Canada’s top general denies telling parents that veteran son’s medals wrongly issued after his suicide
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld A photo of Cpl. Stuart Langridge along with his beret and medals at a news conference on Parliament Hill, Oct. 28, 2010.
Canada’s top general has personally written to the parents of a dead soldier to tell them their loved one’s suicide wasn’t the result of his military service and to suggest that the medals issued in the aftermath of the death weren’t deserved.
Shaun and Sheila Fynes of Victoria, B.C., said they were stunned when they received the letter on Monday from Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Tom Lawson.
Lawson told the couple that a military board of inquiry concluded that the suicide of their son, Cpl. Stuart Langridge, in the barracks at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton wasn’t related to his service. In addition, because of that determination, Lawson raised the issue in the June 22 letter about whether medals should have been awarded to the parents. The couple received Memorial Crosses and the Sacrifice Medal.
“Those medals were the only tiny bit of honour we had left from the military,” explained Sheila Fynes in an interview Tuesday. “Now they’ve said Stuart wasn’t worthy and we shouldn’t have the medals.”
After declining an earlier interview request, Gen. Tom Lawson phoned the Citizen after Fynes’s comments were published. He said it was never his intention to suggest that the medals would be taken back and he blamed the Citizen for deliberately misinterpreting his letter to the Fynes family.
“I’m really disappointed with the characterization in there and the conjecture that we would be taking these medals back,” he said late Tuesday. “These are not in any way being considered.
“Never, at any time, has anyone in the Department considered revoking the awards, nor removing Cpl. Langridge’s name from the Book of Remembrance,” Lawson added in an email. “To do so would be against our well established policies, and would be quite frankly dishonourable.”
But Sheila Fynes said when she read the letter, her interpretation was that Lawson was clearly pointing out that the family did not deserve the medals and that the awards needed to be returned.
“He’s clearly saying these medals mean diddly squat,” she said. “What’s next? Are they going to remove Stuart’s name from the Book of Remembrance?”
Shaun Fynes also said he believed that was the message Lawson was sending.
“It is a truly disgusting and heartless letter,” he said.
Langridge, a veteran of Bosnia and Afghanistan, was suffering from symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder when he killed himself in 2008. The death of the 28-year-old set off a sequence of bungling; paperwork naming Shaun as the executor of the estate was eventually found behind a filing cabinet at CFB Edmonton, but in the meantime the military allowed another person to assume that role.
Documents clearly naming Sheila and Shaun as primary and secondary next of kin were ignored by the Forces.
Military police withheld Langridge’s suicide note from his family for almost 15 months. The letter had been specifically addressed to them.
An officer assigned to help Sheila and Shaun acknowledged in an email the family had been “deceived, misled, and intentionally marginalized (at) various points” by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces.
In March 2015, the Military Police Complaints Commission released a scathing report outlining details of the bungled military police investigation into Langridge’s death. Defence Minister Jason Kenney said the report clearly showed “wrongdoing and incompetence” by military police.
In his letter to the couple, Lawson pointed to the conclusion from the military’s board of inquiry, or BOI, that Langridge’s death “was not attributed to military service.”
He added: “This would normally have precluded his eligibility for the Sacrifice medal (sic) and other benefits. As you know, the Sacrifice Medal and Memorial Crosses were presented almost one year before the BOI was approved by Gen. Natynczyk. I regret that these actions lead you to believe that the CAF had ascertained and recognized your son’s death was attributed to military service.
“In closing, let me again express my sincere condolences and assure you that your son’s service in the CAF was noble and important.”
Lawson said he tried to contact the Fynes Tuesday night to convey his views about the medals. He could not get through to the couple.
Sources inside National Defence headquarters noted it was highly unusual that Lawson responded directly to the couple instead of writing to their Ottawa lawyer.
Sheila Fynes, however, believes that was a deliberate move on Lawson’s part.
“It was about sticking in the knife even further to tell us about the medals,” she explained. “It’s payback. We created a lot of problems for the military because we wouldn’t go away and our case was high profile in the media.”
Lawson told the Citizen it is his understanding that he responded to the couple’s lawyer. The letter, however, is addressed to the Fynes.
Shaun and Sheila Fynes of Victoria, B.C., said they were stunned when they received the letter on Monday from Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Tom Lawson.
family photoStuart Langridge takes a break while deployed in Afghanistan.
“Those medals were the only tiny bit of honour we had left from the military,” explained Sheila Fynes in an interview Tuesday. “Now they’ve said Stuart wasn’t worthy and we shouldn’t have the medals.”
“I’m really disappointed with the characterization in there and the conjecture that we would be taking these medals back,” he said late Tuesday. “These are not in any way being considered.
“Never, at any time, has anyone in the Department considered revoking the awards, nor removing Cpl. Langridge’s name from the Book of Remembrance,” Lawson added in an email. “To do so would be against our well established policies, and would be quite frankly dishonourable.”
But Sheila Fynes said when she read the letter, her interpretation was that Lawson was clearly pointing out that the family did not deserve the medals and that the awards needed to be returned.
“He’s clearly saying these medals mean diddly squat,” she said. “What’s next? Are they going to remove Stuart’s name from the Book of Remembrance?”
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian WyldShaun and Sheila Fynes, parents of Cpl. Stuart Langridge.
“It is a truly disgusting and heartless letter,” he said.
Langridge, a veteran of Bosnia and Afghanistan, was suffering from symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder when he killed himself in 2008. The death of the 28-year-old set off a sequence of bungling; paperwork naming Shaun as the executor of the estate was eventually found behind a filing cabinet at CFB Edmonton, but in the meantime the military allowed another person to assume that role.
Documents clearly naming Sheila and Shaun as primary and secondary next of kin were ignored by the Forces.
Military police withheld Langridge’s suicide note from his family for almost 15 months. The letter had been specifically addressed to them.
An officer assigned to help Sheila and Shaun acknowledged in an email the family had been “deceived, misled, and intentionally marginalized (at) various points” by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces.
The Canadian Forces had also sent Sheila a legal letter forbidding her from contacting the military as she tried to sort out her son’s estate.
In March 2015, the Military Police Complaints Commission released a scathing report outlining details of the bungled military police investigation into Langridge’s death. Defence Minister Jason Kenney said the report clearly showed “wrongdoing and incompetence” by military police.
In his letter to the couple, Lawson pointed to the conclusion from the military’s board of inquiry, or BOI, that Langridge’s death “was not attributed to military service.”
He added: “This would normally have precluded his eligibility for the Sacrifice medal (sic) and other benefits. As you know, the Sacrifice Medal and Memorial Crosses were presented almost one year before the BOI was approved by Gen. Natynczyk. I regret that these actions lead you to believe that the CAF had ascertained and recognized your son’s death was attributed to military service.
“In closing, let me again express my sincere condolences and assure you that your son’s service in the CAF was noble and important.”
The Canadian Forces had also sent Sheila a legal letter forbidding her from contacting the military as she tried to sort out her son’s estate.In March 2015, the Military Police Complaints Commission released a scathing report outlining details of the bungled military police investigation into Langridge’s death. Defence Minister Jason Kenney said the report clearly showed “wrongdoing and incompetence” by military police.
In his letter to the couple, Lawson pointed to the conclusion from the military’s board of inquiry, or BOI, that Langridge’s death “was not attributed to military service.”
He added: “This would normally have precluded his eligibility for the Sacrifice medal (sic) and other benefits. As you know, the Sacrifice Medal and Memorial Crosses were presented almost one year before the BOI was approved by Gen. Natynczyk. I regret that these actions lead you to believe that the CAF had ascertained and recognized your son’s death was attributed to military service.
“In closing, let me again express my sincere condolences and assure you that your son’s service in the CAF was noble and important.”
In March 2015, the Military Police Complaints Commission released a scathing report outlining details of the bungled military police investigation into Langridge’s death. Defence Minister Jason Kenney said the report clearly showed “wrongdoing and incompetence” by military police.
In his letter to the couple, Lawson pointed to the conclusion from the military’s board of inquiry, or BOI, that Langridge’s death “was not attributed to military service.”
He added: “This would normally have precluded his eligibility for the Sacrifice medal (sic) and other benefits. As you know, the Sacrifice Medal and Memorial Crosses were presented almost one year before the BOI was approved by Gen. Natynczyk. I regret that these actions lead you to believe that the CAF had ascertained and recognized your son’s death was attributed to military service.
“In closing, let me again express my sincere condolences and assure you that your son’s service in the CAF was noble and important.”
Lawson said he tried to contact the Fynes Tuesday night to convey his views about the medals. He could not get through to the couple.
Sources inside National Defence headquarters noted it was highly unusual that Lawson responded directly to the couple instead of writing to their Ottawa lawyer.
Sheila Fynes, however, believes that was a deliberate move on Lawson’s part.
“It was about sticking in the knife even further to tell us about the medals,” she explained. “It’s payback. We created a lot of problems for the military because we wouldn’t go away and our case was high profile in the media.”
Lawson told the Citizen it is his understanding that he responded to the couple’s lawyer. The letter, however, is addressed to the Fynes.
