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 60-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On October 17, 2024, at 4:40 a.m., the Niagara Regional Police Service (NRPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On October 16, 2024, the NRPS were attempting to arrest a male [now known to be the Complainant] on the authority of a warrant at his residence. When the officers arrived, the Complainant retreated into the residence and refused to come out. Detectives obtained a Feeney warrant.[2] Officers subsequently entered the residence and, after a struggle with the Complainant, took him into custody. The Complainant had a cut over his right eye and complained of wrist pain. He was being transported to NRPS’s central holding when he was redirected to Niagara Health (NH). The Complainant was diagnosed with a medial orbit fracture over the right eye, near where the cut was.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/10/17 at 8:30 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/10/17 at 8:52 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on October 17, 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 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #4 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between November 7, 2024, and November 19, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired inside a bedroom of an apartment in the area of Bloomfield Avenue and Dundonald Street, St. Catharines.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[3]

NRPS Custody Footage – Detention Corridor

At 3:53:54 a.m., October 17, 2024, a handcuffed Complainant was brought into the detention area by a special constable with WO #3 and WO #1 following. WO #3 advised that the Complainant had been arrested on two outstanding bench warrants at his residence. In addition, further Criminal Code charges of “assault peace officer” and “resist arrest” were also being laid. The Complainant was asked about injuries, and he said he would need plastic surgery because of a fractured orbital bone that he suffered due to “being struck by a bat”. He said he had received stitches to close a wound above his right eye. He added that his fist was “shattered” the last time he was arrested, and he was currently being treated for paranoid schizophrenia.

At 4:23:30 a.m., the Complainant was escorted to a cell.

NRPS Communications Recordings

At 0001:42 hrs into the recording, the SO and WO #3 were dispatched to a “wanted persons” call at the Complainant’s home. The Complainant was wanted for having failed to appear in court, as required.

At 0002:11 hrs, a police officer said he could see the Complainant walking around the apartment and turning off the lights.

At 0002:41 hrs, Officer #1 advised he was monitoring the call and preparing a search warrant to enter the apartment.

At 0002:55 hrs, a police officer described the authorities of the police to arrest the Complainant and authority under the Criminal Code to use force. There were no weapons or hazards known to exist in the Complainant’s home.

At 0004:13 hrs, Officer #1 advised the warrant was signed and authorized by a Justice of the Peace.

At 0005:20 hrs, it was reported that a key for the Complainant’s unit was available at the apartment complex office.

At 0006:34 hrs, a police officer advised the Complainant was in custody.

Video Footage – Apartment Building

On October 17, 2024, at 1:33:16 a.m., the Complainant was walking in a hallway of the apartment building with the SO on his right and WO #3 on his left. WO #2, WO #1 and WO #4 were behind them. The Complainant was handcuffed with his hands behind the back.

At 1:33:26 a.m., the Complainant turned his body to the left and WO #3 reached towards his head with her open left hand. WO #3 did not appear to make contact with the Complainant. The Complainant ducked down and turned to the right. The right side of the Complainant’s face appeared to strike the protective bumper on the wall. WO #3 and the SO held the Complainant. The Complainant continued to walk with WO #3 and the SO towards the exit of the building.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the NRPS between November 5, 2024, and February 10, 2025:

• Communications recordings;
• Custody footage;
• Booking photographs;
• Notes –WO #4, WO #3, WO #2, and WO #1;
• Feeney
• Warrant – the Complainant;
• The Complainant’s NRPS contact history;
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report;
• Occurrence Reports; and
• Policies – Use of Force, Major Incidents and Routine Criminal Investigations, and Powers of Arrest.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between November 15, 2024, and December 6, 2024:

• The Complainant’s medical records from NH; and
• Video footage from the apartment building.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and police eyewitnesses, 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 morning of October 17, 2024, the SO attended at an apartment in the area of Bloomfield Avenue and Dundonald Street, St. Catherines, in the company of WO #3. The officers were there to execute warrants in effect for the arrest of the apartment’s occupant – the Complainant. The SO knocked on the front door and called-out to the Complainant asking him to surrender into custody. The Complainant locked the door, closed the curtains and turned off the lights in his apartment. He told the officers he had no intention of coming out.

About a couple of hours after their arrival, the SO and WO #3, now joined by WO #4, WO #2 and WO #1, entered the apartment using a key provided by the building superintendent. A Feeney warrant had been issued authorizing their entry into the premises to arrest the Complainant. The officers encountered the Complainant lying supine on his bed in the bedroom. The SO was the first to physically engage the Complainant. A struggle ensued in which the Complainant resisted arrest. He kicked and punched at the SO, and was himself struck several times before being subdued and handcuffed behind the back.

Following his arrest, the Complainant was seen at hospital and diagnosed with a fractured right orbital bone.

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 NRPS officers on October 17, 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.

There were warrants in effect for the Complainant’s arrest, including a Feeney warrant authorizing entry into the apartment, and the officers were within their rights in confronting the Complainant in his bedroom to execute the warrants.

With respect to the force brought to bear by the officers in the course of the Complainant’s arrest, the evidence falls short of reasonably establishing it was excessive. There is an account in the evidence that the Complainant was immediately grabbed by an officer and punched in the face by the SO, prompting him to fight back. On the other hand, the officers interviewed by the SIU indicate the Complainant was the aggressor from the start, kicking and punching in the direction of the SO, and knocking him into an open closet. WO #1 says he had observed the Complainant holding the SO’s arm, and punched his upper shoulder three times to get him to release his grip. Shortly thereafter, in the picture painted by the officers, the Complainant was turned onto his front and handcuffed behind the back. On this evidence, I am unable to reasonably conclude with any confidence that the Complainant was struck without good reason. On the contrary, if the Complainant resisted as forcefully as the evidence indicates he did, and did so from the get-go, the punches described in the evidence would appear commensurate with the exigencies of the situation.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s fractured orbital bone was incurred in the altercation that marked his arrest, perhaps via a punch delivered by the SO, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the injury is attributable to any unlawful conduct on the part of the arresting officers. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: February 14, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit