Explanatory note

The Ontario Government is releasing past SIU Director Reports (submitted to the Attorney General prior to May 2017) that include fatalities involving a firearm, physical altercation, and/or use of conducted energy weapon, or other extensive police interaction that did not result in a criminal charge.

Justice Michael H. Tulloch made recommendations about the release of past SIU Director Reports in the Report of the Independent Police Oversight Review, released on April 6, 2017.

Justice Tulloch explained that since past reports were not originally drafted for public release they may have to be edited substantially to protect sensitive information. He took into account that confidentiality assurances were given to various witnesses during the course of SIU investigations, and recommended that some information be redacted in the interests of privacy, safety, and security.

As recommended by Justice Tulloch, this explanatory note is being provided to assist the reader’s understanding of why certain information is redacted in these reports. Notes have also been inserted throughout the reports to help describe the nature of the information that was redacted and why it was redacted.

Law enforcement and personal privacy information considerations

Consistent with Justice Tulloch’s recommendations and guided by section 14 of the Freedom of Information and Protection to Privacy Act (FIPPA) (relating to law enforcement information), portions of these reports have been removed to protect:

  • confidential investigative techniques and procedures used by the SIU
  • 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
  • witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation, provided to the SIU in confidence

Consistent with Justice Tulloch’s recommendations and guided by section 21 of FIPPA (relating to personal privacy information), personal information, including sensitive personal information, has also been redacted, except that which is necessary to explain the rationale for the Director’s decision. 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
  • other identifiers which are likely to reveal personal information about individuals involved in the investigation, including in relation to children
  • witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation, provided to the SIU in confidence

Personal health information

Information related to the personal health of individuals that is unrelated to the Director’s decision (taking into consideration the Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004) has been redacted.

Other proceedings, processes, and investigations

Information may have also been excluded from these reports 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.

Director’s report

Notification of the SIU

At 0800 hrs on April 13, 2006, Notifying Officer of the York Regional Police (YRP) notified the SIU of the shooting death of Shelton McKenzie during a robbery in Markham. Notifying Officer reported that Mr. McKenzie was driving a stolen van and was attempting to flee the scene of a home invasion robbery when he was fatally wounded by shots fired by members of the YRP.

The investigation

Eight SIU investigators and five forensic identification technicians (FIT) were immediately dispatched to the scene at a location, Markham. The scene was extensively photographed, measured and diagrams were prepared. The vehicle driven by the deceased was thoroughly examined at the scene and later at the Centre of Forensic Sciences. The area near the scene was canvassed and civilian witnesses were identified and interviewed on the dates below:

  • Civilian Witness #1 (April 13, 2006)
  • Civilian Witness #2 (April 13, 2006)
  • Civilian Witness #3 (April 13, 2006)
  • Civilian Witness #4 (April 13, 2006)
  • Civilian Witness #5 (April 13, 2006)
  • Civilian Witness #6 (April 19, 2006), and
  • Civilian Witness #7 (May 8, 2006)

The four officers who were at the scene and discharged their firearms were initially designated as subject officers. As a result of forensic and pathological examination of the deceased, Subject Officer was identified as the officer whose actions likely caused the death of Mr. McKenzie. Accordingly, the other three officers were re- designated as witness officers, while Subject Officer remained the sole subject officer Subject Officer agreed to an interview and spoke to SIU investigators on July 7, 2006.

The following witness officers were interviewed on the dates as indicated:

  • Witness Officer #1 (April 14, 2006)
  • Witness Officer #2 (April 14, 2006)
  • Witness Officer #3 (April 14, 2006)
  • Witness Officer #4 (April 14, 2006)
  • Witness Officer #5 (April 14, 2006), and
  • Witness Officer #6 (April 14, 2006)

The following three witness officers discharged their service weapons during the incident and were interviewed as indicated:

  • Witness Officer #7 (May 23, 2006)
  • Witness Officer #8 (May 27, 2006), and
  • Witness Officer #9 (May 27, 2006)

The SIU requested, received and reviewed materials and documents from the YRP as listed below:

  • The duty notes of all witness officers
  • CPIC report of Civilian Witness #5
  • CPIC report on Shelton McKenzie
  • The YRP Witness List
  • The YRP Call History
  • The YRP Compact Disc of the 9-1-1 call of Civilian Witness #4
  • Two YRP Compact Discs of the YRP radio transmissions
  • The Civilian Witness List compiled by the YRP
  • A Compact Disc of the civilian witness statements
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #1
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #2
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #3
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #4
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #5
  • The statement of Civilian Witness #6
  • The statement of Civilian Non-Witness #6
  • The statement of Civilian Witness #2
  • The statement of Civilian Witness #3, and
  • The statement of Civilian Witness #4

Director’s decision under s. 113(7) of the Police Services Act

As noted, the injury to Civilian Witness #5 does not fall within the mandate of the SIU. In my opinion, it is obvious that the shooting of Shelton McKenzie was justified. The police acted commendably in very difficult circumstances. I have no grounds to cause an information to be laid against any police officer in connection with the matter investigated.

Date: July 24, 2006

JA Ramsay

Deputy Director

Special Investigations Unit