Appendix 5 - Methodology

 

Data

In March 2017, the OHRC retained Dr. Scot Wortley, PhD (Professor and Graduate Coordinator, Centre for Criminology & Sociolegal Studies, University of Toronto) to provide expert assistance with the Inquiry.[1] His role included analyzing data the OHRC obtained from the TPS and Special Investigations Unit (SIU) for the period from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2017, as well as survey data related to:

• stop and search practices
• street checks
• use of force
• arrests and charges and forms and conditions of release applied by the TPS for certain categories of offences:
• out-of-sight driving offences
• simple drug possession
• obstructing a police officer, assaulting a police officer, assaulting a police officer to resist arrest, and uttering threats against a police officer
• loitering, causing a disturbance and trespassing
• failing to comply with a bail condition or undertaking to a police officer.

Dr. Wortley was assisted by Dr. Ayobami Laniyonu[2] (Assistant Professor, Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies, University of Toronto) and Erick Laming[3] (PhD student, Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies, University of Toronto) with analyzing use of force data, and by Dr. Maria Jung[4] (Assistant Professor, Faculty of Criminology, Toronto Metropolitan University) with analyzing arrest, charge and release data.

 

Use of force resulting in serious injury or death

Dr. Wortley analyzed data from two periods: January 1, 2000–June 6, 2006, and January 1, 2013–June 30, 2017. Important information from before January 1, 2013, was not available electronically, so the OHRC restricted its analysis to January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2017.

The 2000–06 data was previously collected and coded by Dr. Wortley in 2006 as part of the Ipperwash Inquiry.[5] The 2013–17 data was collected and coded by the OHRC as part of this Inquiry.

As discussed in A Collective Impact, much of the information gathered came from SIU Director’s Reports. These reports provided detailed information on each SIU investigation, including the time, date and location of the incident, characteristics of the civilian or civilians involved, the cause of injury or death, a description of the circumstances surrounding the incident, and the justification behind the director’s decision to charge subject officers with a criminal offence or clear them of criminal wrongdoing.

During both time periods, the SIU did not collect race-based data. For the 2000–2006 period, race was determined by relying on case photographs, interviews with SIU investigators, SIU investigator notes, and/or photographs of the civilian that appeared in the media. For the 2013–2017 period, race was determined by relying on SIU investigator notes, case photographs, media coverage, social media, and/or TPS documents (e.g., officer notes, General Occurrence Reports, TPS charge documents, incident summaries). Dr. Wortley’s analysis included additional factors that could account for use of force, including civilian characteristics (age, gender, etc.) and situational factors (community setting, civilian behaviour, mental illness, civilian impairment, the presence of a weapon, etc.) This analysis is presented in Dr. Wortley’s report on race and police of force, Use of Force: An Examination of Special Investigations Unit Cases Involving the Toronto Police Service in Appendix E of A Collective Impact.[6]

After the release of A Collective Impact, the OHRC reviewed the SIU cases received and coded additional variables, including:

• the patrol zone where the incident took place
• whether the person was in possession of a weapon at the time of the incident
• at what point the weapon was discovered
• how the interaction resulting in the use of force was initiated (i.e., through reactive policing, such as response to a call for service, or proactive policing, such as a traffic stop).

Dr. Wortley and his team analyzed these factors to assess whether they could explain the significant racial disparities in the data. Others also raised some of the factors to critically refute the findings in A Collective Impact. For details of this analysis, see section E of Dr. Wortley’s Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service: Final Report (Use of Force Report).[7]

The OHRC also reviewed SIU Director’s Reports for investigations involving Black people from January 1, 2013, to June 30, 2017. These reports contain an incident narrative along with the SIU’s analysis. The OHRC identified themes related to the TPS and Black civilians. Examples of cases where these themes were identified in SIU Director’s Reports were included in A Collective Impact and are also included in this report.[8]

 

“Lower-level” use of force

The OHRC examined use-of-force incidents that did not result in serious injury or death, and did not meet the threshold for an investigation by the SIU.

Before January 1, 2020, TPS did not collect race-based data on use-of-force incidents. To identify a person’s race in lower-level use-of-force incidents, the OHRC and Dr. Wortley examined three types of documents: Use of Force Reports, Injury/Illness Reports and General Occurrence Reports (GO Reports). As Dr. Wortley’s Use of Force Report sets out in detail, the process for identifying and coding a single lower-level use-of-force case required the OHRC and research team to compile, match and extract information from three separate TPS reports.

Use of Force Reports are completed when an officer:

1. draws their firearm in the presence of a civilian
2. points their firearm at a civilian
3. discharges their firearm
4. uses a police weapon – including a conducted energy weapon – against a civilian
5. uses physical force that results in an injury to a civilian that requires medical attention.[9]

However, they do not contain identifying information about the subject, including their race. Injury/Illness Reports are completed any time police identify an injury or illness in a civilian they have an interaction with, regardless of the cause of the injury, and describe how the person was injured.[10] While Injury/Illness Reports do not contain identifying information about the civilian, including race, they contain a corresponding GO Report number. GO Reports contain a description of the events as well as identifying information for the civilian, which in most cases includes their race.[11]

The OHRC requested Use of Force Reports, Injury/Illness Reports and corresponding GO Reports from the TPS for the period of July 1, 2016–June 30, 2017. These documents were carefully cross-referenced to glean the race of civilians who experienced injuries in their interaction with police.

In collaboration with Dr. Wortley’s research team, the OHRC engaged in a labour-intensive matching process. Coders determined whether Injury/Illness Reports were within the scope of the Inquiry (i.e., whether the injury was sustained as a result of use of force by police). For Injury/Illness Reports that were in scope, the coders identified a corresponding GO Report, and attempted to identify a corresponding Use of Force Report by comparing the date and time, type of police assignment, location of the incident, names of the officers involved, type of force used and other details from the case synopsis. Use of Force Reports were not identified in every case. For example, some injuries may have resulted in an Injury/Illness Report being completed, but the severity of the injury did not meet the threshold of needing medical attention that requires a Use of Force Report to be completed.

Once corresponding documents were identified, the information was coded into a data template, with demographic information on the subject including race, type of force used, injuries sustained, patrol zone where the incident took place, and how the interaction that led to the use of force began (i.e., through reactive or proactive policing). A small number of cases in the dataset met the threshold for “serious injury” and were investigated by the SIU, so they also appeared in the SIU dataset and analysis.

Using population estimates from the 2016 Census, Dr. Wortley analyzed the data. Similar to the analysis for use of force resulting in serious injury or death, Dr. Wortley examined factors that could account for use of force such as civilian characteristics (age, gender, etc.), and situational factors (community setting, civilian behaviour, mental illness, civilian impairment, the presence of a weapon, etc.). This analysis is detailed in the Use of Force Report.[12]

Dr. Wortley’s team also conducted a multivariate analysis. It described whether racial disparities in “lower-level” use of force and use of force that resulted in death or serious injury persisted after controlling for patrol zone characteristics (i.e., violent crime rate, median household income, percentage of single-mother households).[13]

 

Independent review and error in the multivariate analysis of use of force

Following the release of A Disparate Impact, Drs. Wortley and Laniyonu identified a coding error in which civilian race was incorrectly coded in the multivariate analysis. The OHRC (OHRC) retained Dr. Maria Jung[14] to independently review the error. As noted above, Dr. Jung conducted part of the analysis in Racial Disparity in Arrests and Charges: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service, which was part of A Disparate Impact. However, she was not involved in Dr. Wortley’s Use of Force expert report, which was also part of A Disparate Impact.

A Disparate Impact[15] and Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service[16] incorrectly stated that when controlling for patrol zone characteristics:

• Black people were 55 times more likely to experience serious and lower-level use of force than White people
• Other racialized people were 13 times more likely to experience serious and lower-level use of force than White people.

The racial disparities in the multivariate analysis decrease significantly when correcting for the error. Further, other racialized people, when grouped together in the data, are now less likely than White people to experience use of force when controlling for patrol zone characteristics.[17] However, there is still a gross racial disparity in the risk that Black people will experience force compared to White people, which remains “consistent with racial bias arguments[:]”[18]

As a result of this independent review, the analysis shows that Black people are markedly more likely to experience all types of police use of force compared to their White counterparts. These gross racial disparities remain after statistically controlling for patrol zone characteristics, including violent crime rate, median household income, and proportion of single-mother households. This is consistent with the conclusions drawn in the original report. However, the extent of racial disparity is smaller in the corrected analysis than the original report. Instead of 30–58 times the risk of experiencing use of force experienced by Black civilians compared to White civilians, as noted in the original report, the results of this corrected analysis show that Black civilians are 4–5 times more likely to experience use of force relative to their White counterparts.

However, for civilians of other racial minority groups, the conclusions from the corrected analysis are substantially different from those drawn in the original report. In the original report, civilians of other racial minority groups were 5–14 times more likely to experience use of force compared to their White counterparts, controlling for patrol zone characteristics, including violent crime rate, median household income, and proportion of single-mother households. In the corrected analysis, civilians of other racial minority groups are about 40% less likely than their White counterparts to experience use of force, controlling for patrol zone characteristics.

The independent review confirmed that “White civilians were incorrectly coded as Black civilians; Black civilians were incorrectly coded as belonging to some other racialized minority groups; civilians of other racialized minority groups were incorrectly coded as individuals where race could not be identified; and persons whose race could not be identified were coded as White.”[19] The error occurred when data was transferred from one statistical analysis program (SPSS) and put it into another statistical analysis program (R).[20]

After discovering the error, Drs. Wortley and Laniyonu reviewed and corrected the expert use of force report. The tables presented in the independent review are “essentially and substantially the same as the corrected series of tables”[21] in the expert use of force report.

The corrected versions of A Disparate Impact and the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service are referred to in this final report.

 

Charges, arrests and releases

The OHRC requested and received data from the TPS Versadex system related to nine specific offences:

1. Failure to comply with a condition, undertaking or recognizance
2. Obstruct justice
3. Assault police
4. Uttering threats against the police
5. Cannabis possession
6. Other (non-cannabis) illegal drug possession
7. Out-of-sight driving offences (including driving without a valid licence, driving without valid insurance, driving while suspended, etc.)
8. Disturbing the peace
9. Trespassing.[22]

As described by Dr. Wortley in A Disparate Impact, these charges were selected because research – as well as consultations with both defence counsel and community members – suggest that compared to more serious offences, these charges are more likely to be affected by either police surveillance practices or police discretion.[23] In addition to the listed charges, the OHRC requested information on any accompanying charges, offender release details, and charge disposition. The OHRC also requested information on the person’s previous criminal history at the time of each arrest or charge incident. The original request sought this data for the period of 2010–17. In 2013, the TPS switched data systems from the Criminal Information Processing System (CIPS) to Versadex. However, due to limitations associated with the data in CIPS,[24] Dr. Wortley limited his analysis to the Versadex data (2013–17).

The OHRC provided Dr. Wortley with five different datasets. The first included the key charges that were part of the original data request and any accompanying charges associated with the arrest. The second included arrests arising from these charges, and the third provided demographic information (age, gender, race, etc.) on each person involved in the charges and arrests. The fourth included arrest incidents where the person was released on the street on their own recognizance, and the fifth included arrest incidents where the person was taken into custody and transported to the station for “booking.”

Dr. Wortley analyzed the data based on the six different racial categories provided by the TPS: White, Black, Asian, Aboriginal, Brown, and Unknown, combining the Asian, Brown and Indigenous categories into a single category labelled “other racial minority.”[25] There were 111,972 charges where the race of the alleged offender was known, which amounted to 96% of the charges in the dataset.[26]

The findings of this analysis are presented in Dr. Wortley’s report, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service.[27]

Some limitations existed within this data. In some areas, data was missing. Dr. Wortley noted that in 4% of charges, the race of the accused was missing and in 20% of cases the charge disposition was not available.[28] Also, due to communication issues between the TPS and the OHRC, Dr. Wortley was not able to determine if a person was booked but released at the police station or detained for a “show cause” hearing and thus, Dr. Wortley did not analyze disparities in this area. Dr. Wortley was also unable to analyze other arrest details, including whether the suspect was strip-searched, photographed, fingerprinted, or booked into a holding cell, as these fields were not mandatory and often missing from the data.[29] Finally, in response to the OHRC’s request for all criminal offender histories at the time of the arrest, the TPS only provided charge history information from after 2013, and did not provide information on charges and convictions related to other police services.[30] Dr. Wortley noted this “renders the criminal history information provided by the TPS useless with respect to conducting an analysis of all factors that may impact post-arrest treatment.”[31]

 

Addendum report: additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data

Drs. Wortley and Laniyonu supplemented the census benchmarking or general population benchmarking of use force and charges from A Disparate Impact by including additional benchmarking based on additional data obtained by the OHRC from the TPS. This is done in their Addendum report.   

Census or general population benchmarking “captures the overall impact of police use of force on racialized communities”. According to Dr. Wortley:[32]

Proponents maintain that general population benchmarking reveals the likelihood that people from different racial backgrounds will experience police contact and/or a police use-of-force incident. A growing number of researchers recognize that census benchmarking is a valuable first step in the research process and that it serves to effectively document the extent to which different racial groups experience different types of police contact.

Dr. Wortley also acknowledged that that, “while general population benchmarking may highlight the over-representation or under-representation of racialized people in use of force statistics, these statistics may not completely explain racial disparities.”[33]

Drs. Wortley and Laniyonu performed additional benchmarking of use of force data using race-based data on:[34]

• Street checks (2008-2013)

• Arrests (2014-2017), including:
  
  • Total arrests
  • Arrests for property crime
  • Arrests for violent crime
  • Arrests for aggravated assault
  • Arrests for homicide
  • Arrests for attempted homicide
  • Arrests for firearms offences.

This addresses arguments that, for example[35]:

• “Racial groups with high levels of contact with the police are at greater risk of experiencing police violence than those with lower levels of contact than those with lower levels of contact.”
• “Those who have broken the law – and targeted for arrest – are at especially high risk of police use of force.”
• “Violent offenders (i.e., those involved in arrests for violent crime) are more likely to demonstrate “resistance” to the police and are thus particularly vulnerable to police use-of-force incidents.”

Dr. Wortley noted that “racial bias contributes to racial disparities in arrest statistics in several ways” and thus, highlighted research which states that “benchmarking use of force data to arrest data likely underestimates the level of bias that may exist in police use of force.” Similarly, Dr. Laniyonu stated:[36]

Black persons in Toronto are grossly over-represented in TPS street checks and arrests. This overrepresentation is almost certainly a consequence, at least in part, of racial bias among TPS officers. Overall, this means that benchmarking on street checks and arrests should be considered conservative estimates of racial disparities.

Dr. Wortley drew upon data from the 2016 Canadian Census that captures the “number of Toronto residents who drive to work using a car, truck, or other personal motor vehicle.” According to Dr. Wortley, “commute to work estimates may be considered superior to population benchmarks because they better capture the driving population (i.e., those who are of the legal driving age and have access to a motor vehicle)” but they are “not without their limitations” (e.g., they don’t capture people who use a car frequently for leisure purposes or to go to school).[37]

Finally, Dr. Wortley supplemented the analysis of race-based data on failure to comply charges using TPS race-based arrest statistics as a benchmark. This addresses arguments that benchmarking failure to comply charges using general populations statistics “does not capture the population ‘at risk’ of facing failure to comply offences.”[38]

 

 Street checks, stops, and searches

Dr. Wortley examined TPS street checks, stops and searches in his expert report, Racial Profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, Consequences and Policy Options (see Appendix 2).[39]

The street check data consisted of pre-regulated street checks and regulated interactions from 2008 to 2019. The pre-regulated street checks were from 2008 to 2013. Only cases where the officer recorded the race of the carded person were included in his analysis. This data includes the person’s name and home address, the reason for the stop, the location and time of the encounter, the person’s age, gender and skin colour, and often information on the person’s associates (i.e., individuals accompanying the subject civilian) and specific comments about the encounter with police. Dr. Wortley broke down the data by race, analyzing the results for Toronto residents, controlling for things such as people who have been stopped on multiple occasions, incidents involving young males aged 15 to 24, and the reason for the stop.[40]

He did a similar analysis for TPS data for 2014. There was no street check data for 2015 and 2016 as the TPS declared a moratorium on street checks. Dr. Wortley used population estimates from the 2006 Census for his analysis of data from 2008 to 2013, and population estimates from the 2016 Census in his analysis of data from 2014 to 2019[41].

Dr. Wortley examined TPS statistics on Regulated Interactions under Ontario’s street checks regulation, Collecting Identifying Information in Certain Circumstances,[42] for 2017 to 2019.[43]

Dr. Wortley also compared the street check data from Toronto to data from other Ontario cities, including Peel, Ottawa, London, Kingston and Hamilton, and analyzed the impact of gender.[44]

Dr. Wortley examined qualitative research and survey data on stops and searches in Toronto, including:

• The Toronto Guns and Youth Violence Project, which involved “in-depth interviews [from 2018 and 2019] with 492 young people, 16–24 years of age, residing in economically disadvantaged, high-crime communities within the City of Toronto.”[45]
• Smaller-scale qualitative studies conducted since 2017 and the enactment of Ontario’s street check regulation. The studies focus on Black youth from “disadvantaged communities.”[46]

Dr. Wortley re-analyzed data from the Black Experience Project (Environics Institute 2017) – a 2015 survey that explored the opinions of 1,504 Black residents, 16 years or older, from the Greater Toronto Area.[47]

Dr. Wortley’s also examined two surveys conducted from 2017 onwards:

• Perceptions of the Toronto Police and the Impact of Rule Changes Under Regulation 58/16: A Community Survey, commissioned by the Toronto Police Services Board and conducted in 2017. The report described the results of a survey of 1500 people.^[48] 
• Race and Criminal Injustice: An examination of public perceptions of and experiences with the Ontario criminal justice system, a survey conducted in 2019 and commissioned by the Canadian Association of Black Lawyers (CABL), Legal Aid Ontario and the Lincoln Alexander School of Law. The report described the results of a 2019 Environics survey of 1,450 residents, aged 18 or over from the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).^[49]

^​

Review of case law

The OHRC examined case law, including appellate jurisprudence and decisions from the criminal and civil courts.

Appellate jurisprudence on key concepts related to anti-Black racism, systemic racism, and systemic racial discrimination is discussed in Chapter 3 – Anti-Black racism in policing in Toronto.

In Chapter 9 – Accountability and monitoring mechanisms: gaps in data management, performance review and public transparency, the OHRC identified:

• case law with explicit findings of racial profiling or racial discrimination of Black people by TPS officers
• criminal cases with Charter violations that did not assess whether there was racial profiling or racial discrimination but where an inference may be drawn that race was a factor. The cases identified by the OHRC are not exhaustive of criminal cases that may support an inference of racial discrimination or racial profiling of Black people by the TPS.

 

Review of policies and procedures

The OHRC requested policies, procedures, and training documents that existed from 2010 to 2017 from the TPS and the TPSB.[50] The OHRC received and reviewed TPS and TPSB documents relating to charge, arrests and releases, stop and search activities, use of force, and anti-racism initiatives.

The OHRC also requested some updated and additional documents, particularly if they were relevant to potential recommendations. The TPS and TPSB provided these documents for the most part. The only exceptions were:

• The incomplete draft report on the evaluation of the Police and Community Engagement Review (PACER)
• TPS analysis of the data requested by the OHRC in the context of this Inquiry
• Signed acknowledgements confirming that the OHRC’s interview notes reflected the content of the interviews from:
• Mark Saunders, former Chief of the TPS
• Myron Demkiw, then-Staff Superintendent of Corporate Risk Management.

The OHRC analyzed the documents in light of research on best practices, human rights case law, legislation and regulations, and recommendations made by previous inquests and reports, such as the coroner’s inquest into the death of Andrew Loku.[51] This analysis included identifying positive and negative components of the policies, procedures and training, and identifying areas for further improvements. The OHRC also identified areas where further information was required, and then posed these questions to both the TPS and TPSB.

 

Outreach to TPS officers and the TPSB

At the launch of the Inquiry, the OHRC committed to receiving information from affected individuals, groups and organizations, including TPS officers.

The OHRC provided an email to the TPS in December 2019, and an updated version was sent to all officers in March 2021, inviting them to share their thoughts on the Inquiry and related areas such as:[52]

• training, policies and procedures, and performance management related to racial profiling and racial discrimination
• the relationship between the TPS and Black communities
• the culture of the TPS as it might contribute to racial discrimination.

Only five officers agreed to be interviewed or provided detailed feedback.

The OHRC conducted a confidential and voluntary online survey of TPS uniform officers below the rank of inspector. The survey was open between October 12 and 26, 2022. Officers were invited to share their perspectives on issues of racism, particularly anti-Black racism, both within the TPS and with respect to officer interactions with civilians. The TPS supported the survey and provided a description and link to the survey to all officers and civilian staff by internal email and on the TPS Intranet.

The OHRC received 113 responses to the survey. An additional 152 survey responses were excluded from the analysis: 11 respondents declined to provide their consent for the OHRC to collect their survey responses, 110 respondents declined to provide name or badge number to participate in the survey, and 31 respondents were disqualified because they were not uniform officers below the rank of inspector of the TPS[53].

The OHRC interviewed uniform and civilian members of the Black Internal Support Network (BISN), an affinity group of the TPS, to learn about their experiences of anti-Black racism within TPS, police culture, training, policies, procedures, accountability mechanisms relating to racial profiling and discrimination, and the relationship between the TPS and Black communities. A Chief’s direction (649 memorandum) was issued, which allowed the OHRC to reach out to BISN members directly and that no disciplinary action would be taken based on the interviews.

The OHRC also reached out to officers through a public call at the launch of the Inquiry and interviewed two former and one current officer through this process.

The OHRC conducted interviews with members of the TPS senior command about policies and procedures, anti-racism initiatives, accountability mechanisms, and responses to reports, to understand how TPS procedures are operationalized. The OHRC provided the TPS with a list of question areas and any documents that would be referenced in the interview in advance. Interviews were conducted with the following persons. Their titles below reflect their positions at the time of the interview[AL1] :

• Superintendent Domenic Sinopoli, Professional Standards Unit
• Deputy Chief Shawna Coxon, Communities and Neighbourhoods Command
• Deputy Chief Peter Yuen, Primary Response Command
• Inspector Stacy Clarke, 14^th Division
• Deputy Chief Barbara McLean, Human Resources Command
• Suelyn Knight, Manager, Equity, Inclusion and Human Rights Unit
• Staff Superintendent Myron Demkiw, Corporate Risk Management
• Superintendent Christopher Kirkpatrick, Toronto Police College
• Chief Mark Saunders
• Dana Styra, Manager, Audit and Quality Assurance Unit
• Staff Superintendent Robert Johnson, Strategy and Risk Management
• James Cornish, Strategic Advisor to the Chief
• Staff Superintendent Peter Code, Professional Standards Unit
• Inspector Andrew Ecklund, Equity, Inclusion and Human Rights Unit
• Colin Stairs, Chief Information Officer, TPS
• Ian Williams, Director of Information Management, TPS
• Superintendent Frank Barredo, Toronto Police College
• Chief James Ramer.

The OHRC also interviewed Peter Duncan, an Instructor at the Toronto Police College.

Where questions could not be answered during the interview, the OHRC followed up in writing and the TPS provided a response. The OHRC also received written responses to questions from Ian Williams, Manager of Analytics and Innovation.

The OHRC provided the TPSB with a list of questions about its policies and procedures, anti-racism initiatives, accountability mechanisms and responses to reports. The TPSB provided answers in writing.

Interviews with the TPSB included:

• Uppala Chandrasekera, former TPSB board member, fomer  co-chair of the TPSB’s Anti-Racism Advisory Panel, and former member of the TPSB’s Mental Health and Addictions Advisory Panel
• Ryan Teschner, former Executive Director and Chief of Staff, TPSB
• Jim Hart, then-Chair of the TPSB.[D(2] 

The OHRC also interviewed Notisha Massaquoi, former community co-chair of the TPSB’s Anti-Racism Advisory Panel, and Steven Lurie and Jennifer Chambers, community co-chairs of the TPSB’s Mental Health and Addictions Panel (MHAAP).

 

Review of TPS accountability mechanisms

The OHRC compiled a list of eight HRTO and court cases decided between 2009 and 2017 where there was a finding of racial profiling or racial discrimination. The OHRC also identified four court decisions where judges did not assess whether there was racial profiling or racial discrimination, but an inference may be drawn that there was racial profiling or racial discrimination of Black people based on the findings of the judges.

The OHRC made a request to the TPS for any notices of hearing or decisions of the TPS Disciplinary Tribunal,[54] and any records on minor unit-level counseling or remedial training that were not referred to the Chief’s office or Professional Standards Unit, associated with the conduct referred to in these cases.

More broadly, the OHRC also asked for the number of officers who were disciplined for engaging in racial discrimination, racial harassment, or racially-biased policing since 2010, and for any resulting decisions of the TPS Disciplinary Tribunal.

Finally, the OHRC reviewed the SIU Director’s letters to the Chief of Police from 2013 to 2017 arising from SIU investigations where the SIU Director raised concerns about potential police misconduct or problems with the investigation. The OHRC identified 27 cases of potential officer misconduct flagged by the SIU Director. The OHRC identified three cases which raise concerns of racial profiling or racial discrimination of Black people. The letters to the Chief do not state that the civilians are Black, and the SIU did not expressly raise concerns of racial profiling or racial discrimination in the letters.

The OHRC asked the TPS to provide any decisions of the TPS Disciplinary Tribunal and any Notices of Hearing for the TPS Disciplinary Tribunal associated with the misconduct flagged by the SIU Director in the letters to the Chief.

 

 Outreach to Black communities

The OHRC committed to “receive information from affected individuals, interested groups and organizations.”[55] Recognizing the diversity within Black communities, the OHRC put out a public call for organizations and individuals to discuss their experiences of anti-Black racism involving the TPS. A dedicated phone line and email were set up to receive submissions. The OHRC conducted follow-up interviews in person and by phone with people who reported experiences within the scope of the Inquiry.

On the advice of Black community leaders, the OHRC also worked with several organizations that serve Black communities and/or challenge anti-Black racism, to hold focus groups and gather experiences of Black persons with the TPS that fell within the scope of the inquiry. This included asking individuals and organizations how the Toronto police should address anti-Black racism.

Organizations that assisted with outreach included:

• Across Boundaries
• Black Action Defense Committee
• Black Legal Action Centre
• Black Muslim Initiative
• Colour of Poverty – Colour of Change
• Canadian Association of Black Lawyers
• Canadian Civil Liberties Association
• Centre Francophone du Grand Toronto
• Community Legal Aid Services Program of Osgoode Hall Law School
• For Youth Initiative
• Human Rights Legal Support Centre
• Jamaican Canadian Association
• Midaynta Community Services
• Ontario Justice Education Network
• Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth and HairStory (have since been discontinued)
• Rathburn Area Youth Program
• Rexdale Community Hub
• Rexdale Community Legal Clinic
• Success Beyond Limits.
• Urban Alliance on Race Relations

The OHRC met with approximately 190 individuals from Black communities, including in Malvern, Central Etobicoke, Jane and Finch, and York South-Weston. The majority spoke to the OHRC as part of focus groups that were co-organized with these organizations, which identified and reached out to the participants. The OHRC also arranged further meetings with individuals who wanted to share their stories outside of focus groups.

The OHRC also consulted with Black community leaders on its recommendations to the TPS and TPSB. The questions for each consultation were tailored to the knowledge and expertise of each community leader/organization. Leaders included:

• Fareeda Adam (Staff Lawyer, Black Legal Action Centre)
• Jacqueline Edwards (President, Association of Black Law Enforcers)
• Louis March (Founder, Zero Gun Violence)
• Samantha Peters (lawyer, researcher and educator at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law)
• Aseefa Sarang (Across Boundaries)
• Dr. Sam Tecle (Jane-Finch Action Against Poverty/New College U of T)
• Lori Anne Thomas (who spoke with the OHRC as then-president, Canadian Association of Black Lawyers, before being appointed as to the Ontario Court of Justice) and Jaqueline Beckles (Secretary, CABL)
• Brittany Amofah (Board member, Urban Alliance on Race Relations)

 

Review of ongoing and post-2017 TPS and TPSB initiatives

The OHRC reviewed ongoing and post-2017 TPS and TPSB initiatives designed to address racism in police services. Initiatives included:

• the TPSB’s 2020 Police Reform Report[56] and the implementation of its recommendations
• 2020-2022 training on anti-Black racism that was part of the In-Service Training Program
• policies and procedures re artificial intelligence, body-worn cameras and race-based data collection, analysis, and reporting
• the TPS’s report on its analysis of 2020 race-based data on use of force and strip searches released in 2022, which included 38 action items.[57]

This final report’s references to TPS and TPSB initiatives and materials are current as of the time of writing, which is July 2023. However, we acknowledge that the TPS or TPSB may have updated relevant initiatives or undertaken new ones that are not reflected in this report.

 

The policy roundtable

In May 2022, the OHRC, TPS and TPSB held a policy roundtable to discuss important issues identified during the inquiry, and to consider recommendations for change. Participants included members of Black communities, government, academic, policing, and other stakeholders. Issues explored included: discipline, data collection, training, and education; the nature and extent of discriminatory exercise of discretion and the role of Crown counsel; use of force; accountability and enforcement mechanisms.

Participants are listed below. Their titles reflect their positions at the time of interview[AL3] :

• Jacqueline Edwards, President, Association of Black Law Enforcers
• Matt Torigian, Distinguished Fellow, Munk School of Global Affairs & Former Chief of Police for Waterloo Regional Police Service
• Patricia Kosseim, Ontario Information Privacy Commissioner
• Dr. Sam[AL4]  Tecle, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University
• David Bosveld, Founder, Black Education Fund
• Ryan Teschner, Executive Director & Chief of Staff, TPSB
• Nishan Duraiappah, Chief, Peel Regional Police
• James Cornish, Strategic Advisor, TPS
• Larry Vieira, General Legal Counsel, Toronto Police Association
• Sarah Caldwell, Director of Community Safety and Intergovernmental Affairs, Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General
• Moya Teklu, Executive Director, Black Legal Action Centre
• Nadia Gouveia, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Toronto Community Housing
• Clinton Reid, Founder, Collective Impact
• Kike Ojo-Thompson, EDI Consultant, Executive Director of KOJO Institute
• Stephen McCammon, Legal Counsel, Ontario Information Privacy Commission
• Todd Foglesong, Fellow-in-Residence, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy
• Ainsworth Morgan, Co-Chair, TPS Anti-Racism Advisory Panel
• Antje McNeely, Chief, Kingston Police Service
• Andy Marsh, Chief Constable and Chief Executive Officer, UK College of Policing
• Danielle Dowdy, Senior Advisor, TPSB
• Nigel Barriffe, President, Urban Alliance on Race Relations
• Stephen Leach, Ontario Independent Police Review Director
• Paula Di Nota, PhD, Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, University of Toronto
• Andrew Locke, Director of Crown Operations, Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
• Anthony Odoardi, Deputy Chief, Peel Regional Police
• Declan Sullivan, Program Associate, Georgetown Law Center for Innovations in Community Safety
• James Ramer, Chief, TPS
• Ian Williams, Director of Information Management, TPS
• Jon Reid, President, Toronto Police Association
• Anthony Morgan, Co-Chair, TPS Anti-Racist Advisory Panel
• Paul Bailey, Executive Director, Black Health Alliance
• Abby Deshman, Lawyer & Director of the Criminal Justice Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
• Jennifer Chambers, Executive Director, Empowerment Council
• Myron Demkiw, then-Acting Deputy Chief, TPS
• Stephen Menseh, Executive Director, Toronto Youth Council
• Dan Kinsella, Chief, Halifax Regional Police
• Jim Hart, Chair, TPSB
• Ken Weatherill, Inspector of General Policing, Ministry of the Solicitor General
• Roy Austin Jr. (Vice President of Civil Rights, Deputy General Counsel & former Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The OHRC conducted follow-up interviews with the following roundtable participants to gather additional information and perspectives:

• Stephen McCammon, Counsel, Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
• Andrew Locke, Director of Crown Operations (Toronto Region)
• Stephen Leach, Independent Police Review Director
• Nana Yanful, Legal Director of Black Legal Action Centre
• Andy Marsh, CEO of the College of Policing, England and Wales
• Todd Foglesong, Fellow-in-Residence, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy
• Anthony Morgan, Manager, Confronting Anti-Black Racism Unit, City of Toronto.

Prior to the roundtable, the OHRC also interviewed Joseph Martino, Director of the Special Investigations Unit.

 

OHRC visit to the Toronto Police College

On March 23, 2023, the OHRC was invited to attend a full day of training at the Toronto Police College (TPC). The TPC provided samples of training sessions that TPS officers receive in their In-Service training.

Samples included classroom lectures on Anti-Black racism and de-escalation, firearms training, judgement training scenarios which involved virtual interactions, and dynamic simulations involving interactions with live actors.

Members of the OHRC actively participated in each of the sample components of training. Following this visit, the TPC provided the OHRC with additional materials related to their 2023 In-Service training.

 

OHRC recommendations

The OHRC researched best practices from Canada, the U.S., and the U.K. to identify, monitor, and address racial profiling, racial discrimination and anti-Black racism in policing, including recommendations made by previous inquests and reports, such as the coroner’s inquest into the death of Andrew Loku.

The OHRC’s recommendations apply the principles set out in its Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement.[58] They were developed in consultation with Black communities and organizations, Black community leaders, experts, the TPS, TPSB, and TPA. Input was also provided by Dr. Wortley and Senator Gwen Boniface, former Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police.

Some of the OHRC’s recommendations require provincewide action, while others can be acted upon by the TPS and TPSB.

 

---

 

Appendix 5 Endnotes 

_{[1] Dr. Wortley has been qualified as an expert by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario – see Smith v Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, [2004] OJ No 3410 at para. 70; R. v Douse, [2009] OJ No 2874 at para 104; Tahmourpour v Canada (RCMP), [2008] C.H.R.D. No. 10 at para 31; Nassiah v Peel (Regional Municipality) Services Board, 2007 HRTO 14 at para. 23; Maynard v Toronto Police Services Board, 2012 HRTO 1220 at paras 139 and 142; See also “Faculty Directory: Scot Wortley,” online: University of Toronto www.crimsl.utoronto.ca/people/directories/all-faculty/scot-wortley.}

_{[2] “Faculty Directory: Ayobami Laniyonu,” online: University of Toronto www.crimsl.utoronto.ca/people/directories/all-faculty/ayobami-laniyonu.}

_{[3] “Faculty and Research: Erick Laming,” online: Trent University https://www.trentu.ca/criminology/faculty-research/erick-laming.}

_{[4] “Faculty Directory: Maria Jung,” online: Toronto Metropolitan University https://www.torontomu.ca/criminology/people/faculty-directory/jung-maria/.}

_{[5] Scot Wortley, “Police use of Force in Ontario: An Examination of Data from the Special Investigations Unit, Final Report” (2006). Research project conducted on behalf of the African Canadian Legal Clinic for submission to the Ipperwash Inquiry, online (pdf): www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/inquiries/ipperwash/policy_part/projects/pdf/AfricanCanadianClinicIpperwashProject_SIUStudybyScotWortley.pdf.}

_{[6] OHRC, A Collective Impact: Interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service (2018) at 78–79, online: OHRC, www.ohrc.on.ca/en/public-interest-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-discrimination-toronto-police-service/collective-impact-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[7] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 116–124, online: OHRC www.ohrc.on.ca/en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[8] OHRC, A Collective Impact: Interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service (2018) at 21–25, online: OHRC www.ohrc.on.ca/en/public-interest-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-discrimination-toronto-police-service/collective-impact-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[9] RRO 1990, Reg 296, s 15.5(1).}

_{[10] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 87, online: OHRC www.ohrc.on.ca/en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[11] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 87–88, onlineOHRCwww.ohrc.on.ca/en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[12] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 98–115, online: www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Use%20of%20force%20by%20the%20Toronto%20Police%20Service%20Final%20report.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[13] OHRC, A Disparate Impact Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 116–125, online: www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Use%20of%20force%20by%20the%20Toronto%20Police%20Service%20Final%20report.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[14] Dr. Maria Jung is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Criminology of Toronto Metropolitan University. Among other courses, she teaches advanced qualitative and quantitative research methods and has expertise in multivariate analysis. Her work on race and the criminal justice system has been published in peer-reviewed journals; www.torontomu.ca/criminology/people/faculty-directory/jung-maria/ .} 

_{[15] OHRC, A Disparate Impact (August 2020), “Alternative explanations,” online: OHRC www.ohrc.on.ca/en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[16] Scot Wortley et al., Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service: Final Report (July 2020) at 116–126, online (pdf): OHRC www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Use%20of%20force%20by%20the%20Toronto%20Police%20Service%20Final%20report.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[17] Maria Jung, Independent Expert Review of the Data, Analysis, and Conclusions of “Part E: Multivariate Analysis of Use of Force Cases” of the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service report (December 2022). Online: https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/correction-disparate-impact}  

_{[18] Maria Jung, Independent Expert Review of the Data, Analysis, and Conclusions of “Part E: Multivariate Analysis of Use of Force Cases” of the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service report (December 2022) at 10 online: https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/correction-disparate-impact}

_{[19] Maria Jung, Independent Expert Review of the Data, Analysis, and Conclusions of “Part E: Multivariate Analysis of Use of Force Cases” of the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service report (December 2022) at 2-3, online: https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/correction-disparate-impact}

_{[20] Maria Jung, Independent Expert Review of the Data, Analysis, and Conclusions of “Part E: Multivariate Analysis of Use of Force Cases” of the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service report (December 2022) at 3 online: https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/correction-disparate-impact}

_{[21] Maria Jung, Independent Expert Review of the Data, Analysis, and Conclusions of “Part E: Multivariate Analysis of Use of Force Cases” of the Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service report (December 2022) at 3 online: https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/correction-disparate-impact}

_{[22] OHRC, Terms of Reference, Inquiry into racial discrimination and racial profiling of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, (30 November 2017), online: www.ohrc.on.ca/en/terms-reference-tps; see Appendix 7 - Terms of Reference.}

_{[23] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 11, online (pdf): www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[24] For example, the CIPS data was provided in 15 datasets that had to be cleaned, sorted and merged.}

_{[25] In Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service, Dr. Wortley stated that Asian, Brown and Indigenous racial categories were combined into a single racial category called “other racial minority” because:}

_{“First of all, although we can conclude that the “Brown” category is “non-White,” we cannot use it to benchmark a specific racial group. Secondly, the focus of the inquiry is anti-Black racism. Thus, the following analysis focuses on how Black people are treated compared to their White and “other racial minority” counterparts. Finally, a more refined analysis, including the Indigenous, Brown and Asian categories, shows that these groups are either under-represented in TPS arrests (Asians and Brown people) or represented at a level that is equal to their presence in the general population (Indigenous people). Therefore, as the following analysis will reveal, Black people are the only racial group that is significantly over-represented in the charge statistics that are the focus of this inquiry.”}

_{OHRC, A Disparate Impact Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Use of Force by the Toronto Police Service Report (2020) at 15 online (pdf) www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Use%20of%20force%20by%20the%20Toronto%20Police%20Service%20Final%20report.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[26] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 15, online (pdf): www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[27] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 108-115, online (pdf):  www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[28] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 12, online (pdf): www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[29] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 12 online (pdf): www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[30] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 12-13 online (pdf):  www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20and%20Charges%20TPS.pdf#overlay-context=en/disparate-impact-second-interim-report-inquiry-racial-profiling-and-racial-discrimination-black.}

_{[31] OHRC, A Disparate Impact: Second interim report on the inquiry into racial profiling and racial discrimination of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service, Documenting Racial Disparity: An analysis of arrest and charge data from the Toronto Police Service (2020) at 12–13, online (pdf): www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Racial%20Disparity%20in%20Arrests%20a....}

_{[32] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 3-4.}

_{[33] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 3-4.}

_{[34] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022)}

_{[35] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 4.}

_{[36] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 13-14.}

_{[37] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 23-24}

_{[38] Scot Wortley and Ayobami Laniyonu, “Addendum report: Additional benchmarking of TPS use of force and charge data” (November 2022) at 31-32}

_{[39] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021).}

_{[40] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options, OHRC (September 2021) at 36-56.}

_{[41] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 36-56.}

_{[42] O Reg 58/16.}

_{[43] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 36-56.}

_{[44] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 36-56.}

_{[45] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 56–57}

_{[46] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 21.}

_{[47] See Appendix 2, Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 30-35.}

_{[48] Gervan Fearon and Carlyle Farrell, Perceptions of the Toronto Police and the Impact of Rule Changes Under Regulation 58/16: A Community Survey (Toronto Police Services Board, 2017)..}

_{[49] CABL, “Race and Criminal Justice: New report from CABL, Ryerson’s Faculty of Law and the University of Toronto confirms significant racial differences in perceptions and experiences with the Ontario criminal justice system” (10 February 2021), online: https://cabl.ca/race-and-criminal-injustice-new-report-from-cabl-ryersons-faculty-of-law-and-the-university-of-toronto-confirms-significant-racial-differences-in-perceptions-and-experiences-with-the-ontari/;  See Appendix 2 Scot Wortley, Racial profiling and the Toronto Police Service: Evidence, consequences and policy options OHRC (September 2021) at 58-59.}

_{[50] OHRC Inquiry letters to the Toronto Police Service and Toronto Police Services Board, Inquiry into racial discrimination and racial profiling of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service (30 November 2017). See Appendix 10.}

_{[51] Office of the Chief Coroner, Jury Recommendations Inquest into the death of Andrew Loku (30 June 2017) at recommendations 1 and 8.}

_{[52] Letter from the Ontario Human Rights Commission to Toronto Police Services Uniform Members – The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) wants to hear from you (3 March 2021).}

_{[53] For more information about the survey, please see Chapter 4 – Consultations with Black communities, community agencies, and police.} 

_{[54] Cases that proceed to the TPS Disciplinary Tribunal originate from public complaints of officer misconduct to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director or internal complaints.}

_{[55] OHRC Terms of Reference, Inquiry into racial discrimination and racial profiling of Black persons by the Toronto Police Service (30 November 2017), online: www.ohrc.on.ca/en/terms-reference-tps; See Appendix 7.}

_{[56] TPSB, Police Reform in Toronto: Systemic Racism, Alternative Community Safety and Crisis Response Models and Building New Confidence in Public Safety (2020), online: https://tpsb.ca/jdownloads-categories/send/32-agendas/631-august-18-2020-agenda. TPSB, Police Reform Implementation Dashboard, online: https://tpsb.ca/consultations-and-publications/policing-reform-implementation.}

_{[57] TPS, Race & Identity Based Data Collection Strategy: Understanding Use of Force & Strip Searches in 2020 – Detailed Report (June 2022) at Appendix A – Action Plan, online (pdf): www.tps.ca/media/filer_public/93/04/93040d36-3c23-494c-b88b-d60e3655e88b/98ccfdad-fe36-4ea5-a54c-d610a1c5a5a1.pdf.}

_{[58] OHRC, Policy on eliminating racial profiling in law enforcement (2019), online: www.ohrc.on.ca/en/policy-eliminating-racial-profiling-law-enforcement.}