TIMMINS - Ontario's police watchdog found no reasonable grounds to lay charges against a local police officer after a suspect's foot was broken during an arrest.
The incident happened on Sept. 13, 2024, in South Porcupine. While Ontario's Special Investigations Unit (SIU) did not find out how the man's foot was broken, director Joseph Martino's decision released on Jan. 10 found "no reasonable grounds to believe it is attributable to unlawful conduct on the part of the officer."
The SIU is an arms-length agency that investigates police-involved incidents where there has been a death, serious injury, allegations of sexual assault, or the discharge of a firearm at a person.
On Sept. 13, the SIU report says a male called Timmins Police saying that a man had threatened to kill him. Officers responded to the South Porcupine residence and after talking to the complainant determined there were grounds for an arrest and went to the address where the suspect was believed to be.
An officer found the suspect outside the residence. According to the SIU, he "seemed co-operative" about the arrest and asked to smoke a cigarette before going to the station, which he was allowed to do.
When the officer who is the subject of the SIU complaint arrived on scene, there was an altercation and the suspect was "grounded" behind one of the police cruisers. The subject officer hit the suspect several times before his arms were handcuffed behind his back, reads the report.
In the cell at the police station, the SIU says several officer pinned the suspected to the cell bench while removing the handcuffs.
"The following morning, the Complainant complained of pain. He was transported to hospital and diagnosed with a fracture of the left foot," reads the report.
SIU investigators watched 14 hours video from the cell. While the person in custody didn't appear to be favouring his foot at first, later on in the footage the SIU says he favoured his left foot and "was seen hobbling on it."
At the scene of the arrest, the vehicle's system that takes video was on but because the cruiser was parked behind a vehicle, the arrest was not caught on camera.
"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 injury," wrote Martino in his findings.
He goes on to explain how the evidence falls short of reasonably establishing that the force used by officers was excessive.
"The depictions of force used to arrest the Complainant were varied. There is a version of events in which the (subject officer) was needlessly confrontational and the situation quickly deteriorated to the point that the officers grounded the Complainant at the back of a cruiser.
"There is another account indicating the officers did not strike the Complainant in any manner while he was being grounded. Yet another account indicated that the Complainant fought with the officers before he was taken to the ground and kicked by the (subject officer)," he said.
Ultimately, Martino found the no basis for criminal charges and the case is closed.
