• 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

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
1,309
Points
1,110
G2G,

I would argue that in today’s Canadian society, adultery is more morally accepted than before. Without adultery being specifically stated in the QR&Os, you’d have a hard time proving it contravened them. Seems like you may be applying your own moral standards in the discussion, the very thing you are accusing Altair of doing.

If adultery was indeed a contravention of QR&Os, should we charge anyone that is suspected of extra-marital activities?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,772
Points
1,040
G2G,

I would argue that in today’s Canadian society, adultery is more morally accepted than before. Without adultery being specifically stated in the QR&Os, you’d have a hard time proving it contravened them. Seems like you may be applying your own moral standards in the discussion, the very thing you are accusing Altair of doing.

If adultery was indeed a contravention of QR&Os, should we charge anyone that is suspected of extra-marital activities?

The answer to your question lies in the notes to s 129 which basically set out the essential elements of the crime that need to be proven for a conviction. These say amongst other things:

(A) A service tribunal would not be warranted in convicting an accused of this offence laid under section 129 of the National Defence Act unless of the opinion that the act, etc., proved was to the prejudice of both good order and discipline, having regard to its nature and to the circumstances in which it took place.
and
(C) The words “good order” used in section 129 of the National Defence Act are wide enough to include good order in the sense in which the words would be understood in civil life and applicable to civilians and in the sense in which they would be understood in military life as applicable to members of a military force. It is not sufficient to prove that the act, etc., is prejudicial to good order but it must also be proved that the act was prejudicial to discipline.

Accordingly, adultery, while not specifically set out as an offence, could form the basis of a conviction if the evidence establishes, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the adultery in the circumstances of the case was both prejudicial to good order and prejudicial to discipline. That is in fact how it works under the US Uniform Code of Military Justice. The offence is virtually identical to our s 129 but the notes in the US military's Manual for Courts Martial (which is much, much more comprehensive and detailed then our QR&Os) detail how adultery constitutes one of the ways that good order and discipline is broken.

I can recall one situation which was dealt with otherwise than a court martial but where a charge under what was then called s 119 could easily have been brought and successfully prosecuted because in the circumstances of that case there was absolutely no doubt that the circumstances were both a breach of good order and of discipline.

The matter is not one of morality. It's one of whether or not the particular circumstances meet the essential requirements of the offence.

🍻
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,389
Points
1,360
SSM, my case has been that Vance’s conduct contravened 19.14(2).b. Adulterous conduct is but one factor that has caused discouragement by subordinate members of the CAF. I take no issue with others choosing adultery itself, although I feel entitled to judge them and their inability to uphold mutually-agreed vows of fidelity, but I do take issue with leaders who are dishonest to their spouses yet expect respect and assumption from subordinates of otherwise honest behaviour for their conduct as leaders in the CAF. Selective morality gives issue to the validity or lack thereof of trust. Untrustful leaders are not honourable principled leaders, and those under such leaders’ command have every right to be discouraged and betrayed.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,198
Points
1,010
More accepted, sure. By very much, doubtful. It is tolerated. I don't know anyone wounded by it who learned to accept it. Most of the people I know who observe it don't get wound up about it but I wouldn't describe them as "accepting".

I'll take the rap for repeatedly returning to the topic of infidelity. It's worth discussing because it's usually the first step to the other problems. Most senior people are married for years before they get around to being tempted by the junior staff at work.

Well, you seem to know a lot about the issue.

Sure, it happens often enough.

So we have soldiers spying on other soldiers, soldiers trying to gather evidence of other soldiers having affairs, and a potential spouse tipline for cheating soldiers.

We must live in two different realities. "Who is banging who" is usually common knowledge among third parties long before it gets back to those with a direct interest for the simple reason that the offender makes the most effort to conceal it from the partner, with declining effort after that the further away everyone is from "partner".
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
I'll take the rap for repeatedly returning to the topic of infidelity. It's worth discussing because it's usually the first step to the other problems. Most senior people are married for years before they get around to being tempted by the junior staff at work.
No no no,G2G has made it clear that it is all my fault.

Of course.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,576
Points
1,110
No no no,G2G has made it clear that it is all my fault.

Of course.
A friend, who I trust implicitly, has advised me that LGen Coates' marriage was over in every sense but legally, long before he committed "adultery" as has been postulated on here, and perpetuated by the media. Why some folks keep going down this rabbit hole is deeply perplexing and disturbing; I would posit that most posters know at least one colleague who has been in a failed marriage and then started a new relationship, in many cases before the legal documents for dissolution of the previous marriage were signed.

That he was a senior officer, and got embroiled by proxy in the latest scandal, is understandable, given the current information environment, but not defensible, nor should he be answerable for his actions to any of you. Firing rockets from the safety of your compound with what appears to be flawed intelligence is a path rife with peril.
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
A friend, who I trust implicitly, has advised me that LGen Coates' marriage was over in every sense but legally, long before he committed "adultery" as has been postulated on here, and perpetuated by the media. Why some folks keep going down this rabbit hole is deeply perplexing and disturbing; I would posit that most posters know at least one colleague who has been in a failed marriage and then started a new relationship, in many cases before the legal documents for dissolution of the previous marriage were signed.

That he was a senior officer, and got embroiled by proxy in the latest scandal, is understandable, given the current information environment, but not defensible, nor should he be answerable for his actions to any of you. Firing rockets from the safety of your compound with what appears to be flawed intelligence is a path rife with peril.
I agree very much with this, however some people are more judgemental than others it would appear.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,772
Points
1,040
Those of you in this thread who are apologists for adultery seem to concentrate on a situation where the adultery is more morally acceptable in modern society seem to focus on scenarios where the marriage of one of the parties involved is practically but not legally over. I think that the vast majority of us who are not okay with adultery are not so naïve as to say that we don't recognize that there are situations where a marriage breaks down and, while waiting for the legal paperwork to settle, the parties move on to new relationships. For most of us that is morally acceptable.

How about a scenario where an officer, who remains "happily married" and has no intention of dissolving that marriage, sends one of his subordinates on one course and TD tasking after another so that he can have opportunities for recreational sex with the subordinate's wife. Would that offend your level of morality? Or good order and discipline?

The circumstances for sexual relations are close to infinite. Many have absolutely zero impact on good order and discipline. Like others, I can easily accept the scenario where the marriage has broken down and the parties move on to other relationships even before divorce is final. The key here is that each of the partners is aware of the fact that the marriage is over and are living separate and apart emotionally if not physically. On the other hand, I cannot accept someone who cheats on his wife or her husband in a clandestine fashion while pretending the marital relationship is ongoing. That is the breaking of an oath which would make me seriously question the honesty and reliability of the individual in other matters such as how fairly he/she treats subordinates or any of the many other ethical obligations of the job. Trust is everything in the military. Once people have cause to question whether they can trust you or not, the fabric of discipline is torn.

$0.02

🍻
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
Those of you in this thread who are apologists for adultery seem to concentrate on a situation where the adultery is more morally acceptable in modern society seem to focus on scenarios where the marriage of one of the parties involved is practically but not legally over. I think that the vast majority of us who are not okay with adultery are not so naïve as to say that we don't recognize that there are situations where a marriage breaks down and, while waiting for the legal paperwork to settle, the parties move on to new relationships. For most of us that is morally acceptable.

How about a scenario where an officer, who remains "happily married" and has no intention of dissolving that marriage, sends one of his subordinates on one course and TD tasking after another so that he can have opportunities for recreational sex with the subordinate's wife. Would that offend your level of morality? Or good order and discipline?

The circumstances for sexual relations are close to infinite. Many have absolutely zero impact on good order and discipline. Like others, I can easily accept the scenario where the marriage has broken down and the parties move on to other relationships even before divorce is final. The key here is that each of the partners is aware of the fact that the marriage is over and are living separate and apart emotionally if not physically. On the other hand, I cannot accept someone who cheats on his wife or her husband in a clandestine fashion while pretending the marital relationship is ongoing. That is the breaking of an oath which would make me seriously question the honesty and reliability of the individual in other matters such as how fairly he/she treats subordinates or any of the many other ethical obligations of the job. Trust is everything in the military. Once people have cause to question whether they can trust you or not, the fabric of discipline is torn.

$0.02

🍻
Morally wrong? Yes.

Should it effect career? No.

Personally I have way more issues with soldiers who drink and drive.
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
Actually in terms of moral failings, I have things that rate a lot higher than adultery.

Domestic abuse.

Drug use.

Alcohol abuse.

Drinking and driving.

Work relationships(Hello Gen Vance)

Sexism

Racism

Then maybe I slot in adultery.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,389
Points
1,360
Morally wrong? Yes.

Should it effect career? No.

Where is the dividing line when morally wrong behaviour should affect one’s career?

Personally I have way more issues with soldiers who drink and drive.
Do you feel the CAF does not address this issue appropriately?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,772
Points
1,040
Morally wrong? Yes.

Should it effect career? No.

Personally I have way more issues with soldiers who drink and drive.

So the scenario I presented, which incidentally is not merely hypothetical, doesn't cause you any concern at all?

😮
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
So the scenario I presented, which incidentally is not merely hypothetical, doesn't cause you any concern at all?

😮
As I have repeatedly said, so long as adultery does not effect work, and is legal I don't give a flying hoot.

The scenario you mentioned affects work.

And seeing as not all adultery is created equality, it makes little sense to have a blanket rule on it. It is better to judge things on a case per case basis.

What is happening here is "all adultery bad, stop all adultery"
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
Where is the dividing line when morally wrong behaviour should affect one’s career?
If it effects work. As in with a coworker, or coworkers spouse, or with questionable individuals (organized crime, reporters, spies).


Do you feel the CAF does not address this issue appropriately?
Lol, God no.

Caught drinking and driving, rehab. Seen it far too often.
 

Cronicbny

Member
Reaction score
19
Points
230
A friend, who I trust implicitly, has advised me that LGen Coates' marriage was over in every sense but legally, long before he committed "adultery" as has been postulated on here, and perpetuated by the media. Why some folks keep going down this rabbit hole is deeply perplexing and disturbing; I would posit that most posters know at least one colleague who has been in a failed marriage and then started a new relationship, in many cases before the legal documents for dissolution of the previous marriage were signed.

That he was a senior officer, and got embroiled by proxy in the latest scandal, is understandable, given the current information environment, but not defensible, nor should he be answerable for his actions to any of you. Firing rockets from the safety of your compound with what appears to be flawed intelligence is a path rife with peril.
Actually, I agree with most of what you posted. Except, when things finally "officially" dissolved, some of us Canadians had to explain to our US counterparts what was happening when an Assessor suddenly couldnt perform his duties from home. So, for that joyous duty - which I performed - I find it unforgiveable. It was initially left to others to communicate the facts to the personnel responsible for "having the watch".

Edit to add: do you know how embarassing it was, as a Canadian on crew, to have to figure out at which tertiary location the NORAD deputy was at so we could call him for CCIRs?
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
306
Points
930
I for one couldn’t care less about whether someone is faithful to their spouse. (And for those who believe that adultery is a major offence, I have some bad news about the man next in the succession plan to become King of Canada). I do care about sexual relationships poisoning the workplace.

We pay our senior military leaders a decent wage, they have 30 days annual a year, so they have resources and time. If they are looking for partners for some extracurricular ‘horizontal jogging’ then why do some immediately start looking in the workplace? Can‘t they go to bars and the internet? Or are some simply so institutionalized that they lack the social skills to ‘meet and greet‘ strangers, and are stuck in a sort of ‘Sexual Shawshank’?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,772
Points
1,040
I for one couldn’t care less about whether someone is faithful to their spouse. (And for those who believe that adultery is a major offence, I have some bad news about the man next in the succession plan to become King of Canada). I do care about sexual relationships poisoning the workplace.

We pay our senior military leaders a decent wage, they have 30 days annual a year, so they have resources and time. If they are looking for partners for some extracurricular ‘horizontal jogging’ then why do some immediately start looking in the workplace? Can‘t they go to bars and the internet? Or are some simply so institutionalized that they lack the social skills to ‘meet and greet‘ strangers, and are stuck in a sort of ‘Sexual Shawshank’?

And this is why I wouldn't trust the man to do the right thing when there is an issue that would pit his own self interest against that of the nation's. Luckily it probably doesn't matter what he does. I would think if he decides against this nation's interest we would quickly become a republic.

🍻
 

Mills Bomb

Jr. Member
Reaction score
155
Points
480
For those who want to go after adultery, what about the swingers?

I know many CAF members who are married and either openly or discretely swingers. They are happy. That has also been the basis of their relationship and marriage since day one, and it has benefitted both parties and even gotten some of them through long deployments. Some of these couples are even on tinder and other online dating sites. Some of them are also members of the gay community. I doubt many are on army.ca but I suspect most of you work with at least some of these types and may even have no idea.

By going after all CAF adultery, are you proposing the CAF goes into the bedroom and redefine the terms of their marriages? What if they don't want their co-workers knowing they are swingers, what if someone tries to rat them out?
 
Last edited:

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
4,454
Points
1,110
Morally wrong? Yes.

Should it effect career? No.

Personally I have way more issues with soldiers who drink and drive.
I’ve seen this happen or it was rumoured. The gentleman in question read a statement to the effect it never happened
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
For those who want to go after adultery, what about the swingers?

I know many CAF members who are married and either openly or discretely swingers. They are happy. That has also been the basis of their relationship and marriage since day one, and it has benefitted both parties and even gotten some of them through long deployments. Some of these couples are even on tinder and other online dating sites. Some of them are also members of the gay community. I doubt many are on army.ca but I suspect most of you work with at least some of these types and may even have no idea.

By going after all CAF adultery, are you proposing the CAF goes into the bedroom and redefine the terms of their marriages? What if they don't want their co-workers knowing they are swingers, what if someone tries to rat them out?
I'm sure the morality police would not like that one bit.

Fired.
 
Top