Systemic sexual misconduct and racism in the military and RCMP and the complicity of the Liberals and generals
The enforcement of any legislation depends on the willingness of those who enforce it to follow what the legislation lays out. In the Canadian military, coverup, denial, a sense of privilege, and the old boys network has meant the rules that did exist were not enforced or were the equivalent of hitting with a wet noodle for those at the top or those with influence, such as MP Kevin Vuong who got a $500 fine by the military for covering up his sexual assault charge.
It sure sounds like an old school "boys will be boys so we can't be too hard on them" attitude. Its like expecting cops to arrest a fellow officer when they see them illegally assault a citizen.
I'll bite. How do we fix it then?
Start by getting all our leadership to read the countless reports over the years that have offered many potential avenues for ways forward. Changing the culture of an institution is not an easy task and almost impossible without complete buy in from the brass and the politicians who are supposed to be overseeing their actions.I'll bite. How do we fix it then?
General Dany Fortin, who was in charge of the Covid 19 response until sexual abuse allegations at military college arose against him, is now on trial. His female accuser " testified that she woke up in her bed in barracks in 1988 to find Fortin holding her hand on his genitals and using it to masturbate." Fortin claims he never entered her room.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin said Tuesday that he is not guilty of sexual assault and never had any physical contact with a woman who made detailed allegations against him in court this week. Speaking in French on the second day of his trial, Fortin told a Gatineau, Que., courtroom that he was shocked and devastated to learn of what he called the "false allegations" that destroyed his reputation. Fortin was the military officer in charge of the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine campaign. He was removed from the position in May 2021 and charged with one count of sexual assault three months later.
His defence lawyer, Isabel Schurman, has argued that the complainant incorrectly identified Fortin. Fortin testified that everyone had to sleep with their bedroom doors unlocked in the barracks for fire safety reasons and that he never entered the woman's room.
But during testimony in court Tuesday, the woman at the centre of Fortin's trial told court she is certain the high-profile military commander is the one who assaulted her in 1988....
The woman told court that while she can't recall whether her attacker spoke during the alleged assault, she is certain of his identity. "I can assure you without a doubt that it was Dany Fortin standing over me masturbating himself with my hand," the complainant testified Tuesday. "I looked at him. I knew that man. I spent 18 months with him being around day in and day out, and so there may be some slight variances, but there are no variances in that."
Schurman has argued there are inconsistencies between the woman's interviews with investigators and her testimony in court.
Fortin was charged in 2021 with one count of sexual assault tied to an incident alleged to have happened more than three decades ago when he was a cadet at the Royal Military College in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que. Fortin wore his military uniform and his medals for his civilian criminal trial, which started Monday at the Gatineau courthouse in Quebec. His wife and daughter walked into the courthouse with Fortin and sat in the front row.
The court has issued a publication ban on any details that could identify the complainant.
The complainant testified that she woke up in her bed in barracks in 1988 to find Fortin holding her hand on his genitals and using it to masturbate. The woman said Fortin had his other hand on her breasts. She said that when she tried to pull her hand away, he did not stop initially and tightened his grip. The complainant testified that she was "horrified" and pushed him away, saying "get off me, get away." Fortin then pulled up his pants and left her room, she said. The woman testified on Monday that Fortin never spoke during the alleged assault. On Tuesday, Schurman asked why the complainant told an investigator last year that she recognized Fortin's voice and his French accent during the incident.
The defence on Monday cited statements the complainant made in an earlier interview alleging the assailant moved to touch her vagina before she pushed him away. The complainant testified Monday that the statement wasn't accurate and she was under stress during that interview.
The complaint said she has recurring visions of the alleged attack and Fortin "masturbating himself with my hand" over her. She said she doesn't "100 per cent" remember what he did beyond the masturbation because she was 'in shock and in panic. When you come into court and you're asked to take an oath, you have to be 100 per cent sure," said the woman. "I know he has fondled me. When you want to know the exact details, I cannot tell you 100 per cent where his hand was as I am in shock, and I am in panic, and I don't know what he's going to do to me beyond the masturbation … I don't know if his intent is to rape me ..."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/maj-gen-dany-fortin-day-two-sexual-assa...
Quite the inconsistencies.
You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
Rather like the police. The hired thugs of the ruling class in 2 varieties, both rotten.
You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
I think we should be careful stereotyping demographics based on patterns of behavior.
Says the man with the racist views about indigenous run organizations.You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
I think we should be careful stereotyping demographics based on patterns of behavior.
Says the man with the racist views about indigenous run organizations.You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
I think we should be careful stereotyping demographics based on patterns of behavior.
The stereotyping you use against members of the Canadian military is the same tactic that people use against people like First Nations and Black Canadians.
According to what you learned in university would the courts assume I'm likely guilty of something if I'm a soldier because a large portion of other soldiers have been found guilty of something?
consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command.
I stand by my statement. Do all the papers and various reports lie or do you just hate the truth being spoken aloud?
consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command.
I stand by my statement. Do all the papers and various reports lie or do you just hate the truth being spoken aloud?
What rank do you define as a senior officer?
The military is going to examine whether members of the military will be allowed to wear unifroms and medals to civilian court trial after being alleged sexual offender General Dany Fortin did so. Those who have been abused say that wearing the uniform is a power play that triggers anxiety attacks and flashbacks of the abuse they received, makes it appear the military is backing the accused, and can be intimidating to lower ranks testifying at the trial as they have had to show deference to senior officers for years in their military careers.
Canada's military is reviewing its dress code policy for civilian court cases in response to online outrage over a highly-decorated military commander's recent decision to wear his uniform and medals to his sexual assault trial.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin, the former head of Canada's vaccine task force, has been charged with sexual assault in relation to an alleged incident in 1988. He has pleaded not guilty. He defended himself in a Quebec civilian courthouse earlier this week dressed in his uniform, with 10 medals across his chest. Fortin and his lawyer have said they will not comment on any matters during the trial. A spokesperson for Fortin, who did not want to be named due to concerns about online reprisals, said that Fortin is presumed innocent and it's appropriate for him, as a serving officer, to wear his uniform in court.
The Department of National Defence (DND) said military members are permitted to wear their uniforms during civilian criminal trials — but it's a "personal choice for which individuals are responsible."
DND also said the military will now "examine its policies related to the participation of CAF members in civilian judicial proceedings, including the subject of military dress, to assess whether changes should be made."
The civilian judicial system prosecutes a series of offences involving military members, including murder, manslaughter and sexual assault.
Several military sexual trauma advocates have said that the act of wearing the full uniform to court while on trial for sexual assault is a power play that intimidates complainants and triggers victims.
Retired major Donna Riguidel said she wants the military to ban its members from wearing their uniforms in court while on trial — or to at least advise against it. "At best, it's tone-deaf," said Riguidel, the director of Survivor Perspectives Consulting Group. "At worst it's intimidation and bullying … and it will have a silencing effect on survivors." Riguidel has been hired by the military to conduct training sessions to improve how military members respond to sexual misconduct disclosures. She said the uniform is a powerful symbol of the institution and wearing it could make a complainant feel like they're facing off against the entire Canadian Armed Forces. "It's unacceptable in an organization that's trying to become more trauma-informed and trying to focus on changing the culture to allow things like this to happen at his rank, at this leadership level," said Riguidel. ...
The military agreed last year to a government directive to temporarily transfer all sexual assault cases to civilian police for investigation and civilian courts for prosecution. In a scathing report released in May, former Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour recommended the forces permanently give up all control of sexual assault cases.
"Over the last year, the Defence Team has committed that it will use integrated, transparent and trauma-informed approaches as part of its culture growth initiatives," wrote DND spokesperson Daniel Le Bouthillier in a statement to CBC News. ...
DND said military members appearing at courts martial or summary trials within the military's judicial system are expected to wear their "service dress number three" (tunic and ribbons), unless a judge says otherwise.
The policy on military medals states that medals "may be worn, when appropriate, by entitled personnel." But in a civilian trial, serving members are not required to wear a uniform, DND said.
Fortin's spokesperson said his uniform and decorations are an expression of his 37 years of service to Canada and he's disappointed that some would deem inappropriate the act of wearing the uniform during a court appearance.
The military sexual trauma peer group It's Just Not 20K said some survivors have told the organization they were triggered by seeing Fortin in court in his uniform. (The group has had travel expenses covered by the navy for past consulting work.)
Some survivors of military sexual misconduct say they can no longer wear or look at the uniform because they feel the institution betrayed them by not believing them when they reported their allegations.
The issue of uniforms and power dynamics was front and centre at the mass casualty commission in Nova Scotia last month. RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki testified in civilian clothing. The commission had requested she not wear her uniform as it "may be triggering for some individuals attending the proceedings," according to the RCMP. The shooter in that case wore a police uniform. ...
Megan MacKenzie is the Simons chair in international law and human security at Simon Fraser University. She said she believes that once a military member is charged, that member should lose the right to wear the uniform in court. The military uniform is unlike any other uniform because it's a very powerful symbol of "status" in a hierarchical institution, she said. The military's own policy makes it clear the uniform is a symbol of military ethos, public trust and Canadian pride, she added. ...
The public would find it odd to see a judge accused of a criminal offence wearing their robe to court because of the status it symbolizes, she said.
"Everyone is meant to be equal before the law," said MacKenzie. "The minute that someone walks in wearing a military uniform, and in particular a uniform with medals that symbolize accolades and deployments, I really think that it elevates that person's status in a way that could impact the trial. I think that's not appropriate."
Retired captain Annalise Schamuhn said Fortin's decision to wear his uniform "struck me as overtly manipulative and brought back memories of when senior military officers wrote letters on military and regimental letterhead to sway the court in support of the sex offender convicted of assaulting me."
"I would have found it incredibly distressing when I was testifying in court if my assailant had been allowed to attend in full dress uniform," said Schamuhn, who has done some paid consulting work for the navy.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/debate-uniform-military-court-sexual-as...
The military is going to examine whether members of the military will be allowed to wear unifroms and medals to civilian court trial after being alleged sexual offender General Dany Fortin did so. Those who have been abused say that wearing the uniform is a power play that triggers anxiety attacks and flashbacks of the abuse they received, makes it appear the military is backing the accused, and can be intimidating to lower ranks testifying at the trial as they have had to show deference to senior officers for years in their military careers.
There are a few misconceptions here.
Members of the military wear their dress uniform while attending a court martial (trial) in the military. They wear ribbons on their uniform for this, not medals. (Ribbons being small representations of medals). Medals are for special occasions.
Members of the military who wear their dress uniform as a daily uniform wear ribbons not medals.
According to the rules members of the military can wear their dress uniform to civilian court proceedings as it falls under attending a duty. Wearing medals to civilian court, like General Fortin did was against the rules.
There are a few misconceptions here.Members of the military wear their dress uniform while attending a court martial (trial) in the military. They wear ribbons on their uniform for this, not medals. (Ribbons being small representations of medals). Medals are for special occasions.
Members of the military who wear their dress uniform as a daily uniform wear ribbons not medals.
According to the rules members of the military can wear their dress uniform to civilian court proceedings as it falls under attending a duty. Wearing medals to civilian court, like General Fortin did was against the rules.
Thanks for the clarification. However, you have not addressed the central problem, as identified by those sexually abused in the military, who say that wearing the uniform is a power play that triggers anxiety attacks and flashbacks of the abuse they received, makes it appear the military is backing the accused, and can be intimidating to lower ranks testifying at the trial as they have had to show deference to senior officers for years in their military careers. That is why the military is now saying it will review this issue when it comes to civilian courts.
General Dany Fortin trial for sexual abuse has ended but the court's judgement will not be rendered until December.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin, the former head of the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine campaign, now awaits his fate after closing arguments in his sexual assault trial concluded Tuesday in Gatineau, Que. Fortin, who has maintained his innocence, will have to wait until early December before a decision is rendered by a civilian judge.
The complainant in the case testified last month that she woke up one night in her dorm room to find a man masturbating himself using one of her hands while another hand was on her breast. Her name and details that could identify her are protected under a publication ban. She told the court that she is certain "without a doubt" that the perpetrator was Fortin, with whom she was attending military college at the time in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que.
In a closing statement Tuesday, Crown prosecutor Diane Legault argued that there is no reason to believe the complainant in the case would have forgotten or become mistaken about the identity of her aggressor in the years since the 1988 incident. She pointed out that Fortin was able to identify names and faces with certainty when looking at old yearbook photos from military college during his testimony on Monday. "It's not as if she decided 34 years later that it was this person because she saw him on television," Legault said in French, calling back to Fortin's testimony about the number of press conferences that he was attending in early 2021. "That day, she knew right away that it was Mr. Fortin. There's no reason for that to have changed over the years."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trial-dany-fortin-oct-25-1.6629410
drift....
D.C. Sues NFL, Washington Commanders over Toxic Workplace Cover-Up
Washington, D.C.’s attorney general has filed a consumer protection lawsuit against the Washington Commanders and team owner Dan Snyder, along with the National Football League and its commissioner, Roger Goodell. The lawsuit laid out Thursday by Attorney General Karl Racine alleges that Snyder lied when he denied knowing about a hostile work environment and culture of sexual harassment at his franchise.
Attorney General Karl Racine: “In fact, the evidence shows Mr. Snyder was not only aware of the toxic culture within his organization, he encouraged it, and he participated in it. Mr. Snyder exerted a high level of personal control over everything the Commanders did. And his misconduct gave others permission to treat women in the same demeaning manner.”
The lawsuit alleges Snyder was joined by the NFL and its commissioner, Roger Goodell, in a campaign to mislead the public about what was being done to address harassment allegations. Prosecutors are seeking millions of dollars in penalties. Last year, the NFL levied a $10 million fine against the Washington Football Team after 15 women came forward with allegations of sexual harassment and verbal abuse.
....end drift
General Dany Fortin trial for sexual abuse has ended but the court's judgement will not be rendered until December.
His career is over even though he will likely be found not guilty.
He will be paid $20,483 a month to sit at home, similar to Vice-Admiral Edmundson.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin acquitted on 1988 sexual assault charge
Let the excuses begin.
So the victim was a woman, but no woman took part in the decision to decide whether or not the charged person was innocent or guilty, eh!
How much time does the victim have to appeal?
Why was there no jury trial - who gets to decide that, eh!
So the victim was a woman, but no woman took part in the decision to decide whether or not the charged person was innocent or guilty, eh!How much time does the victim have to appeal?
Why was there no jury trial - who gets to decide that, eh!
Northern Report, try reading this link as a start point to finding your answers above:
Northern Report, here is a another great link to find the answers you seek:
Well, it's been over 40 years since I tried a case, but back then, the accused could select trial by judge and jury, or by judge alone. The rule of thumb was that if you had a case that was weak on the law, but strong on the facts, pick a jury, but if your case was weak on facts, but strong on law, pick judge alone. I assume that is what the defense did in this case.
So the victim was a woman, but no woman took part in the decision to decide whether or not the charged person was innocent or guilty, eh!
Should the jury (or judge in this case) be made up of the victim's gender? What about race and sexual orientation?
I assume that is what the defense did in this case.
I assume that the defense concluded, much like this thread displayed, there would be a biased toward the accused due to the number of sexual assault accusations happening in the military. The defense mitigated that assumed bias by electing for a judge. I mean if we went by this thread we wouldn't even need a trial.
Well, it's been over 40 years since I tried a case, but back then, the accused could select trial by judge and jury, or by judge alone. The rule of thumb was that if you had a case that was weak on the law, but strong on the facts, pick a jury, but if your case was weak on facts, but strong on law, pick judge alone. I assume that is what the defense did in this case.
If you were hired to defend Mr. Fortin, how would you go about doing it?
Will be interesting to see how Trevor Cadieux does in his trial next year...
Well, it's been over 40 years since I tried a case, but back then, the accused could select trial by judge and jury, or by judge alone. The rule of thumb was that if you had a case that was weak on the law, but strong on the facts, pick a jury, but if your case was weak on facts, but strong on law, pick judge alone. I assume that is what the defense did in this case.
If you were hired to defend Mr. Fortin, how would you go about doing it?
I haven't paid attention to the evidence in this case, but it definitely sounds like judge alone was the correct choice for the defense under the circumstances. I thought that was what I said in my original post.
Well, it's been over 40 years since I tried a case, but back then, the accused could select trial by judge and jury, or by judge alone. The rule of thumb was that if you had a case that was weak on the law, but strong on the facts, pick a jury, but if your case was weak on facts, but strong on law, pick judge alone. I assume that is what the defense did in this case.
If you were hired to defend Mr. Fortin, how would you go about doing it?
I haven't paid attention to the evidence in this case, but it definitely sounds like judge alone was the correct choice for the defense under the circumstances. I thought that was what I said in my original post.
I was just curious if you would have done anything different. Trial by judge was very clear in your original post.
I was just curious if you would have done anything different. Trial by judge was very clear in your original post.
Well, it's been a very long time since I practiced law, and I don't know nearly enough about this case, so I'll have to pass. The only question I feel comfortable answering is the easy one about choosing jury or judge alone.
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin acquitted on 1988 sexual assault charge
Let the excuses begin.
The innocence or guilt of one individual doesn't mean there is not a major problem with systemic sexual misconduct in the Canadian military, as noted in the title of this thread.
In her "scathing indictment" testimony before the House of Commons defence committee six months after issuing dozens of recommendations to improve the military's handling of inappropriate and criminal sexual behaviour former Canadian Supreme Court and International Criminal Court justice Louise Arbour "accused military leaders of dragging their feet when it comes fighting sexual misconduct in the ranks on Tuesday, even as Defence Minister Anita Anand staked her reputation on their success or failure."
Her testimony coincided with an update from Defence Minister Anita Anand on the progress on those recommendations, all of which have now been accepted.
While Arbour acknowledged some positive steps, such as the appointment of an external monitor to keep tabs on the military's progress, she was exceedingly critical on many other fronts. Chief among them was what she saw as resistance to one of her key recommendations: That the Canadian Armed Forces be permanently stripped of its jurisdiction over the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault and other related crimes. "It's very obvious to me that those involved in that process are dragging their feet on the military side," said Arbour, who previously served as the United Nations high commissioner for human rights.
In her own update presented before Arbour's committee appearance, Anand said the government is consulting with provinces and territories about transferring responsibility for sexual crimes from military police and prosecutors to civilian counterparts.
Military officials have also revealed there were difficulties transferring those cases. Anand issued an interim order to do so in November 2021, but civilian police declined to accept 40 out of 97 cases referred to them by military police over the past year. This comes as some provinces and municipal police forces have complained about the need for more funding and other resources to absorb the military's cases into their own systems.
However, Arbour suggested such requests for money amounted to "posturing," given the number of alleged sex crimes involving military personnel each year represents a tiny fraction of the total in the civilian system. During her appearance before the defence committee, Anand emphasized the importance of acting on the recommendation but rebuffed calls for immediate change, saying several challenges need to be addressed. Those include how to handle cases outside Canada and the capacity of civilian police and courts to take on more files.
Anand also repeatedly referred to the amount of time needed to change the law to officially remove the military's jurisdiction over sex offences, but refused to say when legislation would be presented to Parliament for approval. "My officials will come and present options," she told the committee. "It would be imprudent of me to simply provide a date to this committee and to Canadians."
While acknowledging that amending legislation would take time, Arbour noted civilian police already have jurisdiction over such cases if the military decides not to take them. "Therefore, all that needs to happen today is that the military system stops, and the civilian side takes on investigations of sexual assault and other forms of sexual offences committed by CAF members, on CAF bases or anywhere," she said. "So that requires no change whatsoever. Just this: The military side stops, and the civilian side takes it on."
Anand later pushed back against suggestions that the government and military would repeat past failures by pretending to agree with Arbour's recommendations only to let them gather dust on a shelf. "The way that we ensure cultural change occurs in the military is by trying every single day to get it right," she said. "And the gist of my tenure as minister of national defence is to ensure that that occurs."
Arbour also took issue with the military's failure to remove "the duty to report," which requires that troops report inappropriate or criminal behaviour even if the victim doesn't agree. That had been flagged as a major issue by victims' groups. The former judge also blasted the Armed Forces for not having launched a promised review on the costs and benefits of Canada's two military colleges -- and accused them of having already decided that closing the institutions isn't on the table. "We're now seven months after the production of my report and we're still at a stage of examining parameters and terms of reference," she said. "All of that against the backdrop of a suggestion that the military colleges as they exist are 'superior institutions.' It doesn't suggest the kind of open mind with which I think this kind of exercise should be undertaken."
Anand in her own testimony said the review will be focused on the quality of education, socialization and military training at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ont., and its French counterpart in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que. -- not whether they are required. "These colleges attract some of the best that Canadian society has to offer," she said. "But let's be clear: The culture at our military colleges must change significantly, and we will ensure that this occurs."
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/louise-arbour-accuses-military-of-foot-d...
In response to Canadian Supreme Court and International Criminal Court justice Louise Arbour's criticism of Canadian military colleges, Defence Minister Anita Anand on Tuesday in a new report ordered "a review of Canada's military colleges that could result in sweeping changes at the two schools". The url below includes video criticism of the Liberal government's response to the government's failures in implementing Arbour's report by Conservative associate defence critic Shelby Kramp-Neuman and NDP defence critic Lindsay Mathyssen.
The report — tabled in Parliament by Defence Minister Anita Anand on Tuesday — is the government's reply to former Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour's report calling for major changes to Canada's military in response to a series of sexual misconduct scandals in recent years. The government has accepted all 48 of Arbour's recommendations and has ordered the military to move forward on their implementation, the government's report said. One of those recommendations called for a review of the military colleges in Kingston, Ont., and in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que.
In her report, released in May, Arbour called for widespread cultural change at the colleges. The "continued prevalence of sexual misconduct at the military colleges is well documented," she said at a press conference after releasing the report. While she didn't call for the colleges to be scrapped altogether, Arbour did suggest that the schools be assessed to determine whether they should carry on in their current form. "The military colleges appear as institutions from a different era, with an outdated and problematic leadership model," Arbour wrote in her report.
The report released by Anand says that by ordering a review of the colleges, the federal government "strongly affirms that the culture in these institutions must change significantly."
Canada's military police identified 257 substantiated incidents of unwanted sexual activity at the military colleges between 2016 and 2019, according to a 2020 report. Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Anand said she is confident the colleges' culture can be reformed. "I believe very sincerely in the ability of these colleges to meet this challenge head on," she said. A review board led by an education specialist will be established to evaluate the colleges in 2023, the report says. It does not mention a timeline for completing the work. Anand said her report also will serve as a roadmap for cultural change in the armed forces as a whole. "My goal is to put in place the institutional reforms necessary so that cultural change can last," she said. Tuesday's report says the government will continue moving toward having the civilian justice system investigate and prosecute all cases of sexual offences in the Canadian Armed Forces.
The military was granted jurisdiction over its own sexual assault cases in 1988. Acting on Arbour's interim report, Anand started transferring such cases to the civilian system last year. Tuesday's report says Anand has asked the Armed Forces to present her with options to permanently transfer jurisdiction over such cases to the civilian criminal justice system.
The military has had trouble transferring sexual misconduct investigations to civilian police bodies over the past year. The Canadian Armed Forces has transferred 57 investigations to civilian police services since last December, Col. Vanessa Hanrahan, deputy commander of Canada's military police, said Monday. But another 40 cases have been declined by civilian police for a variety of reasons, including jurisdictional and resource concerns, she said. Military police are trying to address these concerns by working with civilian police investigators and giving them access to military police records, Hanrahan said.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/military-colleges-sexual-misconduct-ana...
Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin acquitted on 1988 sexual assault charge
Let the excuses begin.
The innocence or guilt of one individual doesn't mean there is not a major problem with systemic sexual misconduct in the Canadian military, as noted in the title of this thread.
It's actually much worse than it gets portrayed in the media.
The Minister of National Defense "deciding" all sexual assault cases would be transferred to civilian police wasn't thought out. The premise of it is sound enough but no one actually checked with the police, and they're not happy.
Civilian police are already swamped with long long investigation times. Is the military going to pay the police to hire extra police officers to act as investigators? Pay for travel and expenses for officers traveling to remote locations with small police forces?
It always comes down to money.
Arbour argues that money is not the problem - some provinces don't want to deal with this 'hot potato' to avoid getting burned politically. In the meantime, as the provinces and feds argue, those who came forward, expecting it would be dealt with in civilian courts rather than military justice system where they were badly treated in the first place are "retraumatized".
In her final report released at the end of May, Arbour noted that some police forces and associations representing chiefs of police had publicly and privately opposed her earlier recommendation for the military to transfer cases to their jurisdictions.
Those included the Ontario Provincial Police, the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police and its counterpart in British Columbia.
Yet she noted some other provinces and police services had agreed to accept such cases, including Quebec. She went on to argue that based on historical trends, all provinces besides Ontario were likely to see less than 25 additional cases per year.
Ontario was likely to see about 70 new cases but Arbour said those numbers were not a justification for saying no to transferring them.
“The number of cases, spread across the country, with slightly higher volume around CAF bases and wings, and virtually none elsewhere, hardly justifies this refusal to enforce the law,” she said of those opposed to taking military cases.
“The targeted need for additional resources, if any, can be easily identified and accommodated.”
Arbour went on to predict that unless the federal government formally removed the military’s jurisdiction over criminal sexual offences, Ottawa and the provinces would engage in “interminable discussions” between the two sides.
While Provost Marshal spokesman Lt.-Cmdr. James Bresolin says military police continue to handle those cases that civilian counterparts have refused to accept, the situation is raising fresh worries about the impact on victims of sexual crimes.
“The concern for victims is really that there seems to be sort of a hot-potato situation where some of the provinces essentially don’t want to take the cases,” said Megan MacKenzie, an expert on military sexual misconduct at Simon Fraser University in B.C.
“Victims are going to be impacted if there’s this sort of back and forth between different authorities and potentially under resourcing and disputes about who should be taking care of these cases.”
Charlotte Duval-Lantoine of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, whose book on military sexual misconduct was published last month, worried for victims who may have come forward only because they thought their cases would not be handled by the Armed Forces.
“That’s going to contribute to the re-traumatization of people who have waited decades to come forward.”
https://globalnews.ca/news/8979307/canadian-forces-sex-assault/
This is not a straightforward issue. The Town of Comox with only 15,000 residents is not equipped to shoulder the policing costs for the Comox AFB with nearly 3,000 personnel. If you still have AFB MP's doing the initial investigations of sexual misconduct it doesn't seem like much of a change. That is for criminal assaults however that still leaves, the less than criminal, discriminatory actions that can arise that would have to go to the federal Human Rights tribunal. This is not a straightforward issue. If the ratio of sexual assaults is higher than in the general population then the AFB should be paying for a special unit run by some other authority to serve and protect the women and men from abuse.
The cost total number of such cases in a given province would be a very tiny fraction of the provincial policing budget and should be covered by the province to ensure that investigating and prosecuting such cases is not suppressed initially by the military.
I do not understand how that fits into BC's system of municipal policing with some places having their own forces and other places paying the RCMP to police. I have no problem with the prosecution of offenses it is the investigation and arrests that I think needs to be rethought. I am a cynic and don't believe that our efforts are going to lead to a world were sexual assault does not occur. What happens when a women is claiming that she was sexually assaulted by a superior officer. Does she phone the local RCMP and will the response be better than it is for most women who complain of sexual assault? Will the RCMP have the power to suspend an officer from their employment while they are investigating? Will involving the RCMP, an agency with a very bad reputation itself, lead to better outcomes or in any way change the culture or will the RCMP just see brothers in arms when they interview fellow officers accused of sexual assault.
The cost total number of such cases in a given province would be a very tiny fraction of the provincial policing budget and should be covered by the province to ensure that investigating and prosecuting such cases is not suppressed initially by the military.
I believe Kropt hit the nail on the head.
Suppose a police force is authorized positions for 20 officers.
2 officers are on parental leave.
1 officer is on administrative duties because of an alleged misconduct allegation.
3 officers are on sick leave.
So now the force is down to 14 members covering off work for 20 officers. On top of that, there is mandatory training for officers, officers going on vacation, court etc..
It's one thing for the MND or someone saying it's only a few cases but it doesn't appear that police forces were actually consulted.
As for communities with RCMP as the investigating police force does anyone here trust the RCMP with investigating sexual assault? I don't, and I have a bunch of friends in the RCMP.
Federal court certifies $1.1B class action against RCMP over alleged bullying, harassment
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/rcmp-class-action-lawsuit-c...
Well then what is the alternative or do you throw up your hands and leave everything in the military's hands after the decades and decades of failure to prosecute sexual offences, especially at senior levels?
I don't know what the answer is Jerry. I don't know you but based on your posts here I would trust you to handle sexual assault investigations before I trust the military to do so, so please don't think I'm making excuses for them or defending them.
Civilian police seems like the only viable option at this time. I'm just pointing out the MND's approach is stereo-typical of the DNDs approach. CivPol already pushed back a couple of cases
I've taken a bunch of courses about being a harassment advisor, harassment prevention in the workplace, conflict resolution etc.. with a view to becoming a harassment investigator. Harassment in the civilian workplace can be extremely expensive. Companies are going the way of outsourcing this stuff and while very thorough and professionally done, these investigating companies charge up to $30,000 an investigation (if my memory serves me).
Perhaps the military should go this route in so far as somehow arranging to have a dedicated team of police officers who only investigate sexual harassment for the military. It would be incredibly expensive; maybe charge unit commanding officers some of the cost to come out of budgets. If a unit spends $1million of their budget on sexual assault investigations then just maybe the unit has a culture issue and that commanding officer shouldn't be promoted.
Says the man with the racist views about indigenous run organizations.You mean except for the persistently consistent pattern of senior officers being accused by women under their command. The military is a sick culture.Quite the inconsistencies.
I think we should be careful stereotyping demographics based on patterns of behavior.
The stereotyping you use against members of the Canadian military is the same tactic that people use against people like First Nations and Black Canadians.
According to what you learned in university would the courts assume I'm likely guilty of something if I'm a soldier because a large portion of other soldiers have been found guilty of something?
Military is a self-selected group with a code of ethics.
It is not a genetically distinct nor historically disadvantaged group.
Such a lazy cop out as is the 'reflects society' meme.
The military should be superior to the societal norm in terms of ethics and behavior.
Such a lazy cop out as is the 'reflects society' meme.
The military should be superior to the societal norm in terms of ethics and behavior.
I would argue yes and no.
Lots of reasons why the military should strive to have a high level of ethics and behavior.
On the other hand a multi-tier hierarchy and belief of superior ethics can breed resentment. How many members of the military and police forces see themselves as sheepdogs protecting sheep against wolves?
"Dirty civies".
On the other hand a multi-tier hierarchy and belief of superior ethics can breed resentment. How many members of the military and police forces see themselves as sheepdogs protecting sheep against wolves?
"Dirty civies".
While the members of the military and police may well see themselves as "sheepdogs protecting sheep against wolves", that idea is at odds with all of history and the reality of today. Militaries in particular, have always been the tools of the powerful, used to maintain and expand their power. So it is today, as the capitalist oligarchs and their fully owned politicians use their countries' militaries to promote their own agendas. Protecting the populations of their countries doesn't enter into the calculation, except as a matter of propaganda.
Police forces as we know them are a much newer invention and were clearly created to keep the early capitalists, as well as the remnants of the dying aristocracy, well protected from demands that they share some of their abundance with the working classes. And of course, they still pretty much function that way today. Any help these institutions give to ordinary people is just a side effect of maintaining the capacity to protect capital from the population. After all, most of the time there is no immediate threat because people are intimidated by the large standing army of thugs in the police stations. These (mostly) guys need something to do in between crushing dissent, so they investigate ordinary crimes. It's inefficient, but good for PR.
Police and the military have been used by all power elites whether monarchist, capitalist, Nazi, fascist, soicalist or communist or garden variety democratic to maintain power and order. Some of the greatest bloodbaths executed on their own people have been by the Nazis, Italian fascists, communists, and capitalists (in Russia (Estimates of the number of deaths attributable to the Soviet revolutionary and dictator Joseph Stalin vary widely.[1] The scholarly consensus affirms that archival materials declassified in 1991 contain irrefutable data far superior to sources used prior to 1991 such as statements from emigres and other informants. ... This contained official records of 799,455 executions (1921–1953),[8] around 1.7 million deaths in the Gulag,[9][10] some 390,000[11] deaths during the dekulakization forced resettlement, and up to 400,000 deaths of persons deported during the 1940s,[12] with a total of about 3.3 million officially recorded victims in these categories.[13] According to historian Stephen Wheatcroft, approximately 1 million of these deaths were "purposive" while the rest happened through neglect and irresponsibility.[2] The deaths of at least 5.5 to 6.5 million[14] persons in the Soviet famine of 1932–1933 are sometimes, though not always, included with the victims of the Stalin era)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under...) and Cambodia Estimates range from 1.5 to 3 million people having died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge, with the consensus being approximately 2 million)https://cla.umn.edu/chgs/holocaust-genocide-education/resource-guides/ca...).
In Ireland during the Famine of the 1840s, the police and military were used to tear the roof off of the house of anyone who took in or fed a starving neighbour thereby making it uninhabitable, and expelled those who lived there because the capitalists saw the starving as not only being undeserving but a threat to the social order. So any system carried to the extreme can use the police and military murderously against its own people. Under the Irish workhouse system where those who entered the workhouses during the Irish Famine to be fed also had to do hard labour 12-16 hours a day even they were already very weak. The combination of extreme working conditions and unsanitary living conditions in the workhouses meant those who entered a workhouse often died faster than the starving who did not enter. At the same time, more food in the form of grains and livestock was exported from Ireland under military guard during the Famine than was needed to feed everyone. "During that famine, wealthy Irish landowners continued to sell their abundant crops, their beef and their lamb to French, German and Low-Country markets rather than feed their own impoverished and starving tenant farmers" .(https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1997/09/27/the-irish-fam...).
The English government had used 20% of its budget to pay off the owners of slaves in end slavery in 1837 and proclaim how noble their capitalist system truly was (not one cent went to the slaves despite all their centuries of labour). A decade later, they claimed they did not have a tiny fraction of this amount to feed the starving Irish during the Famine. The population fell from eight million in the 1840 census to five million in the 1850 census with one quarter dying of starvation and one quarter immigrating to stay alive. Ireland is the only country in the world with fewer people (five million) than it had in 1840 (eight million). The police and military were central to suppressing any protest and revolt during the Famine and to removing people from their homes for not paying their rent or taking in other starving neighbours, only to face starvation and the rain and cold outdoors.
The federal Liberal government is introducing legislation to remove armed forces sexual abuse cases from the military court system in order to transfer these cases to civilian court. This comes after sexaul abuse scandal after scandal by top generals generated embarassment for the government and demonstrated how open to abuse the military court system was when it came to sexual abuse. The NDP has criticized the government for failing to add more resources to the civilian court system to deal with the extra court burden and delay created by the resulting increase in trials from military sexual abuse cases.
Defence Minister Bill Blair has introduced new legislation to remove the Canadian military’s jurisdiction to investigate sexual misconduct; something that advocates, survivors and former Supreme Court of Canada justices have all called for.
“The proposed legislation would provide exclusive jurisdiction to civilian authorities to investigate and prosecute such offences committed in Canada,” said Blair in a statement Thursday. Blair is amending the National Defence Act as part of a push to modernize the military justice system. The minister says that about 150 military sexual misconduct investigations have been referred to civilian police since Dec. 2021. “There are real challenges still today in our in our criminal justice system with the way in which sexual assault matters are dealt with,” Blair said. “We need to make sure that that system is also supportive of our victims and respectful of their rights and at the same time move forward to our courts as expeditiously as possible so that they can produce a just outcome and not be discharged because of delays.” Blair said he has been in contact with provincial attorney generals to give them advance notice of the coming changes and provide additional resources to try and prevent delays in cases being heard.
NDP defence critic Lindsay Mathyssen says overall she’s happy to see the legislation introduced, but sees a gap in sending more cases to the civilian system and not including additional resources. “It does seem like a major gap. And I will be pushing on the government to look at that as well,” Mathyssen said.
Blair’s predecessor, Anita Anand, had issued a ministerial directive to transfer sexual misconduct cases not already near completion to civilian courts in one of her first acts as defence minister. But this legislation will enshrine the major change into law permanently.
The changes were part of key recommendations made by former Supreme Court justices Louise Arbour and Morris Fish in twin reports examining sexual misconduct in the Canadian Forces. Arbour’s scathing report released in 2022 found the top ranks of the Canadian Armed Forces were “incapable” of recognizing the “deficient” parts of a culture that keep sexual misconduct and abuse of power entrenched.
Global News first brought to light allegations in February 2021 of sexual misconduct against senior leaders in the Canadian Forces — the first of dozens of exclusive reports.
On the timing of bringing this legislation forward after the recommendation was issued two years ago, Blair says this is an important step in overall military cultural change. “Cultural change is critically important. We’re absolutely committed to it. But I also recognize it’s a process, not an event. This is an important step in that process today,” Blair said. On getting this bill passed, Blair said he’s spoken with the opposition critics about ensuring the recommendations in Arbour and Fish’s reports are implemented and he hopes to get it to committee study as soon as possible. “It’s an important step. It doesn’t cover all of the issues that we’ve seen. It certainly doesn’t also address a lot of the people who have been caught in the middle between the public justice system and the civilian justice system and the military justice system,” Mathyssen said. “So it’s not perfect, but I do believe it’s a first step.”
The proposed changes in this legislation apply to alleged offences in Canada only. Speaking at a technical briefing on background, defence officials say that there is added complexity to ensure that investigations comply with international law. The officials add that it is possible to still lay charges in the civilian system for charges outside of Canada, and they continue to look at the possibility of expanding this legislation to alleged offences outside of Canada.
In Arbour’s recommendations, she calls for the military police to take steps to safeguard evidence and begin the investigation, but they should liaise with civilian law enforcement as early as possible.
https://globalnews.ca/news/10375224/sexual-misconduct-canadian-forces-re...
The federal Liberal government is introducing legislation to remove armed forces sexual abuse cases from the military court system in order to transfer these cases to civilian court.
There may be some unintended consequences here.
For starters the military police have a higher conviction rate for cases of sexual assault than civilian police do. Adding more case files to the civilian police's load isn't going to result in improving conviction rates.
Secondly civilian police have a higher ratio of cases getting dropped due to it not going to court in a reasonable time. With the additional case load given over to civilian police more members of the military will have their cases dropped.Blair talks about additional resources to civilian police but that's bullshit. The only resources that would apply is more police officers working on the case. Unless the MND is going to pay to hire more civilian police there are no additional resources that will help.
Third suppose a commanding officer sexually assaults a subordinate while deployed overseas. Lets say in Kuwait. Who is going to investigate? Will Canada send RCMP officers over? Trust the local police to conduct the investigation?
The federal Liberal government is introducing legislation to remove armed forces sexual abuse cases from the military court system in order to transfer these cases to civilian court.
There may be some unintended consequences here.
For starters the military police have a higher conviction rate for cases of sexual assault than civilian police do. Adding more case files to the civilian police's load isn't going to result in improving conviction rates.
Secondly civilian police have a higher ratio of cases getting dropped due to it not going to court in a reasonable time. With the additional case load given over to civilian police more members of the military will have their cases dropped.
I already noted the failure of the Trudeau Liberals to provide extra resources to deal with the increase in sexual abuses cases being sent from military courts to civilian courts. The civilian courts are far from perfect but they do not have the systemic problem of reporting cases up the chain of command that has resulted in so many failures to prosecute cases and let more senior ranks, including top generals, escape prosecution for decades and sometimes forever. Whatever minor reforms have occurred in the military system by and large have not worked. In the US, where they keep better track of how many sexual abuse cases have occurred in the military, the reforms introduced in the last decade to the military court system have not worked. In fact, the number of sexual abuse cases has increased, according to the most recent data I could find from a 2024 article. "The U.S. military has launched an ambitious effort to hire and train more than 2,000 experts focused on preventing sexual assault and other harmful behaviors within its ranks. The move comes after an estimated 25% increase in military sexual assaults, which affected about 35,900 active duty service members in 2021, up from about 28,600 in 2018". I am glad the US military is hiring 2,000 experts in sexual abuse prevention (hopefully it works but changing any culture is very difficult) to deal with sexual abuse in the military, but the 25% increase to 35,900 cases of sexual abuse shows the American military court system, like the Canadian one, is not working when it comes to sexual abuse.
The U.S. military has launched an ambitious effort to hire and train more than 2,000 experts focused on preventing sexual assault and other harmful behaviors within its ranks. The move comes after an estimated 25% increase in military sexual assaults, which affected about 35,900 active duty service members in 2021, up from about 28,600 in 2018 (2021 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Military Members, Office of People Analytics, 2023).https://www.apa.org/monitor/2024/03/military-sexual-assault-prevention-e...
“We had already seen an uptick in prevalence in 2018, and then once again, that number increased,” said Nathan Galbreath, PhD, acting director for the Department of Defense (DoD) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO). “This was certainly concerning to us and also to the secretary of defense,” who launched an Independent Review Commission (IRC) on Sexual Assault in the Military (PDF, 3.2MB) within days of taking office.
After 90 days of interviews, observations, and data collection, the IRC released a report pinpointing problems in the military’s approach to sexual assault, including “a near total lack of prevention specialists.” The urgency of responding to reported assaults had left little bandwidth for prevention efforts, which generally took the form of lecture-style meetings or well-meaning but unhelpful awareness campaigns such as pancake breakfasts and golf tournaments (Hard Truths and the Duty to Change: Recommendations from the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, 2021 [PDF, 7.4MB]).
“We also found that a key driver of sexual assault, as well as other harmful behaviors, was the culture within a unit,” known as the command climate, said Andra Tharp, PhD, the senior prevention adviser for the DoD Office of Force Resiliency. “When command climate is unhealthy, these behaviors are more likely to take place.”
The new Integrated Primary Prevention Workforce (IPPW) is the military’s intended antidote—but culture shifts take time, especially for an organization with more than 2 million personnel. Through 2028, the IPPW will recruit, hire, and train more than 2,000 psychologists and other prevention experts to serve at hundreds of military locations and ships around the world. Prevention specialists will take a holistic approach to reducing risk factors and promoting protective factors against sexual assault, harassment, suicide, retaliation, and domestic and child abuse.
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3