# Mother wants answers after pardoned sex offender becomes cadet instructor



## GAP (21 Mar 2011)

Mother wants answers after pardoned sex offender becomes cadet instructor
By Chip Martin QMI Agency
Article Link

LONDON, Ont. — A local mother has appealed directly to defence minister Peter MacKay, asking him to investigate how a pardoned sex offender became cadet instructor at the 27 Air Squadron.

"It is incumbent on all of us to ensure that this never happens again," Rita Lepore said in a letter to MacKay, dated Feb. 28, for which she has received no response.

She told QMI Agency local military and cadet officials downplayed the situation.

"I don't believe they will do anything until their hand is forced to do something," she said.

So Lepore continues to wait for a reply from MacKay, whose own department rejected Roger Micks when he applied to be a civilian instructor. Micks, now 50, was pardoned in June 2009, from a 1985 gross indecency conviction involving a 15-year-old boy.

A volunteer with 27 Squadron for several years, Micks had been bestowed the "CI" ranking of a civilian instructor despite the national defence rejection. His photo appeared with that ranking on the squadron's website.

Air Cadets is for boys and girls aged 12 to 18 and is operated under the aegis of the department of national defence.

"I want to know what happened, who knew, when they knew and why that information was not communicated," she said. "Parents need to know the truth."

The mother of a 17-year-old female cadet at the squadron, Lepore was sharply critical of squadron leaders who helped Micks get the job he wanted "through the back door."

Micks stepped down from his post when his past became public and and emergency meeting was called to reassure parents.

MacKay's office was asked if the minister plans to reply to Lepore.

"The individual in question has had his status as a volunteer and member of the Air Cadet League of Canada withdrawn," replied a spokesperson for the minister.

"He no longer works with cadets," he said. "There is a review of the policies and screening of volunteers to ensure that parents of cadets maintain their trust and faith with the Canadian Forces and the Air Cadet League to supervise their children."

But Lepore said MacKay must help close a loophole that says a pardoned sex offender "may be able to work with children" in cadets.

"I would respectfully request that you consider a formal inquiry into this matter," Lepore wrote the minister.

She said an investigation of some kind is essential to ensure parents can rest easy knowing pardoned sex offenders won't be teaching their children in organizations like the cadets.
end


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Mar 2011)

So he was denied, and someone backdoored him into a job anyway? Sounds like that someone needs to be shown the door as well.


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Mar 2011)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> So he was denied, and someone backdoored him into a job anyway? Sounds like that someone needs to be shown the door as well.



I would tend to agree, however lets not toss the baby out with the bathwater.


----------



## JMesh (21 Mar 2011)

The way screening of Civilians goes can go in two different ways with the CCO.
[list type=decimal]
[*]They are screened by DND and become Civilian Instructors. These people are under the direct auspices of DND, can do some courses and are paid for at least some of the days worked.
[*]They are screened by the respective league (Army Cadet, Air Cadet or Navy) and become Civilian Volunteers. These people are under the auspices of the league under which they were screened, reporting to the CO of the unit they work with. Although volunteers, there are some units who call them (albeit incorrectly) Civilian Instructors.
[/list]

The individual in this instance was a Civilian Volunteer screened by the league. Unless DND barred him from working with cadets (as opposed to just rejecting his application as a CI), if the league approved it and issued him a proper ID card, he was technically permitted to volunteer there IAW CATO 23-07. Three parties make a decision before an ID is issued. The CO of the unit can decide whether or not they would like the individual to work there. If they deem the person acceptable, they get a recommendation (or lack thereof) by the Sponsoring Committee. From there the file gets forwarded to the league and they make a decision on whether or not this person is acceptable.

Obviously, there was a breakdown somewhere here. Offences of this nature should show up on a Vulnerable Sector Screening (done as part of a Police Records Check if specifically requested - must be substantiated on the request). The Air Cadet League of Canada has listed in their screening policy on their website that this may be grounds for refusal and that they are currently seeking a legal opinion on this (in a 2006 version of the document). Somewhere along the line, a red flag should have popped up and it should not have been forwarded up. This is evidenced by the fact that his volunteer status has been terminated since this came out.


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (21 Mar 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I would tend to agree, however lets not toss the baby out with the bathwater.



C'mon, Mr S. 

I really hope that someday my little girl wants to be a Cadet. 
If she chooses to serve Her country after that, so be it.

I would really like to put my kid into an organization that doesn't allow registered sex offenders to guide her.

(Maybe I'm crazy, but I'll toss the baby, and the bathwater on this one).


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Mar 2011)

Lets see the proof. The paperwork. Then lets toss em out.


----------



## armyvern (21 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> C'mon, Mr S.
> 
> I really hope that someday my little girl wants to be a Cadet.
> If she chooses to serve Her country after that, so be it.
> ...



I'm thinking that Jim is referring to the accusation that someone "backdoored this guy into the posn" despite his past offense and the call by Puckchaser for *that *person to be punted too. That remains to be seen. The Sex Offender is one thing ... an _alleged_ accomplice has yet to be determined.


----------



## JMesh (21 Mar 2011)

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/02/22/17372886.html

Just read this article (from 23 Feb). The RCO for Central Region has stated that the policies will be changed, since "the senior leadership have come to accept ... that there are certain offences that even with a pardon, the adults (who committed them) should not be able to work with our cadets." The loophole is already being closed, at least in Ontario. I have no doubt that leadership at DCdts and at each RCSU, as well as the three leagues, are in fact reviewing policies now and working on the future path.


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (21 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm thinking that Jim is referring to the accusation that someone "backdoored this guy into the posn" despite his past offense and the call by Puckchaser for *that *person to be punted too. That remains to be seen. The Sex Offender is one thing ... an _alleged_ accomplice has yet to be determined.



Yup.....
Apologies to you, Mr. S,
I was on about the offender, not the system.

Ahhhh......Feels good to step my own dick....forgot that feeling....


----------



## armyvern (21 Mar 2011)

Hammer Sandwich said:
			
		

> Yup.....
> Apologies to you, Mr. S,
> I was on about the offender, not the system.
> 
> Ahhhh......Feels good to step my own dick....forgot that feeling....



+300 for you;


----------



## Hammer Sandwich (21 Mar 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> +300 for you;



Well.....I trod on it 2 outta 3 posts, madam........
Should I start playing AOps?.......


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Mar 2011)

The offender has to go, now.

Whoever let him in must go as well, after due process.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Mar 2011)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> So he was denied, and someone _*backdoored * _ him into a job anyway? Sounds like that someone needs to be shown the door as well.



Nice choice of words  ;D


----------



## catalyst (22 Mar 2011)

Took a while for this to get here 

Apparently there is a piece of the puzzle which is missing, between this volunteer (he was a volunteer), his screening (a VSS would have caught his pardonned conviction) and the officer who was given the run-around for bringing this up. 

That being said, this is why we require VSS's - somebody dropped the ball along the way.


----------



## sapperboysen (22 Mar 2011)

When I got my VSS done to be a Civilian Volunteer, the local detachment (RCMP) asked me to come down to pick it up. It wasn't in a sealed envelope or anything. It would have been very easy to make "corrections" if there was anything I disagreed with. Not saying that's what happened here, but it is a major security flaw if this practice is wide spread.


----------



## Michael OLeary (22 Mar 2011)

If anyone wants to read more background on this case, see the London Free press articles that have been published:

site:lfpress.com micks


----------



## gcclarke (24 Mar 2011)

I can certainly see how this particular case it could be construed as an error having been made. After all, he was hired in 2003, and not pardoned until 2009. 

That having been said, if we switch those dates around, there would have been nothing "wrong" about the situation. It is illegal, under the Canadian Human Rights Act, to discriminate against people on the basis of an offense for which a pardon has been granted. It is just as illegal for us to say "no pardoned sex offenders allowed" as it is to say "no Asians allowed." 

Once that pardon has been granted, the offence officially pretty much never happened. His name was wiped from the sex offenders registry. And, should in the course of any background checks, you come across information relating to said offence, once again, it is illegal to use that information in your decision making process. 

Suffice it to say, I don't think that the RCO who was quoted above saying "the senior leadership have come to accept ... that there are certain offences that even with a pardon, the adults (who committed them) should not be able to work with our cadets" ran that past the JAG legal advisors.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (24 Mar 2011)

I agree with gcclarke.

The problem is the pardons themselves, just wait long enough and you can have one. The system needs to be changed, but then what part of our penal system doesn't?


----------



## gcclarke (24 Mar 2011)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I agree with gcclarke.
> 
> The problem is the pardons themselves, just wait long enough and you can have one. The system needs to be changed, but then what part of our penal system doesn't?



I must say however, it is hard for me to think that the pardon is unjustified in this case. I mean, the guy in question was arrested for a crime in 1985. One would presume that he has gone the entire time since without any further offenses if he was granted this pardon. So, having spent 26 years (over half of his life) without having committed a crime, who are we to say that this guy is a risk without any further information? Heck, he appears to have been doing well working with children since 2003 without any issues (as the entirety of the uproar seems to be about the guy's past, not his conduct on the job), so that seems to me to be a point in his favour.


----------



## JMesh (24 Mar 2011)

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Once that pardon has been granted, the offence officially pretty much never happened. His name was wiped from the sex offenders registry. And, should in the course of any background checks, you come across information relating to said offence, once again, it is illegal to use that information in your decision making process.



Actually, that's not totally accurate. As the crime he was charged with was a sexual offence, it could show up on a VSS. When working with youth, the elderly or disabled persons, if a pardoned offence shows up on a VSS, this can be grounds to refuse. The VSS process is actually in place to ensure pardoned sexual offenders do not work with vulnerable populations.


----------



## Hocdoc (24 Mar 2011)

I think there needs to be some clarification here on Statements made by GC Clarke.

I've been involved with Abuse and Harassment since the mid 1990's with Canadian Hockey and now the CF. I was involved with the implementation of the Speak Out Program and the template used across the country on Abuse and Harassment Prevention. Before all parties began we learnt on how these individuals operate before we could put safe guards in place to keep these individuals out. Believe me these individuals excel at what they do and believe in themselves that they have done nothing wrong. They know how to cover tracks and can go for years undetected until one person has the courage to come forward and disclose then others follow. Part of our process was to learn what to look for the " red flags" that are associated with these individuals. It is like they have a script written for them to follow. We can not risk the safety of children by saying that he has not done anything in 26 years so he is no risk. Can anyone have 100% proof of this or has he not been caught since. We have scientific proof that once someone crosses that line they re offend in most cases but again we can not put children at risk think that a person may not offend. The Human Rights Act does say you can not discriminate against a person who has been pardoned but it also states that a person can be refused under certain conditions regardless of a pardon. A person who has been pardoned for assaulting a woman applies to work at a womans shelter is denied that opportunity based on his prior conviction. Same with a person pardoned for fraud wanting to go and work at a bank. Just because a person has been pardoned does not mean all is forgiven with certain serious crimes. When doing a CPIC check he will have a clear record the moment a VSS is requested that pardon will show up and the VSS will uncover that pardon and the offense will be exposed and the VSS will fail and that person can not work with youth. They go through great lengths to not only groom their victims but to put up a defense perimeter in front of them so when accusations are made then they are deflected away from them that is when they get very comfortable and strike again. Not saying that something has happened here and hopefully nothing has but one never knows for certain.

DND in particular CFRC did their job when the failed VSS came back he was counseled out in definitely to work with youth. It was what happened after that by other parties to have him approved they knowingly and willingly put children at risk and kept his past from the parents that is criminal.

Believe me there is alot more to this story on which I can not comment on.

They could have gotten away with this at another unit but they did not know the  background of the UHRA in this area.

These people have never dealt with the victims of these predators or have seen the affect it has on the victim for the rest of their lives, their families. Where is their pardon it is a life sentence. That is why I retained Mr. Talach to deal with the actions taken against me as he is the top lawyer in this country when it comes to these issue as he has taken on the Vatican and won along with other institutions. Here we have a chance to protect our most precious resource ........our youth from becoming possible victims and we will. Mr. talach is not only a prominent lawyer but also a member of the CF.

I hope this gives some clarification to this issue and to why it was brought forward.


----------



## formercadet1029 (24 Mar 2011)

This is an intense story, London isn't too far away from me. 

I think if they knowingly pushed a guy through the system back in 2003, that had this type of conviction under his belt, it's a big problem and heads should likely roll. The article stated that he didn't receive his pardon until 2009, so that's a 6 year window that he should have been most definitely denied in my opinion.


----------



## garb811 (24 Mar 2011)

For those that want the official word on the issue on pardons and VSS, here's a backgrounder:  Criminal Record Background Checks, Vulnerable Sector and Pardons.


----------

