• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

General Vance - Inappropriate conduct?

HiTechComms

Member
Reaction score
49
Points
380
You’re deeply out of your depth, it appears, on the subject of privileged communication. There are many contexts in which this happens- there are privileged enjoyed by medical practitioners, by lawyers, by journalists... What you are essentially saying is that a victim of some sort of official malfeasance or of crime should not have access to helpful resources unless they are willing to have that resource immediately turn around and repeat to police what the victim discloses. That’s utterly out to lunch. Victims are almost never legally obligated to cooperate with an investigation or to report something in the first place. If they don’t want a matter to proceed through criminal or other investigation because of the additional harm to them, that’s generally respected.

Besides that, you’ve introduced the word ‘criminal’ to this when, as of yet, it’s not at all clear nor strongly implied that crime was committed. There can be tremendous abuses of authority that fall short of criminal culpability.

If a victim of something goes forward to an omnudsperson looking for help, the onbudsperson should, in nearly every case, respect that request for confidentiality, subject to the usual exceptions such as harm to children or threatened harm to oneself or to third parties. That is not ‘literally Fascism!’, no matter how twisted your knickers may be over it.
If a complaint was logged with an Ombudsman about conduct of a Government/Public official and the investigation found there were indeed were possible criminal acts committed then the ombudsman should be able to report to a investigative bodies/and law enforcement. If you cannot do that then what is the point of an ombudsman if the inestigation gets gagged.
You completely missed the point all I said that Oaths shouldn't bar reporting of crimes to bodies that enforce the law and a politician should not have the right to gag such findings. That would breed corruption.

I am not saying Vance committed a crime because Innocent until proven guilty.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
827
Points
890
If a complaint was logged with an Ombudsman about conduct of a Government/Public official and the investigation found there were indeed were possible criminal acts committed then the ombudsman should be able to report to a investigative bodies/and law enforcement. If you cannot do that then what is the point of an ombudsman if the inestigation gets gagged.
You completely missed the point all I said that Oaths shouldn't bar reporting of crimes to bodies that enforce the law and a politician should not have the right to gag such findings. That would breed corruption.

I am not saying Vance committed a crime because Innocent until proven guilty.
I assure you I missed nothing you brought up, you simply aren’t particularly well grounded in the subject matter.

So here’s the part you’ll like: the Ombudsperson can, in fact, report crimes or breaches of the Code of Service Discipline to appropriate authorities. That’s right in the DAOD establishing their position. However, the part you won’t like is that they do not HAVE to. The enabling section of the DAOD says they ‘may’. It is utterly consistent with other professional practices that, where the victim of a potential offense comes forward with such a privileged complaint, it is generally up to the victim whether they want the ombudsperson or other assisting professional to escalate the matter to a formal report for investigative purposes. This is largely out of respect for the rights of the victim, and the psychological harm that can result from an investigation into their victimization being launched against their will.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
421
Points
1,010
I thought you came from a country that you hated because of people ratting on their neighbour's?
 

HiTechComms

Member
Reaction score
49
Points
380
I thought you came from a country that you hated because of people ratting on their neighbour's?
Ombudsman were created to investigate complaints. A little different when no such body existed. I never hated my country I hated the system and it has gotten better because they adopted these democratic/legal changes.

Not sure what you are getting at by Falsely accusing some one for political points and having a system that has no protections of any individual legal rights against a political police has anything to do with this case. Nice try for trying to shift the goal posts with a what aboutism and are you seriously comparing this situation to Communism?
 

HiTechComms

Member
Reaction score
49
Points
380
I assure you I missed nothing you brought up, you simply aren’t particularly well grounded in the subject matter.

So here’s the part you’ll like: the Ombudsperson can, in fact, report crimes or breaches of the Code of Service Discipline to appropriate authorities. That’s right in the DAOD establishing their position. However, the part you won’t like is that they do not HAVE to. The enabling section of the DAOD says they ‘may’. It is utterly consistent with other professional practices that, where the victim of a potential offense comes forward with such a privileged complaint, it is generally up to the victim whether they want the ombudsperson or other assisting professional to escalate the matter to a formal report for investigative purposes. This is largely out of respect for the rights of the victim, and the psychological harm that can result from an investigation into their victimization being launched against their will.
I understand what you are saying, that what I am referring to is a potential Crime.
What my problem is with the situation is if the Ombudsman was pressured by a political body IE: Minister, Prime Minister, for not pursuing an investigation for purely political optics. ALA SNC-Lavalin and the excuse by the PM that they were protecting "Canadian Jobs"
The other question is who is the "victim" even if that can be defined or found, and what or who gets sacrificed in the process, (moral conundrum)

I just rather see an impartial investigation and if the parties are cleared then they are cleared or maybe not. I personnaly want to avoid creating witch hunts.

It also appears in this case that the Political body knew about the problem in 2018. The optics is that the Ombudsman got pressured by a standing minister. It simply doesn't look good.
 

Remius

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
421
Points
830
Ombudsman were created to investigate complaints. A little different when no such body existed. I never hated my country I hated the system and it has gotten better because they adopted these democratic/legal changes.

Not sure what you are getting at by Falsely accusing some one for political points and having a system that has no protections of any individual legal rights against a political police has anything to do with this case. Nice try for trying to shift the goal posts with a what aboutism and are you seriously comparing this situation to Communism?
You’ve been comparing a lot of things to communism in other threads. 🤔
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
610
Points
1,010
This is something that many folks in the military have a hard time wrapping their head around is that misconduct is not necessarily breaking the law. Now the CSD & NDA have some catch alls but many things are administrative investigations things that would be handled by HR depts. in any other place of business.
And that misconduct, if that is what it is, is only defined in Canada under NDA 129 and applied to CAF members (yup, I know that the NDA can apply in certain circumstances to others.) . I cannot for the life of me think of a CC equivalent. (Brihard, please weigh in)
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
330
Points
880
And that misconduct, if that is what it is, is only defined in Canada under NDA 129 and applied to CAF members (yup, I know that the NDA can apply in certain circumstances to others.) . I cannot for the life of me think of a CC equivalent. (Brihard, please weigh in)
NDA S 129 is a uniquely military offence.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
266
Points
910
You are all assuming as well the ombudsman is the one who did nothing. We suspect he told the MND, but until he testifies before committee it is all speculation. It is also possible he reported but someone chose not to investigate. The biggest allegation I have seen so far against Vance is covering up the sexual assault of a subordinate to prevent an affair with that same subordinate from coming to light. If that's true, it destroys the CAFs credibility to enforce operation honor.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,630
Points
1,060
You are all assuming as well the ombudsman is the one who did nothing. We suspect he told the MND, but until he testifies before committee it is all speculation. It is also possible he reported but someone chose not to investigate. The biggest allegation I have seen so far against Vance is covering up the sexual assault of a subordinate to prevent an affair with that same subordinate from coming to light. If that's true, it destroys the CAFs credibility to enforce operation honor.

It's OK, I've got a big green binder somewhere full of ethics stuff that we had to plow through a few years ago as part of yet another mandatory training thing. I'm sure Diogenes has our back ;)

The Statement of Defence Ethics​


Principle I: Respect the Dignity of all Persons. This ethical principle reflects the primacy in the public domain of our common identity as members of one human family over our identities as members of a particular race, religion, nationality, or ethnic group. This common identity is rooted in the biological unity of humankind, in its unique cognitive abilities, and in its distinctive behavioural and social characteristics. At a minimum, adhering to this principle means that we cannot torture, do violence to, brutalize, injure, coerce, bully, deceive, manipulate, use as expendable, treat unjustly, discriminate against, harass, or otherwise ill-treat another human being. At a minimum and more positively, this principle also requires respect for the intrinsic worth of every person and the treatment of all persons with tolerance and consideration. In other words, it means that we must treat others always as ‘ends,’ and not as objects or mere means to an end. Finally, this principle requires respecting the basic rights and freedoms that have come to be recognized as intrinsic and defining characteristics of the dignity of persons. We should not, therefore, without some compelling and overriding reason, deprive any person or group of these basic rights and freedoms.


steve carell sarcasm GIF
 

PPCLI Guy

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
170
Points
710
It's OK, I've got a big green binder somewhere full of ethics stuff that we had to plow through a few years ago as part of yet another mandatory training thing. I'm sure Diogenes has our back ;)

Huh. You took that training? I had a good side hustle going back in the day. I would offer to take the training for people for $20, and after I got their money, I reported them. Applied ethics

For those that don't know me, that is a joke....
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,630
Points
1,060
Huh. You took that training? I had a good side hustle going back in the day. I would offer to take the training for people for $20, and after I got their money, I reported them. Applied ethics

For those that don't know me, that is a joke....
the internship good job GIF
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
259
Points
880
Now please don't flame me here as I am looking to get educated on this, ok ?

From where I sit it looks like the CDS and a Maj had a longstanding quazi relationship that for Vance, at least, was extramarital. Defiantly sexual and it seems probably emotional as well. But from what I have read it seems consensual.

My understanding is that adultery is a private matter in the CAF and Canada and we don't go after people for that. If we did I am not sure we would have much of CAF left and I am pointing at all genders her. So what has has the CDS done wrong ? I understand there is another complainant who the details of have not been released so perhaps there is more there.

If we are going to starting investigating everyone at and above the rank of MS/MCpl, both commissioned and non, who has formed a relationship be it for a few hours or a years; I think we are in a world a hurt.

I want to reiterate, I thought this (Op Honor) was all about consensual VS nonconsensual. Please educate me, and I am being serious.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
421
Points
1,010
Having a Sexual relationship with someone you are in a position of power or control over can be a criminal act. We had an ordained Minister at my treatment jail, who scored 18 months, for ending up in a relationship with a female parisher who came to him for counciling. She went back to hubby and then filed charges that he had taken advantage of the power relationship between the two while she was vulnerable . Obviously the court agreed....
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
259
Points
880
Having a Sexual relationship with someone you are in a position of power or control over can be a criminal act. We had an ordained Minister at my treatment jail, who scored 18 months, for ending up in a relationship with a female parisher who came to him for counciling. She went back to hubby and then filed charges that he had taken advantage of the power relationship between the two while she was vulnerable . Obviously the court agreed....

Gotcha!
 

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
87
Points
280
I want to reiterate, I thought this (Op Honor) was all about consensual VS nonconsensual. Please educate me, and I am being serious.
Under Op Honour, "The CAF accepted all 10 recommendations" of the Deschamps Report. Recommendation 5 of said report recommended that the CAF:

"Develop a definition of adverse personal relationship that specifically addresses relationships between members of different rank, and creates a presumption of an adverse personal relationship where the individuals involved are of different rank, unless the relationship is properly disclosed."

The relationship in question (secretive, different rank) certainly seems to meet that criteria.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
995
Points
890
Would not that be more of a rough equivalent to NDA s. 92 to 94? Of note, convictions under the RCMP Code of Conduct alone cannot land you in jail, whereas the NDA can.
SIDEBAR: Recent amendments to the NDA (not yet in force) will separate Summary Proceedings from trials, and remove detention or imprisonment from the scale of punishments a Summary Proceeding can impose.
 
Top