Ottawa soldier alleges he faced reprisals from military

[stellarpanther]

ottawa-soldier-alleges-he-faced-reprisals-from-military-for-supporting-female-colleague-who-reported-sex-assault

This is a long detailed article so I'm only posting the link but it's quite interesting in my opinion.



Link to article removed based on Site policy, re: reporter.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[MJP]

ottawa-soldier-alleges-he-faced-reprisals-from-military-for-supporting-female-colleague-who-reported-sex-assault

This is a long detailed article so I'm only posting the link but it's quite interesting in my opinion.

Even if it is half true then it certainly does not play well at a number of levels.

 

[MilEME09]

Even if it is half true then it certainly does not play well at a number of levels.

If his allegations, which are pretty damning are proven in court, which would be public and likely reported on by the media, the CAF will have to take action, and the CDS will also be forced to act if the court of public opinion, along with the legal system turns against the CAF for sweeping the much touted OP Honour under the rug and stone walling someones career for speaking up. Either way this will not be good PR and will get worse the longer it drags on.

 

[ModlrMike]

That reads like a massive sh!t show.

 

[ballz]

Big surprise. We can't even get the simplest shit right. What an embarrassment...  :facepalm:

 

[Quirky]

Big surprise. We can't even get the simplest crap right. What an embarrassment...  :facepalm:

<<Inappropriate comment removed by Directing Staff>> How do you change culture through good leadership when your top soldier doesn’t give a crap. Military culture will never change until until leadership stops putting themselves first instead of helping the members. It is so sad that senior officers are screwing over a reserve corporal for helping out his fellow soldier. At this point I’m very cautious to trust anyone in senior leadership positions, they clearly don’t give a crap.

 

[Jarnhamar]

That reads like a massive sh!t show.

Classic CAF.

 

[Journeyman]

At this point I’m very cautious to trust anyone in senior leadership positions, they clearly don’t give a shit.

Whereas I'm very cautious to assume any story written solely from the perspective of 'the aggrieved' is 100% gospel.


As an aside...

Vance is an embarrassment, he is a puppet who pretends to be a good guy.

I once had a post deleted for referring to Fox 'news' reporters as "sock puppets," yet it's acceptable for Canada's top soldier.  op: 

 

[Burrows]

As an aside...I once had a post deleted for referring to Fox 'news' reporters as "sock puppets," yet it's acceptable for Canada's top soldier.  op: 

  Nope. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

This story reads weirdly. Bad things seem to happen to the subject, for no apparent reason, or for reasons tenuously attributed to him testifying at a Court Martial.

I would be interested in seeing ALL of the information- not just what was provided to the reporter. I am not saying this soldier wasn't mistreated. Equally, without all of the facts (several of which are clearly missing), it is difficult to conclude what actually did happen.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

<<Inappropriate comment removed by Directing Staff>> How do you change culture through good leadership when your top soldier doesn’t give a crap. Military culture will never change until until leadership stops putting themselves first instead of helping the members. It is so sad that senior officers are screwing over a reserve corporal for helping out his fellow soldier. At this point I’m very cautious to trust anyone in senior leadership positions, they clearly don’t give a crap.

You mean helping to railroad another member through a court martial where the victim's credibility and story was found to be untruthful. That sort of help? :dunno:

I just wish NIS would actually charge some of these goofs with public mischief.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

The good old one side of the story reporting.....welcome to the world of Corrections, well any LE agency actually.

  Media need to say anything to make folks scream "outrageous, where's my social media account?".

 

[The Bread Guy]

... Bad things seem to happen to the subject, for no apparent reason ...

Zackly -- like the gap between the supportive grievance finding and the non-supportive grievance finding.  "Good stufff - Yadda-yadda-yadda - about turn" could mask a WHOLE lot of other things we're not seeing.

#EverythingHasSomethingButNothingHasEverything

 

[Caesar Augustus]

Very interesting how an independent reviewer could come with totally different conclusion from the chain of command.

Also the same CDS who was involved in the Adm. Norman case and received pay increase shortly after...

People may wonder who is credible or not here...

 

[gryphonv]

I have a lot of issues digesting this event as it's presented. There seems to have been omissions to pad one side of the story.

We have all served with someone who has selective memory, both peers and superiors.

Couple questions I ask myself, why would the Corporal be provided with a car when he returned back to his home unit's area, even for a short period of time. Ottawa has a great public transit system and cabs, etc. I can understand a senior NCO or officer being provided a vehicle in some cases, but how often realistically is such a benefit provided to a junior NCO when other more economical options exist.

Another thing I ask myself, why his testimony would of had much weight, as he admitted he didn't witness anything, and was only going off he was told by the complainant. I personally would think such a statement would of been able to entered in as evidence on it's own, without the corporal having to be present.

My gut feeling in this, is the Corporal had admiration's for the complainant in question, and/or disliked his peer who ended up being charged. I know this is the wrong way to feel, but I still can't shake that feeling.

In the end, the Corporals statement that he wouldn't be able to work with the accused if they ended up being found not guilty definitely feels like an ultimatum to me. No matter how accurate it is. And it really places an unfair circumstance on the accused and their rights. I agree with the options he was presented with to resolve that complaint.

All in all, it is a shit show, even more so with how it is presented to the media.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=gryphonv] .

In the end, the Corporals statement that he wouldn't be able to work with the accused if they ended up being found not guilty definitely feels like an ultimatum to me.
[/quote]

Definitely seems like that to me.

Just an observation but sometimes there's no good guy and bad guy in a story. Sometimes both sides do stupid shady shit.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

I have a lot of issues digesting this event as it's presented. There seems to have been omissions to pad one side of the story.

We have all served with someone who has selective memory, both peers and superiors.

Couple questions I ask myself, why would the Corporal be provided with a car when he returned back to his home unit's area, even for a short period of time. Ottawa has a great public transit system and cabs, etc. I can understand a senior NCO or officer being provided a vehicle in some cases, but how often realistically is such a benefit provided to a junior NCO when other more economical options exist.

Another thing I ask myself, why his testimony would of had much weight, as he admitted he didn't witness anything, and was only going off he was told by the complainant. I personally would think such a statement would of been able to entered in as evidence on it's own, without the corporal having to be present.

My gut feeling in this, is the Corporal had admiration's for the complainant in question, and/or disliked his peer who ended up being charged. I know this is the wrong way to feel, but I still can't shake that feeling.

In the end, the Corporals statement that he wouldn't be able to work with the accused if they ended up being found not guilty definitely feels like an ultimatum to me. No matter how accurate it is. And it really places an unfair circumstance on the accused and their rights. I agree with the options he was presented with to resolve that complaint.

All in all, it is a shit show, even more so with how it is presented to the media.

I read it simply as the Cpl not wanting to share an environment with an individual who would openly know the Cpl was part of the process of raising a complaint against that individual. Understandably, a circumstance such as that can create an insurmountable volume of toxicity depending on all pers involved, especially once word and opinions begin to circulate.

I was recently informed of a CAF situation where a female complainant raised an issue against a male colleague. After all was said and done, the accused was found guilty and dismissed from the CAF. Even though the individual was found guilty, the victim was still blacklisted and has since left the unit where the incidences took place. The accused had a posse of supporters. If that type of bass ackwards, 'circling the wagon' behaviour still occurs wrt an individual who is found guilty, then what can happen if it's an individual who's found not guilty (keeping in mind that examples absolutely exist where the party was found not guilty, but they indeed engaged in unacceptable behaviour) and is the more popular of the parties? As much as people hate to admit it, this stuff still goes on. (And all facts of the situation I just described have been verified.)

I have no clue if the article is accurate. I have no clue what pieces of the situation are missing. There are certainly a few things that give me pause (both in favour of the Cpl and against) when weighing the whole of the facts as they were presented. But the reality is that there's still a lot of work which needs to be done in terms of the fallout once formal complaints are raised. All parties involved can face unnecessary backlash...again, it all comes down to the motives/maturity/agendas/perspective of everyone involved.

 

[gryphonv]

But the reality is that there's still a lot of work which needs to be done in terms of the fallout once formal complaints are raised. All parties involved can face unnecessary backlash...again, it all comes down to the motives/maturity/agendas/perspective of everyone involved.

I agree, I only served a short time in the forces, just over 8 years, but have seen both rightfully and wrongfully of someone being black balled and/or 'held back' in multiple examples.

I have seen people not getting a fair shake with one posting, to go to another and exceed the requirements. I have also seen people who really just make more work for everyone around them, and you wonder how they even made it this far.

No matter what, there will always be bias or popularity contests, and people not getting fair shakes.

I agree with the Cpl feeling he wouldn't be able to work with the accused, but that shouldn't come at a consequence for the accused should he be found not guilty. Unfortunatly in this situation, if the accused maintains a professional deportment and the Cpl still refuses to work with, I feel the only options for the Cpl is to either resign or request another posting. It isn't pretty, but these situations rarely are.

One thing is certain, I feel this Cpls career path is all but doomed now. He used the grievance process, and it didn't come back with a suitable response many times, then he made it public. Even if he has a favorable outcome from the public process, I highly doubt he will be offered any great advancement opportunities for the rest of his career. And that is a shame, if he just was a guy trying to do what is right.

 

[Blackadder1916]

It becomes very difficult to discuss this topic because, eventually, an analysis of the original article would have to be made and that is not possible due to it being contrary to site guidelines.

Looking for some background to this story, there is the CM decision.
https://decisia.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/jmc-cmj/cm/en/item/100332/index.do

While the action is registered at the Federal Court as "T-1057-19", there are no documents accessible for public review.

Likewise, while (some) grievance decisions are on-line, the anonymous manner that they are on-line makes it difficult to find what may be the applicable ones.

 

[medicineman]

So I read this article when it came up on my news feed...I've found over the years that there are 3 sides to every story - the "he said", the "she said" and the "what actually happened".  I think we're only hearing the "he said" and MAYBE a little of the "she said" sides, since rightfully, as this is going before the courts, cards are being held tight.  My opinion is split currently...all I can do is op:

MM