# (SGT?) Franck Gervais (split from Walts, posers)



## x_para76

Did anyone see this Walt interviewed on the TV yesterday? Only difference is he was wearing an RCR cap badge on his horribly formed maroon beret.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Yup.   I believe the reporter has been contacted already.


----------



## OldSolduer

X_para76 said:
			
		

> Did anyone see this Walt interviewed on the TV yesterday? Only difference is he was wearing an RCR cap badge on his horribly formed maroon beret.



Who is this effin clown....... :facepalm:


----------



## x_para76

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Who is this effin clown....... :facepalm:



https://www.facebook.com/#!/franck.gervais.9?fref=ts


----------



## cavalryman

Not a member of Le Regiment de Hull, I can guarantee that.  And for cripes' sake.... an infantry sash while wearing an armoured regiment's cap badge?  Someone direct this man to some instructions about walting in style  :facepalm:


----------



## ModlrMike

Armoured cap badge, infantry sash (worn on the wrong side), aiguillettes, chin strap beard. If you're gonna Walt, go hard.


----------



## George Wallace

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1045145145502361


----------



## prairefire

He has white para wings, pathfinder badge and all the other things mentioned that do not add up. There are not that many actual pathfinders when I was still in. I am not even sure if they course is still run. But the numbers were never very great and everyone new each other directly or through reputation. 

His medals are highly suspect. My screen capture of his image was not great so correct me if I am wrong but he is wearing:

Medal of Bravery (MB) Not possible, not listed in GG lists of awards for bravery There are 3029 awards for bravery under all categories since 1964 and he is not listed anywhere.
*SSM - NATO * possible
looks like *ICCS *Awarded for 90 days cumulative service between 28 January 1973 to 30 April 1975 in Vietnam*Not possible he is not old enough *The only persons who I met in my time in from 1973 to 1989 that had that medal were one WO and 2 x Majors. And they were that rank in 1975.
*Non-Article 5 NATO* Medal for Operations in the Balkans* possible*
CD ?? Could be but my screen capture is not sharp enough.


----------



## George Wallace

Not likely the ICCS, but the UNPROFOR.

Ribbon doesn't look right for the CD.....Too much white.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

For what itt is worth, there is no Sgt Frank Gervais in OUTLOOK and once MM is back, I will check there. If recently retired, there should be record of a request to wear his uniform.
I never paid attention to these things before but for some reason, this year, this really pisses me off.


----------



## x_para76

prairefire said:
			
		

> He has white para wings, pathfinder badge and all the other things mentioned that do not add up. There are not that many actual pathfinders when I was still in. I am not even sure if they course is still run. But the numbers were never very great and everyone new each other directly or through reputation.
> 
> His medals are highly suspect. My screen capture of his image was not great so correct me if I am wrong but he is wearing:
> 
> Medal of Bravery (MB) Not possible, not listed in GG lists of awards for bravery There are 3029 awards for bravery under all categories since 1964 and he is not listed anywhere.
> *SSM - NATO * possible
> looks like *ICCS *Awarded for 90 days cumulative service between 28 January 1973 to 30 April 1975 in Vietnam*Not possible he is not old enough *The only persons who I met in my time in from 1973 to 1989 that had that medal were one WO and 2 x Majors. And they were that rank in 1975.
> *Non-Article 5 NATO* Medal for Operations in the Balkans* possible*
> CD ?? Could be but my screen capture is not sharp enough.



I thought the medal to the right of his SSM was the Peacekeeping medal?


----------



## dapaterson

There are some CANSOF members with medals that are not gazetted. I doubt that is the case here, but it has happened.


----------



## vonGarvin

Infantry Sgt in The RCR without sash?  Walt.
RCR Sgt with maroon beret but no brigade or div patches means he's not in 3 RCR.
He's not at the Canadian Army Advanced Warfare Centre.  

These two things mean "Walt"

Cyprus ribbon with NATO medal?  Walt.


Waltasaurus Rex


----------



## cudmore

Folks, 
I'm working on a story about this guy.  Please feel free to send me any intel/info.  I'm also looking for an ex-RCR pathfinder who would be willing to go on the record and help me establish how we know he's not a soldier. 
Best,
James
james.cudmore@cbc.ca


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

cudmore said:
			
		

> Folks,
> I'm working on a story about this guy.  Please feel free to send me any intel/info.  I'm also looking for an ex-RCR pathfinder who would be willing to go on the record and help me establish how we know he's not a soldier.
> Best,
> James
> james.cudmore@cbc.ca



...and, for those who don't know and may be a little hesitant,  Mr. Cudmore has always been one of the journalists on very good terms with army.ca. 
Bruce
Staff


----------



## George Wallace

There are numerous sites on Facebook made up of serving and former military members that are raging about this guy.  Many are already contacting James Cudmore (above) about this through CBC contact numbers in both Ottawa and Toronto.

These contact numbers were posted on another site following this:

CBC Ottawa Newsroom TEL: (613) 288-6445 or james.cudmore@cbc.ca

CBC Toronto is aware as well (416) 205 5808. Or (416) 205 2500.


The numerous Facebook sites tracking this character have numerous photos of this him in numerous versions of the CAF uniform, not only as an RCR.  As noted above, the Facebook page for Frank Gervais is now 'unavailable'.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> ...and, for those who don't know and may be a little hesitant,  Mr. Cudmore has always been one of the journalists on very good terms with army.ca.
> Bruce
> Staff


 :nod:


----------



## Danjanou

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> ...and, for those who don't know and may be a little hesitant,  Mr. Cudmore has always been one of the journalists on very good terms with army.ca.
> Bruce
> Staff




Probably because he is one of us. former M/Cpl J Cudmore.  8) 

Jamie  J*** T***** is former 3RCR and Pathfinder , I'll hook you up with him via FB tonight and see if he's willing to go on record.


----------



## jollyjacktar

George Wallace said:
			
		

> There are numerous sites on Facebook made up of serving and former military members that are raging about this guy.  Many are already contacting James Cudmore (above) about this through CBC contact numbers in both Ottawa and Toronto.
> 
> These contact numbers were posted on another site following this:
> 
> CBC Ottawa Newsroom TEL: (613) 288-6445 or james.cudmore@cbc.ca
> 
> CBC Toronto is aware as well (416) 205 5808. Or (416) 205 2500.
> 
> 
> The numerous Facebook sites tracking this character have numerous photos of this him in numerous versions of the CAF uniform, not only as an RCR.  As noted above, the Facebook page for Frank Gervais is now 'unavailable'.



I almost feel sorry for what is about to fall on Walt's head.  But I am looking forwards to the light show I anticipate will errupt when it does.   >


----------



## cryco

When veterans wear their uniforms, say for remembrance day, do they require permission? 
This guy's offence is for wearing a combination of stuff he hasn't earned/wasn't a part of, or just wearing the uniform as a ex-military/civilian, even if everything he wore made sense?


----------



## Danjanou

cryco said:
			
		

> When veterans wear their uniforms, say for remembrance day, do they require permission?
> This guy's offence is for wearing a combination of stuff he hasn't earned/wasn't a part of, or just wearing the uniform as a ex-military/civilian, even if everything he wore made sense?



Yes they do, most though prefer to wear blazer with unit crest, tie, or a nice jacket with headress and medals if so entitled. As to what this individual's "offence" is exactly, aside from a confirmed CC section 419 violation for the unauthorized MB, the rest is still under investigation by several sources as noted.


----------



## medicineman

General Disorder said:
			
		

> Infantry Sgt in The RCR without sash?  Walt.
> RCR Sgt with maroon beret but no brigade or div patches means he's not in 3 RCR.
> He's not at the Canadian Army Advanced Warfare Centre.
> 
> These two things mean "Walt"
> 
> Cyprus ribbon with NATO medal?  Walt.
> 
> 
> Waltasaurus Rex



I rewatched the CBC interview...he did have a 2 CMBG patch on his shoulder - caught a glimpse of it as he wandered away.  Odd how he'd remembered his red sash (on wrong) for that wedding picture (with an armoured regt's brass on) but not with his wannabe RCR Para Coy get up.  Bad researcher  :nod: 

Be interesting to see what happens if the Airborne Association finds him before the CBC and or the Police do...

MM


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

http://www.gg.ca/honour.aspx?id=80605&t=3&ln=Gervais

Same guy?


----------



## The Bread Guy

X_para76 said:
			
		

> https://www.facebook.com/#!/franck.gervais.9?fref=ts


An update - as of this post, this site doesn't seem to be working - tick, tick, tick ....


----------



## George Wallace

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> http://www.gg.ca/honour.aspx?id=80605&t=3&ln=Gervais
> 
> Same guy?



Besides the names not matching, Franck vs Roy; doing the math, not likely.  That was 16 years ago.  What age did he have posted on his FB page?  He would have been a whole ten years  of age or so.


----------



## George Wallace

cudmore said:
			
		

> Folks,
> I'm working on a story about this guy.  Please feel free to send me any intel/info.  I'm also looking for an ex-RCR pathfinder who would be willing to go on the record and help me establish how we know he's not a soldier.
> Best,
> James
> james.cudmore@cbc.ca



For those not following this on other means and internet forums, James is looking to interview SME's from RCR, Airborne and/or medals for his coverage of these infractions and possible criminal acts.


----------



## 211RadOp

One of the DND Employees I work with (ex-Tel Op Sgt) saw someone on the bus yesterday heading to South Keys after the ceremony downtown yesterday.  He was a early 20's "soldier", by his rank a no hook Pte, wearing a SOF beret.  He had his CD, SWASM with bar and Campaign Star with two rotation bars.  As she had imbibed in a couple of beverages after the ceremony, her husband would not let her confront him.  I will get the name off his name tag from her tomorrow.


----------



## 211RadOp

General Disorder said:
			
		

> Cyprus ribbon with NATO medal?  Walt.



Looks like the NATO Kosovo medal to me.


----------



## daftandbarmy

211RadOp said:
			
		

> One of the DND Employees I work with (ex-Tel Op Sgt) saw someone on the bus yesterday heading to South Keys after the ceremony downtown yesterday.  He was a early 20's "soldier", by his rank a no hook Pte, wearing a SOF beret.  He had his CD, SWASM with bar and Campaign Star with two rotation bars.  As she had imbibed in a couple of beverages after the ceremony, her husband would not let her confront him.  I will get the name off his name tag from her tomorrow.



Husband Fail!  :nod:


----------



## DAA

General Disorder said:
			
		

> Cyprus ribbon with NATO medal?  Walt.



Cyprus (UNFICYP) Medal/Ribbon came with "numerals" ONLY for multiple tours.  Seeing as Canada has not had a significant presence in the mission since 93, the chances of this guy earning it, is slim and nil.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

medicineman said:
			
		

> Be interesting to see what happens if the Airborne Association finds him before the CBC and or the Police do...
> 
> MM



AND...his mother-in-law  ;D


----------



## kratz

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> AND...his mother-in-law   ;D



Oh you'er cold EITS       ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I feel sorry for the people he lied to...and this pic shows why he might want to runnnnnnn while he can.  Add anyone from 35 CBG unless my eyes are seeing that Brigade patch incorrectly.

_But_...if I were him I might be scared of the brides mother the most.   :blotto:


----------



## Michael OLeary

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> AND...his mother-in-law  ;D



Why would the Airborne Association want to find his mother-in-law?

I suppose they could have the good intentions of introducing her daughter to some real soldiers after the divorce.


----------



## dapaterson

211RadOp said:
			
		

> One of the DND Employees I work with (ex-Tel Op Sgt) saw someone on the bus yesterday heading to South Keys after the ceremony downtown yesterday.  He was a early 20's "soldier", by his rank a no hook Pte, wearing a SOF beret.  He had his CD, SWASM with bar and Campaign Star with two rotation bars.  As she had imbibed in a couple of beverages after the ceremony, her husband would not let her confront him.  I will get the name off his name tag from her tomorrow.



There were a few Army officer types wearing pips&crowns yesterday; is it possible he was an officer (and she didn't check the epaulettes, because no one is used to looking for officer ranks there yet)?  If he went the MilCol route, he could have joined at 16 - and thus be early 20s with a CD and a fair bit of time deployed...


----------



## 211RadOp

Only Cols and above are authorised to wear the pips and crowns at the moment.  Also, the SWASM qualifying time ended in 2009.

Even if he were a 2nd year Capt at age 26, he would have been wearing rank insignia he is not allowed to yet, and would not have been out of MilCol in time to earn the SWASM.


----------



## Good2Golf

Not that it makes a substantive difference, but I believe the first medal Sgt(?) Gervais is wearing is the MMV, not MB.  MB has three thin stripes of blue on a maroon field.  MMV is three white stripes on the same maroon.

Update: so it looks like he got married with a MMV, but upgraded to a MB shortly thereafter...maybe he'll upgrade to a VC after his mother-in-law gets done with him? :nod:

G2G


----------



## dapaterson

211RadOp said:
			
		

> Only Cols and above are authorised to wear the pips and crowns at the moment.  Also, the SWASM qualifying time ended in 2009.
> 
> Even if he were a 2nd year Capt at age 26, he would have been wearing rank insignia he is not allowed to yet, and would not have been out of MilCol in time to earn the SWASM.



I'm aware of who is authorised to wear pips&crowns, and also know what I saw yesterday - there are some discrepancies.

And I'm proposing a possibility; I'm not saying is a probability.


----------



## Tibbson

211RadOp said:
			
		

> Only Cols and above are authorised to wear the pips and crowns at the moment.



That certainly didn't stop two Captains sitting in the Kent Street Legion here in Ottawa yesterday.


----------



## Tibbson

dapaterson said:
			
		

> There were a few Army officer types wearing pips&crowns yesterday; is it possible he was an officer (and she didn't check the epaulettes, because no one is used to looking for officer ranks there yet)?  If he went the MilCol route, he could have joined at 16 - and thus be early 20s with a CD and a fair bit of time deployed...



Naw, the video clearly shows Sgt rank.


----------



## Jungle

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/1.2833025



> Remembrance Day soldier Franck Gervais an imposter, DND says
> 
> CBC News
> 
> Posted:Nov 12, 2014 5:46 PM ET
> Last Updated:Nov 12, 2014 5:55 PM ET
> 
> The Department of National Defence says it can find no indication that Franck Gervais, who spoke with CBC on Remembrance Day wearing a uniform and medals, is a member of the military.
> The Department of National Defence says it can find no indication that Franck Gervais, who spoke with CBC on Remembrance Day wearing a uniform and medals, is a member of the military. CBC
> 
> Franck Gervais, a man who claimed to be a decorated soldier during Tuesday's Remembrance Day ceremony at the National War Memorial in Ottawa, is an imposter, CBC News has confirmed.
> 
> The Department of National Defence said Gervais, who was interviewed during CBC 's Remembrance Day Special, is not a member of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> A number of veterans and soldiers called CBC after seeing Gervais on television to question the veracity of Gervais's status as a soldier.
> 
> "Falsely impersonating a Canadian Armed Forces member is an issue to be taken seriously and is covered under Section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada," a spokesperson for the Defence Department said in an emailed statement. "Such activities are a disservice to the proud men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who earn the right to wear their uniforms through their hard work and the sacrifices they make for our country."
> 
> CBC News spoke with Gervais's wife, and she declined to comment. CBC has not been able to reach Gervais.
> 
> The CBC issued a statement Wednesday: "During CBC's extensive coverage of Remembrance Day commemorations in Ottawa, we interviewed many veterans and serving members of the Canadian Forces. These included one man who had been standing among a group of uniformed personnel. To civilian eyes, he appeared to be an authentic soldier," the statement said.
> 
> "We have since learned that he was not, that his uniform was not correct, and that he was wearing medals he had not earned. All this was drawn to our attention by veterans and serving members, who were understandably angry at seeing this counterfeit soldier. We regret this, and are following up to learn more about the man."


----------



## GPComd

and there it is:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/remembrance-day-soldier-franck-gervais-an-imposter-dnd-says-1.2833025


----------



## Tibbson

Jungle said:
			
		

> CBC News spoke with Gervais's wife, and she declined to comment. CBC has not been able to reach Gervais.



Hmmm, he can't be found and she declined to comment.  Sounds like the mother in law has found out already.  lol  If he's smart he'll just keep on running.


----------



## Remius

Cbc regrets what happened but to be honest he looked enough to fool the average person and even likely some military types who might not know any better.  Some slight mistakes and weird stuff though was enough for some to pick up on.

CBC's coverage was good.  This guy is what tarnished it.  Not the CBC.

I hope he gets charged for this.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Dog (CBC) has got a bone now


----------



## Jarnhamar

Wearing medals he didn't earn?  Wonder if he will get a severe reprimand ;D


----------



## George Wallace

dapaterson said:
			
		

> There were a few Army officer types wearing pips&crowns yesterday; is it possible he was an officer (and she didn't check the epaulettes, because no one is used to looking for officer ranks there yet)?  If he went the MilCol route, he could have joined at 16 - and thus be early 20s with a CD and a fair bit of time deployed...



The CSOR Guard Commander at the ceremony at Beechwood was wearing Pips and Crowns.


----------



## Tibbson

Whats he wearing on his pocket under his medal?  I've never seen that before, although thats not saying much.


----------



## dapaterson

That's the qualification badge for the CSOR course.

And interestingly, one of the ones I saw in pips was also a CANSOF type.  Maybe they're special in more than just one way...


----------



## daftandbarmy

We should criminalize the practise of impersonating military personnel before a Walt packing a suicide vest kills a bunch of people...

Just sayin'  :nod:


----------



## George Wallace

From another Net:

 CBC, The National, tonight at 2100 is doing a whole report on this asshole and other posers. With Mr James Cudmore. Make sure we all watch.


----------



## Haggis

It appears, from this CBC article (shared with the usual disclaimer) that his wife knows of his charade.



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> We should criminalize the practise of impersonating military personnel before a Walt packing a suicide vest kills a bunch of people...



CCC s419 covers part of that.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

211RadOp said:
			
		

> Only Cols and above are authorised to wear the pips and crowns at the moment.  Also, the SWASM qualifying time ended in 2009.
> 
> Even if he were a 2nd year Capt at age 26, he would have been wearing rank insignia he is not allowed to yet, and would not have been out of MilCol in time to earn the SWASM.



I saw 2 Army Capt's with the new rank on yesterday at the parade, and on the actual parade.  1 was Reg Force, 1 was PRes.


----------



## The Bread Guy

GPComd said:
			
		

> and there it is:
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/remembrance-day-soldier-franck-gervais-an-imposter-dnd-says-1.2833025


Good show.


----------



## George Wallace

From the Ottawa Citizen:

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/phoney-soldier-at-remembrance-day-questions-raised-about-man-interviewed-at-ottawa-ceremony



> Phoney soldier at Remembrance Day? Questions raised about man interviewed at Ottawa ceremony
> 
> BLAIR CRAWFORD
> More from Blair Crawford
> Published on: November 12, 2014Last Updated: November 12, 2014 6:54 PM EST
> 
> Did an impostor pass himself off as a Canadian soldier during this week’s Remembrance Day ceremony at the National War Memorial?
> 
> That’s the question being asked after the Department of National Defence said Wednesday it has no record of any employee by the name of Franck Gervais — or Sgt. Franck Gervais. That’s how a man dressed in a soldier’s uniform identified himself during a nationally televised TV interview at Tuesday’s ceremony.
> 
> CBC reporter Diana Swain interviewed the man, who was wearing the uniform of a senior non-commissioned officer in the Royal Canadian Regiment.
> 
> “For me it’s really important to remember that people have fought for our freedom. They didn’t fight for themselves,” the man told the network.
> 
> Halfway across the country, Warrant Officer Michael Womack was watching the interview in Wainwright, Alta., as he prepared for his own unit’s Nov. 11 ceremony.
> 
> He says something about it just didn’t seem right.
> 
> “I saw the interview and I was like, ‘Wait a second, I should know him because that’s an RCR cap badge and a maroon beret.’ I didn’t know him, so I said to my wife, ‘Something’s not right here.'”
> 
> After the ceremony at Garrison Wainwright, Womack went home and re-watched his recording of the Ottawa ceremony.
> 
> “Everything about him was wrong,” Womack said.
> 
> Among the apparent incongruities cited by Womack: The man portraying himself as a soldier wore a pathfinders badge, an advanced reconnaissance award worn by a select few soldiers; the beret perched on his head was too small; he should have been wearing a red sash over his shoulder, something all infantry NCOs wear when in dress uniform with their medals; he wore an outdated brigade patch on his right shoulder; and his beaver-shaped collar dogs were crooked.
> 
> “No NCO worth his salt would have gone anywhere in public without them perfectly lined up,” Womack said.
> 
> The interviewed man also wore a Governor General’s Bravery Medal. A quick check of the Rideau Hall website showed that no one named Frank Gervais has earned the honour.
> 
> Womack spread the word on social media to others in the military and passed along his findings to the military chain of command.
> 
> The matter will likely be turned over to Ottawa police since the military police have no jurisdiction.
> 
> It is a Criminal Code offence to impersonate a soldier.
> 
> Womack’s own sleuthing found the man’s name and address and he heard from another soldier who said he recognized the man from cadets. He also has heard reports that the man bought some of his RCR regalia on the website Kijiji a few days before the Remembrance Day ceremony.
> 
> “He would pass — and did pass — cursory inspection,” by a civilian, Womack said.
> 
> — With files from Meghan Hurley
> 
> bcrawford@ottawacitizen.com


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

I know that "no-hook" privates aren't usually found in CANSOF, but just a question here: Is it possible that it was a corporal  from CSOF that got busted down further to a charge (obviously after earning his CD)?


----------



## Good2Golf

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I know that "no-hook" privates aren't usually found in CANSOF, but just a question here: Is it possible that it was a corporal  from CSOF that got busted down further to a charge (obviously after earning his CD)?



Keep in mind, OGBD, that newly-trained non-selected support personnel could be posted directly to a unit or Command HQ, so it is possible to have a no-hook Pte wearing a tan beret.

Regards
G2G


----------



## ModlrMike

How odd... his Facebook page is now down.


----------



## Remius

Just saw the National.  Good stuff outing that guy. His life is likely in a mess now.  A mess of his own creation.  Just imagining the lies he's told his family over the years.


----------



## George Wallace

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> How odd... his Facebook page is now down.



His went down very early today.  His wife's is now down as well.  I wonder how many of their friends have posted photos of them?   >


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I've given this some thought and I think where this went off the rails was during the (fake) CT/OT he did.

It appears, originally, he was a (fake) PRes GWagon Commando Pathfinder.  Certainly, many of us have aspired for this role in the CAF.   

It appears that being a (fake) PRes Snr NCO GWagon Commando Pathfinder didn't get him the (fake) respect he felt he had (n't) earned. Even after adding a Sash to his (fake) DEU and the 'flashy gold braid thing'.  

Like his comrades in the (real) PRes do often, he _must_ have applied for a (fake) CT/OT from PRes GWagon Commando Pathfinder to (fake) Reg Force, Infantry Jump Coy Pathfinder Commando killerninja Photoshop tech, but one who felt the Sash was hindering him.  Or, he might have traded it for the DEU items from The RCR he added to his DEU.  

More to the point though, I think he should file a grievance; it's obvious his (fake) CT broker did NOT follow the proper (fake) CT/OT processes...even someone who does a fake CT with an OT should NOT be able to retain their (fake) rank in their new (fake) trade!!

If only he had done a (fake) OT that saw him (and RIGHTFULLY so...it's detailed in [fake] CFAO 11-12!) relinquish his (fake) Sgt rank to (fake) Cpl on the date his (fake) OT was effective.  He wouldn't have been out of (fake) dress with no fake Sash to go with his (fake) Sgt's rank.  

Just another (fake) soldier screwed by the system!!!


----------



## cupper

We have a volunteer to be the first of pair boots on the ground to take on the evil forces of ISIS.


----------



## Tibbson

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I've given this some thought and I think where this went off the rails was during the (fake) CT/OT he did.
> 
> It appears, originally, he was a (fake) PRes GWagon Commando Pathfinder.  Certainly, many of us have aspired for this role in the CAF.
> 
> It appears that being a (fake) PRes Snr NCO GWagon Commando Pathfinder didn't get him the (fake) respect he felt he had (n't) earned. Even after adding a Sash to his (fake) DEU and the 'flashy gold braid thing'.
> 
> Like his comrades in the (real) PRes do often, he _must_ have applied for a (fake) CT/OT from PRes GWagon Commando Pathfinder to (fake) Reg Force, Infantry Jump Coy Pathfinder Commando killerninja Photoshop tech, but one who felt the Sash was hindering him.  Or, he might have traded it for the DEU items from The RCR he added to his DEU.
> 
> More to the point though, I think he should file a grievance; it's obvious his (fake) CT broker did NOT follow the proper (fake) CT/OT processes...even someone who does a fake CT with an OT should NOT be able to retain their (fake) rank in their new (fake) trade!!
> 
> If only he had done a (fake) OT that saw him (and RIGHTFULLY so...it's detailed in [fake] CFAO 11-12!) relinquish his (fake) Sgt rank to (fake) Cpl on the date his (fake) OT was effective.  He wouldn't have been out of (fake) dress with no fake Sash to go with his (fake) Sgt's rank.
> 
> Just another (fake) soldier screwed by the system!!!



I can hear his defense now..."If the recruiting system wasn't so screwed up and backlogged I would have been all of these things by now so really I'm just ahead of myself."


----------



## cavalryman

cupper said:
			
		

> We have a volunteer to be the first of pair boots on the ground to take on the evil forces of ISIS.


Excellent use of his (fake) Pathfinder qual ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Why use the real recruiting system?  Just use the (fake) one...so much quicker.  I bet he approved his own (fake) CT/OT and that is where he messed up.  ;D


----------



## Danjanou

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Why use the real recruiting system?  Just use the (fake) one...so much quicker.  I bet he approved his own (fake) CT/OT and that is where he messed up.  ;D



oh so he has been posting in the recruiting threads on here then  8)


----------



## cupper

Danjanou said:
			
		

> oh so he has been (fake) posting in the (fake) recruiting threads on here then  8)


----------



## George Wallace

For those who have not seen the CBC newscast, or missed it, here is James Cudmore's presentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UR2QnVDC0o&feature=youtu.be

Thank you James.


----------



## medicineman

George Wallace said:
			
		

> For those who have not seen the CBC newscast, or missed it, here is James Cudmore's presentation:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UR2QnVDC0o&feature=youtu.be
> 
> Thank you James.



Just watched that  - ditto Dude.

MM


----------



## GAP

+1


----------



## jollyjacktar

Ahhh l just knew the incoming airstrike would be beautiful.  I expect he might very well need (fake) witness protection from his wife and in-laws.


----------



## OldSolduer

I think he's mentally ill and not too bright.

Just my opinion.


----------



## Jarnhamar

James Cudmore didn't dick around when it came to setting this story straight and reaching out for the truth.

I really feel bad for this guys family and friends both because it's freaking embarrassing to be associated with this and also because a lot of Canadians (military and civilian) will totally over react and call for this guy to be stoned and harass his family all over social media and the internet.

Normally I just take a "you're an idiot, next" approach to shit like this but something about this guy really irks me.  Not even the audacity of speaking to cameras on remembrance day. He really went out of his way to play this stuff up. I mean dressing up in DEUs at his wedding? Medal of bravery? This dummy built a life around it. I wonder how many people he used his fake identity to take advantage of.

I really hope the police press charges. Maybe in light of the recent events, overseas and at home,  we will recognize the dangers of civilians passing themselves off as military personal.


----------



## The Bread Guy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> For those who have not seen the CBC newscast, or missed it, here is James Cudmore's presentation:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UR2QnVDC0o&feature=youtu.be
> 
> Thank you James.


Well done - what George said.


----------



## George Wallace

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> James Cudmore didn't dick around when it came to setting this story straight and reaching out for the truth.
> 
> I really feel bad for this guys family and friends both because it's freaking embarrassing to be associated with this and also because a lot of Canadians (military and civilian) will totally over react and call for this guy to be stoned and harass his family all over social media and the internet.
> 
> Normally I just take a "you're an idiot, next" approach to shit like this but something about this guy really irks me.  Not even the audacity of speaking to cameras on remembrance day. He really went out of his way to play this stuff up. I mean dressing up in DEUs at his wedding? Medal of bravery? This dummy built a life around it. I wonder how many people he used his fake identity to take advantage of.
> 
> I really hope the police press charges. Maybe in light of the recent events, overseas and at home,  we will recognize the dangers of civilians passing themselves off as military personal.



This guy is a THIEF, pure and simple.  He has stolen in more ways than this act of dressing up as a soldier on numerous occasions as demonstrated on his and his wife's Facebook pages.  He has stolen the trust of family, friends and acquaintances.  He has defrauded the Canadian Public.  Ottawa has several policies such as free transit to serving and former serving members on OC Transpo (city transit) on Remembrance Day.  Did he falsely use Public Transit?  How about the kindness of some civilian who may have bought him a free coffee at Tim Horton's or simply the acceptance of a civilian's compliment: "Thank you for your service."?  What other benefit did he receive while wearing that uniform?  He is a THIEF.  

He has now gained national notoriety.  I would not be surprised to see his mug appear on the Colbert Report.  No doubt his actions will gain him disrespect from many of the public who run into him on the street or on his job.  I have my doubts as to what exact punishment he may face, as I am sure he only will face a similar fate as the Walt who was exposed in Peterborough, Ontario, in the past  year.  I doubt the 'bleeding hearts' will throw the full extent of the Law against him and his accomplices (wife?).  I hope the bleeding hearts in Parliament do not come to his defence.


----------



## Old Sweat

He also made page 3 of the Ottawa Citizen and, I am told, the cover of the Ottawa Sun. As I type, his "exploits" are being reported on CFRA radio news.


----------



## Loachman

Now if only James could snag an interview with Justin Trudeau to get his thoughts regarding this. There's got to be a root cause or something to beeble on about.


----------



## George Wallace

Loachman said:
			
		

> Now if only James could snag an interview with Justin Trudeau to get his thoughts regarding this. There's got to be a root cause or something to beeble on about.



I fear that the young Dauphine will be too much of a bleeding heart on this matter.  I really hope he doesn't make one of his, now (in)famous, commentaries on this.


----------



## Loachman

I am hoping for a little light comic relief, though, of the variety that only M Trudeau can deliver.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> He also made page 3 of the Ottawa Citizen and, I am told, the cover of the Ottawa Sun. As I type, his "exploits" are being reported on CFRA radio news.


And at least online with the _Toronto Star_, too.


----------



## donaldk

I applaud the CBC for the continuous LIVE shaming every time they cover national headlines since this story broke about this idiot.


----------



## George Wallace

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I think he's mentally ill and not too bright.
> 
> Just my opinion.



Good reason to lock him up until a Psych Eval is done.......for a year or so.


----------



## Remius

http://copainsdavant.linternaute.com/p/franck-gervais-8970529

Looks like our super fabulous jumper pathfinder is a construction worker...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

You think he would tell his wife twice a week he was going to the armouries or is she that obtuse.


----------



## The_Falcon

Perhaps the CAF info machine could come up with pamphlet or website, that would enable the general public and media to easily identify imposters.  Perhaps website to verify service as well, nothing that gives out full details, but basically a portal where you can type in a persons name, and it replies with a yes or no answer as to service, and any awards/decorations/medals you received (since the awarding of some medals is already public record), if you want further details you would be given the appropriate information as to how to obtain it.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Crantor said:
			
		

> http://copainsdavant.linternaute.com/p/franck-gervais-8970529
> 
> Looks like our super fabulous jumper pathfinder is a construction worker...



or is he?   :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## Remius

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> or is he?   :Tin-Foil-Hat:



from helmets to hardhats...we'll even erase your history to protect you and your family.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Does he work for a company?


----------



## Remius

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Does he work for a company?



No clue.  That site just has his profile stating he's a general contractor.


----------



## George Wallace

Crantor said:
			
		

> http://copainsdavant.linternaute.com/p/franck-gervais-8970529
> 
> Looks like our super fabulous jumper pathfinder is a construction worker...



I have seen that photo on a website just recently.


----------



## Pieman

> I think he's mentally ill and not too bright.



Yes, I think this is what happens when one is a psychopath (by the clinical definition) and not intelligent enough to gain the grandiose stature they require in real life. I suspect this is reason we see so many walts, as this is a far cry from an isolated incident. They can't create the respect they clearly deserve in real life so they adapt and create a costume and fake world around themselves. They pretend and think they are fooling everyone (It's easy for them, you are not a real person in their eyes anyway, not even his wife). 

The guy is completely destroyed, but don't worry. In his mind its our fault and he will create a new identity where he is king of the world once again. If I am right, I suspect he will ditch his wife and his entire life here and pop up again somewhere else where no one knows him. Possibly as the ex-mayor of a small non-existent city. Who knows, the only limit to his fake-success is how many lies he can get away with before his world crumbles again.


----------



## Remius

Pieman said:
			
		

> Yes, I think this is what happens when one is a psychopath (by the clinical definition) and not intelligent enough to gain the grandiose stature they require in real life. I suspect this is reason we see so many walts, as this is a far cry from an isolated incident. They can't create the respect they clearly deserve in real life so they adapt and create a costume and fake world around themselves. They pretend and think they are fooling everyone (It's easy for them, you are not a real person in their eyes anyway, not even his wife).
> 
> The guy is completely destroyed, but don't worry. In his mind its our fault and he will create a new identity where he is king of the world once again. If I am right, I suspect he will ditch his wife and his entire life here and pop up again somewhere else where no one knows him. Possibly as the ex-mayor of a small non-existent city. Who knows, the only limit to his fake-success is how many lies he can get away with before his world crumbles again.



I'm sure he's already explained to his family that what he's done was super top cosmic secret and the government is trying to cover up his service record.  His buddies can't come forward either because they would also be disavowed.  Time for witness protection to find him a new life.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I'm not so sure his mother-in-law will be so easy to fool now.


----------



## Remius

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> I'm not so sure his mother-in-law will be so easy to fool now.



Even more reason for witness protection to get involved  ;D


----------



## Pieman

> I'm sure he's already explained to his family that what he's done was super top cosmic secret and the government is trying to cover up his service record.  His buddies can't come forward either because they would also be disavowed.  Time for witness protection to find him a new life.



Hey, that's good! He could totally roll with that one. They can move to somewhere in the states where his covert operations can be utilized better. Maybe he can go to DC. While working undercover at a gas station, he can go on secret missions. So many options! 

I wonder if his wife is gullible enough to go along with this still? If so, I think he should work for the MIB unit. He can wear a black suit and shades. Battle imaginary aliens all day, and then doesn't even need to back his story up. He has a memory wiping unit and everything is officially 'swamp gas'. He will of course relay this information only to his closes friends, and anyone in a bar drunk enough to listen to him.

...let's take this idea further. We can make a reality show out of this guy. 'My fake identity' - A show about a poser and his difficulties of maintaining a fake life. Can he make it work? Will his wife figure him out? Stay tuned.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Crantor said:
			
		

> Even more reason for witless protection to get involved  ;D



There, FTFW   ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar

Crantor said:
			
		

> No clue.  That site just has his profile stating he's a general contractor.



or sergeant contractor, maybe


----------



## Remius

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> or sergeant contractor, maybe



Sergeant contractors wear sashes and aigulettes...oh wait he screwed that up too...


----------



## George Wallace

Pieman said:
			
		

> I wonder if his wife is gullible enough to go along with this still?



I think his wife is completely complacent of the fact.  She was with him on camera, at the National War Memorial, stroking his beard.  She is as guilty as he is.  I would not be surprised if she did the tailoring of his various uniforms.


----------



## Haggis

Pieman said:
			
		

> I wonder if his wife is gullible enough to go along with this still?



Love is blind.  Sometimes it's also deaf, dumb and stupid.  I know.  My wife's been married to me for almost 30 years.   ;D


----------



## Pieman

> I think his wife is completely complacent of the fact.  She was with him on camera, at the National War Memorial, stroking his beard.  She is as guilty as he is.  I would not be surprised if she did the tailoring of his various uniforms.



It's hard to know one way or the other for sure. She possibly did tailor his suits under the guise of 'budget cuts': soldiers have to make their own uniforms now.  Also, batman. I hope he has a batman suit too.

I would not be surprised if she had no clue. This walt is the kind of person looks for victims that are easily manipulated. She could just simply be very naive and makes for a very easy target.  Who knows. I hope they get her side of the story at some point. 

I don't share the view that this is a crime of 'theft' in the traditional sense. It's something much more complicated. Punish someone for this all you want. If the action is seeded by a mental illness then the punishment is useless in the long run.


----------



## George Wallace

'Stolen' equates 'theft' to me.  He has fit the definition for "Stolen Valour".  He has stolen the trust of those around him.  A thief, by whatever name you want to call him.


----------



## Remius

Pieman said:
			
		

> It's hard to know one way or the other for sure. She possibly did tailor his suits under the guise of 'budget cuts': soldiers have to make their own uniforms now.  Also, batman. I hope he has a batman suit too.
> 
> I would not be surprised if she had no clue. This walt is the kind of person looks for victims that are easily manipulated. She could just simply be very naive and makes for a very easy target.  Who knows. I hope they get her side of the story at some point.
> 
> I don't share the view that this is a crime of 'theft' in the traditional sense. It's something much more complicated. Punish someone for this all you want. If the action is seeded by a mental illness then the punishment is useless in the long run.



I wouldn't be surprised if she was unaware or at the very least in denial.  He could easily claim opsec or that he was a reservist (disapearing one night a week or whatever).

Theft, fraud or whatever.  He committed a crime.

Mental illness maybe but I figure it is more of a case of attention seeking, narcisim and envy culminating in something bigger than he could control.  One does not need to be mentally ill to be a liar.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Ah! Com'on guys: Posing as a reservist is the greatest thing: You have the perfect cover with the wife to go to the bar with your pals two nights a week, on a week-end "escapade" eight times a year and go fishing with the boys two weeks every summer.


----------



## George Wallace

Crantor said:
			
		

> .......  One does not need to be mentally ill to be a liar.



Or have an enormous ego.


----------



## The Bread Guy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> She is as guilty as he is.


I wouldn't go that far.  She wouldn't be the only person in Canada who has zero experience about military affairs who could be fooled or not know any different - after all, a CBC national TV reporter roaming the crowds was fooled, right?

It'll be interesting to see if Criminal Code charges come out of this.


----------



## George Wallace

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> It'll be interesting to see if Criminal Code charges come out of this.



Just on the news over the radio (CFRA 580 AM):  Ottawa Police Services are not looking for him as no one has 'filed a complaint', even with the national news expose.


----------



## Old Sweat

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> I wouldn't go that far.  She wouldn't be the only person in Canada who has zero experience about military affairs who could be fooled or not know any different - after all, a CBC national TV reporter roaming the crowds was fooled, right?
> 
> It'll be interesting to see if Criminal Code charges come out of this.



Local radio news is reporting the Ottawa police say that they have not received a complaint, and they also would not day if they have started an investigation.


----------



## The Bread Guy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just on the news over the radio (CFRA 580 AM):  Ottawa Police Services are not looking for him as no one has 'filed a complaint', even with the national news expose.


Good catch.  If I'm reading this French media report correctly (Google English below) ....


> Both the 34 Canadian Brigade Group Headquarters that National Defence has been informed of this imposture. But given that the person is not a member of the Forces , military justice can not do anything . It would be better that a complaint be made ​​so that either the civil courts can take up the case, the impostor who have violated the Canadian Criminal Code.


.... it doesn't appear that DND is going to file a complaint w/civilian police.


----------



## Pieman

I don't think there is anything stopping anyone from filing a complaint to the police against the guy, is there? One would best live in same city at least, and be so inclined to speak out about it. Everyone is willing to bark, but someone has to step forward and take a bite for something to actually happen...If that is the best course of action to take.


----------



## George Wallace

Interesting turn of events.  He has obviously been documented as committing an act in contravention of the Criminal Code of Canada.  The police will do nothing unless someone makes a complaint.  Interesting.  If he robbed a bank, would he be just as free to assume he will not have the police interested in him, unless a complaint is laid?  Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?


----------



## Pieman

> Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?


 Yes, a really good question there.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

It happens all the time..................too many assholes, not enough cops, courts and cells.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Making a complaint is a bit of a misnomer here. Simply reporting to the police authority that you witnesses a crime or that you were the victim of a crime starts their obligation to investigate. However, if no ones come to "report" a crime that police officers did not witness personally, they don't have the authority to investigate on there own mere suspicions.

This said, it seems to me that the best person to report Mr. Gervais' crime would be the CBC. They have the evidence of his posing as a military officer and of the deception (uniform) used in the commission of the crime and they have the information and sources of information reported to them that he is not such an officer. Moreover, in order NOT to be taken in by such posers in the future, it would be in the CBC's interest that the one they caught does not get away with it.


----------



## Old Sweat

The Ottawa police have announced they have opened an investigation.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Making a complaint is a bit of a misnomer here. Simply reporting to the police authority that you witnesses a crime or that you were the victim of a crime starts their obligation to investigate. However, if no ones come to "report" a crime that police officers did not witness personally, they don't have the authority to investigate on there own mere suspicions.


Wouldn't be the first time they shared videotape with "the authorities," which led to an investigation.



			
				Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The Ottawa police have announced they have opened an investigation.


It'll be interesting to see how much effort "the system" (police and Crown) will be willing to spend on this.


----------



## JS2218

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The Ottawa police have announced they have opened an investigation.



Yep: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-soldier-who-wasnt-how-uniform-mistakes-gave-him-away/article21572238/


----------



## The Bread Guy

This from the Ottawa Police Service Twitter feed:


> Investigation launched in light of numerous inquiries about a man at the Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa .... The man possibly made Unlawful use of military uniform or certificates at the Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> It'll be interesting to see how much effort "the system" (police and Crown) will be willing to spend on this.



Once the media gets a hold of a story things change.  There are lots of dirtbags in jail that make Bernardo and Holmoka look like rank amateurs.  They just didn't happen to be cute and cuddly looking, like those two on the front page, so no one hears/cares.


----------



## The Bread Guy

JS2218 said:
			
		

> Yep: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-soldier-who-wasnt-how-uniform-mistakes-gave-him-away/article21572238/


And a bit of precedent, from the bottom of this article ....


> .... Impersonating a member of the military is not a common offence, but a Winnipeg resident pleaded guilty to the charge two years ago.
> 
> Josh Tuckett had claimed he was a corporal who had served in Afghanistan and Haiti. While he faced a maximum sentence of six months, the judge noted that such penalty would be applied only if the deception had a more sinister aim. Since his masquerade gained him no concrete benefits, Mr. Tuckett received a discharge.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

George Wallace said:
			
		

> For those who have not seen the CBC newscast, or missed it, here is James Cudmore's presentation:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UR2QnVDC0o&feature=youtu.be
> 
> Thank you James.



I echo the thanks, very much so.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I personally would like to see tax dollars spent on a prosecution of this...this...human.  Just for the principle of it.  Regardless if he was sentence was discharged, etc.


----------



## George Wallace

So!  Now they are playing the "Victim" card:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.




> We're being threatened: Wife of alleged fake soldier
> 
> BY KELLY ROCHE, OTTAWA SUN
> FIRST POSTED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 11:06 AM MST | UPDATED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 11:39 AM MST
> 
> A West Quebec man accused of posing as a soldier during a Remembrance Day ceremony at the National War Memorial is being harassed and threatened after being outed.
> 
> "We're not going to respond to questions at the moment," said a woman at Franck Gervais' Cantley home. The woman confirmed she is Gervais' wife, but refused to give her name.
> 
> During a national broadcast last Tuesday, CBC reporter Diana Swain interviewed a man who identified himself as 'Sgt. Franck Gervais". The man wore the uniform of a senior non-commissioned officer in the Royal Canadian Regiment.
> 
> Warrant Officer Michael Womack was watching, noticed too many discrepancies with the uniform, and posted on social media saying something was fishy.
> 
> Gervais was outed.
> 
> His wife told the Sun she understands why they're the target of rage but said it's still difficult to handle, calling it a shame. She wouldn't say if he was authorized to wear the uniform.
> 
> Her husband was inside their small brown bungalow along a street just outside the West Quebec village. Toys were strewn about the backyard. A gold Ford SUV with a "Support the Troops" sticker in the driver's side was parked outdoors.
> 
> The woman said Gervais did not want to discuss the controversy, but suggested he might offer comments in a day or two.
> 
> Ottawa Police are now looking into the matter. "The man possibly made unlawful use of military uniform or certificates at the Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa," the service tweeted Thursday afternoon.
> 
> In a statement sent to the Sun, the Department of National Defence said it has “no indication” Gervais is a member of the military.
> “Falsely impersonating a Canadian Armed Forces member is an issue to be taken seriously and is covered under section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada,” reads the statement. “Such activities are a disservice to the proud men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who earn the right to wear their uniforms through their hard work and the sacrifices they make for our country.”
> 
> Such was the sentiment from Ottawans polled Thursday.
> 
> “I thought it was terrible to do something like that,” said Patricia Mullins. “I lost a brother in the Navy, and I used to go with my mom up to the Memorial every year.”
> 
> She said she couldn't fathom a motive for impersonating a soldier.
> 
> “Fifteen minutes of fame; I don't know,” said Mullins. “People do strange things today.”
> 
> Jean Claude simply said “I'm offended.”
> 
> -- With files from Dani-Elle Dube
> 
> kelly.roche@sunmedia.ca
> 
> Twitter: @kellyroche6



More on LINK.


----------



## ModlrMike

> We're being threatened: Wife of alleged fake soldier



I'm not condoning threats, but perhaps now he'll realize that there is a cost attached to everything.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I personally would like to see tax dollars spent on a prosecution of this...this...human.  Just for the principle of it.  Regardless if he was sentence was discharged, etc.


I'm good with tax money spent this way, too.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I'm not condoning threats, but perhaps now he'll realize that there is a cost attached to everything.



Some might call me old school or whatever, but I am one of the people who still believe there is a right time and place for someone to get a punch in the face if they've earned or asked for it.

 :2c:




> His wife told the Sun she understands why they're the target of rage but said it's still difficult to handle, calling it a shame.



She should have shut her mouth after saying the part in yellow.

What is 'a shame' is that this POS did this for so long before being discovered.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Just saw this one on FB.  It was only a matter of time...


----------



## Tibbson

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Interesting turn of events.  He has obviously been documented as committing an act in contravention of the Criminal Code of Canada.  The police will do nothing unless someone makes a complaint.  Interesting.  If he robbed a bank, would he be just as free to assume he will not have the police interested in him, unless a complaint is laid?  Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?



Every criminal act requires a complaint by a person in position to make a complaint before any police department to investigate.  If someone breaks into your home and steals the family silver the police are not just going to show up to investigate because they heard a rumour.  

If someone robs a bank, the bank will call the police and make a complaint.  If they don't, and you complain as someone who sees the bad guys get away in a cloud of dust, the police will still ask the bank management what happened and if they refuse to talk (highly unlikely in this case) they will not take it any further.  However, there are MANY times bank and credit card companies are robbed or ripped off electronically and they refuse to involve the police.  They have their own internal security investigate and then they will decide if they want to take the matter to the police.  It makes the banks look bad every time they get ripped off and they worry that people will take their business elsewhere if they felt their assets were not secure with Bank X.

So, what about when the police find a body and nobody comes forward to report their loved one or friend missing?  The law holds that the deceased, by their mere status as the deceased, is the complainant.  The police will investigate to find out the cause of death.  If its suicide or accident then that is where it ends but if there is foul play suspected they take it further.  

In this case someone in a position to make a complaint needs to do so.  It could be argued that DND as an entity has an interest in lodging a complaint however that is a decision for the department to make.  CBC could be in a similar position as could any serviceperson with a connection to the incident (present at the service or perhaps tied into the leadership of the Unit(s) involved) may also be in a position to file a complaint.  

As it stood initially all there was was a great big group of people rightly saying "thats wrong and something should be done about it" but nobody had gone to OPD and lodged a formal complaint.  (Because the subject isn't a serving member and because the offence took place off base the MPs don't have a claim to jurisdiction)  Obviously that is what has eventually happened and the matter is now being investigated.  Given the results of similar court cases in the past I don't envision much happening other then public outrage and scorn towards the individual but perhaps thats enough.


----------



## Tibbson

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Wouldn't be the first time they shared videotape with "the authorities," which led to an investigation.
> It'll be interesting to see how much effort "the system" (police and Crown) will be willing to spend on this.



Actually, having had to investigate a crime where a major national news organization had the evidence, in the form of video, I was surprised to see how much they are reluctant to cooperate.  They told me point blank, even though they had the only evidence, that I would need to get a warrant to view the footage.  In order to get a warrant I needed to prove an offence took place but I couldn't do that without viewing the footage.  Catch 22.  At the end of the day I was allowed to go to their studio, leave my cell phone and any electronic device outside the room and view the footage under the direct supervision of one of their corporate lawyers.  Thankfully this is a bit different in that the footage is already out there but don't think they make it easy to investigate.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

So, if I am reading right, the most this #@$# could get is a $5000 fine or max 6 months imprisonment?

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-457.html#h-286


----------



## jollyjacktar

Seeing as he's "supposedly" in the construction industry I would expect there are many co-workers who are genuine veterans and will take umbrage to Franck's fun.  I wouldn't be surprised if he suddenly feels as if he stuck his head inside a hornet's nest.  The system may in the end not take any meaningful action against him as it might not be seen to be in the public interest.  But no doubt, as claimed by his wife, others will.


----------



## caocao

I couldn't agree more


----------



## Strike

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-remembrance-day-sergeant-now-receiving-threats-1.2833979

So, according to this article, he's been working construction with the same company for 12 years and told his coworkers he USED TO be in the military.  On that 'Copain' site (which is now down) his birth year was listed as 1982, which means he was 20 yrs old when he started working there.  Quite the high climber to reach the rank of Sgt, become a trained pathfinder and get all those deployments in such a short amount of time.  Wonder how he managed the CD.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Actually, having had to investigate a crime where a major national news organization had the evidence, in the form of video, I was surprised to see how much they are reluctant to cooperate.  They told me point blank, even though they had the only evidence, that I would need to get a warrant to view the footage.  In order to get a warrant I needed to prove an offence took place but I couldn't do that without viewing the footage.


That's likely the usual way it's done.  In the example I gave, it appears that they showed the video to the authorities without much legal resistance, raising the question among those far more cynical than myself that this may have happened because of the potential to make the military look bad.


----------



## Jarnhamar

You would think after that Dodd fellow was outted people would be a little more cognizant of the repercussions for something like this.


----------



## Pieman

Oh wait, hold up guys. Looks like he might have served after all.  I can't wait for the t-shirts to start coming out.


----------



## George Wallace

His employer speaks out:

(Also note video of him and his wife at Remembrance Day Ceremony at top of article)


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.




> Franck Gervais, Remembrance Day 'sergeant,' now receiving threats
> *Man who represented himself as a decorated soldier now under investigation by Ottawa police*
> 
> CBC News Posted: Nov 13, 2014 12:57 PM ET Last Updated: Nov 13, 2014 7:14 PM ET
> 
> 
> The wife of a man who claimed to be a decorated soldier during a Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa says she and her husband feel trapped and have been receiving death threats since CBC News wrote about him on Wednesday.
> 
> Speaking in French on the doorstep of her home in west Quebec Thursday, the woman told CBC News repeatedly that she couldn't comment on Franck Gervais's uniform or why he was wearing it at the National War Memorial in Ottawa on Tuesday.
> 
> Asked if a reporter could speak to Gervais directly, his wife said he wasn't speaking to CBC at the moment.
> 
> Ottawa police announced Thursday that they've launched an official investigation into Gervais, following "multiple complaints" from the public.
> 
> The Department of National Defence on Wednesday confirmed that Gervais, who represented himself as a decorated soldier on Tuesday, is not a member of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> *'I'm shocked,' says Gervais's boss*
> 
> Gervais has worked at Potvin Construction for 12 years, most recently building wooden staircases, said the company's general manager, Martin Savard, on Thursday. He said Gervais had told fellow employees he used to be in the military.
> 
> "He basically told us that he used to be a member of the military," Savard said.
> 
> Savard said he was shocked when he arrived at work Thursday morning and discovered through colleagues that Gervais was in the news.
> 
> "I'm shocked, definitely shocked," Savard said. "It's not something you expect, either from your own employee or from anybody. I mean, you have to pay respect with people who went to war and earned those medals. So definitely, Potvin Construction does not agree with that type of behaviour.
> 
> "We're not sure what our obligations are, so we're going to look into it and take the proper action."
> 
> *Veterans complained*
> 
> A number of veterans and current soldiers complained after seeing Gervais being interviewed on CBC's special live broadcast of the Remembrance Day ceremony.
> 
> Section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada makes it illegal to falsely impersonate a member of the Canadian Forces by wearing a uniform and displaying badges, medals, ribbons, chevrons and other decorations they did not earn in service performed in war.
> 
> "Such activities are a disservice to the proud men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who earn the right to wear their uniforms through their hard work and the sacrifices they make for our country," a spokesperson for the Defence Department said in a statement Wednesday.
> 
> No charges have been laid against Gervais.
> 
> Gervais was interviewed while wearing an army dress uniform with sergeant's chevrons and the cap badge of the Royal Canadian Regiment. He was sporting the maroon beret reserved for soldiers who are active-duty paratroopers, as well as an active paratrooper's jump wings on his chest.
> 
> One piece of insignia Gervais wore that immediately caught the eye of many soldiers was his Patrol Pathfinder badge. That is only worn by paratroopers who pass a gruelling course intended to recreate the experience of being dropped behind enemy lines — a course with a failure rate of up to 90 per cent.
> 
> But what has most irked soldiers and veterans were his five medals, particularly the Medal of Bravery, one of the highest decorations in the Canadian Forces, which has been awarded to a select few soldiers in recent years for bravery in hazardous circumstances.
> 
> A Facebook post, which has since been taken down, showed Gervais wearing a similar uniform at his wedding earlier this year.



More on LINK.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Interesting turn of events.  He has obviously been documented as committing an act in contravention of the Criminal Code of Canada.  The police will do nothing unless someone makes a complaint.  Interesting.  If he robbed a bank, would he be just as free to assume he will not have the police interested in him, unless a complaint is laid?  Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?



Everyone is looking at this as being minor contravention of the Criminal Code. I look at it as a security failure. Prior to Tuesday we had a terrorist attack in Ottawa that left two people dead and a attack on Parliament and resulted in the lockdown of our nations capital. 

So, for Remembrance Day we had an increased security presence just not in Ottawa, but across Canada. At the same the authorities were blabbing about being on the outlook for anything unusual, but this turkey was able to walk around with no problem and even get interviewed on national TV!! And the thing is that there were a couple of things (beard and collar dogs in wrong position) that should have set-off some warning signals. 

Next time it might not be a walt walking around in the crowd, but someone who may be planning on blowing the place up. And remember, you can go into practically any army surplus store in this country and buy a CF uniform.

My 2 cents.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

You'd be surprised how many people have beards these days.


----------



## Tibbson

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Everyone is looking at this as being minor contravention of the Criminal Code. I look at it as a security failure. Prior to Tuesday we had a terrorist attack in Ottawa that left two people dead and a attack on Parliament and resulted in the lockdown of our nations capital.
> 
> So, for Remembrance Day we had an increased security presence just not in Ottawa, but across Canada. At the same the authorities were blabbing about being on the outlook for anything unusual, but this turkey was able to walk around with no problem and even get interviewed on national TV!! And the thing is that there were a couple of things (beard and collar dogs in wrong position) that should have set-off some warning signals.
> 
> Next time it might not be a walt walking around in the crowd, but someone who may be planning on blowing the place up. And remember, you can go into practically any army surplus store in this country and buy a CF uniform.
> 
> My 2 cents.



You do have a point however if it is contraventions of dress regs that indicate potential terrorists then I personally observed 2 officers improperly dressed with the wrong rank insignia (Capts wearing pips rather than the authorized stripes).  We also heard in an earlier post to this thread about someone who saw a Cpl improperly dressed with his top shirt button undone because he was uncomfortable with it done up.  As far as beards go, look no further than Cpl Cirillo and you will quickly conclude that many people in uniform wear some degree of facial hair.  As supervisors we can address these issues with our subordinates but we can hardly spend our time at public gatherings questioning the dress standards, facial hair standards or professional integrity of everyone we cross paths with.  

Uniforms are commonly available and are in no way controlled, not to mention insignia, including medals, are available all over the internet.  I know of no way we can control them or stop those who want to wear them from doing so in public other than through the threat of prosecution if detected.  Most of these threats are why projects are underway to examine various forms of biometrics and access control in order to protect our defence establishments.  

Unfortunately though, when it comes to the matter at hand the courts have not acted with the same degree of outrage that we all feel.  Funny, but I get the feeling that if someone was being tried in court for impersonating a Judge or a Lawyer they would certainly get more of a sentence then someone would for impersonating a soldier.


----------



## George Wallace

I think that the outrage that has arisen out of this case, as opposed to previous cases, may bring some light to the matter and perhaps the courts will treat it a little differently, and the outcome will be a bit more than a slap on the wrist and turn in all your uniforms and paraphernalia into the RCR or Regt de Hull.  The court of public opinion is much larger this time.


----------



## Strike

Heck, for all we know, someone could have called him out about the sash and he could have just said he wasn't able to find it, or he damaged it or something like that.

When someone pretends to be something they are not for long enough, you'd be surprised how convincing they can be when you talk to them sometimes.  And in a situation like Remembrance Day, where people are walking by and not really having all out conversations with each other (read: no real opportunity to throw out some questions that any RCR soldier would know, that kind of thing) it's easy to see how he didn't get caught out on site.


----------



## Tibbson

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I think that the outrage that has arisen out of this case, as opposed to previous cases, may bring some light to the matter and perhaps the courts will treat it a little differently, and the outcome will be a bit more than a slap on the wrist and turn in all your uniforms and paraphernalia into the RCR or Regt de Hull.  The court of public opinion is much larger this time.



I honestly hope so however case law and past presidents in sentencing (if it gets that far) play a much bigger part in such things then public opinion and emotions.


----------



## Alberta Bound

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Every criminal act requires a complaint by a person in position to make a complaint before any police department to investigate.  If someone breaks into your home and steals the family silver the police are not just going to show up to investigate because they heard a rumour.
> 
> If someone robs a bank, the bank will call the police and make a complaint.  If they don't, and you complain as someone who sees the bad guys get away in a cloud of dust, the police will still ask the bank management what happened and if they refuse to talk (highly unlikely in this case) they will not take it any further.  However, there are MANY times bank and credit card companies are robbed or ripped off electronically and they refuse to involve the police.  They have their own internal security investigate and then they will decide if they want to take the matter to the police.  It makes the banks look bad every time they get ripped off and they worry that people will take their business elsewhere if they felt their assets were not secure with Bank X.
> 
> So, what about when the police find a body and nobody comes forward to report their loved one or friend missing?  The law holds that the deceased, by their mere status as the deceased, is the complainant.  The police will investigate to find out the cause of death.  If its suicide or accident then that is where it ends but if there is foul play suspected they take it further.
> 
> In this case someone in a position to make a complaint needs to do so.  It could be argued that DND as an entity has an interest in lodging a complaint however that is a decision for the department to make.  CBC could be in a similar position as could any serviceperson with a connection to the incident (present at the service or perhaps tied into the leadership of the Unit(s) involved) may also be in a position to file a complaint.
> 
> As it stood initially all there was was a great big group of people rightly saying "that's wrong and something should be done about it" but nobody had gone to OPD and lodged a formal complaint.  (Because the subject isn't a serving member and because the offence took place off base the MPs don't have a claim to jurisdiction)  Obviously that is what has eventually happened and the matter is now being investigated.  Given the results of similar court cases in the past I don't envision much happening other then public outrage and scorn towards the individual but perhaps thats enough.



In fact the police themselves do not have to wait to commence an investigation for some member of the public to call. There is no part of the criminal code that says that the Ottawa PS can't commence an investigation till "someone" complains. Many times police locate criminals driving stolen vehicles before they are reported stolen by the owner. Or find criminals involved in break and enters and thefts, arrest them and later track down the owner to provide a statement. I know of criminals who were arrested by solid proactive police work, held in custody, went to court at first appearance, plead guilty and before the owner was even aware of the crime the criminals were in jail. 
Nothing was stopping OPS from the start. They could have watched the interview on the internet, got a production order for the tape, another for military records, honours awarded by the GG, done open source search to ID suspect, etc, etc, etc. Eventually get reasonable and probable grounds, swear an Information, obtain summons or public interest warrant and start the court process.  
That is how many child porn files get solved.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Thanks AB


----------



## Infanteer

The one thing that gave it all away to me is that he didn't have an 1812 pin on...busted.


----------



## Pieman

I'm not expecting any major punishment from the courts. 

If he walked around and tried to issue orders to people, or utilized any kind of authority that the uniform and rank invokes, this would be a very different situation. That would be a clear criminal intent in wearing the uniform and I suspect the law would likely be applied much more harshly.

Right now, it looks like we have a guy who keeps a steady job and likes to play dress up on his time off. The intentions of this person *appears to be* to deceive for the purpose of stroking his own ego and creating a fantasy world. There are worse things in this world.

Courts will hopefully push him into some kind of mental help. We can give him a superman costume in place of the uniform and be done with it. 

There is a good chance this person is happy with any kind of attention he can draw unto himself. The more we give him the more he 'wins' (in his mind). 

I personally find this kind of behavior simply hilarious. We should put him and Rob Ford out for a night on the town and see what happens.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Infanteer said:
			
		

> The one thing that gave it all away to me is that he didn't have an 1812 pin on...busted.


Gold, Jerry, gold!


----------



## The_Falcon

Pieman said:
			
		

> I'm not expecting any major punishment from the courts.
> 
> If he walked around and tried to issue orders to people, or utilized any kind of authority that the uniform and rank invokes, this would be a very different situation. That would be a clear criminal intent in wearing the uniform and I suspect the law would likely be applied much more harshly.
> 
> Right now, it looks like we have a guy who keeps a steady job and likes to play dress up on his time off. The intentions of this person *appears to be* to deceive for the purpose of stroking his own ego and creating a fantasy world. There are worse things in this world.
> 
> Courts will hopefully push him into some kind of mental help. We can give him a superman costume in place of the uniform and be done with it.
> 
> There is a good chance this person is happy with any kind of attention he can draw unto himself. The more we give him the more he 'wins' (in his mind).
> 
> I personally find this kind of behavior simply hilarious. We should put him and Rob Ford out for a night on the town and see what happens.



So you are somehow able to infer based a on short video and a few FB  posts that all he was doing was creating a fantasy world? :  His employer has gone on record saying that he has claimed military service for YEARS, so really at this point WE (the general public) have no clue just how long he has been doing this, and what benefits he has been able to garner directly or indirectly from his claims.  

Also why is it now whenever people to anything remotely outside the norms of society, suddenly they are mentally ill?  I get for many years mental illness (especially when involving criminal acts) was pushed into a corner, but seriously throwing out these blanket statement of a persons mental state has got to stop.  1) It does a disservice to people who truly are suffering from debilitating mental health issues.  2)Mental illness IS NOT a panacea for absolving folks of talking responsibility for, and appreciating the consequences of their actions.  The fact that he is now hiding, and refusing to speak with the media (along with deleting his FB), is pretty telling to me at any rate, he knows precisely that what he did was unacceptable.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Just splitting this off for separate discussion, given how the events unfolded ....

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## DAA

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Just splitting this off for separate discussion, given how the events unfolded ....
> 
> *Milnet.ca Staff*



I think the subject heading should be changed to be more reflective of the circumstances.  Something along the lines of "Acting - Sergeant" might be more appropriate.      :rofl:


----------



## George Wallace

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> I honestly hope so however case law and past presidents in sentencing (if it gets that far) play a much bigger part in such things then public opinion and emotions.



'Presidents' are set.  It does not mean that a decision made in the past that became a 'president' must stand for perpetuity.  We would have no new 'presidents' set in the future if that were true.  Times change.  'Presidents' will change as well.


----------



## The_Falcon

The word you are both looking for is precedent.  But yes hopefully the precedent and the president will change in the future.  ;D


----------



## George Wallace

Recent development:


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.




> Family of fake soldier set to make statement Friday
> 
> 1310 News
> Alex Black @1310AlexBlack	Nov 14, 2014 06:23:37 AM
> 
> OTTAWA – The family of a Cantley man who posed as a military solider on Remembrance Day is expected to release a statement Friday.
> 
> Franck Gervais and his family have received death threats since it was discovered he impersonated a solider in the Royal Canadian Regiment and attended the National Ceremony of Remembrance at the National War Memorial.
> 
> He was quickly called out as an impersonator due to irregularities in his uniform.
> 
> Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino is asking that people stop threatening Gervais’ family and let Ottawa Police conduct its criminal investigation.
> 
> Impersonating a Canadian Forces member is a criminal code offence.




LINK.



With the history demonstrated by Mr Gervais and his family, I am leery to believe that they have actually received 'death threats'; but will accept the fact that thoughtless people may have contacted them and insulted their integrity.  It gives them the opportunity to play the "Victim Card".  

The media feeding frenzy that has gone on has overstep boundaries that should not have been crossed in the publishing of the images and locations of the Gervais home and auto, which do nothing to stop people from thoughtlessly insulting the family.  This in turn does victimize them.  It will taint their day in court, as it has already affected their lives, rightfully or wrongly.


----------



## George Wallace

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> The word you are both looking for is precedent.  But yes hopefully the precedent and the president will change in the future.  ;D



 ;D  Correct.......On both counts.


----------



## Loachman

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> The word you are both looking for is precedent.  But yes hopefully the precedent and the president will change in the future.  ;D



That's why George had his "presidents" in quotation marks.


----------



## PMedMoe

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I am leery to believe that they have actually received 'death threats'; but will accept the fact that thoughtless people may have contacted them and insulted their integrity.  It gives them the opportunity to play the "Victim Card".



I've seen some comments on Facebook that I would definitely categorize as death threats.  And from CF members, too. 




			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> The media feeding frenzy that has gone on has overstep boundaries that should not have been crossed in the publishing of the images and locations of the Gervais home and auto, which do nothing to stop people from thoughtlessly insulting the family.  This in turn does victimize them.  It will taint their day in court, as it has already affected their lives, rightfully or wrongly.



I agree.


----------



## George Wallace

Moe

I have seen those words on some of the FB forums of military members, and have seen them in the past on this very site.  Most have been 'Black Humour' and never followed through in reality, nor involved contact with individuals.  I hope the some numpties have not in reality phoned 'death threats' to this family, but there may still be a 'perceived' threat.  It would not be beyond the imagination for an offender to think that 'the world was now out to get them'.


----------



## PMedMoe

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Most have been 'Black Humour' and never followed through in reality, nor involved contact with individuals.



That may be so, but it still counts as a threat in my book.


----------



## Mako

I say this numpty!!!, utter disgrace, now all these professionals say he might be depressed with narsacistic tendencies. I don't even wear my uniform, if it fit anymore I would love to, but because I am no longer in so I have it in a place in my home I go to to reflect when I think about the lads, but that uniform, with those medals, This isn't  halloween pal and you did nothing to deserve any of it. Jesus last week I saw some punk walking down the road wearing the dress coat of a master jack, with all kinds of medals hanging off him in sandals and cargo pants, my wife sped up before i could get out to him, I don't know where they get the stones.ΩΩ


----------



## Strike

Being a narcissist is not a good enough excuse to pretend to be a soldier.  Heck, most actors are narcissist to some type of extent.  But they worked hard in order to achieve their fame.  Same goes with many politicians.

The only excuse for him doing what he did is that he was too lazy to actually work hard to get the fame he feels of which he is deserving.


----------



## Pieman

> So you are somehow able to infer based a on short video and a few FB  posts that all he was doing was creating a fantasy world? :  His employer has gone on record saying that he has claimed military service for YEARS, so really at this point WE (the general public) have no clue just how long he has been doing this, and what benefits he has been able to garner directly or indirectly from his claims.



You're right, we don't know the extend of this. That is why I wrote 'appeared' to be. There is not indication that he has done anything than play dress up at this point. However, that may certainly change. (but I personally doubt it will)



> Also why is it now whenever people to anything remotely outside the norms of society, suddenly they are mentally ill?  I



It's not a blanket statement, its getting at the root cause of the behavior.  Do you consider the behavior of dressing up in a uniform for the purpose of garnishing attention (if that's what is really going on) to be normal behavior? I don't see the actions (thus far) as nefarious in nature, just twisted and demented. I am in no ways saying he is not accountable for his actions. Rather it's the root cause of the actions that are of interest here. To the original point I was trying to make, all these things will be taken into account if/when he faces a judge. I don't think we should expect to have him handled in a heavy handed way unless there is something more sinister going on.


----------



## Danjanou

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Moe
> 
> I have seen those words on some of the FB forums of military members, and have seen them in the past on this very site.  Most have been 'Black Humour' and never followed through in reality, nor involved contact with individuals.  I hope the some numpties have not in reality phoned 'death threats' to this family, but there may still be a 'perceived' threat.  It would not be beyond the imagination for an offender to think that 'the world was now out to get them'.



Seen and I've seen them to as you know. While many may be written off as venting  and/or black humour among  the military ( serving and retired) community, not all will see it that way. If /when this goes to trial any defence attorney worth his/her salary would not hesitate to use this as some sort of mitigating circumstance in regards to sentencing if not as suggested to taint other aspects of the case.


----------



## Danjanou

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Ah! Com'on guys: Posing as a reservist is the greatest thing: You have the perfect cover with the wife to go to the bar with your pals two nights a week, on a week-end "escapade" eight times a year and go fishing with the boys two weeks every summer.



Brilliant why did I not think of this before, and when she asks where your Class A pay is, jus tpoint out the MO screwed up again. I have to hit a surplus store on the way home from work and kit myself out.

"Honey you're not going to believe it, but the Army called, apparently I've been called back to the Colours for at least 2-4 years so can't come to your sisters with you this Saturday."


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Did a search for this "statement" on google and didn't turn up anything.  

Hopefully it is an apology which, I think, will help the situation.  Where as a "justification/explanation" will just make mad people madder.


----------



## Pieman

The anticipation! I'm betting on an apology and the water works....hopefully he won't wear the uniform this time.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Might've busted himself down to Cpl  >


----------



## Tibbson

Alberta Bound said:
			
		

> In fact the police themselves do not have to wait to commence an investigation for some member of the public to call. There is no part of the criminal code that says that the Ottawa PS can't commence an investigation till "someone" complains. Many times police locate criminals driving stolen vehicles before they are reported stolen by the owner.



In a case such as this they in fact do not know the vehicle is stolen.  It could have simply been lent to the person driving it.  Until they speak with the owner, IF they event take the opportunity to speak to the registered owner, the vehicle is not consider stolen if nobody complains about it.



> Or find criminals involved in break and enters and thefts, arrest them and later track down the owner to provide a statement. I know of criminals who were arrested by solid proactive police work, held in custody, went to court at first appearance, plead guilty and before the owner was even aware of the crime the criminals were in jail.



I call BS on that one.  Yes, police may find someone they suspect breaking into a location and in such case the person is under investigative detention until the matter can be cleared up.  I have also never heard of anyone pleading guilty at first appearance and then being convicted and sentenced immediately.  Also, without a complainant to speak to the illegality of the act the Crown would not be able to make a case.  Sure, the police may catch Bubba breaking into my house and a check of Bubba's ID shows that he lives 50 miles away but that is hardly grounds to convict even if he pleads guilty.



> Nothing was stopping OPS from the start. They could have watched the interview on the internet, got a production order for the tape, another for military records, honours awarded by the GG, done open source search to ID suspect, etc, etc, etc. Eventually get reasonable and probable grounds, swear an Information, obtain summons or public interest warrant and start the court process.
> That is how many child porn files get solved.



1.  a production order is of no value in a case such as this.  CBC is not a third party holder of a document or record.  They are hold material evidence.  As well, ALL media in Canada hold their independence and privacy rights quite close to the vest and getting a warrant for a media agency is almost as difficult as getting a warrant for a lawyers office.  

2.  Child porn cases get solved because police have a start point such as a seized electronic device which they have lawfully obtained because of a complaint against the device owner (the complainant) or electronic records that indicate trafficking of child porn images provided by an ISP who is again...the complainant.  Once this is established the rest of the investigation carries on but in both cases there is some form of complainant otherwise cops would be just walking up to people, seizing their cell phones/tablets/computers and starting an investigation.

The one thing common in all of this is there is some form of complainant.  This wasn't the case with this alleged Sgt at the start however since that time someone has been able (willing?) to step forward and act as a complainant.


----------



## Tibbson

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> The word you are both looking for is precedent.  But yes hopefully the precedent and the president will change in the future.  ;D



Autocorrect strikes again.  lol  Thats what I get for posting from my iPhone.


----------



## cupper

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> The word you are both looking for is precedent.  But yes hopefully the precedent and the president will change in the future.  ;D



I believe the President is scheduled to be changed on November 8th 2016. ;D


----------



## Pieman

Blog post from an Ex-pathfinder. He has some good points. Given the number of curse words used, it's probably legit. 

http://www.publicpolicypirate.com/2014/11/this-real-pathfinder-is-now-standing-up.html


----------



## cupper

Pieman said:
			
		

> Blog post from an Ex-pathfinder. He has some good points. Given the number of curse words used, it's probably legit.
> 
> http://www.publicpolicypirate.com/2014/11/this-real-pathfinder-is-now-standing-up.html



I agree to a point with what he posted. However losing his job is pretty much a done deal. If the company needs to be bonded, then Gervais is unemployable upon conviction. If he had his (fake) prior military service listed on his resume or job application, it's grounds for dismissal having lied on the application. And would you really want to employ someone who is dishonest enough to do something like this, regardless of what the screwed up reasoning for it was?

It's not about punishing the a$$hat, it's about what is best for the company and the other employees. I know if he had done that down here, there wouldn't have even been any question, his job would disappear faster than Democratic voters at midterms, none of this "suspended with pay until we figure out what we are going to do with you".


----------



## George Wallace

cupper said:
			
		

> I agree to a point with what he posted. However losing his job is pretty much a done deal. If the company needs to be bonded, then Gervais is unemployable upon conviction. If he had his (fake) prior military service listed on his resume or job application, it's grounds for dismissal having lied on the application. And would you really want to employ someone who is dishonest enough to do something like this, regardless of what the screwed up reasoning for it was?
> 
> It's not about punishing the a$$hat, it's about what is best for the company and the other employees. I know if he had done that down here, there wouldn't have even been any question, his job would disappear faster than Democratic voters at midterms, none of this "suspended with pay until we figure out what we are going to do with you".



Agreed.  If he lied about his military service, what else did he lie about?


----------



## Danjanou

Pieman said:
			
		

> Blog post from an Ex-pathfinder. He has some good points. Given the number of curse words used, it's probably legit.
> 
> http://www.publicpolicypirate.com/2014/11/this-real-pathfinder-is-now-standing-up.html



Oh he's legit and well known to a few regulars on here, good guy.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

Other then the death threats I disagree with ever point he makes.


----------



## PuckChaser

I would hope that more people are pissed he's wearing a medal of bravery, vice the Patrol Pathfinder badge...


----------



## Pieman

Excellent article on CBC site about why people impersonate soldiers:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sergeant-franck-gervais-scandal-why-people-impersonate-soldiers-1.2833964



> Some individuals who impersonate police officers, firefighters or soldiers may be narcissistic and depressed, seeking to bypass their mundane life and experience, even briefly, for their own "moment in the sun."
> 
> "A lot of times it's extreme narcissism," said Max Wachtel, a Denver-based forensic psychologist. "The person really feels like they have to have that attention paid to them. It comes across as almost psychotic or delusional, because it's just such an unusual way to go about getting attention."
> 
> "The person is lying so much they start to believe it themselves that this is true. This is a common pattern for people who do this."



I liked this part here:


> Many impostors are living mundane, boring or uneventful lives, Berrill said, adding that depression is often at the core of their behaviour. They may also have issues related to masculine inadequacy, and pretending to be soldiers, police officers or firefighters is a way of achieving some recognition and bolstering their sense of self.



Also, with regards to the person understanding of their actions:


> They are also incapable of realizing that their impersonation is insulting and distressing to those individuals who really have served or are currently serving in those roles, or family members who have lost loved ones.
> 
> "And I don’t think they have the capacity, psychologically, to really consider those issues, because as part of the depression I’d also say there’s an infantile narcissism. Meaning, like babies, like young infants, they’re trying to be gratified through these acts."


----------



## Remius

And done.

http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/News/index.aspx?newsId=3c548498-4080-4a13-9c33-d4f291761920

Looks like four counts.  Hopefully this will be an example to others trying this.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

No example if he gets a slap on the wrist


----------



## Remius

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> No example if he gets a slap on the wrist



Getting charged is enough for me. I really don't care what the punishment is.  At least something was done.

The public national flogging was also good as well.


----------



## kratz

With the charge, we should be cautious of our comments, as it'll now be in the courts.

I echo Crantor, I'm happy to see this moving forward.


----------



## Pieman

It's good they laid charges. 



> The public national flogging was also good as well.



Indeed. Guy is probably going to have to leave the country after this one. How else do you recover from becoming infamous like that?


----------



## cupper

It would be interesting to see the expression on his face when he realizes just how F'd up his life has become from this point forward. A criminal record, regardless of what the final disposition is, (if he is found guilty (just to be fair) ). The public notoriety means he will have a tough time living in his current community, get a new job when (or if) he gets fired from his current job. The pressure on his marriage. Complete loss of respect which he was trying to achieve from those around him.

He thought his life sucked before he started doing this. Well he ain't seen nothing yet.

Interesting that he has been charged under both Section 130 and 419. He just went from a summary offense and max 6 moths jail time to the possibility of an indictable offense with a max of 5 years.



			
				Pieman said:
			
		

> Guy is probably going to have to leave the country after this one. How else do you recover from becoming infamous like that?



And he won't be allowed to leave the enter another country regardless, due to that criminal record.


----------



## JS2218

cupper said:
			
		

> Interesting that he has been charged under both Section 130 and 419. He just went from a summary offense and max 6 moths jail time to the possibility of an indictable offense with a max of 5 years.
> 
> And he won't be allowed to leave the enter another country regardless, due to that criminal record.



+1

It will be interesting to see which charge sticks (or if both do). Is it more serious to impersonate a public officer, or to use military items/uniforms without authority? Also, is a CAF member considered a "public officer" by virtue of his rank (i.e. a Snr NCO or officer), or is it any CAF member? Hopefully it will give some greater jurisprudence to Canadian law for walts who play dress up.


----------



## George Wallace

JS2218 said:
			
		

> +1
> 
> It will be interesting to see which charge sticks (or if both do). Is it more serious to impersonate a public officer, or to use military items/uniforms without authority? Also, is a CAF member considered a "public officer" by virtue of his rank (i.e. a Snr NCO or officer), or is it any CAF member? Hopefully it will give some greater jurisprudence to Canadian law for walts who play dress up.



I think that if you get into technicalities of the Law here, "public officer" here refers more to "public OFFICIAL", not what would be considered in the same context as a military "officer".

For instance: An officer of the Court is not in the same sense equal to an officer in the military.  Or, more simple example would be to look at the difference in meaning when referring to a police officer, as opposed to an officer in the military.


----------



## mariomike

JS2218 said:
			
		

> Also, is a CAF member considered a "public officer" by virtue of his rank (i.e. a Snr NCO or officer), or is it any CAF member?



“public officer” includes

(a) an officer of customs or excise,

(b) an officer of the Canadian Forces,

(c) an officer of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and

(d) any officer while the officer is engaged in enforcing the laws of Canada relating to revenue, customs, excise, trade or navigation;
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-1.html


----------



## Haggis

Marionmike beat me to it by a few mouse clicks.  However, it will be up to the courts to determine if he held himself out to be "an officer of the Canadian Forces".  The CCC definition is silent on what constitutes an "officer", but the NDA reads:

“officer” means

(a) a person who holds Her Majesty’s commission in the Canadian Forces,

(b) a person who holds the rank of officer cadet in the Canadian Forces, and

(c) any person who pursuant to law is attached or seconded as an officer to the Canadian Forces;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-5/page-1.html


----------



## ueo

Legal definitions aside, others in Canada suggest that we should pity this person as he was trying to "...show his respect"! See Toronto Star, Vinay Menon's article posted Saturday or hard copy in the Sunday edition. He is a regular paid contributor to the Star and seems to express a point of view contrary to what's being expressed here. Sorry for not including a direct link but I'm old and a bit of a luddite.


----------



## George Wallace

Haggis said:
			
		

> Marionmike beat me to it by a few mouse clicks.  However, it will be up to the courts to determine if he held himself out to be "an officer of the Canadian Forces".  The CCC definition is silent on what constitutes an "officer", but the NDA reads:
> 
> “officer” means
> 
> (a) a person who holds Her Majesty’s commission in the Canadian Forces,
> 
> (b) a person who holds the rank of officer cadet in the Canadian Forces, and
> 
> (c) any person who pursuant to law is attached or seconded as an officer to the Canadian Forces;
> 
> http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-5/page-1.html



Yes.  This refers to an officer in the CAF.   Personating a Public Officer per section 130 (1)(a) Criminal Code does not refer to an officer of the CAF, but a Public Official, which could cover any rank, as outlined by Marionmike.  That distinction has to be made by those who can not differentiate between the two instances.


----------



## George Wallace

ueo said:
			
		

> Legal definitions aside, others in Canada suggest that we should pity this person as he was trying to "...show his respect"! See Toronto Star, Vinay Menon's article posted Saturday or hard copy in the Sunday edition. He is a regular paid contributor to the Star and seems to express a point of view contrary to what's being expressed here. Sorry for not including a direct link but I'm old and a bit of a luddite.



That is fine for the 'Bleeding Hearts' to come to his defence over the issue of CBC's broadcast; but it does not cover the other occasions where he donned a CAF uniform, such as his wedding.  That does not show respect for the CAF.  Nor does it cover the fact that for twelve years he has been boasting to his co-workers of his military service.  He has been caught up in a lie.  How many other lies has he told?  

We had a member here on this site who boasted of being a Royal Marine.  He is still at large, and still being pursued for defrauding lonely women of large sums of money.  He is a fraud and scam artist who used stories of his military service to enamour himself with the ladies who where his prey.  He was a complete fraud with no military service.  Can we and do we consider the possibility that Franck Gervais may be of the same ilk?


----------



## Michael OLeary

ueo said:
			
		

> Legal definitions aside, others in Canada suggest that we should pity this person as he was trying to "...show his respect"! See Toronto Star, Vinay Menon's article posted Saturday or hard copy in the Sunday edition. He is a regular paid contributor to the Star and seems to express a point of view contrary to what's being expressed here. Sorry for not including a direct link but I'm old and a bit of a luddite.



Legal definitions and snivelling excuses from the peanut gallery attempting to "explain" his *illegal* actions aside, he can present his case when he gets his day in court. He had a chance with a microphone in front of his face to say he wasn't a soldier and was "only trying to show his respect." He didn't. In my humble opinion, which is, arguably, as of much value as the "pity the man" brigade's, that excuse is bullshit. I am willing to wait and see what explanation he offers in court, and how an appointed judge deals with it in accordance with the laws he broke.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Legal definitions and snivelling excuses from the peanut gallery attempting to "explain" his *illegal* actions aside, he can present his case when he gets his day in court. He had a chance with a microphone in front of his face to say he wasn't a soldier and was "only trying to show his respect." He didn't. In my humble opinion, which is, arguably, as of much value as the "pity the man" brigade's, that excuse is bullshit. I am willing to wait and see what explanation he offers in court, and how an appointed judge deals with it in accordance with the laws he broke.



Thank you Michael.

As the matter is now before the courts and the person involved has the presumption of innocence, discussion of the individual's characteristics will cease.

This includes the posting of photo shopped pictures, memes, comments about the individual (for or against) or anything else, except court news posted from a legitimate open source.

Let the accused have their day.

---Staff---


----------



## Haggis

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Yes.  This refers to an officer in the CAF.   Personating a Public Officer per section 130 (1)(a) Criminal Code does not refer to an officer of the CAF, but a Public Official, which could cover any rank, as outlined by Marionmike.  That distinction has to be made by those who can not differentiate between the two instances.



He was also charged under CCC 130 (1)(b), likely as an alternative to 130 (1)(a).

I remember a local case during the 1998 Ice Storm where two men were arrested in combat clothing assisting with the clean up operations.  The dead giveaway in that case was that one of the pair was wearing full colonel rank while performing heavy manual labour.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Haggis said:
			
		

> He was also charged under CCC 130 (1)(b), likely as an alternative to 130 (1)(a).
> 
> I remember a local case during the 1998 Ice Storm where two men were arrested in combat clothing assisting with the clean up operations.  The dead giveaway in that case was that one of the pair was wearing full colonel rank while performing heavy manual labour.



I remember that. Wasn't there an issue with someone in uniform trying to steal generators too?


----------



## Harris

So he has now apparently been suspended with pay from his job.  And apparently he also has a full suite of CADPAT clothing based on the photo.  (except apparently head dress) http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/alleged-military-impostor-suspended-from-construction-company-job-1.2102398


----------



## cupper

Just to clarify a bit, under Section 130, he is liable for one of two possible situations. The charge can be tried as either an indictable offense which carries a maximum of 5 years in prison, or as a summary conviction which caries a max of 6 months and / or fines.

My understanding of, and those who are in the legal field can correct me on any errors I make, how this gets pursued will be determined by the prosecutor, and the circumstances of the crime that are discovered in the course of the investigation. If all he did was wear the uniform with medals he didn't receive, without purpose of committing another crime, he most likely would be tried under summary conviction and be punished under those guidelines. If it was discovered through the course of the investigation that he committed another crime such as fraud while impersonating a public officer, then he would be looking at the more serious pursuit of conviction as an indictable offense and liable for a maximum of 5 years behind bars.


----------



## X Royal

Just a guess on my part but a plea may be offered.
Plea to the S.419 charges and the S.130 charge will be dropped.
I'd be surprised if any jail time will be ordered.
My guess is a fine and maybe community service.
And yes a criminal record.


----------



## OldSolduer

Sometimes the public outing is far worse than the actual punishment. 

He'll be forever known as a "Walt"


----------



## Remius

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I remember that. Wasn't there an issue with someone in uniform trying to steal generators too?



Yup. The two twits went to the wrong house. Ex reserve guy now with the OPP.  ;D


----------



## Tibbson

cupper said:
			
		

> Just to clarify a bit, under Section 130, he is liable for one of two possible situations. The charge can be tried as either an indictable offense which carries a maximum of 5 years in prison, or as a summary conviction which caries a max of 6 months and / or fines.
> 
> My understanding of, and those who are in the legal field can correct me on any errors I make, how this gets pursued will be determined by the prosecutor, and the circumstances of the crime that are discovered in the course of the investigation. If all he did was wear the uniform with medals he didn't receive, without purpose of committing another crime, he most likely would be tried under summary conviction and be punished under those guidelines. If it was discovered through the course of the investigation that he committed another crime such as fraud while impersonating a public officer, then he would be looking at the more serious pursuit of conviction as an indictable offense and liable for a maximum of 5 years behind bars.



Yes, you are essentially correct.  When it comes to hybrid offences it is the Crown who decides how to proceed (summarily or by indictment) based upon the elements of the offence and the circumstances of the individual offences involved.  As others have pointed out too, you can pretty much bet on a number of the lesser charges being dropped as the case moves through the system, provided of course there are not any other details that the public is not aware of.  Sentencing options you note are maximums but given the non-judicial sanctions that have already come about (public scorn, potential loss of his job...) I can see the sentence being minimum, potentially even a conditional discharge dependent upon some form of public service and act of contrition.


----------



## Alberta Bound

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> In a case such as this they in fact do not know the vehicle is stolen.  It could have simply been lent to the person driving it.  Until they speak with the owner, IF they event take the opportunity to speak to the registered owner, the vehicle is not consider stolen if nobody complains about it.
> 
> Generally, in the course of a traffic stop the investigation can take many directions. On some occasions police obtain reasonable suspicion that the vehicle is stolen (or taken without consent). I was not discussing cases where vehicles were lent to someone, but that could be one of the paths you end up at. Another path is the driver is using another means to start the car other than the manufacturers keys, the driver is unable to provide correct details of the registered owner and/or under questioning roadside the occupants admit that the vehicle is stolen. Once you gain reasonable and probable grounds you can arrest, charter, warn, etc. even if the RO doesn't answer their phone right then to confirm. I once stopped a gentleman for a common traffic offence. After listening to his version of events and noting how he asserted that he personally owned the pickup and had a licence from another province but no ID on him. I arrested him and pointed out that the screw driver in the ignition was not a key and that the pickup was owned by the Province of Alberta. Something he didn't know. After some discussion, he admitted the theft. Yes a vehicle is stolen simply once it is stolen. Not once someone complains. I have also had to release a couple people roadside (after confirming ID) when I suspected the vehicle was stolen but hadn't got the RPGs through my investigation for an arrest till long after they were gone. In those cases I then laid the Information, got a PI warrant and made efforts to find them.
> 
> I call BS on that one.  Yes, police may find someone they suspect breaking into a location and in such case the person is under investigative detention until the matter can be cleared up.  I have also never heard of anyone pleading guilty at first appearance and then being convicted and sentenced immediately.  Also, without a complainant to speak to the illegality of the act the Crown would not be able to make a case.  Sure, the police may catch Bubba breaking into my house and a check of Bubba's ID shows that he lives 50 miles away but that is hardly grounds to convict even if he pleads guilty.
> 
> Call BS all you want. But you are incorrect. Again investigative detention can be used but once you get RPGs, then arrest, charter, etc. You find two 15 years old's in the local judges house and the back door smashed and you know he is away on holidays. You conduct an investigation and in this case both gentlemen were close to their first appearance date before the judge came home and saw our cards sitting on his kitchen counter with the request to call for a statement.
> 
> I don't know if your police experience was in a large metropolitan police service or some special investigative body. But in small town rural policing. I have arrested people early in the am, taken them back to the detachment, after their lawyer call and doing up an Information, Prosecutors Information Sheet and a copy of the accused criminal record taken them directly to court as a fresh arrest had them do their first appearance before the local judge, seen them plead guilty, get sentenced and taken them to cells to await transport later in the week to the correctional centre.
> 
> It's all a little different depending on where you police. I am guessing that you also haven't arrested people and had to transport them back on your snowmobile or ATV. Or prosecuted your own summary conviction offences while acting as court security also. Possibly never had to pick up the court party (Judge, clerk, Crown and Defence) from the airstrip and drive them to the community hall for trials. Or done the first appearance date in the Detachment lobby as the weather was too bad for the plane to land.
> Oh, and our local media likes us. They have even sent us scene photos and other things when they thought it would be helpful. Like when I forgot the camera at the office one time.
> 
> Anyways that's enough as this has really derailed the main part of this topic. If you ever want to see another style of policing and will be in Alberta feel free to drop me a line.


----------



## Haggis

A bit more on the accused and his past brushes with the law, shared with the usual disclaimer.


----------



## Remius

Despite everything, I am impressed with the way his employer is handling the situation.


----------



## Haggis

Crantor said:
			
		

> Despite everything, I am impressed with the way his employer is handling the situation.



Agreed.  

However, if he played the "veteran" card or used falsified military qualifications to get hired then the employer may reconsider his support for the accused.


----------



## Cloud Cover

His lawyer will play the mental illness card, and the concurrent duty to accommodate in employment. Lets be clear, a person who has acted in this manner, with such deliberation and lack of conscience, is probably not a mentally intact individual. He will be let go "without cause", and receive generous severance with provisions to obtain the medical help that he needs, simply because that will be cheaper for his employer than the certainty of a monumental legal bill trying to defend firing him with cause.  

Putting that aside but not throwing it away, he has arranged for himself a boatload of legal problems in the criminal legal system. He should and will be convicted but we are all better than simply seeing the man be further pushed to the edge of civilization. The question I pose is how to take this situation and use it as an example to demonstrate public revulsion for such acts. I am no bleeding heart lefty, but I would like to see a more positive outcome in addition to a conviction with fines and jail time. [ie a public apology, community service, consent to participate in a public education campaign, other genuine acts of remorse].


----------



## Shamrock

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> His lawyer will play the mental illness card...



There is no DSM entry for "idiocy."


----------



## Cloud Cover

Shamrock said:
			
		

> There is no DSM entry for "idiocy."



That exact word just translates to lack of mental capacity, a pseudo legal parlance.  Science doesn't matter where employment law is concerned  ....


----------



## Remius

The fact that he's known to local police and was involved in a "person in distress" situation demonstrates that there might be a bit nmore to this than meets the eye.  Which is why the employer is taking the right position on this rather than put him out due to media and/or public pressure.  For all we know this fantasy world kept him grounded and his family let him indulge in it, perhaps not aware of the legal ramifications.

At any rate the public outrage, national media coverage and facing a possible conviction all have sent a clear message to all Canadians (and all prospective posers be they ill or just jerks) not to effin do this.

I think, and this is my opinion only, that at least in a non-litteral sense that justice has be served.  We will have to wait and see if it will be served litterally or not.  Either way I think that lessons have been learned.


----------



## Pieman

> The fact that he's known to local police and was involved in a "person in distress" situation demonstrates that there might be a bit more to this than meets the eye



Does not necessarily indicate criminal activity either. Possibly became suicidal or similar incident requiring him to be taken to hospital against his will,  etc. As indicated by the article I sited, this behavior is strongly linked to depression, which is strongly linked to suicidal tendencies. I am happy to hear his employers are being supportive rather than cast someone out, especially after working for them for so long.


----------



## WPJ

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Unfortunately though, when it comes to the matter at hand the courts have not acted with the same degree of outrage that we all feel.  Funny, but I get the feeling that if someone was being tried in court for impersonating a Judge or a Lawyer they would certainly get more of a sentence then someone would for impersonating a soldier.



Or if he was impersonating a police or RCMP officer.


----------



## RedcapCrusader

WPJ said:
			
		

> Or if he was impersonating a police or RCMP officer.



The question will be whether or not he gained any money, benefits, or possessions from his waltery. Personal gain (other than ego) will call for more severe punishment.


----------



## WPJ

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> The question will be whether or not he gained any money, benefits, or possessions from his waltery. Personal gain (other than ego) will call for more severe punishment.



Very true.  

I still have a hard time understanding why someone you lie about service, its one of the greatest forms of ignorance and disrespect someone can do.  I guess it goes to the who mental side which baffles me.  I understand its for self indulgence etch but it just doesn't register why...


----------



## The Bread Guy

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> The question will be whether or not he gained any money, benefits, or possessions from his waltery. Personal gain (other than ego) will call for more severe punishment.


I'm also guessing other charges might be laid, like fraud, if money or some other tangible benefit is concerned.


----------



## mike63

Just got a question a bit off of topic but, has anyone applied to be apart of the 'Stolen Valour' organization?  I applied on-line on 12 Nov but haven't heard anything back yet.   I know they have a statement on their site about it taking some time before you hear back from them (back ground check) but, I'm just wondering how long that might be.  I would very much like to be a part of Stolen Valour but even the webmaster hasn't answered back my email enquiry.  Should I just wait out?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

These things take awhile. Wait it out.


----------



## mike63

Wilco buddy, and thanks.  I thought it was just me.


----------



## old medic

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-charged-with-impersonating-soldier-in-court-jan-6-1.2865528



> A man charged with impersonating a decorated soldier, after he identified himself as a Canadian Forces officer at the National War Memorial in Ottawa during Remembrance Day last month, had his case put over to January when his lawyer appeared on his behalf.
> 
> Franck Gervais, 32, of Cantley, Que., was expected in court Tuesday but Claude Levesque represented him instead.
> 
> A new court date was scheduled for Jan. 6.
> 
> "He is taking the matter very seriously, and for now is reflecting and will take the time to review the accusation and evidence against him," said Levesque.
> 
> Gervais faces two charges of impersonating a public officer, one charge of unlawful use of military uniforms and one charge of unlawful use of military decoration.   ........................


continues at link.


----------



## ueo

Did anyone watch the CBC Airfarce program last night? Our RCR walt made the F Bomb segment. Now if the real judiciary does a similar legal dump.


----------



## reccecrewman

48 hours to go! Be interesting to hear what comes of this on Tuesday.


----------



## X Royal

Was not Franck Gervais due in court yesterday?
Anyone hear the outcome?


----------



## reccecrewman

No official word yet.... I was scouring the internet looking yesterday and today.


----------



## X-PAO

Any NEWS since: http://www.cfra.com/news/2015/01/06/cantley-man-accused-of-impersonating-a-soldier-back-in-court-on-tuesday

???


----------



## 211RadOp

According to Radio Canada, he returns to court this week.

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/ottawa/2015/02/17/001-ottawa-franck-gervais-faux-soldat-retour-cour.shtml


----------



## blackberet17

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-pleads-guilty-to-illegally-wearing-military-gear-on-remembrance-day-1.2981506



> A Quebec man has pleaded guilty to illegally wearing a military uniform and medals during the 2014 Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa at the National War Memorial.
> 
> Franck Gervais, 32, pleaded guilty in an Ottawa courtroom on Wednesday to the unlawful use of military uniforms and unlawful use of military decoration while dressed as a military officer on Nov. 11.
> 
> Gervais is not a member of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> The Crown withdrew two charges of personating a public officer.
> 
> Gervais, who is from Cantley, Que., was arrested in Ottawa in November and later charged.
> 
> After seeing Gervais speaking as a "sergeant" on television on Nov. 11, a number of veterans and soldiers called CBC News to question his status as a soldier.
> 
> Gervais's sentencing hearing is scheduled for May 11.


----------



## ueo

Does anyone have the disposition/status of the Gervais case? Went back a bit and found nothing.


----------



## mariomike

ueo said:
			
		

> Does anyone have the disposition/status of the Gervais case?



(SGT?) Franck Gervais (split from Walts, posers)
http://army.ca/forums/threads/116932/post-1355690.html#msg1355690

"Gervais's sentencing hearing is scheduled for May 11."


----------



## ueo

Thank you.


----------



## mariomike

ueo said:
			
		

> Thank you.



You are welcome. Let's wait and see what happens at the next court date.


----------



## 211RadOp

Sentencing is today.

*Man who pretended to be a soldier on Remembrance Day faces sentencing*

OTTAWA – A Quebec resident who pleaded guilty to charges of unlawfully wearing a military uniform and medals is scheduled to be sentenced today in an Ottawa courtroom.

Franck Gervais pleaded guilty in March to the allegations.

But additional charges of impersonating a soldier are expected to be withdrawn at his sentencing hearing.

Gervais came into the spotlight last November when he appeared in a televised interview on Remembrance Day wearing a Canadian Armed Forces dress uniform.

He also wore a number of decorations including medals for bravery, special service and peacekeeping.

Members of the Canadian Forces quickly came forward after noticing problems with the way Gervais was dressed and the medals he was wearing, and a police investigation was launched.


http://globalnews.ca/news/1990625/man-who-pretended-to-be-a-soldier-on-remembrance-day-faces-sentencing/?hootPostID=8deaa4f8a98b29a6aa8433362393e62c


----------



## Jarnhamar

Why the hell would they withdraw the charge of impersonating a soldier? It's pretty obvious he's guilty of that.


----------



## George Wallace

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Why the hell would they withdraw the charge of impersonating a soldier? It's pretty obvious he's guilty of that.



Not sure, but it could be a typo and it was the charge of him impersonating a "public officer" that was dropped.  WAIT OUT.

[Edit to add:]

Here:  http://www.cfra.com/news/2015/05/11/man-who-posed-as-soldier-last-remembrance-day-to-be-sentenced



> Gervais pleaded guilty in March to unlawfully wearing a uniform and decorations. The charge of impersonating a public officer was dropped.


----------



## X Royal

Sentencing to be delayed?
According to this story Gervais will not appear today but his lawyer will to ask for a delay.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-sentencing-for-wearing-illegal-military-gear-to-be-delayed-1.3068554


----------



## Alberta Bound

Often during the "negotiations" between the Crown and defence, some charges are withdrawn.


----------



## Tibbson

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Why the hell would they withdraw the charge of impersonating a soldier? It's pretty obvious he's guilty of that.



Yep, stuff like that happens all the time and it depends upon what the Crown wants to spend the time and money on prosecuting and and the various elements of the offences being tried.  Very often (all too often if you ask my opinion) the Crown will negotiate with the Defence in order to make the trial as quick and cost effective as possible.  If they can have a few short hearings and then present a viable solution to the Court on what ever charges/punishment they agree upon it's much easier, much quicker and much cheaper than to schedule a full trial with points, counterpoints, delays and everything that goes with a trial.  It happens all the time in our Court Martial system too.  Just look at the number of Court Martials, and even summary trials, where the first charge is dropped or they are found guilty of a lesser alternate charge.


----------



## vonGarvin

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Just look at the number of Court Martials, and even *summary trials*, where the first charge is dropped or they are found guilty of a lesser alternate charge.


For summary trials, there is no such negotiation.  As a presiding officer, the first time I become familiar with the details of a case is when I am sitting at that trial. It is only by this manner that I am able to truthfully swear an oath stating to the effect that I am there without prejudice.

If there is a bit of to and fro, it is normally between the charge laying authority and the JAG office, in order to ensure that all procedures are met.


----------



## Tibbson

Technoviking said:
			
		

> For summary trials, there is no such negotiation.  As a presiding officer, the first time I become familiar with the details of a case is when I am sitting at that trial. It is only by this manner that I am able to truthfully swear an oath stating to the effect that I am there without prejudice.
> 
> If there is a bit of to and fro, it is normally between the charge laying authority and the JAG office, in order to ensure that all procedures are met.



Yes, I understand but my underlying comment still stands that in many cases the primary charge is dropped and they go with the secondary charge, even at summary trials.


----------



## FJAG

It's not so much a question of dropping the primary in favour of a secondary. Where charges are laid in the alternative a conviction is only possible on one charge. One or the other has to go either by plea or when a guilty finding is made. In some case at Courts Martial, even if charges are not laid in the alternative, some charges are negotiated away in favour of a guilty plea. The decision as to which charge depends on how hard nosed the cto rown or the defence are and not so much whether it is the more significant charge or not. The aim is not to see how many charges you convict someone of because at the end of the day there can only be one sentence awarded. The real aim is to negotiate a suitable sentence given the totality of the offences involved.

At summary trials there is never a negotiation because there is no crown and further more there is no procedure for the entry of a plea of guilty or not guilty by the accused. The best that the accused can do is voluntarily admit some or all of the particulars that are the basis for one or another charge in the hope that the presiding officer takes that into consideration when it comes time to imposing a sentence. Whenever I briefed presiding officers on ST procedures I would point out that if the accused admits responsibility for the offence then the presiding officer should give some consideration to giving a lighter sentence than he otherwise would have. Typically, neither the accused nor the average presiding officer at STs is up to snuff on the nuances of "admitting particulars".

 :cheers:


----------



## George Wallace

X Royal said:
			
		

> Sentencing to be delayed?
> According to this story Gervais will not appear today but his lawyer will to ask for a delay.
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-sentencing-for-wearing-illegal-military-gear-to-be-delayed-1.3068554



So now it is August (2015).   Perhaps.......


----------



## ueo

Seems as tho' the sentencing has been delayed for some unexplained reason. One wonders just how long this will drag on, he pled guilty sooooo!


----------



## daftandbarmy

ueo said:
			
		

> Seems as tho' the sentencing has been delayed for some unexplained reason. One wonders just how long this will drag on, he pled guilty sooooo!



Maybe they just found out about his mission for the CIA?  ;D


----------



## Pieman

Love it or lump it, I foresee community service. Perhaps have him scrub floors in the military museum would be a fitting punishment if it comes to that?


----------



## Good2Golf

And to think, if he had stuck to a green beret, perhaps with a Logistics hat badge and at most a QDJM, no one would have even blinked an eye...


----------



## jollyjacktar

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> And to think, if he had stuck to a green beret, perhaps with a Logistics hat badge and at most a QDJM, no one would have even blinked an eye...



No glory in that...


----------



## Good2Golf

Indeed.  It seems that those who do such things are delusional enough that they almost know no bounds. I guess the only limit yet to be met is order ending to have a VC...(waiting)


----------



## Happy Guy

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> And to think, if he had stuck to a green beret, perhaps with a Logistics hat badge and at most a QDJM, no one would have even blinked an eye...


How very true.  It's not very glamorous to say that you drove trucks in convoys to deliver goods, warehoused and issued materiel, packed and shipped materiel, cooked food, took care of the mail, or administered people.  However if you happen to not doing any of these jobs to sustain the fighting forces ....


----------



## The Bread Guy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So now it is August (2015).   Perhaps.......


Zackly .....


> A 32-year-old Cantley, Quebec man who garnered national attention last Remembrance Day for wearing a Canadian Armed Forces dress uniform on live TV, despite not being in the military, will be in court Tuesday to be sentenced.
> 
> Franck Gervais pleaded guilty in March to two charges of donning a military uniform, despite not serving in the military, and for wearing medals he didn't earn.
> 
> He was originally supposed to be sentenced in May, but the case was postponed until August 4th.
> 
> Additional charges of impersonating a soldier were expected to be formally withdrawn at sentencing ....


----------



## jollyjacktar

The sentence is in and I'm good with it.



> Updated
> Franck Gervais, who wore illegal military gear, gets probation, community service
> 
> Cantley, Que., man appeared on CBC News speaking as a sergeant on Nov. 11, 2014
> 
> CBC NewsPosted: Aug 04, 2015 7:38 AM ET|Last Updated: Aug 04, 2015 11:39 AM ET
> 
> The Quebec man who illegally wore a military uniform and medals during last year's Remembrance Day ceremony has received a suspended sentence of probation and community service.
> 
> Franck Gervais of Cantley, Que., north of Ottawa, wiped away tears and choked up several times as he told the courtroom his actions were wrong, misguided and inappropriate, and he will regret them for the rest of his life.
> 
> He said he had intended to pay homage to soldiers and veterans and didn't mean to offend anyone.
> 
> He was sentenced to 12 months of probation and 50 hours of community service through the Collaborative Justice Program.
> 
> Tuesday's sentence followed the 33-year-old's guilty plea in March to charges of unlawful use of military uniforms and unlawful use of military decoration while dressed as a sergeant. Two charges of impersonating a public officer were withdrawn.
> 
> Gervais was wearing the Canadian Armed Forces ceremonial dress uniform of a sergeant with the Royal Canadian Regiment at the Nov. 11 ceremony broadcast live by CBC News.
> 
> He was also wearing the Medal of Bravery, the Special Service Medal with one bar, the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal, the NATO Medal for Kosovo and a Canadian Forces Decoration for 12 years of service.
> 
> Gervais taken to National Military Cemetery
> 
> On Tuesday in court, three veterans read victim impact statements.
> 
> The court also heard the results of a restorative justice project that saw Gervais being taken on a tour of the National Military Cemetery in Ottawa on Aug. 1 by retired major Gerald S. Wharton.
> 
> "From the beginning to the end of our two and a half hours together, Mr. Gervais displayed appreciation for what the program had offered and was profusely thankful for my part in it," Wharton wrote in his prepared statement, which was filed with the courthouse before his testimony.
> 
> "He was attentive to what he was experiencing and attempted to explain the esteem in which he held the Canadian Armed Forces, his desire to be part of it and his frustration of being unable to penetrate that barrier."
> 
> Wharton also said he was left with the impression that Gervais's actions in 2014 "had no malicious intent."
> 
> Spoke as 'sergeant' in 2014 interview
> 
> After a brief interview during the Nov. 11 broadcast in 2014, in which Gervais spoke as a "sergeant," a number of veterans and soldiers called CBC News to question his status.
> 
> Gervais is not a member of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> Court heard Gervais was a cadet for several years in the 1990s, but never joined the military. He was arrested in Ottawa in November and later charged.
> 
> His misrepresentations on Nov. 11 did not end at the Remembrance Day ceremony, according to the agreed statement of facts heard in court.
> 
> Gervais and his wife went to the Canadian War Museum, where author Rod McLeod was promoting his book, Vigil, the statement said. Gervais spoke to McLeod and an officer with the Canadian reserves, falsely claiming he had been a paratrooper and had earned the Medal of Bravery.
> 
> Franck Gervais's lawyer, Claude Levesque, had requested an adjournment to sentencing in May.


----------



## Remius

i think that with this justice has been served, lessons have been learned and the general public have a greater awareness of this type of thing.  I'm glad his life won't be totally ruined by this error in judgement.  

I think we can all move on from this particular case now.


----------



## jaysfan17

*Probation and Community service? 
*
Is this really a fair punishment? I don't think so. 

Although, if I were to pick where he should do his community service it would be to work with disabled veterans. He should learn what sacrifice truly is and that it should not be tarnished by wannabe civilians. I think it would be beneficial for him to do something along the lines of helping veterans.

 To those of you that have served this country here and abroad and have lost comrades in battle, I would like to apologize on behalf of Canada for this guys complete lack of compassion for this countries servicemen and servicewomen. I can only imagine what you guys have gone through to serve our country and I appreciate everything you have done for this countries freedom, including my own. 

Sincerely,
luttrellfan


----------



## Remius

luttrellfan said:
			
		

> *Probation and Community service?
> *
> Is this really a fair punishment? I don't think so.
> 
> Although, if I were to pick where he should do his community service it would be to work with disabled veterans. He should learn what sacrifice truly is and that it should not be tarnished by wannabe civilians. I think it would be beneficial for him to do something along the lines of helping veterans.
> 
> To those of you that have served this country here and abroad and have lost comrades in battle, I would like to apologize on behalf of Canada for this guys complete lack of compassion for this countries servicemen and servicewomen. I can only imagine what you guys have gone through to serve our country and I appreciate everything you have done for this countries freedom, including my own.
> 
> Sincerely,
> luttrellfan



Interesting.  What would be a fair punishment then? No offense but you don't need to apologize on behalf of Canada for this guy's transgression.  The law took care of it.  Public outrage and the media did the rest.  This guy has a criminal record now, was shamed enough and seems to have learned his lesson.  I'm not sure that exacting a pound of flesh would serve any purpose.


----------



## Stonegeneral

I agree with Cantor, this individual has more than paid for his crimes. After all, one of the aims of the judicial system is to prevent an individual from re-offending, I think Mr Gervais has more than learned his lesson without the need for unnecessary imprisonment. The public is more well educated as a result of his actions too, so it serves multiple purposes.


----------



## Strike

Stonegeneral said:
			
		

> I agree with Cantor, this individual has more than paid for his crimes. After all, one of the aims of the judicial system is to prevent an individual from re-offending, I think Mr Gervais has more than learned his lesson without the need for unnecessary imprisonment. The public is more well educated as a result of his actions too, so it serves multiple purposes.



I agree.  And if he ends up doing community service that is associated with veterans, maybe he will learn that there are better and more constructive ways to show one's appreciation for the military and what they do.


----------



## George Wallace

The Ottawa news coverage may have given more info than other outlets as to what Mr Gervais has done.  The Ottawa coverage stated that he visited the National Military Cemetery of the Canadian Forces with Maj (Ret'd) Gerry Wharton and knelt at each and every grave paying his respect.  It is a good step in the right direction and probably a lot more than other offenders have shown in repenting their transgressions.  

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/phoney-soldier-franck-gervais-sentenced-to-probation-community-service


----------



## jollyjacktar

Agreed.  I believe he as learned some valuable lessons from this experience and will be a better person for it.  I no longer have any quibble with the man, I wish him well.


----------



## krustyrl

A question was asked elsewhere about if there were any Veterans in the courtroom yesterday. Anyone.?


----------



## blackberet17

> On Tuesday in court, three veterans read victim impact statements.


----------



## krustyrl

thanks


----------

