Internal investigations of the December 2023 crackdown on prisoners at Maplehurst Correctional Complex found widespread institutional failure at the Milton jail, where nearly 200 inmates were subject to a brutal collective punishment after an inmate assaulted a guard.
Obtained by the Star through a court order, the two investigations by the Ministry of the Solicitor General found Maplehurst staff — from the jail’s superintendent down to rank-and-file guards — broke rules, flouted protocol, and failed to uphold the rights of inmates throughout the two-day operation, which is now subject to court challenges.
Eleven Maplehurst staff members, including those in management positions, were found to be “untruthful†or misleading to ministry investigators, while several engaged in a “code of silence†to protect correctional officers found to have used excessive force.
“The evidence supports an absence of competent managerial oversight from the beginning to the end of this incident,†reads one of the investigative reports.
In all, ministry investigators made negative findings against 29 Maplehurst officials.
The ministry also probed allegations of a coverup, including that some video evidence of the incident may have been intentionally destroyed. Investigators were “unable to substantiate†the allegation, but noted that hours of footage was lost due to “technical†issues.
Ontario Solicitor General Michael Kerzner
Cole Burston The Canadian PressThe ministry launched its investigation into the incident last June, one day after the Star sent detailed questions about the crackdown to Solicitor General Michael Kerzner and other ministry staff ahead of an article published last summer, which publicly revealed the abuses inside the jail.
Kerzner, who oversees the ministry that runs provincial jails, has for months refused to answer questions about the incident, including whether any staff have been disciplined. He did not respond to an interview request for this story and his office did not respond to written questions.
The ministry refused to release copies of its investigations to the Star. Instead, they were made public by a Brampton judge after they were filed as exhibits by defence lawyer Selwyn Pieters in the criminal case of Linval Ritchie, who pleaded guilty to killing his ex-girlfriend.
Ritchie is one of dozens of current or former inmates seeking some form of restitution from the courts on the grounds their Charter rights were violated. Some former Maplehurst inmates have already received reduced sentences because of what happened. Since Ritchie must receive a life sentence, he’s arguing he should be eligible for parole earlier than he otherwise would.
Earlier this year the Star obtained some surveillance camera footage of the Maplehurst incidents through a separate court case. The video shows jail guards in full riot gear forcibly removing inmates from their cells and contorting their arms, wrists and fingers while walking them to a nearby hallway. The inmates, wearing only boxer shorts with their hands zip-tied, were then forced to sit cross legged with their heads bowed while guards trained pepperball guns at the backs of their heads. Inmates were left without clothing for as long as two days.
A judge said the video shows jail staff “breaking the law by abusing the very prisoners they have a duty of care to protect.â€
The ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ Star obtained security camera footage from inside Maplehurst Correctional Complex. Over two days in December 2023, correctional officers carried out a coordinated collective punishment of nearly 200 inmates in what has been described by a judge as a “gross display of power†that violated inmates’ rights.
The ministry’s first investigation concluded in October. A second investigation, focused more narrowly on the actions of officers from the Institutional Crisis Intervention Team (ICIT), was launched in November. It concluded last month.
Ministry investigators noted that Maplehurst impeded their investigation by not providing inmate statements, duty notebooks and other records, despite “numerous†requests.
The men who made the decision to deploy ICIT
While ministry investigators found widespread dysfunction at Maplehurst, they placed the blame for the “unreasonable†decision to deploy ICIT primarily on two people: Superintendent Winston Wong and Staff-Sgt. Darren Jones.
Jones made the request to use ICIT to conduct the mass strip-search, and Wong authorized it.
Jones told ministry investigators he made the request because inmates were “unruly†and “out of control†following the assault of the guard, a claim investigators said they were “unable to substantiate†based on video footage.
(The ICIT operation began Dec. 22, two days after the assault of the guard, who suffered a broken orbital bone and split eyelid, according to the report. The inmate alleged to have thrown the punch had already been transferred to a different jail.)Â Â
Jones also said he overheard guards warning each other to watch for weapons when they were locking the inmates in their cells after the assault. He didn’t followup with any of the guards, but he took these unspecified warnings to indicate the potential presence of weapons, he told investigators. He didn’t document this concern, nor did he conduct a formal risk assessment, as required by policy.
Staff-Sgt. Darren Jones (right) and former Maplehurst superintendent Winston Wong shoulder the blame for the “unreasonable” decision to deploy ICIT, an internal report concluded.
Photo by Brendan KennedyJones conveyed all of this to Wong, who agreed with the request, Jones told investigators. Jones added that he took full responsibility for the decision.
After his interview with ministry investigators, Jones was suspended, pending further investigation. He asked for a second interview so he could “clarify†his earlier remarks. In his second interview he walked back some of his earlier statements, saying Wong asked his opinion on what they should do, and he suggested using ICIT. His earlier comments claiming full responsibility were to “promote loyalty†to the administration.
Investigators found Jones to be “untruthful†in his interviews, adding that he “attempted to mislead†the investigation.
Jones did not respond to a request for comment sent to his LinkedIn account. His government email account is no longer active.
An effort to ‘boost’ jail guards’ morale
Investigators found that Wong effectively kept his superiors in the dark about the extent of the operation, lying in an email to his regional director that ICIT had only been used against nine “non-compliant†inmates, rather than on all of the unit’s inmates.
He also “acted in a manner likely to discredit the Ministry†when he posed for a photo with correctional officers in an effort to “boost morale,†as previously reported by the Star.
Former Superintendent Winston Wong during the two-day crackdown at Maplehurst jail.
Ministry of the Solicitor GeneraWong admitted to investigators it was a “poor choice†to take the group photo, but his intention was to support the officer who had been assaulted. He also told investigators mistakes were made “post deployment,†namely how inmates were left without clothing, but he still thought using ICIT was the right decision
Wong, who told the Star earlier this year that he “mutually parted ways†with the ministry and no longer works at Maplehurst, declined to comment on the reports’ findings.
Ministry investigators heard several different explanations from other Maplehurst staff about why ICIT was deployed. Some said it was because many inmates had been threatening staff, though no threats were documented at the time.
Others said it was to search for weapons, though the basis for the suspicion wasn’t documented. Staff also did not use hand-held metal detectors, as policy requires when searching for weapons, and no weapons were found.
One sergeant told investigators she “heard†the purpose of the operation was to “send a message†to inmates.
Ultimately, ministry investigators concluded that the ICIT deployment was “unnecessary, excessive†and “not proportionate†to the threat posed by inmates.
‘Code of silence’ about excessive force
While many inmates made allegations to investigators of excessive force by ICIT officers during the operation, only a single instance was corroborated by ministry investigators.
They found that Correctional Officer Patrick Williams, while wearing his tactical helmet, repeatedly head-butted an inmate. The incident occurred in the inmate’s cell, so it was not captured by surveillance video. Williams and another guard, Jeff Legault, also delivered a “barrage†of knee strikes to the same inmate. (Inmate names are redacted from the report.)
One of the ICIT team leaders, Shawn Gauthier, told investigators he witnessed the excessive use of force and told other ICIT team leaders about it, arguing for Williams to be removed from the deployment. The others disagreed.
Solicitor General Michael Kerzner, whose ministry runs provincial jails, has ignored repeated interview requests and has not publicly addressed
Solicitor General Michael Kerzner, whose ministry runs provincial jails, has ignored repeated interview requests and has not publicly addressed
Williams and Legault both denied using excessive force on any inmate, but investigators found the officers to be untruthful, concluding on a balance of probabilities the incident had occurred. They found that Williams, Legault and five other ICIT members, including a staff-sergeant, also engaged in a “code of silence†about the incident.
None of the officers responded to a request for comment sent to their government email accounts.
Nearly all of the 26 inmates interviewed by ministry investigators said they were beaten by ICIT officers in their cells, according to summaries of the interviews included in the report.
“They opened the door and the guy with the shield jumped on me and I smashed my head on the floor,†one inmate told the investigators. “They hog-tied me from the back, punching and kicking me. Told me I was their Christmas turkey for this year.â€
“They made my cellie sing Christmas carols or they would hurt us more,†another said.
Several inmates said they were pepper sprayed without warning.
What happened in the cells should have been captured on video, according to government policy, which says that every ICIT activation must include an officer assigned to take video with a hand-held camera to record any interaction with an inmate inside the cells. That didn’t happen.
The ICIT camera, which unlike surveillance cameras also records audio, was placed in the corner of the wing, outside the cells. But even that footage is almost entirely unavailable due to “technical difficulties†with the camera’s battery and memory card, according to the report. Only one hour of hand-held camera footage was provided to ministry investigators.
Both reports highlight an overall cavalier attitude toward record keeping and report writing by jail staff.
It was only in April 2024, after the jail started receiving subpoenas from defence lawyers, that jail staff wrote occurrence reports about the December assault on the guard and the alleged threatening behaviour by Unit 8 inmates.
Two ICIT officers were also found to have “colluded†with each other when they submitted word-for-word identical post-activation reports, including spelling and grammatical errors.
The union representing correctional officers criticized the ministry’s investigation, saying it “lacks impartiality.â€
Janet Laverty, who leads OPSEU’s corrections unit, said the decision to deploy ICIT rests solely with management and it is “unfair to continue to hold front-line employees accountable for bad management decisions.â€
Laverty said she is not aware of any unionized staff who have been disciplined to date, adding that she believes the “allegation process†is ongoing.
Investigation revealed ‘theme of retribution’
None of the jail staff could explain to investigators why inmates were left in their underwear for between 19 and 37 hours after the search. Investigators singled out six sergeants for not doing anything about it and also found that Wong should have conducted an internal investigation.
There were some incidents of abuse where investigators were unable to lay specific blame.
Investigators found several instances in surveillance camera footage of ICIT members pointing pepperball guns at the backs of inmates’ heads, contrary to policy. Every officer interviewed denied doing it or seeing another officer do it.
Since the ICIT team wears balaclavas and helmets, and there is no identification on their uniforms, investigators said they were “unable to identify†who had done it.
Due to the lack of hand-held video footage that would have included audio, investigators said they also “could not substantiate†whether Wong or anyone else used the phrase “Wong-tanamo Bay†to describe the operation, as was alleged by some staff. (Wong has denied he ever said it.)
The report also found the ICIT team’s use of flash grenades to announce their presence on a wing was “unnecessary and excessive†given that inmates were already locked in their cells at the time. Investigators found it “contributed to the overall theme of retribution that emerged throughout the investigation.â€
