Ottawa soldier alleges he faced reprisals from military

[SeaKingTacco]

Just to make sure were on the same page here, are you referring to a person making up a fraudulent CF52 claim saying that they paid for something and then stealing their WO's stamp and forging the signature and making it look like the claim was section 32'd and 34'd because that I've seen happen a few times and they were caught and charged as they should be or are you talking about a person who tries to claim the wrong size car or a claim a car that wasn't approved in advance because that I've also seen happen but not get charged because of it.

Fair point. There are obviously gradations/levels of severity to inaccuracies in claims. I accept that in this circumstance, with this Cpl, Mens Rea, or a guilty mind might be difficult to prove, given what was provided in the news article. In that case, it is odd that the unit went the UDI route...unless there are facts not in evidence to us, the casual observer.

All this to say...  :dunno:

 

[ballz]

To be fair when I read the article I see no mention of the claim being dealt with through the disciplinary system. Those they throw the word "accused" around, reading between the lines it appears that the claim incident was used to justify his low PER score... perhaps mentioned on a PDR or even a remedial measure, and perhaps part of the reason his security clearance might be reviewed... but not through a summary trial or court martial which obviously would not be dealt with through the grievance process.

There's a lot of "maybe's" and "perhaps" in there but it sounds like this claims thing was being dealt with on the administrative side of the house vice disciplinary.

 

[hattrick72]

Why redress the PER if it has RM listed? My guess is no RM were given in this case. You don't spend $45,000 of your families money to fight something so stupid.