Ontario's Special Investigations Unit has decided against laying charges against a London police officer whose cruiser hit a woman in a motorized wheelchair.
The SIU launched an investigation on January 16, 2017 after the woman was struck by the cruiser at the intersection of Dundas St. and Adelaide St. The officer was driving back to police headquarters, turning onto Dundas from Adelaide when the collision took place. The woman was taken to hospital, suffering from a broken arm.
According to the SIU, the charge under consideration in this case would have been dangerous driving causing bodily harm. Investigators viewed a video recording of the collision that captured by a security camera in the vicinity, conducted a forensic reconstruction of the collision, and took statements from the officer, the complainant, and a civilian eyewitness.
SIU Director Tony Laparco says the charge of dangerous driving causing bodily harm is "one of penal negligence and predicated on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised in the circumstances."
"It is clear to me that what appears to have been a momentary lack of attention on the part of the SO [subject officer] falls short of that standard," Laparco adds. "There is no indication, for example, of dangerous or even careless driving in the moments preceding the collision; on the contrary, the SO appears to have been operating the vehicle carefully and at moderate speeds as he was making his way back to the police station. Nor is there any suggestion or evidence that the officer was unduly distracted as he entered into the turn."
Laparco says it should also be noted that the woman's wheelchair had no lightning or reflectors on it, which made it hard to see, considering it was dark and raining at the time of the collision. However, he also says this should not excuse the officer's conduct, given that the woman had the right of way.
"It does, however, assist in my determination that the officer’s conduct fell within the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law, notwithstanding his failure to see the complainant and to correct his driving accordingly," he wrote in his decision.
