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 Personal 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.

This report relates to the SIU’s investigation into the death of a 30-year-old man who fell from the 9th floor window of an apartment building on February 27, 2016 in the City of Belleville. Two police officers were present in the apartment at the time of the fall.

The investigation

Notification of the SIU

The SIU was notified of the incident by the Belleville Police Service (BPS) on February 27, 2016 at 8:35 p.m. BPS reported that on that date, at 6:47 p.m., police officers responded to an apartment building on Sydney Street for a disturbance. BPS reported that the occupants of an apartment unit met the police officers at the door and as they were walking back into the apartment, the male subject stepped onto a chair and jumped out the window. BPS reported that the male was now deceased and was at hospital.

The team

Number of SIU Investigators assigned: 5

Number of SIU Forensic Investigators assigned: 2

SIU Forensic Investigators responded to the scene and identified and preserved evidence. They documented the relevant scenes associated with the incident by way of notes, photography, videography, sketches and measurements. The Forensic Investigators attended and recorded the post-mortem examination and assisted in making submissions to the Centre of Forensic Sciences.

Complainant

30-year-old male deceased

Civilian witnesses

CW #1 Interviewed

CW #2 Interviewed

CW #3 Interviewed

CW #4 Interviewed

CW #5 Interviewed

CW #6 Interviewed

CW #7 Interviewed

Witness officers

WO #1 Interviewed

WO #2 Not interviewed, but statement and notes received and reviewed

Subject officers

SO #1 Interviewed, and notes received and reviewed

SO #2 Interviewed, and notes received and reviewed

The evidence

Scene diagram

Floor plan of a kitchen and living room with furniture and boxes.

Physical evidence

There were various scenes associated to this incident, including the blood staining in the ninth floor hallway, the window sill and screen inside the apartment unit, and the ground outside of the building at Sidney Street below the 9th floor apartment, where the complainant came to rest. All three scenes were photographed and video recorded by the SIU Forensic Investigators. A sketch of the 9th floor hallway and inside the apartment was prepared.

A window in the north wall of the apartment in question, in the living room area adjacent to the apartment door, was open and a chair was next to the window. The window screen, which was propped against the east wall behind some items of furniture, was located by the SIU Forensic Investigator and seized for examination.

Bloodstains on the ground below the open window from which the complainant had jumped was measured and confirmed to be 22.8 m below the level of the window sill and 4.9 m out from the wall containing the window.

Forensic evidence

On February 29, 2016, an autopsy on the complainant was performed by a forensic pathologist. The forensic pathologist reported the preliminary cause of death to be multiple blunt force injuries consistent with a fall from height. There were no injuries identified by the forensic pathologist as being inconsistent with a descent from height.

Video/audio/photographic evidence

The SIU canvassed the area for any video or audio recordings, and photographic evidence, but was not able to locate any.

Materials obtained from the BPS

Upon request the SIU obtained and reviewed the following materials and documents from BPS:

  • background event chronology
  • BPS canvass
  • BPS CPIC
  • BPS photo of complainant
  • contact sheet of BPS photos
  • WO notes
  • occurrence history and
  • recognizance of bail

Incident narrative

At approximately 6:45 p.m. on February 27, 2016, CW #1 called police to notify that an assault had occurred on the 9th floor of an apartment building located at Sidney Street in Belleville. The two subject officers and one witness officer were dispatched. An ambulance was dispatched as well.

At 6:57 p.m., the officers arrived and went to the 9th floor. Once there, they saw physical evidence in the form of a pool of blood in the hall outside of a unit on the ninth floor, a bloody handprint in the hall and hair on the floor. The officers went to the door of one of the units and encountered CW #5, who had obvious injuries. The witness officer convinced CW #5 to get medical assistance, and they walked towards the lobby together.

The subject officers, along with the complainant and CW #2 and CW #3, remained in the apartment. As the complainant appeared to be agitated, the officers directed the complainant to sit down and to relax. Having made initial enquiries and determining that the complainant may have been in violation of a number of conditions of his bail release, the officers asked the complainant to come into the hall with them. Instead, without any advance notice or utterances, the complainant got up from where he was seated, stepped up onto a chair and then proceeded through the open window falling to the frozen ground nine floors below.

At 7:39 p.m., the complainant arrived at hospital with vital signs absent and was pronounced dead shortly thereafter.

Analysis and director’s decision

The narrative findings in relation to this incident are quite certain because the actions leading up to the death of the complainant were witnessed by a number of civilian witnesses who confirm that at no time was there any physical contact between the complainant and any police officer. Furthermore, other than a request by officers to attend with them outside of the apartment in order to gather information about the situation, there was no verbal interaction noted between the officers present and the complainant before he decided to take the drastic action which he did.

It is, of course, pure speculation to attempt to determine what was in the mind of the complainant when he chose to jump out of a 9th story window. Although there is evidence that he was in contravention of his bail release, and may or may not have been arrested by police for assaulting CW #5, it is beyond the scope of this investigation, nor is it necessary, to determine why the complainant jumped from the open window or even if he had intended to cause his own death by doing so.

I find that the complainant’s death was caused by his own actions without any direct involvement by the police officers present; that the subject officers were carrying out their duties as required when they were invited by the legal occupant into the apartment unit to speak to the occupants and investigate the 911 call; and that at no time did either officer have either any physical contact nor any significant verbal interaction with the complainant that could in any way have been seen to initiate his actions. The actions of the complainant were described by all present as being without warning and without any obvious provocation and were completely unforeseeable.

It is notable that at no time were any allegations made against these officers by anyone, with respect to any inappropriate actions on their part and I am satisfied on reasonable grounds on this record that the actions exercised by the officers fell within the limits prescribed by the criminal law and there are no grounds for proceeding with charges in this case.

Date: May 24, 2017

Original signed by

Tony Loparco
Director
Special Investigations Unit