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 32-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On June 5, 2025, at 7:41 p.m. the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) notified the SIU of a serious injury to the Complainant.

According to the OPP, on June 5, 2025, at 12:25 p.m., OPP police officers were investigating two individuals in Tillsonburg for theft when one of them, the Complainant, fled on foot. The Subject Official (SO) and Witness Official (WO) pursued the Complainant and tackled him to the ground. The Complainant complained of chest pain and was taken to Alexandra Hospital (AH) where he was diagnosed with fractured ribs.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/06/06 at 7:30 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/06/06 at 12:30 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on June 6, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on June 6, 2025.

Subject Official

SO Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on June 16, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired on and around the grounds of a property situated in the area of Venison Street West and Bidwell Street, Tillsonburg.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Video Footage – Auto Shop on Bridge Street

On June 5, 2025, OPP police officers were captured standing with the Complainant as he sat in a wheelchair.

Video Footage – Private Residence

On June 5, 2025, at 1:33:10 p.m., the Complainant ran past the driveway of a private residence in the area of Venison Street West and Bidwell Street, followed by the SO at 1:33:13 p.m.

At 1:33:48 p.m., an individual could be heard moaning out of the view of the camera.

OPP In-car Camera (ICC) Footage – WO #2

On June 5, 2025, at 1:45:20 p.m., the Complainant was captured in the rear of WO #2’s cruiser.

Starting at 1:58:36 p.m., the Complainant appeared to be in discomfort. He was transported to AH at 2:20:56 p.m.

OPP Communications Recordings & Computer-aided Dispatch (CAD) Report

On June 5, 2025, at 10:20:00 a.m., a woman contacted OPP Provincial Communications Centre to report the theft of an industrial “blue bin” from a business in the area of Bridge Street West and Bidwell Street in Tillsonburg.

On June 5, 2025, at 12:37:59 p.m., the SO attended an auto shop on Bridge Street, Tillsonburg.

At 12:38:18 p.m., the SO advised he had been in a foot pursuit and had the Complainant in custody.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the OPP on June 9, 2025:

• General Occurrence Report
• Arrest Report
• Crown Brief Synopsis
• CAD Report
• Communications recordings
• ICC footage
• Notes – the SO, WO #1, and WO #2
• Policy - Arrest and Detention

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between June 9, 2025, and June 13, 2025.

• The Complainant’s medical records from AH
• Video footage from auto shop on Bridge Street
• Video footage from private residence

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and police and non-police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

In the early afternoon of June 5, 2025, WO #1 had the Complainant and a woman – CW #1 – stopped for investigation in the area of Bridge Street West and Bidwell Street. He was joined by two other officers, including the SO. CW #1 was suspected in the theft of an industrial blue bin. The Complainant was in a wheelchair, which the officers came to learn had been stolen from a hospital. The Complainant provided a false name to the officers. When his identity was ascertained by the officers, he fled on foot.

Chased by the SO, the Complainant ran north towards Venison Street West, where he turned left to continue westward. The SO caught up to him and grabbed an arm. The Complainant slipped out of the jacket he was wearing and resumed his flight, trying and failing to climb over a fence on the north side of the street.

WO #1 joined in the chase. He drove his cruiser to Venison Street West, exited the vehicle and manually engaged the Complainant. The Complainant had slipped and fallen on the grounds of a property in the area of Venison Street West and Bidwell Street. The officer grabbed hold of the Complainant as the SO arrived on scene. Each of the officers struck the Complainant before his arms were controlled behind the back and handcuffed.

The Complainant was diagnosed in hospital with fractures of two right-sided ribs following his arrest.

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 139(2), Criminal Code - Obstructing Justice

139(1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,

(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or

(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody,

is guilty of

(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) Every person who intentionally attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by OPP officers in Tillsonburg on June 5, 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.

I am satisfied that WO #1 and the SO were within their rights in attempting to take the Complainant into custody. The Complainant had provided a false name, arguably committing an obstruction of justice contrary to section 139(2) of the Criminal Code, and there was evidence that he had stolen the wheelchair.

I am also satisfied the evidence falls short of any reasonable showing that the force used by the officers was unnecessary. Having fled from police, WO #1 and the SO had cause to be concerned that the Complainant would continue to resist arrest once they had hold of him. In fact, the Complainant did not readily release his arms and was met by a punch to the head (WO #1), and a knee to the back and punch to the torso (the SO), following which the Complainant was handcuffed behind the back. That force, in my view, represented a discrete and tailored response to the nature and extent of the Complainant’s resistance.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s ribs were fractured in his run-in with police, whether the result of his one or more falls while fleeing apprehension or the punch or knee delivered by the SO, there are no reasonable grounds to believe the injuries are attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of the officers. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: September 29, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit