Search
Full-text search across every published incident. Officer names are never indexed — search hits match the redacted summary, agency name, tribunal citation, and the controlled-vocabulary fields (incident type, finding, disposition).
custody_death · 2017-Q1
A fatality inquiry was held into the deaths of a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, their family members, found in a home in a rural area. The inquiry made recommendations to improve supports for Canadian Veterans and their families, expand access to health-care services for a specific community, and strengthen the application and licensing processes for firearms.
custody_death · 2017-Q1
A fatality inquiry was held into the deaths of a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, their family members, who were found dead in a home in a rural area. The inquiry made recommendations to improve supports for Canadian Veterans and their families, expand access to health-care services for a specific community, and strengthen the application and licensing processes for firearms.
custody_death · 2017-Q1
A fatality inquiry was held into the deaths of a veteran, their spouse, their child, and the veteran's mother, found in a home in a rural county. The inquiry made recommendations to improve supports for Canadian Veterans and their families, expand access to health-care services for a specific community, and strengthen the application and licensing processes for firearms.
custody_injury · 2006-Q2
Allegations of detainee abuse by Canadian Forces in Afghanistan, including beating and failure to provide medical care. Three detainees were injured, with one having severe injuries. The Military Police allegedly shortcutted procedures and failed to investigate the cause of the injuries.
custody_transport_injury · 2026-Q1
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the affected person and police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, neither subject officer agreed to an interview with the SIU. They did authorize the release of their notes. In the evening of early 2026, an officer was on patrol operating a marked cruiser. Their passenger and partner was another officer. At about 9:41 p.m., the officers began to follow a vehicle for failing to stop at a red light before making a right turn onto a street and heading south. The vehicle quickly turned left into an apartment complex and then left again onto a ramp to the underground parking for a building situated in the area. The cruiser, its emergency lights activated while stopped behind the vehicle, followed the vehicle as the entry gate rose and the garage door opened. The affected person was driving the vehicle. They continued down a lane between rows of parking spaces, reversed into a parking spot and exited their vehicle. They were immediately confronted by an officer asking where they were going. The officers had stopped their cruiser short of the vehicle in the lane. The affected person walked past the officers and towards a wall, against which they began to urinate. They were pinned against the wall by an officer while they continued to relieve themselves, after which they began to struggle against both officers as they tried to control their arms behind the back. The affected person was told they had failed to stop for police. The parties struggled for about five minutes. With the assistance of additional officers, the affected person was handcuffed and taken into custody. They had been forced to the ground, punched twice in the head by an officer and drive-stunned multiple times in the back by another officer. The affected person was transported to hospital and diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis, which was attributed to trauma and the use of the CEW.
pursuit_custody_injury · 2026-Q1
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the affected person, the subject officer and other police and non-police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. In the afternoon of early 2026, the subject officer and another officer were dispatched to a residence in rural Lambton County. A person had called police to request a welfare check, and the caller was aware that two individuals were prohibited from being in each other’s company. The officers arrived at the location and entered the apartment. One person was arrested for assault. The affected person was located in a bedroom and arrested by the subject officer for breach of a non-association condition. The subject officer handcuffed the affected person behind the back and escorted them down an external staircase. As the pair neared the bottom of the stairs, the subject officer stepped on the affected person’s left foot. The affected person was not wearing shoes or socks at the time. The affected person was seen at hospital after their arrest and diagnosed with a fractured left foot.
custody_injury · 2026-Q1
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the affected person and police and non-police witnesses, and video footage that captured the incident in part, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, the subject officer did not agree to an interview with the SIU. They did authorize the release of their notes. In the morning of early 2026, a constable was a Community Intervention Response Team (CIRT) officer on patrol in their marked cruiser when their Automatic Licence Plate Recognition (ALPR) device detected a stolen vehicle - a vehicle - parked outside a market in Brampton. The officer radioed for the assistance of another officer. The subject officer responded to the request and arrived in the area. Notwithstanding the tinted windows on the vehicle, it was determined that there was a person in the driver’s seat of the vehicle. The constable positioned their cruiser directly behind the vehicle to prevent its escape as the subject officer went to the driver’s door and opened it. Their intention was to arrest the driver. The affected person was sitting in the vehicle and gripped the steering wheel with their hand as the subject officer, joined shortly by the constable, attempted to forcibly extricate them. The subject officer delivered several punches to the affected person’s head and upper body area. The affected person was forced out of the vehicle, taken to the ground and punched again in the abdomen by the subject officer before they were handcuffed behind the back. Following their arrest, the affected person was transported to hospital and diagnosed with a broken nose.
custody_injury · 2025-Q4
The material events in question are clear on the evidence collected by the SIU and may briefly be summarized. In late 2025, the subject officer and the witness officer were dispatched to an apartment in the area of a city, following calls to police from the resident, the affected person. The affected person threatened to kill herself if police did not attend her residence and indicated that she had cut her wrists. The officers arrived at the location, where they were joined by paramedics. The first responders made their way to the apartment door. Finding it locked, the subject officer kicked it open. The affected person was in her bedroom at the time. She was highly agitated and belligerent with the officers. A cut was visible on her wrist. The officers handcuffed the affected person behind the back and were escorting her down a hallway in the apartment when the witness officer briefly pinned her against a wall as the affected person’s hostility escalated. The affected person turned and spat on the witness officer, and was taken to the floor by the officers in a prone position. The affected person screamed at the officers to kill her and banged her face on the floor about a half-dozen times, fracturing her nose in the process. The subject officer took hold of the affected person’s head to prevent her hurting herself. The affected person was seen at hospital after her arrest and ultimately diagnosed with a broken nose.
custody_injury · 2026-Q1
In the evening, officers responded to a reported domestic disturbance in the area of a city, altering course to a nearby location following a related call about a male on the roof of a building. The subject officer was the first to arrive on scene, followed by two other officers. The male on the roof, the affected person, was of unsound mind and had earlier called police from their residence, reporting a break-in attempt. They exited their residence through a window and made their way to the location, ascending onto the roof via an exterior ladder. The officers attempted to persuade the affected person to come down safely, but they threatened to jump if not provided with a cigarette and hung from a light bar attached to the top of the exterior wall. As negotiations were ongoing, a fire truck arrived on scene. The affected person eventually lost their grip on the light bar and fell to the ground, landing feet-first, and was transported to hospital with multiple fractures of both feet.
custody_injury · 2026-Q1
The material events in question are clear on the evidence collected by the SIU and may briefly be summarized. In the morning of early 2026, members of the Emergency Response Team convened at a house situated in an area of Cornwall. Acting under the authority of a CDSA search warrant, the team entered the house to search for cocaine and fentanyl. The affected person was present at the time and alerted to the officers’ presence outside the home. They entered the main floor bathroom and attempted to conceal themselves behind a sink. They were quickly located by an officer and placed on the floor in a prone position. The subject officer, the team leader, had forced their way into the bathroom and located the affected person. Having positioned the affected person on the floor, the officer dropped their left knee intending to lower themselves by their side but inadvertently landed on the affected person’s back. The impact fractured the affected person’s left hand, which was underneath their chest at the time. The affected person was taken into custody and transported to the police station. They were seen at hospital later in the day and diagnosed with their injury.
custody_injury · 2026-Q1
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the affected person and police eyewitnesses, and video footage that largely captured the incident, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, neither subject officer agreed to interviews with the SIU. One of the subject officers did provide a written statement. In the late evening of early 2026, police officers were dispatched to a motor vehicle accident at an intersection in a residential area. The collision involved a single vehicle that had been stolen moments earlier. Witnesses to the collision reported that the driver and sole occupant of the vehicle – the affected person – had fled the area. The affected person had run from the site of the collision to a nearby residential street and ultimately made his way to the rear of a property where they hid in a backyard shed. A police dog unit was deployed to the area and eventually tracked the affected person to the shed. One of the officers who had been searching for the affected person called out to them but there was no response. The officer eventually opened the door to the shed and told the affected person to show their hands. When the affected person, lying on the ground, failed to do so, the officer discharged their CEW. As the affected person cried out in pain, the officer dragged them out of the shed, delivering a punch to the torso in the process. Other officers arrived on scene and joined in the arrest process. Repeated directions were given to the affected person to show and release their hands. The officer struck the affected person again in the torso and another officer punched them in the head or upper body area multiple times. Following another CEW discharge by the officer into the affected person’s back, their hands were controlled and handcuffed. The affected person was seen at hospital after their arrest and diagnosed with injuries.
vehicle_injury · 2026-Q1
In the early morning of a day in 2026, a subject officer sat in their marked cruiser in a parking lot at an intersection in a city. The officer and their passenger were manning a perimeter point at that location. At about a certain time, two vehicles travelled past their location at excessive speed. The officer pulled onto the roadway and accelerated after the vehicles, intending to stop them in connection with their speed. One of the vehicles, with several passengers, including the affected person, continued at high speeds and crashed into other vehicles at a red light, resulting in the affected person suffering an injury. The officer arrived on scene and arrested the driver for dangerous driving.
injury · 2024-Q4
Decision in the matter of an injury during arrest by Edmonton Police Service in 2024 | released in 2026
firearm_discharge · 2026-Q1
A decision was made in the matter of a fatal shooting by the RCMP in the Yukon.
firearm_discharge · 2024-Q4
ASIRT decision in the matter of a police shooting in a rural Alberta town in late 2024 | released in mid-2026
firearm_discharge · 2026-Q1
A decision was made in the matter of a shooting involving the RCMP near Grande Prairie in early 2026.
firearm_discharge · 2024-Q4
A decision was made in the matter of a shooting near Tofield in late 2024.
firearm_discharge · 2019-Q1
A decision was made in the matter of a police shooting in Calgary, which occurred in early 2019.
firearm_discharge · 2024-Q4
Decision in the matter of a shooting by the RCMP in late 2024 | released in 2026
injury · 2021-Q3
Decision in the matter of an injury during an arrest by the police in Edmonton in mid 2021 | released in early 2026