Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[The Bread Guy]

Always good to remind people of this ...

That, and "the allegations have not been proven in court" while the trial is underway.

 

[The Bread Guy]

A bit of reach back by the NIS for information ...

The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service is looking into an allegation of sexual assaults involving a child that reportedly took place at 3rd Canadian Division Support Base Edmonton between 1978 and 1980.

The investigation involves a non-family, non-military male youth who is reported to have sexually assaulted a child while babysitting in a residential housing unit at the base (then known as Canadian Forces Base Edmonton and formerly known as RCAF Station Namao).

If you have information about the reported assaults, contact Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS) or www.canadiancrimestoppers.org or call the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service’s Sexual Offence Response Team at 1-844-489-0569.

 

[captloadie]

[size=14pt]A reminder:  under the Charter, "Any person charged with an offence has the right ... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal ..."

I have always wondered, does this mean that the accused has the right to be presumed innocent by all until proven guilty, or just by the independent and impartial tribunal hearing the case and meting out punishment. Is there a difference between being innocent from a legal stand point, and being innocent from a moral stand point?

 

[McG]

A CF member arrested at CFLRS for sexual assault:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/military-investigate-sexual-assault-saint-jean-garrison-1.3850400

Article seems to imply a connection to BMQ, but there are no details of incident, victim or accused.

 

[FJAG]

[size=14pt]A reminder:  under the Charter, "Any person charged with an offence has the right ... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal ..."

I have always wondered, does this mean that the accused has the right to be presumed innocent by all until proven guilty, or just by the independent and impartial tribunal hearing the case and meting out punishment. Is there a difference between being innocent from a legal stand point, and being innocent from a moral stand point?

It's not so much a "moral" question as a "public/private opinion" one.

The totality of s 11(d) reads:

Proceedings in criminal and penal matters

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right

(d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;

Essentially this means that in cases where charges are laid that have criminal or penal consequences the government (prosecution) must prove the individual guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before a fair and impartial tribunal. Laws cannot be created or circumstances allowed to exist whereby the individual is directly or indirectly presumed to be guilty and therefore required to prove his innocence. (There can, however, be low level non-criminal, non-penal strict or absolute liability offences where such presumptions do exist)

S11(d) is not a section that can dictate what public or private opinions are with respect to a given case. It only applies to the government (all levels). On the other hand, defamation laws might very well apply to members of the public that make statements that are not factual and that defame an accused before a conviction is entered.

Out of both an abundance of caution, and out of general fairness to the accused, we tend to withhold our opinions as to an individual's culpability until the trial process has taken its course.

[cheers]

 

[sailorprivateer]

A CF member arrested at CFLRS for sexual assault:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/military-investigate-sexual-assault-saint-jean-garrison-1.3850400

Article seems to imply a connection to BMQ, but there are no details of incident, victim or accused.

A Redditor claims he knows the suspect but didn't specify more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/5cz4fo/military_police_investigate_alleged_sexual/da16iqx/

 

[Flavus101]

A Redditor claims he knows the suspect but didn't specify more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/5cz4fo/military_police_investigate_alleged_sexual/da16iqx/

For very good reason. This is a prime example about how "social media" can get people in trouble.

That thread is a cesspool already, no surprise from reddit.

 

[The Bread Guy]

[size=14pt]A reminder:  under the Charter, "Any person charged with an offence has the right ... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal ..."

"Sexual assault charge laid against student at Royal Military College"

 

[Halifax Tar]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/proposed-lawsuit-alleges-discrimination-bullying-in-canadian-armed-forces-1.3861109

The Canadian Armed Forces is rife with sexual misconduct and harassment of women, according to a proposed class-action lawsuit that claims systemic gender and sexual orientation-based discrimination.

More on link above.

 

[OldSolduer]

A bit of the story:

"The accounts of rampant, routine sexual discrimination, bullying and unwanted sexual advances against female members are astonishing," he said. "This frequent misconduct is part of a troubling and deeply embedded culture that female members have been forced to endure. It's time to step back, acknowledge how wrong it is, and take a stand against it."

And the CAF has.

I'm very annoyed with some lawyers deciding that we're all guilty and labeling an entire profession, my profession. I really do wish someone would step up on behalf of past and current members of the CAF to tell this particular lawyer to "Stuff it".

Offer up some proof....not just uncorroborated garbage.

 

[RedcapCrusader]

A bit of the story:

"The accounts of rampant, routine sexual discrimination, bullying and unwanted sexual advances against female members are astonishing," he said. "This frequent misconduct is part of a troubling and deeply embedded culture that female members have been forced to endure. It's time to step back, acknowledge how wrong it is, and take a stand against it."

And the CAF has.

I'm very annoyed with some lawyers deciding that we're all guilty and labeling an entire profession, my profession. I really do wish someone would step up on behalf of past and current members of the CAF to tell this particular lawyer to "Stuff it".

Offer up some proof....not just uncorroborated garbage.

There was a female Soldier that came forward in the media to say that in her decade or so years of service, she never experienced any of this so called "systematic" assaults and harassment.

But clearly her opinion doesn't matter.

 

[Halifax Tar]

There was a female Soldier that came forward in the media to say that in her decade or so years of service, she never experienced any of this so called "systematic" assaults and harassment.

But clearly her opinion doesn't matter.

Link ?  I would like to read that.

 

[mariomike]

"Wagner said an eventual case would seek damages, but the amount wouldn't be determined until its known how many women decide to be part of the class."

Could be expensive,

Mounties offer apology and $100M compensation for harassment, sexual abuse against female members
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-paulson-compensation-harassment-1.3793785

 

[PuckChaser]

Do I get to file a counter suit for defamation of character because I'm constantly bring accused of being a rapist just because I'm male?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Do I get to file a counter suit for defamation of character because I'm constantly bring accused of being a rapist just because I'm male?

I'll be identifying as a female and jumping on board with this lawsuit. 

 

[daftandbarmy]

Do I get to file a counter suit for defamation of character because I'm constantly bring accused of being a rapist just because I'm male?

You clearly have not read the manual:  ;D

"All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others." George Orwell

 

[Lightguns]

I am not sure what all the hurt is about.  if you have never raped anyone you should not worry.  In fact in a class action suit, all the rapists and abusers are actually not going to be effected or even have to worry, the organization will pay for the sins of the guilty.  The reality is that the court case will decide whether there is merit and at what level that merit should be applied to a remedy.  I have directed 3 women I know who have suffered during their time in the CAF.  If you know of someone, you should do the same and help (Hopefully) bring closure to this unfortunate event.

 

[Kat Stevens]

I am not sure what all the hurt is about.  if you have never raped anyone you should not worry.  In fact in a class action suit, all the rapists and abusers are actually not going to be effected or even have to worry, the organization will pay for the sins of the guilty.  The reality is that the court case will decide whether there is merit and at what level that merit should be applied to a remedy.  I have directed 3 women I know who have suffered during their time in the CAF.  If you know of someone, you should do the same and help (Hopefully) bring closure to this unfortunate event.

Except that when you call something "systematic" (i think they meant systemic, but whatever) you are painting every individual in it as either a perpetrator, enabler, or victim.  Men are already all seen as potential rapists and abusers, just by virtue of being in possession of a certain appendage and its two dependents, and this just perpetuates and reinforces that.

 

[Brasidas]

Link ?  I would like to read that.

Ashley Turner. I keep getting dead links, but she might be able to get you a copy herself.

A stock photo of her with an M-72 got used alongside a reference to the big report last year, she took exception to her image being shoved together with it, and she wrote a letter to the folks who had done so. Metro appears to have nuked both the original article and her rebuttal.

Here's about the best I can find atm:

http://republicbuzz.com/cpl-ashley-turner-dont-associate-me-with-that-sexualized-culture-in-the-military-report
https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/36246s/cpl_ashley_turner_dont_associate_me_with_that/

 

[PuckChaser]

Report from the "voluntary" survey are to be released Monday, CDS expected the results to be "sobering" back in August.

http://ipolitics.ca/2016/11/24/sobering-survey-on-sexual-harassment-in-military-coming-monday/