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 woman (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On September 23, 2025, at 2:04 a.m., the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On September 22, 2025, at 11:47 p.m., OPS police officers responded to an incident of reported violence at a residence in the area of Queen Mary Street and Vanier Parkway in the City of Ottawa. There, the investigation led officers to the arrest of an intoxicated woman, the Complainant. The Complainant was handcuffed behind the back. While removing the Complainant from the residence, she reportedly fell down a flight of stairs in the home, causing an injury to her arm. On September 23, 2025, at 12:25 a.m., Emergency Medical Services were requested. At 12:45 a.m., the Complainant was transported to Hôpital Montfort (HM) and diagnosed with a displaced fracture of the right humerus.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/09/23 at 7:49 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/09/23 at 8:12 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

55-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on September 24, 2025

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on September 24, 2025

Subject Official

SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal right; investigative action report received and reviewed.

Witness Official

WO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed.

The witness official was interviewed on October 6, 2025

The Scene

The events in question transpired on the staircase between the main and second-floors of a residence located in the area of Queen Mary Street and Vanier Parkway in the City of Ottawa.

The staircase area was poorly lit and comprised of eight steps with a wood and metal handrail. The steps and the handrail were sturdy and in good condition.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

OPS Communications Recordings

On September 22, 2025, at 8:44:44 p.m., the Complainant called 911 and reported that CW #2 was yelling and screaming at her. She stated he was not violent and there were no weapons in the residence. She expressed concern about his demeanor. She stated that CW #2 did not drink and was downstairs.

On September 22, 2025, at 8:47:31 p.m., the dispatcher broadcast there was a disturbance ata residence in the area of Queen Mary Street and Vanier Parkway in the City of Ottawa. The caller, the Complainant, had reported CW #2 screaming and yelling at her.

On September 22, 2025, at 11:37:30 p.m., CW #2 called 911. A female was heard screaming in the background. CW #2 reported that the Complainant had punched him and thrown cigarettes at him. He stated she was intoxicated. He asked that police remove her from the residence and confirmed there were no weapons in the house.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

The SIU obtained the following records from the OPS between September 23, 2025, and November 17, 2025:

• Computer-aided Dispatch (CAD) Report
• Communications recordings
• Witness List / Field Binder
• Arrest Details Report
• Notes – WO and three other officers
• Investigative Action Reports – WO and seven other officers
• OPS photographs of

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between October 1, 2025, and October 3, 2025:

• The Complainant’s medical records from HM
• Ottawa Paramedic Service records

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and other witnesses, both police and non-police, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO chose not to interview with the SIU. A written statement he authored was produced.

In the evening of September 22, 2025, the SO and the WO attended a residence in the area of Queen Mary Street and Vanier Parkway in the City of Ottawa. CW #2 had called police to report being assaulted by the Complainant. The officers had previously attended the same residence a couple of hours prior after the Complainant reported a disturbance. No arrests had been made at that time. On this occasion, satisfied that the Complainant had physically attacked CW #2 in the time following their previous visit to the home, the officers decided to arrest the Complainant for assault.

The Complainant was on the second-floor of the home and inebriated. She was handcuffed by the officers without incident and escorted down a flight of stairs to the main-level. On the way down, the Complainant lost her footing and fell, breaking her right arm in the process. She was assisted to her feet by the officers, taken outside and placed in a police cruiser.

Paramedics attended the scene after the Complainant reported pain in her arm and transported her to hospital.

Sections 219 and 221, Criminal Code of Canada - Criminal Negligence Causing Bodily Harm

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.

221 Every person who by criminal negligence causes bodily harm to another person 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 while in the custody of two OPS officers on September 22, 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 injury.

The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing bodily harm contrary to section 221 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 SO, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the Complainant’s fall. In my view, there was not.

The SO and WO were lawfully placed inside the home having been dispatched to investigate a reported assault. Once inside, with information from CW #2 and another witness that the Complainant had attacked CW #2, the officers were within their rights in taking the Complainant into custody for assault.

I am also satisfied that the officers comported themselves with due care and attention for the Complainant’s safety and wellbeing while she was in their custody. One of the officers – the SO – was positioned a step or two in front of the Complainant holding onto her left arm. The WO was behind the Complainant. The stairway was too narrow to allow the officers on either side of the Complainant. There is no evidence that the officers rushed the Complainant or otherwise caused her fall; she simply lost her footing in her intoxicated state. Shortly after, aware of the possibility of injury when the Complainant complained of pain, the officers called for an ambulance and repositioned her handcuffs to the front to make her more comfortable. On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the officers did not take sufficient precautions while the Complainant was in their custody and care.

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

Date: January 21, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit