# 6 Feb 12:  Charges laid against CIC officer



## Nfld Sapper

News Release
Military Police lay charges against a member of the Cadet Instructors Cadre

CFNIS NR – 2012-03 - February 6, 2012

Victoria, BC – The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS), the investigative arm of the Canadian Forces Military Police, has charged a Cadet Instructors Cadre officer for various sexual offences allegedly committed against two cadets at the LGen E.C. Ashton Armoury in Victoria, BC, and the Vernon Army Cadet Summer Training Centre in Vernon, BC.

Captain Daniel Moriarity was charged with the following:

two counts of Sexual Exploitation, contrary to section 130 of the National Defence Act, and pursuant to section 153 of the Criminal Code;

one count of Sexual Assault, contrary to section 130 of the National Defence Act, and pursuant to section 271 of the Criminal Code. In the alternate, one count of Sexual Interference, contrary to section 130 of the National Defence Act, and pursuant to section 151 of the Criminal Code;

one count of Behaved in a Disgraceful Manner, contrary to section 93 of the National Defence Act.

It is alleged that, between 2008 and 2011, Captain Moriarity had an inappropriate relationship with a minor and sexually assaulted another.

The case was brought forward by the victims chain of command who, when made aware of the allegations, immediately contacted the Military Police. As part of the conditions placed on him after his arrest, Captain Moriarity was required not to have any contact with cadets or attend any cadet functions. The case will now proceed through the military justice system.

“Those in a position of leadership in the Canadian Forces are expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times, and this type of alleged behaviour is treated with the utmost seriousness by the Military Police”, said Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Delaney, Commanding Officer of the CFNIS.

The CFNIS is an independent Military Police unit with a mandate to investigate serious and sensitive matters in relation to National Defence property, DND employees and CF personnel serving in Canada and abroad.

- 30 -

For more information about the CFNIS, please go to http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/view-news-afficher-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=2824.

For more information about the CFNIS investigation process, please go to http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/view-news-afficher-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=2960.

Media contact:
Captain Karina Holder
CF MP Gp Public Affairs Officer
Tel: 613-949-1098
Karina.Holder@forces.gc.ca

_- mod edit to clean up title a bit -_


----------



## dogger1936

Unfortunately youth organisations are ripe with people like this. I wonder how many days this member served at one of the national camps? I would LOVE to see the media jump onboard and do some investigative journalism into this organisation. Parents think their kids are heading off with "military men and women" when infact their children are being sent off with people with less than 20 days training as officers of the CF. Maybe the media could also look into how much we fund this program; and why must the nation pay for this youth organisation while others seem to do just fine internally.

Maybe look at how much money is paid out to people who have made a full federally paid career as a cadet officer. Look how many cadet officers are making over 100,000 to do not much at all.

Parents deserve to know; most don't know the difference.

I hope the justice is swift and punishment severe. Wanna be a child molester in a federally funded youth organisation? You should be hung.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Not just youth organizations.  What's with all these Teachers all of a sudden bonking their students.  Seems as if everyday there is another one coming to surface after being convicted...


----------



## Scott

*I'll say this once: we have the presumption of innocence in this country. Base your posts around that.*

*Staff*


----------



## Michael OLeary

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately youth organisations are ripe with people like this.



Unless you have proof in this case or others that you have been withholding, your remarks are excessive and out of line. It's time to rein in your rhetoric and get off your soapbox.

For all - as in any legal case, the laying of charges is not to be auotomatically assumed as guilt or taken an excuse to charge off into explaining what you think should be done about it.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## my72jeep

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately youth organisations are ripe with people like this. I wonder how many days this member served at one of the national camps? I would LOVE to see the media jump onboard and do some investigative journalism into this organisation. Parents think their kids are heading off with "military men and women" when infact their children are being sent off with people with less than 20 days training as officers of the CF. Maybe the media could also look into how much we fund this program; and why must the nation pay for this youth organisation while others seem to do just fine internally.
> 
> Maybe look at how much money is paid out to people who have made a full federally paid career as a cadet officer. Look how many cadet officers are making over 100,000 to do not much at all.
> 
> Parents deserve to know; most don't know the difference.
> 
> I hope the justice is swift and punishment severe. Wanna be a child molester in a federally funded youth organisation? You should be hung.



Dogger OK I get it you have personal grievance against some one in the CIC or the CIC as a whole, we get that. but you keep referring to the entire CIC as a pack of money grubbing, glory seeking, child molesters,  until the powers that bee change things enough is enough. 
My $.02


----------



## VIChris

I parade at the Ashton Armoury, and while I have no direct contact with the cadets, and only passing contact with their staff, I do see much of the activity that goes on there. What I see there is a dedicated group of staff and volunteers putting huge amounts of their time into ensuring the kids have the best experience they can. It's not uncommon to see the staff there working well into the wee hours of the mornings before their exercises and events. To slag them all from this one allegation is completely unfair and unprofessional.


----------



## Teeps74

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately youth organisations are ripe with people like this. I wonder how many days this member served at one of the national camps? I would LOVE to see the media jump onboard and do some investigative journalism into this organisation. Parents think their kids are heading off with "military men and women" when infact their children are being sent off with people with less than 20 days training as officers of the CF. Maybe the media could also look into how much we fund this program; and why must the nation pay for this youth organisation while others seem to do just fine internally.
> 
> Maybe look at how much money is paid out to people who have made a full federally paid career as a cadet officer. Look how many cadet officers are making over 100,000 to do not much at all.
> 
> Parents deserve to know; most don't know the difference.
> 
> I hope the justice is swift and punishment severe. Wanna be a child molester in a federally funded youth organisation? You should be hung.



As someone who has volunteered with the local Army cadets, and was an Air Cadet, your comment lacks an informed opinion and smacks of prejudice and malice.

The cadets is the ONLY free youth organization out there. The only one. All the others (Scouts etc.) require some sort of money to participate.

CIC officers have rather extreme limits on payable hours placed on them (I cannot remember the exact number of days, but I do know it is less then CL A Reserve, 16 days a month). There are very few CL B CIC officers out there. The majority of their full time staff is either Reg F or PRes.

The summer camps are  a mixture of CIC officers, PRes officers and SNR NCMs and Reg F officers and SNR NCMs and WOs.

Your suggestion that all CIC are suspect is, frankly, insulting and idiotic. I suggest you reel your neck in just a bit.


----------



## Hurricane

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately youth organizations are ripe with people like this.
> 
> I hope the justice is swift and punishment severe. Wanna be a child molester in a federally funded youth organization? You should be hung.



Unfortunately, EVERY organization ever established has some sort of questionable people within it. However, singling out youth organizations and saying they are full of child molesters is not on. Painting an entire organization with one brush because of the actions of one person is wrong. Needless to say, this man is NOT convicted of any crimes to date. 

Also, I can't help but notice that the officers age is not given. Could it be that this CIC officer is say 20 or 21 and that his inappropriate relationship was with a 17 year old staff cadet? Not saying this is the case, as I don't know the details. Just a possibility.


----------



## Scott

Enough, I think he gets the point by now.

*Staff*


----------



## catalyst

VIChris said:
			
		

> I parade at the Ashton Armoury, and while I have no direct contact with the cadets, and only passing contact with their staff, I do see much of the activity that goes on there. What I see there is a dedicated group of staff and volunteers putting huge amounts of their time into ensuring the kids have the best experience they can. It's not uncommon to see the staff there working well into the wee hours of the mornings before their exercises and events. To slag them all from this one allegation is completely unfair and unprofessional.



Awww - as one of those staff members, I have to say this was a bright spot in a rather dark day. I'd also like to point out that your regiment has been AWESOME in supporting the Cadets (ref: the steak dinner cooked for us by suprize last overnighter!) 

This was my corps  and as such, my cadets. There is so much more I would like to say, but it is not my place to say it (that, and due to  the fact it is currently before the courts, it would also be improper of me to comment).


----------



## OldSolduer

I am not suprised that a member of the CF has been charged with this. We have had people caught with child pornography on computers, others convicted of sexual assault of prespective recruits. Not surprised but still it is disappointing.


----------



## Jarnhamar

Ewww


----------



## dogger1936

Allegedly occured at the Veron Army Camp during cadet summer camp.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/02/06/bc-cadet-captain-charged.html


----------



## Fiera

> CIC officers have rather extreme limits on payable hours placed on them (I cannot remember the exact number of days, but I do know it is less then CL A Reserve, 16 days a month). There are very few CL B CIC officers out there. The majority of their full time staff is either Reg F or PRes.



I am a screened Volunteer with a Navy League/Sea Cadet corp and actually looked this one up. CIC Officers are paid according to rank on a fixed daily rate. For a full day's work (more than six hours) you get a full day's pay; for less than six hours, you get half that amount. At that, a CIC Officer is entitled to 25 days per year of local HQ training, with additional remuneration possible for attending courses or being employed at a Cadet Summer Training Center.


----------



## daftandbarmy

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Allegedly occured at the Veron Army Camp during cadet summer camp.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/02/06/bc-cadet-captain-charged.html



Any idea if the guy would have been Criminal Record Checked as an SOP? May not have helped in any case...


----------



## Fiera

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Any idea if the guy would have been Criminal Record Checked as an SOP? May not have helped in any case...



All persons looking to work with minors are required to undergo a CRC. The extent of the involvement will dictate how many different avenues are checked. ie: Recent history, pardoned history, juvenile record related to an adult record, sealed/unsealed juvenile record. I think there was more on the last form I filled out but I can't remember off the top of my head.


----------



## lethalLemon

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Any idea if the guy would have been Criminal Record Checked as an SOP? May not have helped in any case...



If he had never had any criminal activity before, it wouldn't make a difference


----------



## bLUE fOX

A Vulnerable Sector Check is required for enrolment into the CIC or transfer from the PRes and Regs into the COATS subcomponent. As well, it's required to be updated every five years, and I believe it's every year for civilian volunteers. But that's right, if it wasn't recorded previously it wouldn't have shown up at all.


----------



## Maxadia

When I see certain comments regarding stories like this, I remember back to Grade 8 when my teacher pointed out the fact to us that we were currently going to school with robbers, murderers, and rapists.....they just hadn't committed the crimes yet.

Like he said "What?  You think people like that were never kids?  That they never went to school?  That they don't live around here, or are playing hockey with you, or working with your parents? Criminals are in all aspects of society....don't try to single out one area and blame it for the actions of a few."

This type of thing can happen to any organization.  Not surprising, just disappointing.  And in the end, allegations don't mean diddly squat until it's proven.


----------



## bcbarman

Where the CIC officers do have the least taxing of recruitment standards, they do have the most in-depth interview and background check of anybody joining the CF (personally witnessed when I was with CFRC) The 1 hour interview is a no holds barred in depth chat with a specifically trained MCC.  More do not make it then do.

The big problem is that these predators (not making any judgment on this case, I am talking sexual predators in general) are excellent actors.  Most are victims of abuse themselves and leared to adapt, then took over the role of the abuser later on.  The wacko's on "To Catch a Predator" are the dumb bottom of the barrel idiots that can't see through a simple ruse.  The ones that are in positions of power over children are easy to spot, but so so so difficult to prove. 

Bottom line, never use a broad brush with these monsters, lets just do our best to train our kids to come to us when something is wrong.  

On a lighter note, the cadet problem is far from perfect, but I hate to think where I would be today without it.


----------



## X Royal

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> As someone who has volunteered with the local Army cadets, and was an Air Cadet, your comment lacks an informed opinion and smacks of prejudice and malice.
> 
> _*The cadets is the ONLY free youth organization out there. The only one. All the others (Scouts etc.) require some sort of money to participate.*_



I'll have to call you on this comment. Maybe you should have qualified this with "_to the best of my knowledge_".
I know of one other and there be others I'm not aware of.
St. John Ambulance Cadets are a free youth organization. No cost to participate. Money is never required to participate. 
Only time money is asked for is for some rare weekend trips and then it's minimal. Usually some form of fund raising is used to make it free. At times it's a cost of around $10 per day to cover food. 
If a cadet  is unable to pay a way is found for them to go any way.
At daily events many times lunch is provided free although sometimes cadets are asked to bring their own lunch.
Occasional free BBQ's, pizza nights, movie nights or similar type of things are not unheard of.
And this is also at no cost to the tax payers unlike the cadets you are referring to.
Don't take my comment wrong as I in no way have a problem supporting the cadets with my tax dollars. It's just that there is more options out there then you portrayed.


----------



## Pusser

I was a cadet 30 years ago.  I knew many CIL (as they were then) officers.  Some I respected.  Others I did not.  None of them molested me and to the best of my knowledge, anyone else.  Most were dedicated people who worked hard and honestly wanted to do the best they could to make the program work.  Thirty years later, I'm still in contact with some of the folks I met as a cadet and regret losing touch with some of the others.  One of my best friends from that period of my life is now the CO of our old corps.  He's one of the finest people I know and it pains me to see him tarred with the same brush as others who have done bad things.

My younger son has now joined the Army Cadets and I couldn't be more thrilled.  He loves it and I see that the officers in his corps are still the same type of dedicated individuals that were involved when I was his age.  If anything, they're more professional than they were then.  It's a fantastic organization and the CF is right to support it.  Sure there are idiots and slimy people in the CIC, but there are idiots and slimy people in the Logistics, Naval Operations, Music and may other branches.  They exist in amateur sport, church groups and probably every organization.  There is no shortage of idiots and slimy people in the world, but that doesn't mean we should stop patronizing these organizations.  All we can do is try to identify the idiots and slimy people as early as possible and then deal with it.  A Police Record Check (Vulnerable Sector) is only a start, but it cannot screen out every bad person (only the ones who've been caught).

It used to be that CF members could not be court-martialed for sexual offences within Canada.  When the CF asked to take over responsibility for this, there was an outcry from the usual suspects that the Code of Service Discipline would only whitewash over sexual offences and perpetrators would not see justice (implying that all perpetrators are male who would be protected by the Old Boys Club).  Once it was pointed out that in fact, the CF's record for dealing with sexual offences is actually stronger than the civilian court system (based on statistics from charges laid overseas), the restriction was lifted and CF members can now be charged under the Code of Service Discipline.  In short, CIC officers who do bad things can be court-martialed, which in many cases is perceived to be a much harsher system.


----------



## tomahawk6

The system works. The victims told their chain of command and now the individual charged will have his day in court. This should encourage all cadets that they matter and their safety and well being is important. The failure here would have been if these incidents had been swept under the rug. The staff took action and brought in the MP's. Good job by the unit staff.


----------



## armyvern

X Royal said:
			
		

> I'll have to call you on this comment. Maybe you should have qualified this with "_to the best of my knowledge_".
> I know of one other and there be others I'm not aware of.
> St. John Ambulance Cadets are a free youth organization. No cost to participate. Money is never required to participate.
> Only time money is asked for is for some rare weekend trips and then it's minimal. Usually some form of fund raising is used to make it free. At times it's a cost of around $10 per day to cover food.
> If a cadet  is unable to pay a way is found for them to go any way.
> At daily events many times lunch is provided free although sometimes cadets are asked to bring their own lunch.
> Occasional free BBQ's, pizza nights, movie nights or similar type of things are not unheard of.
> And this is also at no cost to the tax payers unlike the cadets you are referring to.
> Don't take my comment wrong as I in no way have a problem supporting the cadets with my tax dollars. It's just that there is more options out there then you portrayed.



The same is also true of Scouts. We have a sponsorship program where youth from disadvantaged families or those whom are working poor etc can have their membership fees, uniforms, camps covered. If the financial need is there, it is possible to go no-cost to the child.


----------



## Teeps74

X Royal said:
			
		

> I'll have to call you on this comment. Maybe you should have qualified this with "_to the best of my knowledge_".
> I know of one other and there be others I'm not aware of.
> St. John Ambulance Cadets are a free youth organization. No cost to participate. Money is never required to participate.



Why is it I always forget the SJA cadets? My girlfriend is going to kill me for that. And fair enough... A belated "as far as I know...". 

The cadet program has it's issues, but but it is a good program because of the volunteers (in and out of uniform).

Further, SJA and CF Cadets, are free by default. No need for sponsorship.


----------



## The Bread Guy

.... with the latest:


> A court martial is expected to begin (Monday) at CFB Esquimalt, west of Victoria, for a cadet instructor who faces several charges.
> 
> Captain Daniel Moriarity is accused of sexual exploitation, sexual interference and sexual assault.
> 
> The charges involve two cadets, a 16 year old girl and a boy who was 15 when the alleged assaults began.
> 
> Investigators say the attacks allegedly occurred between 2008 and 2011, at the Vernon army camp in the North Okanagan and at the Lt. Gen. Ashton Armoury in Victoria ....


----------



## The Bread Guy

> A military judge has found a former army cadet instructor guilty of three sex-related charges.
> 
> The judge found Capt. Daniel Moriarity guilty on two counts of sexual exploitation and one count each of sexual assault at Moriarity’s court martial hearing at CFB Esquimalt on Monday.
> 
> The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service (CFNIS) charged Moriarity in February after he committed crimes against two teenaged cadets at the Lt.-Gen. E.C. Ashton Armoury in Saanich and the Vernon Army Cadet Summer Training Centre.
> 
> The incidents occurred between 2008 and 2011. The case was brought forward by the chains of command for the two cadets, who contacted the military police about the allegations.
> 
> When the accusations were made, Moriarity was deputy commanding officer of 3005 Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps, which is based at the Ashton Armoury.
> 
> Moriarity is slated to be sentenced on Oct. 31. The three charges were laid pursuant to the National Defence Act and Criminal Code of Canada ....


Oak Bay News, 25 Oct 12


----------



## The Bread Guy

.... according to this news report:


> A former B.C. cadet instructor found guilty of sex offences in a court martial will find out his punishment later today.
> 
> Capt. Daniel Moriarity was convicted of sexual assault and two other charges in a military court in Esquimalt in October.
> 
> The incidents involved a 16-year-old girl and 15-year-old boy between 2008 and 2011 at camps in Vernon and Victoria ....


----------



## Dissident

Considering the subject it might be a bit petty of me but: the Province article is using a stock pictures of troops in Multicam something else than Cadpat.

Edit: My camo patern recognition skills were lacking.


----------



## The Bread Guy

NinerSix said:
			
		

> Considering the subject it might be a bit petty of me but: the Province article is using a stock pictures of troops in Multicam.


Good catch - looks more Aussie than Canadian....


----------



## armyguyswife

ESQUIMALT, B.C. - A military court has sentenced a former deputy commander of the Victoria-based military cadet corps to one year in prison and banished him from the military for sexually abusing teenage cadets.

Twenty-six-year-old Capt. Daniel Moriarity was also demoted to a 2nd Lieutenant by military judge Lt-Col. Louis-Vincent D'auteuil (doe-tay), who says he took advantage of vulnerable young people he was entrusted to lead.

Moriarity was found guilty of sexual exploitation, sexual assault and sexual interference by a military court last October in connection to attacks on a 15-year-old boy and 16-year-old girl in separate incidents at the Vernon, B.C., army camp.

In a joint submission, the military prosecutor and Moriarity's defence lawyer called for the 12-month sentence, rank demotion and military expulsion.

Moments after the judge delivered his sentence, the defence submitted an application to release Moriarity pending the outcome of an appeal.

Moriarity was deputy commanding officer of the Victoria Signal Armoury Cadet Corps 3005 at the time of his arrest.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

IMO, his Commission should be striped from him.


----------



## PMedMoe

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> IMO, his Commission should be striped from him.



 :goodpost:


----------



## armyguyswife

Stripping him of his commission would take an act of Parliament. Unfortunately.


----------



## Dissident

armyguyswife said:
			
		

> Stripping him of his commission would take an act of Parliament. Unfortunately.



So because it is hard we don't do it? This is not directed at you armyguyswife, as I presume you would also like to see him stripped of his commission. 

FJAG et al, what do we need to do to make this happen?


----------



## catalyst

How long does it take for an appeal to happen?

I'm glad its over...........hopefully, we can all move on. It has been a challenge........not everyday that one of your co-workers ends up CM'd.


----------



## The Bread Guy

armyguyswife said:
			
		

> Stripping him of his commission would take an act of Parliament. Unfortunately.


Not quite that much process - GG appears to be able to do it on recommendation from the military, as has been done in the recent past.  

Given the horrendousness of event that caused this to happen (what appears to be) the first time ever, I doubt it would be easy to build a convincing case in this situation, in spite of how bad an abuse of power this represents.


----------



## OldSolduer

For what tis worth, any time spent in custody will be quite miserable for him. Not only do the staff if a prison detest sex offenders, the inmates have a pretty well set up tiering system as well. Guess who is on the bottom.....


----------



## Strike

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> For what tis worth, any time spent in custody will be quite miserable for him. Not only do the staff if a prison detest sex offenders, the inmates have a pretty well set up tiering system as well. Guess who is on the bottom.....



Yes but, as this was a CM, would the sentence not be served at DB in Edmonton?

And why was this done under a CM anyway when the victims were civilian? Is there some odd loophole because they are cadets? I would have thought this would have gone through civilian courts. Or is it because of where the offences took place? I am quite curious as to why this wasn't dealt with by civilian courts as I have seen in the past.


----------



## Journeyman

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> ....... I doubt it would be easy to build a convincing case in this situation, in spite of how bad an abuse of power this represents.


I think it would be pretty easy; hell, even the opposition parties would likely buy in rather than risk being seen as supporting a child molester. In a simplistic world where public analysis and understanding of events is barely headline-deep, and based on the Williams' precedent, I can see muck-raking media trumpetting: 

* DND Says Murdering Subordinates/Wearing their Underwear on Head is Bad; 
Diddling Underage Cadets -- Not So Bad *
Harper to blame ​
I think it's a no-brainer to muster public support where the incidents involve protection of minors....unless of course, there appears to be no public interest, in which case the government will simply ignore the Court Martial, rather than do the right thing, in order to minimize further media attention.

Strip his commission!


----------



## Jarnhamar

ArmySailor said:
			
		

> How long does it take for an appeal to happen?
> 
> I'm glad its over...........hopefully, we can all move on. It has been a challenge........not everyday that one of your co-workers ends up CM'd.



I'm not trying to pick a fight with you but your comment confuses me.  How exactly are you challenged by your co-worker being CM'd?

Do you perhaps mean the challenge is from the institution you belong to having it's honour image and credibility tarnished by his behavior?  Or challenging by having the trust of your subordinates shaken?


----------



## my72jeep

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to pick a fight with you but your comment confuses me.  How exactly are you challenged by your co-worker being CM'd?
> 
> Do you perhaps mean the challenge is from the institution you belong to having it's honour image and credibility tarnished by his behavior?  Or challenging by having the trust of your subordinates shaken?


If I remember Army Salior is from the same unit as the Gulty party.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I think it's a no-brainer to muster public support where the incidents involve protection of minors....unless of course, there appears to be no public interest, in which case the government will simply ignore the Court Martial, rather than do the right thing, in order to minimize further media attention.
> 
> Strip his commission!


Don't get me wrong - I'm with you on the idea, but does that mean that'll have to happen to all the others found guilty of this crap in the past?  Go for them, too, but just sayin' about the threshold that was needed for this to happen a_ first _ time.


----------



## garb811

Strike said:
			
		

> Yes but, as this was a CM, would the sentence not be served at DB in Edmonton?
> 
> And why was this done under a CM anyway when the victims were civilian? Is there some odd loophole because they are cadets? I would have thought this would have gone through civilian courts. Or is it because of where the offences took place? I am quite curious as to why this wasn't dealt with by civilian courts as I have seen in the past.


He was subject to the CSD at the time the offences were committed and they occurred on a Defence Establishment.  Status of the victims has no bearing.


----------



## catalyst

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to pick a fight with you but your comment confuses me.  How exactly are you challenged by your co-worker being CM'd?
> 
> Do you perhaps mean the challenge is from the institution you belong to having it's honour image and credibility tarnished by his behavior?  Or challenging by having the trust of your subordinates shaken?



I can't fully answer that question properly without putting too much information out there. 

I don't really worry about the institution's honour/image/credibility - it is strong, it will recover, as it has done before.


----------



## FJAG

NinerSix said:
			
		

> So because it is hard we don't do it? This is not directed at you armyguyswife, as I presume you would also like to see him stripped of his commission.
> 
> FJAG et al, what do we need to do to make this happen?



Sorry. Not really sure. It shouldn't take an act of parliament as the commission comes from the Queen (Governor General). My view was that the commission (which in effect is an appointment to be her officer in the CF) ran in tandem with service with the forces and a dismissal by a court martial terminated the commission as well. I'm not sure that there is any formal process to strip someone of their commission although I remember in the Williams case apparently his commissioning scroll was to be shredded and his medals cut up.


----------



## FJAG

Strike said:
			
		

> Yes but, as this was a CM, would the sentence not be served at DB in Edmonton?
> 
> And why was this done under a CM anyway when the victims were civilian? Is there some odd loophole because they are cadets? I would have thought this would have gone through civilian courts. Or is it because of where the offences took place? I am quite curious as to why this wasn't dealt with by civilian courts as I have seen in the past.



Either court could have taken jurisdiction. The fact that he could be tried as a reservist means to me that at the time of the offences he was subject to the code of service discipline (ie at a military facility or while he was on duty etc etc) and therefore I would think the civilian crown prosecutor would probably have had no objections to the military dealing with it because the offences were a serious breach of military discipline as well as a crime against the vistims.


----------



## Kat Stevens

I'm pretty sure the Governor General could stroll into his house and tear up his scroll.  It's a Queen's Commission, not a Parliamentary one.


----------



## Jarnhamar

ArmySailor said:
			
		

> I can't fully answer that question properly without putting too much information out there.



Fair enough. I just didn't notice you mentioning anything about the victims or the challenges they're facing.

I understand how being a member of the unit you can't really comment. Cheers.


----------



## The Bread Guy

FJAG said:
			
		

> Sorry. Not really sure. It shouldn't take an act of parliament as the commission comes from the Queen (Governor General). My view was that the commission (which in effect is an appointment to be her officer in the CF) ran in tandem with service with the forces and a dismissal by a court martial terminated the commission as well. I'm not sure that there is any formal process to strip someone of their commission although I remember in the Williams case apparently his commissioning scroll was to be shredded and his medals cut up.


From DND's news release on the Williams situation linked earlier in the thread (also attached if link doesn't work) - highlights mine....


> *Upon the recommendation of General Walt Natynczyk, Chief of the Defence Staff*, His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, has signed the documents revoking the commission of Russell Williams and approved his release from the Canadian Forces (CF).
> 
> (....)
> 
> The governor general is commander-in-chief of Canada. As such, the governor general plays a major role in recognizing the importance of Canada’s military at home and abroad. Among these duties, *the governor general signs Commissioning Scrolls*. Every officer, for the discharge of his or her duties, holds a commission granted by the governor general on behalf of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and countersigned by the Minister of National Defence.  *Along with the authority to grant such commissions is the authority of the governor general to revoke them*.


What process leads up to the CDS recommendation?  No clue, but happy to know more from those who do.


----------



## Blackadder1916

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> From DND's news release on the Williams situation linked earlier in the thread (also attached if link doesn't work) - highlights mine....What process leads up to the CDS recommendation?  No clue, but happy to know more from those who do.



The Governor General revokes commissions quite often, regularly in fact, though it is likely a pro forma function.  As FJAG mentioned above, an officer holds a commission in tandem with his service in the CF (or the RCMP or CCG for those officers who hold commissions in those organizations).  When an officer releases (either compulsorily or voluntarily) from the CF, his commission is revoked.  While the QR&Os states that the authority to release a commissioned officer rests with the Governor General, the administrative processing (and approval)  happens within the CF/DND.  Approval authorities for release are (or had been during my time in) delegated to various levels depending on the rank level and type of release.  I assume that the CDS very publically sent the recommendation for release (and concurrent revocation of commission) to the GG because of the optics involved in the Williams case.

A while back, I received notice that I had been released from the Supp Res.  I was understandably confused as I had not reached either the CRA or the ten years of inactive service deadline that the Supp Res uses as the reason for release.  When I contacted them to question their action, I found out that they had no record of my Primary Res service and were going on the end date of my Reg F service.  It seemed that no one talks to the Supp Res.  Trying to correct this became an issue as they told me that "they had already sent my name (along with the other ones for that month) to the Governor General for notification of release and cancelling my commission".  What they do at Government House with such information I do not know, but no one asked for my scroll back.


----------



## catalyst

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Fair enough. I just didn't notice you mentioning anything about the victims or the challenges they're facing.
> 
> I understand how being a member of the unit you can't really comment. Cheers.



There's a gag order identifying anything about them. Thus, I can't(and wont) touch that without a ten-foot pole.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> The Governor General revokes commissions quite often, regularly in fact, though it is likely a pro forma function.  As FJAG mentioned above, an officer holds a commission in tandem with his service in the CF (or the RCMP or CCG for those officers who hold commissions in those organizations).  When an officer releases (either compulsorily or voluntarily) from the CF, his commission is revoked.  While the QR&Os states that the authority to release a commissioned officer rests with the Governor General, the administrative processing (and approval)  happens within the CF/DND.  Approval authorities for release are (or had been during my time in) delegated to various levels depending on the rank level and type of release.  I assume that the CDS very publically sent the recommendation for release (and concurrent revocation of commission) to the GG because of the optics involved in the Williams case.
> 
> A while back, I received notice that I had been released from the Supp Res.  I was understandably confused as I had not reached either the CRA or the ten years of inactive service deadline that the Supp Res uses as the reason for release.  When I contacted them to question their action, I found out that they had no record of my Primary Res service and were going on the end date of my Reg F service.  It seemed that no one talks to the Supp Res.  Trying to correct this became an issue as they told me that "they had already sent my name (along with the other ones for that month) to the Governor General for notification of release and cancelling my commission".  What they do at Government House with such information I do not know, but no one asked for my scroll back.


Thanks for the rest of the story - much appreciated.


----------



## gwp

dogger1936 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately youth organisations are ripe with people like this. I wonder how many days this member served at one of the national camps? I would LOVE to see the media jump onboard and do some investigative journalism into this organisation. Parents think their kids are heading off with "military men and women" when infact their children are being sent off with people with less than 20 days training as officers of the CF. Maybe the media could also look into how much we fund this program; and why must the nation pay for this youth organisation while others seem to do just fine internally. Maybe look at how much money is paid out to people who have made a full federally paid career as a cadet officer. Look how many cadet officers are making over 100,000 to do not much at all.
> Parents deserve to know; most don't know the difference.



I am little late in my response to this rant but it may be instructive to know that the most common thing that happens in this regard in the cadet organization is the cadet that does not want to go home from summer training.  He or she is hiding in a shower, hiding in a locker, they do not want to get on the bus to go home .... because they have had two, three, or six weeks of safety .. they have made friends, been well fed, had great fun, learned stuff .. they have been exposed to the harrassement breifing and perhaps discussed their life with other cadets.  They have come to understand that part of their life does not have to be the way it is and going home puts them in harms way as someone in their home is doing them evil.  There are about a dozen of such cases every year. The cadet organization empowers young people to report untoward behaviour.  The mistreatment of young people is not a cadet organization problem.  It is a societal problem. 


The revised Cadet Instructor Branch BOQ and Initial MOC Course involves 65 days of computer based DL and in house training.


----------



## Scott

gwp said:
			
		

> I am little late in my response to this rant but it may be instructive to know that the most common thing that happens in this regard in the cadet organization is the cadet that does not want to go home from summer training.  He or she is hiding in a shower, hiding in a locker, they do not want to get on the bus to go home .... because they have had two, three, or six weeks of safety .. they have made friends, been well fed, had great fun, learned stuff .. they have been exposed to the harrassement breifing and perhaps discussed their life with other cadets.  They have come to understand that part of their life does not have to be the way it is and going home puts them in harms way as someone in their home is doing them evil.  There are about a dozen of such cases every year. The cadet organization empowers young people to report untoward behaviour.  The mistreatment of young people is not a cadet organization problem.  It is a societal problem.



Only a year late, but fine. Plenty of other people already rebutted the statement you went after, and you did notice where I had said enough was enough, right?

No one here is stupid. We know hockey coaches, Scout leaders, whatever, have it in them to do this. It's not the organization they belong to that sees them short circuit in such a manner, it's down to the individual. What the organization does, on the other hand, to root this shit out and see the perverts punished, is another thing altogether.


----------



## Pusser

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> The Governor General revokes commissions quite often, regularly in fact, though it is likely a pro forma function.  As FJAG mentioned above, an officer holds a commission in tandem with his service in the CF (or the RCMP or CCG for those officers who hold commissions in those organizations).  When an officer releases (either compulsorily or voluntarily) from the CF, his commission is revoked.  While the QR&Os states that the authority to release a commissioned officer rests with the Governor General, the administrative processing (and approval)  happens within the CF/DND.  Approval authorities for release are (or had been during my time in) delegated to various levels depending on the rank level and type of release.  I assume that the CDS very publically sent the recommendation for release (and concurrent revocation of commission) to the GG because of the optics involved in the Williams case.
> 
> A while back, I received notice that I had been released from the Supp Res.  I was understandably confused as I had not reached either the CRA or the ten years of inactive service deadline that the Supp Res uses as the reason for release.  When I contacted them to question their action, I found out that they had no record of my Primary Res service and were going on the end date of my Reg F service.  It seemed that no one talks to the Supp Res.  Trying to correct this became an issue as they told me that "they had already sent my name (along with the other ones for that month) to the Governor General for notification of release and cancelling my commission".  What they do at Government House with such information I do not know, but no one asked for my scroll back.



Sorry to chime in so late, but I just noticed this and had to speak up. Commissions are rarely if ever revoked.  In fact, Russell Williams is the only Canadian officer to ever have a commission revoked.  It's quite a process and folks actually had to look up the procedure when it was done!  There is a difference between being released from the CF and losing one's commission.  The two do not go hand in hand.  QR&O 15.09 describes the use of rank after release.  If one can retain one's rank after release, then one can retain the commission that goes with it.  Whoever told you that your commission was being cancelled was simply wrong.


----------

