# Questions : Explaining my criminal record to a senior officer committee



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

Hi,

I'm trying to join the army. Here's what happened so far...

2002-05-19 - First Application (Infantry soldier)
2002-10-20 - Security clearance denied because of an ongoing criminal pursuit (due to a criminal offence I've done in july 2002)

In january 2004, I have been found guilty on 3 charges (Theft under 5 000$, Public mischief, Plot). That prevented me from applying in the canadian forces... until april 24th 2007. So I decided to use than delay to work and study, so I could be a better applicant later. Here's what I've done since 2002. Academics : Associate degree in Computer Science (Avg : +- 88%), bachelor degree in public relations and management (Avg : 3,3 or A-) and began a master degree in business administration (Avg of A- so far), but I'm thinking about swithching to a master degree in public administration. Work: In 2003, I got a programmer job, but fast became a project manager and finally got a manager job at IBM (at only 23).

2007-04-26 - Second application (Direct Entry Officier Program, Infantry)
2008-04-02 - I went to the recruiting center to get some news, and was told that my application had expired because they weren't able to reach me. (my bad : I bought a new house and forgot to tell them my new address and phone number)

2008-04-03 - Third application (Direct Entry Officier Program, Infantry)
2008-07-02 - Security clearance approved, but the file was sent to the recruiting center without the charges details
2008-07-14 - Medical test done
2008-07-14 - The interview has been cancelled because as I have been found guilty on 3 charges, I'll have to explain myself to a senior committee (not sure if it's the right expression for "Comité d'état major"). Basicly, I'll have to tell them what I have done since 2002, and convince them that despite my criminal record, I could be a good officer. The production clerck at the recruting center is supposed to tell me which documents will be required, as soon he will receive the details of the 3 charges I've been found guilty, and then appoint me for that committee.

Does someone here had to do that or have some infos on that procedure?
Should I worry about that?
Is it a formality or could it prevent me from joining the army?
What will those senior officers expect from me during that interview?

I've been waiting for more than 6 years now to join the army... hope I won't have to wait for another 5 years to get pardon, and then join in at 29!

Thanks!

P.S. Sorry for my poor english... I'm francophone! If I don't use the right english term for something somewhere in the text : please tell me!


----------



## CountDC (18 Jul 2008)

Impressive record since then - good turn around.

Not just a formality - this is for real and could keep you out.  The best tip I can give you is don't lie, twist things or BS them. Be upfront and honest with them. If they catch you up then your trustworthiness goes out the door and you with it.  Remember you are trying to prove to them that you are now a fine upstanding citizen and will be not just a fine soldier but a leader as well. I know it can be fun to get in with a past history but it can be done (I'm here!). Maybe it will help you be a bit more relaxed by remembering that not all of us in the military today have a stellar past - that person asking you the question may have the same record you do. At one time military service was an option given to criminals by judges - 2 years jail or join the military!! Many wished after that they had chosen the jail!!.


----------



## Greymatters (18 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> (Theft under 5 000$, Public mischief, Plot).



Theft and mischief is pretty much self-explanatory... what's the 'Plot' charge?


----------



## OldSolduer (18 Jul 2008)

After five years, apply for a pardon. It clears your record and you can answer the question as "No".


----------



## North Star (18 Jul 2008)

After having worked in recruiting, I feel I can wade in.

Basically, if you have any criminal record it will make becoming an officer very difficult. While you have an impressive turnaround, the only thing that can obliterate any shred of doubt is to get a pardon. 

Quality Control for officer selection is difficult to say the least. While I admit they are in themselves flawed in certain ways, official records are one of the very few legally recognized ways of trying to tell someone's character beyond the quite limited 1-2 hours interview. So three convictions under the criminal code will be considered very carefully. The committee meeting will not be fun for you I'm afraid: you will be held to account for your former actions.

My advice is give it a try, and then if it doesn't work out carry on with your career plans. If you're still interested after your pardon is processed, head on back. But don't bank on being accepted this time through though.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jul 2008)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Theft and mischief is pretty much self-explanatory... what's the 'Plot' charge?



I read his french post......its should read " conspiracy"


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

@CountDC
Thanks for the answer. I think the best thing to do, as you mentioned, will be to stay honest and upfront. It's nice to hear from someone that got in although he had a criminal record. I'm confident that I can still join in. And if it fails this time, it won't later with a pardon... so they should take me in now because I won't give up : if it fails and takes me another 5 or 10 years to join in, I'll wait! Giving up is not an option for me.



			
				Greymatters said:
			
		

> Theft and mischief is pretty much self-explanatory... what's the 'Plot' charge?


Maybe I didn't use the right term. In french it is "Complot". Basically, it's a charge they add when the criminal offense has been premeditated.



			
				OldSolduer said:
			
		

> After five years, apply for a pardon. It clears your record and you can answer the question as "No".


I'll be eligible for a pardon in 2011, and it takes between 12 and 24 months to get. Hope I won't have to wait in 2013 to join in!



			
				North Star said:
			
		

> After having worked in recruiting, I feel I can wade in.
> 
> Basically, if you have any criminal record it will make becoming an officer very difficult. While you have an impressive turnaround, the only thing that can obliterate any shred of doubt is to get a pardon.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the answer. I know it won't be easy but not impossible. I'll give it a try and work really hard to make it work. And if it fails, as I said previously, it will only delay my career plan (I will never give up on joining the army). And during the wait, I have a really good career already.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> Maybe I didn't use the right term. In french it is "Complot". Basically, it's a charge they add when the criminal offense has been premeditated.



As i said above , "complot' translates to "conspiracy'


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> As i said above , "complot' translates to "conspiracy'


Thanks for the translation!


----------



## Greymatters (18 Jul 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> As i said above , "complot' translates to "conspiracy'



Not a good word to have floating around in your background when applying for a government job...


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Not a good word to have floating around in your background when applying for a government job...


Yeah, you're right. Fortunatly, the committee will be held with french speaking officers. In french, there's a really big difference between "conspiration" and "complot". Complot means planning a criminal offence agains't someone or something, and conspiration means planning a criminal offence agains't the state. Complot is a pretty common charge in the Province of Quebec from the moment that a criminal offence is premeditated.

Ithink the best way to know how will end up that committee thing will be to go to that committee...


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> Complot means planning a criminal offence agains't someone or something, and conspiration means planning a criminal offence agains't the state.



"conspiration" is far from something commited against the state only.

The language of the reviewing officers is irrelevant.

Personaly, i hope they turn you down and send you on your way, but thats just me.


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "conspiration" is far from something commited against the state only.
> 
> The language of the reviewing officers is irrelevant.



That's not what I meant, sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I was only explaining that there's a difference between these two words in the french language. I was not aware that there's no such difference in english.



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Personaly, i hope they turn you down and send you on your way, but thats just me.



Why?


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> That's not what I meant, sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I was only explaining that there's a difference between these two words in the french language. I was not aware that there's no such difference in english.



I'm french so there's no misunderstanding. Theres a difference between both words but the implications of both is not a good thing.



> Why?



Its just my personal opinion and i'm sure you really dont want to hear the reason why. You will just get upset and this thread will end up locked.


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I'm french so there's no misunderstanding. Theres a difference between both words but the implications of both is not a good thing.



I totally agree with you. Both things, although they are different, are really bad things... a bad thing that I now have to live with.



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Its just my personal opinion and i'm sure you really dont want to hear the reason why. You will just get upset and this thread will end up locked.



I'm sure I want to know. If you don't find the "politically correct" way to say it publicly, send me a private message. I really want to know. If you think there's something wrong about me, I'm pretty sure I could improve myself by knowing it.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> I totally agree with you. Both things, although they are different, are really bad things... a bad thing that I now have to live with.



"complot" and "conspiration" are synonyms btw.......



> I'm sure I want to know. If you don't find the "politically correct" way to say it publicly, send me a private message.



Fair enough...PM inbound sometime in the near future.


----------



## Stein (18 Jul 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> "complot" and "conspiration" are synonyms btw.......



That's not what I read about it : 



> Il convient de réserver l’emploi des termes conspiration  et conspirer aux cas d’une entente secrète entre deux ou plusieurs personnes pour renverser le pouvoir établi, cas du *crime de trahison ou de haute trahison, ou de sabotage ou d’espionnage* par exemple.
> 
> http://www.termiumplus.gc.ca/guides/juridi/files/717.html



Anyway, we're talking about same thing. We both agree that it was a bad thing that could prevent me from joining the army.



			
				CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Fair enough...PM inbound sometime in the near future.



Thank you. I really appreciate it.


----------



## TheNomad (19 Jul 2008)

So a convicted criminal wants to hold a Queen's Commission.

I think not.  You may have turned your life around etc, but maybe you should have thought about how your voluntary criminal career might affect your later life choices.

You have a history of dishonesty, why should the Queen entrust the lives of her soldiers to you?  It is one thing for a soldier to be recruited with a dubious past, but as a commissioned officer?  I would not want to serve under you, with you, or have you under my command.  How much credibility do you think you would have once knowledge of your criminal past got out?  

You may think I am being harsh, but that is how I see it.  It is not personal and I do wish you good luck in another career choice.


----------



## NCRCrow (19 Jul 2008)

I know MP's with prior criminal records.

Everybody deserves a second chance!


----------



## Occam (19 Jul 2008)

TheNomad said:
			
		

> So a convicted criminal wants to hold a Queen's Commission.
> 
> I think not.  You may have turned your life around etc, but maybe you should have thought about how your voluntary criminal career might affect your later life choices.
> 
> You have a history of dishonesty, why should the Queen entrust the lives of her soldiers to you?  It is one thing for a soldier to be recruited with a dubious past, but as a commissioned officer?  I would not want to serve under you, with you, or have you under my command.  How much credibility do you think you would have once knowledge of your criminal past got out?



I had no idea that officers were as pure as the driven snow.   :

http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/decisions_e.asp

You might want to take a look at the number of officers whose careers have *not* been adversely affected by a criminal record.  It doesn't appear to have affected their credibility.


----------



## Stein (19 Jul 2008)

TheNomad said:
			
		

> So a convicted criminal wants to hold a Queen's Commission.



Not only I want, but I will. It's only a matter of time. If it fails this time, it won't once I will have received a pardon...



			
				TheNomad said:
			
		

> You may have turned your life around etc, but maybe you should have thought about how your voluntary criminal career might affect your later life choices.



That's why now I know more than a lot of people about what responsibility is, for my own actions and for actions that other do because of my influence. What I've done affected my whole life, but it also affected who I am. And from the moment I have learnt from it, I'm a better, more responsible and more mature person, making myself a better person compared to what I would have been without commiting that mistake. I know what consequences a bad action can have, so I always think twice everything I do in my life. Maybe that's one of the reason that caused my career in computer science and management to be very successful.



			
				TheNomad said:
			
		

> You have a history of dishonesty, why should the Queen entrust the lives of her soldiers to you?



I don't know anybody that has been 100% honest everytime in their lives. The fact that I faced my mistakes and paid for it without trying to run away, and the fact that I have learnt from it and repaired what I did, proves that although I have made mistakes, I'm not a criminal but a one time mistaker. There's a difference between someone making a mistake once then repair it, and someone choosing the crime as a way of life... Don't you think people derserve a second chance? Not a third or fourth chance, but only a second chance...



			
				TheNomad said:
			
		

> It is one thing for a soldier to be recruited with a dubious past, but as a commissioned officer?  I would not want to serve under you, with you, or have you under my command.  How much credibility do you think you would have once knowledge of your criminal past got out?



I don't think credibility depends only on a criminal record. It's also a matter of who you are, and how you are. From the moment you are a good worker, a good leader and a good person, you can get high credibility although you have a criminal record. I have 45 employees under me, and I have a lot credibility  (and they know for my criminal record because I have many friends now among my team (and because I need a waiver to enter USA...)).. Why? Because the way I lead them. They know I am here to serve them, make sure they have everything they need to get their job done, to avoid external factors to disturb them when doing their job and do the political things they don't like to care about. They know I only have another function, not a domination role... To have a criminal record don't affect the way we work together and what we can achieve as a team.

If I would have a pardon and join in the army without anybody knowing my past, could you really see a difference? Probably not. What's the difference between me without a pardon, and me with a pardon? I'm still the same person. The only difference is that in the first case, you would never know I made mistakes. But I'm still the same person...

And what if I would have been convicted of driving drunk? Would it be different to you?




			
				TheNomad said:
			
		

> You may think I am being harsh, but that is how I see it.  It is not personal and I do wish you good luck in another career choice.



It's ok. You have your opinion and I have mine. Your not harsh, you're honest with yourself and other about what you think, wich I think is a quality.
========================================================


			
				x80 said:
			
		

> I for one am going to have to disagree. The whole foundation of the military justice and administrative punishment system is to allow our members a second chance to improve on their faults and become better members of the CF. That's why you don't automatically throw someone on C&P without first going through the other steps and providing counseling. If this individual has indeed pulled themselves out of whatever slump got them into trouble in the first place then power to him. Sure he may have a black mark on his record; an IC stays on your file forever but if you correct your fault in 3 to 6 months then it becomes a moot point.



You are right x80. Our system is based on the fact that someone can commit a mistake, repair it, and change the way he is to nver commit it again. It's not only about the military justice, it's about Canada. We are one of the rare country allowing a second chance. And it seems it's a good system if we look at the statistics. And you guys in the CF are working to preserve that system. And that's what I want to do : preserve the way we live and the foundation of our system. I don't know any other country in which I would have succeed to start my life in one of the poorest place in Canada, then make a stupid thing, then turn around and succeed in my personnal and profesionnal life, becoming a really good citizen.
========================================================


			
				HFXCrow said:
			
		

> I know MP's with prior criminal records.
> 
> Everybody deserves a second chance!



Totally agree!
========================================================


			
				Occam said:
			
		

> I had no idea that officers were as pure as the driven snow.



They are not, and nobody is. If someone says he is, he just lies. There's only one man in the history that was, and unfortunatly he died 2000 years ago... But I have to admit that not everybody made a criminal offence. My mistakes were sometimes bigger that a lot of people.



			
				Occam said:
			
		

> http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/decisions_e.asp



How many of them had prior criminal records? It could be interresting to see the numbers... I don't think there's a correlation.



			
				Occam said:
			
		

> You might want to take a look at the number of officers whose careers have *not* been adversely affected by a criminal record.  It doesn't appear to have affected their credibility.



Indeed, credibility do not depend only on the criminal record. I know people without criminal record that hve absolutely no credibility. That depends mainly on how you are with others and who you are in general...


----------



## bartbandyrfc (19 Jul 2008)

Stein,

You appear to be a good person who made a mistake in the past.  I wish you the best of luck with your application.  I for one think that sometimes people who have made a mistake, and have learned from that mistake, often become the very best role models of trustworthiness.

However, I believe the pardon is likely the only way to expunge the past and become an officer in the Canadian Forces.  The committee will be harsh in their judgement of your character, but this stems from the responsibility they have to ensure that the soldiers of the future are led by the most upstanding people possible.

The first line of the Queen's commission says it all:

_To our trusty and well beloved STEIN. Greeting!

We, reposing especial trust in your loyalty, courage, and good conduct do by these presents constitute and appoint you to be an officer in Our Canadian Armed Forces_

This document continues on with beautiful and awe inspiring language, and illustrates to its subject the awesome responsibilities that he or she must bear.  A criminal record brings your character into question and the committee has no room for error.  You have an uphill battle.

Good luck to you.

BB


----------



## Greymatters (19 Jul 2008)

TheNomad said:
			
		

> So a convicted criminal wants to hold a Queen's Commission.
> 
> I think not.  You may have turned your life around etc, but maybe you should have thought about how your voluntary criminal career might affect your later life choices.
> 
> ...



That sounds a bit judgemental, not to mention contradictory.  In one line you mention how they've turned their life around and in the next you accuse them of a history of dishonesty.  

I would think an officer in the MP branch would preferably be pure as the driven snow, but lesser mortals should be allowed a bit more leniency without being regarded as 'career criminals'...


----------



## Stein (19 Jul 2008)

bartbandyrfc said:
			
		

> However, I believe the pardon is likely the only way to expunge the past and become an officer in the Canadian Forces.  The committee will be harsh in their judgement of your character, but this stems from the responsibility they have to ensure that the soldiers of the future are led by the most upstanding people possible.



I wish good luck to myself too! But if it fails, due to my past mistake, I will just accept it as consequence of my own actions. I will be the only one to blame in that failure, and will have to wait more to do what I want to do. If the committee decide that I'll have to wait, I will respect their decision and be patient. I have a totally trust in them to take the right decision, no matter if it's the decision I want or not. After all, as you said, they have a great responsibility toward the army.


----------



## Love793 (19 Jul 2008)

TheNomad said:
			
		

> So a convicted criminal wants to hold a Queen's Commission.
> 
> I think not.  You may have turned your life around etc, but maybe you should have thought about how your voluntary criminal career might affect your later life choices.
> 
> ...



I know law enforcement officers whom have had convictions more serious than this (not trying to down play the offence by any means), and they are taken at word in court.  The guy made a mistake, that makes him human. Now he seems to have learned from his mistakes and is striving to better himself, that makes him a better human. I do believe that's a principle of leadership. I remember reading it some where.  Yes he has a up hill battle, but I think some of the improvements he has made, may just help him out.


----------



## RCDtpr (20 Jul 2008)

Love793 said:
			
		

> I know law enforcement officers whom have had convictions more serious than this (not trying to down play the offence by any means), and they are taken at word in court.  The guy made a mistake, that makes him human. Now he seems to have learned from his mistakes and is striving to better himself, that makes him a better human. I do believe that's a principle of leadership. I remember reading it some where.  Yes he has a up hill battle, but I think some of the improvements he has made, may just help him out.



I'm sure there are law enforcements officers out there with convictions more serious than this.  However I don't think you will find many people getting hired with a conviction of any kind.  Getting convicted of something while already a law enforcement officer or a serving CF member is VERY different from a person trying to become a member with a conviction.....

And secondly I agree with the above posters who don't think you should be getting hired as an officer.  Like it or not officers are expected to be example setters and therefore are held to a higher standard.  I personally would not want to follow someone who not only committed a theft, but premeditated the crime as well.  Being convicted of a heat of the moment crime.....ok you made a quick stupid decision, it happens.  But to premeditated a crime? Inexcusable for this line of work, simple as that.  I for one hope you aren't accepted as an officer in the CF.


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

RCDtpr said:
			
		

> etting convicted of something while already a law enforcement officer or a serving CF member is VERY different from a person trying to become a member with a conviction.....



Which one do you think is worst? The one that made a mistake before and got in the army, or someone making a mistake after he sworn that he will an example setter?



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> And secondly I agree with the above posters who don't think you should be getting hired as an officer.  Like it or not officers are expected to be example setters and therefore are held to a higher standard.



Making a mistake don't prevent someone to become, after that mistake, an example setter and reach even higher standards... Don't you think?



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> I personally would not want to follow someone who not only committed a theft, but premeditated the crime as well.  Being convicted of a heat of the moment crime.....ok you made a quick stupid decision, it happens.  But to premeditated a crime? Inexcusable for this line of work, simple as that.



So you would prefer to follow someone that make actions without thinking of before?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (20 Jul 2008)

I for one wish you the best of luck in becoming an officer Stein. Hopefully down the road if one of your subordinates gets into trouble with the law you would use your experience to assist them in their legal needs.


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> I for one wish you the best of luck in becoming an officer Stein. Hopefully down the road if one of your subordinates gets into trouble with the law you would use your experience to assist them in their legal needs.



In Canada, there's actually more than 3,3 million people having a criminal record. On that 3,3 millions, there's a man/woman proportion of 98/2. So, about 20% of male canadians had or have a criminal record during their lives. It's a lot and that's why our system is based on the "second chance" principle. We are convicting more than anywhere else in the world, but we recognize the right to have a second chance. http://www.asrsq.ca/Fr/Bulletin/Bul_Anc_Fre.htm (sorry it's in french, but I'm pretty sure you can find the stats in english somewhere ...)

So as you said, if someone I know has trouble with the law, which has almost 100% chances to happen if I know more than 5 people, I would use my experience to help him. Not help him to run away from his responsibilities, but help him to face it.


----------



## RCDtpr (20 Jul 2008)

In your question of which one do I think is worse...getting a record while in the CF or getting one before you get in I don't think either is better.  They are both bad.  HOWEVER if you have one before you get in luckily the CF has the right to tell you to take a walk.  Becoming a soldier, especially an officer, is not a right it's a priviledge.  YOU in my opinion, should lose that priviledge as soon as you committed a crime.  I don't care what you've done since it happened and I don't care that you've tried to better yourself.

If I found out my Lt. had a criminal record for theft I would never look at him in the same light.  I would always be wondering if he is going to steal my stuff when I'm not around.  How can I trust you to lead me into combat and get me out alive if I can't even trust you to be around my belongings when I'm not?

And in my opinion your little statistic regarding criminal records is nonsense.  It also takes into account YOUTH records which lots of people have.  However you have an adult record which I can tell you, most Canadians don't have.  It also doesn't tell you the circumstances regarding someones "criminal" record.  I know of a fellow soldier who obtained a record after being convicted of assault.  Why was he convicted of assault?  He was backing up a buddy in a bar fight who got jumped.  He has a criminal record, but in my opinion it's a justified record, and I have no problems working with him.  

That being said, I would not want to work with a common thief which is what you are/were.  Simple as that.  And please don't think this is meant to be a personal attack......it's not.  I'm simply voicing my opinion on why I hope this board turns you down and tell you never to apply to the CF again.


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

RCDtpr said:
			
		

> should lose that priviledge as soon as you committed a crime.  I don't care what you've done since it happened and I don't care that you've tried to better yourself.



AND



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> I would always be wondering if he is going to steal my stuff when I'm not around.  How can I trust you to lead me into combat and get me out alive if I can't even trust you to be around my belongings when I'm not?



AND



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> It also doesn't tell you the circumstances regarding someones "criminal" record.



AND



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> I know of a fellow soldier who obtained a record after being convicted of assault.  Why was he convicted of assault?  He was backing up a buddy in a bar fight who got jumped.  He has a criminal record, but in my opinion it's a justified record, and I have no problems working with him.



So one hand you say that we should not judge without knowing the circumstances, and the hand you judge me without knowing the circumstances. Nevertheless, you first say that all crimes are bad, but you make a distinction between good crimes (you friend) and bad crimes (all the other). By making such a distinction, you say that steeling something is worst than fighting with someone in a bar, "to help a buddy who got into troubles" and taking the risk of hurting innocent people, instead of trying to calm down the situation and/or preventing it to happen? My opinion is that both are bad actions.

And, your stuff wouldn't be at risk with me. I am always following the rules and laws now, probably more than most people. It's caused by the fact that I know what the consequences are and I really don't want to face it again. And, I don't think there's a correlation between having stolen something and the capacity to lead or to have honour and courage. There's a lot of examples in history that proves that someone with a criminal record can become a really good person...

If someone has faced his past actions, without trying to run away from the consequences, isn't that person showing that he has the sense of what responsibility is? If someone never had to face the consequences of his own actions, how do you know that person wouldn't run away from ihis responsibilities? If someone has faced his responsibilities and learnt from his past actions, don't it make that person more better than what he would have became without his mistakes?



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> And in my opinion your little statistic regarding criminal records is nonsense.



Facts are sometimes nonsense... but these are not my statistics, these are Canada's Minister of Justice statistics and do not include youth records.



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> That being said, I would not want to work with a common thief which is what you are/were.  Simple as that.  And please don't think this is meant to be a personal attack......it's not.  I'm simply voicing my opinion on why I hope this board turns you down and tell you never to apply to the CF again.



That's your opinion and I respect it.


----------



## RCDtpr (20 Jul 2008)

Please go ahead and show me where I said some crimes are good and some are bad.  I said that some crimes might be jusitifiable, such as the example I gave.  From what you've said your crime wasn't justifiable.  But alas, this is turning into a pissing contest.  I've made my opinion heard, you've made your opinion heard.  So I guess now all we can do is sit and wait until you have your board meeting.


----------



## AlphaQup (20 Jul 2008)

Occam said:
			
		

> I had no idea that officers were as pure as the driven snow.   :
> 
> http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/decisions_e.asp
> 
> You might want to take a look at the number of officers whose careers have *not* been adversely affected by a criminal record.  It doesn't appear to have affected their credibility.


Cool link. Any reason why an officer cadet would be on that sight though?
R. v. Officer Cadet S.R.M. Warren, 2008 CM 2005

Presiding - Military Judge P.J. Lamont, Cdr


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

RCDtpr said:
			
		

> Please go ahead and show me where I said some crimes are good and some are bad.  I said that some crimes might be jusitifiable, such as the example I gave.  From what you've said your crime wasn't justifiable.





			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> but in my opinion it's a justified record



I don't think any crime can be justifiable. But, that's only my opinion. If you consider it to be justifiable, don't you think he has done the right thing? Or do you still consider he has done a bad thing?



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> So I guess now all we can do is sit and wait until you have your board meeting.



Absolutely, that's the only thing we can do. Thanks for your opinion though. I know that it won't be easy to get the trust of some people if I succed to join in and someone then know about my past actions. The easiest thing to do would be to wait for a pardon so nobody would know about my past actions. But I am not the kind of people that automatically choose the easy way... still believe it can work and if the information get out oneday, it is the right of people to question me on it and it will my duty to be honest with them. But I always succeeded so far to get the trust of people I was working with, despite my criminal record. It's always possible to get someone's trust, it's just that sometimes it's harder to do.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (20 Jul 2008)

RCDtpr said:
			
		

> I'm sure there are law enforcements officers out there with convictions more serious than this.  However I don't think you will find many people getting hired with a conviction of any kind.  Getting convicted of something while already a law enforcement officer or a serving CF member is VERY different from a person trying to become a member with a conviction.....



You are so far out of your lane you should be in the car with Steve Martin and John Candy........



			
				RCDtpr said:
			
		

> And secondly I agree with the above posters who don't think you should be getting hired as an officer.  Like it or not officers are expected to be example setters and therefore are held to a higher standard.  I personally would not want to follow someone who not only committed a theft, but premeditated the crime as well.  Being convicted of a heat of the moment crime.....ok you made a quick stupid decision, it happens.  But to premeditated a crime? Inexcusable for this line of work, simple as that.  I for one hope you aren't accepted as an officer in the CF.



More kife........................Gee, I hope I don't have to give back my 10 years in the Service and my 19 in Corrections because 30 years ago I needed to learn something the hard way. 
Give me a friggin' break.


Stein....................you have already done something lots of people never accomplish.............reaching down, grabbing yourself by the nuts and saying "I don't want to be a dirtbag anymore".   Good luck.
Bruce


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

AlphaQup said:
			
		

> Cool link. Any reason why an officer cadet would be on that sight though?
> R. v. Officer Cadet S.R.M. Warren, 2008 CM 2005
> 
> Presiding - Military Judge P.J. Lamont, Cdr



He got caught taking drugs.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/sentence/2008/2008cm1014.f.pdf


----------



## Stein (20 Jul 2008)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Good luck.



Thanks!


----------



## CountDC (21 Jul 2008)

wholly crap!!! 

Guess we better go back through the books and take away some commisions and ranks from all those past criminals now in the military. Glad I already qualify for pension with my 23+ years - hopefully they won't be able to take that away from me just because of my past.

Stein you have my vote of support - based on the info you have provided here hopefully I will have the priviledge of working with you in the future along with some of these nay sayers and we can drive them crazy talking about our wonderful past. ;D

Justified crime makes me think of all those speeders, reckless drivers, drug users, drunk drivers, etc that always say you think the cops would have something better to do like catch real criminals - my response is you are a real criminal as you broke the law and if not for people like you the police would have more time available to deal with the other criminals. Can't help but wonder how many of the negative posters here have never broken the law and how many of them are still breaking the law to this day.


----------



## tabernac (21 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> He got caught taking drugs.
> 
> http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/sentence/2008/2008cm1014.f.pdf



Not quite. You have the wrong link. http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/sentence/2008/2008cm2005.pdf



> Officer Cadet Warren, having accepted and recorded your pleas of guilty
> to charge No. 1, a charge of *assault causing bodily harm*, and charge No. 3, a charge of
> *drunkenness*, this court now finds you guilty of charges No. 1 and 3.


----------



## Stein (21 Jul 2008)

cheeky_monkey said:
			
		

> Not quite. You have the wrong link. http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/sentence/2008/2008cm2005.pdf



Sorry, my bad!


----------



## Stein (21 Jul 2008)

CountDC said:
			
		

> Stein you have my vote of support - based on the info you have provided here hopefully I will have the priviledge of working with you in the future along with some of these nay sayers and we can drive them crazy talking about our wonderful past. ;D



Thanks for your support CountDC!


----------



## armyvern (21 Jul 2008)

Stein,

Good on you. You've got 'nads at least. There's serving people posting in this very thread who've been "convicted" (at least one anyway). 

For all those saying they'd never want to serve under one ... I hope you all have less than 5 years in; for it wasn't that long ago we had many pers who were offered the choice of "join the military" or go to "jail" after they found themselves convicted of an offense.

BTW, I just watched one CFR a couple of weeks ago. And a heck of a lot of people respected his butt. (wavering now that he's gone to the _dark side_ ..  >) <--- KIDDING!!


----------



## Greymatters (21 Jul 2008)

I think their are a few people here who dont understand the concept of the criminal/justice system.  

People commit crimes.
They get caught.
They get tried.
They get punished.
They serve out their punishment.
They are once again regarded as equal members of society.
They can apply to have past criminal rcords abolished if they maintain their adherence to societies rules and laws.

I will admit that I am biased and say that the commission of certain crimes deserve permanent expulsion from the the human race (not just society).

But for the majority of crimes, one mistake (or even two or three in some cases) does not make them a career criminal or forever ineligible for positions of authority and responsibility.


----------



## AlphaQup (21 Jul 2008)

Stein said:
			
		

> He got caught taking drugs.
> 
> http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/sentence/2008/2008cm1014.f.pdf


I spent a bit of time looking through that site and it's really fascinating how decisions are made and sentencing. You should all take a look at it if you get the chance.


----------



## Grando (21 Jul 2008)

Yeah, I found it really interesting as well.  Particularly the seemingly low fines people get for somewhat serious offences.


----------



## lou-reed (21 Jul 2008)

As a former NCM and a former Officer - now retired after 20 years, here are my thoughts.

First, everyone makes mistakes.  Judging by your age, it would appear that you made some youthful mistakes, using very bad judgement, that came with very serious consequences.  You are now paying dearest for those mistakes.

On the surface it appears that you have done a good job of turning your life around and making the improvements necessary for you to get where you want to be in life.  I say on the surface because we (being the readers of this post) have no idea about your past before you were caught in your misdeeds.  My point being is this a one-time offence or was it a culmunation of several years of this behaviour.  Do you still associate with those who were part of your past.  Just a lot of questions that you may have to answer.  When I read your first post, those were the questions that I had for you.  I have those questions because part of turning your life around is more than just going back to school.  It also takes time and you have to gain trust and that can take a long time.

I do believe that you will be facing an uphill battle.  Although I never worked in recruiting, I do believe that there is immense competition for recruits for both the NCM and Officer side.  But, I may be wrong.  Thus, although you may have turned your life around, and you may be able to show the officer board that you have done so, you may just not be competitive enough.  Unfortunately, that may just be the reality of this situation.  Reality is that you have no one to blame but yourself.

The fact that the recruiting centre is still talking to you is a positive sign.  I would encourage you to be open and honest with them.  However, do not be too disappointed if the decision does not go your way.  

Good luck.


----------



## Stein (22 Jul 2008)

lou-reed said:
			
		

> First, everyone makes mistakes.  Judging by your age, it would appear that you made some youthful mistakes, using very bad judgement, that came with very serious consequences.  You are now paying dearest for those mistakes.



I was 18 and 2 months...



			
				lou-reed said:
			
		

> On the surface it appears that you have done a good job of turning your life around and making the improvements necessary for you to get where you want to be in life.  I say on the surface because we (being the readers of this post) have no idea about your past before you were caught in your misdeeds.  My point being is this a one-time offence or was it a culmunation of several years of this behaviour.  Do you still associate with those who were part of your past.  Just a lot of questions that you may have to answer.  When I read your first post, those were the questions that I had for you.  I have those questions because part of turning your life around is more than just going back to school.  It also takes time and you have to gain trust and that can take a long time.



These are good questions. Before making that mistake, I used to be a good person, well performing at school and in sports (I was in a rugby sport/study program). It really is a one time offense. It was not the culmination of previous similar behaviors but the culmination of many factors at the same time. I could not give a single factor as an explanation as it was the result of a more complex system of factors. The result caused myself to commit a criminal offense although I always had repugnance toward those kind of behaviors. The worst consequences, in my case, were not the prison, the probing period or the fines, but the fact that I have done one of the things I most disapprove, and that I have lost the society's trust for that.




			
				lou-reed said:
			
		

> Although I never worked in recruiting, I do believe that there is immense competition for recruits for both the NCM and Officer side.



I think there's a lot of competition too.




			
				lou-reed said:
			
		

> Thus, although you may have turned your life around, and you may be able to show the officer board that you have done so, you may just not be competitive enough.  Unfortunately, that may just be the reality of this situation.



If I succeed to show the officer board that I am trustworthy, I am pretty sure I can be competitve enough. And if I am not, there's probably something I can improve to be more competitive. But my criminal record would for sure cause my merit mark to be lower, but how much lower? It can end, as you said, causing me to not be competitive enough...



			
				lou-reed said:
			
		

> Reality is that you have no one to blame but yourself.



Absolutly!




			
				lou-reed said:
			
		

> The fact that the recruiting centre is still talking to you is a positive sign.  I would encourage you to be open and honest with them.  However, do not be too disappointed if the decision does not go your way.



My personnal experience taught me that the best thing to do in any situation is to stay honest. I hope the fact that they are still talking to me is a good sign, but I am prepared whatever the decision will be. If I succeed to show the officers that I am trustworthy enough, that will be really nice. But if I don't, I won't consider that decision as permanent. I will retry once I will get a pardon in few years. Until then, I will have the time to finish my master degree next year to increase my competitivity for when I will reapply. And if I have to wait, I am not in a bad position right now. Although I want to make a career change and join the forces, I  already have an interesting career that allows me to increase my leadership and management skills, which will be usefull when I'll join the CF.


----------

