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 16-year-old female (the “Complainant”).

Notification of the SIU[1]

On September 6, 2025, at 9:55 p.m., the Waterloo Regional Police Service (WRPS) contacted the SIU with the following information.

On September 6, 2025, at about 3:30 p.m., a male and female entered an LCBO at 1005 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener. They were stopped attempting to steal alcohol by an off-duty WRPS member, the Subject Official (SO), who tried to make an arrest. The male started striking the SO, as did the female, and all three fell to the ground. The male fled the scene. The female – the Complainant – was arrested. She was taken to Grand River Health Network - Midtown Medical Centre, and diagnosed with several broken right ribs.

The Team

Date and time team dispatched: 2025/09/06 at 10:08 p.m.

Date and time SIU arrived on scene: 2025/09/07 at 9:20 a.m.

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 3

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 0

Affected Person (aka “Complainant”):

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

The Complainant was interviewed on September 7, 2025.

Civilian Witnesses (CW)

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Not interviewed

CW #5 Not interviewed

The civilian witnesses were interviewed on September 9, 2025.

Subject Official (SO)

SO Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

The subject official was interviewed on September 16, 2025.

Witness Officials (WO)

WO #1 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #2 Interviewed; notes received and reviewed

WO #3 Not interviewed; notes reviewed and interview deemed unnecessary

The witness officials were interviewed on September 11, 2025.

The Scene

The events in question transpired in the vestibule and the interior of the LCBO store, 1005 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener.

Video/Audio/Photographic Evidence[2]

Video Footage[3] – LCBO Store – 1005 Ottawa Street North

Starting at about 3:34:27 p.m., September 6, 2025, the SO entered the store, wearing blue jeans and a hooded-sweater, accompanied by his wife, CW #4. The Complainant entered the store directly behind the SO. She was dressed in black with a baseball cap and black hooded-sweater.

Starting at about 3:35:21 p.m., the Complainant walked past the tills towards the store exit. She carried a bottle of clear liquid (believed to be Smirnoff Vodka). The SO walked quickly behind the Complainant and reached towards the Complainant with his right hand. The Complainant backed away from the SO in the vestibule of the store while the SO held onto her hooded-sweater with his left hand. The Complainant fell to the floor, landing on her hands and knees. The SO dropped onto the Complainant’s back and attempted to gain control of her arms. The Complainant struggled to free herself as the SO laid on her back. The officer pulled the Complainant further into the vestibule.

Starting at about 3:35:57 p.m., a man dressed in a black hooded-sweater, light-coloured pants and a baseball cap entered the vestibule and delivered a single kick towards the SO with his right foot, after which he stood in the vestibule over top of the SO and the Complainant.

Starting at about 3:36:12 p.m., the SO and the Complainant rose to their feet. The SO held the Complainant with both hands and forced her into the store through the entrance door. The man in the black hooded-sweater stood in the entrance door and appeared to be speaking towards the SO.

Starting at about 3:36:40 p.m., the SO forced the Complainant deeper into the store through the entrance turnstiles. Another man in a dark-coloured shirt grabbed the Complainant’s left arm with his right hand. The SO held the Complainant with both arms as the Complainant attempted to break free.

Starting at about 3:37:04 p.m., the SO forced the Complainant to the floor just out of camera view. A man in a red shirt [now known to be CW #5] walked through the entrance turnstiles holding an object [now known to be the SO’s wallet badge.] The SO and the Complainant struggled on the floor. The Complainant repeatedly kneed and kicked at the SO.

Starting at about 3:39:36 p.m., a WRPS officer, WO #1, entered the store and ran to the SO’s location.

Starting at about 3:40:47 p.m., a second WRPS officer, WO #2, entered the store.

Starting at about 3:41:17 p.m., the Complainant was walked into camera view, escorted by WO #1 and WO #2. She had been handcuffed with her hands behind the back.

Body-worn Camera (BWC) Footage - WO #1

Starting at about 3:40:18 p.m., September 6, 2025, WO #1 was captured kneeling on the floor to the left of the Complainant, who was in a prone position with her left arm handcuffed. WO #1 applied a handcuff to the Complainant’s right arm while the SO maintained control of the Complainant’s right wrist.

Starting at about 3:41:00 p.m., WO #2 knelt on the right side of the Complainant. The SO had risen from the floor. Blood was apparent on the front of his white hooded-sweatshirt.

Starting at about 3:41:09 p.m., the Complainant was assisted to her feet by WO #1 and escorted to the store’s exit.

Starting at about 3:41:50 p.m., the Complainant stood at the rear passenger door of WO #1’s police vehicle, blood visible on her chin. She was asked if she required an ambulance, and replied, “No dude, I’m not a pussy. I’ve dealt with abuse my entire life.” She repeated that she did not want an ambulance. She stated that the SO had grabbed her by the throat and attempted to choke her out, and that he had whacked her hand with a bottle.

Starting at about 3:43:54 p.m., the Complainant was placed into the rear passenger seat of WO #1’s vehicle.

Starting at about 3:47:40 p.m., the Complainant was removed from WO #1’s vehicle and walked to an ambulance. WO #1 removed her handcuffs, and re-handcuffed her to the front. Blood was observed on both her hands. A dressing was applied to her right hand. WO #1 accompanied the Complainant in the ambulance.

BWC Footage - WO #2

Starting at about 3:40:36 p.m., September 6, 2025, WO #2 arrived at the LCBO, exited his vehicle and ran towards the store. Inside the LCBO, WO #1 knelt beside the Complainant, who lay on her stomach on the floor.

Starting at about 3:41:09 p.m., WO #1 assisted the Complainant to her feet. The Complainant was escorted to WO #1’s police vehicle.

Starting at about 3:45:05 p.m., WO #2 re-entered the LCBO and spoke briefly with the SO, who confirmed that the SO did not require an ambulance. The SO directed WO #2 to take a statement and provided a description of the male who had accompanied the Complainant.

Police Communications Recordings

CW #4 called WRPS 911 and reported that the SO had apprehended a youth at the Ottawa Street LCBO. He was presently on the ground with the youth.

CW #2 called WRPS 911 and reported that a male, claiming to be a police officer, had stopped a female at the Ottawa Street LCBO. The female’s boyfriend had kicked the male. CW #2 reported seeing broken glass and blood just inside the foyer of the LCBO.

The LCBO manager called WRPS 911 and reported a fight at the Ottawa Street LCBO. A man, claiming to be a police officer, and a female were fighting.

Materials Obtained from Police Service

Upon request, the SIU obtained the following records from the WRPS between September 6, 2025, and September 10, 2025:

• Computer-assisted Dispatch Report
• General, Supplementary and Arrest Reports
• Communications recordings
• In-car camera footage
• BWC footage
• Civilian statements
• Notes - WO #1, WO #2 and WO #3
• Notes – the SO

Materials Obtained from Other Sources

The SIU obtained the following records from the following other sources between September 9, 2025, and September 12, 2025:

• Video footage from LCBO store

The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the Complainant, the SO and several civilian eyewitnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario.

In the afternoon of September 6, 2025, the SO attended the LCBO store at 1005 Ottawa Street North, Kitchener. He was off-duty and in the company of his wife. A young person - the Complainant - caught the officer’s attention. The SO watched as the Complainant grabbed three bottles of spirits from the shelves and attempted to leave the store without paying for them. The officer grabbed hold of the Complainant in the vestibule of the store and prevented her exiting.

The Complainant resisted the SO. They jostled on their feet for a brief period before the officer forced her down and used his body weight to keep her pinned to the floor. The Complainant struggled to free herself. A male acquaintance entered the vestibule, demanded that the SO let the Complainant go, and kicked the officer in the back.

The SO lifted the Complainant to her feet and forced her back into the store where the struggle continued. The officer again took her down and kept her down using his body weight. The Complainant continued to resist and kicked the SO in the head. WO #1 arrived on scene shortly after and assisted the SO in taking the Complainant into custody. She was handcuffed and escorted to WO #1’s cruiser.

The Complainant was transported to hospital after her arrest and diagnosed with a fractured right rib. She had also sustained several lacerations and some bruising.

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.

The Complainant was seriously injured in the course of her arrest by a WRPS officer on September 6, 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 that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s arrest and injuries.

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.

Having observed the Complainant attempting to leave the LCBO store without paying for the merchandise she had gathered from the store’s shelves, I am satisfied the SO was within his rights in attempting to arrest her for theft.

I am also satisfied that the SO used only reasonable force in aid of the Complainant’s arrest. The initial takedown made sense. The Complainant had reacted violently to the officer’s intervention. Bringing the Complainant to the ground would better position the officer to safely deal with any continuing resistance on her part. It is alleged that the Complainant struggled against the SO because she did not know he was an officer. That evidence, however, is belied by the weight of witness evidence, indicating that the SO identified himself as an officer and told her she was under arrest. The takedown itself does not appear to have been executed with undue force, and no strikes were delivered by the officer during the struggle in the vestibule. The officer’s use of his body weight to keep the Complainant pinned to the floor was also reasonable. The Complainant was not relenting and the officer needed to keep her subdued pending the arrival of on-duty police officers. The force used by the SO inside the store - the second takedown and the use of the officer’s body weight - was legally justified for the same reasons. Again, no strikes of any kind were brought to bear.

In the result, while I accept that the Complainant’s injuries were incurred in the altercation that marked her arrest, there are no reasonable and probable grounds to believe that they are the result of any unlawful conduct on the part of the SO. As such, there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case. The file is closed.

Date: January 2, 2026

Electronically approved by

Joseph Martino

Director

Special Investigations Unit