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

Notification of the SIU[1]

On January 22, 2025, at 12:56 a.m., the Toronto Police Service (TPS) notified the SIU of the death of a woman [now known to be the Complainant].

According to the TPS, at 10:50 p.m., January 21, 2025, the TPS received an ‘unknown trouble’ call from a man residing in a building in the area of King Street West and Spadina Avenue. He reported seeing a person – the Complainant – standing on the railing of a neighbouring apartment building – Building #1. Officers arrived at the caller’s apartment in Building #2 at 11:03 p.m., went on his balcony, and saw the Complainant on the railing of Building #1. At 11:13 p.m., the Complainant jumped. The Complainant was taken to St. Michael’s Hospital (SMH) and pronounced deceased at 12:01 a.m., January 22, 2025.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/01/22 at 1:07 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/01/22 at 1:43 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

29-year-old female; deceased

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

CW #6 Interviewed

CW #7 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between January 22, 2025, and March 14, 2025.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

WO #4 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness officials were interviewed on January 30, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired on and around the balcony of an apartment in Building #1 located in the area of King Street West and Spadina Avenue, Toronto.

Physical Evidence

At 4:40 a.m., SIU forensic investigators arrived at the apartment in Building #1 to conduct a forensic examination. There were no signs of forced entry into the unit. The unit had a balcony. In the apartment was an open notebook, revealing a handwritten note indicating the writer’s intention of taking her own life.

On the kitchen counter was a suicide prevention safety plan with the Centre for Addition and Mental Health, displaying a label indicating that it was for the Complainant, dated January 19, 2025. The safety plan outlined strategies and available help if in a crisis.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

TPS Communications Recordings – 911

There were five people who called about the Complainant being out on her balcony.

TPS Communications Recordings – Radio

On January 21, 2025, at about 10:51 p.m., dispatch broadcast an unknown trouble call located at an address in the area of King Street West and Spadina Avenue, on an upper floor of Building #1. An individual was reportedly leaning their stomach against the balcony railing and extending their body over it. It was unknown if the person was suicidal.

At about 11:03 p.m., TPS officers attended an apartment in a neighbouring building – Building #2 [residence of CW #1 and CW #2]. A female [now known to be the Complainant] was said to be hanging over her balcony. As police officers arrived, WO #1 was in communication with the Complainant. Toronto Fire Service (TFS) and paramedics were notified.

At about 11:10 p.m., WO #1 broadcast that he was still attempting to communicate with the female.

At about 11:13 p.m., there was a broadcast that the Complainant had fallen and was on ground level.

At about 11:16 p.m., police officers located the Complainant’s apartment in Building #1 and entered the unit.

The Complainant was located. It was reported that paramedics and the TFS were engaged as she was breathing. The Complainant was taken to SMH at 11:45 p.m., and pronounced deceased at 12:01 a.m., January 22, 2025.

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage – WO #2 and WO #1

On January 21, 2025, at about 11:00 p.m., WO #1 and WO #2 were captured waiting for an elevator. About a minute later, they knocked on an apartment door [now known to be that of CW #1 in Building #2]. They were taken to the balcony and told a woman [now known to be the Complainant] was believed to be on the balcony of an adjacent apartment building.

At about 11:04 p.m., with the assistance of a flashlight, the Complainant was located on her balcony climbing onto and sitting on the railing with her legs on the outside. WO #1 and WO #2 yelled out to the Complainant in an attempt to communicate with her. The Complainant was told to stop and get back on her balcony.

Continuous attempts were made to speak with the Complainant, who made her way to the front of the balcony and eventually hung by her arms attempting to climb back over the railing. Positive encouragement was given to the Complainant. She was told WO #1 and WO #2 wanted to speak with her and hear her story and that, once she was on the balcony, they would come and help her. The Complainant continued her attempt to climb back onto the balcony, but did not respond to the police officers.

At about 11:10 p.m., the Complainant climbed back onto the balcony and disappeared. A couple of minutes later, her feet were seen on the far end of the balcony and WO #1 questioned if the Complainant was on the other side. Further encouragement was given to get back on the balcony.

At about 11:13 p.m., WO #2’s BWC captured the Complainant falling from the balcony. An impact was heard followed by a second and louder impact moments later. WO #1 and WO #2 ran from the balcony and made their way to the lobby to meet with the TFS. CW #6 was in the lobby and assisted emergency personnel to locate where the Complainant had landed. The Complainant was breathing, and a pulse was located. WO #2 remained with the TFS.

At about 11:28 p.m., the Complainant was removed from the area. WO #2 remained at the scene and, at about 11:32 p.m., turned her BWC off.

WO #1 did not remain with the Complainant, but returned at 11:34 p.m. with yellow caution tape to secure the scene.

At 11:36 p.m. WO #1 turned off his BWC.

BWC Footage – WO #4 and WO #3

On January 21, 2025, at about 11:03 p.m., WO #3 and WO #4 made their way to the rear of Building #1. With his flashlight on, WO #3 illuminated an apartment [now known to be the Complainant’s apartment]. WO #3 tried to communicate with a woman [now known to be the Complainant] on the balcony, telling her the police were on the way and asking her to go back inside. TFS was requested. WO #3 continued to try to communicate with the Complainant. There were further efforts made to try and encourage the Complainant to stay on the balcony and go inside, but she was on and off the balcony, hanging off the railing at times. The sounds of WO #2 and WO #1 could be heard on the BWC audio, faintly. WO #3 broadcast that he thought the officers were doing well in their efforts to communicate with the Complainant.

At about 11:11 p.m., WO #3 directed WO #4 to go over to where the TFS had staged.

At about 11:13 p.m., the Complainant hung her body over the balcony and WO #3 told her officers were on their way to help. She fell, hit the railing of the balcony below, and continued to the ground. WO #3 immediately requested paramedics.

WO #3 and WO #4 returned to the rear of the building. TFS was present and made their way to the Complainant’s location.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the TPS between January 22, 2025, and January 24, 2025:

• General Occurrence Report
• Communications recordings
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report
• Notes and BWC footage - WO #1
• Notes and BWC footage - WO #4
• Notes and BWC footage - WO #3
• Notes and BWC footage - WO #2
• BWC footage - Officer #1

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Preliminary Autopsy Findings Report from the Ontario Forensic Pathology Service on January 25, 2025.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with police and civilian eyewitnesses, and video footage that captured the incident, gives rise to the following scenario.

In the evening of January 21, 2025, TPS received several 911 calls about a woman hanging from the balcony of a building in the area of King Street West and Spadina Avenue. Officers were dispatched to the area to locate the woman. Unable to find her, two of them – WO #1 and WO #2 – made their way to the residence of one of the 911 callers – CW #1 – who resided in Building #2. From CW #1’s balcony, the officers observed the woman on the balcony of the building immediately beside their location – Building #1.

The woman was the Complainant. The Complainant was of unsound mind at the time. She had a history of suicide attempts and was seemingly planning a jump from the balcony. Over the course of the next few minutes, she alternately hung from the railing on the exterior side of the balcony, sat perched on the railing, and stood on the balcony platform. At about 11:13 p.m., approximately ten minutes after the officers’ arrival at CW #1’s residence, the Complainant, while hanging from the balcony, fell.

WO #1 and WO #2 had attempted to persuade the Complainant in the few minutes before she fell to return to safety. The same is true for officers positioned outside at the bottom of the Complainant’s building.

First responders attended and transported the Complainant to hospital. She was pronounced deceased at 12:01 a.m., January 22, 2025.

Cause of Death

The pathologist at autopsy was of the preliminary view that the Complainant’s death was attributable to multiple blunt force trauma consistent with a fall from height.

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 fell to her death from an upper floor balcony in Toronto on January 21, 2025. As police officers were attempting to prevent her fall at the time, the SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any TPS officer committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s death.

The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing death contrary to section 220 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 TPS officers, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the Complainant’s death. In my view, there was not.

The officers who responded to the 911 calls were engaged in the lawful execution of their duty. Aware of a woman in distress, seemingly contemplating suicide, the officers were within their rights to attend at the scene to do what they reasonably could to protect the Complainant and preserve public safety.

It is also apparent that the responding officers comported themselves with due care for the Complainant’s safety in the few minutes they had before she fell. Unable to quickly ascertain the Complainant’s location, WO #1 and WO #2 acted prudently in getting to the balcony from which one of the 911 callers had seen her. From that location, the officers attempted to communicate with the Complainant from a distance, assuring her of help and encouraging her to return to safety. Other officers positioned outside the building did the same. Regrettably, the Complainant’s dangerous behaviour continued and she eventually fell while hanging from the balcony railing. Officers had not yet had an opportunity to reach her apartment by that point. Once on the ground, the officers did their part to secure timely medical attention. On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that any of the responding officers failed in their duty of care to the Complainant.

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

Date: May 14, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit