The Special Investigations Unit (SIU) has concluded its investigation into the death of a 57-year-old motorcyclist in Madoc, finding no reasonable grounds to believe an Ontario Provincial Police officer committed a criminal offence.
The collision occurred on April 27, 2025, at Highway 7 and St. Lawrence Street West. The motorcyclist was struck by a Porsche being driven by an individual who was being pursued by an OPP officer for dangerous driving. The motorcyclist was pronounced dead at the scene, while the Porsche driver was not seriously injured.
The SIU, an independent agency that investigates police conduct in cases involving death, serious injury, sexual assault, or the discharge of a firearm, reviewed evidence, witness statements, and other materials before deciding not to lay charges.
Full details, including the incident narrative, evidence, and the Director’s analysis, are available in the official report here: SIU Director’s Report:
https://siu.on.ca/en/directors_report_d ... ?drid=4627
https://northumberlanddaily.ca/rss/siu- ... cle-death/
SIU clears OPP officer in Madoc motorcycle death
-
Michael Jack
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:18 pm
- Contact:
SIU clears OPP officer in Madoc motorcycle death
Michael Jack, Administrator
-
Michael Jack
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:18 pm
- Contact:
Special Investigations Unit clears OPP in April traffic death of motorcyclist in Madoc
Motorcyclist struck by Porsche, which was pursued by police
An Ontario Provincial Police officer did not commit any crime in relation to the April death of a motorcyclist on Highway 7 in Madoc, Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit director has ruled.
A 57-year-old man on April 27 was riding a Honda Goldwing motorcycle at the intersection of Highway 7 and St. Lawrence Street West when he was struck by a Porsche GT4RS sports car. The man died of multiple injuries suffered in the collision, a Special Investigations Unit (SIU) report stated.
The OPP officer had been pursuing the Porsche due to alleged dangerous driving, the SIU release stated.
“On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the collision,” Martino wrote in his final decision.
The unit investigations cases involving police and other peace officers when there is a death, serious injury, sexual assault, or the discharging of a firearm at a person.
Martino’s report stated Central Hastings OPP at 8:27 p.m. April 27 received a traffic complaint about a blue Porsche.
A witness in Kaladar described the car’s motions.
“He has just passed six vehicles, two tractor trailers on a corner, and he has been doing this since Smiths Falls,” Martino quoted the caller as saying.
“He is in and out of traffic like crazy. He’s passing on double lines. He’s probably at Madoc right now. He’s going to kill somebody. He’s flying … doing at least 160 km/h.”
The officer who became the subject of the SIU investigation left the detachment in a police Dodge Durango with emergency lights and “suppressed” OPP markings. He headed east along Highway 7 with his radar activated, Martino wrote.
He added the officer saw a westbound Porsche travelling at 125 km/h in the 80 km/h zone.
“Without activating his emergency lights, the officer made a U-turn, and followed the Porsche westbound with the intention of stopping the driver for stunt driving,” wrote Martino. The Porsche rounded a curve in the road, and the officer lost sight of it.
“Less than two kilometres away, the SO (subject officer) approached a cloud of smoke.
“The Porsche had tried to overtake several vehicles using the eastbound lane of traffic and swiped a westbound motorcyclist as it returned into the westbound lane.”
The officer arrived at the scene about 20 seconds after the collision, Martino continued.
Six SIU staff took part in the resulting investigation. The subject officer used his legal right to decline to provide his notes or be interviewed by investigators, Martino wrote.
The Porsche’s driver, a 19-year-old man, suffered no serious injury and declined an SIU interview.
The collision tore the rear end from the motorcycle and threw its operator from his seat, the SIU report states. The Porsche sustained heavy damage and came to rest partially in a ditch and against a light pole on the highway’s south side, west of St. Lawrence Street West.
As the officer accelerated after making the U-turn in pursuit, “his emergency lights were not activated nor was his siren,” stated Martino. The officer activated the lights as his vehicle reached 150 km/h.
Data from the OPP vehicle’s global positioning system showed its speed during the pursuit peaked at nearly 192 km/h.
Following the collision, the officer’s body-worn camera showed someone’s hands, palms facing forward, visible in the windshield and below one of the activated air bags. The man asked the officer and two witnesses if he, the driver, had struck anyone.
Another witness soon reported the motorcyclist was in the ditch. Martino wrote the motorcyclist was not breathing; paramedics and firefighters attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, but the man was pronounced dead.
The officer told the Porsche’s driver he was being detained pending an investigation and placed him n the back seat of the police vehicle.
Martino wrote the only criminal charge against the officer to be considered was that of dangerous driving causing bodily harm, yet the officer “was within his rights” in attempting to stop the Porsche.
“As an offence of penal negligence, a simple want of care will not suffice to give rise to liability,” the director wrote. “Rather, the offence is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have observed in the circumstances.”
He explained “the issue is whether there was a want of care in the manner in which the SO operated his vehicle, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the collision.
“In my view, there was not.”
The officer’s actions were justified by the Porsche’s speed and “reckless operation” as described by the 911 caller, Martino added.
“I am also satisfied that … the officer comported himself with due care and regard for public safety.”
The officer’s speed “is subject to legitimate scrutiny, particularly as the officer did not turn on his emergency equipment until the vehicle did so automatically at 150 km/h.
“That said, at least some of that excessive speed is understandable if the officer was going to close the distance to the Porsche given how fast it was travelling.”
No other motorist had to evade the police vehicle, Martino wrote: there was no other traffic.
He said the officer was never close enough to the Porsche “such that it could be said he unduly pushed” that car’s driver. Martino stated “it may well be” the Porsche’s driver “was never aware” of the officer’s presence.
“On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law … (and) there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.”
https://www.intelligencer.ca/news/speci ... list-death
An Ontario Provincial Police officer did not commit any crime in relation to the April death of a motorcyclist on Highway 7 in Madoc, Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit director has ruled.
A 57-year-old man on April 27 was riding a Honda Goldwing motorcycle at the intersection of Highway 7 and St. Lawrence Street West when he was struck by a Porsche GT4RS sports car. The man died of multiple injuries suffered in the collision, a Special Investigations Unit (SIU) report stated.
The OPP officer had been pursuing the Porsche due to alleged dangerous driving, the SIU release stated.
“On my assessment of the evidence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the SO committed a criminal offence in connection with the collision,” Martino wrote in his final decision.
The unit investigations cases involving police and other peace officers when there is a death, serious injury, sexual assault, or the discharging of a firearm at a person.
Martino’s report stated Central Hastings OPP at 8:27 p.m. April 27 received a traffic complaint about a blue Porsche.
A witness in Kaladar described the car’s motions.
“He has just passed six vehicles, two tractor trailers on a corner, and he has been doing this since Smiths Falls,” Martino quoted the caller as saying.
“He is in and out of traffic like crazy. He’s passing on double lines. He’s probably at Madoc right now. He’s going to kill somebody. He’s flying … doing at least 160 km/h.”
The officer who became the subject of the SIU investigation left the detachment in a police Dodge Durango with emergency lights and “suppressed” OPP markings. He headed east along Highway 7 with his radar activated, Martino wrote.
He added the officer saw a westbound Porsche travelling at 125 km/h in the 80 km/h zone.
“Without activating his emergency lights, the officer made a U-turn, and followed the Porsche westbound with the intention of stopping the driver for stunt driving,” wrote Martino. The Porsche rounded a curve in the road, and the officer lost sight of it.
“Less than two kilometres away, the SO (subject officer) approached a cloud of smoke.
“The Porsche had tried to overtake several vehicles using the eastbound lane of traffic and swiped a westbound motorcyclist as it returned into the westbound lane.”
The officer arrived at the scene about 20 seconds after the collision, Martino continued.
Six SIU staff took part in the resulting investigation. The subject officer used his legal right to decline to provide his notes or be interviewed by investigators, Martino wrote.
The Porsche’s driver, a 19-year-old man, suffered no serious injury and declined an SIU interview.
The collision tore the rear end from the motorcycle and threw its operator from his seat, the SIU report states. The Porsche sustained heavy damage and came to rest partially in a ditch and against a light pole on the highway’s south side, west of St. Lawrence Street West.
As the officer accelerated after making the U-turn in pursuit, “his emergency lights were not activated nor was his siren,” stated Martino. The officer activated the lights as his vehicle reached 150 km/h.
Data from the OPP vehicle’s global positioning system showed its speed during the pursuit peaked at nearly 192 km/h.
Following the collision, the officer’s body-worn camera showed someone’s hands, palms facing forward, visible in the windshield and below one of the activated air bags. The man asked the officer and two witnesses if he, the driver, had struck anyone.
Another witness soon reported the motorcyclist was in the ditch. Martino wrote the motorcyclist was not breathing; paramedics and firefighters attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, but the man was pronounced dead.
The officer told the Porsche’s driver he was being detained pending an investigation and placed him n the back seat of the police vehicle.
Martino wrote the only criminal charge against the officer to be considered was that of dangerous driving causing bodily harm, yet the officer “was within his rights” in attempting to stop the Porsche.
“As an offence of penal negligence, a simple want of care will not suffice to give rise to liability,” the director wrote. “Rather, the offence is predicated, in part, on conduct that amounts to a marked departure from the level of care that a reasonable person would have observed in the circumstances.”
He explained “the issue is whether there was a want of care in the manner in which the SO operated his vehicle, sufficiently egregious to attract criminal sanction, that caused or contributed to the collision.
“In my view, there was not.”
The officer’s actions were justified by the Porsche’s speed and “reckless operation” as described by the 911 caller, Martino added.
“I am also satisfied that … the officer comported himself with due care and regard for public safety.”
The officer’s speed “is subject to legitimate scrutiny, particularly as the officer did not turn on his emergency equipment until the vehicle did so automatically at 150 km/h.
“That said, at least some of that excessive speed is understandable if the officer was going to close the distance to the Porsche given how fast it was travelling.”
No other motorist had to evade the police vehicle, Martino wrote: there was no other traffic.
He said the officer was never close enough to the Porsche “such that it could be said he unduly pushed” that car’s driver. Martino stated “it may well be” the Porsche’s driver “was never aware” of the officer’s presence.
“On this record, I am unable to reasonably conclude that the SO transgressed the limits of care prescribed by the criminal law … (and) there is no basis for proceeding with criminal charges in this case.”
https://www.intelligencer.ca/news/speci ... list-death
Michael Jack, Administrator