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

June 20, 2006 at 0610 hrs, Notifying Officer of the Toronto Police Service (TPS) notified the SIU of the shooting death of a car-theft suspect at Tecumseh Public School on Scarborough Golf Club Road.

The investigation

Ten investigators and six forensic identification technicians were assigned to commence the investigation. The scene was located in the rear parking lot of 3700 Lawrence Avenue East. A driveway runs west of Scarborough Golf Club Road, north of Lawrence Avenue East into a small cul-de-sac at the rear of the apartment building. A white Dodge van was near the north fence, opposite the cul-de-sac, facing east. It had collided with a tree. It had been stolen from Durham region. A TPS vehicle was facing west and was parked in the cul-de-sac just south of the van. Police gloves and fire extinguishers were found near the van. The van was examined and found to contain marks of five, or possibly six, projectiles.

As a result of a canvas of the apartment building and review of police and 911 communications, SIU investigators took statements from 34 civilian witnesses who were in the neighbourhood of the shooting at the relevant time. Most were in their apartments. Some were on the street relatively near by.

Statements were also taken from five police officers and a firefighter who was first on scene. Police radio communications were reviewed.

Witness statements and evidence gathered in the course of the investigation provided to the SIU in confidence (Law Enforcement and Privacy Considerations)

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

I believe Witness Officer’s account. It is consistent with all the other evidence and it is not contradicted by any person or circumstance. Subject Officer discharged his firearm to prevent Witness Officer from being deliberately run down. I have no grounds to cause an information to be laid against any police officer.

Date: August 2, 2006

JA Ramsay

Deputy Director

Special Investigator Unit