(SGT?) Franck Gervais (split from Walts, posers)

[Eye In The Sky]

For those who have not seen the CBC newscast, or missed it, here is James Cudmore's presentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UR2QnVDC0o&feature=youtu.be

Thank you James.

I echo the thanks, very much so.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I personally would like to see tax dollars spent on a prosecution of this...this...human.  Just for the principle of it.  Regardless if he was sentence was discharged, etc. 

 

[George Wallace]

So!  Now they are playing the "Victim" card:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

We're being threatened: Wife of alleged fake soldier

BY KELLY ROCHE, OTTAWA SUN
FIRST POSTED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 11:06 AM MST | UPDATED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2014 11:39 AM MST

A West Quebec man accused of posing as a soldier during a Remembrance Day ceremony at the National War Memorial is being harassed and threatened after being outed.

"We're not going to respond to questions at the moment," said a woman at Franck Gervais' Cantley home. The woman confirmed she is Gervais' wife, but refused to give her name.

During a national broadcast last Tuesday, CBC reporter Diana Swain interviewed a man who identified himself as 'Sgt. Franck Gervais". The man wore the uniform of a senior non-commissioned officer in the Royal Canadian Regiment.

Warrant Officer Michael Womack was watching, noticed too many discrepancies with the uniform, and posted on social media saying something was fishy.

Gervais was outed.

His wife told the Sun she understands why they're the target of rage but said it's still difficult to handle, calling it a shame. She wouldn't say if he was authorized to wear the uniform.

Her husband was inside their small brown bungalow along a street just outside the West Quebec village. Toys were strewn about the backyard. A gold Ford SUV with a "Support the Troops" sticker in the driver's side was parked outdoors.

The woman said Gervais did not want to discuss the controversy, but suggested he might offer comments in a day or two.

Ottawa Police are now looking into the matter. "The man possibly made unlawful use of military uniform or certificates at the Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa," the service tweeted Thursday afternoon.

In a statement sent to the Sun, the Department of National Defence said it has “no indication” Gervais is a member of the military.
“Falsely impersonating a Canadian Armed Forces member is an issue to be taken seriously and is covered under section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada,” reads the statement. “Such activities are a disservice to the proud men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who earn the right to wear their uniforms through their hard work and the sacrifices they make for our country.”

Such was the sentiment from Ottawans polled Thursday.

“I thought it was terrible to do something like that,” said Patricia Mullins. “I lost a brother in the Navy, and I used to go with my mom up to the Memorial every year.”

She said she couldn't fathom a motive for impersonating a soldier.

“Fifteen minutes of fame; I don't know,” said Mullins. “People do strange things today.”

Jean Claude simply said “I'm offended.”

-- With files from Dani-Elle Dube

kelly.roche@sunmedia.ca

Twitter: @kellyroche6

More on LINK.

 

[ModlrMike]

We're being threatened: Wife of alleged fake soldier

I'm not condoning threats, but perhaps now he'll realize that there is a cost attached to everything.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I personally would like to see tax dollars spent on a prosecution of this...this...human.  Just for the principle of it.  Regardless if he was sentence was discharged, etc.

I'm good with tax money spent this way, too.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I'm not condoning threats, but perhaps now he'll realize that there is a cost attached to everything.

Some might call me old school or whatever, but I am one of the people who still believe there is a right time and place for someone to get a punch in the face if they've earned or asked for it.

:2c:

His wife told the Sun she understands why they're the target of rage but said it's still difficult to handle, calling it a shame.

She should have shut her mouth after saying the part in yellow.

What is 'a shame' is that this POS did this for so long before being discovered.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Just saw this one on FB.  It was only a matter of time...

 

[Tibbson]

Interesting turn of events.  He has obviously been documented as committing an act in contravention of the Criminal Code of Canada.  The police will do nothing unless someone makes a complaint.  Interesting.  If he robbed a bank, would he be just as free to assume he will not have the police interested in him, unless a complaint is laid?  Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?

Every criminal act requires a complaint by a person in position to make a complaint before any police department to investigate.  If someone breaks into your home and steals the family silver the police are not just going to show up to investigate because they heard a rumour. 

If someone robs a bank, the bank will call the police and make a complaint.  If they don't, and you complain as someone who sees the bad guys get away in a cloud of dust, the police will still ask the bank management what happened and if they refuse to talk (highly unlikely in this case) they will not take it any further.  However, there are MANY times bank and credit card companies are robbed or ripped off electronically and they refuse to involve the police.  They have their own internal security investigate and then they will decide if they want to take the matter to the police.  It makes the banks look bad every time they get ripped off and they worry that people will take their business elsewhere if they felt their assets were not secure with Bank X.

So, what about when the police find a body and nobody comes forward to report their loved one or friend missing?  The law holds that the deceased, by their mere status as the deceased, is the complainant.  The police will investigate to find out the cause of death.  If its suicide or accident then that is where it ends but if there is foul play suspected they take it further. 

In this case someone in a position to make a complaint needs to do so.  It could be argued that DND as an entity has an interest in lodging a complaint however that is a decision for the department to make.  CBC could be in a similar position as could any serviceperson with a connection to the incident (present at the service or perhaps tied into the leadership of the Unit(s) involved) may also be in a position to file a complaint. 

As it stood initially all there was was a great big group of people rightly saying "thats wrong and something should be done about it" but nobody had gone to OPD and lodged a formal complaint.  (Because the subject isn't a serving member and because the offence took place off base the MPs don't have a claim to jurisdiction)  Obviously that is what has eventually happened and the matter is now being investigated.  Given the results of similar court cases in the past I don't envision much happening other then public outrage and scorn towards the individual but perhaps thats enough. 

 

[Tibbson]

Wouldn't be the first time they shared videotape with "the authorities," which led to an investigation.
It'll be interesting to see how much effort "the system" (police and Crown) will be willing to spend on this.

Actually, having had to investigate a crime where a major national news organization had the evidence, in the form of video, I was surprised to see how much they are reluctant to cooperate.  They told me point blank, even though they had the only evidence, that I would need to get a warrant to view the footage.  In order to get a warrant I needed to prove an offence took place but I couldn't do that without viewing the footage.  Catch 22.  At the end of the day I was allowed to go to their studio, leave my cell phone and any electronic device outside the room and view the footage under the direct supervision of one of their corporate lawyers.  Thankfully this is a bit different in that the footage is already out there but don't think they make it easy to investigate.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

So, if I am reading right, the most this #@$# could get is a $5000 fine or max 6 months imprisonment?

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-457.html#h-286

 

[jollyjacktar]

Seeing as he's "supposedly" in the construction industry I would expect there are many co-workers who are genuine veterans and will take umbrage to Franck's fun.  I wouldn't be surprised if he suddenly feels as if he stuck his head inside a hornet's nest.  The system may in the end not take any meaningful action against him as it might not be seen to be in the public interest.  But no doubt, as claimed by his wife, others will. 

 

[caocao]

I couldn't agree more

 

[Strike]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/franck-gervais-remembrance-day-sergeant-now-receiving-threats-1.2833979

So, according to this article, he's been working construction with the same company for 12 years and told his coworkers he USED TO be in the military.  On that 'Copain' site (which is now down) his birth year was listed as 1982, which means he was 20 yrs old when he started working there.  Quite the high climber to reach the rank of Sgt, become a trained pathfinder and get all those deployments in such a short amount of time.  Wonder how he managed the CD.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Actually, having had to investigate a crime where a major national news organization had the evidence, in the form of video, I was surprised to see how much they are reluctant to cooperate.  They told me point blank, even though they had the only evidence, that I would need to get a warrant to view the footage.  In order to get a warrant I needed to prove an offence took place but I couldn't do that without viewing the footage.

That's likely the usual way it's done.  In the example I gave, it appears that they showed the video to the authorities without much legal resistance, raising the question among those far more cynical than myself that this may have happened because of the potential to make the military look bad.

 

[Jarnhamar]

You would think after that Dodd fellow was outted people would be a little more cognizant of the repercussions for something like this.

 

[Pieman]

Oh wait, hold up guys. Looks like he might have served after all. I can't wait for the t-shirts to start coming out.

 

[George Wallace]

His employer speaks out:

(Also note video of him and his wife at Remembrance Day Ceremony at top of article)


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Franck Gervais, Remembrance Day 'sergeant,' now receiving threats
Man who represented himself as a decorated soldier now under investigation by Ottawa police

CBC News Posted: Nov 13, 2014 12:57 PM ET Last Updated: Nov 13, 2014 7:14 PM ET


The wife of a man who claimed to be a decorated soldier during a Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa says she and her husband feel trapped and have been receiving death threats since CBC News wrote about him on Wednesday.

Speaking in French on the doorstep of her home in west Quebec Thursday, the woman told CBC News repeatedly that she couldn't comment on Franck Gervais's uniform or why he was wearing it at the National War Memorial in Ottawa on Tuesday.

Asked if a reporter could speak to Gervais directly, his wife said he wasn't speaking to CBC at the moment.

Ottawa police announced Thursday that they've launched an official investigation into Gervais, following "multiple complaints" from the public.

The Department of National Defence on Wednesday confirmed that Gervais, who represented himself as a decorated soldier on Tuesday, is not a member of the Canadian Forces.

'I'm shocked,' says Gervais's boss

Gervais has worked at Potvin Construction for 12 years, most recently building wooden staircases, said the company's general manager, Martin Savard, on Thursday. He said Gervais had told fellow employees he used to be in the military.

"He basically told us that he used to be a member of the military," Savard said.

Savard said he was shocked when he arrived at work Thursday morning and discovered through colleagues that Gervais was in the news.

"I'm shocked, definitely shocked," Savard said. "It's not something you expect, either from your own employee or from anybody. I mean, you have to pay respect with people who went to war and earned those medals. So definitely, Potvin Construction does not agree with that type of behaviour.

"We're not sure what our obligations are, so we're going to look into it and take the proper action."

Veterans complained

A number of veterans and current soldiers complained after seeing Gervais being interviewed on CBC's special live broadcast of the Remembrance Day ceremony.

Section 419 of the Criminal Code of Canada makes it illegal to falsely impersonate a member of the Canadian Forces by wearing a uniform and displaying badges, medals, ribbons, chevrons and other decorations they did not earn in service performed in war.

"Such activities are a disservice to the proud men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, who earn the right to wear their uniforms through their hard work and the sacrifices they make for our country," a spokesperson for the Defence Department said in a statement Wednesday.

No charges have been laid against Gervais.

Gervais was interviewed while wearing an army dress uniform with sergeant's chevrons and the cap badge of the Royal Canadian Regiment. He was sporting the maroon beret reserved for soldiers who are active-duty paratroopers, as well as an active paratrooper's jump wings on his chest.

One piece of insignia Gervais wore that immediately caught the eye of many soldiers was his Patrol Pathfinder badge. That is only worn by paratroopers who pass a gruelling course intended to recreate the experience of being dropped behind enemy lines — a course with a failure rate of up to 90 per cent.

But what has most irked soldiers and veterans were his five medals, particularly the Medal of Bravery, one of the highest decorations in the Canadian Forces, which has been awarded to a select few soldiers in recent years for bravery in hazardous circumstances.

A Facebook post, which has since been taken down, showed Gervais wearing a similar uniform at his wedding earlier this year.

More on LINK.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Interesting turn of events.  He has obviously been documented as committing an act in contravention of the Criminal Code of Canada.  The police will do nothing unless someone makes a complaint.  Interesting.  If he robbed a bank, would he be just as free to assume he will not have the police interested in him, unless a complaint is laid?  Where is the line drawn as to the requirement of someone to 'file a complaint' and one where one is not needed?

Everyone is looking at this as being minor contravention of the Criminal Code. I look at it as a security failure. Prior to Tuesday we had a terrorist attack in Ottawa that left two people dead and a attack on Parliament and resulted in the lockdown of our nations capital.

So, for Remembrance Day we had an increased security presence just not in Ottawa, but across Canada. At the same the authorities were blabbing about being on the outlook for anything unusual, but this turkey was able to walk around with no problem and even get interviewed on national TV!! And the thing is that there were a couple of things (beard and collar dogs in wrong position) that should have set-off some warning signals.

Next time it might not be a walt walking around in the crowd, but someone who may be planning on blowing the place up. And remember, you can go into practically any army surplus store in this country and buy a CF uniform.

My 2 cents.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

You'd be surprised how many people have beards these days.

 

[Tibbson]

Everyone is looking at this as being minor contravention of the Criminal Code. I look at it as a security failure. Prior to Tuesday we had a terrorist attack in Ottawa that left two people dead and a attack on Parliament and resulted in the lockdown of our nations capital.

So, for Remembrance Day we had an increased security presence just not in Ottawa, but across Canada. At the same the authorities were blabbing about being on the outlook for anything unusual, but this turkey was able to walk around with no problem and even get interviewed on national TV!! And the thing is that there were a couple of things (beard and collar dogs in wrong position) that should have set-off some warning signals.

Next time it might not be a walt walking around in the crowd, but someone who may be planning on blowing the place up. And remember, you can go into practically any army surplus store in this country and buy a CF uniform.

My 2 cents.

You do have a point however if it is contraventions of dress regs that indicate potential terrorists then I personally observed 2 officers improperly dressed with the wrong rank insignia (Capts wearing pips rather than the authorized stripes).  We also heard in an earlier post to this thread about someone who saw a Cpl improperly dressed with his top shirt button undone because he was uncomfortable with it done up.  As far as beards go, look no further than Cpl Cirillo and you will quickly conclude that many people in uniform wear some degree of facial hair.  As supervisors we can address these issues with our subordinates but we can hardly spend our time at public gatherings questioning the dress standards, facial hair standards or professional integrity of everyone we cross paths with. 

Uniforms are commonly available and are in no way controlled, not to mention insignia, including medals, are available all over the internet.  I know of no way we can control them or stop those who want to wear them from doing so in public other than through the threat of prosecution if detected.  Most of these threats are why projects are underway to examine various forms of biometrics and access control in order to protect our defence establishments. 

Unfortunately though, when it comes to the matter at hand the courts have not acted with the same degree of outrage that we all feel.  Funny, but I get the feeling that if someone was being tried in court for impersonating a Judge or a Lawyer they would certainly get more of a sentence then someone would for impersonating a soldier.