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 31-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On November 24, 2025, at 10:48 a.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On November 24, 2025, the Complainant was causing a disturbance at the Muskoka Algonquin Health Centre[2] and was asked to leave. He had to be escorted out by hospital security personnel. While outside, he urinated at the front doors. Police were called and Witness Official (WO) #1 and the Subject Official (SO), members of the Central Region Emergency Response Team, were dispatched and responded in a grey Chevrolet Tahoe. While police were present, the Complainant tried to re-enter the hospital. Under their authority of the Trespass to Property Act, the SO grabbed the Complainant’s left arm and the arm broke. The fracture was diagnosed as a spiral fracture (supra condylar fracture) and there was information that the Complainant had a pre-existing medical condition. The Complainant was being transported to Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital (SMH) in Orillia for surgery. Security personnel and a person later identified as the Civilian Witness (CW #1) were present at the hospital. Both officers were equipped with body-worn cameras (BWC), and the vehicle was equipped with in-car camera (ICC) system.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/11/24 at 11:19 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/11/24 at 11:33 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”)

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

The Complainant was interviewed on November 25, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on November 25, 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 December 8, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in a designated accessible parking space in front of the Peter Gilgan Emergency Department of the Muskoka Algonquin Health Centre.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[3]

Communications Recordings

On November 24, 2025, at 8:42:02 a.m., CW #3 reported the Complainant had been discharged from the hospital and security guards physically escorted him out of the building. The Complainant was refusing to leave, security guards had to go hands on with him a couple of times, and CW #1 was trying to get him in a car (the Complainant was heard yelling profanities in the background). A call taker asked to keep them updated and indicated “We’ll be there shortly.”

ICC Footage

The ICC captured the police vehicle approaching the hospital and being briefed by the security officers through the open vehicle window as they entered the parking lot. The Complainant was not seen in the video, and no interactions involving the police officers were captured.

BWC Footage - The SO and WO #1

On November 24, 2025, at 8:47:00 a.m., the SO exited the passenger side of the police vehicle. He walked over to the Complainant who was standing outside the right passenger door of CW #1’s vehicle and advised that he had been asked to leave hospital property, so he needed to leave. The Complainant indicated that he had been asked by a few people. The SO asked what the problem was, what the Complainant wanted to go to the hospital for that he had not already been treated for. The Complainant responded saying he hurt, he had a lot of broken bones. The SO told the Complainant he had to leave; he had received all the care the hospital was prepared to give him. The Complainant responded the hospital had done nothing for him. WO #1 suggested that he attend a different hospital as he had been trespassed from that hospital, and the Complainant responded that that was one of his next ideas.

At 8:48:00 a.m., the SO told the Complainant to get in the vehicle and go to another hospital. The Complainant repeated the same words back to the officer and raised his right hand in what appeared to be a peace sign towards the SO. The police officer repeated that the Complainant needed to leave, and if he did not leave, he would be arrested and removed from the location. The SO again told the Complainant to get in the car and leave. The Complainant again raised his right hand in what appeared to be a peace sign towards the police officer. The SO informed the Complainant “That would be now”. The Complainant again raised his right hand in what appeared to be a peace sign towards the SO and said, “You know how many times both of these guys said that” (pointing to CW #3 and CW #2). The Complainant walked away from the vehicle in the direction of the hospital doors. The SO said “Where are you going”, as he walked past the officer. The SO grabbed the Complainant’s left arm above the elbow, started to turn him around and grabbed a hold of his right arm below the shoulder with his right hand. The Complainant uttered a sharp “Ow”.

At 8:49:00 a.m., CW #1 screamed out “Oh my God, you just snapped his fucking arm”. The Complainant yelled at the officer to let go, asked if he could please go to the hospital, and said he was not making this up. He stated that he hurt “like hell” and was shaking everywhere and had been all night. The SO let go of the Complainant’s hand and was now just holding his left shoulder with his right hand. The SO apologized to the Complainant. The Complainant just wanted to go back into the hospital. The SO said they were going to get his injury looked at.

At 8:50:00 a.m., WO #1 went into the hospital to get some medical assistance.

At 8:52:00 a.m., the SO let the Complainant walk around and told him this incident was being video recorded, and the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) would be contacted about his injury. CW #1 started yelling at the SO. WO #1 arrived. The Complainant apologized to the SO for CW #1 yelling at him. The Complainant also apologized to the SO for being rude to him and difficult to deal with.

Other than asking CW #1 and the Complainant whether the Complainant had a particular medical condition and prior incidents related to that medical condition the footage of WO #1’s BWC was the same as the SO’s BWC.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the OPP between November 24, 2025, and December 3, 2025:

• Annual Use of Force Recertification - the SO and WO #1
• Notes – WO #2 and WO #1
• General Occurrence Report
• Provincial Offence Notice
• ICC footage
• BWC footage
• Communications recordings

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between November 24, 2025, and December 19, 2025:

• Muskoka EMS Ambulance Call Report[4]
• The Complainant’s medical records - MAHC
• Security Event Incident Report - CW #3
• The Complainant’s medical records - SMH

• Photo of the Complainant’s injury - CW #1

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

In the morning of November 24, 2025, OPP received a call from hospital security reporting that a patient who had been discharged and escorted out of the hospital – the Complainant – was in the parking lot, refusing to leave. The SO and WO #1of the Central Region Emergency Response Team were dispatched. Upon arrival, the officers spoke with security and confirmed the information provided in the call. Security advised that the Complainant had been discharged and provided with medication but refused to leave the hospital. They had to physically escort him out of the building; however, he still would not leave the property and wanted to return to the hospital. He was trespassed. Hospital staff did not want him back inside and wanted him removed. The briefing did not include information indicating that the Complainant, had a particular medical condition.

The SO approached the Complainant and informed him that he was required to leave the premises. The Complainant stated that he wanted to return to the hospital because he was in pain. He was advised that he could seek care at another hospital, that he had been trespassed from this one, and that he must either leave or be arrested and removed from the premises. During the conversation, the Complainant moved away from the vehicle where he had been standing and proceeded in the direction of the hospital doors. As he walked past, the SO asked where he was going and took hold of his arm. As the SO began to turn him around, an audible cracking sound was heard and the arm appeared to rotate in an abnormal manner consistent with having snapped.

The Complainant was permitted to re-enter the hospital so that his injury could be addressed. He was diagnosed with, and subsequently treated for, a comminuted and displaced fracture of the left distal humerus.

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 2(1), Trespass to Property Act - Trespass an Offence

2 (1) Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,

(a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the defendant,

(i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or

(ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this Act; or

(b) does not leave the premises immediately after he or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person authorized by the occupier,

is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000.

Section 9, Trespass to Property Act - Arrest Without Warrant on Premises

9 (1) A police officer, or the occupier of premises, or a person authorized by the occupier may arrest without warrant any person he or she believes on reasonable and probable grounds to be on the premises in contravention of section 2.

(2) Where the person who makes an arrest under subsection (1) is not a police officer, he or she shall promptly call for the assistance of a police officer and give the person arrested into the custody of the police officer.

(3) A police officer to whom the custody of a person is given under subsection (2) shall be deemed to have arrested the person for the purposes of the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act applying to his or her release or continued detention and bail.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of an interaction with OPP officers on November 24, 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.

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 Complainant was directed by hospital staff and security to leave the premises, but he did not comply. Security personnel escorted him out of the building. He then remained on the property and did not leave as instructed. On this record, I am satisfied that the officers who responded to the scene to deal with the Complainant were within their rights in seeking to take him into custody under sections 2 and 9 of the Trespass to Property Act.

I am also satisfied that the SO acted reasonably when he attempted to stop the Complainant from walking in the direction of the hospital doors. He did not know where the Complainant was going, and he understood that the Complainant had been trespassed from the hospital and was not permitted to re-enter. He took hold of the Complainant’s left arm and applied a minimal amount of force to pull him back and turn him around.

I accept that the SO was not informed that the Complainant had a preexisting medical condition. It is reasonable to conclude that, had this information been available to him, he may have approached the situation differently.

On the totality of the evidence, the interactions between the Complainant and the officers were largely uneventful. Aside from taking hold of the Complainant’s arm to prevent him from potentially returning to the hospital, no force was brought to bear during the incident. The officers attempted to obtain the Complainant’s peaceful compliance.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injury was incurred in the physical interaction with the SO, I do not accept that the injury was attributable to any unlawful conduct on the part of the officer. Accordingly, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: March 20, 2026

Electronically approved by

Stacey O’Brien

Deputy Director

Special Investigations Unit