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 24-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On October 13, 2024, at 3:45 p.m., the Sault Ste. Marie Police Service (SSMPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On October 13, 2024, at 2:40 p.m., Civilian Witness (CW) #1 called SSMPS for assistance because the Complainant had become volatile. CW #1 was worried the Complainant would become aggressive with her. There were shouts in the background of CW #1’s call to SSMPS. The Complainant became upset when she found out CW #1 had called police. Witness Official (WO) #1 and WO #2 were dispatched. They stopped down the street from the caller’s residence because they saw the two women on the front lawn of the house. At 2:57 p.m., WO #1 and WO #2 called another unit to attend as the Complainant was aggressive. They intervened before another SSMPS officer could arrive to prevent an assault on CW #1. During the interaction, the Complainant swung her arms and was combative. WO #2 received a finger or fingernail to his eye and was sent to the hospital with a swollen eye and pain. WO #1 was slapped twice in the face. The SO, assigned to the Mobile Crisis Rapid Response Team (MCRRT), arrived. He assisted WO #2 and WO #1 to secure the Complainant in handcuffs. The Complainant sustained an injury to the arm while being restrained by the SO. Paramedic services attended the scene. The Complainant was taken to Sault Area Hospital (SAH) because of a possible arm fracture. WO #2 was taken to the hospital in another ambulance.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/10/15 at 8:42 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/10/15 at 9:11 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 2

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

24-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on October 17, 2024.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on October 17, 2024.

Subject Official (SO)

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

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on October 29, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around the front yard of a residence located near Huron Street and Wellington Street West, Sault Ste. Marie.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Police Communications

On October 13, 2024, at 2:40 p.m., a civilian called 911. The caller had received a phone call from CW #1, who reported that the Complainant had become violent. The caller was not at the scene and would not attend for violent calls. She provided information about the Complainant’s disability and weight, and reported that the Complainant had difficulty with regulating her behavior. She frequently became violent with her family. A medication had been given to calm her down but had not taken effect yet.

At 2:55 p.m., CW #1 called 911. The Complainant yelled in the background of the phone call. She was agitated. The dispatcher asked if the incident was about the Complainant and CW #1 confirmed it was.

In-car Camera System (ICCS) Footage

At 3:07:29 p.m., two police vehicles arrived at the scene. Three police officers [WO #1, WO #2, and the SO] were already on-scene and surrounded the Complainant as she sat on the sidewalk. There was a police officer on her left side [WO #1] and a male police officer on her right side.

At 3:14:08 p.m., paramedic services arrived.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from SSMPS between October 15, 2024, and November 5, 2024:

• General Occurrence Report
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Subject Profile – the Complainant
• Communications recordings
• ICCS footage
• Notes – WO #1, WO #2, Officer #1, Officer #2 and Officer #3
• Witness statements – WO #1, WO #2 and the SO

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical records from SAH on October 31, 2024.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant, and other police and non-police witnesses, 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. He did authorize the release of a written statement.

In the afternoon of October 13, 2024, SSMPS officers were dispatched to a residence near Huron Street and Wellington Street West with respect to a reported domestic disturbance. The Complainant was acting out against CW #1, causing her to be concerned about her safety.

WO #1 and WO #2 arrived on scene, outside in front of the residence, and placed themselves between the Complainant and CW #1 to keep them separated. They took hold of the aggressor, the Complainant, who reacted by striking them each in the face. The officers were able to seat the Complainant on the sidewalk while they waited for assistance to arrive.

The SO, a member of the SSMPS MCRRT, arrived shortly with CW #2, a registered social worker and member of the MCRRT. The officer took hold of the Complainant’s right arm and brought it behind her back to be handcuffed. In that process, an audible snap was heard. The Complainant had sustained a fracture of the right arm.

Paramedics arrived on scene and transported the Complainant to hospital where her injury was diagnosed and treated.

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 her arrest by SSMPS officers on October 13, 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 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.

WO #1 and WO #2 were within their rights in physically separating the Complainant from CW #1 in order to prevent an assault and preserve the peace. Thereafter, when the Complainant reacted by striking the officers in the face, causing injury to WO #2, she rendered herself subject to arrest for assault.

With respect to the force brought to bear by the SO, I am unable to reasonably conclude it was excessive. Grabbing hold of the Complainant’s right arm and manipulating it around her back to be handcuffed were actions required to effect the arrest and performed without undue force. Certainly, some force was used by the officer to bring it behind the back, but this was made necessary by the Complainant’s resistance.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injury was incurred in the handcuffing process – the product, it appears, of countervailing forces acting on each other - I am not reasonably satisfied that it was attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of the SO. The file is closed.

Date: February 10, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit