# Military accepts B.C. man who allegedly boasted of murders, said he was Christ



## super26 (28 Jan 2008)

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=268142


Private Stephen Cox had been at the Canadian Forces Leadership and Recruit School in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu for all of 10 days when the complaints began.

In handwritten statements to a Military Police corporal, a dozen platoon members said Pte. Cox had claimed to be the Son of Man and the Second Coming of Christ.

He said God had chosen him to cleanse the world of evil and that he was going to kill the Jews, Catholics, blacks, aboriginals, gays and lesbians, they wrote.

"I heard Private Cox talk of mass genocide of all humans who do not share his beliefs," one complaint read. Said another, "It was revealed to him that he was the second Christ and it was his duty to join the Canadian Army and get into JTF-2 [the special forces] so that he would be in place for the apocalypse in 2012."

The military is supposed to screen its recruits before sending them to basic training. The Canadian Forces calls screening "essential" to ensuring that Canada's soldiers are loyal, trustworthy and reliable.

So how did Pte. Cox make it to boot camp?

He was known to police as a marijuana trafficker and wannabe underworld figure who, during a police sting, had boasted about killing a B.C. couple and hacking up their bodies with a knife. But he still managed to pass the "reliability screening" that all applicants to the armed forces undergo.

How commonly this happens is anyone's guess. The Canadian Forces has no records on how many applicants fail the reliability screening -- which includes criminal records, credit and reference checks.

But rejection figures for the next level of screening, which begins only once a recruit has started basic training, are low: Since 2002, the military has found reason to deny just six of the almost 75,000 people it screened.

Mr. Cox says he was upfront with recruiters in Vancouver about his troubles with police, but Captain Cindy Tessier, spokeswoman for the Canadian Forces Provost Marshall, said Mr. Cox's past did not turn up during screening.

"It didn't. I don't know why it didn't," she said. "The bottom line is: The information wasn't available during the screening process. But the important thing is [that] as soon as his behaviour was brought to the attention of the authorities, it was dealt with."

---

Stephen Cox grew up in Wales as Stephen Mark Richards. He was a Sea Cadet and Marine Cadet but in 1980 he left school at age 16 to join the Royal Marines Commando and was trained by the SAS, the British Special Forces.

He moved to British Columbia, worked as a welder and befriended an associate of the Hells Angels. When the headless remains of a marijuana grow-operator named John Bayer Jr. were found by spotted owl researchers on a logging road near Spuzzum, B.C., on Aug. 15, 1996, Mr. Cox became a suspect.

RCMP homicide investigators found a marijuana grow-room in a bunker under Mr. Bayer's garage. They also found documents linking him to Dale Weir. Phone records showed that, on the day of the murder, Mr. Cox had made calls from Mr. Weir's home in Chilliwack, B.C., and then left four days later for Colombia, the home of his wife, Maria Hurtado Zafra.


----------



## super26 (28 Jan 2008)

If you go to the link there is like 4 pages on this guy !!


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2008)

That is absolutely crazy!!  The link is not working for me.  Has he since been released?   ???


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jan 2008)

Yes.


----------



## Michael OLeary (28 Jan 2008)

We do have to keep in mind:

Being a person of interest to police does not equal having a criminal record, or ensure having any paperwork that might immediately appear during an initial security check.

Having religious fervor, even if he admitted it to the recruiter, can't be used as a means to deny enrollment - I would assume he didn't brief the recruiters like his fellow trainees.

We don't know what he admitted to during the recruitment process, or what evidence did or did not come to the attention of the recruiting process.  Since he was enrolled, we should assume that there was no significant evidence on which a clear denial of enrollment could be made.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jan 2008)

..and if he does have a mental illness,[as opposed to just trying to be a stooge] then I challenge anyone, even professionals, to diagnose that during the "good" times.

I remember taking a "client" down to ST. Mikes in Toronto to be committed as his prison sentence was over but the paperwork from our shrink had been dated wrong so the Doctor there said she couldn't hold him unless she gave him an evaluation. He answered everyone of her questions better than I could and even knew exactly where he was going [Seaton House] to get a residence so that he could then go to welfare[he even knew the address] and get his emergency funds.

Doc looks at my partner and me and says "Let him go",...so we release him from the 4 point tiedown, change him from 'baby dolls' and out the front door he walked...................still as nutty as a fruit bar.


----------



## dapaterson (28 Jan 2008)

I'd be curious to see what remedial action is being taken for the recruiter who interviewed this guy - that screening should also pick up the more "peculiar" segments of society that try to join the CF.


----------



## Sonnyjim (28 Jan 2008)

I have been saying for a while there needs to be a more thorough test or even personality test similar to the MMPI that the police give for screening. We have paid doctors and dentists, but we don't have as many paid psycologists or people who are capable of diagnosing a problem when they see one. I know one individual who works with CF that should not be in for mental health reasons but that individual is and it bothers everybody around them. We keep saying, something is going to happen and then it's going to be all over the headlines. We need to catch these people who aren't "mentally" fit to be in the army before they get in.


----------



## geo (28 Jan 2008)

Let's face it, given that we provide uniforms & weapon training, we attract all sort of semi strange people.
Our recruiters catch some.... our recruit instructors catch others.... our section commanders & Troop leaders catch others still.
It's an ongoing process & I figure that, in this case, the "system" worked as it should.

The nutbar who did Dawson college (Kimveer Gill) was Identified during recruit training...
The nutbar who did the Quebec legislature (Cpl Lortie) was only identified after he executed his mission...
The nutbar who did the metro Toronto & Maryland police (Pte Schumacher) was only identified after he executed his mission...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jan 2008)

Sonnyjim said:
			
		

> I have been saying for a while there needs to be a more thorough test or even personality test similar to the MMPI that the police give for screening. We have paid doctors and dentists, but we don't have as many paid psycologists or people who are capable of diagnosing a problem when they see one. I know one individual who works with CF that should not be in for mental health reasons but that individual is and it bothers everybody around them. We keep saying, something is going to happen and then it's going to be all over the headlines. We need to catch these people who aren't "mentally" fit to be in the army before they get in.



You didn't read my previous post. did you?


----------



## Infanteer (28 Jan 2008)

I've worked within the recruit training system and I can tell you now that this isn't a surprise to me.  I've seen guys with files as thick as Sergeants on my desk.

Can't really blame the recruiters as it is the system we make them work in - forcing guys through a minimal paperwork cycle.  I'm surprised this guy wasn't in some sort of Commissioning program.... :-X


----------



## benny88 (28 Jan 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> The nutbar who did Dawson college (Kimveer Gill) was Identified during recruit training...
> The nutbar who did the Quebec legislature (Cpl Lortie) was only identified after he executed his mission...
> The nutbar who did the metro Toronto & Maryland police (Pte Schumacher) was only identified after he executed his mission...



   They also rejected Marc Lepine, the nutbar who did the Ecole Polytechnique during the interview process.


----------



## Reccesoldier (28 Jan 2008)

{Devils Advocate}
Hmmm, I says to myself.  I'm a bored tough guy and petty criminal so I think I'll join the army to learn how to handle weapons and maybe even get the chance to kill people.

So not having been convicted of any crime and being a rather normal individual I get through the CF maze and into Recruit school.

Hmmm, I says to myself.  This isn't nearly as much fun as the last Rambo movie I saw and having a real drill instructor isn't nearly as funny as that guy from Full Metal Jacket. How am I going to get the hell out of here?

I have an idea...


----------



## Trinity (28 Jan 2008)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Can't really blame the recruiters as it is the system we make them work in - forcing guys through a minimal paperwork cycle.  I'm surprised this guy wasn't in some sort of Commissioning program.... :-X



Well, if he was Jesus, perhaps the Chaplains branch   :


----------



## dimsum (28 Jan 2008)

super26 said:
			
		

> Stephen Cox grew up in Wales as Stephen Mark Richards. He was a Sea Cadet and Marine Cadet but in 1980 *he left school at age 16 to join the Royal Marines Commando and was trained by the SAS, the British Special Forces.*



Uh, anyone notice this?  I think that raises more alarm bells, for me at least.


----------



## blacktriangle (28 Jan 2008)

He's OLD!


----------



## benny88 (28 Jan 2008)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Uh, anyone notice this?  I think that raises more alarm bells, for me at least.




   How so? I would think anyone with prior military experience, especially with Special Forces time would be an appropriate addition to the CF.


----------



## Pte.Butt (28 Jan 2008)

benny88 said:
			
		

> How so? I would think anyone with prior military experience, especially with Special Forces time would be an appropriate addition to the CF.



I think he raising the point that if was he was with the Royal Marines Commando and the SAS, and then joined the Canadian Forces, then it's alarming no one noticed he was was a nutbar until now.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2008)

Pte.Butt said:
			
		

> I think he raising the point that if was he was with the Royal Marines Commando and the SAS, and then joined the Canadian Forces, then it's alarming no one noticed he was was a nutbar until now.



 ???

How does previous military experience make him a nutbar?


Just a question for all of you out there:  When were you last FingerPrinted?    Right now, unless you are going for a high level Security Clearance, none of you probably have been required to.  So how is an Enhanced Reliability Check going to turn up anything?


----------



## Pte.Butt (28 Jan 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> ???
> 
> How does previous military experience make him a nutbar?
> 
> ...



I am guessing he was aways a bit nutty, and it's alarming how no one in his previous military experience had noticed it.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (28 Jan 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> ???
> 
> How does previous military experience make him a nutbar?
> 
> ...



Hmm.. never got finger printed for my Level II Security Clearance but had to do it to get my Permanent ID Card


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Hmm.. never got finger printed for my Level II Security Clearance but had to do it to get my Permanent ID Card



And when was it you got issued a Permanent ID?  Not on enrolment.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (28 Jan 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> And when was it you got issued a Permanent ID?  Not on enrolment.



True on that George got it 2 years after joining.


----------



## benny88 (28 Jan 2008)

I got fingerprinted on my IAP, the same day they took my picture for my card, which I got a week or so later.


----------



## sgf (28 Jan 2008)

> Mr. Cox says he was upfront with recruiters in Vancouver about his troubles with police, but Captain Cindy Tessier, spokeswoman for the Canadian Forces Provost Marshall, said Mr. Cox's past did not turn up during screening.
> 
> "It didn't. I don't know why it didn't," she said. "The bottom line is: The information wasn't available during the screening process. But the important thing is [that] as soon as his behaviour was brought to the attention of the authorities, it was dealt with."



 if he was never charged with anything, then his criminal record check would be clean. Cox is obviously a liar and wasnt up front about  being known to police so how could the recuriter know. The important thing, is that as soon as his mental state became known, he has been released.


----------



## Pte.Butt (28 Jan 2008)

sgf said:
			
		

> if he was never charged with anything, then his criminal record check would be clean. Cox is obviously a liar and wasnt up front about  being known to police so how could the recuriter know. The important thing, is that as soon as his mental state became known, he has been released.




Definatly a ''better late then never'' case. All we need is for him to have one of his ''second coming of Christ'' moments, while pinned down by enemy fire in A-Stan.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2008)

benny88 said:
			
		

> I got fingerprinted on my IAP, the same day they took my picture for my card, which I got a week or so later.



 :

Did you go onto you IAP directly from the Recruiting Center?  Come on.  Read the previous posts.

As so many have already pointed out; if he had not been Charged and Convicted then he wouldn't have a Record.  Unless he was Fingerprinted, there would be no way to truly verify those facts.  As for mental faculties, a Psychiatric examination is not part of the enrolment process either.  So we catch him later "in the stream" when he shows symptoms of mental illness.  This is the way things happen in a Democratic Society that has a Charter of Human Rights governing every aspect of life.


----------



## Southern Boy (28 Jan 2008)

Full Metal Jacket in person.


----------



## Pencil Tech (28 Jan 2008)

I'm glad that the system worked in the end.


----------



## Rodahn (28 Jan 2008)

Reccesoldier said:
			
		

> {Devils Advocate}
> Hmmm, I says to myself.  I'm a bored tough guy and petty criminal so I think I'll join the army to learn how to handle weapons and maybe even get the chance to kill people.
> 
> So not having been convicted of any crime and being a rather normal individual I get through the CF maze and into Recruit school.
> ...



And I've known some very twisted, warped and depraved individuals that were actually very good soldiers...........




			
				popnfresh said:
			
		

> He's OLD!



Hmmm, that's something that happens to all of us..........


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just a question for all of you out there:  When were you last FingerPrinted?    Right now, unless you are going for a high level Security Clearance, none of you probably have been required to.  So how is an Enhanced Reliability Check going to turn up anything?



You're telling me this: 





> The RCMP charged Mr. Cox with two counts of murder. He was denied bail and spent 18 months in custody.


 never showed up on a enhanced reliability check?

I realize he was acquitted but he was indeed charged and spent time in jail.


----------



## Rodahn (28 Jan 2008)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> You're telling me this:  never showed up on a enhanced reliability check?
> 
> I realize he was acquitted but he was indeed charged and spent time in jail.



But unless I'm mistaken (which is possible) once the person has been acquitted, the evidence and all associated material used on that person is sealed and cannot be divulged, due to their proof of innocence in the law courts.


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2008)

I suppose that's probably true.  You'd think there's be a BIG red flag when his name is submitted, though.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2008)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> You're telling me this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Charged.  Spent 18 months in jail.  OK?  For two murders?  Looks like he wasn't convicted.  Innocent and punished for a crime he wasn't convicted of.  Should that show up on an Enhance Reliability Check.  Perhaps it did, and someone came to the conclusion that he was innocent and falsely imprisoned, or maybe it never showed up at all.


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2008)

I kind of figured that, George, as he DID get in.  Still makes you wonder, though.


----------



## geo (28 Jan 2008)

All he had to do was doctor up his documents a little bit...
Creative work with the birth certificate - use a second (or third) name instead of a first given name.... suddenly you create doubt about being the bad guy...


----------



## armyvern (28 Jan 2008)

popnfresh said:
			
		

> He's OLD!



He's 40/41.

That's NOT old.  

Take that back.


----------



## geo (28 Jan 2008)

40/41    A spring chicken!

Uh.... a sprung chicken?


----------



## armyvern (28 Jan 2008)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I suppose that's probably true.  You'd think there's be a BIG red flag when his name is submitted, though.



Mother of Gawd ... If there HAD been a huge RED flag because he had been charged ... we'd be reading the exact opposite spin on this story in the papers!! The left would have a field day.

Headline:

"Military denies entry to man found not guilty of murder because government illegally keeps files on those found innocent." The shock!! The horror!! Bad military!! Bad Government!!

I've come to conclusion -- that with todays MSM and a wacko left --- we can't win for fucking losing, and it doesn't matter which way we go on any _issue_ -- it'll be WRONG in their eyes. Bunch of twits.

Just look at the Prisoner exchange. The MSM and the left got what they have been screaming for -- yet they still aren't god-damn well satisfied. OPSEC is OPSEC --- and they know that, but it sure makes like a good conspiracy for them. Bunch of twits.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (29 Jan 2008)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Uh, anyone notice this?  I think that raises more alarm bells, for me at least.



It only raises alarm bells for me in that everyone in the media seems to believe it. He could have said anything. I seriously doubt he was a Royal Marines Commando......after all, none of these fruitcakes are ever chefs or mechanics right?


----------



## geo (29 Jan 2008)

... well said TTG
A bolt - missing it's wing-nut


----------



## Col.Steiner (29 Jan 2008)

All that and no bells went off? But someone who teaches English in Japan for a year gets put through the ringer and waits for 2 years for the check to come back? It seems that things are done in a half-assed manner or extremely anal and thorough; common sense never coming into the equation. :rage:


----------



## armyvern (29 Jan 2008)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> It only raises alarm bells for me in that everyone in the media seems to believe it. He could have said anything. I seriously doubt he was a Royal Marines Commando......after all, none of these fruitcakes are ever chefs or mechanics right?



Actually, no one -- not even the CF spokeperson has denied his previous military service. So rather -- I'd suspect that's because it's a fact.

For all those of you yelling and screaming "HOW??", "How would the Royal Marines not have noticed", "What's happening to the recruiter who missed this etc" ... perhaps you should all re-read they very first article ...

where "the second coming himself" has stated that he never experienced these feelings or wanted to do these things until AFTER he was charged, and found innocent of those BC murders. He says that dealing with all that ... is what led to his current state.

Sometimes, it helps to read the entire thread ... and the articles reffed if one wants to avoid ranting about "Marine time" etc that occured well before the mental issues did.


----------



## Col.Steiner (29 Jan 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Actually, no one -- not even the CF spokeperson has denied his previous military service. So rather -- I'd suspect that's because it's a fact.
> 
> For all those of you yelling and screaming "HOW??", "How would the Royal Marines not have noticed", "What's happening to the recruiter who missed this etc" ... perhaps you should all re-read they very first article ...
> 
> ...



I really don't think this person all of a sudden went bat-shit-crazy AFTER he joined the forces! There must have been some signs that he was nuts during the interview, as I cannot believe someone like that falls through the cracks.


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> I really don't think this person all of a sudden went bat-crap-crazy AFTER he joined the forces! There must have been some signs that he was nuts during the interview, as I cannot believe someone like that falls through the cracks.



And what skills are you expecting a military career counselor to have that would enable pronouncing someone "bat-crap-crazy" during a recruiting interview?  I am quite certain if he was drooling and chanting throughout the interview it would have been noted.  

Try to imagine the crap that would arise if someone thought their application was turned down because some recruiter decided they weren't right in the head.  Read the forums here, we can't even get people to understand that their serious medical problems are rational grounds for denying their presumed "right" to serve, even after they've been formally refused.


----------



## geo (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> There must have been some signs that he was nuts during the interview, as I cannot believe someone like that falls through the cracks.



Uhhh... soo you were there & know for a fact that someone at the recruiting centre didn't do his job properly?

It's an bewildering thing to see the variety of people who show up on our doorstep, asking to be let in...  
Some people show their colours at day 1
Some people have learnt to hide their colours ... but it always comes out - sooner or later.


----------



## kincanucks (29 Jan 2008)

Michael O`Leary said:
			
		

> And what skills are you expecting a military career counselor to have that would enable pronouncing someone "bat-crap-crazy" during a recruiting interview?  I am quite certain if he was drooling and chanting throughout the interview it would have been noted.
> 
> Try to imagine the crap that would arise if someone thought their application was turned down because some recruiter decided they weren't right in the head.  Read the forums here, we can't even get people to understand that their serious medical problems are rational grounds for denying their presumed "right" to serve, even after they've been formally refused.



+1

I could see it now. "I am sorry Mr. Bloggins but I think you are completely off your rocker and therefore I m denying your application."  If I had that ability while in recruiting there would be a few less problems in the CF right now.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> All that and no bells went off? But someone who teaches English in Japan for a year gets put through the ringer and waits for 2 years for the check to come back? It seems that things are done in a half-assed manner or extremely anal and thorough; common sense never coming into the equation. :rage:



'Just going back to this.

The above shows a lack of knowledge of what actually happens in these "Checks".  First off, there are different agreements between the Governments of Japan and Canada, and those between the Governments of Canada and the UK.  On one hand you may have very cooperative links between Police and Intelligence agencies of the Commonwealth countries, and none or very little between non-Commonwealth nations.  Sadly, if there is no way to confirm a person's records in a foreign nation, then that person is "on hold" for a long time, until such records can be produced, verified or cleared.  

Second; nothing is done half-assed.  Yes they have to be anal and thorough.  What do you expect of a Security Check?  Or perhaps you figure we should just hand out automatic weapons and control of artillery pieces to any Joe Blow on the street?  Think about it.  You are talking about the Security of the Nation, not a job at Micky D's.

 :


----------



## Col.Steiner (29 Jan 2008)

Michael O`Leary said:
			
		

> And what skills are you expecting a military career counselor to have that would enable pronouncing someone "bat-crap-crazy" during a recruiting interview?  I am quite certain if he was drooling and chanting throughout the interview it would have been noted.
> 
> Try to imagine the crap that would arise if someone thought their application was turned down because some recruiter decided they weren't right in the head.  Read the forums here, we can't even get people to understand that their serious medical problems are rational grounds for denying their presumed "right" to serve, even after they've been formally refused.


They can turn down your application if they simply do not like your face! I have read the forums and the medical problems you speak of have nothing to do with what I said. What do you think the officer interview is all about? It is because you made it that far based on the right paperwork, but the interview is where they wean out the undesirables. And that can be capricious.


----------



## Col.Steiner (29 Jan 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> 'Just going back to this.
> 
> The above shows a lack of knowledge of what actually happens in these "Checks".  First off, there are different agreements between the Governments of Japan and Canada, and those between the Governments of Canada and the UK.  On one hand you may have very cooperative links between Police and Intelligence agencies of the Commonwealth countries, and none or very little between non-Commonwealth nations.  Sadly, if there is no way to confirm a person's records in a foreign nation, then that person is "on hold" for a long time, until such records can be produced, verified or cleared.
> 
> ...



With all due respect Mr.Wallace, I have to say bullsh1t to that. You don't think things in the recruiting process happen in a half-*** fashion? Try the Montreal recruiting center versus the Calgary center. In Montreal I had the officer interview, bypassing the  pre-sec clearance entirely. Moving out west and having to 'transfer' my file, the recruiters  told me they were 'by the books' and decided to make me go through the pre-sec procedure that Montreal decided to skip.  Does that sound as if things are done in a consistant and even-handed fashion? I speak from personal experience, not out of my ***. Out of respect I will also not insult you by adding the rolling eyes to my post.
ps. I am not disenchanted with the CF at all, I just think the culture of bureaucracy in the recruiting process is a joke. They talk the talk, but I haven't seen any streamlining of my application. And I am certainly not just 'off the street', I was in the godamn reserves prior to my full time application. What are they expecting to find, that I was inducted into the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo terrorist cult whilst a teacher?


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> They can turn down your application if they simply do not like your face! I have read the forums and the medical problems you speak of have nothing to do with what I said. What do you think the officer interview is all about? It is because you made it that far based on the right paperwork, but the interview is where they wean out the undesirables. And that can be capricious.



You are confusing an interview process that is deliberately subjective with an expectation that recruiters should asses candidates' mental health.


----------



## Col.Steiner (29 Jan 2008)

Isn't the interview process part of the recruiting process? Seemed to me that i was the last step. The only thing I am trying to say is that the nut job should not have made it past the interview process. Sure, everything before that is paperwork and certainly no recruiter will have the time,training or know how to pick up on anything suggesting mental illness, nor would it be possible. The interview, a sit down, one on one with an educated person should be a good opportunity to see if things are as they should be, and is 'deliberately subjective' as you say . I am sure the guy didn't just decide one day he was the frickin' messiah.


----------



## Remius (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> With all due respect Mr.Wallace, I have to say bullsh1t to that. You don't think things in the recruiting process happen in a half-*** fashion? Try the Montreal recruiting center versus the Calgary center. In Montreal I had the officer interview, bypassing the  pre-sec clearance entirely. Moving out west and having to 'transfer' my file, the recruiters  told me they were 'by the books' and decided to make me go through the pre-sec procedure that Montreal decided to skip.  Does that sound as if things are done in a consistant and even-handed fashion? I speak from personal experience, not out of my ***. Out of respect I will also not insult you by adding the rolling eyes to my post.
> ps. I am not disenchanted with the CF at all, I just think the culture of bureaucracy in the recruiting process is a joke. They talk the talk, but I haven't seen any streamlining of my application. And I am certainly not just 'off the street', I was in the godamn reserves prior to my full time application. What are they expecting to find, that I was inducted into the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo terrorist cult whilst a teacher?




Dude you need a reality check.  They didn't by-pass your pre-sec they just moved it to different stage of the process.  calgary has it right as the pre-sec can take a while (yes even if YOU chose to go to Japan) so why tie up valuable interview and medical space when you may not get cleared for 6 to 18 month and have to probably do it over again.  Also teh pre-sec has absolutely nothing to do with this guy's mental health issues.  George actually works closely with the recruiting system so be careful when you call BS to someone who might know more than you.  Your little experience with the recruiting world doesn't amount to much.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> Isn't the interview process part of the recruiting process? Seemed to me that i was the last step. The only thing I am trying to say is that the nut job should not have made it past the interview process. Sure, everything before that is paperwork and certainly no recruiter will have the time,training or know how to pick up on anything suggesting mental illness, nor would it be possible. The interview, a sit down, one on one with an educated person should be a good opportunity to see if things are as they should be, and is 'deliberately subjective' as you say . I am sure the guy didn't just decide one day he was the frickin' messiah.




..and when you have as many years as I have dealing with those with a variety of mental illnesses you will find out that, yes, one day he just may have decided that.

The onset of mental illness can be just like the onset of cancer, etc,....NO ONE gets to pick where and when it may effect someone.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner

Just to add to Crantor's reply, the pre-sec procedure is a very time consuming and labour intensive job for a small number of personnel to do.  Your pre-sec procedure was probably left to last in Montreal, like it is in Ottawa, because they have found it impractical to initialize Security Screenings on people who may fail the Medical, CFAT, Educational Requirements, Citizenship, or a number or other tests to join the CF.  Take for example; if you had failed your Medical, then someone would be wasting valuable time doing a Security Check on you, when they could be doing one on someone who had passed all the other entry requirements.


----------



## armyvern (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> With all due respect Mr.Wallace, I have to say bullsh1t to that. You don't think things in the recruiting process happen in a half-*** fashion? Try the Montreal recruiting center versus the Calgary center. In Montreal I had the officer interview, bypassing the  pre-sec clearance entirely. Moving out west and having to 'transfer' my file, the recruiters  told me they were 'by the books' and decided to make me go through the pre-sec procedure that Montreal decided to skip.  Does that sound as if things are done in a consistant and even-handed fashion? I speak from personal experience, not out of my ***. Out of respect I will also not insult you by adding the rolling eyes to my post.
> ps. I am not disenchanted with the CF at all, I just think the culture of bureaucracy in the recruiting process is a joke. They talk the talk, but I haven't seen any streamlining of my application. And I am certainly not just 'off the street', I was in the godamn reserves prior to my full time application. What are they expecting to find, that I was inducted into the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo terrorist cult whilst a teacher?



And you're going Officer??

No worries ... I'll add them:  :

Gawd help us ... may attitudes such as yours be the minority -- the "I'M SPECIAL & DESERVE STREAMLINING" attitude --- perhaps _your_ interviewer picked up on that??  

Word up -- you are not special despite your protestations otherwise, nor is a single one of us in this Team.


----------



## BinRat55 (29 Jan 2008)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> Isn't the interview process part of the recruiting process? Seemed to me that i was the last step. The only thing I am trying to say is that the nut job should not have made it past the interview process. ... The interview, a sit down, *one on one with an educated person* should be a good opportunity to see if things are as they should be, and is 'deliberately subjective' as you say . I am sure the guy didn't just decide one day he was the frickin' messiah.



Hmmm... how does it go, "Can't see the forest for the trees."?  I believe Theodore Bundy was almost a State Senator, wasn't he?  Actually had a part time job as a suicide counselor, didn't he?  Understand that ANYONE can talk a good game if they are trying.  Just because they are educated (again, Bundy was a call from the bar away from hanging a shingle) does NOT mean they cannot be insane, emotionally disturbed, troubled or even stoned!!  The interview process is what it is - an interview.  Basic training, past medical files (reviewed by proper authorities) and incidents will tell the tale.


----------



## Col.Steiner (30 Jan 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> And you're going Officer??
> 
> No worries ... I'll add them:  :
> 
> ...



I never said I wanted or demanded streamlining ArmyVern! But after nearly five fucking years and not a hell of a lot of progress in my file, I would think that is not quite right. I would think that your term 'special' however, does apply to my file! Give me a break with your team crap, i can't stand cliches.


----------



## Michael OLeary (30 Jan 2008)

Folks, we're done here for now.  If some new facts arise on the original issue the thread can be reopened.  Do not be surprised when any of your posts disappear if a Moderator cleans this thread to focus on the original discussion.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------

