SIU Director’s Report - Case # 26-TCI-087

Warning:

This page contains graphic content that can shock, offend and upset.

Mandate of the SIU

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.

Information Restrictions

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.

Mandate Engaged

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 33-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).

The Investigation

Notification of the SIU[1]

On February 23, 2026, at 2:31 a.m., the Toronto Police Service (TPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On February 22, 2026, at about 10:00 p.m., an off-duty TPS police officer, Witness Official (WO) #2, and his female friend, the Complainant, were walking near Soho Street and Bulwer Street, Toronto, when they became involved in an argument. WO #2 became concerned for the Complainant’s wellbeing and contacted the TPS to report a person in crisis. Police officers responded to the area and attempted to locate the Complainant. The Complainant called the TPS, which facilitated a location ping on her cellular telephone. As a result, officers attended the area of Commissioners Street and Don Roadway, Toronto. Shortly prior to 11:27 p.m., the Subject Official (SO) and WO #1 checked the area of the Commissioners Bridge and located the Complainant near the bridge’s guardrail. WO #1 and the SO called the Complainant’s name and began to run towards her. The Complainant scaled the guardrail and jumped to the frozen river below. Marine police officers and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) responded to assist with the retrieval of the Complainant, who was subsequently transported to St. Michael’s Hospital (SMH). She was diagnosed with a fractured pelvis and leg.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2026/02/23 at 3:52 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2026/02/23 at 6:27 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”)

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

The Complainant was interviewed on February 24, 2026.

Subject Official

SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject official’s legal right

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Not interviewed; written statement reviewed, and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness official was interviewed on March 5, 2026.

Evidence

The Scene

The events in question transpired on the Commissioners Street Bridge over the Don River, Toronto.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

TPS Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage - The SO and WO #1

On February 22, 2026, at 11:26 p.m., the SO drove eastbound on Commissioners Bridge. It was dark and clear outside with artificial lighting.

At 11:26:44 p.m., the SO stopped on the east side of the bridge. As he exited his cruiser, the officer said, “Hey, hey, hey.” At the same time, the movement of a person

wearing a light-coloured top [the Complainant] was seen. She climbed up and jumped over the north side railing. As the SO ran across the road to where the Complainant had jumped, WO #1 appeared from the back of the cruiser and ran towards the same location. The SO broadcast that the Complainant had jumped. WO #1 ran to the east side of the bridge and down to the river below, where he walked across the ice.

At 11:29 p.m., WO #1 reached the Complainant. She was conscious and laying on her back. She complained of back pain.

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

On February 22, 2025, at 9:57 p.m., off-duty TPS police officer, WO #2, telephoned the TPS and reported that he was in the laneway by the Green P parking lot at Bulwer Street and Soho Street. He indicated that his friend, the Complainant, was in crisis and had disappeared, leaving her car in the parking ramp. A description of the Complainant was provided. The Complainant had previously attempted suicide, and on one occasion had slashed her wrists. She suffered from anxiety, depression and, on this date, had consumed alcohol.

At 10:41 p.m., a TPS unit [Officer #1] arrived at Bulwer Street and Soho Street.

At 10:49 p.m., a second TPS unit [Officer #2] arrived on scene. Officer #1 asked for a ping of a telephone number, belonging to a phone that the Complainant had used to call WO #2. A third TPS unit [WO #1 and the SO] advised they would check bars on Queen Street.

At 11:14 p.m., Officer #1 advised that the Complainant was on a telephone call with WO #2. Reportedly, the Complainant was at the Commissioners Bridge, and there was a concern she would jump. Officer #1 requested a unit from TPS 51 Division respond to the location.

At 11:16 p.m., WO #1 and the SO advised they would respond to the bridge. Officer #1 reported that the person whose telephone the Complainant had used was driving a light-coloured GMC pick-up truck.

At 11:27 p.m., the SO broadcast that the Complainant had jumped, and they would

require the TPS Marine Unit and EMS. The SO subsequently advised that the Complainant was breathing, conscious and suffering back pain. She had landed on ice at the base of the bridge. The Toronto Fire Service (TFS) was to respond with a Stokes basket.

At 11:44 p.m., Officer #1 advised that the Complainant was wrapped in a blanket and being carried off the ice by TFS.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the TPS between February 24, 2026, and March 5, 2026:

  • BWC footage
  • Communications recordings
  • CAD Report
  • General Occurrence
  • TPS History – the Complainant
  • Notes – WO #1
  • TPS policies – Persons in Crisis; Incident Response (Use of Force)
  • Written statement – WO #2

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Ambulance Call Report from Toronto EMS on March 2, 2026.

Incident Narrative

The material events in question are clear on the evidence collected by the SIU and may be briefly summarized.

In the evening of February 22, 2026, the Complainant was with her boyfriend, off-duty officer WO #2, on Queen Street West in Toronto when the two quarreled and she left the area telling him that she was going to jump. She made her way to the Commissioners Street Bridge, over the Don River, and called WO #2 using a passerby’s cellphone. She told him she was going to commit suicide and that it would be his fault.

WO #2 called police to report that the Complainant was in mental health crisis and threatening to harm herself. He would subsequently learn from a third-party whose phone the Complainant had used to call him that she was in the area of Commissioners Street and Don Roadway.

The SO drove in that direction, travelling eastward across the Commissioners Street Bridge. With him was WO #1. The SO approached the eastern side of the bridge, brought his vehicle to a stop and exited with WO #1. They were just out of their cruiser when the Complainant scaled the bridge guardrail north of their location and jumped down the other side. She landed on the frozen river below, a distance of about eight metres.

WO #1 and the SO made their way to the riverbank and walked onto the river to render aid to the Complainant. Firefighters attended the scene and assisted in her removal. She was transported to hospital and diagnosed with fractures of the pelvis and spine, and injuries to her lungs and kidney.

Relevant Legislation

Sections 219 and 221, Criminal Code - 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

Analysis and Director’s Decision

The Complainant was seriously injured in a fall from the Commissioners Street Bridge on February 22, 2026. As TPS officers were on the bridge to check on her wellbeing at the time, the SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation. The SO was identified as 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 fall.

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 jump. In my view, there was not.

A police officer’s foremost duty is the protection and preservation of life. With information to believe that the Complainant was threatening to harm herself, the SO and WO #1 were duty bound to attend at her location to do what they could to prevent that from happening.

Once on the bridge, there is no evidence to suggest that the officers failed to comport themselves with due care and regard for the Complainant’s safety. They had only just arrived on the bridge and located the Complainant when she quickly scaled the bridge guardrail and jumped. There was simply no time for any intervention on the part of the officers. Following the jump, the officers acted quickly to render aid and arrange for emergency services to have the Complainant removed safely from the frozen river and transported to hospital.

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

Date: May 19, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit

Endnotes

  • 1) Unless otherwise specified, the information in this section reflects the information received by the SIU at the time of notification and does not necessarily reflect the SIU’s finding of facts following its investigation. [Back to text]
  • 2) The following records contain sensitive personal information and are not being released pursuant to section 34(2) of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019. The material portions of the records are summarized below. [Back to text]

Note:

The signed English original report is authoritative, and any discrepancy between that report and the French and English online versions should be resolved in favour of the original English report.