L3 criminology + crime

Question 1

what is the consensus theory?

Answer 1

criminal laws represent a consensus within a society about what acts should be prohibited

Question 2

disagreement re: consensus theory

+ modification

Answer 2

disagree: some ppl think certain things should be illegal and legal. diff opinions.
- also this theory suggests that law is fair for everyone which may not be true.

mod: laws are a codification of values shared by most members of society

Question 3

conflict perspective

Answer 3

• reject idea that laws reflect consensus in society
• class conflict theorists see law as tool used by ruling class to maintain privilege by keeping “common people” under control. law isn’t made equal.
• belief that laws are result of political process, which involves conflict between different interest groups.

Question 4

what are consensus crimes

Answer 4

widespread agreement that these are inherently wrong, harmful, and mandate severe response

Question 5

what are conflict crimes?

Answer 5

illegal acts, but there is vast disagreement about whether they should be illegal, how serious they are, and how we should respond

Question 6

incarceration rates

• 2 highest?
• where is canada?

Answer 6

US, Russia

canada - middle/low end

Question 7

incarceration rates per 100,000 ppl

• highest
• what factors contribute?

Answer 7

US is highest, + el salvador, turkmenistan, cuba, maldives, thailand, russia

factors:

• commitment to political values
• religious factors
• money (prison for profit)
• hypercriminalization

Question 8

categories of offences in canada (3)

Answer 8

indictable offences

• summary offences
• hybrid offenses

Question 9

what are idictable offences?

Answer 9

serious offences,
max penalty - life (25 years) in prison
- no expiry on prosectution - no statute of limitations

ex: assault causing bodily harm, homicide

Question 10

what are summary offences

Answer 10

less serious

• max sentence: 6 months in jail, $5,000 fine or both.
• prosecuted within 6 months

ex: property offence, stealing

Question 11

what are hybrid offences

Answer 11

certain offences can be tried as either indictable or summary.
- decided by crown prosecuter.

Question 12

correctional services in canada

Answer 12

federal govt/prison: if sentence is 2+ years

provincial/territorial govt.

• prison : if 2 years, less a day.
• community sentences : fines, community service, probation
• young offenders
• awaiting trial : remand. can be transferred to federal system after trial.

Question 13

canadian justice service costs

Answer 13

• hard to get new stats.

- corrections is 32% of budget. expensive “lesson”

Question 14

trend in federal custody, procinvial custody, and remand over time

Answer 14

fed: increased around 2014, decreasing again.
remand: just below fed, increasing atm at fed decreases (legally innocent)
prov: lower than both fed + remand. declining in recent years

Question 15

AB: incarceration of sentenced vs unsentenced.

Answer 15

sentenced : 28%
unsentenced (in remand, awaiting trial) : 72%

• remand reserved for those dangerous to society + those who are a flight risk.
• but often non-violent, non-dangerous

-Ab has highest remand in country

Question 16

people in court:

Answer 16

judge: public official appointed to decide (unless trial by jury - accused can decide) cases in court of law
jury: members of public who hear the case and decide if accused is guilty
accused: person charged with offence
defense: lawyer who represents accused. ensures the guarantee of rights as canadian citizen are protected.

prosecutor/crown: gov’t lawyers ho prosecute criminal cases

Question 17

true crimes vs regulatory offences

Answer 17

tc: engage in conduct that is not only prohibited but also constitutes a serious breach of community values. perceived as inherently wrong + deserving of punishment
ro: regulate inherently legitimate activities connected with trade, commerce, industry or every day living. carry minor penalty is convicted

Question 18

defenses to criminal charge

• conviction happens when?
• mens rea

Answer 18

defense: plead guilty (argue for less harsh punishment or why one shouldnt be punished, treat ppl differently than others)
- conviction of “true crime” should not occur unless accused person is considered blameworthy

• crown must prove mens rea
• no mens rea = mistake of fact
• if there is mens rea, but no reasonable alternative choice

Question 19

what is mistake of fact

Answer 19

• not ignorance of law (expect overall understanding of right/wrong)
• rather, ignorance of illegality: mistake or ignorance is negates element of crime.
  = honest mistake, or if crown can’t prove mens rea.

Question 20

intoxication as defense

Answer 20

• complex.
• can result in disinhibition that renders accused less able to control their conduct.
• only for offences that required complex mens rea - specific intent. not valid for basic intent offences, most intoxicated have basic knowledge

Question 21

offenses with specific intent

Answer 21

mens rea differs for crime committed.
- specific intent = complex mens rea, intentional complex way of thinking. if intoxicated, shouldn’t be able to form the level of intent in your mind.

• depends also if purposefully intoxicated or accidentally intoxicated

Question 22

necessity as defense

Answer 22

• accused person commits lesser evil of crim to avoid occurrence of greater evil
• when the only way to avoid disaster is to break the law.

Question 23

duress as defense

Answer 23

• accused was forced to commit a crime as consequence of threat of death, bodily harm by another.
• threat must be serious.
• • accused believes that it will be carried out
• • court satisfied, that reasonable person under same situation would act the same way

Question 24

provocation as defense

- required elements

Answer 24

• partial defense to a charge of murder. will reduce to manslaughter.
• accused responded to a wrongful act or insult that was of such nature that an ordinary person would have been likely to lose the power of self control
• that accused acted “on the sudden and before there was a time for their passion to cool”
• compassionate response to human frailty

Question 25

self-defense as defence in court

Answer 25

a peson may use a reasonable amount fo force in self defense if they reasonably believe that they or another individual are the target of actual force, or that threat is made against them.

• • was actio reasonable within situation? (threat? imminent? other way to respond? physical capabilities of parties? proportionality of force?)
• in case or property, must be reasonable

Question 26

Lavalle Case + Battered Woman sydrome

Answer 26

• women who are assaulted by their partners may suffer Battered woman’s syndrome + are judged against “reasonable women who face ongoing abuse”
  lavalle: shot husband as final desparate act , acquitted.

Question 27

Mallot + Battered woman Syndrome.

- pieces of evidence presented to assist jury in understanding mens rea (4)

Answer 27

1. why an abused woman might remain in abusive relationship
2. nature and extent of violence that might exist in an abusive relationship
3. ability to perceive when her partner was dangerous
4. whether she reasonably believed that she couldn’t otherwise protect herself

Question 28

list of defenses

Answer 28

mental disorder - not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder
general: mistake of fact; necessity, duress; provocation; self-defense; intoxication as defense **