"MP's or Provost - An Idea on Roles" and "Replace base MP with RCMP"

[JesseWZ]

I'd encourage everyone currently involved in this discussion to check out the thread Mariomike posted - regarding replacing Base MPs with the RCMP. Or perhaps we could get a merge? The topic seems to have jumped the shark here.

The RCMP over base MP was shot down primarily for one big reason: Cost for services.

Most CF establishments have a minimum MP manning of 2 or 3 members on shift at all times. Factor in a recall and other units which run on duty schedules (such as mine) and Base/Establishment Commanders can see a swell of MPs up to nearly the entire guardhouse (20-40 persons) when required, plus the call in of investigators for specific types of offences.

When the CF approached the other large police forces about maintaining this level of service (2-3 on or about a Defense Establishment at all times), the quote they received was quite high, and, the members would be out of the Base Commanders control. I know as a branch we are more independent from the Base Chain of Command then perhaps ever before, but we still follow a chain of command. With RCMP policing the bases, Base Commanders, and Commanders at all levels won't get the same kind of buy in and access they have now. Gone would be the request for extra security checks, checks of deployed members PMQs, traffic control for military functions, escorts of military goods when outside a defense establishment, speeding or traffic safety enforcement on demand, etc. All of these extra services would then cost money - out of the Base Commanders budget.

In the CFNIS (the unit I'm from), one of the steps of most of our investigations includes a backbrief to the Base Commander. The details of the brief scale dramatically depending on the sensitivity of the investigation, but almost always, we brief local commanders on our files as they unfold. It's part of our SOPs. You won't see that be an SOP at a civilian service.

Commanders and MPs have a unique relationship. MP have a law enforcement/security/provost role, which has to be balanced with the mission - and the mission is the Commanders focus. If we ever move to an RCMP policed military, I can forsee a lot of Commanders pulling out their hair, not knowing the reasons why Pte McPrivatestein suddenly didn't show up for work up training or a deployment, or why his passport has been seized, or countless other reasons why law enforcement activities might effect planning or execution of the mission.

 

[brihard]

MP pay is garbage compared to most civilian police forces, even the RCMP. And they don’t get overtime, either. Going to RCMP or other police services on a contracted basis would be quite a cost increase.

 

[garb811]

...in fact, the origins of the Canadian Provost Corps came from NWMP personnel who enlisted during WWI...

I think you are confusing WWI and WWII.  WWI, the Canadian Military Police Corps (CMPC) was authorized in 1917 and disbanded in 1920.  While it is possible some former NWMP pers transferred into it on establishment, they were not the origin of the Canadian Provost Corps as it did not exist by that name.

On the other hand, the Canadian Provost Corps (CProC) was established 15 June 1940 with No 1 Company (RCMP) and No 2 Provost Company.  That is the strong tie in between the history of the MP Branch and RCMP.  It is also the reason why the MP Branch now considers 15 June 1940 to be our birth date, as opposed to amalgamation in 1968.

 

[garb811]

I wonder what the late Colonel James Stone, DSO, MC, CD would have thought about replacing MP's with the RCMP....

Considering he was a life long infantry officer who served as the Provost Marshal as one of his many postings, that's a good question.

 

[Piece of Cake]

Considering he was a life long infantry officer who served as the Provost Marshal as one of his many postings, that's a good question.

Also, a philanthropist and an Order of Canada recipient.

But I digress.

 

[Good2Golf]

JesseWZ and Brihard’s notes about cost should not go un/under appreciated.  On a tangential note to general policing, having seen first-hand the transition of Dom CT from RCMP to military and being aware of the mounting cost that a Supt., a couple Insp., a few Staffs, several Sgts and a working force roughly split between Cpls and Sr.Consts, I can only imagine what the inter-Departmental Vote 1 transfer between DND and PSC would be for DND-wide policing.  As well, perhaps practice might be different, but the point JesseWZ makes about NIS backbrief/link to the implicated CoC is important. Having benefited from professional comms w/ the NIS I note my appreciation with their professional conduct that might not exist to the same extent were such services to be provided from a non-Defence-aligned investigatory capacity.  That’s not intended as a dig at theoumties by any stretch; I respect that Force greatly.

I will opine slightly for a moment, in that the MP/MPO organization while often taking significant criticism from many, is but one player in the play.  Command often abrogates true responsibilities to the enablers (I can think of the CoC letting Signals run as though a panacea, when some clear leadership, stewardship and direction was more appropriate) and I think that the case of military policing is no exception. I would say that on the whole, with MP/SI and more recently CP, the Branch is not as broken as some make it out to be.

Sorry, not able to offer meaningful suggestions per se to adjusting how the MP/provost function is performed, but at least wanted to provide some feedback to those providing the service and others, as a means of providing an indication of “layman appreciation” to the work performed by the MP Branch.

Regards
G2G

 

[RCDtpr]

People are quick to slag the MP branch for doing substandard work but a lot of the times it isn’t necessarily us (although we certainly have our deficiencies).  I can’t count the number of times I’ve investigated something, found no grounds to recommend a charge, annotate that in my report, only to have the CO basically say well that guy is a **** rat and I’m charging him anyways.  Member elects CM and charges are withdrawn.  MP are then blamed as we didn’t do a “solid enough” invest.

A lot of people will now counter argue me that that’s impossible since JAG reviews before charges are laid.  Without opening a can of worms or slagging an entire trade.....JAG does not always make correct decisions and I’ll leave it at that.

Replacing MP with any civilian police service may be done in the near future and I can all but guarantee that within a year that decision would be regretted by the CAF as a whole.  Cost aside, base commanders will begin being told by young constables to do an access to information to get any info on files AFTER the invest is done, the CAF can no longer control what is released to the media, and units will become inundated with UDI’s as civilian police are not going to investigate some of the nonsense MP are forced to investigate.

I’m a firm believer the CAF is going to make a rash decision within the next decade or so and drop the MP from policing duties only to regret that (for reasons listed and others) once it’s too late.

 

[brihard]

  Cost aside, base commanders will begin being told by young constables to do an access to information to get any info on files AFTER the invest is done, the CAF can no longer control what is released to the media, and units will become inundated with UDI’s as civilian police are not going to investigate some of the nonsense MP are forced to investigate.

Definitely this. Civilian police constantly use discretion to write off silly little matters where there is no public interest justifying the time and expense of an investigation or prosecution. Nor would military rank or appointment carry any real weight in terms of getting certain action or results or information. I could see that not going over well. But units would adjust, using the tools available to them that have perhaps gone underutilized.

 

[jollyjacktar]

But ExRCD, as l alluded to in my earlier post, during my time in Calgary there were a number of times we had pressure applied from the outside the unit to shut things down or sweep under the carpet.  Much to our (those of us in the shifts) frustrations. 

If the guys can do their job today without outsiders sticking their nose in, then that's progress. 

 

[RCDtpr]

But ExRCD, as l alluded to in my earlier post, during my time in Calgary there were a number of times we had pressure applied from the outside the unit to shut things down or sweep under the carpet.  Much to our (those of us in the shifts) frustrations. 

If the guys can do their job today without outsiders sticking their nose in, then that's progress.

I’m all for it.  Nothing frustrates me more than when the trade spews this illusion that we are free from influence from the CAF CoC because it’s hogwash.

I’m more referring to the CAF higher ups who would be VERY unhappy if they lose their sphere of influence over internal policing because I can assure you the OPP, RCMP or whoever couldn’t care less that Col Bloggins is a Col.  In the CAF world of egos and inflated self value based on rank, it won’t go over well if the switch was made from MP to civvie police.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I’m more referring to the CAF higher ups who would be VERY unhappy if they lose their sphere of influence over internal policing because I can assure you the OPP, RCMP or whoever couldn’t care less that Col Bloggins is a Col.  In the CAF world of egos and inflated self value based on rank, it won’t go over well if the switch was made from MP to civvie police.

You're an MP right?  MPs making statements like the stuff I've highlighted in yellow is part of the reason you guys suffer from the opinion some of the CF have of you.  The CAF is a power/authority based organization and people of higher ranks have higher power and influence; it is the way it should be and needs to be. 

Believe me, the worst 'ego and inflated self value based' I've witnessed personally was actually a MP Cpl years ago.  I was in a different trade at the time and a Sgt and I took the time to educate the Cpl on the fact he was still a Cpl and I was a superior officer IAW the QR & O.  Careful using wide strokes - remember the M in MP means Military - you're not exempt from the rank structure or the CSD either.  I could easily change your statement to say "inflated self value based on a badge"...and you've provided an example.  A CO deciding to lay a charge even though your report didn't recommend it.  Maybe the CO is aware you don't see an actual Commanding Officer, just someone with an ego and inflated self value based on rank.

 

[RCDtpr]

You're an MP right?  MPs making statements like the stuff I've highlighted in yellow is part of the reason you guys suffer from the opinion some of the CF have of you.  The CAF is a power/authority based organization and people of higher ranks have higher power and influence; it is the way it should be and needs to be. 

Believe me, the worst 'ego and inflated self value based' I've witnessed personally was actually a MP Cpl years ago.  I was in a different trade at the time and a Sgt and I took the time to educate the Cpl on the fact he was still a Cpl and I was a superior officer IAW the QR & O.  Careful using wide strokes - remember the M in MP means Military - you're not exempt from the rank structure or the CSD either.  I could easily change your statement to say "inflated self value based on a badge"...and you've provided an example.  A CO deciding to lay a charge even though your report didn't recommend it.  Maybe the CO is aware you don't see an actual Commanding Officer, just someone with an ego and inflated self value based on rank.

I will agree with your statement we do have Cpl’s who tend to think they are more than they are, however those tend to be younger direct entries who haven’t quite grasped the fact that they have the unique challenge of policing within the military.  They will learn the hard way eventually.

However, I’ll assume you’ve never been an MP and therefore have never had to navigate the minefield that is doing our job when an individual thinks their rank affords them immunity to the law (this may shock you but those people exist).  Further, when I stated people with egos and inflated self worth I’m referring to individuals like a LCol I had make his way over to a domestic I was at and began demanding information.  When he was told to leave he made it very clear I was a Cpl, he was an LCol and I was to obey his every directive.  At this point, I had to counsel him that while I may be a Cpl and him a LCol, I was engaged in my policing duties and therefore him interfering constituted the criminal offence of obstructing a peace officer.  He was then given the choice of walking away or being arrested.  Needles to say the phone rang on Monday morning with him very upset I dared stand up to him. (Of course had I been a civvie cop I doubt he’d have even approached let alone begin interfering)

While I despise the saying “don’t mistake your rank with my authority” (and have no problems issuing my Cpls a 5b if they say that nonsense) the saying does have merit.  While I agree with you the CAF is a “power/authority” based organization, there are times when the power of the police supersede that of the Military.  Just accept it because that’s the way it is whether you agree or not.

I’m not going to get into this pissing match that’s happened over and over on these boards.  The discussion was in regards to Military vs RCMP having policing DND establishment and once again someone takes the time to hijack it to let everyone know what they think of the MPs. 

And people wonder why MP’s walk around with the attitudes they do.....

 

[FJAG]

. . .  At this point, I had to counsel him that while I may be a Cpl and him a LCol, I was engaged in my policing duties and therefore him interfering constituted the criminal offence of obstructing a peace officer.  He was then given the choice of walking away or being arrested.  Needles to say the phone rang on Monday morning with him very upset I dared stand up to him. . . .

. . .  While I agree with you the CAF is a “power/authority” based organization, there are times when the power of the police supersede that of the Military.  Just accept it because that’s the way it is whether you agree or not.

I’m not going to get into this pissing match that’s happened over and over on these boards.  The discussion was in regards to Military vs RCMP having policing DND establishment and once again someone takes the time to hijack it to let everyone know what they think of the MPs. 

And people wonder why MP’s walk around with the attitudes they do.....

The issue that you seem to miss completely is that the administration of discipline is a function of the chain of command and that you as an MP are a  part of that function but not by any stretch of the imagination the foundation of it.

The actual foundation of the disciplinary system, under the Code of Service Discipline, is the commanding officer to whom most of the discipline functions and powers have been given. Even Superior Commanders have less powers than a CO albeit that they apply to a subset of the military over which the CO has no or limited jurisdiction.

MPs have the authority to investigate disciplinary matters and to provide reports of their findings to the appropriate chain of command. It is the chain of command that principally lays charges and administers discipline (and CFNIS who have powers to charge but not administer discipline)

I think that a Cpl who feels it is necessary to "counsel" a LCol (commanding officer) who was "demanding information" respecting what I presumed was a situation involving one of his subordinates has perhaps lost the point of the whole exercise and is perhaps a little intoxicated with the power/authority that he thinks he has. I don't know all the circumstances of what happened but, quite frankly, from the way that you make it sound, I think that you were lucky to get away unscathed in this event. MPs and the chain of command work best when they work cooperatively and not with chips on their shoulders.

As far as the topic of MP v RCMP is concerned, I will always be on the side of retaining the MPs because they are more versatile than the RCMP. the RCMP, at this point, simply offer the basic policing function without any of the universality of service elements that enable us to use the MPs in all the military functions that they are designed for from the investigation of offences to traffic control on the battlefield.

[cheers]

 

[trooper142]

The issue that you seem to miss completely is that the administration of discipline is a function of the chain of command and that you as an MP are a  part of that function but not by any stretch of the imagination the foundation of it.

The actual foundation of the disciplinary system, under the Code of Service Discipline, is the commanding officer to whom most of the discipline functions and powers have been given. Even Superior Commanders have less powers than a CO albeit that they apply to a subset of the military over which the CO has no or limited jurisdiction.

MPs have the authority to investigate disciplinary matters and to provide reports of their findings to the appropriate chain of command. It is the chain of command that principally lays charges and administers discipline (and CFNIS who have powers to charge but not administer discipline)

I think that a Cpl who feels it is necessary to "counsel" a LCol (commanding officer) who was "demanding information" respecting what I presumed was a situation involving one of his subordinates has perhaps lost the point of the whole exercise and is perhaps a little intoxicated with the power/authority that he thinks he has. I don't know all the circumstances of what happened but, quite frankly, from the way that you make it sound, I think that you were lucky to get away unscathed in this event. MPs and the chain of command work best when they work cooperatively and not with chips on their shoulders.

As far as the topic of MP v RCMP is concerned, I will always be on the side of retaining the MPs because they are more versatile than the RCMP. the RCMP, at this point, simply offer the basic policing function without any of the universality of service elements that enable us to use the MPs in all the military functions that they are designed for from the investigation of offences to traffic control on the battlefield.

[cheers]

I think the main point I took away from exRCDcpl's post was that, while conducting a policing function, he was interrupted by someone of a higher rank. Although you are correct FJAG that MP's are a function of the system, it is clear that while conducting strictly policing functions, a LCol was wildly out of place demanding information during what was, presumably, an acute situation. That very same LCol could have just as easily waited for the situation to be over and politely and respectfully addressed the situation through the proper channels.

I will agree that some MP's have a tendency to be a bit headstrong, but I believe, IMO, it is because of this very same sense of entitlement. Yes we are all Military, but as of 2011, when the branch became independent of the CoC, I do not have to explain myself to anyone outside my chain of command while conducting strictly policing duties.

I personally have had a similar situation happen to me, and I would have been well within my discretion to arrest and charge the member, a higher rank than me, with obstructing a peace officer.

There is a reason the trend has been to move further and further away from the CoC in respect to policing, and it is this exact problem that crops up again and again. I am sorry, but even as a CO, you are not entitled to information from an MP on scene of an incident, and any attempt to gather information while an MP is dealing with something, puts you at risk of arrest, and having to answer to your chain. Just wait, be polite and respectful, and get the information through the channels that are already in place.

Just my  :2c:, I'm open to seeing it from someone else's view.

 

[FJAG]

I think the main point I took away from exRCDcpl's post was that, while conducting a policing function, he was interrupted by someone of a higher rank. Although you are correct FJAG that MP's are a function of the system, it is clear that while conducting strictly policing functions, a LCol was wildly out of place demanding information during what was, presumably, an acute situation. That very same LCol could have just as easily waited for the situation to be over and politely and respectfully addressed the situation through the proper channels.

I will agree that some MP's have a tendency to be a bit headstrong, but I believe, IMO, it is because of this very same sense of entitlement. Yes we are all Military, but as of 2011, when the branch became independent of the CoC, I do not have to explain myself to anyone outside my chain of command while conducting strictly policing duties.

I personally have had a similar situation happen to me, and I would have been well within my discretion to arrest and charge the member, a higher rank than me, with obstructing a peace officer.

There is a reason the trend has been to move further and further away from the CoC in respect to policing, and it is this exact problem that crops up again and again. I am sorry, but even as a CO, you are not entitled to information from an MP on scene of an incident, and any attempt to gather information while an MP is dealing with something, puts you at risk of arrest, and having to answer to your chain. Just wait, be polite and respectful, and get the information through the channels that are already in place.

Just my  :2c:, I'm open to seeing it from someone else's view.

Fair enough and very well said.

What set me off with ExRCDcpl is primarily his tone when he uses words like:

. . . an individual thinks their rank affords them immunity to the law . . . people with egos and inflated self worth . . . demanding information . . . I was to obey his every directive  . . . him very upset I dared stand up to him. . . . While I despise the saying “don’t mistake your rank with my authority” . . . there are times when the power of the police supersede that of the Military.  Just accept it because that’s the way it is whether you agree or not. . . .And people wonder why MP’s walk around with the attitudes they do.....

During my early years when I was prosecuting I dealt with many MPs and can say that the vast majority were consummate professionals while some fell a little short of the mark (same goes for COs and prosecutors - in fact once I was sent in to replace a prosecutor on a court martial because the MPs were of the view that they simply couldn't work with the prior prosecutor and made their objections known to the AJAG in charge of the case (this was prior to DMP))

The point is when I sit down to analyse what a given person is saying I take a very close look at what is said and how it is said and what my general experience is in similar circumstances to see if my bulls*** meter goes off.

I don't doubt that there are occasions when a more senior officer engages with the MPs in order to obtain information in the course of an investigation. Generally this is because they too have a role to play in the process (or at least they honestly think that they do) and not because they simply want to throw their weight around or because of their "egos and inflated self worth". How the individual MP deals with that--for example "discretion" versus "power of the police"--tells me a lot about the individual MP's attitude and professionalism.

The fact is I think highly of our MPs and, even though I have a son-in-law who is an RCMP officer, I would not want to see them taking over any of the MP's policing functions.

:cheers:

 

[RCDtpr]

Fair enough and very well said.

What set me off with ExRCDcpl is primarily his tone when he uses words like:

During my early years when I was prosecuting I dealt with many MPs and can say that the vast majority were consummate professionals while some fell a little short of the mark (same goes for COs and prosecutors - in fact once I was sent in to replace a prosecutor on a court martial because the MPs were of the view that they simply couldn't work with the prior prosecutor and made their objections known to the AJAG in charge of the case (this was prior to DMP))

The point is when I sit down to analyse what a given person is saying I take a very close look at what is said and how it is said and what my general experience is in similar circumstances to see if my bulls*** meter goes off.

I don't doubt that there are occasions when a more senior officer engages with the MPs in order to obtain information in the course of an investigation. Generally this is because they too have a role to play in the process (or at least they honestly think that they do) and not because they simply want to throw their weight around or because of their "egos and inflated self worth". How the individual MP deals with that--for example "discretion" versus "power of the police"--tells me a lot about the individual MP's attitude and professionalism.

The fact is I think highly of our MPs and, even though I have a son-in-law who is an RCMP officer, I would not want to see them taking over any of the MP's policing functions.

:cheers:

It would seem you’re taking some of my quotes out of context here.

I am not saying higher ranks do not have a place and a purpose within the day to day procedures of the MP’s.  What I am saying is there is a time and place as well as a need to know.  In this particular instance this LCol was attempting to enter this Pte’s residence, during an ongoing and volatile situation, giving no more info than “I’m a LCol and you will do what you’re told.”

Had he approached me after the fact, properly identified himself as his CO and asked for a small update, I would have certainly informed him Pte Bloggins was under arrest for assault and would be held for bail.  As it was, however, this particular LCol handled it terribly unprofessionally, and after the fact I learned he wasn’t even this Pte’s CO, giving him absolutely no need to know on the situation.  Had we been the OPP at this residence I can all but guarantee he wouldn’t have attempted it.  It was nothing more than weight trying to be thrown around based on rank and status and whether you want to believe it or not, it happens a lot more than you would think.

With regards to your surprise I was not administratively dealt with, well by his own admission to my CO, I was not rude to him in anyway, he just felt a Cpl had no place telling a LCol no and didn’t think it was appropriate I informed him of his possible jeopardy of being arrested if he didn’t leave the vicinity of the residence (of which he had no right to even be at).

Another common problem we have at this base is the Base Duty Officer demanding information they are not entitled to and getting very upset while trying to use rank to get what they want.  A prime example is demanding information on the spouses of service members who are victims of assault.  These people are not in the military and as such are entitled to certain privacy rights.  I have had more than a few Base Duty Officers screaming at me over the phone when I refuse to give them the personal information of Mrs. Bloggins.  It’s a rock and a hard place for us as the military is demanding we give that info, but if we do and she makes a professional standards complaint for giving her personal information to the military without her consent, we run the risk of being suspended or other administrative measures taken against us.

Just because someone in the military decides they want information does not mean they are entitled to it automatically.  Surely you as an attorney understand that better than anyone.

While I may come off as having a problem with authority etc. it couldn’t be further from the truth.  I have been in the military well over a decade and have never had so much as an extra.  I respect the rank structure and shake my head at the new Cpls coming into the trade thinking they are all that and a bag of chips.  Having said that, I have a job to do and I do it to the best of my ability.  I conduct myself professionally and expect the same of higher ranking members of the CAF I come into contact with during the course of my duties.

 

[FJAG]

Look. I don't want to get into a bun fight with you over this.

I'm sure you've got your viewpoint on all these things but random LCols showing up and inserting themselves into investigations and "Base Duty Officers screaming at me over the phone" stretches my credulity.

I don't think that I'm taking your words out of context. They were your words.

I don't doubt for a minute that there are situations where MPs have to deal with officers from the chain of command who are seeking information about a case you are working on.

The difference between you and me is that I see this generally as a situation where the officer is of the honestly held belief that he has a responsibility or a duty to gather that information in order to properly do his job and inform the chain of command of an ongoing situation. There are frequently occurences where the chain of command needs situational awareness and can't wait for a fully completed investigation to work it's way over to them.

You on the other hand see "screaming duty officers", "an individual [who] thinks their rank affords them immunity to the law" and  "people with egos and inflated self worth". Those are strong words to use against people who are professionals in their own right, and, by virtue of the Queen's Commission, your superiors even if not in the MP chain of command.

Obviously, if the applicable procedures do not allow you to answer the questions (and frequently they do allow it) then the simple and best response is to say "Sir. I'm not authorized to disclose that information at this time and you'll need to contact my supervisor." In my time I've had disagreements with someone else's subordinates (Not MPs) and I have never ever had a bun fight or screaming match with a corporal or any NCM for that matter. It's much more satisfying to yell at one of their superior officers who is of equal rank to yourself.

[cheers]

 

[RCDtpr]

Look. I don't want to get into a bun fight with you over this.

I'm sure you've got your viewpoint on all these things but random LCols showing up and inserting themselves into investigations and "Base Duty Officers screaming at me over the phone" stretches my credulity.

I don't think that I'm taking your words out of context. They were your words.

I don't doubt for a minute that there are situations where MPs have to deal with officers from the chain of command who are seeking information about a case you are working on.

The difference between you and me is that I see this generally as a situation where the officer is of the honestly held belief that he has a responsibility or a duty to gather that information in order to properly do his job and inform the chain of command of an ongoing situation. There are frequently occurences where the chain of command needs situational awareness and can't wait for a fully completed investigation to work it's way over to them.

You on the other hand see "screaming duty officers", "an individual [who] thinks their rank affords them immunity to the law" and  "people with egos and inflated self worth". Those are strong words to use against people who are professionals in their own right, and, by virtue of the Queen's Commission, your superiors even if not in the MP chain of command.

Obviously, if the applicable procedures do not allow you to answer the questions (and frequently they do allow it) then the simple and best response is to say "Sir. I'm not authorized to disclose that information at this time and you'll need to contact my supervisor." In my time I've had disagreements with someone else's subordinates (Not MPs) and I have never ever had a bun fight or screaming match with a corporal or any NCM for that matter. It's much more satisfying to yell at one of their superior officers who is of equal rank to yourself.

[cheers]

Well it seems we’ve hit a stalemate.  You quite obviously think I have nothing better to do than make up grandiose stories and that’s your prerogative.

In your world a Base Duty Officer being told at 3am to contact my supervisor in the morning is more than sufficient and they are always more than willing to accommodate.  In your world higher ups are always consummate professionals and nothing will change your view.  That’s fine, I’m envious of you for never have had to deal with any of this sort of hassle during your time in the CAF.

It would seem this discussion has gotten way off topic and is not getting anyone anywhere so I will respectfully bow out and get some sleep.

 

[FJAG]

Well it seems we’ve hit a stalemate.  You quite obviously think I have nothing better to do than make up grandiose stories and that’s your prerogative.

In your world a Base Duty Officer being told at 3am to contact my supervisor in the morning is more than sufficient and they are always more than willing to accommodate. In your world higher ups are always consummate professionals and nothing will change your view.  That’s fine, I’m envious of you for never have had to deal with any of this sort of hassle during your time in the CAF.

It would seem this discussion has gotten way off topic and is not getting anyone anywhere so I will respectfully bow out and get some sleep.

I've prosecuted a few officers so I know that the word "always" doesn't apply.

I agree. We've gone ff topic: too far. Have a good night.

:cheers:

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

It would seem you’re taking some of my quotes out of context here.

I am not saying higher ranks do not have a place and a purpose within the day to day procedures of the MP’s.  What I am saying is there is a time and place as well as a need to know.  In this particular instance this LCol was attempting to enter this Pte’s residence, during an ongoing and volatile situation, giving no more info than “I’m a LCol and you will do what you’re told.”

Had he approached me after the fact, properly identified himself as his CO and asked for a small update, I would have certainly informed him Pte Bloggins was under arrest for assault and would be held for bail.  As it was, however, this particular LCol handled it terribly unprofessionally, and after the fact I learned he wasn’t even this Pte’s CO, giving him absolutely no need to know on the situation.  Had we been the OPP at this residence I can all but guarantee he wouldn’t have attempted it.  It was nothing more than weight trying to be thrown around based on rank and status and whether you want to believe it or not, it happens a lot more than you would think.

With regards to your surprise I was not administratively dealt with, well by his own admission to my CO, I was not rude to him in anyway, he just felt a Cpl had no place telling a LCol no and didn’t think it was appropriate I informed him of his possible jeopardy of being arrested if he didn’t leave the vicinity of the residence (of which he had no right to even be at).

Another common problem we have at this base is the Base Duty Officer demanding information they are not entitled to and getting very upset while trying to use rank to get what they want.  A prime example is demanding information on the spouses of service members who are victims of assault.  These people are not in the military and as such are entitled to certain privacy rights.  I have had more than a few Base Duty Officers screaming at me over the phone when I refuse to give them the personal information of Mrs. Bloggins.  It’s a rock and a hard place for us as the military is demanding we give that info, but if we do and she makes a professional standards complaint for giving her personal information to the military without her consent, we run the risk of being suspended or other administrative measures taken against us.

Just because someone in the military decides they want information does not mean they are entitled to it automatically.  Surely you as an attorney understand that better than anyone.

While I may come off as having a problem with authority etc. it couldn’t be further from the truth.  I have been in the military well over a decade and have never had so much as an extra.  I respect the rank structure and shake my head at the new Cpls coming into the trade thinking they are all that and a bag of chips.  Having said that, I have a job to do and I do it to the best of my ability.  I conduct myself professionally and expect the same of higher ranking members of the CAF I come into contact with during the course of my duties.

I'll go out on a limb and say I've personally seen this sort of thing happen before and it's mostly down to ignorance of policy on the part of the CoC.

We had a case at my unit this year where an individual was arrested for DUI and the CoC was all ready to jump all over them without knowing the facts.  They got real ticked at me when I told them to wait for the MP Report and started pestering the MPs who told them to screw off.  If you read the DMCA aide memoire, there is a clear process for dealing with DUIs. 

Part of it involves waiting for the police investigation shadow file to be released by the MPs.  These are always sent to the CO and the Adjutant is supposed to draft a case synopsis which is the document that is used as the basis for issuing remedial measures. 

In the case I mentioned, the unit basically wanted remedial measures drafted the day after the member informed the chain of command; however, the reason one should wait is because there are things that could come out in the police investigation that were unknown i.e. member had a prohibited weapon on them and was also getting charged for that.  Or even, maybe the member isn't getting charged with anything and it all gets dropped, now you have someone on administrative action that stays on their file for something they didn't even do.

Everyone always throws around administrative action like it's candy and says "lower burden of proof" however if you read DAODs and actual policy burden of proof needs to be higher before Administrative Action can be taken in certain instances i.e. a criminal investigation.  A pretty serious matter that shouldn't be dealt with lightly.