• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

OCdt Speaks at Freedom Rally

brihard said:
The encouraging mutiny charge would have been a tough sell in court, especially given how untested that offence is in case law. I wouldn’t be surprised if the prosecutor looked at it, assessed that his ‘encouragement’ had no meaningful impact on anyone else in uniform, and figured they’d be risking bad case law. That’s my very amateur guess on it.

If he had been in an actual position of responsibility or likely to be heeded in any real way, that probably would have been another matter.

Just my take on it. You could well be right.
Click to expand...
Except that he was charged with 81b, endeavours to persuade any person to join in a mutiny. The actus reus and men's rea can be met without anyone actually listening to him. This isn't one of those impact or intent issues.
 
Always an outsider looking in, but would any objective military member watching this guy rant on the news have taken him seriously? If he was addressing a military assembly perhaps, but anybody attending a rally like that wasn't likely there to hear a variety of viewpoints.

Depending on the wording of a particular offence, whether an action or intended action has a successful outcome or even the potential for one may or may not be relevant. I am guessing that, in the grand scheme of military conduct law, 'encouraging a mutiny' is pretty top drawer, but rare. He wasn't addressing a military assembly - he was talking to the wind. I can well imagine that the prosecutor, based on not a whole lot of case law, either didn't see a reasonable prospect of conviction or didn't feel the trial effort would result in a significantly different verdict. If the charge had been tried and lost, then a contemporary legal benchmark would be set. Of course, he could have just as easily been convicted. Judgement call; juice vs. squeeze.

I never quite figured a 60 year old officer cadet; is(was?) an officer in the cadet program?
 
Kilted said:
Except that he was charged with 81b, endeavours to persuade any person to join in a mutiny. The actus reus and men's rea can be met without anyone actually listening to him. This isn't one of those impact or intent issues.
Click to expand...
Wasn't that charge dropped?

lenaitch said:
I never quite figured a 60 year old officer cadet; is(was?) an officer in the cadet program?
Click to expand...
Yes, he was not in the Reg F or PRes. I don't know his story but it's totally possible to have a 60-year old OCdt in CIC if they just don't continue with courses.
 
dimsum said:
Yes, he was not in the Reg F or PRes. I don't know his story but it's totally possible to have a 60-year old OCdt in CIC if they just don't continue with courses.
Click to expand...
Sorry, civi here still unclear. Is (was) he on staff of the cadet program; i.e. teaching, managing, etc., or was he a cadet, wanting to be an officer? I thought the cadet program had age rules. No biggie - just curious.
 
lenaitch said:
Sorry, civi here still unclear. Is (was) he on staff of the cadet program; i.e. teaching, managing, etc., or was he a cadet, wanting to be an officer? I thought the cadet program had age rules. No biggie - just curious.
Click to expand...
His rank is Officer Cadet and he worked in the cadet program. For the CIC program you can be from 18 to 64 years of age. Cadet Instructor Cadre Officers - Canada.ca I can see how it can be confusing.
 
Kilted said:
Except that he was charged with 81b, endeavours to persuade any person to join in a mutiny. The actus reus and men's rea can be met without anyone actually listening to him. This isn't one of those impact or intent issues.
Click to expand...
Yes, I’m aware. And they withdrew that charge, so they evidently felt the circumstances didn’t warrant pushing it. They may have gotten a conviction, they may not. It would probably have been marginal, due to his utter lack of influence, rank, credibility, or military significance.

Re questions about his rank/status/age: he worked exclusively with the Army Cadets, and was part of a subcomponent of the primary reserve called COATS that includes the Cadet Instructor’s Cadre officer trade.
 
brihard said:
The encouraging mutiny charge would have been a tough sell in court, especially given how untested that offence is in case law. I wouldn’t be surprised if the prosecutor looked at it, assessed that his ‘encouragement’ had no meaningful impact on anyone else in uniform, and figured they’d be risking bad case law. That’s my very amateur guess on it.

If he had been in an actual position of responsibility or likely to be heeded in any real way, that probably would have been another matter.

Just my take on it. You could well be right.
Click to expand...

I'm not smart enough to know whether or not we have a good justice system but it doesn't really seem like justice to me. It always seems like we're making plea deals for the sake of expediency, resources, and 'to get something on paper'. 10 charges for a maximum of 10 years jail gets bargained to 1 charge with 6 months. "Better than nothing". It seems like a crumby approach (but I know I'm missing perspectives here).

In jobs with extreme trust, the CAF and police, it's gross to see our people have sexual assault charges, assault charges, and other shit bargained down. Staying charges is right up there too. I don't have a better solution unfortunately.

This guys crime is victimless but still serious (for soldiers anyways). I would have liked to see him get 30 days in club ed then given his release papers on day 31. It would be a good example and bar to set.
 
Jarnhamar said:
I'm not smart enough to know whether or not we have a good justice system but it doesn't really seem like justice to me. It always seems like we're making plea deals for the sake of expediency, resources, and 'to get something on paper'. 10 charges for a maximum of 10 years jail gets bargained to 1 charge with 6 months. "Better than nothing". It seems like a crumby approach (but I know I'm missing perspectives here).

In jobs with extreme trust, the CAF and police, it's gross to see our people have sexual assault charges, assault charges, and other shit bargained down. Staying charges is right up there too. I don't have a better solution unfortunately.

This guys crime is victimless but still serious (for soldiers anyways). I would have liked to see him get 30 days in club ed then given his release papers on day 31. It would be a good example and bar to set.
Click to expand...
I remember a JAG lawyer once said in a brief that how far they push a charge will depend on severity of the offence (s) and whats in the public's interest. They do seek pleas for sake of expediency when its appropriate.
 
Jarnhamar said:
I'm not smart enough to know whether or not we have a good justice system but it doesn't really seem like justice to me. It always seems like we're making plea deals for the sake of expediency, resources, and 'to get something on paper'. 10 charges for a maximum of 10 years jail gets bargained to 1 charge with 6 months. "Better than nothing". It seems like a crumby approach (but I know I'm missing perspectives here).

In jobs with extreme trust, the CAF and police, it's gross to see our people have sexual assault charges, assault charges, and other shit bargained down. Staying charges is right up there too. I don't have a better solution unfortunately.

This guys crime is victimless but still serious (for soldiers anyways). I would have liked to see him get 30 days in club ed then given his release papers on day 31. It would be a good example and bar to set.
Click to expand...
I’ll be blunt: the justice system is completely overwhelmed and badly under resourced and cases are getting thrown out frequently for undue delay- eighteen months post charge, if a case hasn’t gone to trial, it’s likely tossed.

The justice system is really expensive. Judges and lawyers obviously get paid a lot. There’s a whole support infrastructure behind the scenes.

So, plea deals are necessary to help control the volume of matters before the courts. Is it distasteful at times? Sure. It also has other benefits though, such as saving the victims of violent crimes from having to testify. It also saves having to pull investigators or technical experts away from their duties for days of court (a lot of money is poured down the drain paying cops to sit in court - sometimes on overtime - waiting to be called to testify, if they even do.

So yeah, the rampancy of plea deals is not ideal, but it’s a necessary reality. Of all the many people I’ve ever charged, a strong majority have pled out.
 
brihard said:
I’ll be blunt: the justice system is completely overwhelmed and badly under resourced and cases are getting thrown out frequently for undue delay- eighteen months
So yeah, the rampancy of plea deals is not ideal, but it’s a necessary reality. Of all the many people I’ve ever charged, a strong majority have pled out.
Click to expand...

And they usually (I think) wind up with a criminal record, which is a distasteful longer term experience for most.
 
brihard said:
I’ll be blunt: the justice system is completely overwhelmed and badly under resourced and cases are getting thrown out frequently for undue delay- eighteen months post charge, if a case hasn’t gone to trial, it’s likely tossed.

The justice system is really expensive. Judges and lawyers obviously get paid a lot. There’s a whole support infrastructure behind the scenes.

So, plea deals are necessary to help control the volume of matters before the courts. Is it distasteful at times? Sure. It also has other benefits though, such as saving the victims of violent crimes from having to testify. It also saves having to pull investigators or technical experts away from their duties for days of court (a lot of money is poured down the drain paying cops to sit in court - sometimes on overtime - waiting to be called to testify, if they even do.

So yeah, the rampancy of plea deals is not ideal, but it’s a necessary reality. Of all the many people I’ve ever charged, a strong majority have pled out.
Click to expand...
One of my brothers-in-law is a retired partner from a major law firm and taught at a law school in Ontario. He said most lawyers today will never see the inside of a courtroom, either criminal or civil, with the possible exception of maybe a motions or a plea/settlement hearing unless they choose to specialize. It's just too expensive, even for private litigants, and most major law firms aren't interested.
 
lenaitch said:
One of my brothers-in-law is a retired partner from a major law firm and taught at a law school in Ontario. He said most lawyers today will never see the inside of a courtroom, either criminal or civil, with the possible exception of maybe a motions or a plea/settlement hearing unless they choose to specialize. It's just too expensive, even for private litigants, and most major law firms aren't interested.
Click to expand...
It would be neat to see some stats on what actually goes to trial. I’d bet that impaired driving prosecutions for middle to upper middle class people with no criminal record would feature disproportionately.
 
brihard said:
It would be neat to see some stats on what actually goes to trial. I’d bet that impaired driving prosecutions for middle to upper middle class people with no criminal record would feature disproportionately.
Click to expand...
Yes it would. I have heard that, in some Ontario courts, 'low level' impaired (if true, because what I'm hearing is all unofficial, I don't what that cut-off means) are being plead down to HTA Careless Driving, simply to clear the docket. I do know that, with a virtual mandatory charge policy in domestic disputes, coupled with a Ministry directive to oppose bail, many Assault I charges end up being disposed of as Peace Bonds, mostly at the first appearance. I would also be interesting to see the stats on cases lost simply to timing out. Lower level Ontario courts are a bit of a mess.

My B-in-L was a bit a unicorn in a large 'Bay Street' law firm because he had been a copper and did some articling time as Crown prosecutor, so when some big money corporate client's kid got popped for Impaired or drugs, most of the partners had no clue what to do and had never litigated at (then) Provincial Court level. He is convinced this 'go-to guy' image was part of how quickly he rose in the firm.
 
Jarnhamar said:
Yea man, I think so.

He's a military officer who in a military uniform publicly called for a mutiny. The plea deal is part of the slap on the wrist IMO. He's probably already got right-wing wingnuts offering to pay that fine for him.
Click to expand...

100% agree with you on this, this was weak. Weak. This person should have done time in DB IMO.
 
this man has been given a lot of bandwidth. wasted taxpayers money, in lack of training, uniforms ( wasting a lot of his own money, reminds me of guys coming off the basic training courses and spending a pay cheque back my days on US kit, like jungle boots, rain coat, personalized camo paint) and now on a plea bargain court case. Good Riddance and farewell, do not let the door hit you on the way out.
 
dapaterson said:
No.

CIC are Reserve Force members. The Reserve Force consists of four sub components.

The Primary Reserve
The Canadian Rangers
The COATS
The Supplementary Reserve
Click to expand...

Doh! Good catch…I should know better to post before coffee (still no power in my neck of the woods).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Who owns you?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Rifleman62
Rifleman62
Edward Campbell
    • Wow
    • Like
    • Sad
PAK National Arrested in QC Plotting Attack in NYC
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
The Bread Guy
The Bread Guy
daftandbarmy
    • Like
Dan Snow is the ultimate midwit historian
Replies
3
Views
7K
FSTO
FSTO
Bruce Monkhouse
    • Love it!
    • Like
    • Sad
Old Sweat- LCol Brian Reid [retired]
Replies
16
Views
11K
211RadOp
211RadOp
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
Optimism
Replies
2
Views
7K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top