Author Topic: Operation HONOUR discussion  (Read 88518 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline QV

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 9,645
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 358
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #50 on: July 03, 2019, 11:26:01 »
When the complainant admits to making it all up for revenge, I feel there is a solid case for public mischief. 

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 86,390
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,621
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #51 on: July 03, 2019, 13:28:35 »
When the complainant admits to making it all up for revenge, I feel there is a solid case for public mischief.
Sure, if when the confession was made the charters and cautions have been read and the video tape is running with the monitor paying attention and making fulsome and accurate notes... Not a show stopper if that wasn't the case but the hill you need to climb to prove that charge has now turned into a cliff face when she realizes the jeopardy she is suddenly in and refuses to repeat it once all of that is in place.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 233,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,742
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #52 on: July 03, 2019, 14:06:33 »
When the complainant admits to making it all up for revenge, I feel there is a solid case for public mischief.

Did the interviewing officer immediately tell the person to stop, and caution them? The instant such an admission is made, any reasonable officer will now suspect that the person has committed an offense, and the nature of the interview has changed. That doesn't meant he initial unsolicited admission is inadmissible, but it does mean that the individual's jeopardy has changed radically, and they need to be cautioned so as to unequivocally understand their rights not to say anything further and the problems they face.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #53 on: July 03, 2019, 16:13:59 »
Nope....I wasn’t allowed to.

I was basically told that if we charge people for lying...it will dissuade truthful victims from coming forward.

Isn't this 'selective justice' or whatever the term is?  One person is accused of committing some type of offence and is investigated.  The person who makes the false accusation and lied to the police/authorities then admits "It was all a lie"...but with no consequences.

There is something else wrong with the system if we are letting people off the hook for things like this.  If you broke your right leg, would you go to hospital to get it in a cast etc?  Or would you break your other leg...

Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline exCAFguy

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 5,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 338
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #54 on: July 03, 2019, 17:23:46 »
Did the interviewing officer immediately tell the person to stop, and caution them? The instant such an admission is made, any reasonable officer will now suspect that the person has committed an offense, and the nature of the interview has changed. That doesn't meant he initial unsolicited admission is inadmissible, but it does mean that the individual's jeopardy has changed radically, and they need to be cautioned so as to unequivocally understand their rights not to say anything further and the problems they face.

In my office at that point the invest would be concluded and that’s that.  I once asked if I could at least send it to JAG for their opinion on moving forward for public mischief and got yelled at.

Edit....this reply was meant for Eye in the Sky however I clicked Brihard by mistake.  Not tech savvy enough to fix it lol
« Last Edit: July 03, 2019, 17:26:19 by exCAFguy »

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #55 on: July 03, 2019, 17:43:30 »
This is where I think the "victim" has become the mbr originally thought to be "the accused".  Where is the concern for that individual?  Where are their rights to justice?   ???
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 249,320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,893
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #56 on: July 07, 2019, 11:00:50 »
When the complainant admits to making it all up for revenge, I feel there is a solid case for public mischief.

I have seen two occasions when this happened. In each case the reputational damage to the accused was unrecoverable, despite the lies being exposed, which was the greatest tragedy.

I’m not sure what the best approach might be, but am pretty sure that slamming people into immediate house arrest, or the equivalent, based on an as yet unproven allegation is probably not the way to go.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 299,006
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,981
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #57 on: August 30, 2019, 10:11:40 »
Severe punishment (career ending perhaps?) handed down to Canadian Forces officer who repeatedly grabbed the genitals of colleagues.

I'm guessing the guilty party making the statement "Oh, I know you like it," had a hand to play in the judges decision.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/halifax/fondling-of-frigate-mates-earns-navy-officer-a-reprimand-346626/
« Last Edit: August 30, 2019, 10:19:52 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 119,889
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,209
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #58 on: August 30, 2019, 10:46:18 »
Severe punishment (career ending perhaps?) handed down to Canadian Forces officer who repeatedly grabbed the genitals of colleagues.

I'm guessing the guilty party making the statement "Oh, I know you like it," had a hand to play in the judges decision.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/halifax/fondling-of-frigate-mates-earns-navy-officer-a-reprimand-346626/

Meanwhile in Belgium:

Belgian soldiers and police ‘held orgy’ during Brussels lockdown
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/30/belgian-soldiers-police-held-orgy-during-brussels-lockdown

 :rofl:

Our world today is a funny mix of Roman Decadence and Victorian Morality




Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 31,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 874
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #59 on: August 30, 2019, 10:52:37 »
Maybe will be clearer when the actual CM decision is out in a few months, but any reason why something like this couldn't have had sexual assault as the primary, with the behaving in a disgraceful manner as an alternate? Understand there is discretion for the prosecutor but not really clear why this wouldn't meet the elements of the charge.

Does it have to be more sustained or not through clothes or something?  From looking at other CMs seems to be a range of similar behaviour that may or may not hit the threshold.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 119,889
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,209
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #60 on: August 30, 2019, 11:01:51 »
Maybe will be clearer when the actual CM decision is out in a few months, but any reason why something like this couldn't have had sexual assault as the primary, with the behaving in a disgraceful manner as an alternate? Understand there is discretion for the prosecutor but not really clear why this wouldn't meet the elements of the charge.

Does it have to be more sustained or not through clothes or something?  From looking at other CMs seems to be a range of similar behaviour that may or may not hit the threshold.

Because cultural/societal biases, that's why.


Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 249,320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,893
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #61 on: August 30, 2019, 11:22:16 »
Meanwhile in Belgium:

Belgian soldiers and police ‘held orgy’ during Brussels lockdown
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/30/belgian-soldiers-police-held-orgy-during-brussels-lockdown

 :rofl:

Our world today is a funny mix of Roman Decadence and Victorian Morality

Perception vs. reality related to crime is very different oin different countries e.g., https://www.visualcapitalist.com/crime-rate-perception-gap/
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #62 on: August 30, 2019, 11:29:59 »
Severe punishment (career ending perhaps?) handed down to Canadian Forces officer who repeatedly grabbed the genitals of colleagues.

I'm guessing the guilty party making the statement "Oh, I know you like it," had a hand to play in the judges decision.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/halifax/fondling-of-frigate-mates-earns-navy-officer-a-reprimand-346626/

A severe reprimand and a $3,000 fine?  That doesn't seem too severe to me.  I wonder if the Officer found guilty had been male and the victims female if the punishment would have been so (IMO) light.
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 249,320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,893
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #63 on: August 30, 2019, 11:32:22 »
A severe reprimand and a $3,000 fine?  That doesn't seem too severe to me.  I wonder if the Officer found guilty had been male and the victims female if the punishment would have been so (IMO) light.

I'm tracking a couple of FB groups that are blowing up about that right now....
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 233,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,742
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #64 on: August 30, 2019, 11:42:18 »
Maybe will be clearer when the actual CM decision is out in a few months, but any reason why something like this couldn't have had sexual assault as the primary, with the behaving in a disgraceful manner as an alternate? Understand there is discretion for the prosecutor but not really clear why this wouldn't meet the elements of the charge.

Does it have to be more sustained or not through clothes or something?  From looking at other CMs seems to be a range of similar behaviour that may or may not hit the threshold.

She was charged with Sexual Assault x3, Assault x1, and Disgraceful x3. She pled guilty to disgraceful x3, which suggests a plea deal with the SA/Assault charges being stayed. Many men have gotten that same plea deal. CDS direction suggests that findings of guilt in such cases will probably result in an administrative (vs disciplinary) release from the CAF.
+300
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 142,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,691
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #65 on: August 30, 2019, 11:50:40 »
Maybe things have changed, but in my days a Severe reprimand on an officer's file was pretty career limiting.

She may make it to two-ringer, late, on the "automatic" process but extremely unlikely to make it past that rank unless she turns into the superstar of the fleet in all she does. Moreover, in my days, such finding could've security clearance implications. Not sure if that would still be the case today, though.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 299,006
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,981
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #66 on: August 30, 2019, 12:06:59 »
A severe reprimand and a $3,000 fine?  That doesn't seem too severe to me.  I wonder if the Officer found guilty had been male and the victims female if the punishment would have been so (IMO) light.

$3000 fine paid in convenient $300 installments.

Would a male officer found guilty of grabbing women's crotches, saying "I knoe you like it" got the same punishment through today's op honour crosshairs? No idea, lots of people don't seem to think so from what I'm reading.

It sounds like she was promoted to LT(N) and redeployed on the same ship, in the same role.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 228,677
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,329
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #67 on: August 30, 2019, 12:12:53 »
$3000 fine paid in convenient $300 installments.

Would a male officer found guilty of grabbing women's crotches, saying "I knoe you like it" got the same punishment through today's op honour crosshairs? No idea, lots of people don't seem to think so from what I'm reading.

It sounds like she was promoted to LT(N) and redeployed on the same ship, in the same role.

All good questions. Her career will probably stop, at least short term due to the severe reprimand.

I would not be surprised if she was released administratively. I've been out for over two years now so who knows how they will treat this situation.

Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 742,937
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,057
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #68 on: August 30, 2019, 12:39:52 »
Maybe things have changed, but in my days a Severe reprimand on an officer's file was pretty career limiting.

She may make it to two-ringer, late, on the "automatic" process but extremely unlikely to make it past that rank unless she turns into the superstar of the fleet in all she does. Moreover, in my days, such finding could've security clearance implications. Not sure if that would still be the case today, though.

The member is now a LT(N).
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 31,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 874
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #69 on: August 30, 2019, 12:51:21 »
She was charged with Sexual Assault x3, Assault x1, and Disgraceful x3. She pled guilty to disgraceful x3, which suggests a plea deal with the SA/Assault charges being stayed. Many men have gotten that same plea deal. CDS direction suggests that findings of guilt in such cases will probably result in an administrative (vs disciplinary) release from the CAF.

Thanks, that makes sense. The CMJ site only lists the disgraceful x3; didn't realize they don't list stayed charges from plea bargains on there. Learn something everyday; now I can start my weekend with confidence!  :cheers:

AR with possible release seems reasonable. Seems like a pretty light fine, but guessing this was par for the course with similar cases. On paper, severe reprimand is pretty bad, but kind of a moot point if you will get a dishonourable release anyway. Will be interesting to read the decision and see what the judge had for mitigating/aggravating factors. Speculating before that is available is a waste of time (IMHO).

If she was that close to getting her NOPQ she had enough experience that 'I'm just a dumb Subbie' doesn't wash. Especially to do it multiple times. I'm a fan of the bigger responsibility = bigger hammer if you mess up, so think generally that officers and senior NCMs should get smote for things like this to set an example for the sailors/troops.

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 50,755
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,837
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #70 on: August 30, 2019, 12:53:45 »
The member is now a LT(N).

Members are either a physical appendages or in the RCMP.

She's a Naval Officer (although a tainted one now)

Offline Chief Engineer

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 742,937
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,057
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #71 on: August 30, 2019, 13:04:42 »
Members are either a physical appendages or in the RCMP.

She's a Naval Officer (although a tainted one now)

Yes this Naval Officer is now a LT(N), my bad.
"When your draught exceeds your depth, you are most assuredly aground"

All opinions stated are not official policy of the CF and of a private individual

كافر

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 923,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,204
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #72 on: August 30, 2019, 13:28:40 »
All good questions. Her career will probably stop, at least short term due to the severe reprimand.

I would not be surprised if she was released administratively. I've been out for over two years now so who knows how they will treat this situation.

If she's not released, its grounds for grievance for any male released after having similar charges and findings of guilt. Possibly even brought to a human rights tribunal, if someone was bold enough.

Offline kratz

    Summer is here...and more rain.

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 265,578
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,348
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #73 on: August 30, 2019, 13:49:38 »
Sadly, grievances can only be made while in the service.

Those who were released would have to make use of other methods of recourse. As you suggested, a HRT.
Quote from: Pipe *General Call*
"Tanning Stations on the flight deck"


Remember, this site is unofficial and privately owned. The site benefits from the presence of current members willing to answer questions.

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 119,889
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,209
Re: Operation HONOUR discussion
« Reply #74 on: August 30, 2019, 15:52:31 »
Perception vs. reality related to crime is very different oin different countries e.g., https://www.visualcapitalist.com/crime-rate-perception-gap/
*WARNING: UNPOPULAR OPINION ALERT!*

I'm glad she didn't get convicted of sexual assault, it shows that there actually is some common sense in the legal system.

Yah she did wrong but ffs, she isn't a sex offender and I don't think it's in the public interest to have her on the registered sex offenders list with 3x sexual assault convictions which would essentially destroy her life.

She is essentially guilty of being pig headed and promiscuous which btw I can go to any bar in town and watch the same thing happen multiple times in one night.  They don't have OP HONOUR in bars though so it's all good there.

Which btw, I think brings up an important point.  The whole purpose of the military justice system is to firstly, maintain discipline in the ranks but also correct behaviour and make someone employable by the CAF again. 

It is not supposed to be step 4 in the 30 step process of modern society's equivalent of tarring and feathering. I would personally offer her counselling and education and give her the chance to prove her worth again and that goes for anyone else OF EITHER SEX who did something similar. 

If everyone were judged by their worst moments, we would all be in prison (shamelessly stole that quote from someone else). 

This is kind of the point of my comment above regarding our society now.  We are a society of excess.  We promote absolute decadence in many instances (our celebrity obsessed culture) and then act all POed when someone acts exactly like the very people we spend most of our time idolizing.  Loudly yelling FOR SHAME!

I won't participate in it, I refuse to.




« Last Edit: August 30, 2019, 15:55:26 by Humphrey Bogart »