THUNDER BAY - The Special Investigations Unit has found no grounds to charge two Thunder Bay Police Service officers following the 2010 death of a man outside a south side apartment building, concluding he had died of a medical condition.
The SIU was contacted by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director on July 7, 2021 to confirm if the Thunder Bay Police had notified them of two death cases, which were related to its 2018 Broken Trust report that found systemic racism at an institutional level in the police service.
One of the two cases had been reported to the SIU and investigated, though one that had occurred in April 2010 and involved the death of a 50-year-old man was not. The Thunder Bay Police investigated the incident at the time and found the man died of a medical condition unrelated to conduct of the officers.
The OIPRD met with Thunder Bay Police Service chief Sylvie Hauth on July 19, 2021, asking her to formally report the death to the SIU.
The SIU received the report on the 2010 incident the next day on July 20.
According to SIU director Joseph Martino’s report, released late Wednesday afternoon, the investigation identified two Subject Officers who declined to be interviewed, as is their legal right.
Two Witness Officers were also identified and interviewed, though because of the passage of time no forensic team was dispatched to the scene and civilian witnesses could not be contacted. The investigation did include video evidence from the Eye on the Street surveillance camera on the corner of May Street and Victoria Avenue East.
The incident took place in the early morning hours of April 1, 2010, when the two Subject Officers responded to a call from a woman at an apartment building on May Street advising of an unwanted person inside her residence.
The two Subject Officers entered the building and spoke with a 50-year-old man, referred to as the Complainant in the SIU report, and explained that he had to leave. The Complainant was escorted out of the building to the sidewalk by the officers who then departed the scene.
Not long after, the Complainant collapsed on the sidewalk and asked several individuals in the area who came to see what was wrong to call an ambulance. A second police cruiser with one of the Witness Officers was travelling southbound down May Street observed the man on the sidewalk.
The officer stopped to offer assistance and seeing that the Complainant was having difficulty breathing called paramedics.
Paramedics arrived on the scene and began treatment, but the Complainant was pronounced dead at the scene. The cause of death was determined to be ischemic heart disease due to, or as the consequence of, severe coronary atherosclerosis.
Offences taken into consideration by the SIU included failure to provide the necessities of life and criminal negligence causing death.
“On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that either subject official committed a criminal offence in connection with the Complainant’s death,” Martino writes.
Martino adds there is no evidence to suggest the Subject Officers were unlawfully placed in their interactions with the Complainant and were acting within the course of their duties when escorting him out of the building.
“Nor is there evidence sufficient to reasonably establish that either officer failed in their duty of care towards the Complainant,” Martino writes.
“They had no idea that the Complainant suffered from a heart condition that would soon result in cardiac arrest and, tragically, death, and therefore were without cause to believe that he required immediate medical attention.”
While the Subject Officers were aware the man was intoxicated, Martino said it was not to the point where the Complainant was unable to care for himself, as he was able to dress himself while in the apartment and walked out with the officers and then ask for help when he collapsed after the officers left.
“On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that either of the subject officials failed to comport themselves with due care and regard for the Complainant’s health and well-being,” Martino said.
“In the result, as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the subject officials transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law in their engagement with the Complainant, there are no grounds for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.”
