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 36-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On February 17, 2026, at 9:34 p.m., the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On February 17, 2026, at 4:15 p.m., the OPS were contacted to attend the intersection of Bank Street and Catherine Street, Ottawa, regarding a male [the Complainant] reportedly involved in a physical altercation in an Ottawa transit bus. Simultaneously, an officer operating a marked police vehicle was stopped in the area and observed the aftermath of the incident, specifically, the Complainant outside the bus, smashing the front door in an attempt to regain entry. Officers arrived in the area and attempted to arrest the combative and intoxicated Complainant. The Complainant was grounded and handcuffed. Paramedics arrived on scene and sedated the Complainant. He was transported to the Ottawa Hospital - Civic Campus (OHCC) and diagnosed with a fracture of the C7 vertebra (base of the neck).

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2026/02/18 at 8:01 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2026/03/03 at 11:30 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

36-year-old male; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on March 3, 2026

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Not interviewed; declined

CW #2 Not interviewed; declined

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between February 19, 2026, and February 26, 2026.

Subject Officials

SO #1 Interviewed, but declined to submit notes, as is the subject official’s legal right

SO #2 Declined interview, as is the subject official’s legal right; notes received and reviewed

SO #1 was interviewed on June 26, 2026.

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed.

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed.

The witness officials were interviewed on February 20, 2026.

Investigative Delay

This investigation was delayed due to workload pressures impacting the investigation team.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around a public transit bus stopped in the southbound lanes of Bank Street at its intersection with Catherine Street, Ottawa.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Police Communication Recordings

On February 17, 2026, starting at about 4:14 p.m., CW #3 called 911 to request police attendance at the corner of Bank Street and Catherine Street. CW #3 reported a male getting in the way of traffic and standing in front of a bus. The male was banging on the bus trying to get in and had an injury to his face.

Starting at about 4:16 p.m., a male called 911 to request police at Catherine Street and Bank Street. A different male had been involved in a fight inside a bus and was now outside trying to kick-in the doors of the bus and “attacking” other cars. The male was standing in front of the bus and preventing it from moving.

In-car Camera (ICC) Footage – SO #1’s Cruiser

On February 17, 2026, starting at about 4:18 p.m., SO #1 stopped her police vehicle across the southbound curb lane of Bank Street, in front of an OC Transpo Bus. The Complainant was standing in a live lane of traffic, in front of the bus. He appeared to have blood covering his face, and was wearing a winter jacket and a blue backpack.

At 4:18:32 p.m., the Complainant put his arms onto the passenger side fender of the SO’s police vehicle. The SO, now out of her police vehicle, put on her protective gloves and engaged in conversation with the Complainant. She motioned to the Complainant to come off the roadway as he walked on the southbound curb lane of Bank Street.

At 4:19:12 p.m., SO #1 took hold of the Complainant’s jacket on the right side and appeared to be trying to move him off the roadway from in front of the bus. The Complainant leaned up against the bus with his right hand and moved SO #1’s hand away. The Complainant took his cell phone out of his left pant pocket. He then took hold of the bike rack on the front of the bus, after which he appeared to push SO #1 backward.

At 4:20:30 p.m., SO #2 arrived and took hold of the Complainant’s left arm while SO #1 took hold of his right arm. The three rocked back and forth. The Complainant went to the ground in a seated motion, after which he was forced to ground, chest first, with SO #1 and SO #2 holding him down. WO #2 arrived on scene.

At 4:20:40 p.m., WO #1 arrived and assisted in holding the Complainant to the ground. Once on the ground, the officers’ and the Complainant’s actions were partially blocked by the passenger side fender of SO #1’s police vehicle.

At 4:21:06 p.m., the Complainant’s backpack was removed and WO #2 placed it on top of SO #1’s police vehicle. Officers appeared to be handcuffing the Complainant.

At 4:21:49 p.m., the Complainant’s arms were handcuffed behind the back. He was picked up off the ground and escorted away, off camera.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

The SIU obtained the following records from the OPS between February 18, 2026, and June 11, 2026:

• Police communications recordings
• Computer-assisted Dispatch (CAD) Report
• List of involved officers and description of their roles
• Body-worn camera footage
• ICC footage
• Notes – WO #1, WO #2 and SO #2

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between February 23, 2026, and July 7, 2026:

• The Complainant’s medical records from OHCC
• Photographs from CW #3
• Video footage from City of Ottawa traffic camera

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

In the afternoon of February 17, 2026, the OPS received 911 calls about a male causing a disturbance inside and outside a transit bus stopped in the southbound lanes of Bank Street at Catherine Street. At about the same time, SO #1 was on patrol in her cruiser travelling west on Catherine Street when she was flagged down by a person in connection with the same disturbance. The officer brought her cruiser to a stop in front of the bus and exited to investigate.

The male was the Complainant. He was heavily intoxicated by alcohol and bleeding from the head. Moments prior, a male passenger on the bus had fought with the Complainant, also a passenger, and forcibly ejected him from the bus. On learning of the altercation in the bus, the driver had contacted security and locked-down the vehicle pending the arrival of assistance. The Complainant had attempted to re-enter the bus, banging and kicking its exterior and causing damage to the front door. He had also banged on other vehicles passing by in the area.

SO #1 attempted to escort the Complainant off the roadway but he refused. At one point, he got in the officer’s face and forced her backward. SO #2 arrived on scene with his partner, WO #1, and intervened to assist SO #1 in taking the Complainant to the roadway. With WO #1’s assistance, the officers proceeded to handcuff the Complainant’s hands behind the back.

Paramedics arrived on scene and transported the Complainant to hospital. He was treated for lacerations to the head and forehead, and diagnosed with a neck fracture.

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 430, Criminal Code of Canada – Mischief

430 (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

(a) destroys or damages property;

(b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

(c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or

operation of property; or

(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use,

enjoyment or operation of property.

The Complainant was diagnosed with a serious injury following his arrest by OPS officers on February 17, 2026. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, naming two subject officials – SO #1 and SO #2. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that either subject official committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and 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 had damaged the bus and was subject to arrest for mischief under section 430 of the Criminal Code.

The only force used by the officers against the Complainant consisted of SO #1 and SO #2 taking hold of the Complainant’s arms and guiding him to the ground, and SO #1, SO #2 and WO #1 physically engaging with the Complainant in the process of securing him in handcuffs. These were necessary and reasonable applications of force considering the Complainant’s belligerence and unwillingness to comply with the officers’ requests. It is apparent on the video footage of the arrest that the force used was minimal and no more than was necessary to take the Complainant into custody. At no point was the Complainant struck by the officers.

It is doubtful that the Complainant’s injuries were caused by the police. These appear far more likely the result of his altercation with a passenger on the bus, the self-inflicted result of the Complainant intentionally banging his head off the bus exterior on multiple occasions, or some combination of the two.

Be that as it may, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the subject officials comported themselves unlawfully in their dealings with the Complainant. The file is closed.

Date: July 10, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit