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 death of a 36-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU

On July 10, 2024, at 12:47 p.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On July 9, 2024, at 8:30 p.m., the Complainant was arrested by the OPP in relation to a domestic violence incident in the area of Smith Street and Frederick Street East, Arthur. He was transported to the Rockwood OPP Detachment (2006 Main Street North, Rockwood) and lodged in a cell awaiting a bail hearing on July 10, 2024. The Complainant admitted that sometime during the day, prior to coming into police custody, he had consumed crack cocaine, fentanyl, and methamphetamines. The cells were monitored by special constables. At 3:59 a.m., the Complainant was sweating and shivering, and had vomited several times. Asked by staff if he wanted Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to be contacted, the Complainant declined indicating that he was suffering from drug withdrawal symptoms. At 10:10 a.m., a notation was made that the Complainant was on the toilet and provided tissue. It was sometime shortly after 10:10 a.m. that cell staff observed the Complainant to be in medical distress. Witness Official (WO) #1 responded to the cell area and directed the administration of Narcan. EMS were notified and the Complainant was transported to the Guelph General Hospital (GGH). Lifesaving attempts were unsuccessful, and the Complainant was pronounced deceased at 11:20 a.m.

At 5:41 p.m., the OPP contacted the SIU with the following update.

The Complainant was arrested for assault causing bodily harm at 8:32 p.m., on July 9, 2024. He was initially transported to the North Wellington Operations Centre in Teviotdale and lodged in cells at 9:35 p.m. He was monitored for a short time and then transferred to the South Wellington Operations Centre in Rockwood at 10:02 p.m., where he would await a bail hearing. He arrived at 10:58 p.m. and was placed in a cell. The Complainant was observed having vomited several times, and with cold sweats and chills. As a result, he was transferred to another cell at 8:07 a.m. At 9:02 a.m., the Complainant was provided breakfast.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2024/07/10 at 2:10 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2024/07/11 at 3:35 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

36-year-old male; deceased

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

CW #6 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between July 10, 2024, and August 7, 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

WO #5 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #6 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #7 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness officials were interviewed between July 15, 2024, and July 31, 2024.

Service Employee Witnesses (SEW)

SEW #1 Interviewed

SEW #2 Interviewed

SEW #3 Interviewed

The service employee witnesses were interviewed on July 15, 2024.

Investigative Delay

The Report of Postmortem Examination was received by the SIU from the Coroner’s Office on March 14, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around the cells area of the OPP Rockwood Detachment, 5145 Wellington Road 27, 2006 Main Street North, Rockwood.

Physical Evidence

On July 10, 2024, the SIU forensic investigator attended the Rockwood OPP Detachment. The scene was a male cell block area, containing three individual cells.

One cell showed evidence of occupancy, and the following items were noted: cell mattress and blankets, maroon T-shirt (with signs of EMS intervention) ,two deployed Narcan kits and packaging, two defibrillator pad protectors, and food and drink (sandwich and juice box).

A second cell showed evidence of use with the following item noted: defibrillator unit and a rolled-up blanket on the bed.

The third cell showed no signs of occupancy or use.

A pillow and blanket were in the hallway of the cell block, outside the cells. There were cameras in all three cells and the hallway.

The SIU forensic collected two dispensers of Narcan.

Forensic Evidence

On July 13, 2024, a Forensic Pathologist performed a post-mortem (PM) examination on the Complainant’s body. The cause of death was determined as “Pending”.

The Report of Postmortem Examination was received by the SIU from the Coroner’s Office on March 14, 2025. In it, the pathologist concluded that the Complainant’s death was attributable to “fluorofentanyl, fentanyl, methyl/isobutyryl-fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine toxicity”. He noted: “Fentanyl (and its derivatives, fluorofentanyl, methyl/isobutyryl-fentanyl) are potent opioid central nervous system depressants that can cause fatal respiratory depression, and their toxicity is dependent on the tolerance of the individual. Cocaine and methamphetamine are stimulants that can cause fatal cardiac arrhythmia in a dose-independent manner.”

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

OPP Communications Recordings

On July 9, 2024, at 8:19:00 p.m., a man called the OPP and reported a domestic disturbance in a backyard in which a man [now known to be the Complainant] was yelling at a woman [now known to be CW #2].

At 8:20:00 p.m., WO #6 and WO #5 were dispatched to the address.

At 8:23:00 p.m., WO #6 arrived and stated he was separating the parties. A minute later, WO #6 indicated the two had been separated and that EMS were not required.

At 8:26:00 p.m., the EMS were requested as a precaution for CW #2.

At 8:32:00 p.m., the Complainant was said to have been arrested.

At 9:13:00 p.m., the Complainant was said to be in transit to the OPP Teviotdale Detachment.

At 10:19:00 a.m., on July 10, 2024, the OPP Wellington Detachment called the London Communications Centre (LCC) indicating an ambulance was needed for a man [now known to be the Complainant] having a seizure in the cells at the OPP Rockwood Detachment. A call was placed to EMS.

At 10:25:00 a.m., EMS called the OPP back to ensure they were aware a call was received from OPP staff at the Rockwood Detachment. A man was having a seizure and was possibly vital signs absent (VSA). EMS were already on scene.

At 10:36:00 a.m., an officer broadcast he was following the ambulance to the hospital.

At 11:12:00 a.m., the officer arrived at the GGH.

At 11:15:00 a.m., a sergeant from the LCC notified the Provincial Communications Centre that the Complainant had been transported to the hospital due to seizures.

EMS Communications Recordings

On July 10, 2024, at 10:19:24 a.m., EMS received a call from SEW #1 reporting that the Complainant was having seizures in a cell. The telephone call was cutting in and out. SEW #1 explained that the Complainant had been on fentanyl and meth. SEW #1 returned to the cell and instructions were given by the call-taker to roll the Complainant on his side. The call-taker was told Narcan had been given because of the Complainant’s drug intake. SEW #1 spoke of the Complainant throwing up earlier.

WO #1 came on the telephone and explained that the Complainant had come into the detachment that day. He was not breathing, and Narcan had been administered with no reaction. The Complainant was being removed from the cell. WO #1, when asked, said the Complainant was not breathing and unconscious. WO #1 had just arrived, and information had been provided that the Complainant had taken fentanyl.

The call-taker indicated that EMS were on their way, and she asked if a defibrillator was at their location. The call-taker said a defibrillator should be used if there was no breathing. WO #1 said a weak pulse had been found. The call-taker instructed that the Complainant be kept on his side until paramedics arrived.

At 10:21:00 a.m., the EMS were dispatched.

At 10:22:17 a.m., an update was supplied - a 36-year-old man was seizing in the cell and apparently had overdosed earlier on fentanyl and meth.

At 10:24:20 a.m., the Complainant was VSA, and a defibrillator had been applied.

At 10:24:55 a.m., the EMS had arrived.

At 10:58:27 a.m., CW #6 (a paramedic) asked that GGH be notified that a VSA Complainant was being transported to hospital.

At 10:59:29 a.m., CW #6 advised they were about ten minutes away from the GGH.

At 11:12:13 a.m., EMS arrived at the GGH.

In-car Camera (ICC) Footage

Starting at about 8:33:00 p.m., July 9, 2024, the Complainant was placed into the rear of WO #6’s police vehicle. The reason for his arrest was explained. The Complainant replied he understood.

Starting at about 8:49:00 p.m., there was a discussion about where the Complainant could stay. The Complainant stated he was an opioid addict, and he would be pretty sick soon.

At 9:08:00 p.m., the Complainant was removed from WO #6’s police vehicle to be taken to the detachment in another police vehicle.

Starting at about 10:08:00 p.m., the Complainant was placed in the rear of a police vehicle. He sat calmly handcuffed with his hands behind his back and his eyes closed. The vehicle left for the Rockwood Detachment. During the trip, the Complainant said his shoulder was sore but he would be fine. When asked if he had consumed drugs that night, the Complainant spoke of his history using drugs and his sobriety, and said he used fentanyl, meth and crack, but mainly fentanyl.

Starting at about 10:41:00 p.m., the Complainant said he would probably be really sick in the next couple of hours. When asked if he was referring to the effects of withdrawal, he replied, “Yea.”

Starting at about 10:56:00 p.m., the police vehicle arrived at the Rockwood Detachment. The Complainant was removed from the police vehicle.

Video Footage - OPP Teviotdale Detachment – Sally Port

Starting at about 0106:44 hours into the recording, July 9, 2024, an OPP vehicle arrived in the sally port. WO #6 and WO #7 escorted the Complainant from the rear of the OPP vehicle through the side door. The Complainant was handcuffed behind his back.

Starting at about 0146:50 hours into the recording, the Complainant was escorted by two police officers into the rear of another OPP vehicle, which then departed the sally port.

Video Footage - OPP Teviotdale Detachment – Vestibule

Starting at about 03:32 minutes into the recording, the Complainant was escorted by WO #5 through the vestibule into a cell.

Starting at about 34:45 minutes into the recording, WO #6 approached the cell door and then left. He returned at 35:38 minutes into the recording and unlocked the cell. He escorted the Complainant out of the vestibule.

Video Footage - OPP Teviotdale Detachment – Cell

WO #5 pointed out the surveillance and facilities to the Complainant, then left and locked the cell at 04:02 minutes into the footage. The Complainant covered himself in a blanket and lay down on the bench.

Starting at about 35:49 minutes into the footage, the Complainant was escorted from the cell.

Video Footage - OPP Rockwood Detachment – Booking Area

At 0112:26 hours into the footage, the Complainant was handcuffed behind his back and escorted by two police officers from the sally port. He moved without duress under his own power. Handcuffs were removed and he was escorted out of view down a hallway.

Video Footage - OPP Rockwood Detachment – Cell Area

Starting at about 0031:51 hours into the footage (July 9, 2024, at approximately 10:58 p.m.), the Complainant was escorted to a cell by three officers, including WO #4. SEW #3 visually checked on the Complainant approximately every 15 minutes.

Starting at about 0049:40 hours into the footage, SEW #3 delivered a bottle of water and a blanket to the Complainant’s cell.

Starting at about 0102:28 hours into the footage, SEW #3 visually checked on the Complainant, who shifted his position periodically.

Starting at about 0117:54 hours into the footage, SEW #3 visually checked on the Complainant, who yawned and struggled to rest comfortably. SEW #3 did a double-take on the Complainant, then walked out of view.

Starting at about 0126:18 hours into the footage, SEW #3 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0131:02 hours into the footage, SEW #2 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0136:34 hours into the footage, the Complainant sat up on the bench. He rocked forward a couple times and bent over with his head between his knees. He sat on the toilet and remained motionless for over ten minutes.

Starting at about 0152:29 hours into the footage, the Complainant stood up and then laid back down on the bench.

Starting at about 0200:42 hours into the footage, SEW #2 visually checked on the Complainant. She visually checked his cell approximately every 15 minutes, but it was not clear if she verbally engaged the Complainant. Occasionally, the Complainant would stir under the blankets and re-adjust his position.

Starting at about 0529:31 hours into the footage, the Complainant sat up, clutched his stomach, and bent over with his head between his knees. He sat back upright and then laid down on the bench.

Starting at about 0532:34 hours into the footage, SEW #2 left a blanket at the cell door. The Complainant did not stir.

Starting at about 0617:00 hours into the footage, the Complainant retrieved the extra blanket as a pillow and laid back down.

Starting at about 0800:05 hours into the footage, SEW #2 interacted with a metal box mounted on the wall and departed.

Starting at about 0800:52 hours into the footage, the SO briefly checked on the Complainant and departed.

Starting at about 0820:43 hours into the footage, SEW #2 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0826:14 hours into the footage, the Complainant sat on the toilet and then returned to the bench.

Starting at about 0828:00 hours into the footage, SEW #2 interacted with the metal box but did not check on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0845:08 hours into the footage, SEW #2 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0848:15 hours into the footage, the Complainant got up abruptly and appeared to vomit in the toilet. He returned to lay down on the bench.

Starting at about 0849:18 hours into the footage, SEW #2 interacted with the metal box and visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0852:06 hours into the footage, WO #3 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0904:35 hours, 0911:37 hours, and 0931:28 hours into the footage, SEW #1 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 0933:54 hours into the footage, the prisoner in a neighbouring cell, CW #4, spoke to someone out of view, after which SEW #1 entered the hallway. She checked on the Complainant and visually examined the cell. WO #3 escorted CW #4 from his cell along with his bedding.

Starting at about 0935:50 hours into the footage, SEW #1 and WO #3 stood outside the Complainant’s cell until WO #3 posted a biohazard sheet above the cell door.

Starting at about 0939:08 hours into the footage, WO #3 unlocked the Complainant’s cell door and escorted him to an adjacent cell.

Starting at about 0954:56 hours into the footage, SEW #1 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 1004:35 hours into the footage, WO #3 visually checked on the Complainant and, 30 seconds later, brought him toilet paper.

Starting at about 1020:33 hours, 1036:34 hours, 1045:57 hours, 1052:15 hours, and 1100:14 hours into the footage, SEW #1 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 1102:44 hours into the footage, SEW #1 opened the initial cell where the Complainant was lodged for a person to clean. She checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 1108:45 hours, 1113:13 hours, and 1118:16 hours into the footage, SEW #1 visually checked on the Complainant.

Starting at about 1149:00 hours into the footage, SEW #1 quickly checked on the Complainant before hurrying out of the hallway. She ushered WO #3 to the Complainant’s cell and then hurried out and pressed the alarm button on the wall. WO #3 spoke into the cell and then hurried out.

Starting at about 1149:30 hours into the footage, SEW #1 pressed the alarm button again. WO #3 unlocked the cell and they both entered. SEW #1 rushed in and out of the hallway multiple times while WO #3 remained with the Complainant.

Starting at about 1154:32 hours into the footage, SEW #1 returned, followed by WO #2 and WO #4.

Starting at about 1155:05 hours into the footage, a cadet arrived, followed by WO #1. Along with SEW #1, they stood outside the cell and departed the hallway periodically while WO #3, WO #2 and WO #4 remained in the cell.

Starting at about 1157:36 hours into the footage, SEW #1 brought a medical kit.

Starting at about 1159:03 hours into the footage, EMS arrived with a stretcher. CW #5 and CW #6 (paramedics) entered the cell and WO #3 exited.

Starting at about 1202:35 hours into the footage, the Complainant was lifted onto the stretcher and escorted by paramedics. WO #4 performed compressions on the Complainant, who appeared unresponsive.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the OPP between July 10, 2024, and August 1, 2024:

• Communications recordings;
• Prisoner Report Forms;
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Reports;
• General Occurrence Report;
• Log On Sheets;
• Fingerprints - the Complainant;
• Notes – SEW #3, SEW #2, SEW #1, WO #1, WO #2, WO #3, WO #7, WO #5, WO #4 and WO #6;
• Custody footage;
• ICC footage;
• Prisoner Care Manual; and
• Order - Prisoner Care and Control.

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between July 13, 2024, and March 14, 2025:

• Preliminary Autopsy Findings Report – Ontario Forensic Pathology Service;
• Ambulance Call Reports;
• Guelph Eramosa Fire Department Incident Report and Witness Statements;
• Report of Postmortem Examination – Coroner’s Office; and
• Cambridge Central Ambulance Communications Centre Call Details Report and communications recordings.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with custodial staff tasked with monitoring the Complainant while in custody, and video footage that captured his period in cells, 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.

The Complainant was arrested for assault in the evening of July 9, 2024, at his home in Arthur. Neighbours had contacted police about a domestic disturbance involving the Complainant and CW #2. WO #6 had arrived on scene, spoken to the parties, and taken the Complainant into custody. A search of his person revealed the presence of a “meth pipe” in a pocket, but no illicit substances.

The Complainant was transported to the OPP Teviotdale Detachment and lodged in a cell at about 9:30 p.m. Asked about any consumption of drugs, the Complainant indicated he had taken fentanyl, cocaine and methamphetamine. It was decided that the Complainant would be transferred to the OPP Rockwood Detachment as there was a prisoner there already under supervision.

The Complainant arrived at OPP Rockwood and was placed in a cell at about 11:00 p.m. Over the course of the next eight hours or so, he was routinely checked by civilian guards who had been apprised of his previous drug use. He slept for some of that time and breathed without difficulty. At about 4:00 a.m., one of the guards – SEW #2 – checked the Complainant. He appeared sweaty, cold and pale. Asked if needed medical assistance, the Complainant answered in the negative and explained he was experiencing withdrawal. SEW #2 provided him an extra blanket. At about 7:20 a.m., the Complainant began to vomit. SEW #2 asked if he was feeling better, and he confirmed that he was but still had chills and cold sweats.

SEW #1 relieved SEW #2 in the cells at about 7:22 a.m. At about 8:00 a.m., the Complainant vomited again. He appeared pale and clammy to the special constable, but breathed steadily lying on his side. SEW #1 briefed the SO on the Complainant’s condition. The SO agreed that the Complainant was going through withdrawal and that the special constable should not be too concerned as it was not unusual to have prisoners experiencing withdrawal symptoms in cells.

SEW #1 returned to the cells area and asked the Complainant if he was alright. He replied that he was. The Complainant was subsequently removed from his cell to another cell because of the vomit on the floor. He walked on his own power during the transfer. SEW #1 continued to check on the Complainant regularly. When asked, he told her he was fine.

Shortly after 10:15 a.m., upon hearing a strange sound, SEW #1 ran out of the guard station and recognized someone gasping for breath. Believing the Complainant was suffering a seizure, SEW #1 yelled for help from WO #3 and hit the station alarm button. She retrieved the cell key from the guard station and met WO #3 on the way to the Complainant’s cell. WO #3 opened the cell door and the Complainant fell from the bench on the floor. The officer told the Complainant to keep breathing and instructed SEW #1 to call 911. WO #3 kept the Complainant on his left side.

Additional police personnel arrived in the cells area to render assistance, including WO #1. A defibrillator was retrieved but was not used on the advice of the paramedic call centre as one of the officers – WO #3 – believed he had felt a pulse. Two doses of nasal Narcan were administered.

Paramedics arrived on scene at about 10:25 a.m. and took charge of the Complainant’s care. The Complainant was vital signs absent and could not be resuscitated. He was transported to hospital and pronounced deceased at about 11:20 a.m.

Cause of Death

The pathologist at autopsy was of the view that the Complainant’s death was attributable to “fluorofentanyl, fentanyl, methyl/isobutyryl-fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine toxicity”.

Section 215, Criminal Code - Failure to Provide Necessaries

215 (1) Every one is under a legal duty

(c) to provide necessaries of life to a person under his charge if that person

(i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, illness, mental disorder or other cause, to withdraw himself from that charge, and

(ii) is unable to provide himself with necessaries of life.

(2) Every person commits an offence who, being under a legal duty within the meaning of subsection (1), fails without lawful excuse to perform that duty, if

(b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (1)(c), the failure to perform the duty endangers the life of the person to whom the duty is owed or causes or is likely to cause the health of that person to be injured permanently.

Sections 219 and 220, Criminal Code - Criminal Negligence Causing Death

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.

220 Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and

(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

The Complainant died in hospital on July 10, 2024, after being found in medical distress in police cells earlier that day. The SIU was notified of the death and initiated an investigation. The sergeant at the detachment with overall responsibility for the care of prisoners in the hours leading to the Complainant’s medical crisis – 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 death.

The offences that arise for consideration are failure to provide the necessaries of life and criminal negligence causing death contrary to sections 215 and 220 of the Criminal Code, respectively. Both require something more than a simple want of care to give rise to liability. The former is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. The latter is premised on even more egregious conduct that demonstrates a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is not made out unless the neglect constitutes a marked and substantial departure from a reasonable standard of care. In the instant case, the question is whether there was any want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently serious to attract criminal sanction, that endangered the Complainant’s life or caused his death. In my view, there was not.

I am satisfied that the Complainant’s arrest was lawful. Having spoken to CW #2 and examined an apparent injury, there was sufficient evidence to take the Complainant into custody for assault.

I am also satisfied that the SO, and the police custodians more directly responsible for the Complainant’s care, comported themselves with due care and regard for his health and wellbeing. The record establishes that the officers were aware of the Complainant’s drug use and the fact he was experiencing withdrawal. He was monitored regularly while in custody – about every 15 minutes or so. Asked on several occasions when it appeared he was ailing – either because he had vomited and / or seemed pale and clammy – whether he wanted medical attention, the Complainant declined. Shortly after the Complainant’s breathing became laboured and he lapsed into medical crisis, SEW #1 promptly called for help and the officers on scene did what they could to render assistance. The Complainant was placed in a recovery position and Narcan was administered. A defibrillator was also retrieved but not used as one of the officers believed he had detected a pulse. Paramedics were on scene in short order and followed their own emergency protocols. On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the SO or any of the involved officers transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in their dealings with the Complainant.

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

Date: March 24, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit