MP Response to fire - Split from First infantry regular force female LCol.

[Jarnhamar]

And Jarnhamar, that delusion I mention covers exactly the type of situation you describe: A MP making a traffic stop not saluting an officer. The MP is still a NCM in the CAF and proper forms of respect and address have not been set aside just because the MP is making a traffic stop

I understand what you're saying.  In the context my friend was talking about it sounded like the officers were trying to prove a point or assert some kind of authority over the MP, not just proper protocol. 

I recall him saying that MPs could actually refuse to salute if doing so would "put them in physical danger" in a traffic stop, such as stepping back from the car coming to attention and saluting (I guess putting them closer to traffic).  It seems like a case of **** you salute me! *** you I don't have to.



Question about MP authority. Unit policy is that the soldiers on the duty desk will not give out members contact information over the phone. MP calls and says I'm an MP I want this guys phone number and/or address.  Does the soldier have to provide it?  (For argument sake say the phone's identical says the call is coming from the local MP detachment).

 

[RCDtpr]

I tend to agree with Strike on that one: This was NOT a police investigation, it was a search for a soldier in order to protect him from himself. Once the senior person present informed him that the person he sought was not in that building, he had no business trying to enter it. The obvious next question for him would have been to inquire with the major whether she knew where the person he sought could be or how he could find said person. That's it.

BTW, is it just me or is this whole thing cockeyed? Here, I am going to ask police officers (civilian ones) to chime in.

It seems to me that if a civilian 9-1-1 centre got a call from someone claiming that their spouse  expressed suicidal thoughts, they would not dispatch a squad car, but an ambulance/paramedics (sure, if the person is not at the residence, the police may send a car to get the "missing" person's details and issue a BOLO, but that would not  be a police "investigation"). It would be treated for what it is: a medical matter (we just had Bell Canada Let's talk day on mental illnesses). When did it become a police matter to protect people with mental illness from themselves?

Here, would  not the proper course of action for the M.P. getting a 9-1-1 call have been to inform base hospital and then contact the member's unit to advise them of the situation , then up to the unit to locate its member and get him/her to the medical services?

This may shock you....people lie to the police.  I don't take anyone's word for anything on a call until I can establish you're credible.  And no, being an officer in the CAF means jack in my eyes as I've seen more than a few act with less than stellar integrity.

As for you question so to what to do if he's found and says I'm not going....not an option.  If you're suicidal the police will apprehend you under the provinces mental health act and you're going to hospital whether you like it or not.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Let's change the scenario a bit.....police officer is called to Microsoft to investigate something and middle management comes down and says "you can't investigate now leave."

Can the middle management demand to see a warrant to be on the premises and if if the officer doesn't have one tell them to leave?

 

[RCDtpr]

Can the middle management demand to see a warrant to be on the premises and if if the officer doesn't have one tell them to leave?

That will depend on how th call originated...in this case as a 911, no warrants are necessary as preservation of life is priority.

But it's moot....a good leader would say "I care about my guy how can I help or how can we work together" not to tell him to get lost.

 

[ModlrMike]

...being an officer in the CAF means jack..

That, right there is the problem. If one can't balance the nuances of being an NCM and an MP at the same time, perhaps other work would be more suitable.

 

[RCDtpr]

That, right there is the problem. If one can't balance the nuances of being an NCM and an MP at the same time, perhaps other work would be more suitable.

I'm referring to my personal opinion as a police officer and not as an NCM.

As stated, if I'm on a call and someone tells me "I'm an officer in the CAF and this is what happened" I put no more weight into their statement than if they were homeless.

Frankly, it's attitudes like that of the Maj and people on this board that have probably caused the MPs to have the attitudes they do.  "I'm a higher rank than you and can obstruct you all I want because of that" is a terrible attitude and obviously would put ANY police officer on the defensive.

You wouldn't talk to the OPP or whoever that way' why not offer the same courtesy to the MPs?

 

[Jarnhamar]

That will depend on how th call originated...in this case as a 911, no warrants are necessary as preservation of life is priority.

But it's moot....a good leader would say "how can I help" not to tell him to get lost.

A leader ensuring an officer is following proper protocol, policy and the rules isn't bad leadership. If anything they may be looking out for the best interests of their employees depending on what the call is regarding.

This may shock you....people lie to the police.

But the police can lie to people too, can't they?

 

[RCDtpr]

A leader ensuring an officer is following proper protocol, policy and the rules isn't bad leadership. If anything they may be looking out for the best interests of their employees depending on what the call is regarding.

If the call originated from 911, that's not their decision to decide what is in the best interests of their employee anymore and by doing so would be obstruction......hence why she was convicted.

 

[ModlrMike]

I'm referring to my personal opinion as a police officer and not as an NCM.

As stated, if I'm on a call and someone tells me "I'm an officer in the CAF and this is what happened" I put no more weight into their statement than if they were homeless.

Frankly, it's attitudes like that of the Maj and people on this board that have probably caused the MPs to have the attitudes they do.  "I'm a higher rank than you and can obstruct you all I want because of that" is a terrible attitude and obviously would put ANY police officer on the defensive.

You wouldn't talk to the OPP or whoever that way' why not offer the same courtesy to the MPs?

So there's no harm in MP QL3 students wearing shirts that say "Don't confuse your rank with my authority" then? That doesn't set the groundwork for problems?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I'm referring to my personal opinion as a police officer and not as an NCM.

As stated, if I'm on a call and someone tells me "I'm an officer in the CAF and this is what happened" I put no more weight into their statement than if they were homeless.

Frankly, it's attitudes like that of the Maj and people on this board that have probably caused the MPs to have the attitudes they do.  "I'm a higher rank than you and can obstruct you all I want because of that" is a terrible attitude and obviously would put ANY police officer on the defensive.

You wouldn't talk to the OPP or whoever that way' why not offer the same courtesy to the MPs?

This is a mistake on your part.  An Officer has a commission and that means something.  So yes, you should take an Officers word at higher face value than a homeless person. 

That being said, if said officer is found to be lying, acting unethically, etc.... Then the full brunt of the law should be brought down on them.

Having worked with LCol Wellwood, I can't imagine what would set off such a mild mannered woman? 

 

[Jarnhamar]

So there's no harm in MP QL3 students wearing shirts that say "Don't confuse your rank with my authority" then? That doesn't set the groundwork for problems?

I've actually seen that shirt.

This is a mistake on your part.  An Officer has a commission and that means something.  So yes, you should take an Officers word at higher face value than a homeless person. 

Statements like you're responding to do seem to highlight an entrenched us vs them mentality that seems planted in Borden.

 

[Loachman]

And no, being an officer in the CAF means jack in my eyes

So you place yourself above our Sovereign, then, whose words on my Commissioning Scroll, and LCol Wellwood's, includes:

"WE reposing especial Trust and Confidence in your Loyalty, Courage and Integrity do by these Presents Constitute and Appoint you to be an Officer in our Canadian Armed Forces. You are therefore carefully and diligently to discharge your Duty as such in the Rank of .............. or in such other Rank as We may from time to time hereafter be pleased to promote or appoint you to, and you are in such manner and on such occasions as may be prescribed by us to exercise and well discipline both the Inferior Officers and Non-Commissioned Members serving under you and use your best endeavour to keep them in good Order and Discipline, and We do hereby Command them to Obey you as their Superior Officer, and you to observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any other your Superior Officer according to Law, in pursuance of the Trust hereby Reposed in you."

Your relationship to members of the CF is NOT the same as that between civilian police and ordinary citizens.

I've seen more than a few act with less than stellar integrity.

To paraphrase: no, being an MP in the CAF means jack in my eyes as I've seen more than a few act with less than stellar integrity.

That goes both ways. If you want respect, earn it, including by your own words in here. I, for one, am not inclined to help those who are rude, arrogant, unprofessional, or overstep the bounds of common decency and common sense, regardless of their occupation. That previous paragraph aside, however, I have found the vast majority of MPs to be professional and respectful, and I freely return that respect. Balance has to be found, and most seem to be able to find it.

And I appreciate that, as MPs are part of the CF and have additional authority while still carrying rank that may often be less than that of the person(s) with whom they are dealing, it is not always easy.

Both parties to this incident were at fault, but the MPs actions seem far from defensible to me and I believe that he should also have been charged.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

This is a mistake on your part.  An Officer has a commission and that means something.  So yes, you should take an Officers word at higher face value than a homeless person. 

BULLSHIT!!!  How freakin' arrogant can one be??  It means you finished some schooling and courses......lots of career criminal assholes have finished school and courses.

That being said, if said officer is found to be lying, acting unethically, etc.... Then the full brunt of the law should be brought down on them.

"Should"........never to be confused with "will be".  We both know better........

 

[Loachman]

To paraphrase once more: Frankly, it's attitudes like that of the MPs on this board that have probably caused everybody else to have the attitudes they do.  "I'm an MP and I can go anywhere I want, anytime I want, and do anything I want, to anyone I want because of that" is a terrible attitude and obviously would put ANYBODY on the defensive.[/quote]

99% of you could be perfectly professional, and that may be the actual percentage, but it only takes one thud to put everybody off.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quoting myself from the CP thread.  [yes we are watching this close] :camo:

No one is allowed to 'abuse' any kind of authority XXXXXX.  'Authority' swings both ways and there may be overlap......

It's morons with ego's that cause that overlap to be a problem.

 

[McG]

It's morons with ego's that cause that overlap to be a problem.

And (just as in discussions of politics) those individuals are always on both sides of the fence.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

And (just as in discussions of politics) those individuals are always on both sides of the fence.

Which I should have added......thanks, MCG.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

BULLSHIT!!!  How freakin' arrogant can one be??  It means you finished some schooling and courses......lots of career criminal assholes have finished school and courses.

"Should"........never to be confused with "will be".  We both know better........

Sorry Bruce but you're wrong this time.

If the commission means nothing, why even bother having Officers?  Why bother having Warrants either? 

That piece of paper means something, whether you like it or not is another argument entirely.

PS

Nobody is stopping anyone here from attending the school and receiving the training.  It's a free country, want the rank and privilege that comes with it?  Then put the time and effort in and you'll have it.

 

[Staff Weenie]

Quick question - where is the balance between enabling an MP to conduct an investigation without interference versus the need to protect OPSEC? For example, if an MP asked/demanded entrance into an area where Secret (or higher) material, crypto, comms eqpt, etc was currently in use, can the OC on the scene refuse for OPSEC purposes?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Sorry Bruce but you're wrong this time.
If the commission means nothing, why even bother having Officers?  Why bother having Warrants either? 

Every corporation needs management.......

That piece of paper means something, whether you like it or not is another argument entirely.
PS
Nobody is stopping anyone here from attending the school and receiving the training.  It's a free country, want the rank and privilege that comes with it?  Then put the time and effort in and you'll have it.

And that'll make me ethically superior then I am now???  Arrogance abounds...