SIU Concludes Vehicle Injury Investigation in Brampton
Case Number: 15-OVI-039
Other News Releases Related to Case 15-OVI-039
Mississauga (27 May, 2015) --- The Director of the Special Investigations Unit (SIU), Tony Loparco, has concluded that there are no reasonable grounds to charge a Peel Regional Police (PRP) officer with any criminal offence in relation to the injury sustained by a man in March.
The SIU assigned five investigators and three forensic investigators to probe the circumstances of this incident. As part of the investigation, two witness officers and three civilian witnesses were interviewed. The subject officer did not participate in an SIU interview and declined to provide a copy of his duty notes, as is his legal right.
The SIU investigation found that the following events took place on Friday, March 6, 2015:
- In the morning hours, the subject officer was operating a marked PRP cruiser south on Resolution Drive when he attempted to complete a left turn into the eastbound passing lane of Steeles Avenue East in Brampton.
- At the same time, a 33-year-old man was walking north in the crosswalk, in compliance with the pedestrian walk signal, attempting to get to the northeast corner of the Resolution Drive and Steeles Avenue East intersection. The man was several steps away from the centre median dividing east and west traffic along Steeles Avenue East when the cruiser’s front bumper struck him.
- The collision left the man with a fractured left fibula.
Director Loparco said, “The officer is clearly to blame for the collision and the injury. He was under a duty to yield to pedestrians crossing the intersection on a right-of-way and to only enter into a left hand turn when it was safe to do so.”
Director Loparco continued, “The criminal offence that arises for consideration is that of dangerous driving. As prior cases have made clear, the liability standard is a high one and will not be made out unless the impugned driving amounts to a marked departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. Aside from his driving at the intersection, there is nothing to suggest the officer had engaged in poor driving in the moments leading to the events in question. As for the collision itself, the evidence indicates the officer was proceeding at a low speed throughout the turn, and simply did not see the pedestrian until it was too late.
“In the final analysis, it appears that the collision resulted from a moment’s inattention on the part of the subject officer. While I am satisfied the officer is responsible for the accident, I am also satisfied that the conduct falls short of a marked departure and that there are no reasonable grounds to proceed with criminal charges in this case.”
The SIU is an arm’s length agency that investigates reports involving police where there has been death, serious injury or allegations of sexual assault. Under the Police Services Act, the Director of the SIU must
- consider whether an officer has committed a criminal offence in connection with the incident under investigation
- depending on the evidence, lay a criminal charge against the officer if appropriate or close the file without any charges being laid
- report the results of any investigations to the Attorney General.
Monica Hudon, email@example.com
SIU Communications/Service des communications, UES
Telephone/No de téléphone: 416-622-2342 or/ou 1-800-787-8529 extension 2342