Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[opcougar]

Remember Menard and his antic in theater? Ironically it was Now CDS Vance that was sent back into to take his place. Menard was demoted, and eventually released.

Administrative action is separate from disciplinary action, and the burden of proof for administrative action is the balance of probabilities.

He can 100% be dealt with administratively immediately while all of this plays out, without interfering with the legal system at all, if his CoC are satisfied that on the balance of probabilities he has conducted himself in a manner not suitable for his rank / appointment / job description, etc.

 

[Pusser]

I think the question here would be how could he not be removed from his position?  As a CO, one of his duties is to lay charges within his battalion where he deems appropriate.  NIS do not always investigate sexual assaults; "minor" sex assaults (hate to use the word minor as its not minor to the victim, but merely referring to an assault of such a nature that it wasn't deemed serious enough for NIS) that are investigated by the patrol MPs would have to be sent to the CO if a charge is recommended.

For a person to lay a charge for something he has charges outstanding for is a miscarriage of the legal system.  I understand the slippery slope of removing him would be tantamount to stating he is guilty before proven as such, but the reality is if you leave a CO in position when he has been accused of sexually assaulting a minor....whether guilty or not.....the CF will lose the trust of the public.

Remember years ago when Commodore Lerhe reported himself for inappropriate behaviour (surfing porn on a DND computer)?  At the time, he was the Fleet Commander and was faced with having to lay a charge against one of his ship's CO's for doing something that he had done himself.  Ethically, he decided he couldn't do that, so he reported himself to the Formation Commander.  Commodore Lerhe was suspended from command pending investigation and trial.  He was found guilty, fined and then reinstated in command.

On another note, I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned that this latest case involves a man named "Stalker..."

 

[George Wallace]

On another note, I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned that this latest case involves a man named "Stalker..."

It has been alluded to in this thread, and is irrelevant.

 

[YZT580]

With all due respect, the man is innocent. The alleged offences have occurred against a single individual and have yet to prove out in a court of law. No one else seems to have come forward although that could happen later.  There have been literally hundreds of cases where people have had their lives totally destroyed and have later been proven innocent.  It would be a tragedy if an excellent officer and leader was lost because of nothing more than innuendo.  I have noticed that no one on these pages has offered up any personal observations on the man and his abilities.  That might be more relevant than regurgitating various press releases.
 

 

[George Wallace]

Once again; it is not this site's decision to make, on his innocence or quilt.

 

[Strike]

...I have noticed that no one on these pages has offered up any personal observations on the man and his abilities.  That might be more relevant than regurgitating various press releases.

That's probably because those of us that know him, and know him well, are in shock about the allegations and don't know how to react. 

 

[Old EO Tech]

Yes I concur, this is a large shock for those of us who know him well, still a lot to process.

 

[JesseWZ]

Hmmm...here we go again. The email sent out by the boss last week, must have hit home hard...I mean why is this just coming to light now if it  *allegedly* took place between 1998 - 2007? Mbr would have been a Captain - Major at the time.
This sounds like another Williams situation, only that the last name here makes it even more eerie.

I disagree entirely. These investigations, particularly investigations which result in charges being laid, take enormous amounts of time. The email likely had nothing to do with charges being laid as the National Investigation Service (the primary agency) is independent of the Chain of Command and couldn't be influenced one way or another to lay charges. A week is usually not enough time to travel to where the victims reside, conduct detailed interviews, prepare and execute production orders and search warrants, gather any other physical or witness evidence, arrest, charge and release the accused.
I suspect it is simply coincidence that the press release was issued *around* the same time our new CDS has issued strong positive direction in regards to how to handle sexual harassment. It may be that the recent review conducted by the Madame Justice spurred the victims to report the offence, but that is only speculation. I also suspect the timing of the press release is only coincidence and not a ploy or an effort to make an example of one individual.

*Edited for grammar*

 

[PMedMoe]

I mean why is this just coming to light now if it  *allegedly* took place between 1998 - 2007?

Because the victim only came forward in April: Globe and Mail article

 

[opcougar]

Thanks...a couple of people already echoed your point up thread!

Because the victim only came forward in April: Globe and Mail article

For those saying they are "shocked"...I guess this has similarities to the ongoing RMC incident that made the news as well i.e. the victim, and someone she knew too well, but wasn't "in charge of" / mentoring her.

A civilian court will decide this latest incident, and we can expect it to drag on for a while. Aside, the new direction from the "boss", is that when there is an alleged accusation of harassment, the accused is to be "removed" / "separated" from the accuser until an investigation is complete. It makes sense really for awkwardness sake and all that

 

[PMedMoe]

Wouldn't it be prudent for the CoC to remove him from his current position due to the fact that he will be preoccupied with dealing the charges against him, and not able to fully focus on his duties as CO?

Yep.  QR&O 101.09 RELIEF FROM PERFORMANCE OF MILITARY DUTY – PRE AND POST TRIAL: link

 

[vonGarvin]

With all due respect, the man is innocent. The alleged offences have occurred against a single individual and have yet to prove out in a court of law. No one else seems to have come forward although that could happen later.  There have been literally hundreds of cases where people have had their lives totally destroyed and have later been proven innocent.  It would be a tragedy if an excellent officer and leader was lost because of nothing more than innuendo.  I have noticed that no one on these pages has offered up any personal observations on the man and his abilities.  That might be more relevant than regurgitating various press releases.

You're quite right in that the man is innocent; he has been convicted of nothing.  His record is exemplary, and given that he was chosen to command an infantry battalion, he has been judged as the right person to command.  This is no small feat; many officers are passed over for battalion command.

Having said all of this, however, if (and that is a huge *if*) he were to be convicted, then none of that would be relevant.  As an example of an exemplary career being irrelevant, consider Russell Williams.  He was a colonel in the Air Force and commanded at Trenton.  He was popular, he was effective, and he was key in Canada's response to the earthquake in Haiti some years ago.  But behind the scenes, it turns out he was a monster.  In short, his exemplary career was one thing, he criminal actions another.

For LCol Stalker, he's only been accused and until such time that he is convicted, should that day ever come, he remains an exemplary officer who will be given his due process.  The onus of guilt or innocence remains with HM The Queen, not with him.

 

[CountDC]

ok - is my math off.

Say this young man joined when he turned twelve and events started that year which would have been 1998.  What ever happened took place between then and 2007 which would make him 22 years old.  But cadets is for those 12 to 18 years old. 

Sorry to be a little wary of jumping on the bandwagon.

 

[mba2011]

For LCol Stalker, he's only been accused and until such time that he is convicted, should that day ever come, he remains an exemplary officer who will be given his due process.  The onus of guilt or innocence remains with HM The Queen, not with him.

Very true Mr Viking.

It is an problem though, guilty or innocent, that cases like this get tried in the Court of Public opinion first. Unfortunately it paints a disgusting picture before LCol Stalker has had the opportunity to defend himself or prove his innocence. As it was mentioned in the thread, there is a lot more to the story than has been reported in the media. The very little information we know is certainly disturbing, but we don't know the whole story yet. *I am not saying he's innocent or the alleged victim is lying, merely that he deserves the right to defend himself, like all Canadians*

ok - is my math off.

Say this young man joined when he turned twelve and events started that year which would have been 1998.  What ever happened took place between then and 2007 which would make him 22 years old.  But cadets is for those 12 to 18 years old. 

Sorry to be a little wary of jumping on the bandwagon.

CountDC,

We have so little information about the alleged victim that the math is almost irrelevant. For all we know, the charges could be in relation to events that took place while he was a minor and a cadet, then carried on after, when he was over the age of majority. We don not have enough facts about the incident.

 

[Strike]

ok - is my math off.

Say this young man joined when he turned twelve and events started that year which would have been 1998.  What ever happened took place between then and 2007 which would make him 22 years old.  But cadets is for those 12 to 18 years old. 

Sorry to be a little wary of jumping on the bandwagon.

You're not the only one who was thinking that.  But we have to remember that it's relatively early days in the investigation and the dates reflect the time he was mentoring cadets and not necessarily when the accused incidences took place.  They would keep the dates vague in order to protect the accuser and also encourage others to come forward if there were other cases.

 

[Ayrsayle]

That's probably because those of us that know him, and know him well, are in shock about the allegations and don't know how to react.

Exactly.  I've had the pleasure of working for him over the last year and there was nothing to suspect any of these particular charges.  I suspect most of the members at 1 PPCLI (who are currently on leave) haven't really had the time to process the information.  It was completely unexpected - shock is the common reaction.

 

[Tibbson]

ok - is my math off.

Say this young man joined when he turned twelve and events started that year which would have been 1998.  What ever happened took place between then and 2007 which would make him 22 years old.  But cadets is for those 12 to 18 years old. 

Sorry to be a little wary of jumping on the bandwagon.

Besides considering the math, one must also consider the nature of the charges.  Speaking in generalities, and not in any way trying to dissect what did or didn't happen or imply someone's guilt or innocence:

1)  Charges for sexual interference can be laid in response to alleged incidents when the victim is younger than 16 years of age;

2)  Charges for "invitation to sexual touching" also apply to crimes against a person younger than 16;

3)  Charges for of sexual exploitation can be laid in response to alleged incident(s) when the person who commits the offence is in a position of trust or authority towards a young person.  A young person is defined as someone between the ages of 16 and 18.

4)  Charges for sexual assault can be laid in response to incident(s) that took place against a victim of any age; and

5)  Charges for "breach of trust for a public officer" can also be laid in response to incidents that took place against a victim of any age or, more then likely, because of the circumstances under which any of the above offences occurred.

If this all makes it to court, and the case is presented, it will become clear why various charges were laid but people can't assume things based on rough indications of timelines and press release details.  Many other factors can come into play.

 

[YZT580]

There is nothing known whatsoever.  The only fact is as stated in the title of this thread: CAF Member charged with sex-related offenses.  Everything else is supposition, hearsay, and slanderous unless and until proven to be true.  Unfortunately it is those thoughts that will come to mind every time his name is mentioned from now until the day he leaves.  He may have been a good officer but he has been tried in the court of public opinion, his guilt has been decided and regardless of the final outcome of his trial (and I truly hope that he is indeed innocent) he will never command even an office party ever.

 

[Pusser]

ok - is my math off.

Say this young man joined when he turned twelve and events started that year which would have been 1998.  What ever happened took place between then and 2007 which would make him 22 years old.  But cadets is for those 12 to 18 years old. 

Sorry to be a little wary of jumping on the bandwagon.

There is nothing wrong with the math.  I don't think it says anywhere that he was a cadet at the time.  In fact, one article states that it allegedly happened when he was mentoring cadets. It is not at all uncommon for regular force members to volunteer with local cadet corps.  Also, most cadet corps are assigned liaison officers from both regular and reserve units in the vicinity.  I suspect that he is being accused of doing something while he was working with a local cadet corps as a regular force officer.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The Op Order is now out there, complete with "Soldier's Card" here - highlights mine ....

August 2015

Distribution List

References:

    A. External Review Report on Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces 27 March 2015
    B. CDS Initiating Directive Sexual Misconduct and Harassment Prevention and Response in the Canadian Armed Forces 25 February 2015
    C. CANFORGEN 130/15 CDS 041/15 222041Z JUL 15
    D. Duty With Honour The Profession of Arms in Canada 2009
    E. DND and CAF Code of Values and Ethics
    F. QR&O 19.15 – Prohibition of Reprisals
    G. QR&O 4.02 - General Responsibilities Of Officers
    H. QR&O 5.01 - General Responsibilities of Non-Commissioned Members
    I. QR&O 106.02 – Investigation Before Charge Laid
    J. DAOD 5019-5 – Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Disorders, 26 Sep 08
    K. DAOD 5012-0 – Harassment Prevention and Resolution, 20 Dec 00

Situation

    General.  Earlier this year, former Supreme Court Justice and External Review Authority (ERA) Marie Deschamps reported on sexual misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).  The report, issued at reference A indicated the existence of an underlying sexualized culture in the CAF, which if not addressed, is conducive to more serious incidents of sexual harassment and sexual assault.  Indeed this conduct is wrong and runs contrary to the values of the profession of arms and ethical principles of DND/CAF.
    The cornerstone of any military is the ability to be ready to respond to a wide variety of challenges at a moment’s notice.  Personnel readiness is a function of many factors, the most basic of which is a high degree of physical and mental fitness.  Harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour grievously erodes the confidence that members need to successfully carry out military duties.  It is from this perspective that harmfl and inappropriate sexual behaviour involving members of the CAF is an operational readiness issue, incongruent with our ethics and values, and wrong.
    Harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour is a real and serious problem for the CAF which requires the direct, deliberate and sustained engagement by the leadership of the CAF and the entire chain of command to address.  Sustained engagement on this issue is critical to our effectiveness as a military force and the continued support of the Canadian people.
    Problem Definition.  There are behaviours that are inconsistent with the Profession of Arms.  Harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour includes but is not limited to actions that perpetuate stereotypes and modes of thinking that devalue members on the basis of their sex, sexuality, or sexual orientation; unacceptable language or jokes; accessing, distributing, or publishing in the workplace material of a sexual nature; offensive sexual remarks; exploitation of power relationships for the purposes of sexual activity; unwelcome requests of a sexual nature, or verbal abuse of a sexual nature; publication of an intimate image of a person without their consent, voyeurism, indecent acts, sexual interference, sexual exploitation, and sexual assault.

Mission

    To eliminate harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour within the CAF.

Execution

    CDS Intent.  My intent is to eliminate harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour within the CAF by leveraging the unequivocal support of my Commanders and all leaders in the CAF.  Any form of harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour is a threat to the morale and operational readiness of the CAF, undermines good order and discipline, is inconsistent with the values of the profession of arms and the ethical principles of DND and CAF, and is wrong.  I will not allow harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour within our organization, and I shall hold all leaders in the CAF accountable for failures that permit its continuation.
    All CAF members have a duty to report, to the proper authority, any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions applicable to military members.  Furthermore, where a complaint is made or where there are other reasons to believe that a service offence has been committed, an investigation shall be conducted as soon as practicable.
    Predators and bullies who act contrary to the betterment and wellbeing of any in our ranks are neither useful in operations nor in garrison and are not welcome in the CAF.  Commanders will ensure that prompt and decisive action is taken in response to any harmful and inappropriate sexual behaviour, consistent with all applicable laws and policies.
    Eliminating harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour within the CAF depends on its members demonstrating the integrity to act in a manner that bears the closest scrutiny and the courage to overcome difficult challenges through determination and strength of character.  There shall be no grace period for the application of our values and ethics.  Proper conduct starts now.
    The increased attention that I have directed the CAF to place on this issue will likely lead to a surge in reporting of harmful and inappropriate sexual behaviour, as victims who in the past would have suffered in silence now have the confidence to come forward. This should be seen as progress. Some reports will concern events dating back several years.  Others will be more recent.  Regardless, CAF must accept this as another opportunity to address the problem and win-back members’ trust.
    To retain the trust and confidence of Canadians, the CAF will maintain transparency in all actions taken under Op HONOUR.
    This OPORD supersedes the Initiating Directive promulgated at ref B.
    Lines of Effort.  Any harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour is a real and serious problem within the CAF.  A single act of wrong-doing, regardless whether it is conducted inadvertently or without malice, is one too many.  Even unintentional harm or offense undermines good order and discipline, threatens morale, and reduces operational effectiveness.  We will use a strategy involving four lines of effort:

a. Understand.  The CAF shall establish a clear understanding of what constitutes harmful and inappropriate sexual behaviour, the means to identify members who are in need of support, and improved reporting and assessment measures;

b. Respond.  The CAF shall institutionalize a cultural change, framed by clear direction and training for leaders on how to better direct and effect culture change throughout the institution;

c. Support.  The CAF shall provide support and better facilitate services to CAF members affected by harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour including the establishment of a Sexual Misconduct Response Centre (SMRC).  To the extent possible, support to those affected by harmful and inappropriate sexual behavior shall be guided by “do no harm”; and

d. Prevent.  The CAF shall develop a unified policy approach to specifically define what constitutes harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour in plain language, enhance education and training on harmful and inappropriate sexual behaviour, and establish an objective and enduring capability to measure performance and effect.

    Conduct of Operations.  This will be a whole-of-CAF effort.  The CAF will initially use the CAF Strategic Response Team – Sexual Misconduct (CSRT-SM) to coordinate the development of policies, education, training, and additional member support.  Op HONOUR shall be executed in four phases:

a. Phase One - Initiation.  (Ongoing) VCDS will complete a comprehensive strategy and associated action plan to address the remaining recommendations of the ERA report while taking the necessary steps to develop the mandate, governance and operational model of the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre (Interim) (SMRC(I))(See Annex B). Commanders and the Senior Leadership of the CAF shall personally receive my detailed direction and intent on the actions needed to achieve the mission.  Commanders will formally and personally communicate this down and oversee the development of Formation and Unit-level orders.  Phase One is to be complete no later than (NLT) 30 Sep 15;

b. Phase Two – Preparation.  Commanders shall personally oversee the communication and application of discipline, extant leadership doctrine, and orders and policies specifically in relation to inappropriate sexual behaviour.  The Supported Commander, assisted by the Supporting Commanders, will develop and deliver education on harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour to CAF.  Concurrent with the execution of this phase, the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre (Interim (SMRC(I)) will commence operations as outlined in Annex B.  The effectiveness of Phase Two activities are to be measured, with the results reported to me NLT 1 Jul 16;

c. Phase Three – Deployment/Employment.  Concurrent with Commanders’ continued communication and application of discipline, the CAF will issue revised policies and deliver mission-specific training to its leaders.  Concurrent with the execution of this phase, SMRC(I) will transition to a full operational capability.  The effectiveness of each of Phase Three activities are to be measured, with the results reported to me NLT 1 Jul 17; and

d. Phase Four – Maintain and Hold.  In this phase, the CSRT-SM coordination functions will be re-absorbed into a DND/CAF that is better oriented, educated and trained to administer them in a manner that is fully consistent with DND and CAF Code of Values and Ethics.  Commanders will continue to personally oversee the maintenance of values and the application of administrative and/or disciplinary measures. The SMRC will continue to function at full operational capability .

    Main Effort. Leveraging CAF leadership at all levels to stop wrong and harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour and provide better support to affected members.                     
    End State.  The end state shall be achieved when all CAF members are able to perform their duties in an environment free of harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour and are able to fully enjoy the support of an institution that fosters mutual trust, respect, honour, and dignity.  Meeting this end state requires the following conditions to be met:

a. Leadership-Driven Culture Change:  The strengthening of the CAF culture and ethos in a manner that reinforces mutual trust, respect, honour, and dignity;

b. Uphold the Profession of Arms:  The CAF is founded on a core Canadian value; the respect for dignity of all persons at all times.  Honour flows from practicing Canadian military values and ethics.  It is every member’s duty to uphold the Profession of Arms and, above all, do the right thing; and

c. Support for CAF Members:  CAF members who have been affected by harmful and inappropriate sexual behavior will be better supported with discretion and empathy, and appropriately informed about the resources that are available to them from an effective, comprehensive, and coordinated network.

    CDS Critical Information Requirements (CCIR).  The CCIRs below apply to all phases of Op HONOUR:

a. Extent and nature of harmful and Inappropriate sexual behaviour within CAF;

b. Any alleged or confirmed acts of sexual misconduct or other breaches of these orders by Formation Commanders, Commanding Officers, and their Chief Petty Officers 1st Class/Chief Warrant Officers; and

c. Issues that prevent Commanders from achieving the mission.

    Groupings and Tasks.  See Annex A
    Coordinating Instructions

      a. Key dates and timings. The key dates frame CAF activities:

(1) 20 Aug 15: CDS Leadership Engagement;

(2) 01 Sep 15: Stand-up of SMRC(I);

(3) 15 Sep 15: SMRC(1) reaches initial operational capacity;

(4) NLT 30 Sep 15: Orders issued down to the lowest tactical level;

(5) 01 Oct 15: CSRT-SM from VCDS to CMP;

(6) Winter 15/16: Symposium for CAF Senior Leaders and Stakeholders on Harmful and Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour;

(7) APS 18: Stand-down CSRT-SM and transfer of functions to applicable DND/CAF OPIs; and

( 8 ) FY 18/19: SMRC Full Operational Capability (FOC).

Service Support

    The JAG is committed to ensuring that those findings and recommendations within reference A that touch upon the military justice system are closely reviewed, in coordination with CSRT-SM, to ensure that any changes to military justice legislation, policies and practices are consistent with the approaches being developed by that team.
    The CFPM is committed to ensuring that those findings and recommendations within reference A that touch upon military police investigations, training or professional standards are closely reviewed, in coordination with JAG and CSRT-SM, to ensure that any changes to policies and practices in these areas are consistent with the approaches being developed by that team.       
    Force Allocation.  Op HONOUR will be conducted from within the extant establishment of the CAF, with support provided by DND.  Human and other resources for Op HONOUR will be acquired through the CFTPO, civilian secondments, and/or the extant Level 0 Business Plan.       
    Task Coordination.  Personnel will be tasked through the National Personnel Tasking System to ensure filling of essential tasks and provide reports to the CDS as required.
    Commanders shall continue to coordinate their efforts through CSRT-SM.  CAF mission success will depend on the development of effective staff linkages between Commanders and CSRT-SM.  CSRT-SM will work closely with SMRC(I).  Both will operate within their respective mandates to inform actions undertaken by the CAF leadership to achieve the mission.
    Public Affairs Posture.  The CAF will pursue an active PA posture, with ADM (PA) responsible for developing the public affairs strategy and leading and coordinating its execution.  CSRT-SM Public Affairs will coordinate and staff PA products for ADM (PA) approval through the Supported Commander.

Command and Signals

    This operation is command-centric, supported by an accountability framework that extends throughout the CAF.
    Commanders at all levels are to personally issue their own formal, written orders down to the lowest tactical unit to ensure consistency of messaging.  These shall be used as the basis for the development of tactical orders, which shall be reviewed two levels up prior to their issuance.  Supported and Supporting Commanders will verify to me personally that orders have been reviewed, communicated and understood at all levels.     
    Supported Commander.  VCDS is the supported commander for Phase One.  CMP is the supported commander for Phases Two, Three and Four.         
    Supporting Commanders/Group Principals. All other Commanders and Group Principals.   
    Transfer of Command Authority (TOCA). On 1 Sep 15, SMRC(I) will stand-up.
    On 1 Oct 15, authority for CSRT-SM will transfer from VCDS to CMP.
    Points of Contact:       

    a. VCDS:

(1) Cmdre BWN Santarpia, COS VCDS, 613-992-6091

    b. CMP:

(1) BGen N Eldaoud, COS CMP, 613-992-7702

    c. CSRT-SM:

(1) LGen CT Whitecross, Commander, 613-996-2347;

(2) Col GMH Fontaine, Deputy Commander, 613-996-2365;

(3) Ms. N. Neault, Strategic Advisor, 613-996-2592;

(4) LCol JPS Lapointe, Chief of Staff, 613-996-3522;

(5) Cdr P Grimshaw, Deputy Director Policy, Education and Training, 613-996-3181;

(6) LCol JAM Villeneuve, Deputy Director Programme Effectiveness Measurement, 613-996-3158;

(7) Ms. M. Lamothe, Communications Advisor, 613-996-3133; and

33. SMRC(I):  To be promulgated

J.H. Vance
General