(Re) 1607-04053, 2017 ONCICB 38

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD

Adjudicator: George Berrigan

Date: February 19, 2017

Indexed as: (Re) 1607-04053

ORDER

Introduction

1The Applicant asks the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (CICB) to compensate him for injuries resulting from a crime of violence in accordance with the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act, RSO 1990, c. C. 24, as amended (the “Act”). The Applicant was on duty as a Police Officer when he was injured while attempting to arrest the Offender.

2The Offender was charged, found guilty, and convicted of Uttering Threats pursuant to section 264.1 of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-46. He was sentenced to one day incarceration.

Issue

3The issue before the CICB is whether or not the Applicant suffered any injury as a result of a crime of violence within the meaning of subsection 5(a) of the Act. If the answer is in the affirmative, the CICB must determine whether the Applicant is compensable and what the appropriate amount of compensation will be.

Evidence

4The information described herein is based on the information contained in the Application and in the appended documents including the Police Reports and reports from the Hospital.

5The Applicant states he located the Offender who was wanted on an outstanding “bench warrant”. As the Applicant proceeded to arrest the male, the male stated he would stab the Applicant. The applicant deployed his Taser, which did not work because of the Offender’s heavy clothing. The Offender ran with the Applicant in foot pursuit. The Applicant eventually caught up with the Offender, who refused to submit to arrest. The Taser was once more deployed and a struggle ensued before the Offender was handcuffed.

6As to injuries the Applicant states he sustained a deep laceration to his right thumb. The nail of his left ring finger was torn off. He states he sustained a pulled muscle in his back. For several days after the incident he experienced pain where the fingernail was and to his upper back. He states he was unable to function and had to stay in bed due to the back pain. The nail bed continued to bleed and when he struck it against the wall he felt dizzy and light headed. As this occurred on his last shift, he was unable to enjoy his days off. The pain subsided after three days and he returned to work.

7A report from the ambulance service states the nail on the 4 finger of the right hand was split and lifted with the nail bleeding. There was bleeding to a minor avulsion of the right thumb which was controlled.

8A triage report from the Hospital states the chief complaint was he had an injury and laceration to his right hand and finger bleeding. The bleeding was controlled. No sutures were required. The emergency record notes the injury to the hand and further states there were issues with the shoulder blade, unfortunately further references are indecipherable. Upon discharge it was recommended that the Applicant apply polysporin and allow the broken nail to grow out.

Analysis and Decision

9Section 11 of the Act, states that proof of conviction shall be taken as conclusive evidence that the offence has been committed. The next issue is whether or not the Applicant suffered injury, which would make him a victim within the meaning of section 5(a) of the Act. The Act defines injury as “actual bodily harm”.

10The conviction relates to a charge of uttering a threat, the CICB assumes that conviction relates to the offender saying he would stab the applicant. The Applicant has not provided therapy or medical reports or other information that would lead the CICB to conclude that he suffered psychological or emotional injuries as a result of the threat. As a result the CICB is unable to conclude he was injured as a result of the threat.

11As to the physical injuries, the Applicant states he suffered a deep laceration to his thumb and a fingernail was torn off. He also suffered back pain that left him bed ridden for three days, before returning to work. The emergency and ambulance record refer to the thumb injury as being a minor avulsion that did not require suturing. There is a minor reference to the Applicant’s complaint of shoulder pain in the hospital records. However, there is no physiotherapy or other medical report that describe the shoulder injury.

12The CICB must decide if a torn finger nail, minor avulsion to the thumb (that did not require sutures) and /or the passing shoulder pain can be construed as actual bodily harm. The Criminal Code definition of bodily harm is an injury that interferes with the health and comfort of an individual and is more than transient or trifling in nature.

13The CICB notes that the Applicant returned to work after his days off with no apparent restrictions.

14There is no evidence to suggest that the back pain, broken finger nail, and minor cut to the thumb were more than transient in nature. As a result they do not meet a definition of bodily harm as contemplated by the Act.

15As a result of the foregoing the CICB finds the Applicant did not suffer injury as a result of a crime of violence.

16The claim is denied.