SIU clears officer in Tim Hortons incident

A Niagara Regional Police officer who punched a man in the face in St. Catharines after the man shoulder-checked another officer has been cleared of any wrongdoing.

The province’s Special Investigations Unit said Monday there is no reasonable grounds to believe the officer committed a criminal offence in connection with the man’s arrest and injury of a broken ankle.

The incident happened Dec. 29 just after 11 a.m. when police were called to the Tim Hortons at 212 Welland Ave. for a report of a man spitting on someone else.

A 32-year-old man was arrested for assault and placed in a police cruiser. When officers couldn’t locate the alleged victim, they decided to release the man.

The SIU said when the man was removed from the back seat of the cruiser, he became angry and accused the officers of stealing his property. As one officer walked past him to get his wallet from the cruiser, the man dipped his shoulder and checked the officer. The officer stumbled, regained his footing and pushed the man away from him with his hands.

The SIU said at about the same time, another officer delivered a single punch to the man’s face and then spun him to the ground, where he was re-handcuffed without further incident.

The man was arrested for assaulting an officer and taken to the police station in Niagara Falls. While being booked, he complained about pain to his leg. He was taken to Greater Niagara Falls General Hospital at 2:30 p.m. with a broken ankle.

SIU officers obtained closed circuit television footage from the Tim Hortons restaurant and medical information about the complainant from the hospital.

The SIU was able to view on video that the 32-year-old spit on and punched the driver’s side front window of a car, which turned out to be driven by his mother. It’s believed another motorist reported the spitting.

The SIU interviewed the man, his mother, the subject police officer and two witness officers.

SIU director Joseph Martino wrote in his report, released Monday, there is no question about the lawfulness of the man’s apprehension at the Tim Hortons and by all accounts he shoulder-checked an officer and was subject to arrest for assault.

He wrote there is also no question about whether the use of force was proper in the man’s arrest.

“Despite being released from police custody, the complainant grew increasingly belligerent in his exchanges with the police and delivered a shoulder-check to WO#1 (witness officer 1). In the circumstances, the officers were entitled to defend themselves with a measure of force of their own,” he wrote.

“WO#1 pushed the complainant back to create some further distance between them while the SO (subject officer) punched the complainant in the face and took him to the ground to deter any further aggression, none of which were unreasonable reactions in my estimation given the complainant’s unprovoked act of violence.”

The director wrote while it is possible the man fractured his ankle in the course of his confrontation with the subject officer and witness officer, it is possible he was injured prior to the encounter.

“Be that as it may, as I am satisfied that the officers acted lawfully throughout their dealings with the complainant, there is no basis for proceeding with charges in this case and the file is closed.”