Older troops assaulting young people, report finds

[ENGINEERS WIFE]

Older troops assaulting young people, report finds
Updated Sun. Mar. 8 2009 3:12 PM ET

The Canadian Press

HALIFAX -- Military police say the Canadian Forces needs to step up its supervision of training facilities after an investigation found alarming levels of sexual assault of young people by older members.

Officials with the criminal intelligence section say there is a disturbing number of cases involving young people, with sexual assaults against youth making up more than half of the reported sex offences.

The findings are contained in a draft report obtained by The Canadian Press that was done through the Military Police Criminal Intelligence Program for the period 2004 to June 2008.

It says the results reinforce the need for continued "rigorous policing of sex offence cases involving children," particularly cadets.

Of the 219 incidents, it states the average age of military and civilian offenders was between 27 and 31 years old, while the age of the victims was as young as 12.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090308/military_assault_090308/20090308?hub=Canada

Couldn't find this anywhere else.  Move or delete if I just missed it.
This is pretty vague hope to get more info.

 

[GAP]

Of the 219 incidents, it states the average age of military and civilian offenders was between 27 and 31 years old, while the age of the victims was as young as 12.

Uhh....lets compare apples and apples here....if you want to talk about averages, let it be averages, if you want to talk about the youngest offenders and victims, lets talk about that....don't mix them.

It might be nice to compare relative stats in regards to 219 country wide incidents from the civilian population.....

 

[George Wallace]

What a poorly worded concise little report.  It is so poorly worded and brief that it actually is inflamatory in its insinuations.  How much more vague and inaccurate can a reporter have gotten?  12 years old?  Where does 12 years old fit into the CF, other than perhaps Cadets?  Where does civilian offences fall under CF or DND?  That report is nothing more than a convoluted piece of trash news, suitable only for the garbage.

 

[NCRCrow]

another slam against the best Military in the world!

 

[a78jumper]

What a poorly worded concise little report.  It is so poorly worded and brief that it actually is inflamatory in its insinuations.  How much more vague and inaccurate can a reporter have gotten?  12 years old?  Where does 12 years old fit into the CF, other than perhaps Cadets?  Where does civilian offences fall under CF or DND?  That report is nothing more than a convoluted piece of trash news, suitable only for the garbage.

Could possibly also be a dependant child who was assaulted on DND property. And like it or lump it-that reflects on the CF even though the case would be dealt with by civilian authorities.

I know personally of one retired perv after wrecking havoc in the Reg Force that was trying to get onto the  CIL list to be the CO of a Summer Cadet Camp. Fortunately his offer of service was declined.

For too many years some elements in the CF refused to deal with case of sexual and other types of assualt. This goes back even before 1968-look at the Stephen Truscott case. You reap what you sow. It would be interesting to see the MP study or whatever it is that set all this off.

 

[George Wallace]

I am not denying it could and can happen, and many of us probably know of various cases alluded to here.  This is just a piece of poor journalism in its ambiguity.  It is a garbage piece, open to a wide interpretation and speculation.

 

[Armymedic]

Article in Macleans Magazine:

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=n030867A

Military report raises concern about sex offences against young people by older personnel

March 8, 2009 - 19:42

Alison Auld, THE CANADIAN PRESS

HALIFAX, N.S. - The Canadian Forces needs to step up its supervision of training facilities and family centres on bases across the country, according to a military police investigation that found a disproportionate number of sexual assault cases involved young people at the hands of older personnel.

In a draft report obtained by The Canadian Press, officials with the criminal intelligence section said sexual assaults against youth made up about half of the reported sex offences.

more on link

 

[kratz]

The Halifax Herald has added it's own spin on this story today with MFRC Youth activities, three bases and PRETC drawn into it. Sadly the media repeats recommendations like training and reporting the abuse, but no mention of the CHAP for cadets or SHARP for the military is already in place.

Forces sex abuse hits youth hard
Training facilities, family centres favourite targets for predators
By ALISON AULD The Canadian Press
Mon. Mar 9 - 6:46 AM
[*edit*]

With 25 reported cases, Canadian Forces Base Borden in Ontario had the highest number of reported sex offences, while bases in Halifax and Petawawa followed with 21 and 20 incidents respectively.

The document, completed last November, recommended that an education program be developed for members of the military, especially new recruits, that would outline what constitutes a sexual offence.

It should also tell alleged victims that they can report any assault to their superiors in the chain of command, or directly to the military police.

Dawn Black, the NDP’s defence critic, said she was disturbed by the findings and said the military should inform all cadets and young people in the forces about the nature of sexual assault, and that they will be supported if they file a complaint.

"Educating young people on ways to protect themselves would also be a very valuable recommendation because in the cadet program you have young people who are under the chain of command of the older people that this report talks about," she said from Ottawa.

"You’re working under a command structure where people are even more vulnerable to people who have authority over them."

Of the 25 incidents in Borden, Ont., 10 involved cadets with eight of those charged being privates who were members of the Post Recruitment Education and Training Centre.[*edit*]

Full story at link

 

[Michael OLeary]

Of the 25 incidents in Borden, Ont., 10 involved cadets with eight of those charged being privates who were members of the Post Recruitment Education and Training Centre.

This is just one more outrageously misleading statement.

Is it saying that:

"Of the 25 incidents in Borden, Ont., 10 involved cadets [and of those ten] eight of those charged being privates who were members of the Post Recruitment Education and Training Centre."

Or is it saying:

"Of the 25 incidents in Borden, Ont., 10 involved cadets."

AND

"Of the 25 incidents in Borden, Ont., eight of those charged being privates who were members of the Post Recruitment Education and Training Centre."

... which MAY OR MAY NOT include Cadets and "Ptes in the PRETC" being involved in any of the same incidents.


While I can appreciate the fact that the youngest reported victim was 12, and the references to cadets leads a reader to believe that it may have been a Cadet, I do find it concerning that there was no further examination of age ranges.

Age of cadets

Q: How old do I have to be to join Cadets? (LINK)
A: You can join as soon as you've reached your twelfth birthday and you can remain until you turn 19.

Age of soldiers in PRETC (LINK)

CF Basic Eligibility Requirements

Be 17 years of age (with parental/guardian consent) or older;
# junior level Military College applicants must be 16 years of age;
# you may be enrolled in the Reserves providing you are 16 years of age (with parental/guardian consent);


So, theoretically, one or more of those incidents could have invlved a senior Cadet and a younger Regular Force Private ......

 

[PMedMoe]

kratz, I'd like to point out that the article in the Halifax Herald is virtually identical to the other links posted, right down to having the same writer as the second link.  There is no "spin" added.

I, for one, would need more concise information that what is given in the article.

 

[CountDC]

very vague info - which is normal when they talk sexual assault.

The Borden-cadet-PRETC really shows how vague and misleading the info could be.  To someone that knows absolutely nothing to very little about cadets and/or the mililtary this will seem to be a major problem of adults assaulting kids from the way the article is written.  For myself I see the possibilty of them talking about a 17/18 year old new to the military member  getting a 17 year old cadet mad at him and crying foul.  Sexual assault is just too broad of a term - get into a crowded elevator and have your hand brush another passenger and you could find the MPs questioning you about sexual assault. I knew a CWO that was called in on Sexual Harassment Charges - his offence was that he was a Caper and used the term "dear" when he thanked a female private for helping him. There was also the case where a guy I knew was picked up at the bar, woke up in the morning with the girl in his bed, had breakfast with her before she left and then the next day the police were at his door charging him with sexual assault.  He was saved in the end because of her friends testamony.

I would like to see a lot more details on this - such as matching of ages in the cases, sexes involved (not all assaults are male on female), circumstances and what actually happened.

 

[old medic]

The article is so badly worded, and confused on facts that it should be considered fake news.

 

[George Wallace]

Unfortunately for all the flaws that we have seen in this piece of garbage reporting, many Canadians are too lazy to actually question or research further.  They simply muddle on through life and get another negative view of the CF. 

 

[kratz]

Moe,

Thanks for that. I had not followed the previous links so that lead me to think the Herald was adding more information.

 

[Blackadder1916]

As much as I could similarly pick apart the syntax of this article (and it is mediocre at best) the essence of the piece is not the numbers, but the reported (and quoted) conclusions of the Military Police.

(emphasis added is mine)

"The number of reported sexual offence complaints involving cadets and young persons is a cause for concern as young persons and cadets combined account for almost half of the victims of reported sex offences," states the 15-page report, done through the Military Police Criminal Intelligence Program and obtained under the Access to Information Act.

"This reinforced that rigorous policing of sex offence cases involving children must continue."

It went on to say that "improved adult supervision of cadet and Military Family Resource Centre children's events may be worthwhile."
. . .

The report also says the forces should review its policies on the supervision and employment of untrained CF personnel. And it should provide awareness training to cadet camp staff members.

It is understandable that most who frequent this means will get indignant when the CF is protrayed in a less than ideal light, however the story is based on a CF produced document.  Any indignation resulting from the conclusions presented should then most properly be aimed at the original drafters of that report.  Then again, the poor writing of the story may be a reflection of poor staff work in the source document.

 

[OldSolduer]

The article, as I understand it, was produced from the Military Police stat sheet, or something similar.
No matter how bad the article was or is, the fact is that any undesirable press is reflected on all members of the CF, from the CDS down to the newest private at CFLRS.
Somalia should have taught us that. Apparently we didn't learn a whole lot from that escapade.

 

[The_Falcon]

I think it is also prudent to point out that, without down playing the seriousness of the issue, that without the context of these situations, especially situations involving cadets/recruits at PRETC that these numbers are misleading.  As someone already pointed out, you can be in cadets until you are 19, and join the regs at 17, ergo can that lead to situations were teenage recruits get involved with teenage cadets (or even cadets/cadets), while they are both at CFB Borden?  Of course it can (and obviously does) happen.  Unfortunately for the recruit/older cadet, by virtue of the fact that they are in a position of trust/authority (by being in the Regs) under the law, it doesn't matter if the younger cadet consented to any sexual activities, even if they are close in age or heck the same age.  And teens being teens they are going to run their mouth off, and next thing you know a senior NCO/Officer gets wind of the activities and then MPs get involved, and the recruit/older cadet is charged, and the CF, looks like its full of sexual predators.

Again, that isn't to say serious assaults don't occur, and history has shown that they have, but without context, those reports are too vague. 

 

[chris_log]

I'd like to see the rates in the CF vis a vis national rates.

I'm also curious about the cadet stats. Let's remember that most cadet camps are on DND property, so the MP's would investigate regardless. Do these stats include civilians, older staff cadets etc? If a 18 year old staff cadet sleeps with a 13 year old course cadet (it's happened) that is sexual assault.

I know this was an internal CF document, but still, how is this news?

 

[Greymatters]

The article, as I understand it, was produced from the Military Police stat sheet, or something similar. 

Although the news article emphasized the most negative aspects of the original report, it all seems based on fact.  Hard to argue with that...

 

[Armymedic]

The rebuttal to any outrage outside the CF is that this MP report is to highlight a problem which we need to solve.

You can't solve a problem without knowing you have one.

WE all know the inconsistencies and untruths, but joe civy may not.

Honestly though, has this story got any traction other than a one column piece on Sunday afternoon?