Worth less than a donkey.

And an imaginary one at that.

It’s a very good day in Canada if you’re a donkey.

Rona, a Canadian hardware and home improvement chain, ran a commercial based upon the English language slang term “half-assed” which generally means to do something poorly or ineptly.

The commercial is cute in the sense that it shows the front half of a donkey, other wise known as an ass, wandering around as people disparage jobs that are done “half-assed”.

Well, someone at a donkey sanctuary got their nose out-of-joint and had to let the public know that the term “half-ass” and “half-assed” are offensive to donkeys.

Canada’s top notch media sprang into action!

CTV actually ran a fucking news story on this.

And no, this wasn’t an April fool’s day prank, or an Onion Article.

Workers complaining about “half-assed” work.
Half-ass leaving the job site.
Half-ass wandering from job site to job site.
Half-ass pulling an Iron Eyes Cody tear……

It’s shit like this that makes me realize just how completely fucked the media is in this country.

I’ve tried to get CTV NEWS and CTV’s W5 interested in the issue of how the Canadian Armed Forces handled child sexual abuse on the bases pre-1998, not the slightest bit of interest.

I’ve been trying to get the media to pay attention to the fact that the modern day Canadian Armed Forces and Department of National Defence hide behind flaws in the pre-1998 National Defence Act that make sure that crimes of a criminal code in nature stay buried in the past.

Both the DND and the CAF could ask parliament to pass legislation that would subject persons who were subjected to the code of service discipline prior to 1998 to prosecution in the modern justice system, but both the DND and the CAF just don’t seem to want to risk this.

LS-311E(1998) was authored by Government of Canada lawyer David Goetz in 1998 to explain in plain English that certain flaws in the National Defence Act had to be removed in order to prevent fiascos in the military justice system from ever occurring again like which had occurred in Bosnia and Somalia.

Two of the most grievous flaws were the 3-year-time-bar flaw, and the summary investigation flaw.

The 3-year-time-bar flaw meant that service offences could only be investigated if the investigation would lead to a summary trial, a courts martial, or a civilian trial within 3-years of the date of the alleged offence.

One thing that people completely misunderstand, and believe me there are lawyers that misunderstand this, but service offences include not only all offences of a military nature, but all criminal code offences as well.

What criminal code offences would be affected by this 3-year-time-bar?

Don’t believe me that the Canadian Armed Forces had the ability to try these crimes?

Here are the Criminal Code of Canada offences that Captain McRae was subjected to a Courts Martial in a military tribunal for.

These are all criminal code offence that are being handled as service offences.

In the civilian world there is no statute of limitations on these criminal code offences. In the military world, any child who was sexually abused on a defence establishment by a person subject to the code of service discipline only had three years from the date of the offence to bring charges.

And no, these charges can’t simply be moved into the civilian justice system. If they were committed by a person subject to the code of service discipline while that person was on a defence establishment, the Canadian Forces retained the jurisdiction for the investigation and prosecution.

The even more insidious flaw was the summary investigation flaw.

Prior to 1998 the charges involving the sexual assault of children was not handed to the provincial crown prosecutors for review. Prior to 1998, it was the commanding officer of the accused that would be required to determine the fate of their subordinate.

The disturbing aspect of this is that these commanding officers had no legal training and no legal or law enforcement background. And they were found by the Somalia inquiry to often taken improper matters into consideration when reviewing the charges that had been brought against their subordinates.

It’s right there in plain English. The commanding officer could simply dismiss any charge that had been brought against their subordinate.

When I grew up on the bases, for the most part it was the Revised Statutes of Canada, chapter C-34 Criminal Code of Canada, that was in effect.

This meant that commanding officers had the full authority to dismiss criminal code offences such as Sections 146, 148, 149, 150, 153, 155, 156, and 157. These are all sections that applied to children under the age of 16.

And yes, the Canadian Armed Forces were precluded from conducting service tribunals for Murder, Manslaughter, and Rape, rape was not a crime that could be committed against girls under the age of 16.

Rape was section 143. Sexual intercourse with girls under 16 was handled by sections 146(1) and 146 (2).

The custom in the justice system is to prosecute the offence as it would have been prosecuted at the date of the offence. The accused would have the right to enjoy the same protections that they would have enjoyed at the time of the alleged offence.

This means that as the 3-year-time-bar was never retroactively removed from the National Defence Act, it still applies to all Service Offences that occurred prior to 1998.

Don’t believe me?

This was the response from the Office of the Judge Advocate General in 2018 when I asked the CFNIS if they could talk to Daniel Edward Munro about who made the decision in 1998 to reduce the number of charges that had been brought against Captain McRae.

The Crown Prosecutor is in regard to the babysitter.
The legal advisor was in regard to Daniel Edward Munro, the commanding officer of Captain Father Angus McRae.

The three-year-time-bar posed an interesting dilemma for the CFNIS in 2011.

Angus McRae was still alive in March of 2011 when the Edmonton Police Service transferred my complaint to the CFNIS. Angus McRae didn’t die until May 20th, 2011. The CFNIS had the 1980 CFSIU paperwork, and the 1980 Courts Martial transcripts. So the CFNIS knew of the direct and irrefutable link between Captain Angus McRae and his accomplice, P.S., whom had been my babysitter in 1978 to 1980.

And while the CFNIS could charge the babysitter with sexual offences against a child under the age of 12 as the babysitter was over 14 when the majority of the crime occurred, the CFNIS could never charge Angus McRae for his sexual offences against children as the 3-year-time-bar prohibited it.

How many children were sexually abused on the bases prior to 1998 and can’t lay charges due to the 3-year-time-bar or the summary investigation flaw?

Who knows?

How many times pre-1998 did the CFSIU conduct sham dog ‘n’ pony show investigations to make the victim feel like something was being done when nothing could ever be done?

Who knows?

How many times post-1998 did the CFNIS conduct sham dog ‘n’ pony show investigations to make the victim feel like something was being done when the pre-1998 flaws meant that nothing could ever be done?

Who knows?

How many times has the chain of command interfered with CFNIS investigations to shield the Canadian Armed Forces and the office of the Minister of National Defence from civil actions related to child sexual abuse in the defence community at the hands of the employees of the Canadian Armed Forces?

Again, who the fuck knows.

I know who doesn’t want to know.

The media doesn’t want to know.

But the media sure wants to know how the donkeys feel about silly advertisements on TV.

Unknown's avatar

Author: bobbiebees

I started out life as a military dependant. Got to see the country from one side to the other, at a cost. Tattoos and peircings are a hobby of mine. I'm a 4th Class Power Engineer. And I love filing ATIP requests with the Federal Government.

Leave a comment