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 38-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On September 12, 2025, at 6:11 a.m., the Windsor Police Service (WPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On September 11, 2025, at 8:41 p.m., WPS officers responded to a break-in at a residence in the area of Cabana Road East and Walker Road, Windsor. The Complainant was located hiding in a vehicle in the garage. Officers struggled to remove him from the vehicle. A conducted energy weapon (CEW) was deployed and the assistance of additional officers was requested. The Complainant was eventually handcuffed. The Complainant was transported to Windsor Regional Hospital (WRH) – Ouellette Campus and underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan that was negative. When an officer at the hospital overheard a nurse mentioning facial fractures, the attending physician confirmed the Complainant had sustained facial fractures but would not provide further details because of patient confidentiality concerns.

The SIU subsequently contacted the attending physician. Upon being provided a release by the Complainant, the doctor confirmed the Complainant had sustained a fractured orbital bone and a fractured nasal bone.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/09/12 at 7:42 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/09/12 at 4:00 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on September 12, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on September 12, 2025.

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

The witness officials were interviewed on September 24, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in the garage of a residence situated in the area of Cabana Road East and Walker Road, Windsor.

Forensic Evidence

CEW Deployment Data – The SO

At 8:57:23 p.m.,[2] September 11, 2025, the CEW was armed with two cartridges loaded in Bays 1 and 2. Approximately one second later, the trigger was pulled, the cartridge in Bay 1 was deployed, and electricity discharged for approximately five seconds.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[3]

Communications Recordings – 911

On September 11, 2025, at 8:39 p.m., a woman called 911 and advised that a man [now known to be the Complainant] had hid in her backyard and stated that a vehicle was “trying to get him”. The 911 caller indicated that the Complainant had pushed her father-in-law. The 911 caller explained that the Complainant had departed and headed south [in the direction of CW #1 and CW #2’s residence], jumping fences in backyards. She described the Complainant.

At 8:41 p.m., a second caller contacted the WPS and indicated that a man [now known to be the Complainant] had been on her porch and indicated that “someone was after him”. The Complainant had indicated that he had come from the hotel at the corner of Division Road [also known to be Cabana Road] and Byng Road. He was acting strange and appeared “high” on drugs.

At 8:50 p.m., CW #2 called WPS to advise that a man [now known to be the Complainant] had broken into her residence via the rear patio screen door. He demanded their vehicle. CW #2’s husband, CW #1, chased the Complainant on the property. CW #2 could hear CW #1 scream and something being struck and items crashing. The Complainant had ripped CW #1’s shirt off. CW #2 requested Emergency Medical Services (EMS).

Communications Recordings – Radio

At 8:51 p.m., September 11, 2025, the SO and WO #1 arrived at the residence of CW #1 and CW #2, in the area of Cabana Road East and Walker Road. WO #2 was dispatched to the area.

At 8:56 p.m., the SO broadcast that the Complainant had locked himself in a car in the garage and requested that additional officers attend.

At 8:57 p.m., WO #2 arrived at the location.

At 8:58 p.m., WO #2 broadcast that the Complainant was in custody.

At 9:00 p.m., WO #2 requested the attendance of EMS to assess the Complainant as he was under the influence of drugs and breathing heavily. He also had a bloody nose, and a CEW had been deployed.

WPS In-car Camera (ICC) Footage

At 8:57 p.m., September 11, 2025, WO #2 arrived at a residence in the area of Cabana Road East and Walker Road. A police vehicle was already at the location. WO #2 ran to the residence and went out of camera view.

From 8:57 p.m. to 8:59 p.m., three distinct voices could be heard - WO #2, the SO and WO #1. Commands were being provided to “roll over”, “put your hands behind your back now” and “stop moving”. At 8:58 p.m., a police officer advised dispatch that a man was in custody. EMS attendance was requested.

The SO advised that the Complainant had locked himself inside the vehicle and, when he opened the vehicle door, had kicked the SO and then punched him. WO #1 assisted in getting the Complainant out of the vehicle. The Complainant had grabbed onto the steering wheel and driver seat.

At 9:03 p.m., EMS arrived and began to assess and treat the Complainant.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the WPS between September 15, 2025, and September 23, 2025.

• Names, contact information and statements of civilian witnesses
• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report
• General, Supplementary and Arrest reports
• Communications recordings
• ICC footage
• CEW deployment data
• Video footage from rear of CW #1 and CW #2’s residence
• Photographs of scene and CW #1
• Notes - WO #2 and WO #1

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical records from WRH – Ouellette Campus, on September 16, 2025.

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and police and non-police witnesses, 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.

In the evening of September 11, 2025, the SO and his partner, WO #1, were dispatched to a residence in the area of Cabana Road East and Walker Road. One of the homeowners, CW #2, had contacted police to report a break and enter in progress. The intruder had demanded her vehicle and assaulted CW #2’s husband, CW #1.

The suspect was the Complainant. He was in drug-induced psychosis at the time. Filled with paranoia about persons chasing him to do him harm, the Complainant had broken into the home of CW #1 and CW #2 via the back entrance and demanded the couple’s vehicle so he could escape his “pursuers”.

The officers arrived on scene at about 8:51 p.m. and entered the residence’s attached garage to confront the Complainant. The Complainant, in the driver’s seat of a GMC Terrain parked in the garage, had locked the vehicle’s doors and refused to exit at the officers’ repeated direction. WO #1 retrieved the car keys from CW #1 and CW #2 and unlocked the doors, after which the SO opened the driver’s door. The officers attempted to wrestle the Complainant out of the vehicle. The Complainant resisted by gripping onto the driver seat headrest and the steering wheel. Strikes were exchanged between the Complainant and the SO before the former was extricated from the vehicle. The Complainant continued to resist on the ground beside the driver’s door and was tazed by the SO. WO #2 arrived on scene shortly after and assisted in handcuffing the Complainant’s hands behind the back.

Following his arrest, the Complainant was transported to hospital and diagnosed with fractures of the orbital bone and nose.

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 348, Criminal Code of Canada - Breaking and Entering with Intent, Committing Offence or Breaking Out

348 (1) Every one who

(a) breaks and enters a place with intent to commit an indictable offence therein,

(b) breaks and enters a place and commits an indictable offence therein, or

(c) breaks out of a place after

(i) committing an indictable offence therein, or

(ii) entering the place with intent to commit an indictable offence therein,

is guilty

(d) if the offence is committed in relation to a dwelling-house, of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life, and

(e) if the offence is committed in relation to a place other than a dwelling-house, of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of his arrest by WPS officers on September 11, 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 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.

I am satisfied that the SO was within his rights in seeking to arrest the Complainant for breaking and entering contrary to section 348(1) of the Criminal Code. With information at his disposal from the 911 call that the Complainant had entered the home of CW #1 and CW #2 without permission and assaulted CW #1, the officer had lawful grounds to take the Complainant into custody for the offence.

As for the force used against the Complainant, the evidence does not reasonably establish that it was unnecessary. On the contrary, the evidence indicates that the Complainant vigorously resisted his arrest, kicking the SO at least twice in the chest and punching him in the forehead. The officer responded with like force by punching the Complainant twice. The Complainant continued to resist, even after he was out of the vehicle. At one point, having wrapped his arms around the SO’s waist, the officer discharged his CEW. The deployment was effective but only momentarily, and the Complainant continued to struggle once the discharge ended. It was only with the assistance of WO #2, arriving shortly after the CEW discharge, that the officers managed to secure the Complainant in handcuffs. On this record, there is no showing of excessive force by the SO.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injuries were incurred in the altercation that marked his arrest, there are no reasonable grounds to attribute them to any unlawful conduct on the part of the SO. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: January 7, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit