Alberta’s police watchdog says no charges will be laid against a Calgary police officer who forcefully took a 12-year-old autistic boy to the pavement, leaving the child with a fractured skull.The Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe the officer committed an offence during the August 2018 incident, but the Alberta Crown Prosecution Service (ACPS) recommended against charges.“Based on the opinion provided by the ACPS, no charges will be laid,” ASIRT said in its report.The incident happened Aug. 21, 2018, after the boy’s mother called 911 from the family’s Calgary home because she was concerned about his mental health.The boy, identified in the report only as the affected person, or AP, had been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. His mother told police he had become extremely upset following an argument with his brother and had not taken his medication for five days.She wanted police assistance taking him to Alberta Children’s Hospital for crisis intervention and help with his medication.Two Calgary Police Service officers arrived at the home and Emergency Medical Services was called to assess the boy. Paramedics determined he could be transported to hospital by his parents and left.The boy initially refused to leave his bedroom but eventually calmed after speaking with his father and began walking toward the police vehicle.He then went into an upstairs bathroom.According to ASIRT, one officer entered the bathroom and took hold of the boy. The child panicked and struggled as officers escorted him downstairs and outside.The boy’s father told investigators the child was about five-foot-three and weighed approximately 90 pounds.Surveillance video from a neighbour’s home showed both officers escorting the boy toward their police vehicle while he pulled backward and braced his legs.When they reached the vehicle, one officer — identified by ASIRT as the subject officer — took control of both of the boy’s arms and pressed him against the side of the police SUV. The officer’s right leg was positioned between the boy’s legs.The other officer moved away to open the vehicle.The boy then shouted, “Bastard!”“Almost immediately afterward, the SO used a rapid twisting motion combined with a downward movement and took the AP to the ground,” ASIRT said..The surveillance recording captured a loud impact consistent with the boy’s head striking the pavement.Moments later, the subject officer said, “He fell.”When the boy’s father accused the officer of throwing his son to the ground, the officer responded: “I didn’t mean it.”The officer later said the child “spun up over my leg.”The boy was taken by ambulance to Alberta Children’s Hospital, where doctors diagnosed him with a basal skull fracture. Surgery was not required, and he was treated with Tylenol and Advil before being medically cleared.The boy later told a forensic psychologist he remembered the officer shoving or throwing him sideways to the ground. His next memory was waking in the ambulance while coughing up blood, vomiting and feeling dizzy.The boy’s mother told investigators the officer had control of her son immediately before he hit the ground.“In her opinion, there was no way that the AP just fell,” the report said.The boy’s father went further, telling investigators he believed the officer became angry after the child called him a “bastard” and immediately threw him face-first onto the pavement.The subject officer exercised his right not to participate in an interview or provide investigators with a statement..ASIRT said police are permitted under the Criminal Code to use as much force as necessary in carrying out their duties, but that force must be proportionate, necessary and reasonable.“The SO was dealing with a 12-year-old child and brought him forcefully down to pavement,” the report said.“An injury is predictable when you bring someone down to pavement forcefully and the head is a very likely spot for this injury. All blows to the head risk serious injury.”ASIRT also noted another officer was only about a metre away and available to assist.The watchdog determined there were reasonable grounds to believe the subject officer had committed an offence and referred the case to ACPS on Sept. 16, 2025.However, prosecutors recommended on May 14, 2026 that no charges be laid.ASIRT said the two agencies apply different legal standards. ASIRT determines whether reasonable grounds exist to believe an offence occurred, while prosecutors consider whether there is a reasonable likelihood of conviction and whether prosecution is in the public interest.“In this case, while ASIRT found reasonable grounds to believe an offence had been committed, for the reasons provided in their opinion, the ACPS did not recommend that charges be laid,” the report said.As a result, the officer will not face criminal charges.
