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 19-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On March 31, 2026, at 5:01 p.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On March 30, 2026, officers from the Offender Management Apprehension Program were conducting compliance checks on individuals with outstanding warrants. At 12:22 p.m., a male [the Complainant] known to be wanted on several warrants was located in the area of Cambridge Avenue and Victoria Road, Iroquois Falls. A short foot pursuit ensued as officers approached the Complainant to execute the arrest. He was eventually apprehended without incident, and a preliminary search was conducted roadside, after which the Complainant was transported to the Iroquois Falls OPP Detachment at 12:35 p.m. Upon booking, another search was conducted of the Complainant and 1.2 grams of “PURP” was located on his person. The Complainant was lodged in cells pending a bail hearing on March 31, 2026. On March 31, 2026, the Complainant was removed from his cell at some point midday and thereafter returned to his cell after his bail hearing. At 1:40 p.m., the Complainant was seen via cell video to be experiencing a medical event. A special constable went to the cell and observed him to be suffering an apparent seizure and excreting white foam from his mouth. A small container was observed in the vicinity of the Complainant. At 1:45 p.m., and 1:47 p.m., the special constable administered two doses of naloxone and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) were summoned to the detachment. EMS arrived at 2:09 p.m., and the Complainant was transported to Anson General Hospital for treatment. A toxicology screen revealed the presence of cocaine and fentanyl, suspected to have been ingested during his time in police custody. Because of his diagnosis, the Complainant was transferred at 5:01 p.m. to Timmins and District Hospital where he was to remain in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for further treatment.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2026/04/01 at 7:57 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2026/04/08 at 2:00 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”)

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

The Complainant was interviewed on April 8, 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; notes reviewed, and interview deemed unnecessary

WO #3 Not interviewed; notes reviewed, and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness official was interviewed on April 20, 2026.

Service Employee Witnesses

SEW #1 Interviewed

SEW #2 Interviewed

The service employee witnesses were interviewed on April 20, 2026.

The Scene

The events in question transpired roadside in the area of Cambridge Avenue and Victoria Road, Iroquois Falls, and the booking area and a cell of the OPP Iroquois Falls Detachment, 52 Critchley Avenue, Iroquois Falls.

The cell contained a concrete bed along with a stainless steel toilet / fountain combination.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

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

On March 30, 2026, at 12:20 p.m., WO #1 advised the dispatcher he was with two males and that one male had run but was in custody. WO #2 advised the Complainant was in custody.

Starting at 12:33 p.m., WO #1 advised the Complainant was to be transported to the detachment. He requested a criminal record check to confirm warrants.

Starting at 12:44 p.m., WO #1 arrived at the detachment.

On March 31, 2026, at 1:45 p.m., EMS were requested to attend the detachment as the Complainant was convulsing, not talking and unable to open his eyes.

Starting at 1:50 p.m., a request to expedite EMS was broadcast as the Complainant had reportedly ingested something and Narcan had been administered.

Starting at 2:09 p.m., EMS arrived on scene.

Starting at 2:26 p.m., the Complainant was transported to Anson General Hospital via ambulance.

Starting at 5:01 p.m., the Complainant was transferred to the ICU at Timmins and District Hospital, arriving at 5:57 p.m..

Starting at 6:32 p.m., toxicology results showed the Complainant had fentanyl and cocaine in his system.

OPP Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage – The SO, WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3

On March 30, 2026, at 12:19 p.m., WO #1 and WO #2 exited their vehicle and spoke with the Complainant, who was wearing a black balaclava over his face. The Complainant removed the balaclava, revealing a facial tattoo, and was advised he was under arrest for assault. The Complainant fled on foot but was grounded by WO #1 after a four-second foot pursuit.

Starting at 12:21 p.m., WO #1 escorted the Complainant to his police vehicle and searched him. The Complainant initially denied his identity, but WO #1 and WO #2 accessed a mugshot to confirm his identity.

Starting at 12:33 p.m., the Complainant was transported to the Iroquois Falls Detachment.

Starting at 12:45 p.m., the Complainant was paraded in the cell area.

Starting at 12:49 p.m., the Complainant was searched and advised officers of the fanny pack under his jacket.

Starting at 12:50 p.m., the SO searched the cell and found it clear.

Starting at 12:51 p.m., the Complainant confirmed he had consumed methadone at around 12:00 p.m.

On March 31, 2026, at 12:11 p.m., the Complainant attended video bail court and appeared to be in good health. He was returned to his cell at 12:24 p.m.

Starting at 2:10 p.m., WO #3 attended the cell as the Complainant was in medical distress. The officer asked if the Complainant had ingested drugs, which he confirmed. The Complainant also disclosed to paramedics that he had ingested “jib” an hour or two earlier.

Starting at 2:17 p.m., the Complainant was placed on a stretcher. His body shook uncontrollably. The Complainant denied a history of seizures.

Starting at 2:18 p.m., the SO observed a plastic container in the cell and asked WO #3 about it. WO #3 responded that the Complainant said he had it in his possession when he came into cells.

Starting at 2:57 p.m., the SO attended the Complainant’s cell and counted three doses of Narcan that had been administered.

OPP In-car Camera (ICC) Footage - WO #1 and WO #2

Starting at 12:28 p.m., March 30, 2026, while the Complainant was handcuffed behind the back, he contorted his body in a way that allowed him to manipulate something within or under his jacket.

Starting at 12:33 p.m., the Complainant, still handcuffed behind the back, removed his left hand from under his jacket and placed it down the front of his pants.

OPP Custody Footage

On March 31, 2026, starting at 12:31 p.m., the Complainant used the toilet in his cell and picked up an object beside his foot. The Complainant subsequently laid down on the bed and covered himself, including his head, with a blanket.

Starting at 12:50 p.m., the Complainant put something in his mouth.

Starting at 1:42 p.m., the Complainant appeared to be in medical distress with seizure-like symptoms.

Starting at 1:45 p.m., the Complainant was administered Narcan. He left the cell with EMS at 2:22 p.m.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the OPP between April 2, 2026, and June 17, 2026:

• Names, roles and call signs for involved police officers
• General Occurrence Report
• Arrest Report
• BWC footage
• ICC footage
• Video footage of the Complainant while in custody
• Police communications recordings
• CAD Report
• Photographs
• Notes – WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Complainant’s medical records from Anson General Hospital and Timmins and District Hospital between May 1, 2026, and May 4, 2026.

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

In the early afternoon of March 31, 2026, the Complainant, while detained in a cell of the OPP Iroquois Falls Detachment, reached into his underpants, retrieved a quantity of drugs and consumed them. About an hour later, he lapsed into medical distress with seizure-like symptoms. Custodial staff were quickly alerted to the Complainant’s situation. They administered several doses of Narcan and summoned EMS. Paramedics arrived on scene and transported the Complainant to hospital where he was treated for an overdose.

The day before, acting on the strength of a warrant, WO #1 and WO #2 had arrested the Complainant. WO #1 had conducted a pat-down search at the time, but failed to discover a body-pack around the Complainant’s torso, which contained a plastic container of illicit substances. After being placed in a cruiser for transport to the detachment, the Complainant was able to manipulate his handcuffed arms to retrieve the container from his pack and conceal it down the front of his underwear. At the detachment, the Complainant revealed he was wearing the body-pack. It was removed from his possession and a quantity of methamphetamine was confiscated. A further pat-down search before the Complainant was lodged in a cell failed to discover the container he was hiding.

Section 215, Criminal Code - Failure to Provide Necessaries

215 (1) Every one is under a legal duty

(c) to provide necessaries of life to a person under his charge if that person

(i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, illness, mental disorder or other cause, to withdraw himself from that charge, and

(ii) is unable to provide himself with necessaries of life.

(2) Every person commits an offence who, being under a legal duty within the meaning of subsection (1), fails without lawful excuse to perform that duty, if

(b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (1)(c), the failure to perform the duty endangers the life of the person to whom the duty is owed or causes or is likely to cause the health of that person to be injured permanently.

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 (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the custody of the OPP on March 31, 2026. 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 offences that arise for consideration are failure to provide the necessaries of life and criminal negligence causing bodily harm contrary to sections 215 and 221 of the Criminal Code, respectively. Both require something more than a simple want of care to give rise to liability. The former is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. The latter is premised on even more egregious conduct that demonstrates a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons. It is not made out unless the neglect constitutes a marked and substantial departure from a reasonable standard of care. In the instant case, the question is whether there was any want of care on the part of the SO, sufficiently serious to attract criminal sanction, that endangered the Complainant’s life or contributed to his overdose. In my view, there was not.

The Complainant was arrested further to an outstanding warrant and was in lawful police custody through the series of events culminating in his ingestion of illicit substances and overdose.

With respect to the care the Complainant received during his time in custody, I am unable to reasonably conclude that his custodians transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law. At the outset, the evidence establishes that the Complainant was monitored regularly while lodged in his cell and that his jailers acted quickly to discover his medical condition and provide medical care. The real question involves the failure of the arresting officers to discover the drugs prior to their consumption by the Complainant in the cell. Contained in a pouch that the Complainant was wearing under his coat at the time of arrest, the drugs ought arguably to have been detected and confiscated by WO #1 in the course of the initial pat-down search. It was that failing that set the stage for what happened next, namely, the Complainant’s surreptitious retrieval of the drugs and their concealment in his underwear. It is not as clear that the plastic container holding the substances should have been located during the second pat-down search at the detachment. They were secreted under a couple of layers of clothing at this time and might not have been obvious to the touch. It may be that only a strip search would have revealed the container, but it is not apparent that there were grounds to justify the invasive procedure under the law set out in R. v. Golden, [2001] 3 SCR 679. After all, the Complainant had already been searched twice and a quantity of drugs removed from his person, he had not been arrested for a drug offence, and he did not appear under the influence of drugs until just before he started displaying symptoms of overdose. On the totality of this record, the failure of the Complainant’s custodians to locate and remove the drugs in his possession that he later ingested, resulting in an overdose, falls short of a marked departure from a reasonable standard of care. That being the case, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO, who was ultimately responsible for the Complainant’s well-being while in cells, bears criminal responsibility for the Complainant’s overdose.

For the foregoing reasons, the file is closed.

Date: June 24, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit