The Toothless Tiger: SIU’s Refusal to Charge Cyclist’s Attacker Proves Police Accountability is a Myth

Once again, the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) has reminded the public that its primary function is not to hold police accountable, but to provide a rubber stamp for state-sanctioned violence.

In a report released Tuesday, SIU Director Joseph Martino announced that no criminal charges will be laid against a Toronto Police Service officer involved in the May 31 takedown of a 21-year-old cyclist. The result of this encounter? The cyclist was left with a mild traumatic brain injury. The cause? A failure to stop at a stop sign during a targeted bicycle enforcement blitz near Queen Quay W. and Little Norway Crescent.

Let us be clear: this is an opinion piece, and my position is simple. The SIU's decision is a moral and systemic failure. When a police officer can tackle a citizen off a bicycle—resulting in a brain injury—over a minor traffic violation and walk away without so much as a reprimand, the 'watchdog' has ceased to be a guard and has become a lapdog.

According to reporting from CBC Toronto and CityNews Toronto, the sequence of events was as follows: a cyclist went through a stop sign and allegedly told two officers, "F--k the police." In response, officers engaged in a chase. As reported by CBC Toronto, an officer stepped in front of the cyclist, who then attempted to avoid him by cycling eastward. The officer pursued the man, reaching out to grab the cyclist's backpack. This caused the cyclist to lose control and fall onto a sidewalk and grass boulevard.

It didn't stop there. The SIU report specifically notes that the officer then "fell on top of the Complainant and forced him flat on the ground," while other officers pinned the cyclist down until he was handcuffed.

Director Martino’s justification for this brutality is as insulting as the act itself. In the report, Martino claimed the force used was "within the range of what was lawful in the circumstances." He further argued that the officer would have been "rightly concerned" that the cyclist would continue to flee, a consideration that, in Martino's view, justifies wrestling the man to the ground and pinning him there.

Even more galling is the SIU's admission that it is "unclear" from the footage whether the officer intended to grab the backpack or push the cyclist off the bike. In any other context, the ambiguity of whether an officer intended to cause a crash would be a point of suspicion. In the SIU's world, it is a non-issue. Martino went so far as to describe the risk of injury as "moderate" because the cyclist had slowed down.

We are talking about a mild traumatic brain injury. There is nothing "moderate" about a head injury sustained during a police takedown for a stop-sign violation.

As David Shellnutt, a personal injury lawyer with The Biking Lawyer team, told CBC Radio's Metro Morning, police force must be reasonable, necessary, and proportionate. Shellnutt argued that tackling someone off a bike for not stopping at a stop sign is simply not proportionate. He is correct. The escalation from a traffic violation to a violent physical takedown is a textbook example of police overreach.

Yet, the SIU views this as a lawful exercise of power. By framing the cyclist's attempt to ride around the officer as rendering himself "subject to arrest," the SIU creates a closed loop of logic where any attempt to avoid a confrontation is seen as a justification for more violence.

This is the SIU's pattern. They operate on a narrow definition of "lawful" that ignores the reality of street-level brutality. If an officer can claim they were "concerned" a suspect might flee, they are granted a license to use whatever force they deem necessary, regardless of the actual crime. In this case, the "crime" was a traffic ticket. The punishment was a brain injury.

CityNews Toronto notes that this incident occurred during a time of ongoing debate regarding how the city enforces traffic laws on the waterfront trail, and that police have faced criticism in the past for similar blitzes. The fact that these tactics continue—and that the oversight body continues to excuse them—suggests that the Toronto Police Service believes it is untouchable.

When the SIU clears an officer under these circumstances, it sends a clear message to every beat cop in the city: as long as you can frame your violence as a response to a suspect's "efforts to flee," the SIU will have your back. It tells the public that our safety is secondary to the officer's convenience.

Justice is not found in a report that declares a brain injury "lawful." Justice is found in accountability. Until the SIU stops treating "lawful force" as a blanket excuse for unnecessary violence, it will remain a toothless tiger, existing only to protect the police from the consequences of their own aggression.