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

Sexual Misconduct Allegations in The CAF

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
702
Points
940
Upholding the highest level of integrity is a joke for this minister, we have a CDS who was accused, investigated and not charged. Upholding the highest integrity would mean Upholding innocent until proven guilty meaning without charges the admiral did nothing criminally wrong, nor is he facing any administrative action that we know of, in essence by not being given his job back, in my not so educated position, he is bring punished for being cleared.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,271
Points
890
She has now granted Global News permission to share the details of her allegation publicly, which she says pertained to unwanted touching on board HMCS Montreal in July 2010, when the ship was docked in Nuuk, Greenland.

During a party with allied military on board the ship, [the complainant] alleges McDonald shoved the face of the ship captain into her breasts after a button on her shirt popped open.

McDonald was task force commander at the time of a group made up of warships from the U.S., Denmark and Canada. The captain was [the complainant]’s commanding officer.

 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,284
Points
1,060
IMO only the Admiral has lost the moral authority to command the CAF as CDS. He needs to understand that in the court of public opinion he's guilty.


Vice-Admiral Craig Baines, commander of the Navy, lost moral authority but was kept on the job. Something about learning from mistakes, and he was guilty of what he was accused of. MacDonald wasn't.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,642
Points
910
Vice-Admiral Craig Baines, commander of the Navy, lost moral authority but was kept on the job. Something about learning from mistakes, and he was guilty of what he was accused of. MacDonald wasn't.
A golf game with a disgraced former CDS is far far different from sexual assault
 

dangerboy

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
388
Points
910
Official statement from the minister : Statement from the Minister of National Defence - Canada.ca

Statement​

August 12, 2021 – Ottawa – National Defence / Canadian Armed Forces
The Honourable Harjit S. Sajjan, Minister of National Defence, issued the following statement today:
“Yesterday, I indicated that it was my expectation that Admiral Art McDonald would remain on leave while the Government reviews the situation.
I am confirming today that this is the case. Admiral McDonald will be on administrative leave effective today and until further notice.
Appointments like that of Chief of Defence Staff must meet the highest possible standards and our goal must be to create a better workplace for the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces. A workplace that ensures that complainants and survivors are treated with the utmost respect and that allegations are taken seriously in every instance.
I have complete confidence that Canadians and our Armed Forces will continue to be very well-served by the Acting Chief of Defence Staff, Lieutenant-General Wayne Eyre, as we deal with some very complex issues – from fighting forest fires and helping Canadians battle the pandemic at home, to assisting our Afghan interpreters and locally engaged staff to come to Canada, while continuing to confront other security challenges around the world.”
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
702
Points
940
"workplace that ensures that complainants and survivors are treated with the utmost respect and that allegations are taken seriously in every instance." Thos would also imply individuals cleared by an investigation would also be treated in a respectful manner.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,284
Points
1,060
A golf game with a disgraced former CDS is far far different from sexual assault
True.

But I figure moral authority is moral authority. We were told the chief of the Navy had reduced moral authority, but was still kept in place.

Is moral authority not as important for our navy I wonder?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
960
Points
910
A vexing problem. Those appointed by others without moral authority should not be blamed for the latter's lack of moral authority. But how can we be sure that those appointed were not selected precisely because of attributes which align with those doing the appointing?

Suppose the PM lacked moral authority. Would you trust his appointments? Suppose the PM appointed a MND whose moral authority you doubted? Would you trust the MND's appointments?
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
359
Points
910
Christ...I can't decide whose face should be photoshopped into this pic. SO....MANY....CHOICES....
 

Attachments

  • TGS.jpg
    TGS.jpg
    194.3 KB · Views: 5

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,271
Points
890
Upholding the highest level of integrity is a joke for this minister, we have a CDS who was accused, investigated and not charged. Upholding the highest integrity would mean Upholding innocent until proven guilty meaning without charges the admiral did nothing criminally wrong, nor is he facing any administrative action that we know of, in essence by not being given his job back, in my not so educated position, he is bring punished for being cleared.
"I was not charged" is not the same as "I was cleared."

Most of us have probably witnessed conduct that was inappropriate, but not charged; that doesn't make it right.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,642
Points
910
"I was not charged" is not the same as "I was cleared."

Most of us have probably witnessed conduct that was inappropriate, but not charged; that doesn't make it right.
Hell most of us have done inappropriate things - but you are very correct.

"I was not charged" to me means there wasn't enough credible evidence to prosecute. "I was cleared" means there was a distinct lack of evidence to support the assertion, if y'all know what I mean.
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
296
Points
880
"I was not charged" is not the same as "I was cleared."

Most of us have probably witnessed conduct that was inappropriate, but not charged; that doesn't make it right.
If you want to be CDS (again) and have your lawyers publish a statement like that, you are misrepresenting the profession’s disciplinary process and undermining the public’s confidence in the institution’s ability to police itself. Not really a great CoA.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
359
Points
910
To touch back to some discussion 2, 3 pages back re: 'transparency of our administrative actions":
  • Summary Trial activity/results are often passed thru Wing-Wide emails (names, charges, findings, punishments), but not published in our "Wing newspaper".
  • The CAF, however, routinely publishes details on Courts Martials, both upcoming and ones that have finished.
Why not have the same model for administrative law matters? Less severe sanctions (ICs, RWs, etc) need not be published for reasons of efficiency, but more severe administrative actions...certain types of ARs, for example Sexual Misconduct, would be published. Why can we disclose information on CMs on the Internet to the public...but not ARs?

Administrative actions...some people seem to focus lock on "remedial measures". Just a reminder, RMs are only one group of admin actions the CAF has in it's toolbelt.

DAOD 5019-2 refers:

5.9 Once an AR case file has been reviewed and a decision reached, the AA [approving authority] may, under applicable regulations, policies, orders, instructions and directives, initiate an administrative action, including:

  • remedial measures under DAOD 5019-4;
  • occupational transfer;
  • transfer between sub-components;
  • posting;
  • an offer of terms of service in any case in which an offer has not been made by CAF authorities;
  • reversion in rank; or
  • release or recommendation for release, as applicable.
According to the table to Sect 4.6, the CMP would be the AA for an AR involving a GOFO. If the GoC believes the Adm is not fit for the post, despite the evidence not supporting criminal charges, why not use our well-documented AR process and, if warranted, exercise the release action IAW the DAOD that "applies to officers and non-commissioned members of the Canadian Armed Forces (“CAF members”)? There's even a whole para on sexual misconduct in 5019.

Adm MacDonald was not charged (criminally). There's no disputing that. However, that isn't the only yardstick used to measure a CAF member. Where does his alleged conduct fall in our Statement of Defence Ethics policy?

DAOD 5019-0, Conduct and Performance Deficiencies
3.2 CAF members are expected to:

  1. meet established standards of behavior in applicable regulations, codes of conduct, policies, orders, instructions and directives, including the DND and CF Code of Values and Ethics and Duty with Honour: The Profession of Arms in Canada;
  2. meet established standards of performance in the execution of their duties, tasks and responsibilities, based on their current rank, military occupation, experience and position; and
  3. respect the dignity and value of all persons by treating them with respect and fairness at all times and in all places in accordance with the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Policy Statement

3.5 CAF members must be held accountable for conduct and performance deficiencies resulting from factors within their control. Hateful conduct by CAF members is prohibited.

Requirements
3.6 The chain of command must ensure that all CAF members are made aware of this DAOD. If the chain of command suspects that a conduct or performance deficiency by a CAF member resulting from factors within their control has occurred, the chain of command must take appropriate action. Depending on the circumstances, the appropriate action may involve administrative or disciplinary action, or both.

I don't know the details, facts, evidence in the Adm's case. I have no clue if he is (ethically, administratively) 'guilty' or not. Just some policy and standards to consider, whether your brandishing a pitch fork on behalf of either camp....
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
198
Points
630
When a jury reads its verdict do they say we find the defendant not guilty or do they say we find the defendant to be innocent? I believe it is the former. Once you have been accused, you are never again an innocent person.
 

hattrick72

Member
Reaction score
46
Points
380
When a jury reads its verdict do they say we find the defendant not guilty or do they say we find the defendant to be innocent? I believe it is the former. Once you have been accused, you are never again an innocent person.
Which is sad for the people that have been falsely accused of murder, tried, convicted, to be exonerated years later. I would like to think they are innocent, despite losing their innocence.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
2,106
Points
990
Legally, unless convicted of a criminal offense, you are innocent in terms of criminal law. That doesn’t mean you didn’t do the thing, it doesn’t mean you didn’t do any harm, it just means that the state has not prosecuted you for a specific criminal offense with a guilty verdict resulting.

The space between “factually did not do the thing”, and “proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” leaves a lot of room and can be very nebulous. Many wrongs can be done that are either not criminal, or that cannot be proven to be.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
702
Points
940
Legally, unless convicted of a criminal offense, you are innocent in terms of criminal law. That doesn’t mean you didn’t do the thing, it doesn’t mean you didn’t do any harm, it just means that the state has not prosecuted you for a specific criminal offense with a guilty verdict resulting.

The space between “factually did not do the thing”, and “proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” leaves a lot of room and can be very nebulous. Many wrongs can be done that are either not criminal, or that cannot be proven to be.
The biggest problem here is that it happened 11 years ago, at a party, where alcohol was likely served, good luck getting accurate witness statements. While I believe that all victims of crime should be able to come forward, I think we need to have a hard conversation of at what point after an incident is the likelihood of gathering accurate and credible evidence gone? Victims deserve to be heard but I feel like sexual misconduct is a broad spectrum and that more minor offenses shouldn't be pursued after a certain amount if time, example flashing, while more major things like sexual assault including Rape should be investigated.

NIS I believe needs its own sex crimes task force, trained by civilian police forces, both RCMP and others I'm order to cross train and increase over all passage of best practices. This task force would be fully independent, and report to the provost marshal, CDS, and MND, but only take orders from the MND or deputy minister
 
Top