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 55-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On April 19, 2025, at 3:46 a.m., the Toronto Police Service (TPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On April 18, 2025, at approximately 8:51 p.m., the TPS received a call about a man [later identified at the Complainant] with a firearm in an apartment in the area of Avenue Road and Wilson Avenue, North York. A Civilian Witness (CW) reported that he often allowed homeless people to stay in his apartment to get out of the cold. On this occasion, the Complainant was creating a problem and had threatened him with a firearm. The CW had asked the Complainant to leave and, when he refused, called the police. TPS police officers arrived and attempted to remove the Complainant from the apartment. The Complainant resisted, and one of the police officers used an ASP baton to strike the Complainant in the arm. The Complainant subsequently complained of pain to his right elbow. The police officers transported the Complainant to the North York General Hospital (NYGH), where he was diagnosed with a fractured right elbow.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/04/19 at 5:35 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/04/19 at 6:46 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

55-year-old male; interviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on April 19, 2025.

Civilian Witness

CW Interviewed

The civilian witness was interviewed on April 21, 2025.

Subject Official (SO)

SO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The subject official was interviewed on May 23, 2025.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between May 5, 2025, and May 9, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in the living room of an apartment in the area of Avenue Road and Wilson Avenue, Toronto.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage

On April 18, 2025, starting at about 8:58 p.m., WO #1 knocked on a door. WO #1 identified himself as “Toronto Police” and asked the occupant to come to the door. WO #1 took the lead in negotiating with the occupant to open the door, with no success. The occupant - the Complainant - refused to come to the door. At one point, six uniformed police officers were visible in the hallway.

Starting at about 9:30 p.m., the apartment door was opened with the use of a passkey, and the police officers, led by WO #1, entered. Numerous police officers shouted, “Toronto Police.” The Complainant sat on a sofa with a coffee table in front of him. The apartment appeared furnished and lived in. WO #1 asked the Complainant what was happening, and the Complainant replied, “You are not Metro, and why are the police standing in my apartment.” WO #1 asked the Complainant if he was in distress or suffering from mental health issues. The officer stood on the Complainant’s left side and the SO stood on the Complainant’s right side. WO #2 stood behind WO #1. The Complainant said, “This is my apartment.” An unknown police officer asked, “Do you have anything to prove you live here?” WO #1 grabbed the Complainant’s left wrist and elbow and the SO grabbed the Complainant’s right arm. The Complainant was turned over onto his front and left side. WO #1 let go of the Complainant’s left hand, removed his handcuffs, and applied a handcuff to the right wrist. An unknown police officer said, “You’re under arrest.” The Complainant said, “For what?” and the police officers replied, “For mental health.” The Complainant said, “Why are you stepping on my feet, why are you pulling down my fucking pants, why are you on my phone?” The Complainant shouted, “Help, help, I am being fucking assaulted.” The Complainant moved his right handcuffed wrist under his body. Four police officers struggled with the Complainant to get his arms handcuffed behind the back.

Starting at about 9:31 p.m., WO #1 momentarily stood back, extended his ASP, and said, “I got this.” He inserted the ASP between the Complainant’s right arm and torso to pry loose the Complainant’s arm. The Complainant yelled, “Help, help, I am being fucking assaulted.” An unknown police officer said, “Hey buddy, everything is good.” The Complainant said, “Oh my fucking kidneys, what is your problem?” The SO said, “You’ve got to put your hands behind your back, you are being recorded.” The SO handcuffed the Complainant’s left wrist behind his back, and informed the Complainant he was under arrest for uttering threats. The Complainant shouted objections. The SO used both his hands to cradle the Complainant’s right elbow, and assisted him to his feet. WO #2 assisted the Complainant on the left side. The SO held the Complainant’s hands with his left hand, inserted his right hand downward along the Complainant’s back, and used a lever motion to raise both of the Complainant’s hands. At about 9:35 p.m., a cracking sound was heard as the Complainant shouted, “Oh fuck, did you just hear that fucking crack?” The SO opened the Complainant’s clenched fingers as Officer #1 told the Complainant to calm down.

Communications Recordings

On April 18, 2025, starting at about 8:51 p.m., the CW, who resided at an apartment in the area of Avenue Road and Wilson Avenue, Toronto, called the TPS and reported that someone - the Complainant - was in his house and had threatened to kill him. The CW advised that the Complainant had a gun. Officer #1 monitored the call, and the Emergency Task Force (ETF) were notified.

Starting at about 8:56 p.m., WO #1 and the SO arrived at the scene.

Starting at about 8:59 p.m., Officer #1 was on scene in the lobby. The SO advised he was outside the door of the apartment. He had knocked on the door with no response.

Starting at about 9:01 p.m., an officer spoke to the CW in the front lobby. The CW advised he had not seen a gun. The CW did not have the keys to his apartment on him. The SO requested confirmation that the CW wanted the Complainant removed. Officer #1 spoke to the Complainant through the closed apartment door. The Complainant had been drinking, and made threats to the police officers.

Starting at about 9:31 p.m., Officer #1 advised that police officers were inside the apartment.

Starting at about 9:34 p.m., Officer #2 advised the Complainant was handcuffed, and no other police units were required.

Starting at about 10:09 p.m., the SO advised he was going to transport the Complainant to TPS 32 Division.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the TPS between April 21, 2025, and June 5, 2025.

• BWC footage
• In-car camera footage
• Custody footage
• Communications recordings
• Civilian Witness List
• General Occurrence Report
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report
• Notes – WO #2, the SO and WO #1
• Policies – Arrest / Use of Force
• TPS History - the Complainant
• TPS statement - the CW

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and the SO, and video footage that largely captured the incident, gives rise to the following scenario.

In the evening of April 18, 2025, TPS officers were dispatched to an apartment in the area of Avenue Road and Wilson Avenue. The tenant – the CW – had contacted police to report that the Complainant had locked him out of the apartment and threatened him with a gun through the closed door. The Complainant was an unhoused person whom the CW had taken in for a time.

Officers arrived on scene at about 9:00 p.m. They announced their presence and status as police officers, and asked the Complainant to open the door. The Complainant refused.

At about 9:30 p.m., with the use of a passkey, the officers entered the apartment. The Complainant was seated on the living room sofa. A coffee table in front of him contained drug paraphernalia. With the SO positioned to the Complainant’s right and WO #1 to the left, the officers took hold of his arms and rolled him onto his front on the sofa. Following a brief struggle, in which WO #1 used his baton to pry free the Complainant’s right arm, the Complainant was handcuffed behind the back and assisted to his feet.

During a search following the arrest, the SO raised the Complainant’s hands behind his back and, in so doing, caused the Complainant’s right arm to fracture at the elbow.

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.

Section 264.1, Criminal Code - Uttering Threats

264.1 (1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys or causes any person to receive a threat

(a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

(b) to burn, destroy or damage real or personal property; or

(c) to kill, poison or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by TPS officers on April 18, 2025. 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.

Based on the information provided the police by the CW, the Complainant was subject to arrest for uttering threats contrary to section 264.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Once under lawful arrest, the SO was entitled to search the Complainant pursuant to a police officer’s common law powers of search incident to arrest.

I am satisfied that the force used by the SO in the course of the search following the Complainant’s arrest did not exceed what was legally justified in the circumstances. The SO says that he raised the Complainant’s hands behind the back to search the waistband of his pants. The officer was looking for possible weapons and the Complainant was making that difficult by holding his arms tightly against the back. If the SO misjudged the amount of force that was strictly necessary in the circumstances, the BWC footage reveals that the officer’s conduct was not so disproportionate to the task at hand as to attract criminal sanction.

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

Date: August 8, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit