Canadian Forces Officer guilty of wearing unearned medals.

[The Bread Guy]

What else will it be?  If guilty she'll get a slap and NCM's of good ethics and character will still be forced to salute her.....

Or, if it works like some bits of the public service, everyone below the rank of Sergeant will have to take compulsory Values & Ethics training ....

 

[Haggis]

She picked up a severe reprimand and a $3k fine last time around; I can't imagine it'll be helpful during sentencing this time if she's convicted.

TFTFY.

I'm guessing that since that sentence was passed in 2012, neither offence has been pardoned.  So, yes, this would have a bearing on her next sentencing, should she be found guilty.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Or, if it works like some bits of the public service, everyone below the rank of Sergeant will have to take compulsory Values & Ethics training ....

Truth sadly, perhaps another little brown book on the subject...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

What else will it be?  If guilty she'll get a slap and NCM's of good ethics and character will still be forced to salute her.....

I think you've been out too long Bruce.  :nod:

You're saluting the commission, not the person. 

However, I see your point and agree.  8)

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Respecting the mods direction, my comments have nothing to with the current charges against LCol Miller, but rather with what is clearly a matter of public record.

It's a rather sad commentary on the CAF that a senior officer, found guilty of offences that very clearly call into question some basic tenets of officership, has remained in the service.

An officer is not a private, who can be kicked in the arse and sent on their way. There is, IMHO, far more expected of an officer, and these expectations should increase with rank. So should the consequences of failure of character. The CAF has machinery to deal with professionalism issues, but sometimes seems very reluctant to use it.

I've been laughing uncontrollably at the fact she still is a member of the Order of Military Merit given her previous conduct.  What a joke hahahaha  :facepalm:

 

[George Wallace]

I've been laughing uncontrollably at the fact she still is a member of the Order of Military Merit given her previous conduct.  What a joke hahahaha  :facepalm:

Well......She wasn't nominated to the Senate.  >






Yet.

 

[TCM621]

This is one of the problems of the current system. Given the seeming inability of the CF to release people who constantly screw up and the fact that an officer's job requires that he be in charge of others, you are bound to have a fair number of people who shouldn't be in the military in charge of NCMs. A corporal can be fired off to the library or canteen where he can't cause damage but an officer has to be put in a situation to screw things up for others. You also have the problems of good NCM being forced to work for people who are constantly being fired or "reassigned".
It doesn't happen often but happens enough that it is a legit issue in the CAF.

 

[Shamrock]

This is one of the problems of the current system. Given the seeming inability of the CF to release people who constantly screw up and the fact that an officer's job requires that he be in charge of others, you are bound to have a fair number of people who shouldn't be in the military in charge of NCMs. A corporal can be fired off to the library or canteen where he can't cause damage but an officer has to be put in a situation to screw things up for others. You also have the problems of good NCM being forced to work for people who are constantly being fired or "reassigned".
It doesn't happen often but happens enough that it is a legit issue in the CAF.

Not even close to true.

 

[TCM621]

Really? I have seen it a handful of times in my career and I am sure I am not the only one.  It isn't common but it does happen.

 

[GreenMarine]

This is one of the problems of the current system. Given the seeming inability of the CF to release people who constantly screw up and the fact that an officer's job requires that he be in charge of others, you are bound to have a fair number of people who shouldn't be in the military in charge of NCMs. A corporal can be fired off to the library or canteen where he can't cause damage but an officer has to be put in a situation to screw things up for others. You also have the problems of good NCM being forced to work for people who are constantly being fired or "reassigned".
It doesn't happen often but happens enough that it is a legit issue in the CAF.

Not even close to true.

I begg to differ tcm621 has a point, as I've seen people who are considered screw ups or at risk are given the can do no wrong positions. While the standard work horse person is left at the gamble. Of course the apple polishers seem to get the nice fast track jobs.

Officers and Sr. NCM just seem to be randomly put where they can be put even if it's a redundant post and in the mix they're given something important to do. If all goes well no one clues in, if the boat sinks cause the leader stinks, then everyone gets wet or certain people get thrown under the bus to provide an escape goat for the failer of leadership.

In this LCol case of course keeping in mind not all facts are known, and other high profile officer cases I can see the "super powers" given to high ranks being cut down a bit as the corrupt are weeded out of service.

 

[pbi]

I've been laughing uncontrollably at the fact she still is a member of the Order of Military Merit given her previous conduct.  What a joke hahahaha  :facepalm:

Yes-there's another good point.

When I was in uniform I dealt with two cases, (years apart in two different battalions) in which the CO tried to get rid of two officers who had managed, in a relatively short period of time, to flagrantly violate not only most of the tenets of officership, but most of the behaviour we would expect of a responsible adult.

In one case I was the Acting Adjt, in the second I was the Adjt. In both cases the CO and I were shocked and frustrated by how difficult it was to get rid of these embarrassing wretches. It was as if the entire chain of command and the NDHQ pers system were working against us intentionally. At one point we were accused of indulging in a "vendetta".

Both individuals were eventually released after lengthy struggles with "The System". The first was released years later in a different unit, when another CO finally managed to make a case stick. The second, after being charged for one of his various idiocies, was eventually released, but I was no longer around.

When we started to work on both cases, the files of these two people showed the same sad story: problems not dealt with, or not dealt with properly; problems shunted to another unit, etc. What really bothered me throughout both of these cases, and now again in this most recent case, is the apparent absence of any real conviction by "The System" that officers are supposed to set an example, and that character matters.

 

[TCM621]

Just to be clear, I am painting with a decidedly narrow brush. I have dealt with the whole range of officers in my career from a CO who got a spontaneous 10 min ovation at his change of command down to an officer who I wouldn't talk to without a direct order and an escort. Officers are people and they come in all types.

My point is that this officer has on two occasions (assuming she is found guilty here) shown a blatant disregard for the truth, the military Ethos and values.  Unless she is released, she will end up in a position with subordinates. Everything she does from now on could be seen as suspect. Got a bad PER? Well the LCol has lied in the past and she is lying again. Project came in under budget? Really? Are we sure or is she lying again? As bad this would be for say a Sgt, this is much worse for an officer due to the nature of the military system.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

She hasn't been found guilty on the latest charges. Most are keeping a civil tongue in their heads regarding our policy on the forum.

However, not withstanding the former charges, a large number of posters here are still trying to get their licks in, by talking in the most obvious, generalities.

No one is being fooled by the obtuse references.

Your still talking about a serving commissioned officer. That's not on.

Soooo.....

Until a verdict comes in, either way, we will cease talking about her.

Locked

---Staff---

 

[The Bread Guy]

Thread stays locked, but here's an update:

A high-ranking military officer accused of wearing medals she wasn’t awarded pleaded guilty Monday to three National Defence Act counts of prejudice of good order and discipline.

Eight other charges against Lt.-Col. Deborah Miller, 57, including three counts of unlawful use of military uniforms or certificates, were withdrawn.

The charges are for her attire at a Canadian Defence Academy event on Dec. 12, 2012.

The prosecution and defence submitted a joint sentence recommendation of a severe reprimand and a $5,000 fine ....

 

[The Bread Guy]

And the latest - sentence passed:

Lt.-Col. Deborah Miller, a high-ranking military officer based in Kingston, Ont., was sentenced to a severe reprimand and a $5,000 fine on Tuesday morning at a court martial held in Currie Hall at Royal Military College.

On Monday, Miller, 57, pleaded guilty to three counts of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline for wearing military medals and insignia on her uniform she was not authorized to wear.

She initially faced eight similar charges, but those were dropped in a plea bargain for her admitting guilt on the three charges.

The trial's prosecutor, Maj. Eric Carrier, and Miller's counsel, Maj. Sara Collins, submitted the joint sentence submission to Military Judge Col. Michael R. Gibson on Monday, but the judge admitted he was struggling with the joint sentence recommendation and thought it may be a bit light considering Miller's record of a conviction at a previous court martial only two years ago.

Gibson accepted the joint sentence submission 24 hours later, saying Miller was "deficient in her self-control by wearing the medals."

He said Miller, being a senior officer, "should have known better" than to wear the medals just for the extra recognition she may have received by wearing them.

He was also concerned Miller wore the unauthorized medals at military events only two months after being convicted at her other court martial, at which she was found guilty of making false statements ....

 

[Journeyman]

And the latest - sentence passed:

        :not-again:

If only we had some Legal Branch apologist who could explain the awesomeness of this decision.

 

[Good2Golf]

Next time she'll get an $8,000 fine and a severe, severe reprimand.

  *sigh*

 

[PuckChaser]

Her defense council said a severe reprimand is the harshest message a soldier could recieve to denounce their conduct.... Dismissal from the CAF might just be a tiny bit harsher, but I'm not a lawyer.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Next time she'll get an $8,000 fine and a severe, severe reprimand.

  *sigh*

Or ....

 

[George Wallace]

She and her case(s) are an embarrassment to the Canadian Armed Forces, and cause for a lot of discussion on various media forums.  Not only is she a topic of discussion, but the members of the court and their judgement are coming into question.  Many are beginning to wonder if this may be signs of a systemic problem, not limited to this one individual.