Two officers with the Dryden Police Service won’t face any charges after discharging their firearm at a 40-year-old man last September.

Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit has finished their investigation into the conduct of the officers and found no grounds to lay charges.

Their report says DPS officers attended a disturbance call at a rural address on Highway 17. A caller from the address had contacted 911 to report a disturbance involving her parents, the 40-year-old man and his wife.

The wife then took the phone, spoke about a fight with her husband and told the 911 operator that everything was okay, but was informed that officers would be sent anyways to make sure everyone was safe.

When officers arrived, they exited their vehicle and saw the 40-year-old man running across his yard. He then entered a truck and drove into a DPS SUV, which struck one of the two officers. The pair then sought cover by the passenger side, and one officer discharged a round from his pistol.

DPS CruiserThe Dryden Police Service SUV that was struck by the man’s truck.

Officers later sought cover behind nearby trees, and as the truck circled back and neared towards them, both officers discharged their firearms multiple times until the truck came to a stop, wedged between the trees they had been using for cover. Thirty-two spent ammunition cartridges were located at the scene.

GlockOne of the subject officer’s Glock 17 9mm pistol.

The complainant then opened his truck’s door, exited the vehicle and laid on the ground. He was handcuffed, when the officer accused him of trying to kill the two officers. The 40-year-old man then threatened to kill one of the officers, indicating he knew his personal address.

The complainant was taken into custody with fractured ribs, but no gunshot wounds. One officer received medical attention for two sprained ankles as a result of the collision, and both vehicles received extensive damage.

The SIU invoked their mandate as a result of officers firing their firearms on September 30. Their report states that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that either official committed a criminal offence in connection to the incident.

The SIU is an independent government agency that investigates the conduct of officials that may have resulted in death, serious injury, sexual assault or the discharge of a firearm. Their work will consider whether the officer has committed a criminal offence in connection with the incident.

The SIU considers a serious injury as an injury that causes hospitalization, a fracture to the skull or to a limb, rib or vertebra, significant burns, a person loses a portion of their body, they experience a loss of vision or hearing, or the injury interferes with their health or comfort.