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 25-year-old man (“Complainant #1”) and a 28-year-old man (“Complainant #2”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On May 14, 2025, at 2:00 p.m., the Toronto Police Service (TPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

That day, at approximately 10:00 a.m., members of the Major Crime Unit (MCU) attended a residence in the area of Eglinton Avenue West and Dufferin Street – Residence #1 – to execute a search warrant of two individuals wanted in connection with break and enter offences. Upon entry, officers observed two men, Complainant #2 and Complainant #1, exit through a window onto the roof of the home. While fleeing across neighbouring rooftops to evade police, Complainant #2 fell from one of the roofs, while Complainant #1 jumped from a second-storey roof. Both individuals were arrested and transported by Emergency Medical Services to Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (SHSC). Initial medical assessments indicated Complainant #2 had sustained a fractured right radial bone, while Complainant #1 was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit due to his deteriorating condition.

At 4:49 p.m., the TPS updated the SIU, indicating both men had fled to the upper level of the home upon police entry, entering into an attic space and then exiting out through an upper window onto the roof. Additional medical information confirmed Complainant #2 had also suffered a fractured heel, while Complainant #1 sustained a fractured jaw and a fractured heel after unsuccessfully attempting to jump from one rooftop to another, striking an eavestrough and falling to the ground below.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/05/14 at 2:30 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/05/14 at 3:10 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2

Affected Persons (aka “Complainant”):

Complainant #1 25-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

Complainant #2 28-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainants were interviewed between May 14, 2025, and May 29, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between May 15, 2025, and June 4, 2025.

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

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

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

WO #8 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

WO #9 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness officials were interviewed on June 8, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around a residence – Residence #1 – located in the area of Eglinton Avenue West and Dufferin Street, Toronto.

Physical Evidence

The primary scene at Residence #1 was secured with crime scene tape extending along the street to include a number of the neighbouring houses. Additional tape blocked access to the rear area between the house next door – Residence #2 – and the residence beside it – Residence #3.

Damaged eavestroughs were noted on the rear of Residence #3 and the side of Residence #2. Transfer bloodstains appeared on the eavestrough, the window beneath it, and the wall at Residence #2. A pooling of blood was found on the concrete beside Residence #3, near the reported arrest location of Complainant #2. A single blood droplet was observed on the bottom frame of a rear window at Residence #3 below the damaged eavestrough. Bloodstaining was also found near the front steps of Residence #3, identified as the location where either Complainant #2 or Complainant #1 received ambulance treatment.

At the rear yard of a house on a neighbouring street – Residence #4 - guarded by TPS, SIU forensic services observed a small, suspected bloodstain in the dirt near a rear shed. This location is believed to be where Complainant #1 was arrested.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

TPS Body-worn Camera (BWC)

On May 14, 2025, TPS officers executed a search warrant at Residence #1. The footage captured the sequence of events beginning at 9:52 a.m. WO #3 and other uniformed and plainclothes officers announced their presence and entry. Shortly after, noises were heard in the attic of the home at the address and, starting at about at 9:54 a.m., Complainant #2 was observed climbing onto the roof of the residence. He moved across multiple neighbouring rooftops, despite officers repeatedly urging him to come down.

Starting at about 9:58 a.m., Complainant #2 was observed on the roof of Residence #3. He sat, complained of pain, and then continued moving but became unable to proceed further.

Complainant #1 was captured fleeing across rooftops from Residence #1, before turning and continuing in the opposite direction. Officers tracked his movements from the street as he jumped between multiple homes before he descended into backyards and fled on a stolen bicycle. Officers pursued on foot and in vehicles.

Starting at about 10:03 a.m., Complainant #1 was located crouched behind a shed at Residence #4 by WO #5, and was arrested by the officer. WO #2 approached the site of the arrest and landed with his right knee on the upper back of Complainant #1, who was prone on the ground at the time. Paramedics later treated him for injuries, and he was transported to hospital under police supervision. BWC footage captured paramedics asking whether he had jumped or fallen from a roof, which he denied by shaking his head.

TPS In-car Camera (ICC) Footage

The ICC footage captured various police cruisers responding to the area of Residence #4, where Complainant #1 was taken into custody. Police cruisers travelling with emergency lights and sirens activated responded to radio updates that Complainant #1 had fled from Residence #1 and jumped from roof to roof, subsequently fleeing on a bicycle. The cruisers operated by WO #5 and Officer #1 converged in the area, where the officers exited and ran towards a residential driveway. Radio transmissions confirmed Complainant #1 was in custody, and an ambulance was requested for minor injuries sustained while jumping between rooftops.

Complainant #1 was observed being placed in a police cruiser in handcuffs, visibly injured with blood around his mouth and breathing heavily. He was assessed by firefighters and paramedics at the scene before being transferred to an ambulance.

TPS Communications Recordings

At 9:20 a.m., May 14, 2025, shortly after confirmation that a search warrant had been granted, WO #1 requested uniform officer assistance. Over the next 15 minutes, officers transmitted updates about people entering and leaving the target residence.

At 9:38 a.m., uniformed officers arrived. Radio transmissions captured tactical considerations for the warrant execution.

At 9:51 a.m., officers signalled readiness to proceed and, by 9:52 a.m., they began moving in. Moments later, at 9:53 a.m., officers reported a woman inside the residence was waving for others to flee the home.

At 9:54 a.m., officers noted noises coming from the attic, followed by a report that one of the targets [Complainant #2] had jumped onto the roof of the adjacent house. WO #4 reported Complainant #2 was running across rooftops and had reached Residence #2. She requested a police dog and provided a clothing description. She noted officers were attempting to surround him. Around the same time, a second man [Complainant #1] was spotted on the roof. The dispatcher informed another officer the situation had escalated, with suspects fleeing across rooftops.

At 10:02 a.m., Complainant #2 was confirmed at the rear of an address further down the street and was reported to be bleeding from several areas. Complainant #1 was seen fleeing on a bicycle.

At 10:07 a.m., a MCU officer confirmed both individuals were in custody.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the TPS between May 14, 2025, and June 30, 2025:

• General Occurrence & Supplementary Reports
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Communications recordings
• BWC footage
• Notes - WO #1, WO #9, WO #2, WO #8, WO #3, WO #7, WO #4, WO #5, and WO #6
• ICC footage
• Information to Obtain Search Warrant
• Search Warrants

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources between May 23, 2025, and May 27, 2025:

• Complainant #2’s medical records from SHSC
• Complainant #1’s medical records from SHSC
• Doorbell camera footage from a residence
• Video footage from a residence
• Cellphone video footage – CW #2

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainants and additional civilian and police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, none of the subject officials agreed interviews with the SIU or the release of their notes.

In the morning of May 14, 2025, acting on the strength of a search warrant identifying the Complainants as the targets of a criminal investigation of break and enters, TPS plainclothes and uniformed officers converged on a home located in the area of Eglinton Avenue West and Dufferin Street, Toronto. They took up positions at the front and rear of the residence, announced their presence and began to make entry.

Complainant #2 and Complainant #1 were present at the address in the basement. Aware of the police presence outside, they each made their way to the attic of the residence and out through a window onto the roof. Complainant #2 was the first to emerge. Attempting to evade police apprehension, he jumped from roof to roof. Police tracked his progress and urged him to surrender and come down. Complainant #2 remained undeterred. On reversing course heading in the opposite direction, he attempted to jump from the roof of Residence #3 onto the roof of Residence #2. His effort was unsuccessful, and he fell onto the concrete surface below. SO #1, SO #2 and SO #3 approached and took him into custody.

At about the same time as Complainant #2 was falling, Complainant #1 was making his way to the roof of Residence #1. He fled from roof to roof, also ignoring calls from police to desist. Complainant #1 eventually came off a roof and fled across backyards, finding a bicycle and using it to flee. Officers pursued Complainant #1 and caught up to him hiding behind a shed in the backyard of Residence #4, where he was taken into custody by WO #5 and WO #2.

Complainant #2 and Complainant #1 were taken to hospital following their arrests. The former was diagnosed with fractures of the right arm and heel, left wrist and left orbital wall, and back. The latter broke his left mandible and left heel.

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.

On May 14, 2025, Complainant #2 and Complainant #1 were diagnosed with serious injuries following their arrest earlier that day by TPS officers. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, identifying three subject officials – SO #1, SO #2 and SO #3. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any of the subject officials committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainants’ 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.

The Complainants were subject to arrest at the time of the events in question. They were named in a search warrant with respect to break and enter offences, authorizing police to take them into custody.

There is a version of events proffered in the evidence that the Complainants were needlessly struck multiple times by officers during their arrests, but it would be unwise and unsafe to proceed with charges based on the strength of this evidence. Police and non-police witnesses indicate that neither party was struck by officers when they were apprehended. And the video footage that captured parts of each arrest does not reveal untoward conduct on the part of the officers. On the contrary, the weight of the evidence indicates that the arrests were largely without incident. WO #2 did land with a knee on the upper back of Complainant #1 around the time of his arrest, but there is no reason to believe that the contact was anything other than accidental, as the officer explained, the result of him tripping and falling on arrival at the scene. Nor would the contact itself appear to amount to excessive force in the circumstances of the arrest. Lastly, the injuries suffered by the Complainants are consistent with falls from height. On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that unlawful force was brought to bear against either Complainant.

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

Date: September 11, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit