The province's civilian-led police watchdog will now not recommend charges against three RCMP officers, after a high-speed chase and subsequent use of a Police Service Dog resulted in serious injuries needing surgery for a suspect. They'd previously forwarded charges in 2022 to Crown Counsel for consideration. (Image Credit: File Photo/NanaimoNewsNOW)

By NanaimoNewsNOW staff

2021 chase

No charges for Ladysmith officers after suspect sustains ‘serious dog bite injuries’

Mar 4, 2026 | 11:49 AM

LADYSMITH — Despite initially forwarding charge recommendation to Crown Counsel, B.C.’s police watchdog now says no further action is needed against three RCMP officers in Ladysmith.

An attempted traffic stop in April 2021 turned into a high-speed chase involving three officers on Hwy. 1 in Ladysmith, when a white Pontiac Montana van was spotted by an unmarked Police Dog Services vehicle.

The Independent Investigations Officer of B.C. (IIO) report, released Wednesday, March 4, stated two additional officers from the local detachment were called, with Mounties noting the vehicle’s license plate was reported stolen and officers were familiar with the driver from past interactions.

Officers attempted to pull the van over to the side of the road, however the driver accelerated with the report noting “forceful maneuvers” were made against officers, “leading to an impact between the SO’s (subject officer’s) vehicle and the rear passenger side of the Montana, which also made contact with the rear of [an officer’s] vehicle.”

Dashcam video and officer testimony states the suspect’s vehicle “skidded through 180 degrees” before hitting a concrete barrier on the side of the road.

2021 chase

No charges for Ladysmith officers after suspect sustains 'serious dog bite injuries'

1h ago

no fall back

B.C.'s move to end clock changes won't be without complications

5h ago

100+ transactions

Nanaimo workplace fraudster pocketed $133K

7h ago

Mounties pinned the vehicle in place with their cruisers.

Officers then forcibly gained entry to the van, by breaking a passenger window.

The IIO report noted the sequence of events which occurred next were “difficult to understand” due to no statement provided by either the Police Dog Services officer, or the suspect.

“[The Police Services Dog (PSD) officer] had exited his police vehicle and had brought his PSD out onto the roadway. The PSD was not leashed, and the [officer] was holding the dog directly by its harness. The dog was visibly excited, and at first bit [a supporting officer] on the buttock before entering the Montana.”

The dog bit the victim’s right arm, dragging him out of the vehicle in the process.

Officers placed the suspect in handcuffs, during which the dog released its bite on the suspect’s arm and re-engaged on his left leg.

The dog handler then asked another officer to gather a leash from his vehicle for the dog, with one of the supporting officers stating “this delay resulted in the PSD remaining on the AP’s leg for ‘two or three minutes’ as he lay on the asphalt.”

Once leashed, the dog was returned to the vehicle.

The suspect was taken to hospital, where he received surgery to help treat “serious dog bite injuries”, noted the report.

Originally forwarded to Crown Counsel in 2022 with charge recommendation, the IIO noted “it was withdrawn after further investigative steps, consultation and analysis were undertaken.”

Chief Civilian Director Jessica Berglund now states a lack of a statement from the Police Dog Services officer, along with the suspect “makes it difficult to understand his continued efforts to escape despite his vehicle being pinned against the barrier.”

Her report noted “this behaviour only escalated the situation further, culminating in the prolonged and perhaps unnecessary continued application of the PSD.”

She found the suspect’s action in attempting to evade arrest during the police chase as a primary factor in the situation.

However the report found, in addition to the “perhaps unnecessary” use of the police dog, one of the responding officers may not have followed police and regulations as it overtook the suspect vehicle in an attempt to stop it.

Berglund did not state why the dog handler officer did not provide a statement.

“The significant evidentiary gaps that remain preclude a conclusion that any of the involved officers acted unlawfully.”

The IIO reports any situation where police action or inaction could have potentially led to serious injury or death.

“The goal is to provide assurance to the public that when the investigation is complete, they can trust the IIO’s conclusions, because the investigation was conducted by an independent, unbiased, civilian-led agency,” the report states.

Local news. Delivered. Free. Subscribe to our daily news wrap and get our top local stories delivered to your email inbox every evening.

info@nanaimonewsnow.com

Follow us on: Twitter (X) | Bluesky | Facebook