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 June 14, 2026, at 11:51 p.m., the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On June 14, 2026, at 9:49 a.m., the Complainant called the OPP to request a wellness check on his girlfriend, whom he alleged was suffering from a mental health condition. It became clear the call was not genuine. The Complainant refused to provide information to substantiate his allegation and subsequently disconnected the call. At 10:16 a.m., a man called the OPP to report that the Complainant had stolen his vehicle and left the residence, and that he was intoxicated by drugs. OPP officers searched the Huntsville area for the man’s vehicle but were unable to locate the Complainant. At 11:30 a.m., Witness Official (WO) #2 and WO #1 attended the man’s residence in Huntsville. While the officers were at the residence, the Complainant returned home and immediately went to his bedroom. WO #2 and WO #1 went to the bedroom, and the Complainant attempted to scale down a TV antenna tower that was attached to the side of the home. He subsequently lost his grip, fell to the ground and injured an ankle. At 11:53 a.m., WO #2 and WO #1 arrested the Complainant for various criminal offences and transported him to the Huntsville OPP Detachment, where he was to be held for a bail hearing. At 2:45 p.m., the Complainant complained of pain to his ankle. He was transported to the Huntsville District Memorial Hospital (HDMH) where he was examined and his ankle placed in an air cast. At that time, there was no apparent serious injury, and he was returned to the Huntsville Detachment, arriving at 3:22 p.m. At 3:30 p.m., the Complainant again complained of pain to his ankle. At 4:00 p.m., paramedic services transported him back to the HDMH. As the door to the ambulance was opened, the Complainant jumped out and fled. He was no longer wearing the air cast. His hands were still handcuffed in front of his body. Multiple OPP officers and the canine unit were dispatched to locate the Complainant, who was last seen jumping down an embankment nearby. At 4:22 p.m., the OPP received a call from an unknown person at another address in Huntsville, reporting there was a handcuffed man in his backyard. OPP officers attended the address and re-arrested the Complainant without incident. The Complainant was again returned to HDMH, where radiographs confirmed a fractured ankle.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2026/06/15 at 6:24 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2026/06/15 at 9:08 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 5

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 June 16, 2026.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on June 16, 2026.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed between June 22, 2026, and July 2, 2026.

The Scene

The events in question transpired on and around a television antenna tower by the external side of a house in Huntsville, and the external grounds around the ambulance bay at HDMH, 100 Frank Miller Drive, Huntsville.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage - WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3

On June 14, 2026, at 11:49:24 a.m., WO #1 activated his BWC as he ran downstairs [in a house in Huntsville]. He ran outside and around the side of the house. On the side of the residence was a television antenna tower. The Complainant was scaling down the antenna. He said, “I’m not going to jail”. He wore socks but no shoes. WO #2 was on the roof and yelled at the Complainant to stop. When the Complainant’s feet were about two metres from the ground, he jumped the remainder of the distance. He landed upright as WO #1 attempted to grab him. The Complainant immediately fell forwards to the ground, then quickly stood up.

At 11:49:51 a.m., WO #1’s BWC was obscured as he struggled with the Complainant, and eventually it detached from his vest.

At 11:52:11 a.m., the BWC was reattached to WO #1. WO #3 requested that paramedic services attend. The Complainant was in a supine position handcuffed with his hands in front of his body. His wrist had blood on it. The Complainant said, “You fucked up my ankle bud.” WO #1 assured him an ambulance was on the way. WO #1 told WO #3 that the Complainant had punched the window. The Complainant continued to struggle as he tried to crawl away.

At 12:02:30 p.m., the Complainant said he had smoked crack cocaine for days and drank two bottles of wine. He stood up on his own and placed weight on his ankle with no pain response.

At 12:20:20 p.m., paramedic services arrived. The Complainant had difficulty stepping up into the ambulance on his right foot.

At 3:16:35 p.m., WO #1 and WO #3 were outside the Huntsville OPP Detachment. The Complainant was told an ambulance was on its way. His right foot was in a cast. Five minutes later, paramedic services arrived. WO #3 rode in the ambulance with the Complainant.

At 6:02:47 p.m., WO #1 arrived at a property [another residence in Huntsville] carrying a rifle. He asked a man [CW #2] where someone had gone. CW #2 pointed into a wooded area. WO #1 ran into the wooded area and ordered the Complainant to stop. The Complainant surrendered himself and followed commands. His handcuffs were moved to behind the back.

Video Footage - Private Residence

The footage was not time and date-stamped. It captured police officers arriving at and leave CW #2’s property. As they left, the Complainant was in handcuffs and walked with a limp past the camera.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU received the following materials from the OPP between June 19, 2026, and June 24, 2026:

• General Occurrence Reports
• Computer-aided Dispatch Reports
• Arrest Reports
• BWC footage
• In-car camera footage
• Police communications recordings
• OPP policies – Use of Force; BWC
• Notes – WO #2, WO #1 and WO #3
• Release Order
• Involved Persons Synopsis

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between June 18, 2026, and June 19, 2026:

• Video footage from CW #2
• The Complainant’s medical records from HDMH

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and other police and non-police witnesses, and video footage that captured portions of the incident, gives rise to the following scenario.

On June 14, 2026, police were dispatched to an address in Huntsville in an attempt to locate a jeep that had apparently been taken by the Complainant from his grandfather without his grandfather’s consent. It was also reported that the Complainant had consumed drugs and was in breach of the house arrest conditions of the release he was on.

WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3 attended the residence where the Complainant was to be residing with his surety in order to take a statement about the stolen jeep. As they were speaking with CW #1, WO #3 and WO #2 realized that the Complainant was hiding upstairs in his bedroom. WO #3 and WO #2 were allowed to enter the home by CW #1. WO #1 attended and joined the other officers upstairs in the residence. Officers were unable to make their way into the Complainant’s bedroom due to an object holding the door closed. WO #1 was able to peer through a gap between the door and the doorframe and saw the Complainant. He moved to a window, punched the glass out and climbed out the window using a television antenna attached to the residence to make his way towards the ground.

WO #1 ran downstairs and outside where he grounded the Complainant after he jumped from the antenna to the ground from a height of approximately one to two metres. WO #1 told the Complainant he was under arrest. The Complainant struggled and was able to gain his feet before again being grounded. WO #3 and WO #2 attended and assisted in subduing the Complainant by taking control of his legs. The Complainant was foaming at the mouth and spitting, and his eyes were pinpoint and glossy. Officers felt that the Complainant was under the influence of drugs. They were eventually able to secure the Complainant’s hands in handcuffs in front of his body.

The Complainant indicated his right ankle hurt. He removed his socks and officers observed his ankle to be swollen. Paramedics attended the scene and arranged to transport him to HDMH. At the Complainant’s request, WO #3 rode with him in the back of the ambulance to the hospital.

The Complainant was treated at the hospital and discharged into the custody of the OPP as it could not be confirmed that the Complainant had suffered a fracture to his foot. The Complainant wore an air cast boot and returned in the custody of WO #3 to the detachment.

After returning to the detachment the Complainant made medical complaints and apparently expressed suicidal ideation. These complaints and information caused police to summon emergency medical services to attend to him at the detachment. The decision was made to take the Complainant to the HDMH again. The Complainant entered the ambulance, his hands handcuffed to the front.

At approximately 3:49 p.m., the ambulance arrived at HDMH. While the bay doors to the area where ambulances parked to offload patients were still open, the Complainant got up and jumped out of the rear doors of the ambulance as the ambulance attendant was opening them. The air cast boot had been removed from the Complainant’s right foot while in the ambulance prior to arrival at the hospital because it was bothering him.

WO #1 and WO #3 chased the Complainant, who sprinted, barefoot, through the parking lot. WO #1 did not observe the Complainant to have any apparent difficulty with his ankle during this run. The Complainant covered approximately 150 metres before jumping down a steep embankment into some bushes. He landed upright and continued to run. WO #1 did not follow him at that point because he felt it was unsafe to do so.

A canine unit was brought in to assist and officers searched for the Complainant for approximately two-and-a-half hours before terminating their efforts. Shortly after, police received a call from a person reporting a male crawling through his backyard wearing handcuffs. WO #1 and other officers attended and arrested the Complainant without incident in a wooded area behind the residence.

At the time of his final arrest, the Complainant walked with a limp and claimed to have fallen through the floor of a residence where he had hidden from officers as they searched for him. WO #2 observed that there was a new laceration to the Complainant’s foot and his ankle was more swollen than it had been after he had jumped off the television antenna earlier in the day. The Complainant was again taken to hospital where he was diagnosed with a serious injury to his right foot.

The Complainant was diagnosed with two fractures to his foot following his arrest by OPP officers in and around Huntsville on June 14, 2026. The SIU was notified of the incident and initiated an investigation, but was unable to identify a subject official. The investigation is now concluded. On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that any OPP officers committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s injury.

The Complainant suffered an injury in the form of fractures to the bones in his right foot. There is no evidence that was uncovered in the investigation that these injuries were caused by the action of any police officer. Assuming that he did not suffer the injury to his foot prior to his involvement with police on June 14, 2026, there are three identifiable points in the events of that day where the Complainant could have suffered an injury to his foot. The first possibility is that he injured his foot when he jumped from the television antenna as he attempted to escape police, who had attended at his family residence. The second potential point where the injury might have been suffered is when he jumped down the embankment after having absconded from the ambulance. The third possibility is that he injured himself when he apparently fell through the floor of a residence into the basement while hiding from officers. In none of these incidents is there a causal connection that can be drawn from the actions of an officer to the potential mechanism of injury, and consequently no reason to believe that officers committed a criminal offence with relation to the Complainant.

Before closing the file, I note for the record a possible violation of section 27 of the Police Code of Conduct with respect to the apparent failure of WO #3 to activate her BWC in a timely manner and/or deactivating her BWC. I will be referring this matter to the police service for their review. Pursuant to section 35.1 of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019, the matter will also be referred to the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency.

Date: October 9, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit