Ontario's police watchdog has ruled there are no grounds on which to charge a London police officer whose cruiser hit a man who was lying on the road.
The Special Investigations Unit released its decision Friday, nearly a year after the incident occured. According to the SIU report, in the early morning hours of September 2, 2018, a London police officer responded to Leroy Avenue near Taylor Street after a caller reported seeing a man with a flashlight walking up and down driveways. The alleged prowler was intoxicated and at one point, had laid down on the road while using a cellular phone. A passing driver managed to avoid the man, but when the officer turned onto Leroy Avenue from Taylor Street, the right front tire of his cruiser made contact with the man, causing serious lacerations to the man's head and elbow. The officer stopped immediately and called for an ambulance.
"The road was dry and in good repair, and there appears to have been no other motorists in the vicinity. What remains unknown is whether the police vehicle’s headlights were on at the time. If not, visibility in the area would have been significantly compromised, particularly as the street lighting was all but obscured by the trees lining the roadway," the SIU report said. "It is also unclear why the SO [subject officer] did not see the complainant on the road when another motorist had been able to and managed to maneuver around him only moments earlier. It may be that the Complainant was no longer using his mobile phone, the light from which may have alerted the earlier motorist to his presence, but this is sheer speculation. Be that as it may, the officer had no reason to suspect that someone might take the sort of unusual action adopted by the complainant, which knowledge might have necessitated greater precautions as he travelled on Leroy Avenue."
According to SIU Interim Director Joseph Martino, it would be unreasonable to conclude that the officer "transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law." Because of this determination, the SIU has closed the file on this case.
