, across a driveway and beside a tree, stood a man and a woman [now known to be the CW and Civilian #1, respectively]. The SO and WO #2 approached the Complainant and spoke to him.
At 6:56 minutes, a woman - Civilian #2 - entered the screen from the opposite side of the street from where the police vehicles were parked. Civilian #2 approached the Complainant and the SO and WO #2. She was animated and appeared to shout at the Complainant. The interaction was obstructed by a tree. Civilian #2 then approached Civilian #1 and the CW, who were still with WO #1.
At 8:34 minutes, Civilian #2 approached the Complainant, and started to push him down the driveway, to the roadway, and away from the police officers. They went in front of WO #2’s police vehicle, which obstructed the view.
At 8:40 minutes, the Complainant appeared on the roadway at the front driver’s fender of WO #2’s police vehicle. He suddenly turned to his left and threw a punch with his right fist in the direction of WO #2. The SO immediately reacted by punching the Complainant to the left side of the face with his right hand. The Complainant fell to the ground and appeared to be unconscious. The Complainant was placed into the recovery position, after which WO #2 activated the emergency lights on his police vehicle.
WRPS Communications Recordings
On September 21, 2024, at 7:44 p.m., the WRPS communications received an emergency call from a male - the CW - reporting he was delivering alcohol when someone assaulted him. The perpetrator [now known to be the Complainant] was drunk and also harassing a woman with the CW. The CW said he could not get to his car as the Complainant was blocking him. The CW explained he was dropping off alcohol to Civilian #2, and the Complainant came out of the house and started to hit him. Both the Complainant and Civilian #2 were drunk.
At 7:56 p.m., WO #2 requested an ambulance and a sergeant. The Complainant had tried to assault the police and was now unconscious.
At 8:02 p.m., the dispatcher advised the ambulance was six minutes away.
Materials Obtained from Police Service
Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the WRPS between September 25, 2024, and October 21, 2024:
- Cellular telephone video - the CW;
- Communications recordings;
- ICCS footage;
- List of Civilian Witnesses;
- List of Involved Officers;
- The SO’s training records;
- General & Follow-up Reports;
- Statement – the CW;
- Statement – Civilian #1;
- Subject Occurrence History Reports - the Complainant;
- Computer-assisted Dispatch Report;
- Occurrence Details Report;
- Notes - the SO;
- Notes - WO #2;
- Notes - WO #1;
- Notes - WO #3;
- Procedure - Arrest and Release; and
- Procedure - Use of Force.
Materials Obtained from Other Sources
The SIU obtained the following records from other sources on September 30, 2024:
- Ambulance Call Report; and
- The Complainant’s medical records from GRH.
Incident Narrative
The evidence collected by the SIU, including an interview with the Complainant and police and non-police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.
In the evening of September 21, 2024, WRPS were dispatched to a residence in the area of Bleams Road and Strasburg Road, Kitchener, following a call to police by the CW. The CW – an Uber driver – reported that he had been assaulted by a male while making an alcohol delivery to the male’s address.
The male was the Complainant. Moments prior, Civilian #2 had quarreled with the CW about a delivery of alcohol she had ordered. Finding Civilian #2 intoxicated, the CW had refused to provide the alcohol, in accordance with Uber policy. Civilian #2 snatched the alcohol from the CW and brought it inside the residence. When the CW refused to return the health card she had earlier provided him as identification, she became irate and informed the Complainant. The Complainant exited the residence and confronted the CW, pushing him in the chest and chasing him for a period.
WO #1 was the first officer on scene, followed shortly by the SO and WO #2. While WO #1 dealt with the CW and his companion, who had travelled with him during the delivery, the SO and WO #2 were engaged with Civilian #2 and the Complainant. The Complainant became aggressive with the officers and bumped up against the SO’s chest. The SO pushed him away and the Complainant was asked to calm down. When his belligerence did not abate, they decided to arrest him for breach of the peace and public intoxication.
WO #2 approached the Complainant and took hold of his left arm from behind. The Complainant reacted by turning in the officer’s direction and punching him in the face. On seeing the assault on WO #2, the SO immediately punched the Complainant in the face. The strike felled the Complainant. His head impacted the ground, and he lost consciousness.
Paramedics were summoned to the scene and transported the Complainant to hospital where he was diagnosed with a brain bleed.
Relevant Legislation
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.
Section 31(1), Criminal Code - Arrest for Breach of Peace
31(1) Every peace officer who witnesses a breach of the peace and every one who lawfully assists the peace officer is justified in arresting any person whom he finds committing the breach of the peace or who, on reasonable grounds, he believes is about to join in or renew the breach of the peace.
Section 31, Liquor Licence and Control Act - Intoxication
31 (1) No person shall be in an intoxicated condition in,
(a) a place to which the general public is invited or permitted access; or
(b) any part of a residence that is used in common by persons occupying
more than one dwelling in the residence.
(2) A police officer or conservation officer may arrest without warrant any person who is contravening subsection (1) if, in the opinion of the officer, it is necessary to do so for the safety of any person.
Analysis and Director’s Decision
The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by WRPS officers on September 21, 2024. 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 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.
Given what they knew of the 911 call, and what they observed of the Complainant’s threatening behaviour and intoxication at the scene, the officers were within their rights in deciding to arrest the Complainant for breaching the peace under section 31(1) of the Criminal Code and public intoxication under section 31(2) of the Liquor Licence and Control Act, 2019.
The evidence further establishes that the SO used no more force than was reasonably necessary in effecting the Complainant’s arrest. When the Complainant turned and punched WO #2 as the officer attempted to arrest him, the SO was entitled to intervene to deter a further attack and subdue a violent detainee. The delivery of a single punch would appear a proportionate response that was commensurate with the exigencies of the situation.
In the result, while it is regrettable that the Complainant fell, struck his head and suffered a brain bleed, his injury is not attributable to any unlawful conduct on the part of the SO. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.
Date: January 17, 2025
Electronically approved by
Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit
Endnotes
- 1) Unless otherwise specified, the information in this section reflects the information received by the SIU at the time of notification and does not necessarily reflect the SIU’s findings of fact following its investigation. [Back to text]
- 2) The following records contain sensitive personal information and are not being released pursuant to section 34(2) of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019. The material portions of the records are summarized below. [Back to text]
Note:
The signed English original report is authoritative, and any discrepancy between that report and the French and English online versions should be resolved in favour of the original English report.