Attempted Murder Charge Laid After Memorial Avenue Weapons Incident, Thunder Bay Police Say

January 25, 2026

4497

Thunder Bay man charged with attempted murder after north-end weapons incident; victim stable.

Suspect arrested Jan. 25; victim found injured at Memorial Avenue business remains in stable condition

THUNDER BAY — Thunder Bay Police say a 40-year-old city resident is facing an attempted murder charge after a weapons-related incident on the city’s north end earlier this month.

Police report Primary Response Unit officers were called to a business on Memorial Avenue at about 2:00 a.m. on January 18, 2026, after a person was located with injuries. Police say the victim is in stable condition.

The Thunder Bay Police Service Major Crime Unit took over the investigation. On January 25, 2026, officers with the Primary Response Unit located and arrested a suspect, police said.

The accused remains in custody, with a future court date.

Summary of Charges laid

Police identify the accused as George Palosaari, 40, of Thunder Bay, charged with:

Attempt to Commit Murder using a Restricted Firearm or Prohibited Firearm
Possession of Weapon for Dangerous Purpose
Unauthorized Possession of a Prohibited or Restricted Firearm
Possession of Prohibited Firearm with Ammo
Occupant of motor vehicle knowing there was Prohibited or Restricted Weapon
Firearm – Use while Committing Offence
Careless use of Firearm, Weapon, Prohibited Device or Ammunition

As with all criminal matters, the charges are allegations that must be proven in court.

What the main allegations mean in law — and the sentencing range a judge could consider

Attempted murder involving a restricted/prohibited firearm

Under the Criminal Code, attempted murder is an indictable offence punishable by life imprisonment. Where a restricted or prohibited firearm is used, the law also sets a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for a first offence (and seven years for a second or subsequent offence).

In practical terms, if the Crown proves this allegation beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge must sentence within that framework: life is the maximum, and five years is the minimum on a first conviction where the specified firearm condition is proven.

“Firearm – use while committing an offence”

This charge typically refers to Criminal Code s. 85, which makes it an offence to use a firearm while committing (or attempting) an indictable offence. The maximum penalty is 14 years.

Section 85 also requires that any sentence imposed for this offence be served consecutively (stacked) to other sentences arising from the same event.

(Note: The Criminal Code lists certain offences—such as attempted murder—that are treated differently within s. 85’s wording. The Crown’s theory of the case and the specific facts proven at trial determine how charges ultimately proceed.)

Possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose

This offence covers carrying or possessing a weapon “for a purpose dangerous to the public peace” or to commit an offence. If the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment.

Unauthorized possession (restricted/prohibited firearm) and firearm-with-ammunition

Police have laid two charges commonly used in firearms investigations:

Unauthorized possession of a firearm is commonly prosecuted under s. 91, which carries a maximum of five years (if proceeded by indictment).
Possession of a prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition is addressed in s. 95, which carries a maximum of 14 years (if proceeded by indictment).

Occupant of a motor vehicle knowing a prohibited/restricted weapon was present

This offence is set out in s. 94. If proceeded by indictment, the maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment.

Careless use (or handling/storage) of a firearm

Under s. 86, “careless use” (and related careless handling/transport/storage) can proceed by indictment, with a maximum of two years for a first offence, or five years for a subsequent offence.

How “summary” vs “indictable” affects maximum penalties

Several of the listed offences can be prosecuted either summarily or by indictment (often called “hybrid” offences). Where an offence is dealt with by summary conviction and no different limit is specified, the general summary maximum is a $5,000 fine and/or up to two years less a day in jail.

Attempted murder, however, is straight indictable and carries the life maximum described above.

Other orders a judge may impose on conviction

Beyond jail (or in addition to it), firearms cases often involve mandatory court orders. If a person is convicted of certain violent or firearms offences—including offences such as using a firearm in the commission of an offence (s. 85) and possession of a prohibited/restricted firearm with ammunition (s. 95)—the court must impose a weapons prohibition order under s. 109.

For a first order, s. 109 sets minimum durations that can include:

At least 10 years for firearms other than prohibited/restricted firearms (timed from release in custody cases), and
A lifetime prohibition for prohibited and restricted firearms (and certain related items).

Police seeking information

Anyone with information about this investigation is asked to contact the Thunder Bay Police Service at (807) 684-1200.

Anonymous tips can be submitted to Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477 or online at:

Investigation Timeline

Police will sometimes withhold details in a case for practical, legal, and safety reasons. It’s not (usually) about secrecy for its own sake—it’s about protecting the investigation and the people involved.

1) Protecting the integrity of an ongoing investigation

Avoid tipping off suspects (about what police know, who they’re looking at, what evidence they have).
Prevent destruction of evidence or coordinated stories between suspects/witnesses.
Preserve investigative tactics (surveillance methods, informant use, timelines, digital forensics steps).

2) Preventing “contamination” of witness evidence

If key facts become public, witnesses can unintentionally blend what they saw with what they read online.
Police often keep certain details private so they can test credibility later (e.g., only the true witness would know X).

3) Ensuring a fair trial and avoiding prejudice

Releasing too much can risk tainting a jury pool or compromising court proceedings.
Police communications are often constrained so they don’t appear to “try the case in public.”

4) Protecting victims, families, and vulnerable people

Details can identify victims indirectly, especially in smaller communities.
In cases involving sexual violence, intimate partner violence, minors, or sensitive health information, disclosure can cause harm or retraumatize.

5) Privacy laws and policy limits

Police have limits around sharing personal information, medical status, addresses, or identifying details about victims/witnesses.
Even suspect details can be restricted if charges aren’t laid or identification could be legally problematic.

6) Safety risks and retaliation concerns

Naming witnesses, locations, or specific circumstances can increase the risk of reprisals or intimidation.
Police may also avoid releasing information that could inspire copycat behaviour or escalate tensions.

7) Court-imposed restrictions

There may be publication bans, sealed materials, or restrictions involving youth (often very strict).
Bail conditions, evidence exhibits, or investigative information can be limited until court stages are completed.

8) Cross-jurisdictional coordination

If multiple agencies are involved, details may be held back until everyone agrees on what can be released without harming parallel investigations.

What this often looks like publicly

Police releases will usually include the basics:

Time window, general area, nature of incident (in broad terms), arrest/charges if laid, and a tip line.
And they’ll often omit:
The exact sequence of events, weapon specifics beyond what’s needed, witness identities, precise locations, and detailed evidence.