Sexual Misconduct Allegations in The CAF

[CBH99]

I truly think if Harper had been as open and transparent as they wanted him to be, Parliament would have been even more dry

Which is a wonderful thing. I want my PM’s to be fairly boring folks who run the country decently well, and are able to step up when needed. I’d much prefer that over this nonsense

 

[OldSolduer]

I've said it before. SOMEONE has seized an opportunity to publicly humiliate a GOFO over a slight of some sort.

SOMEONE got Butts hurt...…

We've seen this before.

 

[ballz]

Do you have knowledge of the payment arrangement between Fortin and his lawyer? I would have guessed retainer up front and % of settlement upon award, but if you have more insight, we’d be interested to know what you know.

Thomas G. Conway seems to be competent in litigation.

No idea, just being curious out loud and luckily OGBD could provide some insight.

Actually, Ballz, you are thinking in criminal law terms. This is a civil law suit. On every motion and at the end of the case, the court rules on legal costs and can award them to the prevailing party. In Ontario the usual basis is "condemning XXX to pay or do XX, with cost", which result in the winning lawyer filing a bill of cost on behalf of his client, which is then "taxed" (meaning evaluated for reasonableness) by a taxing master, who sets the amount due (in Ontario, that is usually something close to approx. 60% of what a reasonable average amount of time at a reasonable average lawyers hourly rate would be billed to a client in Toronto + all actual set expenses). However, in cases of unjust dismissal or anything affecting a person's reputation, if the court finds any indication of bad faith on the part of the employer or libeller, the court can order the costs on a "party and party" basis, meaning the lawyer simply supplies all of his/her actual billing to her client to the taxing master and he has to accept them in full.

Correct, I was thinking about how expensive top legal professionals cost and the 1,000,000+ speculated by many related to VAdm Norman's bill. While it's not a criminal case an expert lawyer is an expert lawyer so I imagine Thomas Conway's fees aren't cheap either.

So, if he went through the grievance system, none of the above would apply and therefore he'd be on the hook regardless? But since he's going this route he can get all of the fees paid for (assuming he wins)?

 

[PPCLI Guy]

The irony of the prime ministers rapey hands getting a pass is incredible.

Exactly

 

[Maxman1]

It's kind of interesting when you recall that the Liberal beef against Harper was that he was secretive and required everyone to tow a strict party line. Pot - kettle - black.

They truly are the authoritarians they accused Harper of being.

 

[PuckChaser]

Moved the election stuff where it belongs. I know there's a pretty close political nexus to these GOFO removals, but that got way off the rails quick.

- Milnet.ca Staff

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Moved the election stuff where it belongs. I know there's a pretty close political nexus to these GOFO removals, but that got way off the rails quick.

- Milnet.ca Staff

Thank-you and sorry for the derail!

 

[dimsum]

Investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Admiral Art McDonald ends without charges

​

An investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Admiral Art McDonald has concluded and will not result in any charges against Canada's top military commander.

"The investigation did not reveal evidence to support the laying of charges under either the Code of Service Discipline or the Criminal Code of Canada," said a statement issued by the Canadian Forces Provost Marshal today,

The investigation into McDonald was handled by the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS), which says it interviewed "a large number of potential witnesses" connected to the case.

"The evidence gathered from these witnesses was considered in the ultimate determination that the evidence did not support the laying of any charges," the statement continued.

CFNIS said it will not release any further details due to the privacy rights of the people involved.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/art-mcdonald-investigation-concludes-1.6132999

 

[dangerboy]

The question is what happens now? Does he go back to being CDS? I doubt it.

 

[Kilted]

The question is what happens now? Does he go back to being CDS? I doubt it.

I think that there will be a lot of people who will be upset either way.

 

[MilEME09]

I think that there will be a lot of people who will be upset either way.

Plenty of comments on Facebook claiming white privilege, connections to the liberals...etc... whole cleared innocent by putting this in the media the court of public opinion already found him guilty and his career is likely dome as a result.

 

[FSTO]

Is it not the PM’s prerogative to give him the job back? But then that would halt his ability to be disappointed in the decision process of the CAF GOFOs.

 

[Good2Golf]

Is it not the PM’s prerogative to give him the job back? But then that would halt his ability to be disappointed in the decision process of the CAF GOFOs.

It is, but many are willing to bet that the PM will chose instead to be all preachy about how the CAF needs to be even better, ignoring that fact that he himself is a sexual assaulter, cultural appropriator, woman’s chest groper, black pretender, etc. but that was far enough in his past that he’s moved on, but the CAF needs to work harder because…that’s what Canadians expect. Life in the ivory moral towers is grand indeed…if you’re a false-feminist politician.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think that there will be a lot of people who will be upset either way.

No doubt, this is a tough one. I can't see this become anything but an albatross around his neck, so probably best if he just quietly retires. On one hand, he is a good institutional leader from what I've seen, but his credibility is gone here, so can't see him being effective if reinstated as CDS, and there aren't really any other employment options.

 

[ballz]

I think that there will be a lot of people who will be upset either way.

Well of course.... broken record here, but without any transparency, those who are on the wrong side of this issue can't be corrected / have their concerns addressed.

One side seems to think that just because there's no charges laid, he should be "exonerated." That's dumb. The standard for laying a charge is higher than the balance of probabilities. The evidence could very well suggest that he is, in fact, guilty of sexual assault.

The other side seems to think that there is ample evidence but the institution is covering it up / not being firm enough.

Neither side can be shown to be incorrect without transparency. We need to amend the Privacy Act and start regulating ourselves like a proper profession.

 

[brihard]

Well of course.... broken record here, but without any transparency, those who are on the wrong side of this issue can't be corrected / have their concerns addressed.

One side seems to think that just because there's no charges laid, he should be "exonerated." That's dumb. The standard for laying a charge is higher than the balance of probabilities. The evidence could very well suggest that he is, in fact, guilty of sexual assault.

The other side seems to think that there is ample evidence but the institution is covering it up / not being firm enough.

Neither side can be shown to be incorrect without transparency. We need to amend the Privacy Act and start regulating ourselves like a proper profession.

Without a misconduct proceeding going through a court or other quasi-judicial body, what is it that you imagine would be made public?

It sounds like you basically want CAF members to lose the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in conduct measures. Ok, fine, but you need to be prepared for some sanctions (Eg, cells) to be removed from the table. You would probably be most likely to find an analogous system in police conduct matters- but even that doesn’t mean all are published or subject to disclosure.

What information, in the CDS’ case, do you think should be made public?

 

[McG]

It sounds like you basically want CAF members to lose the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in conduct measures.

Careful that you are not building a strawman argument. I did not see anything suggesting what you are attacking.

Without a misconduct proceeding going through a court or other quasi-judicial body, what is it that you imagine would be made public?

I think a judicial body is what the post was proposing. Most professions have a disciplinary body that holds members accountable to professional standards of conduct and performance. These bodies conduct trials in public and they can typically levy sanctions based on a balance of probabilities.

We don’t have this. Our Courts Martial and summary trials are all held to the level of beyond reasonable doubt, and our remedial measures system is kept hidden and behind closed doors.

For a profession, it is healthy that the public can see it holds its members to account. If we had a tribunal system that could convict some offences on balance of probabilities, then situations such as the current one could be resolved in public without people imagining that the institution is involved in a cover-up.

 

[ballz]

Without a misconduct proceeding going through a court or other quasi-judicial body, what is it that you imagine would be made public?

It sounds like you basically want CAF members to lose the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in conduct measures. Ok, fine, but you need to be prepared for some sanctions (Eg, cells) to be removed from the table. You would probably be most likely to find an analogous system in police conduct matters- but even that doesn’t mean all are published or subject to disclosure.

What information, in the CDS’ case, do you think should be made public?

Nope, not at all. MCG has explained it pretty well, as I have on other threads.

We use the term "discipline" regarding court martials / summary trials, but in reality that's a justice system.

When other professions use "discipline," it's synonymous with our administrative actions. Sanctions for performance and conduct that are not criminal / illegal but are not accepted by the profession nonetheless. Similar to us, you could be charged for fraud in the justice system (civilian courts) and sanctioned by your profession at the same time, completely separate proceedings that are independent of one another. The professional "disciplinary proceeding" (again, this administrative action) is public, the evidence is public, the decisions are public, the reasonings are public, the sanctions are public, etc.

There are plenty of items that don't meet proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that a profession needs to deal with. If anyone thinks we should only be able to sanction people professionally if it's been "proven beyond a reasonable doubt," then you're part of the problem. If we've got evidence beyond the balance of probabilities that someone sexually assaulted someone, I don't give a damn about their "innocence until proven guilty," that's so we don't accidentally lock someone up, it's not to protect their employment with our organization. Release under 2a for unsatisfactory conduct, see ya later buds.

For some reason we seem to think administrative measures / balance of probabilities are good enough for Corporals but not for Colonels.

Every other self-regulated profession has managed to figure this out, time for the CAF to turn down the suck.

 

[dapaterson]

No doubt, this is a tough one. I can't see this become anything but an albatross around his neck, so probably best if he just quietly retires. On one hand, he is a good institutional leader from what I've seen, but his credibility is gone here, so can't see him being effective if reinstated as CDS, and there aren't really any other employment options.

A good institutional leader would have actually changed the Naval ranks in English, and not just made an announcement without legal authority to do so.

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

I think the more pressing question is, what will the CAF and Department do to rehabilitate MacDonald's reputation? Nothing of course. The institution and the government are very quick to throw a member under the bus and trash the person's reputation, but do nothing to rehabilitate it after the fact? Once charges were dropped against Norman, nothing was done to publicly repair the damage to his personal and professional reputation. Anyone remember LCol Mason Stalker? Removed from command of an Infantry Battalion, dragged publicly through the mud by Vance, et al., then when the charges were dropped, quietly promoted and posted away (cash in hand of course). Same will happen with Fortin after the Quebec prosecutor drops the charges.