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 34-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On October 21, 2024, at 9:06 a.m., the Peel Regional Police (PRP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

At 3:10 a.m., that morning, PRP received a call regarding a home invasion at a residence in the area of Winston Churchill Boulevard and Highway 403, Mississauga. The 911 caller said he was the victim of the home invasion and had been shot in the leg. PRP officers arrived to find the Complainant standing in front of a second-floor window. His mother was at the front door. She advised the police officers that her son was in crisis and there had been no home invasion or shooting. As PRP Tactics and Rescue Unit (TRU) officers approached the home, they instructed the Complainant not to move. The Complainant proceeded to jump from the second-floor window and land on the hood of a car parked in the driveway. The Complainant was transported by emergency medical services (EMS) to the Credit Valley Hospital (CVH) where he was diagnosed as having a fractured L-1 vertebra. The Complainant was also placed on a Form 1 under the Mental Health Act.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/10/21 at 10:19 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/10/21 at 10:56 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on October 21, 2024.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between October 21, 2024, and October 25, 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

The witness officials were interviewed on October 25, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around a residence situated in the area of Winston Churchill Boulevard and Highway 403, Mississauga.

Physical Evidence

On October 21, 2024, at 10:19 a.m., a SIU forensic investigator arrived at the residence.

On the driveway of the residence was a vehicle parked facing the garage door. The windshield was buckled inward and shattered on the driver side. Denting was visible to the hood below the windshield damage.

The scene was photographed and measured, and a scene drawing was created.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

PRP Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage

On October 21, 2024, starting at about 3:16 a.m., the SO arrived at the residence. A pick-up truck arrived with WO #2 and Officer #1, and parked near the home. A police officer was heard issuing a command to, “Put your hands up. Do not move.” The Complainant stood on the second-floor ledge outside a window and replied, “It’s not me, it’s the other guy in the bedroom.” Further police commands were issued to the Complainant, primarily to show his hands and telling him not to fall.

Starting at about 3:17 a.m., CW #2 came to the front door, and WO #1 was instructed to take her away and get some information. WO #2 and Officer #1 prepared to enter the residence. The SO advised that the Complainant was above the officers, moving on the ledge. WO #2 and Officer #1 entered the front door. Somebody ordered the Complainant to stop moving. The Complainant was captured falling backward onto the hood of a car parked in the driveway. The SO stated, “Jesus fuck,” and then asked the Complainant why he would do that. The SO made a radio transmission that the Complainant had jumped from the second-floor and landed on a car. The Complainant complained of a sore back. EMS were requested to attend. The Complainant continued stating he had been shot. The Complainant cautioned the officers to watch the window above and stated he was shot in the leg and stomach, and that his back hurt. The SO gave an update that the Complainant was in mental health crisis. The SO again asked the Complainant why he did this, and the Complainant replied he fell.

Starting at about 3:19 a.m., Officer #1’s BWC captured CW #1 telling police officers that his son was hallucinating. WO #2 broadcast this information. CW #1 told the police officers that his son was an alcoholic, and that day he went out and purchased a white drug, and that he cut himself with a knife and was hallucinating.

Starting at about 3:22 a.m., EMS arrived. The Complainant told the paramedics that he did not jump, he fell.

Communications Recordings & Computer-assisted Dispatch (CAD) Report

On October 21, 2024, starting at about 3:11 a.m., the Complainant called 911 advising he had been shot in the leg with a shotgun; that suspects had a gun to his mother’s head; that his father had been placed in handcuffs; and, that the suspects were still in the house. The police dispatcher advised the Complainant that police and EMS had been dispatched, and the Complainant asked them to hurry.

Starting at about 3:12 a.m., the dispatcher advised of a priority one call at an address in the area of Winston Churchill Boulevard and Highway 403. Dispatch advised that a man had been shot in the leg and the culprit was in the home holding a gun to the mother’s head. Eight police officers (TRU and patrol) were placed on the call.

Police officers arrived while the 911 call was still live, and the Complainant could be heard saying, “It’s not me, it’s the other guy.” Police commands were heard telling the Complainant not to move.

Starting at about 3:17 a.m., the SO reported the Complainant had jumped from a second-storey window and landed on a car. He further advised the Complainant was in mental health crisis, had tried to scale the residence, and jumped on a car. The Complainant was likely to have a back injury. Officer #2 broadcast that the Complainant’s mother advised there was no shooting.

Starting at about 3:20 a.m., WO #2 broadcast that the father of the Complainant indicated his son was hallucinating. He further stated that the Complainant was said to be on multiple drugs, and had consumed a lot of alcohol that day.

Starting at about 3:31 a.m., WO #1 advised the Complainant had been taken to the hospital.

Video Footage from a Residence

On October 21, 2024, starting at about 3:18:32 a.m., CW #2 stood with a police officer in the driveway. It appeared the Complainant had already jumped. A sergeant [now known to be the SO] came into camera view and made a radio transmission that the Complainant had jumped.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the PRP between October 23, 2024, and October 25, 2024:

• Communications recordings
• BWC recordings - Officer #3, Officer #4, Officer #5, Officer #1, Officer #6, WO #1, WO #2, and the SO;
• CAD Report;
• Incident History Report;
• General Occurrence Report;
• Notes - WO #1; and
• Notes - WO #2.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between October 21, 2024, and November 1, 2024:

• Video recordings from a residence; and
• The Complainant’s medical records from CVH.

The material events in question, clear on the evidence collected by the SIU, may briefly be summarized. 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 21, 2024, PRP officers, including tactical officers, were dispatched to a residence located in the area of Winston Churchill Boulevard and Highway 403, Mississauga. The Complainant, who resided at the address with his parents, had called police to report a home invasion in progress. He told the 911 call-taker that he had been shot and the intruders were holding his mother at gunpoint inside the house.

The Complainant was of unsound mind, the result of an overconsumption of alcohol and illicit drugs. He had hallucinated the home invasion, and could not be convinced otherwise by his mother and father. Fearful for his life, he had climbed through a second-floor window onto a small ledge. His intention was to escape by jumping onto the family vehicle parked in the driveway below.

Arriving within minutes of the call, police officers, including the SO (the sergeant on scene), witnessed the Complainant standing on an exterior second-floor ledge at the front of the house, his front to the wall. Not knowing exactly what his involvement in the home invasion was, the officers ordered him to remain still and show his hands. The Complainant said that he was the victim and showed the officers blood on his right leg, the result, he claimed, of a gunshot.

Shortly after their arrival, it started to become clear to the officers that the Complainant was in mental health crisis. His mother, who had emerged from the home, explained to the officers that the Complainant was hallucinating. Within minutes of their arrival, the Complainant either fell or jumped from the ledge, his back landing on the front windshield of the parked vehicle.

The Complainant was transported to hospital, diagnosed with a fractured back, and admitted for psychiatric examination. He had not sustained any gunshots.

Sections 219 and 221, Criminal Code - Criminal Negligence Causing Bodily Harm

219 (1) Every one is criminally negligent who

(a) in doing anything, or

(b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,

shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.

(2) For the purposes of this section, duty means a duty imposed by law.

221 Every person who by criminal negligence causes bodily harm to another person is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

The Complainant was seriously injured in a fall from height in Mississauga on October 21, 2024. As PRP officers were on scene at the time, 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 fall.

The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing bodily harm contrary to section 221 of the Criminal Code. The offence is reserved for serious cases of neglect that demonstrate a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked and substantial departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. In the instant case, the question is whether there was a want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the Complainant’s fall. There was not.

The officers responding to the scene, including the SO, were lawfully placed and in the execution of their duties through the chain of events culminating in the Complainant’s fall. As one would expect, they responded quickly to the report of a violent home invasion in progress. Not knowing exactly what they were dealing with when they arrived to find the Complainant perched perilously on the ledge, I am unable to fault the officers for asking the Complainant to show his hands and remain still. For all they knew, the Complainant might have been one of the intruders. By the time it began to dawn on them that the Complainant was delusional, there was little opportunity to do anything to prevent his fall other than to ask him to stop moving. Once on the ground, the officers acted quickly to secure medical attention for the Complainant. On this record, I am satisfied that the SO comported himself at all times with due care and regard for public safety, including the Complainant’s well-being.

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

Date: February 12, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit