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 discharge of a firearm by the police at a 41-year-old man (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On July 1, 2025, at 7:35 a.m., the Brantford Police Service (BPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On July 1, 2025, at 7:00 a.m., the Complainant was threatening patrons by wielding a knife at the Pioneer Gas Station, 206 Henry Street, Brantford. BPS officers located the Complainant and directed him to drop the knife. The Complainant refused and advanced towards BPS officers while holding the knife. The Subject Official (SO) deployed an Anti-riot Weapon Enfield (ARWEN), striking the Complainant in the abdomen. He was transported by Emergency Medical Services to Brantford General Hospital (BGH) for examination.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/07/01 at 8:30 a.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/07/01 at 9:12 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 4

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 1

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

41-year-old male; interviewed; medical records obtained and reviewed

The Complainant was interviewed on July 1, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on July 1, 2025.

Subject Official (SO)

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

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The witness officials were interviewed on July 8, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in and around the intersection of Wayne Gretzky Parkway and Carter Street, Brantford.

The area in which the interaction took place was located on the west side of Wayne Gretzky Parkway, near Carter Street. There was a paved sidewalk on the west side of Wayne Gretzky Parkway, which aligned north/south. The area east of Wayne Gretzky Parkway was mainly commercial businesses while the area west was primarily residential with a chain link fence separating the residential area from the sidewalk and roadway.

Figure 1 – The scene

Scene Diagram

Physical Evidence

SIU forensic services arrived on scene at about 9:34 a.m., July 1, 2025. A BPS officer was at the location. An area along a paved walking path to the west side of Wayne Gretzky Parkway had been marked off using barrier tape. This path was elevated above the roadway and separated by a grassed area. Within the marked off portion of the path were a black cartridge case, and a green and black projectile. The scene was photographed, and the following items were collected:

• An ARWEN 37 mm cartridge case (marked “less-lethal”), located to the east side of the paved path, 13.4 metres north and 2.41 metres west of a utility pole.
• An ARWEN 37 mm baton (projectile), located on the east edge of the paved path, 10.3 metres north and 4.17 metres west of the utility pole.

Later that morning, SIU forensic services attended the BPS station at 344 Elgin Street where access was provided to the 37 mm ARWEN reportedly used in the incident.

The involved less-lethal device was a Canadian-made 37 mm ARWEN launcher with an integral five round drum magazine. The drum contained four live cartridges, with one space empty. On examination, the ARWEN was found to be operational and functioning properly. Images were taken and the device returned to the custody of BPS.

Figure 2 - ARWEN projectile

Figure 3 - ARWEN launcher

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

BPS Communications Recordings – 911

On July 1, 2025, shortly before 7:00 a.m., CW #1 called BPS to report a male “swiping a knife at people” in the parking lot. A description of the Complainant was provided along with his direction of travel.

BPS Communications Recordings – Radio

On July 1, 2025, shortly before 7:00 a.m., WO #1 and WO #2 were dispatched to 206 Henry Street regarding a male reportedly swinging a knife at people.

At 6:59:07 a.m., WO #2 updated the BPS dispatcher that they had the Complainant in custody.

At 7:01:54 a.m., WO #2 requested an ambulance as there had been an ARWEN deployment.

BPS In-car Camera (ICC) Footage - WO #1

On July 1, 2025, at 6:58:06 a.m., WO #1 was driving near Wayne Gretzky Parkway and Carter Street when the Complainant was recorded walking on a pathway west of the roadway.

At 6:58:08 a.m., the Complainant could be seen carrying a knife in his hand, which he folded and placed in a pants pocket.

At 6:58:19 a.m., WO #1 exited her police vehicle with her service pistol drawn and instructed the Complainant to stop. During this time, WO #2 arrived with his CEW drawn and instructed the Complainant to get on the ground.

At 6:58:31 a.m., the SO arrived with an ARWEN, which he discharged at 6:58:48 a.m., causing the Complainant to go to the ground. The Complainant was handcuffed, searched, and escorted to WO #1’s police vehicle with the knife the Complainant had in his possession placed on the hood.

Video Footage – Commercial Location

On July 1, 2025, at 6:52:04 a.m., the Complainant was captured near the gas pumps pointing a knife at patrons. The Complainant subsequently walked around the gas pumps and headed south at 6:54:10 a.m., disappearing from camera.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the BPS between July 3, 2025, and July 24, 2025:

• General Occurrence Report
• Arrest Report
• Notes – the SO, WO #1 and WO #2
• Crown Brief Synopsis
• Computer-aided Dispatch Report
• Communications recordings
• Policies – Use of Force; Arrest, Security, Prisoner Care and Control; Emergency Response Team Perimeter Control and Containment; Tactical Unit
• ICC footage
• Annual Use of Force requalification records - the SO
• Names, contact information and statements obtained of civilian witnesses

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between July 1, 2025, and July 11, 2025:

• The Complainant’s medical records from BGH
• Video footage from Pioneer Gas Station, 206 Henry Street, Brantford

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant and other witnesses, both police and non-police, 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 morning of July 1, 2025, BPS officers were dispatched to the Pioneer Gas Station at Wayne Gretzky Parkway and Henry Street following a call to police about a male – the Complainant – brandishing a knife at customers by the gas pumps.

WO #1 and WO #2 were the first officers on scene, arriving shortly before 7:00 a.m. and locating the Complainant on the west side of Wayne Gretzky Parkway at the Carter Street intersection. At the arrival of the officers, the Complainant folded his knife and placed it in a pants pocket. WO #1 and WO #2 exited their cruisers and confronted the Complainant with a gun and CEW in hand, respectively. The Complainant refused to get on the ground at the officers’ direction. The SO joined WO #1 and WO #2, armed with an ARWEN. The Complainant continued to ignore police direction and was felled following a single shot to the abdomen by the SO.

Officers approached the Complainant, handcuffed him and removed the knife from his possession.

The Complainant was transported to hospital and treated for an abrasion to his abdomen. He did not suffer any serious injury.

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 88, Criminal Code - Possession of Weapon for Dangerous Purpose

88 (1) Every person commits an offence who carries or possesses a weapon, an imitation of a weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition for a purpose dangerous to the public peace or for the purpose of committing an offence.

(2) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1)

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years; or

(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Section 264.1, Criminal Code - Uttering Threats

264.1 (1) Every one commits an offence who, in any manner, knowingly utters, conveys or causes any person to receive a threat

(a) to cause death or bodily harm to any person;

(b) to burn, destroy or damage real or personal property; or

(c) to kill, poison or injure an animal or bird that is the property of any person.

On July 1, 2025, the BPS notified the SIU that one of their officers had fired an ARWEN at a male – the Complainant – earlier that day. The SIU 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 use of the ARWEN.

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.

With information at their disposal that the Complainant was walking away from a business at which he had threatened patrons with a knife, the officers, including the SO, were within their rights in moving to arrest him for threatening and possession of a dangerous weapon contrary to sections 264.1(1) and 88.1 of the Criminal Code, respectively.

As for the force brought to bear by the SO in aid of the Complainant’s arrest, I am satisfied it was legally justified. The officer had reason to believe that the Complainant was armed with a knife and was prepared to use it. A hands-on engagement was off the table as it would unduly imperil the officers’ lives and safety. In the circumstances, the use of a less-lethal weapon to temporarily distract the Complainant, allowing a safe opportunity for the officers to approach and take him into custody, was a reasonable option. In fact, the weapon had the intended effect, permitting the officers to arrest the Complainant without the infliction of serious injury.

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

The incident gave rise to what appears to have been a violation of section 18 of the Special Investigations Unit Act, 2019, with respect to conduct on the part of WO #1 and WO #2 that might have contravened the SIU’s “lead investigator” status. I will be referring this matter to the Chief of Police for review and action as may be appropriate. Pursuant to the SIU Director’s legal obligation under section 35.1 of the Special Investigations Unit, 2019, I will also be referring the matter to the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency.

Date: October 29, 2025

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit