Cross of Valour for Const. Chris Garrett

[Lazarus]

On May 15th, 2004, Cobourgh Ont. Constable Chris Garrett was killed in the line of duty, his killer was convicted and sentenced in 2007. Apparently Garrett was nominated for the Governor General's Cross of Valour (posthumous), however one has to be nominated within two years of the event in order to be granted the award. In the interest of justice, the nomination was not put forth until after his killer had been tried and convicted, thus missing the deadline. There is a petition (only Canadian Citizens can sign) urging the Government of Canada and the Governor General to reconsider this policy and award the Cross of Valour to fallen Constable Chris Garrett.

This Hour Has 22 Minutes Appeal

Sign Petition Here

Edited January 10, 2008 by Lazarus

[capricorn]

Thank you for this Lazarus.

[FTA Lawyer]

Taken from the Cobourg Police website:

Heroes Medal - Changes to the Two-Year Limit

On December 7th, 2007, MP Rick Norlock held a Press Conference at our station advising that the Prime Minister was changing the two year rule on the Cross of Valour application. The rule will state that applications must be submitted two years after any court case or investigation is completed.

With this new rule put in place, this allows for Cst. Chris Garrett's nomination to now be reviewed by the Honours Committee.

Even though we have crossed a major hurdle towards getting Cst. Chris Garrett the Cross of Valour, there is still a ways to go.

Click Here to View and Sign the Online Petition

All of your continued support towards this cause is much appreciated and also thanks to our Prime Minister for acting quickly once everything got to him.

All articles involving the push for Constable Garrett's nomination are on the 221 Tribute section of the site at www.nesphotos.ca

Link

FTA

[g_bambino]

Apparently Garrett was nominated for the Governor General's Cross of Valour (posthumous)

Minor correction: it is the Queen's Cross of Valour, she created the award and the Governor General only presents them on her behalf.

...however one has to be nominated within two years of the event in order to be granted the award. In the interest of justice, the nomination was not put forth until after his killer had been tried and convicted, thus missing the deadline.

I think the bureaucracy at Rideau Hall bunged this one up first, and then the Governor General just made it worse. Not only did they enforce the rules of application in a draconian fashion, but then the GG first got herself publicly involved in a political matter by turning the responsibility of solving the matter over to the PMO, and then broke centuries old convention by making known some of the content of her discussions with her Prime Minister about the matter.

Rideau Hall needs, to use a metaphor, a good house cleaning.

Edited January 10, 2008 by g_bambino

[charter.rights]

Minor correction: it is the Queen's Cross of Valour, she created the award and the Governor General only presents them on her behalf.

I think the bureaucracy at Rideau Hall bunged this one up first, and then the Governor General just made it worse. Not only did they enforce the rules of application in a draconian fashion, but then the GG first got herself publicly involved in a political matter by turning the responsibility of solving the matter over to the PMO, and then broke centuries old convention by making known some of the content of her discussions with her Prime Minister about the matter.

Rideau Hall needs, to use a metaphor, a good house cleaning.

Getting a nomination, and getting the award are two different things. It is beyond the deadline and I don't have a problem with that.

I don't necessarily agree that a Queen's Cross of Valor is warranted in this case since the guy was doing his job and got ambushed by a coward. That doesn't mean he did something extraordinary "above and beyond the call of duty". He has already been memorialized with a park in his name. There isn't much more needed IMO.

[g_bambino]

It is beyond the deadline and I don't have a problem with that.

I would agree, but I think the change in the requirements being made are worthwhile.

I don't necessarily agree that a Queen's Cross of Valor is warranted in this case since the guy was doing his job and got ambushed by a coward. That doesn't mean he did something extraordinary "above and beyond the call of duty". He has already been memorialized with a park in his name. There isn't much more needed IMO.

It seems to me that the bravery part of this incident comes when the constable, after having, I believe, his throat cut, still fired on the perpetrator and brought him down, thereby preventing further attacks which his muderer had planned. I don't know, though, whether that's considered brave enough to merit a Cross of Valour or not.