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 death of a 62-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On May 24, 2026, at 10:29 p.m., Waterloo Regional Police Service (WRPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On May 24, 2026, at 6:01 p.m., police received a call from a mental health crisis line, advising that a man [now known to be the Complainant] was threatening to harm himself with a .44 calibre firearm. At 7:50 p.m., police officers identified the Complainant’s address as an apartment in the area of University Avenue East and Weber Street North in Waterloo. The apartment was contained and the tactical unit responded and began negotiations on the telephone, using a negotiator. At 9:52 p.m., a single gunshot was heard. Officers entered the apartment and located the Complainant on his bed, obviously deceased.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2026/05/24 at 10:37 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2026/05/24 at 10:52 p.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

62-year-old male; deceased

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed between May 25, 2026, and June 3, 2026

Subject Official

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

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on May 29, 2026.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around an apartment in the area of University Avenue East and Weber Street North, Waterloo.

Physical Evidence

On May 25, 2026, at 2:40 a.m., SIU forensic services attended the apartment in the area of University Avenue East and Weber Street North, Waterloo. The door to the apartment was smashed and inside were several pieces of identification in the name of the Complainant, including expired firearms licences. On the coffee table in the living room was a notepad with the Complainant’s reflections and observations written in ink.[2]

Down a hallway were two bedrooms. The Complainant was located sitting on his bed with his back to the headboard. The top part of his skull was grievously wounded. A silver 44 calibre Magnum revolver was partially in his right hand. On the bed were two cellphones, a mirror and a plastic box. There was a hole through the lampshade on a lamp next to the bed.

The revolver used in this event was a six-shot Colt Anaconda 44 Magnum stainless steel revolver. The cylinder was found to contain five cartridges: one fired and four unfired, all with Hornady 44 Rem Mag head stamps.[3] The box on the bed was the gun box for the revolver. It contained a sixth cartridge (unfired) with the same markings.

The trajectory of the bullet was followed into a wall. Even after drywall was removed, the projectile could not be located.

SIU forensic services photographed and video-recorded the scene, and collected the revolver and two cellphones.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[4]

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage

At 7:48 p.m., May 24, 2026, uniformed WRPS officers were captured in the hallway outside the apartment. Door knocks were conducted on the Complainant’s apartment door with no response. The officers backed away from the door and waited for Emergency Response Team (ERT) officers, who arrived at 8:28 p.m..

At 8:32 p.m., WO #2 made contact by telephone with the Complainant. He established that the Complainant was alone in the apartment and owned firearms but they were currently locked in a vault. WO #2 explained to the Complainant that he would be apprehended under the MHA. The Complainant sounded reasonable. He said he felt better, and was not inclined towards self-harm. He remained anxious with the presence of officers and refused to answer his door. He spoke with a worker from a suicide crisis helpline on a different phone.

At 9:15 p.m. WO #2 offered to have a mobile crisis worker attend and speak to the Complainant, and he seemed receptive. He remained reasonable during the negotiations, and spoke of coming out if that could be done without being placed in handcuffs. After further negotiations, WO #2 told the Complainant the crisis worker would meet him at the hospital if he exited with empty hands. Officers stood by for some time with the expectation that the Complainant would exit.

At 9:50 p.m. WO #2 called the Complainant again to check-in. The Complainant wanted police to contact his boss, and police agreed to do that for him.

At 9:52 p.m., a single shot was heard. Officers called out to the Complainant with no response.

At 9:54 p.m., a drone was deployed into the apartment. The Complainant was located on a bed in a bedroom with a gunshot wound to the head.

At 9:58 p.m., ERT officers entered the apartment and found the Complainant with an obvious gunshot wound to the head.

WRPS Communications Recordings - 911

On May 24, 2026, at 6:01 p.m., a woman from a mental health service called 911 to report a suicidal man in crisis [now known to be the Complainant]. She was connected to WRPS dispatch.

At 6:26 p.m., the woman called again to update dispatch that the Complainant had had an incident earlier in the day, which triggered suicidal ideations. A year ago, the Complainant had attempted suicide unsuccessfully.

At 7:25 p.m., the woman advised that the Complainant was still speaking with a colleague. The Complainant had analyzed suicide statistics and felt suicide was not a rare event. He planned to send a text to his boss before he set his cellphone to airplane mode and ended his life. The counsellor speaking to the Complainant convinced him to engage with a suicide crisis help line.

WRPS Communications Recordings - Radio

On May 24, 2026, shortly after the aforementioned woman’s initial call to 911, the SO was notified of the situation.

At 6:14 p.m., a ping of the Complainant’s cellphone placed its location at his address.

At 7:29 p.m., ERT officers were dispatched to the address.

At 7:43 p.m., uniformed officers were on scene.

At 7:50 p.m., it was reported that no sounds were heard from the apartment door.

At 8:16 p.m., ERT officers arrived on scene and began call-outs to the Complainant with negative results.

At 8:30 p.m., the Complainant was contacted by WO #2.

At 9:52 p.m., a single gunshot was heard.

At 9:54 p.m., the door of the Complainant’s apartment was breached.

At 9:56 p.m., ERT officers entered the apartment.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from WRPS between May 26, 2026, and August 11, 2026:

• Notes – the SO, WO #1 and WO #2
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Police communications recordings
• General Occurrence Report
• BWC footage
• List of ammunition used by WRPS
• WRPS policies - Emergency Response and Hostage Rescue; Mental Health Response

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the Preliminary Autopsy Findings Report from the Ontario Forensic Pathology Service.[5]

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with police witnesses and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was his legal right, the SO did not agree an interview with the SIU. He did authorize the release of his notes.

In the evening of May 24, 2026, WRPS officers were dispatched to an apartment in the area of University Avenue East and Weber Street North, Waterloo. A mental health counselling service had called police to report they were in contact with a male – the Complainant – expressing suicidal ideation. The Complainant was feeling depressed and alone. He was also frustrated with a traffic ticket he had received earlier in the day. Uniformed officers arrived outside his apartment and called out to the Complainant from outside his door. There was no response from the inside.

As police were aware of firearms registered to the Complainant, and that he had placed a gun to his head about a year prior, ERT officers were dispatched to the scene. Led by the SO, the team took over from the uniformed officers outside the apartment and attempted to establish communications with the Complainant. A member of the team and trained negotiator – WO #2– was able to contact the Complainant by telephone. The Complainant seemed calm and composed. Though assuring the officer that he did not intend to harm himself, the Complainant expressed unease with the police outside his door and the prospect of being arrested. WO #2 explained that the Complainant would not be arrested for a criminal offence but, rather, taken into custody under the Mental Health Act for his own safety. The Complainant seemed open to the idea of going to hospital and asked how long the process would take. WO #2 said they would do what they could to expedite his stay at hospital. At about 9:50 p.m., after the Complainant asked WO #2 to call his employer to inform him that he might not make it into work the next day, a gunshot was heard from within the apartment.

The ERT team forced open the door and sent in a drone. The drone’s camera captured the Complainant in a seated position on a bed in a bedroom. He was deceased. The Complainant had shot himself in the head with a revolver.

Cause of Death

The pathologist at autopsy was of the preliminary view that the Complainant’s death was attributable to a gunshot wound of the head.

Sections 219 and 220, Criminal Code of Canada - Criminal Negligence Causing Death

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.

220 Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and

(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

Section 17, Mental Health Act - Action by Police Officer

17 Where a police officer has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a person is acting or has acted in a disorderly manner and has reasonable cause to believe that the person,

(a) has threatened or attempted or is threatening or attempting to cause bodily harm to himself or herself;

(b) has behaved or is behaving violently towards another person or has caused or is causing another person to fear bodily harm from him or her; or

(c) has shown or is showing a lack of competence to care for himself or herself,

and in addition the police officer is of the opinion that the person is apparently suffering from mental disorder of a nature or quality that likely will result in,

(d) serious bodily harm to the person;

(e) serious bodily harm to another person; or

(f) serious physical impairment of the person,

and that it would be dangerous to proceed under section 16, the police officer may take the person in custody to an appropriate place for examination by a physician.

The Complainant passed away on May 24, 2026, the result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. As WRPS officers were engaged with the Complainant at the time attempting to prevent him harming himself, 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 death.

The offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing death contrary to section 220 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 death. The evidence establishes there was not.

The SO and the ERT officers involved in the police operation outside the Complainant’s apartment were lawfully placed and engaged in the exercise of their duty to protect and preserve life. With information at their disposal that the Complainant was the owner of multiple firearms and had talked about suicide, they were within their rights in seeking to apprehend him under section 17 of the Mental Health Act in the interest of public safety.

It is also apparent that the officers comported themselves with due care and regard for the Complainant’s wellbeing throughout the police operation. The Complainant’s state of mind and the presence of guns in the apartment effectively precluded the police from forcing entry into the apartment. Their only real option, which they pursued reasonably in the circumstances, was negotiations. Indeed, there were times when WO #2, a trained negotiator, appeared to be making progress in talks with the Complainant. Regrettably, the Complainant could not ultimately be deterred from taking his life, but his death was not from a want of reasonable efforts on the part of the involved officers.

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

Date: September 10, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit