Missing Fatality – But Still No Useful Details Revealed

by | Nov 14, 2025 | News

When severe vehicle damage is created (like this historical incident) when is it reasonable to accept that a police investigation would not detect a deceased vehicle occupant? This is a question that is not being allowed an answer.

It was reported by news media that on Saturday, November 1, 2025, at approximately 0420 hours a fatal collision occurred between two vehicles near the intersection of Chinguacousy Road and Queen Street in Brampton, Ontario. Initially it was announced that one of the drivers was killed.

Then on Tuesday, November 4th, news media reported that a second person, 20-year-old female, was also was killed. However no further information was provided.

Then on Wednesday, November 5th news media reported that the second victim had been reported missing by family members and her “last known location, confirmed through a shared tracking app, was the crash site“. Police reportedly returned to the crash site and to the towing compound where they discovered the remains of the female in the rear passenger compartment of the involved Honda Civic.

News media indicated that the Peel Regional Police spokesperson indicated that “In the hours after the collision” police were notified about the missing person. But how many hours were involved. Two hours, 12 hours, 24 hours? Such a comment is of little assistance in understanding the scenario.

A police spokesperson told news media that the deceased passenger of the Honda Civic was difficult to find because the vehicle was deformed. That explanation may be sufficient for many who are not experienced in examining collision-damaged vehicles. But it is not sufficient for someone with that experience.

I am someone who has conducted numerous detailed examinations of crushed vehicles following a collision. Most of these examinations were done at a time when no one heard of a laser scanner and there was no software available to obtain measurements directly from photographs. There were no event data recorders and no downloads from various onboard infotainment modules. Back then it was all about paying attention to physical evidence, documenting it and interpreting it. Such activities involved many hours of direct contact with a collision-involved vehicle.

The comments I will make at the end of this article will be supported by the detailed discussion of my past collision reconstruction activities and what should be involved in a truly scientific investigation and analysis.

Historical Collision Reconstruction With Physical Evidence

As part of my duties with the University of Western Ontario Multi-Disciplinary research team commencing over 40 years ago, I was out, essentially every day, for 10 years, rain, snow or sunshine conducting vehicle and site examinations. Typically I had just barely enough time in a day to conduct two vehicle examinations and then a collision site. Many a day in January, when the sun would set before 1730 hours I barely had enough time to get to the collision site and take some useful photos before it became too dark to do so. But the vehicle examinations were extensive.

As part of my duties I had to measure the crush on each vehicle. For a collision such as the one being described by Peel police it was required that I place a “measurement Jig” or rectangle made up of heavy posts and a elastic shock cord (the type used in boating) around the vehicle and then take measurements from the rectangle to the crushed metal. These methods were for the purpose of determining the kinetic energy dissipated in the collision and thus to determine a “change-in-velocity resulting from an impact. But my methods went several steps beyond what was required. Not only did I measure the crush but I also took measurements to determine the crushed shape of the vehicle and I also identified and measured specific imprints called “points of mutual contact”. It was this method that allowed for a detailed scale diagram to be completed of each collision-involved vehicle. Such details could also be used to study how the striking vehicles interacted with each other during the contact phase and it also enabled a study of the differences in similar collisions. As mentioned before, all this work occurred long before anyone heard of a laser scanner or software programs used to develop 3-dimensional models of damaged vehicles.

As an example, the crush patterns of vehicles involved in severe head-on collisions were explored with large scale diagrams as shown in some of the figures below.

This is a photo of Zygmunt Gorski taken in the office of the University of Western Ontario Multi-Disciplinary Accident Research Team in the mid-1980s. Upon obtaining detailed measurements of a crushed vehicle a scale diagram was created. Such diagrams were used to compare the results of one collision to another and to identify differences in those results.
As an example, different damage patterns in severe head-on collisions could help in establishing the post-impact rotation direction of vehicles. The three examples at the top of the figure caused clock-wise rotation. The single example at the bottom of this figure shows counter-clockwise rotation, which is less common. These are some of the details in physical evidence that are revealed through a proper examination of a serious motor vehicle collision.

With respect to angle collisions, such as the one investigated by the Peel Regional Police, similar methods were employed. A large scale diagram could be created from measurements taken at a collision site. In the days before total stations and laser scanners such details were not easy to develop with accuracy. However, with some thoughtful effort procedures were developed whereby redundant measurements were taken to remove the distortion that is created from reliance on just a single measurement. Although not as precise as the current “toys” used by experts, these methods enabled measurements to be within about an inch or two from a true distance. The current “toys” can provide a measurement within thousands of an inch from a true distance but, unless you work for NASA and are developing a spaceship, such precision becomes pointless.

Detailed measurements were taken of physical evidence at a collision scene such as tire marks so that a large scale diagram could be created.
Large vehicle diagrams of the vehicles were placed on the large site diagram and the path of each vehicle could be traced with reasonable precision. Again, these methods were developed long before laser scanners or 3D computer software were even heard of.
Here the post-impact motion of the vehicle struck in its right side is defined by matching its wheels to the tire marks that it produced.
Similarly the post-impact path of the vehicle with front-end damage is defined by matching its wheels to the tire marks it produced.

With respect to the interior of vehicles reference lines were also erected using perpendicular shock cords attached to select portions of the vehicle structure. For example a lateral cord could be attached between a vehicle’s two B-pillars. Again, measurements were then taken of existing evidence, such as occupant contact points, to those reference lines and then these data could be transferred onto scale diagrams.

This view of a vehicle with major front end damage shows how shock cords were used to create perpendicular reference lines. Measurements were taken of physical evidence, such as occupant contact points, to these lines and then the location of the evidence became part of the overall, scale diagram of the vehicle.

In some instances where gouges were created on a roadway, a vehicle could be tipped onto its side and detailed measurements could be made with reference to certain structural landmarks of the vehicle such as the centre of a bumper or to the wheels. Once again, shock cords could be attached to these structures and the markings on the underside of the vehicle could be measured to those cords. In this way markings on the underside of vehicle could be matched directly to the pattern of gouges on the road surface and thus this was definitive proof of a point of impact and where a vehicle was located at that point of impact.

By these methods the mapped interior could be combined with the scale diagram of the vehicle exterior and the mapped markings on the underside of a vehicle could also be combined that the diagram of the vehicle exterior. When done correctly the vehicle interior, the vehicle exterior and the collision site could all be combined in reasonably detailed scale diagrams.

An Example of a Higher Severity Angle Collision

With respect to higher-severity, angle collisions such as the one investigated by the Peel Regional Police the following figures below provide some details about how these collisions were investigated and analysed.

In this historical example from almost 40 years ago this Pontiac Parisienne was struck in its right side by the front end of a small Chevrolet Chevette.
This is another view of the crush caused to the right side of the Parisienne.
In this view a shock cord is shown placed along the right side of the Parisienne. While this was done to capture the extent of crush the procedures were extended with additional measurements to create a scale diagram of the crushed vehicle and to locate the position of “points of mutual contact”.

The image below shows some of the measurements that were taken to enable the creation of a scale diagram of the damaged Parisienne. A location of a single “point of mutual contact” is shown here where a blue license plate transfer was caused by the front end of the striking Chevrolet Chevette.

The next figures show views of the striking vehicle, a small Chevrolet Corvette.

This is a front view of the small Chevette which struck the Parisienne.
This is a left side view showing the extent of frontal crush caused to the Chevette from impact of the Parisienne.

As discussed earlier, a reference rectangle was carefully created around the damaged vehicle so that detailed measurements could be obtained of its shape, as well as the crush.

This elevated view shows a reference rectangle positioned around the perimeter of the Chevette. While it was used to measure the crush existing on the vehicle the procedures were advanced by additional measurements which enabled the creation of a scale diagram of the vehicle’s crushed shape.

Once the scale diagrams of the vehicles were created they were brought together to consider how they made contact and how their motions progressed through to the point of separation, as shown below.

Once scale diagrams were created of the two vehicles they were arranged in an offset and angle that were determined by the “points of mutual contact”. Here the two vehicles are positioned at the point of initial contact.
Here the vehicles were positioned at a time partly through the collision phase before the vehicle’s commenced rotation with respect to themselves. The front license plate of the Chevette is matched with the blue paint imprint on the side of the Parisienne.
Here the vehicles are oriented in the latter stage of contact when rotation caused the sides to approach each other. This was determined through the location of “points of mutual contact” on each vehicle.

Through the use of scale diagrams the vehicle motions could be determined from the physical evidence and enhanced by the specific evidence from the “points of mutual contact”.

Computer reconstruction programs such as CRASH were used to examine the severity of the collision. CRASH focuses primarily on the circumstances at impact. However any software program creates a model of a collision that does not precisely replicate the details exhibited in the physical evidence. It is the scale diagrams and the “points of mutual contact” that anchor the model to the precise manner that the collision occurred. Alternatively in some instances the results from a CRASH analysis could reveal that the interpretation of the physical evidence was not consistent with the physics. This is how this combination is used through progressive adjustments until a result is reached which comes close to reality.

The continuation of the analysis with a simulation program such as SMAC is also enhanced when the model is anchored to the physical evidence that was identified. A simulation program like SMAC brings the striking vehicles from their point of contact through to their rest positions. When such a simulation is successful at replicating the vehicle paths to rest then that is a pretty good indicator that the reconstruction of a collision was performed correctly. When the simulation results are also consistent with a CRASH analysis and with the detailed physical evidence the results become fully reliable.

With respect to injury issues, a through examination of the interior of each vehicle was conducted. The figure below shows the results from an examination of the interior of the Chevette.

Typically measurements of various occupant contacts were taken along with detailed photos. These data could then be matched with medical information identifying the specific injuries of each occupant. Physical evidence from other sources such as loading marking on seatbelts could provide further information about the mechanisms that caused injuries and if some injuries were suspect.

Again such details cannot be obtained from a vehicle interior without spending considerable time being present inside the vehicle. This is not pleasant work and not for the squeamish. In all instances my work was carried out after the injured or deceased were removed from a vehicle. Yet in many instances my work would commence very shortly after a vehicle was removed from a collision site to a towing compound, sometimes only hours after the collision took place. Such a circumstance would not be much different from the required actions of a police reconstructionist who may not attend a collision until several hours had passed and some investigative activities would need to be completed at a towing yard.

Current methods of police investigation have been adjusted from these historic methods discussed above and this is revealing. Police may now use a laser scanner to document evidence and/or they may use a drone. They will also use hardware such as a Crash Data Retrieval kit to connect to a module which is an event data recorder to download crash data. They may also download crash photos from newer vehicles that store those images on a separate module. And they may interrogate infotainment data stored on in-vehicle communication devices. Such evidence is valuable and contributes to understanding some aspects of collision causation. However these activities become a negative when they take the investigator away from an examination and understanding of the physical evidence on the roadway and on the vehicle interior and exterior.

Working with physical evidence is a key component of any collision investigator’s toolbox. The detection of relevant physical evidence requires that the investigator have substantial experience from many years of contact with it. The ability to detect and identify relevant physical evidence is not a simple matter of reading a book or taking a short course. An effective investigator must be exposed to many instances where that evidence may vary from case to case. Multiple exposure to such evidence allows the investigator to observe how that evidence changes. And these multiple exposures allow the investigator to develop an understanding why that change exists and how it relates to previous observations of that evidence. However when persons in a position of power and limited accountability, take someone with limited experience, give someone a badge, uniform and title and suddenly designate someone an “expert”, bad results are bound to happen.

Comments On Peel Police Collision Investigation

The purpose for conducting a motor vehicle collision reconstruction is to identify factors that caused harm. In police circles that definition of harm is largely focused on driver behaviors and punishment for those behaviors. Such a focus is necessary and important but it is also narrow.

Injury is also an example of harm. It is also important. It is a benefit to society, that we attempt to prevent, or lessen, collision injuries including their consequences.

What should be concluded from the above discussion about historical methods of collision reconstruction is that, in order to conduct a properly scientific analysis of a collision, vehicle interiors must be included in that analysis and examined in detail. When a proper examination of the interior of a collision-involved vehicle is conducted there should be no reason for an injured occupant in that vehicle to be unidentified. What led to the lack of identification a a deceased inside a vehicle has not been explained. Beyond police, medical personnel and even fire department personnel have responsibilities for identifying occupants in a damaged vehicle and why their failures occurred also needs to be revealed. Up to now there has been no photo posted of a reasonable quality that could reveal the extent of damage to the Honda Civic and provide some explanation as to why no one detected the deceased passenger.

It has been a long-expressed concern on this Gorski Consulting website that police forces in general often fail to understand that they have an obligation to identify and report to the public whenever an incident exposes a danger to the public. That obligation should be obvious because often police are the only ones with the ability and authority to conduct a thorough investigation of an incident. Dangers related to motor vehicle collisions that are not publicly reported expose the public to future preventable incidents that could be life-threatening.

Collision dangers can come from a wide variety of sources and road safety researchers often us the acronym “HVE” to refer to those broad factors involving the Human, the Vehicle and the Environment. When police fail to inform the public that humans are increasingly speeding, drug impaired, inattentive etc. they are failing in their duty. When police fail to inform the public about the presence of a vehicle defect, a vehicle maintenance danger or any vehicle factor that may cause restricted visibility or attention then they fail in their duty. When police do not report incidents where improper roadway design, maintenance or signage have influenced a collision they have failed in their duty. These are exemplar components of HVE.

While the undetected body of the deceased in the present incident may be described to the public as an isolated matter in our view it is not isolated. It is a failing that has revealed itself in this one incident but it is also a failing that is more systemic. Police must change from their presently narrow focus on driver behavior modification to a wider focus on identifying and reporting all matters than may cause harm to the public. Such a wider focus will lessen the occasions where obvious duties, such as detecting the presence of the body of a deceased, fail to be achieved.