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 injuries of a 22-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On November 18, 2024, at 8:20 a.m., the Timmins Police Service (TPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On November 17, 2024, the police received a call about a theft in progress at the Circle K convenience store, 287 Algonquin Boulevard West, Timmins, involving two men [one of whom, reportedly, was the Complainant]. Police responded to the location and engaged in a foot pursuit with the Complainant. At 11:42 p.m., officers located the Complainant around 100 Waterloo Road, Timmins, where he was arrested. The Complainant resisted and was subsequently grounded. Once under control, the Complainant was transported to the TPS station. Injuries were observed to the Complainant during his booking, prompting a request for emergency medical services. The Complainant was transported to Timmins and District Hospital (TDH) where he was examined on November 18, 2024, and diagnosed at 3:30 a.m. with a fractured jaw, broken and missing teeth, and a remote nasal fracture. The Complainant was released from police custody on an undertaking at 3:40 a.m.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/11/18 at 10:15 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/11/27 at 7:50 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on November 28, 2024.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Not interviewed

CW #2 Not interviewed

Subject Officials (SO)

SO #1 Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal right

SO #2 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

WO #5 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between December 11 and 20, 2024.

The Scene

The events in question began in and around the intersection of Preston Street and Wilson Avenue, continued northbound for several blocks, and concluded on and around the parking lot of Hollinger Court, 100 Waterloo Road, Timmins.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Police In-car Camera (ICC) Footage & Communications Recordings

On November 17, 2024, at about 11:35 p.m., a call was received about a theft in progress from Circle K convenience store, 287 Algonquin Boulevard West.

At about 11:37 p.m., officers were dispatched to the area with the description of two male suspects.

At about 11:40 p.m., SO #1 located the suspects behind a business at 100 Wilson Avenue, and advised they were running from him. SO #1 chased the suspect across Algonquin Boulevard West, past Little Caesars, and through the Wendy’s parking lot over a metal railing into the laneway alongside Hollinger Court.

At about 11:41 p.m., SO #1 caught the Complainant and struck him but the Complainant was able to escape and continued running away behind Hollinger Court. The Complainant rounded the back of Hollinger Court into the parking lot area where he was met by SO #2, who struck and grounded him.

At about 11:42 p.m., the Complainant was in police custody. SO #2 and SO #1 were both on top of the Complainant, who resisted and refused to give up his hands from under his body. SO #2 struck the Complainant several times in the head, after which his hands were handcuffed behind his back. The Complainant was brought to WO #1’s police vehicle and transported to the TPS station.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the TPS between November 17, 2024, and December 12, 2024:

• ICC footage
• Communications recordings
• Notes - WO #1
• Notes - WO #3
• Notes - WO #4
• Notes - WO #2
• Notes - WO #5
• Custody footage
• Civilian witness statement
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report
• Involved Officers List
• A screen shot of a male at Circle K convenience store
• Police History - the Complainant

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical records from TDH on November 28, 2024.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including an interview with the Complainant, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, neither subject official agreed an interview with the SIU or the release of their notes.

In the evening of November 17, 2024, TPS received a 911 call from the Circle K store, 287 Algonquin Boulevard West, Timmins, about a theft in progress involving two males. SO #1 arrived within minutes of the call and observed the males fleeing in the area of 100 Wilson Avenue, about three blocks away from the scene of the theft. The officer chased one of the males on foot.

The male being chased was the Complainant. The Complainant ran northward towards Algonquin Boulevard West, crossed the street, and continued his flight towards a metal railing at the north end of a Wendy’s parking lot. He climbed over the railing and was grounded by SO #1, the officer having caught up to him. Following a brief struggle on the ground, during which the officer struck him in the head, the Complainant rose to his feet and fled east and then north behind the plaza at 100 Waterloo Road. As he rounded the corner of the plaza and continued west in the parking lot, the Complainant was confronted by SO #2 and taken to the ground again. The Complainant was struck several times in the head on the ground before the officers handcuffed his arms behind the back.

The Complainant was seen at hospital following his arrest and diagnosed with a fractured jaw, a broken nose, and loose and missing teeth.

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 TPS officers on November 17, 2024. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, naming the arresting officers – SO #1 and SO #2 – the 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 injuries.

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.

I am satisfied that the Complainant was subject to arrest for theft. He matched the description of one of the suspects and was seen running away from the scene of the crime.

I am also satisfied that the evidence around the force used by the officers in the Complainant’s arrest falls short of reasonably establishing it was excessive. The two takedowns seem a reasonable apprehension tactic in the context of a male fleeing from arrest. Forcing the Complainant to the ground would accomplish the twin goals of bringing his flight to an end while positioning the officers to better manage any continuing physical resistance that they could reasonably expect from a fleeing suspect. With respect to the several punches struck by the officers, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the force was unwarranted in light of evidence that the Complainant continued to resist after he was grounded and refused to release his arms to be handcuffed.

In the result, while it is apparent that the Complainant’s injuries were incurred in some combination of the two takedowns and the punches to the head, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that they are attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of either subject official. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.

Before closing the file, I note what appears to have been a late notification of the incident by the TPS to the SIU in possible contravention of section 16 of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019. The matter was not reported to the SIU until 8:20 a.m., November 18, 2024, even though there is evidence that the service was aware of the nature and extent of the Complainant’s injuries as early as 3:30 a.m. Late notifications of this nature jeopardize the integrity of SIU investigations, detract from the SIU’s independence and credibility, and undermine the public’s confidence in policing and policing oversight. I will be raising this matter in my reporting letter to the chief of police, and notifying the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency pursuant to section 35.1(1) of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019.

Date: March 17, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit