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 30-year-old woman (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On April 20, 2025, at 4:29 P.M., the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On April 20, 2025, at about 9:00 a.m., Witness Official (WO) #1 and the Subject Official (SO) observed two individuals with outstanding arrest warrants in the area of Bank Street and Flora Street, Ottawa. The officers approached the individuals and WO #1 confirmed the warrants. WO #1 placed Civilian Witness (CW) #1 under arrest and escorted him to his police cruiser. The Complainant initially agreed to accompany the SO, but subsequently fled while she was being escorted to the cruiser. The Complainant ran into a busy Bank Street, was struck by a slow-moving vehicle, got up, and resumed her flight. She was eventually caught and arrested. The Complainant was taken to the Montfort Hospital (MH) in Ottawa, where she was diagnosed with a fractured shoulder.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/04/20 at 6:53 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/04/21 at 8:20 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

30-year-old female; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on April 21, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses

CW #1 Declined an interviewed

CW #2 Declined an interviewed

CW #3 Not interviewed; could not be located

Subject Official

SO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The subject official was interviewed on May 6, 2025.

Witness Officials

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on April 25, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired on and around Bank Street, Ottawa, between about 499 Bank Street and 507 Bank Street.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Video Footage – 499 Bank Street

On April 20, 2025, at 9:04:00 a.m., a blue Mazda [CW #2] was captured stopped on Bank Street, just south of Flora Street, in the southbound lane closest to the west sidewalk.

Starting at about 9:04:04 a.m., two police officers – the SO and WO #1 - stood in the southbound lane of Bank Street, north of Flora Street. The SO and WO #1 picked someone – the Complainant - up off the ground and escorted her to the east side of Bank Street.

Starting at about 9:04:17 a.m., additional police vehicles arrived.

Video Footage – 485 Bank Street

On April 20, 2025, starting at about 8:58:23 a.m., a man - CW #1 - walked northbound on the east sidewalk of Bank Street, and out of camera frame.

Starting at about 8:58:46 a.m., a police officer – WO #1 - walked northbound on the east sidewalk of Bank Street. He motioned for CW #1 to come back, and walked out of camera frame.

Starting at about 8:59:50 a.m., WO #1 and CW #1 walked southbound together on the east sidewalk and out of camera frame.

Starting at about 9:02:34 a.m., a blue Mazda [CW #2] travelled southbound on Bank Street, at a similar speed to other vehicles on the roadway, and out of camera frame.

Starting at about 9:02:53 a.m., a woman – the Complainant - ran northbound on Bank Street and onto the east sidewalk of Bank Street, tripping as she stepped onto the sidewalk from the road and falling forwards onto her outstretched arms. Her arms appeared to buckle underneath her, and she landed on her arms and head. A police officer – the SO - arrived one second later. The Complainant moved to a seated position and backwards away from the SO.

Starting at about 9:03:02 a.m., the Complainant stood up and ran west across Bank Street. There was a man [CW #3] on the west sidewalk, whom the Complainant used as a barrier between her and the SO.

Starting at about 9:03:18 a.m., the SO drew her conducted energy weapon and pointed it at CW #3 and the Complainant. CW #3 walked away from the Complainant. The Complainant collapsed to the ground onto her buttocks. The SO appeared to try and take something away from the Complainant, but she pulled away. WO #1 arrived from the south. The SO and WO #1 each took control of one of the Complainant’s arms and escorted her south out of camera frame.

Video Footage – 507 Bank Street

The time-stamps on the video was approximately one hour ahead of actual time.

On April 20, 2025, starting at about 8:02:37 a.m., the Complainant was captured running westbound across Bank Street into the path of a vehicle [CW #2] travelling southbound on Bank Street. At 8:02:39 a.m., the Complainant was struck by the vehicle, landing with her body on the hood of the vehicle and her legs in the air. She slid off and landed on the west side of CW #2’s vehicle.

Starting at about 8:02:40 a.m., the SO entered the camera frame from the east and ran towards the Complainant. The Complainant stood up and ran a few steps, then fell down. She stood up again and ran northeast across Bank Street and out of camera frame.

Starting at about 8:03:08 a.m., the Complainant and the SO ran to the west sidewalk of Bank Street again. As the vehicle slowly moved, the Complainant was seen again. She collapsed to the ground in the southbound curbside lane.

Starting at about 8:03:48 a.m., WO #1 ran northwest across Bank Street towards the SO and the Complainant.

Starting at about 8:03:59 a.m., the SO and WO #1 lifted the Complainant off the ground and escorted her across the road to the east sidewalk.

Starting at about 8:07:27 a.m., paramedic services arrived on scene.

OPS Communications Recordings

On April 20, 2025, at 8:58 a.m., WO #1 asked the dispatcher to mark himself and another police officer [the SO] at Bank Street and Flora Street with a person in custody [CW #1]. The SO also advised she had the Complainant in custody. WO #1 and the SO each asked the dispatcher to confirm whether there was a positive warrant for their respective persons in custody. The dispatcher asked if additional assistance was required, and WO #1 answered in the negative.

Starting at about 9:02 a.m., the SO said she was engaged in a foot pursuit. She indicated the Complainant was headed northbound on Bank Street.

Starting at about 9:03 a.m., the SO advised the Complainant had been struck by a vehicle but was “all good, she’s running”. The dispatcher called paramedic services and requested they attend the scene.

Starting at about 9:05 a.m., WO #1 advised the Complainant was in custody.

Starting at about 9:12 a.m., the SO advised the Complainant was with paramedics. The dispatcher confirmed the Complainant had two warrants, one endorsed and the other unendorsed. CW #1 had two endorsed warrants.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

The SIU obtained the following records from OPS between April 23, 2025, and May 6, 2025.

• General Occurrence Report
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Communications recordings
• Notes – WO #1, WO #2 and SO
• Arrest Warrant – Complainant
• OPS Policies – Arrest / Search / Handcuffing Procedure

Records Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between April 22, 2025, and May 13, 2025.

• Complainant’s medical records from MH
• Video footage from
• Video footage from
• Video footage from OC Transpo
• Video footage from

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

In the morning of April 20, 2025, the SO was in a cruiser on patrol with her partner, WO #1. They were travelling north on Bank Street when WO #1 noticed a pair of individuals – the Complainant and CW #1 - who were subject to arrest warrants. The officer stopped the cruiser, and he and the SO emerged to take the two into custody.

The SO approached the Complainant while WO #1 dealt with CW #1. The Complainant initially presented as cooperative. She asked the SO if she could have a cigarette before being handcuffed, and was allowed to do so by the officer. Having finished the cigarette, the Complainant reached for a crack pipe and tried to light it. When the SO prevented her from doing so, the Complainant fled from the officer.

The Complainant ran west across Bank Street and was struck by a southbound vehicle around the Flora Street intersection. She picked herself up and crossed the street again, falling onto the east sidewalk. She again righted herself and made her way to the west sidewalk, where she positioned herself between a pedestrian and the SO. WO #1 arrived to assist the SO and removed the crack pipe from the Complainant’s possession. The Complainant was subsequently handcuffed without further incident.

The Complainant was transported to hospital after her arrest and diagnosed with a fractured right shoulder.

Section 221, Criminal Code - Causing Bodily Harm by Criminal Negligence

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 course of her arrest by OPS officers on April 20, 2025. 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 the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and injury.

There are no questions raised about the lawfulness of the Complainant’s arrest. She was subject to two arrest warrants, and the SO was within her rights in taking her into custody. Nor are there questions about the propriety of the force used by the SO. Aside from the minimal force used to secure the handcuffs, there was none.

There is an issue around the fact that a person in the SO’s custody was seriously injured. In this regard, the offence that arises for consideration is criminal negligence causing bodily harm contrary to section 221 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 injury. In my view, there was not.

In retrospect, it might have been better to have secured the Complainant’s hands in cuffs promptly following her arrest rather than allow them to be unrestrained while she smoked a cigarette. On the other hand, the Complainant had been cooperative with the officer upon their encounter, and the SO had no particular reason to believe she was a flight risk or otherwise violent. At the same time, the officer had taken some precautions by remaining in proximity to the Complainant and placing her in a less mobile position – seated curbside - while she smoked a cigarette. On this record, I am satisfied that the SO did not transgress the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in relation to the Complainant’s flight from police and broken shoulder.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant broke her shoulder while fleeing from the SO, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges against the officer. The file is closed.

Date: August 11, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit