• 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

QV

Sr. Member
Reaction score
82
Points
330
He was not "the accused." He was already convicted. He was unambiguously a sex offender.
If someone as an individual wants to go sit in the trail and testify on thier own behalf that Jon was a nice guy, then they can fill their boots.
There should never have been any letters of support from the the CAF or any part of the CAF.
Neither performance in Kandahar nor PTSD have any bearing in the matter of what Jon did.
I agree here. I think what keeps getting crossed is the term “sexual misconduct”. This guy committed violent indictable crimes against another person. Unlawfully entering another’s home and sexually assaulting them should never be even remotely in the same category as an inappropriate relationship. After he was convicted of this, the CAF goes on to state what a good guy he is so go easy... uh no he’s not. This would have been the time to abstain. This goes back to my assertion where discipline matters and crimes are being conflated in the CAF.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
404
Points
1,010
And we can also ask, had the convicted been Sgt. Bloggins, would these letters, written in the good name of the unit, been made and forwarded?? "Have faith in our leadership" has got to be about zero by now......and sinking.
 
Last edited:

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
287
Points
860
I'd like to suggest a potential possibility in regards to the Dawes letter... no idea if I am right or wrong, and we don't have any statements either way.

But is it possible that Dawes wrote him a character reference, not knowing the full details of the case against him? Or that the accused/convicted downplayed the events, or used their friendship to his advantage?


I've personally seen it happen, probably more than once - where someone has an employer, longtime family friend, even someone in the criminal justice community, write a character reference on their behalf - not knowing the details of the case, who would not have written the letter if they had.

I have no idea either way, just tossing it out there as a possibility?
 

dangerboy

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
161
Points
710
Statement from the MND

Every day, Defence Team members uphold the values of peace, freedom, and respect for the dignity of all people.

Recently we have seen sobering evidence that, for many of you, these values do not match your own lived experiences. We have listened and reflected on the words from those who have shared their accounts of sexual misconduct.

To every member in the Canadian Armed Forces and every person in the Department of National Defence who has been affected by sexual harassment and violence and felt that we were not there to support you, I am truly sorry.

Experts inside and outside National Defence have highlighted the gaps in our policies and practices that have led us to fail our fellow team members, and we recognize that bold action is needed to transform the culture of the Defence Team to one of dignity and respect.

This culture change must be comprehensive, lasting and address the systemic challenges at the root of the problem, including any value, policy, or practice that results in discrimination, biases, harmful stereotypes, abuses of power, or other harmful behaviours.

To begin understanding and addressing these challenges, the Government of Canada is setting up an Independent External Comprehensive Review of our institutional policies, practices, programs, procedures and culture.

This review will be led by Madam Louise Arbour, former Supreme Court Justice, carried out transparently, and with input from appropriate stakeholders. It builds on the report prepared by former Justice Marie Deschamps in 2015, taking a broader look at how and why our existing workplace dynamics enable harmful behaviours, and how we must change to address them.

In addition and support to this review, we are also standing up a new organization—the Chief, Professional Conduct and Culture.

Under the leadership of LGen Jennie Carignan this team will be responsible for creating the conditions for cultural transformation. They will unify, integrate, and coordinate efforts across the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.

Their goal is ensuring that our actions and behaviours reflect the very best parts of our organization, and Canadian society. We’re dedicated to creating lasting culture change across the Defence Team.

At the same time, we know we must do more to support people when they’ve been harmed. Recent announcements in Budget 2021 have outlined financial support for new programs to address sexual misconduct and gender-based violence across the Defence Team. These include a partnership with Veterans Affairs Canada to develop a peer support network for CAF members, and continued efforts to implement the Declaration of Victims’ Rights in our military justice system, to name a few.

These are just the first of many new steps that we are taking to build on the positive aspects of our culture while shedding the toxic and outdated values, practices, and policies that harm our people.

I remain grateful every day for the hard work I see from all members of the Defence Team. I am proud of the work you do. The efforts we are starting today are my commitment to ensure that every member of the Defence Team can go about their work with dignity, respect and a renewed trust in the organization that supports them. You deserve no less.

The Honourable Harjit S. Sajjan

Minister of National Defence
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
257
Points
880
Russell Williams kept his pension after confessing to and being found guilty of murdering one of his own troops.
He shouldn't have either.

That's a little extreme isn't it? A lapse in judgement such as this isn't criminal and has no bearing on someone's previous honourable service.
That sounds remarkably like the spirit of the letter these officers wrote in defense of a convicted rapist.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
257
Points
880
Another external review by a retired justice.


Interestingly, it appears that MGen Carrignan will be promoted (either to LGen or Lt-Gov🙃), as Chief of Professional Conduct:

"Sajjan also announced the creation of the Chief Professional Conduct and Culture, led by Lt.-Gov. Jennie Carignan, which will function as an internal organization coordinating between branches to establish culture change."
So Officers policing officers. Sounds reasonable. Its worked for the last few hundred years.

I wish Gen Carrignan the best and I hope she's successful, but I have lost faith that the commissioned folks have the moral fortitude to police themselves or the CAF as a whole in general terms.
 

PuckChaser

Army.ca Fixture
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
294
Points
1,030
He was not "the accused." He was already convicted. He was unambiguously a sex offender.
If someone as an individual wants to go sit in the trail and testify on thier own behalf that Jon was a nice guy, then they can fill their boots.
There should never have been any letters of support from the the CAF or any part of the CAF.
Neither performance in Kandahar nor PTSD have any bearing in the matter of what Jon did.
Out of all that you cherry picked 3 words and took them out of context.

Hamilton is an offender, he was convicted. I was speaking it much broader terms about both accused individuals and offenders being given all of their entitled rights under the Charter. As much as we want to tar and feather these folks or march them through the streets yelling "Shame" like Game of Thrones, they're still Canadian Citizens and should see due process.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
257
Points
880
Out of all that you cherry picked 3 words and took them out of context.

Hamilton is an offender, he was convicted. I was speaking it much broader terms about both accused individuals and offenders being given all of their entitled rights under the Charter. As much as we want to tar and feather these folks or march them through the streets yelling "Shame" like Game of Thrones, they're still Canadian Citizens and should see due process.
He did receive due process and was convicted. And after the conviction letters were submitted to the court in defence of his character. I'm not sure what you two are arguing about.
 

QV

Sr. Member
Reaction score
82
Points
330
He shouldn't have either.


That sounds remarkably like the spirit of the letter these officers wrote in defense of a convicted rapist.
To take his money would be stealing. It would be the same as Walmart taking a former employees RRSP contributions somehow. Just because someone commits a grievous crime doesn’t mean the state can now commit crimes against the accused/ convicted.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
257
Points
880
To take his money would be stealing. It would be the same as Walmart taking a former employees RRSP contributions somehow. Just because someone commits a grievous crime doesn’t mean the state can now commit crimes against the accused/ convicted.

I would say defending a rapist is stealing the faith and trust we place in the CoC. Give him a return of contributions.
 

mariomike

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
191
Points
930
I'm not an expert on pension law. But, my understanding is once an employee is vested in a pension plan, he or she has the right to keep it. Aka "locked in".

Any SMEs please correct me if I'm wrong.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
724
Points
910
He shouldn't have either.


That sounds remarkably like the spirit of the letter these officers wrote in defense of a convicted rapist.
Then lobby your MP to submit a bill in Parliament that might one day become a law that strips people of their pensions, if convicted of some level of crime.

Quick question or two, if it is not too much trouble:

What level of crime between DUI and murder loses someone their pension?

Is this just the CAF? All Federal Gov’t? The entire country?

RRSPs, too?

Where does the confiscated pension go? The victim? General Revenues?

What do we do about the now newly destitute ex-service member (and convicted criminal) once they have served their sentence? How about the (probably) spouse and kids that you just plunged into poverty? Too bad, sad? Can they apply for welfare?

Not defending convicted criminals, I just think you potentially might create a whole new class of issues, if you legalize pension confiscation.
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
118
Points
680
Out of all that you cherry picked 3 words and took them out of context.

Hamilton is an offender, he was convicted. I was speaking it much broader terms about both accused individuals and offenders being given all of their entitled rights under the Charter. As much as we want to tar and feather these folks or march them through the streets yelling "Shame" like Game of Thrones, they're still Canadian Citizens and should see due process.
No Canadian has a charter right that the Canadian Armed Forces (or any part of it) will defend their honour after having been convicted of a predatory behaviour. If an individual, acting as an individual, want to go on the stand and give a character reference then that is the individual's decision. Never in the history of forever should there have been a letter on PPCLI letterhead saying this rapist is actually a good guy.
 

PuckChaser

Army.ca Fixture
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
294
Points
1,030
No, but offenders are entitled to character references in sentencing mitigation. If the CAF takes a stand banning all CAF members for filing letters on behalf, then we are influencing due process. There's a way to provide a character reference based on past actions that isn't a glowing recommendation on their current behaviour, clearly these 2 Patricias missed that mark.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
798
Points
890
Then lobby your MP to submit a bill in Parliament that might one day become a law that strips people of their pensions, if convicted of some level of crime.

Quick question or two, if it is not too much trouble:

What level of crime between DUI and murder loses someone their pension?

Is this just the CAF? All Federal Gov’t? The entire country?

RRSPs, too?

Where does the confiscated pension go? The victim? General Revenues?

What do we do about the now newly destitute ex-service member (and convicted criminal) once they have served their sentence? How about the (probably) spouse and kids that you just plunged into poverty? Too bad, sad? Can they apply for welfare?

Not defending convicted criminals, I just think you potentially might create a whole new class of issues, if you legalize pension confiscation.
The RCMP Superannuation Act allows for a member dismissed for misconduct to be given a return of contributions, or Treasury Board may exercise discretion to allow the member to receive their pension. TBS has recently started making greater use of this provision.

It would require a similar amendment to the CF Superannuation Act.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
257
Points
880
Then lobby your MP to submit a bill in Parliament that might one day become a law that strips people of their pensions, if convicted of some level of crime.

Quick question or two, if it is not too much trouble:

What level of crime between DUI and murder loses someone their pension?

When a Snr Officer in seen to defend the character of another rapist officer this does nothing but work to errod the CoC. I can tell you right now in my lines the rumblings are not good and we are seeing people show their displeasure for the perceived lenience towards officers in punishment in these matters with their feet.

Throw into this that the victim was not only a JR Officer but married to another officer who has been bullied by the convicted. This seems to be an especially egregious crime and while the punishment for the offender needs to be swift and vicious the same must be for anyone who can be seen to support the convicted. The trust in the CoC must be maintained and that means sometimes when people step out of line in scenarios like this we need to make an example of them.

Is this just the CAF? All Federal Gov’t? The entire country?

I am only talking CAF.

RRSPs, too?

That depends did the CAF make direct contributions ?

Where does the confiscated pension go? The victim? General Revenues?

I like the idea of giving it to the victim.

What do we do about the now newly destitute ex-service member (and convicted criminal) once they have served their sentence? How about the (probably) spouse and kids that you just plunged into poverty? Too bad, sad? Can they apply for welfare?

Not defending convicted criminals, I just think you potentially might create a whole new class of issues, if you legalize pension confiscation.

Sounds like someone should have used better judgement before they put the livelihood of their family at stake.

I'm certain CANSOF was just as supportive and understanding and wrote letters of support for Cpl Collier, convicted of theft a couple years ago.

Oh.

Never mind.
Is this establishing a pattern perhaps ?
 

IRONMAN3

Sr. Member
Reaction score
6
Points
180
CAF only has itself to blame for this ongoing wave of embarrassment. Now there is an MND fumbling through a press conference and the only bonus this time around is that the CDS (acting) did not throw senior NCOs under the bus. There were key words thrown out, highly respected people profiled and introduced, directives explained etc... The positive for the Federal gov't/DND/CAF on this is that the Class Action was settled before this current wave of Duty Without Honour!
 
Last edited:

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,550
Points
1,060
I'm certain CANSOF was just as supportive and understanding and wrote letters of support for Cpl Collier, convicted of theft a couple years ago.

Oh.

Never mind.

monty python wink GIF
 
Top