SIU Director’s Report - Case # 20-OVD-214

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 police officers where there has been death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault. The Unit’s jurisdiction covers more than 50 municipal, regional and provincial police services across Ontario.

Under the Police Services Act, the Director of the SIU must determine based on the evidence gathered in an investigation whether an officer has committed a criminal offence in connection with the incident under investigation. If, after an investigation, there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence was committed, the Director has the authority to lay a criminal charge against the officer. Alternatively, in all cases where no reasonable grounds exist, the Director does not lay criminal charges but files a report with the Attorney General communicating the results of an investigation.

Information Restrictions

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (“FIPPA”)

Pursuant to section 14 of FIPPA (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 whose release 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 of FIPPA (i.e., personal privacy), protected personal information is not included in this document. This information may include, but is not limited to, the following:
  • Subject Officer name(s);
  • Witness Officer name(s);
  • Civilian Witness name(s);
  • 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 (“PHIPA”)

Pursuant to PHIPA, any information related to the personal health of identifiable individuals is not included.

Other proceedings, processes, and investigations

Information may have also 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

The Unit’s investigative jurisdiction is limited to those incidents where there is a serious injury (including sexual assault allegations) or death in cases involving the police.

“Serious injuries” shall include those that are likely to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim and are more than merely transient or trifling in nature and will include serious injury resulting from sexual assault. “Serious Injury” shall initially be presumed when the victim is admitted to hospital, suffers a fracture to a limb, rib or vertebrae or to the skull, suffers burns to a major portion of the body or loses any portion of the body or suffers loss of vision or hearing, or alleges sexual assault. Where a prolonged delay is likely before the seriousness of the injury can be assessed, the Unit should be notified so that it can monitor the situation and decide on the extent of its involvement.

This report relates to the SIU’s investigation into the death of a 21-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

The Investigation

Notification of the SIU

On August 29, 2020, at 4:10 a.m., the Brantford Police Service (BPS) contacted the SIU and reported the following.

The BPS reported that on August 29, 2020, at 2:55 a.m., Witness Officer (WO) #2 saw two vehicles racing in the area of Dalhousie and Clarence Streets. He attempted to stop both vehicles, but one vehicle sped off. WO #2 remained with the vehicle that had stopped and broadcasted over the radio what had just occurred.

The Subject Officer (SO) learned of the information, attended a local bar called “Vegas”, and spoke with civilian witnesses who said they saw the vehicle in question driving at a high rate of speed.

At some point, WO #6 of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) saw what was believed to be the same vehicle that had sped off in the area of Dalhousie Street and Brant Avenue. The vehicle was travelling north on Brant Avenue but started to fishtail. WO #6 activated his emergency lights and went through a red light in an attempt to catch up, but the vehicle sped at a high rate of speed on Brant Avenue.

The SO saw this vehicle continuing on Brant Avenue at high rate of speed. At some point, the SO arrived in the area of Brant Avenue, Ava Road and Parkside Drive where a single vehicle was on fire and on its hood. The SO attempted to approach the vehicle, but the fire was too intense.

The Emergency Medical Service (EMS) and Fire Department were called. The identity of the deceased in the vehicle was unknown at the time of notification.

The Team

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3
Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2
Number of SIU Collision Reconstructionist assigned: 1

The Forensic Investigators completed a scene examination, took photographs and video of the scene, and measured it with a Total Station device for forensic mapping purposes.

The SIU Reconstructionist analyzed the causes and events during a vehicle collision.

Arrangements were made for the vehicle and body to be transported to the Centre of Forensic Sciences (CFS) by the OPP using their covered tow truck. Arrangements were also made for the OPP members to attend and remove the body for post-mortem examination.

The SIU obtained videos taken by civilian witnesses.

Complainant: 21-year-old male, deceased 


Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed
CW #2 Interviewed
CW #3 Interviewed
CW #4 Interviewed
CW #5 Interviewed
CW #6 Interviewed

Witness Officers

WO #1 Interviewed
WO #2 Interviewed
WO #3 Notes reviewed, interview deemed not necessary
WO #4 Notes reviewed, interview deemed not necessary
WO #5 Notes reviewed, interview deemed not necessary
WO #6 Interviewed



Subject Officers

SO Declined interview and to provide notes, as is the subject officer’s legal right. Written statement received and reviewed.



Evidence

The Scene

The scene began on the Brant Avenue overpass and ended on Ava Road, located below the Brant Avenue overpass.

Brant Avenue runs in a general north-south direction. There are four paved lanes - two in each direction. There are raised concrete curbs and sidewalks on either edge of the roadway. As one proceeds north on Brant Avenue towards the overpass over Ava Road and the railway lines, there is a slight curve to the right in the roadway. There are exits and entrances to Ava Road on the west side of Brant Avenue from eastbound Ava Road. These lanes are separated with raised islands. There are overhead lights on both sides of the roadway. On the east and west side of the Brant Avenue overpass there are raised concrete sidewalks. The sidewalks are raised .27 metres and the width is .97 metres. There are metal guardrails on either edge of the overpass, 1.1 metres in height. The distance from the top of the sidewalk to Ava Road, which runs under the overpass, measured 6.915 metres.

Tire marks commenced over the solid yellow line of Brant Avenue, continuing in a northwest direction across a raised island and continuing to the west raised sidewalk of the overpass. A section of the metal guardrail was removed.



Figure 1 - The broken metal guardrail and the Complainant's vehicle on the ground below.

Ava Road runs in a general northwest direction. There is one paved which runs in a northwesterly direction under the Brant Avenue overpass. There is a railway line that runs parallel to the roadway. There were gouge and scrape marks on the roadway and northwest of the overpass. A men’s damaged brown leather watch was located on the roadway amongst the vehicle debris.

A 2015 Infiniti G50 4-door vehicle was located on its roof facing in a northerly direction on Ava Road. The vehicle had extreme collision damage and fire damage. A portion of the guardrail from the Brant Avenue overpass was located on the roadway.

Scene Diagram

Expert Evidence

Summary of SIU Reconstructionist Report Findings

On August 29, 2020, at about 2:55 a.m., the SO used a Ford Explorer BPS Unit as he drove northbound on Brant Avenue. He was following a 2015 Infiniti Q50 operated by the Complainant. It was cloudy, the atmosphere was clear, and the roads were dry. The posted speed limit was 50 km/h.

Where Brant Avenue starts to go over Ava Road the Complainant was travelling at a minimal speed range of 110 km/h to 120 km/h in the northbound lane. He failed to negotiate a right curve in the road and slid across the southbound lane of Brant Avenue, onto the grassed boulevard at the Ava Road off ramp and across the Ava Road off ramp. The front impacted the west sidewalk of Brant Avenue. While doing this the Infiniti was rotating clockwise about its vertical axis. The front of the Infiniti impacted the west sidewalk of Brant Avenue and the front undercarriage was ripped apart. The front of the Infiniti downloaded on the sidewalk and the rear became elevated causing forward rotation about the lateral axis. The hood of the Infiniti impacted 2.8-metre-wide section of the metal rail on the west side of the Brant Avenue overpass, detaching it. While rotating and flipping the Infiniti fell 6.1 metres and landed on its roof and hood on Ave Road, 18.6 metres to the west of the west edge of the Brant Avenue overpass. The Infiniti slid another ten metres to rest facing north in the southbound lane of Ava Road. It burst into flames and the Complainant was burned in the fire, succumbing to injuries received from this collision at the scene.

The maximum speed which the SO drove was 85 km/h for a matter of seconds on Brant Avenue. He was followed by an OPP Unit which was operated at a maximum speed of 92 km/h for a matter of seconds on Brant Avenue. The precise location of the SO’s Unit and the OPP Unit when the collision occurred is unknown.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence

Summary of the University’s Closed-circuit Television (CCTV) Footage
The SIU obtained CCTV footage from the Laurier Brantford Special Constables Office situated at 45 Market Street, Brantford. The following is a summary of what was captured on the video:

On August 29, 2020, at 2:46 a.m., the headlights of an Infiniti were seen as the Infiniti pulled out from behind a BMW parked on Dalhousie Street in front of the Vegas World Lounge situated at 112 Dalhousie Street. People were standing at the corner of the lounge. The driver, the Complainant, went around the BMW and made a right turn onto Market Street. He stopped on Market Street blocking the laneway between the Vegas World Lounge and the Laurier Office. The Complainant held his cellular telephone out the sunroof and appeared to be taken photographs. The Complainant’s head popped up through the sunroof and the Complainant looked back toward Dalhousie Street. Two women walked toward the Infiniti. The women began walking back to the front of the Vegas World Lounge and the Complainant went back into his seat.

At 2:46:58 a.m., the Complainant performed a three point turn on Market Street as the BMW drove westbound through the intersection on Dalhousie Street. The Complainant proceeded to Dalhousie Street, stopped at the red light and then proceeded after the BMW.

At 2:47:24 a.m., the Complainant caught up to the BMW on Dalhousie Street as it began to make a right turn onto Queen Street. The BMW made a right turn from Queen Street onto Darling Street, followed by the Complainant. The Complainant drove beside the BMW. The Complainant pulled in front of the BMW and appeared to almost stop as a BPS SUV [now known to be WO #2] pulled out of a parking lot onto Darling Street. The BMW began pulling over as the Complainant began driving toward Market Street. A second BPS SUV [now known to be the SO] came out of the parking lot onto Darling Street. WO #2 activated his emergency lights and pulled in front of the BMW.

At 2:47:58 a.m., the Complainant, without stopping at the red light, made a right turn onto Market Street as a Dodge Pickup [now known to be driven by CW #1] came southbound on Market Street and was about to enter the intersection. Nine seconds later, the SO made a right turn onto Market Street behind CW #1. WO #2 stopped and remained with the BMW. He was seen at the driver’s door of the BMW interacting with the occupants.

A 2:48:06 a.m., the Complainant had sped to Dalhousie Street and made a right turn without stopping at the red light. Seven seconds later, CW #1, without stopping for the red light, made a right turn onto Dalhousie Street. About five seconds later, the SO reached Dalhousie Street, stopped briefly for the red light and made a right turn. The Complainant sped toward Queen Street.

At 2:48:14 a.m., the Complainant went through the intersection of Queen Street on a green light. Ten seconds later, CW #1 reached Queen Street in the left lane. Three seconds later, the SO went through the intersection in the right lane. The light remained green for both CW #1 and the SO.

Summary of CW #1’s vehicle dash camera

There were 13 video clips contained on the dash camera micro SD card. Seven of the clips were unrelated to the incident under investigation. The time and date had not been set on the dash camera.

CW #1 was driving southbound on Market Street, past Wellington Street. As he approached Darling Street, he had a green light. A 2015 Infiniti Q50S was turning onto Market Street from Darling Street at a higher than normal speed; not slowing down for the red light. It essentially cut off CW #1 in the intersection. The Infinity Q50S [now known to be driven by the Complainant] sped up on Market Street and then slowed, but only slightly, turning right onto Dalhousie Street. CW #1 also made a right turn onto Dalhousie Street; upon completing his turn, the Infinity was only visible in the distance. CW #1 drove down Dalhousie Street and, as he approached Queen Street, the Infinity could be seen two blocks ahead making a right hand turn onto Brant Avenue. What is believed to be an OPP cruiser can be seen travelling through the intersection behind the Infiniti. This is believed to be WO #6, who did not have his emergency lighting activated. Just past the KFC located at King and Dalhousie Streets, a marked BPS SUV [now known to be operated by the SO] passed CW #1 on his right side. The SO was not speeding and had no emergency lighting or siren activated. The BPS SUV slowed down at Brant Avenue and made a right-hand turn. As the BPS SUV drove on Brant Avenue, it still did not have its emergency lighting activated, nor did have its siren on. CW #1 continued to travel on Brant Avenue past several intersections and the BPS SUV was about one block ahead of him. At around Church Street, in the distance, a vehicle was on the curb lane, believed to be WO #6’s OPP cruiser. The OPP cruiser may have been slowing down or parked. The BPS SUV caught up to the OPP cruiser and the two police vehicles were about two blocks ahead of CW #1. At about Church Street, emergency lighting could be seen. The OPP cruiser was in the curb lane and the BPS SUV was in the centre lane. The emergency lighting then stopped. The BPS SUV continued on Brant Avenue, with the OPP cruiser driving again, in the curb lane. The SO was followed by WO #6.

CW #1 continued on Brant Avenue and approached the train bridge/overpass where Brant Avenue turned slightly right and then became Paris Road. As he followed the road to the right on the ‘S’ curve to Paris Road, a fully marked OPP cruiser was seen on the bridge, with no emergency lighting on; in front of it was the BPS SUV (the SO followed by WO #6), and they were going to the left (towards Ave Road). Sirens could be heard in the distance. CW #1 made a 3-point turn and, as he did so, a section of missing guardrail became visible on the northwestern side of the train bridge/overpass.

CW #1 pulled his Dodge Ram truck in behind WO #6 who was on the curb of Ava Road with the SO in front, also on the curb. CW #1 then went around both police vehicles and parked in front of them. Neither the BPS SUV nor the OPP cruiser had their emergency lighting or siren on. As he passed the area where it was later determined the Complainant was located, a number of sparks could be seen from what was later determined to be the Infinity Q50. About eight minutes later, CW #1 moved his vehicle from Ava Road and, as he turned around, the Infiniti Q50 was fully engulfed in flames.

Communications Recordings

Summary of the BPS communications

The following is a synopsis of hundreds of audio clips provided to the SIU by the BPS:

August 29, 2020, at 2:48 a.m., the SO: “Did you get a plate for that car?” WO #2 asked him to repeat the broadcast and the SO asked if he got that guy’s plate, and noted he just went onto Brant Avenue. WO #2 responded he did not get it, then through a muffled voice there was an indication WO #2 was still with the other vehicle.

At 2:50:26 a.m., the SO: “I think a car just went off the fucking bridge at ahhhh, Paris Road; yah, it’s on fire, by the train tracks.” A voice broadcasted to get CN and Fire notified. BPS officers indicated they were responding. A telephone call was made to Brantford Fire that a single car went off the road on Paris Road and it was on fire. The man’s voice told Brantford Fire he was being told they were needed there fast as it was on fire and they did not know if anyone was inside and trapped. The male caller was being told the intersection was Ava Road and Parkside, which he relayed to Brantford Fire. The man’s voice said when they went around the bend they must have went over the bridge.

BPS officers were dispatched and acknowledged going to the call. There was confusion where the call was and, at about 2:51 a.m., (believed to be) the SO: “It’s right off of ahh, fuck am I, Ava Road and Parkside; it’s not on the tracks, it’s underneath the whatchamacallit, right underneath the bridge, Parkside Ava Road.”

BPS officers were taking containment positions and blocking traffic and roads. A broadcast was made that Brantford Fire was still needed as there might be someone inside the vehicle; it was on fire, crackling and might blow.

At about 2:52 a.m., a transmission indicated Brantford Fire was on scene, and that ambulance was needed. BPS dispatch called an ambulance to attend. Still at about 2:52 a.m., OPP dispatch called BPS dispatch to say they were on scene, and BPS dispatch said they were as well.

At about 2:54 a.m., BPS dispatch notified Brantford Fire the BPS officers were saying the vehicle might blow up. Another broadcast indicated all units to get back. At about 2:54:56 a.m., the SO: “When I got on scene the vehicle was on top of its roof and it was already on fire pretty bad. It’s making all sorts of crackling noises, there’s fluids everywhere, I tried to get a fire extinguisher out to try to calm the flames down however it’s too dangerous.”

At about 2:55 a.m., it was broadcast that the Brantford Fire was pulling up. At about 2:55:57 a.m., a telephone call was made to a sergeant. The caller said, “Hey, something happened before this eh.” The sergeant responded he was tracking that, and he hoped that this was not in relation to “what [the SO] was looking at”.

A search was conducted by BPS officers for a second person that might have been ejected from the vehicle. At about 3:16 a.m., a broadcast indicated that Brantford Fire were going to have to rip the door to the vehicle open.

At about 3:30 a.m., a telephone call was made by WO #1 to the sergeant, who asked if the OPP “lit him up”. WO #1 replied, “Negative.” The sergeant asked to clarify that the OPP was sitting at the stop lights outside the armories, facing north. WO #1 confirmed. The sergeant noted the subject vehicle came off of Dalhousie Street, fishtailed, almost hit a Jeep or another vehicle and sped off onto Brant Avenue, and asked if the OPP moved. WO #1 clarified that he began to move, and he realized the subject vehicle was flying so he made no attempt to stop it. The sergeant asked if his lights were on, and WO #1 was not aware if they were on or not. The sergeant seemed puzzled by that and WO #1 was at the scene and went over to OPP WO #6. While looking for WO #6, the sergeant was on the line speaking to someone about who would be a subject and witness officer. WO #1 returned to say, “[WO #6]’s pulling up to the red light at Brant Avenue and Dalhousie, sees the vehicle fly through the intersection, fishtail, and it went off into the distance; [WO #6] put his lights on to get through the intersection and then turned them off once clear of the intersection, and by this time the vehicle was already long gone so he pulled right over and did not attempt to pursue.” An OPP sergeant was en route. The sergeant asked where the vehicle was when he activated his roof lights, and WO #1 went to get the answer but was distracted. The sergeant directed that the OPP and the SO’s police vehicles were not to be moved. The sergeant asked where WO #2 stopped one of the two vehicles. WO #1 said he would inquire and called back at about 4:14 a.m., advising the sergeant that when the SO turned onto Brant Avenue, he never had his emergency lighting activated at any point. The SO’s only sight of the vehicle was on Darling Street; once it turned onto Market Street, he never saw it again. The sergeant inquired if all the SO saw was taillights going up Brant Avenue and then he lost it; WO #1 agreed. WO #1 advised that WO #2 was heading to the office, that WO #6 was speaking to an OPP Sergeant and that the SO was separated and in his vehicle by himself.

At about 4:17 a.m., the sergeant contacted a forensic officer advising of a fatality which might involve SIU. He indicated two cars were racing and BPS officers managed to pull over one; the OPP were coming to the intersection of Brant Avenue and Dalhousie Street, the vehicle did a fishtail and took off. The sergeant said the OPP was probably half asleep but did turn on its roof lights to go through the intersection, but the vehicle was speeding away. The SO was right there and apparently never turned on his roof lights. The SO continued northbound on Brant Avenue but lost sight of the vehicle. The SO carried on northbound and got to Paris Road and saw that a big chunk of the bridge was taken out. The SO pulled up, and looked down to see a vehicle on its roof and on fire. The forensic officer responded, “Oh fuck.” The sergeant indicated the body was still in the car.

At about 4:49 a.m., the sergeant answered a call from an officer with Brant County OPP. OPP had some administrative inquiries and asked which BPS officers were involved. The sergeant indicated the name of the Duty Inspector, and that he had contacted SIU. It was advised that OPP WO #6 was “at the intersection and saw your guy come through, no lights or siren or anything, so he followed him, and they came across it together”, and indicated that WO #6 would likely be a witness officer. She mentioned she heard there was previous contact with the driver and the sergeant indicated the driver was involved in what appeared to be a road rage incident with another vehicle. He indicated BPS pulled one vehicle over but the other kept going. The incident stemmed at a drinking establishment. The involved vehicle was driving and went through an intersection, almost hit a car, fishtailed, and took off like a rocket up Brant Avenue. The SO was in the general area. WO #6 was coming to a red light and engaged his emergency lighting to get through the red light, but as he cleared the intersection the involved vehicle had already passed Brant Collegiate Institute; at least 200 metres away. The involved vehicle took off and was going so fast that neither police officer tried to catch up to it. As they followed Brant Avenue in the same direction, they came across the bridge damage and a car on fire at the base of the bridge. The sergeant said he had a concern as he heard there may have been two people in the vehicle, and they only located one.

Summary of the OPP communications

On August 29, 2020, members of the OPP and the BPS were on duty in Brantford and witnessed a black 2015 Infinity Q50S drive erratically. OPP audio recordings from communications and telephone calls were provided to the SIU. There were four clips, and each clip captured multiple calls and transmissions. The only time provided was the initial time stamp. The following is a synopsis of the OPP communications recordings for this event:

911 - 6:54:35 a.m.
Orillia OPP dispatch contacted OPP OPP Provincial Communications Centre ">PCC (Provincial Communication Centre) to patch through the coroner. The coroner explained that there was a motor vehicle collision and the car was on its roof and totally burnt. He explained that he consulted with the Province’s Chief Coroner and they wanted the car taken to the CFS to have the body extricated. He explained that BPS did not have an enclosed truck to tow the vehicle and he was told to contact OPP. He also explained that the matter was now with SIU. Arrangements were made to locate an enclosed truck.

Radio – 2:48:48 a.m.
WO #6 advised OPP dispatch he was on Brant Avenue, going northbound and stopped at a light. He saw a vehicle turn at the barracks [1] northbound onto Brant Avenue; the vehicle almost spun out of control, and then he was unable to see the vehicle any longer. The vehicle was gone and was past a school for the blind [2] and past St. Paul Avenue. OPP dispatch asked if he had his emergency equipment activated and if it was a fail to stop; WO #6 said negative. WO #6 then saw a BPS cruiser and said he would speak with the BPS officer. WO #6 advised OPP dispatch that the vehicle might have “wrecked” off the bridge, and that he was with BPS. The vehicle was on fire.

Dispatch Telephone - 2:51:05 a.m.
OPP dispatch alerted Brantford Fire of incident and they appeared to be aware. OPP contacted BPS dispatch to ensure they were both aware. OPP dispatch also advised EMS and they appeared to be aware. OPP dispatch called into OPP Brant County to make a supervisor aware.

Dispatch – 2:53:32 a.m.
OPP dispatch contacted the OPP Provincial Communications Centre ">PCC in London and spoke to a sergeant, advising that an officer in Brant County had a vehicle spin out in front of him in Brantford; no lighting activated, the vehicle crashed and was on fire.

A man contacted a sergeant to advise that he spoke to WO #6, who told him that he was cutting through Brantford and was sitting at a light; a vehicle came screaming through the intersection like an “idiot”, almost hitting another vehicle. WO #6 pulled out “a little bit”, and then lost sight of the vehicle. A BPS cruiser came by and they both “kind of ventured on up” and found that the guy had gone off the guardrail, over the bridge and the vehicle was in flames. It was confirmed WO #6 was not chasing the vehicle and that this was a BPS call.

The sergeant received a call from the same male voice advising that the SIU had been notified. The sergeant discussed SIU protocol. Another call had an officer speaking to a male voice indicating that WO #6 did not call in his mileage as he was not in pursuit of the vehicle; he had his lights on to clear the red light and then turned them off. WO #6 then saw a BPS cruiser, followed behind it and, about a kilometre later, they came across the vehicle which had gone off of a bridge. The officer indicated that the only reason BPS called SIU was that they had previously pursued the vehicle earlier that morning. As well, WO #6 would be a witness officer who would say that the BPS vehicle did not pursue the vehicle.

There were further calls with the POC and the SIU liaison officer, and the OPP Provincial Communications Centre ">PCC about whether there was a fatality, which was later confirmed. Arrangements were then made with OPP Orillia to get an enclosed vehicle to transport the vehicle involved in the incident to the CFS.

Materials obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained and reviewed the following materials and documents from the OPP and BPS:
  • Computer-assisted Dispatch Report;
  • Event Details Report;
  • Global Positioning System (GPS) Data-WO #2;
  • GPS Data-the SO;
  • CW #4’s calls to the Complainant;
  • Notes of WOs;
  • Communication recordings - BPS and OPP;
  • BPS Drone Footage;
  • BPS JPEG Fingerprint, Tattoo images;
  • Occurrence Summary;
  • Procedure - Suspect Apprehension Pursuit;
  • Subject Occurrence History Report;
  • Supplementary Occurrence Report;
  • Training Record 2019-the SO; and
  • Will State of the SO, WO#1 and WO #2.

Materials obtained from Other Sources

Upon request, the SIU obtained and reviewed the following documents from the Brantford EMS and Brantford Fire Department:
  • Ambulance Call Reports;
  • Brantford Fire Incident Report; and
  • Brantford Fire Witness Report.

The SIU obtained the following records from other sources:
  • CCTV-Laurier Special Constable Building;
  • In-Car Camera Video (CW #1); and
  • Audio Clip from civilian’s camera.

Incident Narrative

The following scenario emerges from the evidence collected by the SIU, which included interviews with civilian and police witnesses to the incident, video recordings captured by security cameras of the events in question, and GPS data associated with the speed and directionality of the SO’s cruiser.

At about 2:45 a.m. of August 29, 2020, the SO was stationary in his cruiser in a parking lot off of Queen Street, north of Darling Street, when a BMW and an Infiniti caught his attention. The two vehicles disregarded a stop sign at the Queen Street intersection with Dalhousie Street, drove north past the officers, and turned right to travel eastward on Darling Street - each again ignoring the stop signs at the intersection.
The SO and WO #2, also stopped in the parking lot in a separate cruiser, exited the lot to pursue the vehicles. The BMW and WO #2’s cruiser came to a stop on the roadway soon after WO #2, the lead cruiser, activated his emergency lights. The occupants of the BMW would go on to tell WO #2 that they had been involved in a dispute with the driver of the Infiniti at the Vegas World Lounge, and that the Infiniti driver had followed them in his vehicle. The Infiniti driver was the Complainant.

The Complainant had not stopped his vehicle at the sight of the police on Darling Street. Instead, with the SO in tow, the Complainant turned to travel south onto Market Street, almost striking a southbound vehicle in the process, and then right again onto westbound Dalhousie Street. He continued along Dalhousie Street, turning right to travel north on Brant Avenue, again, almost hitting a vehicle in the intersection.

WO #6 was in his cruiser on Brant Avenue stopped facing north at a red light on Dalhousie Street when the Complainant’s vehicle turned in front of him. As the officer travelled through the intersection, he considered but quickly rejected any notion of engaging in a high speed pursuit of the Infiniti given the speed at which it was traveling – estimated by the officer at about 150 km/h. Just north of Church Street, with the Infiniti far off in the distance, WO #6 pulled over, deactivated his emergency lights, advised the communications centre what he had seen and indicated there had been no pursuit.

Shortly after pulling to the side of the road, WO #6 was passed by the SO’s cruiser. By this time, WO #6 believed that the Infiniti was in the area of St. Paul Avenue. [3] At speeds largely between 50 to 70 km/h, both cruisers continued north on Brant Avenue in the direction of travel of the Infiniti. As they came onto the Brant Avenue bridge over Ava Road and railway tracks, WO #6 noticed debris on the roadway and a portion of the west side guardrail missing.

The debris and damage were the result of a single motor vehicle collision involving the Infiniti. The Complainant had approached a curve on the Brant Avenue overpass at speeds in excess of 100 km/h, lost control of his vehicle, smashed through the guardrail and plummeted to the ground below, the Infiniti coming to rest on its roof before catching fire.

The SO and WO #6 parked their vehicles on Ava Road and ran to render assistance to the Complainant. The intensity of the flames from the vehicle, however, kept them at a distance.

The fire department arrived at the scene and eventually put out the fire. The Complainant was found, deceased, in the vehicle.

Cause of Death

The pathologist at autopsy concluded that the Complainant’s death was the result of “blunt force injuries”.

Relevant Legislation

Section 320.13, Criminal Code – Dangerous operation of motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft

320.13 (1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.

(3) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public and, as a result, causes the death of another person.

Analysis and Director's Decision

On August 29, 2020, the Complainant died in a car crash on Ava Road in Brantford. As his vehicle had been followed for a period prior to the crash by two police cruisers, the SIU was notified and commenced an investigation. The driver of one of the cruisers, the SO of the BPS, was identified as the subject officer for purposes of the SIU investigation. 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 dangerous driving causing death contrary to section 320.13(3) of the Criminal Code. As an offence of penal negligence, liability for the crime is premised, 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. In the instant case, the issue is whether there was any want of care in the manner in which the SO engaged with the Complainant that contributed to his death and / or was sufficiently egregious as to attract criminal sanction. In my view, there was not.

The SO was in the lawful performance of his duty when he set after the Complainant on Darling Street. The Complainant had been involved in a physical altercation with an occupant of the BMW, a dispute which continued on the roadways as the Complainant’s Infiniti aggressively followed the BMW. By the time the officers got involved, the Complainant had blown through two-stop signs. He was clearly subject to being stopped for HTA infractions.

Once engaged, there is little evidence that the SO did not comport himself with due regard for the safety of the public. In fact, it appears on the weight of the evidence that the SO quickly abandoned any thoughts of a high speed pursuit of the Infiniti as it turned from Dalhousie Street to travel north on Brant Avenue, if not sooner. From that point forward, the evidence establishes that the Infiniti was well ahead of the SO’s cruiser, if not out of sight altogether, and that the officer had resolved to simply follow in the Infiniti’s direction at moderate speeds. As he did so, there is no indication of any dangerous driving on the part of the officer either by way of protracted speed in excess of the speed limit or roadway maneuvers. On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the SO, at any point, transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law.

In the result, as there is insufficient evidence to reasonably conclude that the SO acted other than lawfully in his brief engagement with the Complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges against the officer and the file is closed.


Date: April 20, 2021

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino
Director
Special Investigations Unit

Endnotes

  • 1) Canadian Forces barracks located at 18 Brant Avenue; corner of Brant Avenue and Dalhousie Street. [Back to text]
  • 2) W. Ross MacDonald School for the Blind, 350 Brant Avenue. [Back to text]
  • 3) About 1.2 kilometres north of Church Street. [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.