No charges after man in mental health crisis bitten by police dog

Manitoba’s police watchdog is not pressing charges against RCMP officers involved in an incident in Dauphin last year when a man experiencing a mental health crisis suffered serious wounds from being bitten by a police dog.

The Independent Investigation Unit of Manitoba sought advice from the province’s prosecution services, which said the standard to lay charges had not been met, a report from the IIU civilian director said on Monday.

The man sustained serious injuries during his arrest on June 3, 2025. He was admitted to a hospital for stitches of a “deep and triangular laceration” on his calf area and to treat other puncture wounds.

“Antibiotics were required by IV, and he was taken into the operating room to address the wound,” the IIU report said.

Mounties were notified of a man experiencing a mental health crisis who had ingested multiple prescription medication pills and was staying at the Canway Hotel on Main Street South with his parents after the family lost their home due to wildfires in the area, the report said.

The man’s father and his friend both called 911 and said he was not armed with a weapon.

The RCMP used police dogs and a drone to help find the man after he left the hotel and his location was unknown.

Police tracked his phone, which showed he was hiding in a dense brush area in a cemetery.

The man, who was interviewed by investigators more than a week after the incident, said he saw a car drive by and assumed it was looking for him, but he stayed in the cemetery.

He was approached by two police officers and a police dog, but he didn’t know they were RCMP at first because they “did not identify themselves or yell at him,” the report said.

“His first contact with the officers was the police dog biting his leg,” the civilian director said in the report.

He said the officers started yelling at him to put his hands in the air and he listened. Despite asking the officers to stop the dog from biting him, the canine continued until the man was handcuffed, the report said.

Once the dog stopped, officers assisted the man to the road and waited for an ambulance.

The report said no one explained to the man why a police dog was used without warning him and that the man suggested officers “attempted to rationalize the use of the dog by saying he could have died if he was not found.”

The man confirmed that police did not use any other form of force besides the police dog in the incident.

Body-worn camera footage from two officers showed them entering the brush area without saying a word, followed by the man yelling “Ow” as one of the officers directs the dog to “hang him up.”

The same officer told the man to “show me your f—— hands” and continued stating “hang him up,” the report said.

The man responded by saying his hands were in the air and asked for the dog to stop biting him. The officer told the man to walk to his voice and he replied, saying “he can’t keep his hands up and get out of the woods because the dog is biting his leg.”

The officer said, “You should have f—— come out when you heard us” and “the dog is not coming off until you f—— comply,” the report said.

The footage showed the man sitting on the ground with his arms up and his legs out in front of him as the dog continued to bite his leg. Throughout the interaction, he remained “calm” and promised not to move if the dog got off him, the report said.

Once he was handcuffed, the officer directed the dog to stop biting, the footage showed.

Although the officer who directed the police dog to attack the man declined to be interviewed by investigators, he prepared two reports detailing what happened from his perspective.

In a police service dog report, the officer said people experiencing a mental health crisis are often armed and lash out violently.

He said the man would have heard police searching for him and was evading being taken into police custody.

The officer stated the man “made no efforts to negotiate a peaceful surrender” and he felt it was best to deploy the police dog — and keep the canine engaged — to maintain the safety of the officers until the man was handcuffed.

A use of force report written by the officer said the man’s “unusual” behaviour suggested he was armed and would ambush the police dog. He said the man was “pain tolerant, violent and not responsive to police presence.”

Investigators at the police oversight agency also interviewed three witness officers involved in the incident. One of the officers who handcuffed the man said he was “lethargic” and was “never aggressive.”

The IIU said it was concerned about the use of force and whether it was justifiable in the circumstances. The agency asked an independent expert to review the evidence.

The expert said there was no evidence indicating the man posed an imminent threat to the police or others, was armed or was attempting to ambush officers. The dog handler maintained physical control of the canine through a long leash, “which further reduced the need to escalate force to gain control or ensure officer safety,” the report said.

The expert also said the absence of a verbal compliance order or warning before sending the dog into a heavily wooded area was concerning and tactically unsound and unsafe as the man wasn’t a threat.

In February, the IIU asked the Crown to review and determine whether any charges should be authorized against the officer handling the dog. The Crown responded eight months later, advising that it was not recommending any charges, resulting in the IIU closing its investigation.

» tadamski@brandonsun.com