Informant was branded a ‘rat’ and attacked in jail after outing by Peel police, lawsuit claims

A confidential informant injured in a jailhouse attack by inmates after his identity was revealed by police has launched a multimillion-dollar civil lawsuit against Peel Regional Police.

The lawsuit was filed after a criminal court judge determined that the informant’s Charter rights had been breached and charges against the informant were stayed.

“The police encouraged T.B. to go out on a limb and then they sawed off the limb behind him/her,” Ontario Superior Court Judge F. Bruce Fitzpatrick wrote in his reasons in a 2020 judgment.

Fitzpatrick omitted details that could identify the informant, whose initials are not T.B. He did not name Peel police or identify the officers. 

CBC News located a statement of claim from a multimillion-dollar lawsuit an informant and his family have filed against Peel Regional Police, individual officers on the force west of Toronto, and the province of Ontario. The events described in the document align with events Fitzpatrick described in his ruling. 

“The police deliberately, blatantly and calculatingly disclosed T.B.’s identity,” Fitzpatrick wrote in his ruling.

Police tricked the man into believing he was not being recorded while he was unknowingly captured on camera providing information on serious crimes, according to the statement of claim. 

Criminal charges stayed

As a result of the police conduct, Fitzpatrick granted T.B.’s application to have criminal charges against him stayed, and said his Charter rights had been violated.

The officers named in the informant’s lawsuit deny his claims, which have not been tested in court. 

Peel police say none of the accused officers was disciplined. 

“We became aware of this matter as a result of a judicial finding,” Charles Payette, executive director in the Peel chief’s office, said in an email. “An internal investigation followed and no misconduct was substantiated.”

A Peel police task force was investigating what Fitzpatrick calls “a series of serious crimes” in 2016 when officers arrested T.B. on unrelated charges.

T.B. was the lone suspect in the serious crimes, according to Fitzpatrick, and task force members planned to place a tracker on his car and introduce him to an undercover officer.

Officer ‘deployed a trick,’ judge said

The plan went south when T.B. backed into the arresting officers’ car, but he agreed to an interview while in custody.

When T.B. asked that a camera be turned off, the interviewing officer, who was not a member of the task force, “deployed a trick,” according to Fitzpatrick: he told T.B. recording devices were off and then moved him to another room.

The man was then captured on camera providing information on murder, drug dealing and other crimes, according to his statement of claim. 

Roughly three months after T.B.’s interview, police arrested a man Fitzpatrick calls “Mr./Ms. X.,” who was once another suspect in the crimes for which T.B. was charged. X had not been charged with anything at the time, Fitzpatrick said.

Two task force officers told X that T.B. had identified X as the planner of serious crimes. When police told X that T.B.’s statement was recorded, X asked to see it. The officers obliged, according to Fitzpatrick.

The informant’s statement of claim identifies a man, who appears to be the same individual Fitzpatrick calls “X,” by his full name. 

X watched portions of the video twice, and police said they planned to play it for “‘five, six, seven of these people’ who have been implicated by T.B,” Fitzpatrick said.

“The interview with Mr./Ms. X was a set-up by the police to ensure that what T.B. had told them about other persons alleged to have committed criminal acts was communicated to the criminal element at large.”

X said they planned to speak to T.B. Police then released X.

‘Razor-like weapons’

The informant was watching television in a common area of Maplehurst Correctional Complex in Milton, Ont., in January 2018 when another inmate put him in a chokehold and pulled him to the floor, according to his statement of claim.

Two others joined the attack. The men called T.B. a “rat” and cut his face with “razor-like weapons,” Fitzpatrick said.

The judge said the brief attack appeared “pre-meditated” after watching it on video.

One of the attackers was supposed to be kept separate from the informant after deeming him a “rat” and threatening him, according to the statement of claim.

A corrections officer saw “a large pool of blood near the television” after responding to a radio report of a fight in progress, according to an occurrence report obtained by CBC News through a freedom of information request. 

“There was no direct evidence linking Mr./Ms. X to the assailants. I nevertheless find, on the balance of probabilities, that T.B. suffered an assault … because of information that was available to other inmates,” Fitzpatrick said. “That information came from the revelations made to Mr./Ms. X while he/she was in police custody.”

According to the statement of claim, the informant “wears the scars of the attack clearly on his face.”

The claim only partially identifies the interviewing officer and Peel’s investigative team by their last names.

Payette did not answer questions about the officers named in the suit, and said they would not comment.

A confidential informant injured in a jailhouse attack by inmates after his identity was outed by police has launched a multimillion-dollar civil lawsuit against Peel Regional Police.

The lawsuit was filed after a criminal court judge determined that the informant’s Charter rights had been breached and charges against the informant were dismissed.

“The police encouraged T.B. to go out on a limb and then they sawed off the limb behind him/her,” Ontario Superior Court Judge F. Bruce Fitzpatrick wrote in his reasons in a 2020 judgment.

Fitzpatrick said he agreed with a Crown submission that the interviewing officer did not explicitly promise T.B. confidentiality, but said officers were mistaken in believing the interview did not render him a confidential informant.

The interviewing officer offered T.B. help with a bail application in return for information, Fitzpatrick said, and spoke about creating a “business relationship” with T.B. 

T.B. was a confidential informant following the interview, Fitzpatrick said, a status that binds the police to protect the individual’s identity.

‘Near absolute privilege’

Ontario’s Crown Prosecution Manual says “the near absolute privilege” granted to informants “is meant to protect them against retribution from those involved in crime and to encourage continued information sharing.”

The Toronto Star reported in June that a Peel officer pleaded guilty to breach of trust and resigned after exposing a Crime Stoppers tipster’s identity to an informant. 

In a statement of defence and cross-claim against the province, Peel police denied showing the video “at any material time” to the person who appears to be the individual Fitzpatrick called X. 

If the video was disclosed to the individual, the statement adds, it “was part of a police strategy reasonably employed at the time in the circumstances,” and officers could not have anticipated any risk to the plaintiffs.

The officers and Peel Regional Police deny other central claims in the informant’s lawsuit.

Court staff denied CBC News requests for records related to the informant and his case. 

Fitzpatrick wrote that his previous decisions in T.B.’s case were under a publication ban. A decision by another judge in the matter was sealed, he noted in his ruling.