Recherche
Recherche plein texte sur tous les incidents publiés. Les noms d'agents ne sont jamais indexés — les résultats portent sur le résumé caviardé, le nom du corps policier, la référence tribunalaire et les champs à vocabulaire contrôlé (type d'incident, constat, disposition).
- Province: ON×
custody_death · 2018-Q2
Inquest into the death of the affected person, who died at a regional treatment centre in Bath, in mid-2018.
custody_death · 2015-Q2
Inquest into the death of the affected person, who died at a regional health centre in June 2015.
custody_death · 2018-Q2
An inquest was held virtually in a city in February–March 2023 into the death of an individual who died by suicide at a federal institution in a region. The jury issued extensive recommendations to Correctional Services of Canada and the Ministry of the Solicitor General regarding services, mental health care, suicide prevention, and health record transfer practices in federal custody.
custody_death · 2018-Q2
A person died in a correctional institution after being incised. The coroner's inquest is ongoing.
custody_death · 2022-Q2
An individual died while in custody at a correctional facility in the region.
custody_death · 2022-Q2
An individual died while in custody at a correctional complex in the region.
firearm_death · 2016-Q4
A man died from gunshot wounds. The coroner's inquest made recommendations to the police service and other organizations to improve public safety and prevent future deaths in similar circumstances.
firearm_death · 2013-Q3
The death of a person who died from a gunshot wound to the chest was the subject of a coroner's inquest. The jury made several recommendations to improve policing practices, including mandatory bystander/peer intervention training, quality assurance and audit positions, and the use of body-worn cameras.
custody_death · 2018-Q2
Inquest into the death of the affected person, who died at a regional treatment centre in Bath, in mid-2018.
firearm_death · 2013-Q3
The death of the affected person, who died from a gunshot wound to the chest, was the subject of a coroner's inquest. The jury made several recommendations to improve policing practices and prevent similar deaths in the future.
custody_death · 2022-Q2
An individual died from complications of fentanyl toxicity at a hospital.
custody_death · 2021-Q3
An individual died from hanging at a detention centre.
custody_death · 2018-Q4
Inquest into the death of the affected person, who died at a hospital in a regional city, in late 2018.
firearm_death · 2013-Q3
The death of the affected person, who died from a gunshot wound to the chest, was the subject of a coroner's inquest. The inquest made several recommendations to improve policing practices and prevent similar deaths in the future.
pursuit_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, the subject officer did not agree to an interview with the SIU or the release of their notes. In the afternoon of early 2026, the affected person was in custody at a police detachment. Earlier that day, they had been arrested in relation to an incident at a municipal building. While being processed for release following a period in detention, the affected person objected to a condition that would prohibit their presence at a location. The officer explained that an amendment could be made but indicated that the affected person would have to be returned to cells for a period. The affected person refused to accompany the officer to cells and a struggle followed in which they were forced to the floor. The affected person was eventually handcuffed and returned to a cell. Later that day, paramedics transported the affected person to hospital where they were diagnosed with injuries.
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 the individuals involved were prohibited from being in each other’s company. The officers arrived at the location and entered the residence. One person was arrested for assault. The affected person was located 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, the subject officer and other civilian eyewitnesses, gives rise to the following scenario. In the morning of early 2026, the subject officer was dispatched to the area of a domestic disturbance. On their arrival, the officer observed a male holding the affected person down on the roadway. Ordered to remove himself from the affected person, the male did so while explaining to the officer that the affected person had damaged his property and assaulted him. The subject officer decided to arrest the affected person for assault and mischief. There followed a physical engagement between the three parties during which the subject officer used force against the affected person and the male. The affected person and the male were handcuffed and taken into custody. The affected person attended hospital following their release and was diagnosed with a concussion.
pursuit_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, the subject officer chose not to interview with the SIU or authorize the release of their notes. In the early afternoon of a day in 2026, the affected person, while detained in a cell of a police detachment, reached into their underpants, retrieved a quantity of drugs and consumed them. About an hour later, they lapsed into medical distress with seizure-like symptoms. Custodial staff were quickly alerted to the affected person’s situation. They administered several doses of Narcan and summoned EMS. Paramedics arrived on scene and transported the affected person to hospital where they were treated for an overdose. The day before, acting on the strength of a warrant, two officers had arrested the affected person. One of the officers had conducted a pat-down search at the time, but failed to discover a body-pack around the affected person’s torso, which contained a plastic container of illicit substances. After being placed in a cruiser for transport to the detachment, the affected person was able to manipulate their handcuffed arms to retrieve the container from their pack and conceal it down the front of their underwear. At the detachment, the affected person revealed they were wearing the body-pack. It was removed from their possession and a quantity of methamphetamine was confiscated. A further pat-down search before the affected person was lodged in a cell failed to discover the container they were hiding.
pursuit_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, police officers were on the lookout in a regional area for a SUV that had reportedly been involved in several collisions and was said to be operated in a reckless manner - speeding, swerving and skidding on the roadway. It had sustained significant damage to the front passenger side. An officer was among the officers responding to one of the collision scenes, travelling east on a county road, when he spotted the SUV passing him in the opposite direction. The officer performed a U-turn and accelerated after the vehicle, activating his cruiser’s emergency lights and siren. A short time later, the SUV pulled over to the shoulder of the road and came to a stop. The officer stopped a short distance behind the SUV. The affected person was driving the SUV and was alone in the vehicle. He opened his driver’s door, observed the officer approaching him on foot, and asked the officer what he had done. The officer said he was driving a stolen vehicle. The affected person said the vehicle was not stolen. Told he was being detained for a “hit and run”, the affected person asked for more information. The affected person refused to exit the SUV at the officer’s direction and then began to grapple with him on the road when the officer dragged him out. Another officer was responding to the first officer’s radio request for backup when he arrived on scene to find the two fighting in the middle of the county road. The officer exited his cruiser and ran to the altercation just as the first officer was bringing the affected person down against the driver side of the SUV. As the two continued to wrestle each other, the second officer threw six punches in the direction of the affected person’s head. Following the final blow, the affected person brought his hands to cover his face. He was turned onto his front and handcuffed behind the back. Following his arrest, the affected person was seen at hospital and diagnosed with a fractured right orbital bone.
custody_transport_injury · 2026-Q1
The evidence collected by the SIU, including interviews with the affected person and police and non-police eyewitness, and video footage that captured the incident, gives rise to the following scenario. As was their legal right, the subject officer did not agree to an interview with the SIU or the release of their notes. In the morning of early 2026, the subject officer and another officer were dispatched to a convenience store in the area of a major road and avenue. A store employee had contacted police to report a male and female shoplifter. The officers arrived on scene and spoke with store staff, confirming that two suspects had left the store with alcohol and food without paying for the items. The employee showed a video clip they had taken with their cellphone, depicting the male and female. The officers located the suspects – a person and the affected person – at a nearby bus shelter. One person was taken into custody by one officer without incident. The affected person, however, resisted when the subject officer attempted to secure them in handcuffs. The officer was able to affix a cuff to the right hand but had difficulty attaching the other cuff to the affected person’s left hand. The affected person objected to their arrest, denied that they had done anything wrong, and struggled against the subject officer’s efforts to bring their arms behind the back. The tussle eventually made its way outside the bus shelter where the other officer intervened. The officers brought the affected person to the ground, after which the other officer secured both their hands in handcuffs. Following their arrest, the affected person was taken to hospital and treated for an injury.