Midterm 2 Flashcards
What are the 4 levels of policing ?
- Federal (RCI)
- Provincial (3 provinces have their own police force : Ontario, Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador)
- Municipal (Ottawa police)
⅔ of all police - First Nations police
What are the roles of police
- Fighting crime
- Crime prevention (reduce it, educate about it)
- Law enforcement (¼ of officers duties)
- Order maintenance (Majority of officers time) / preventing disturbances.
- Public order policing. Maintaining rights of protestors, government and society (for big events)
- Emergency response (natural disaster etc)
- Assistance to victims : Providing resources, protection, attending courts
What are the 2 methods of calling a suspect to court for police and what are the consequences to forgoing attendance ?
Appears notice : a document requiring individual to appear at court on a certain time in a certain place to respond to criminal charges
- Given before they have been charged
Summons : Official notice requiring individual to appear in court at a specific time / location to respond to criminal charges
- After they’ve been charged
Consequences of absence: Judge can issue a warrant for arrest and can be charged for failure to appear in court
What is discretion and how is it used ?
Def : the ability of officers to make decisions based on their own judgment
Applications :
- Whether or not to charge
- Whether or not to use lethal force
- If a situation is dangerous
- Whether or not to arrest someone
Doctrine of plain sight
Why are people with mental health issues disproportionately met with lethal force ?
- Responses are based on the assumption that the individual is rational (Command and demand approach)
- Police are rather quick to react rather than to de-escalate
- Preconceived notions about people with mental illness
- Lack of training
Describe the evolution of criminal law
- King Henry II established British common law (judges traveled to make decisions and reconvene and decide on the best way to manage on the future)
- Based on stare decisis = doctrine of presidence : Bound by prior decisions and decisions of other court.
- Ensures that decisions are more uniform and predictable. Reduces bias (ideally)
- Rule of law : No one is above the law (status is irrelevant). Based upon the doctrine of magna carta
Rape laws Pre-1983 : What was required to constitute a rape ?
- Victim had to be female
- Accused had to be male
- The complainant and the accused could not be married to each other
- Sexual intercourse must have occured
- Doctrine of recent complaint (Report at the first reasonable opportunity - would otherwise impact her credibility)
- Victims sexual history could be brought up in court
- Implied consent could be accepted as defense
- Subjective consent (drinking, body language, revealing clothing, etc.)
- Extreme intoxication could be used as a defence
After B-C127 (1983), how was the definition of rape changed and what is stealthing
- It was abolished and replaced with sexual assault (reflect the violent nature + broaden offense)
Stealthing : - Removing a condom during sex without consent is sexual assault
- No longer meets legal grounds for consentual sex (2022)
Possible sex offender registry (SOR) for all levels, time on SOR can vary
Describe sexual assault level 1
- Involves minor physical injuries or no injuries to the victim
- Hybrid offense (summary or indictable treatment)
- Max sentence : 18 months in jail (if treated as a summary offense)
- Max sentence : 10 years in jail (if treated as indictable)
Describe sexual assault level 2
Involves the use of weapon, bodily harm or threats of violence
Max sentence : 14 years in jail
Describe sexual assault level 3 (aggravated assault)
Involves wounding, disfiguring or endangering the life of the victim
Max sentence : Life
Requirements for SA after B-C127
- Sex of accused and complainant was revised (all genders and sexes can be either)
- Spousal immunity terminated
- Sexual intercourse no longer required
- No statute of limitations
- Rape shield law introduced (no longer allowed to introduce victim’s sexual history as evidence)
- Distinctions between implied and actual consent were made
- Extreme intoxication is no longer accepted
Elements necessary for a crime - Mens rea (guilty mind) is the result of what?
Negligence : Failing to take steps that a reasonable person would take
- Crime of commission (leaving kids in car)
- Crime of omission (Not giving child with medicine when injured)
Recklessness : acting in a way they know is reckless and that any reasonable person would not take
Willful blindness : Person is aware that a crime is being committed but chooses to ignore the facts
Elements necessary for a crime - Actus reus (the guilty act) is the result of what?
Crimes of commission
- Murder
Crimes of ommission (failure to act)
- Tax fraud
What is an alibi ? Can they legally be fabricated ?
The accused claims there is evidence as to why they could NOT have committed the crime
Must be…
- Adequate : must contain details that can be crosschecked
- Timely : Must be stated well before the trial to ensure it’s accuracy
A fabricated alibi can be used against the defendant when determining the verdict
What is the lowest and highest minimum age of criminal responsibility? What is it in Canada?
Minimum age of criminal responsibility
- In Canada, 12 yrs old.
- Lowest age for criminal responsibility - Australia and England (10 yrs)
- Highest age for criminal defense - Argentina (16 yrs)
What is an excuse defense ?
A crime was committed but the conduct can be excused because the defendant lacked the mens rea
- Not developed enough mentally
- Actus non nisi mens sit rea (An act does not make a person guilty unless there is a guilty mind)
Describe the excuse defense NCRMD
As a result of a mental disorder an individual is incapable of understanding their actions or of knowing the act was wrong
- Person can be deemed NCRMD even if their actions are planned and deliberate
- They do not get a criminal record
- They get sent to a mental health hospital and the focus is on rehabilitation
- INDETERMEDIATE SENTENCE (don’t know if or when)
- Released when they no longer pose a threat to society
- A review board has jurisdiction over the individuals
Why is NCRMD controversial?
- May not be convinced by doctor diagnosis
- Fear there of malingering (people faking mental illness)
- Illness not visible to jury
- Know people with mental illness who wouldn’t commit the act
- Fear of mental health slip
NCRMD have a lower rate of re-offending (recidivism) because the crime was committed as the result of psych disorder that can be treated
Describe the excuse defense of automatism
The defendant commits an offense due to impaired conciousness in which they lost voluntary contril over their body
- Must be very strong evidence (sleepwalking, night terrors, severe medical condition)
- Voluntary intoxication is not a defense
Involuntary intoxication is
Self induced extreme intoxication
- Must be from mind altering drugs
- Supreme court recognises that alcohol alone will almost never lead to this extreme intoxication
Describe the excuse defense “mistake of law”
The defendant claims they were unaware of the law and therefore unaware that they’d committed a crime
- Typically not applicable (ignorance of the law is no excuse)
- Smoking in a new area where smoking is illegal when it was legal in his town
Describe the excuse defense of “mistake of fact”
Defendant states that they were aware of the law, but they honestly believed they were not breaking it
- Taking sunglasses you genuinely believed were yours (theft but not intentional)
Describe the youth criminal justice act
- Youth in Canada : 12-17
Determines how to respond to youth
First degree murder : - Max for youth : 10 years (6 years in custody and 4 yrs in the community)
- 25 yrs for adult
Second degree youth : 7 yrs (4 in custody and 3 in the community) - After 18 yrs old : held to full criminal responsibility
- Youth who commit a serious and violent offense can be sentenced as an adult if 14 or older
What is a justification defense
The accused admits to comiting an offense but argues that the act was justified
Describe the justification defense of consent
The accused contends that the victim was a willing party in the offense (agreement to fight, full contact sports)
- Age of consent for sexual activity : 16 in Canada
- Close in age exceptions : for ages 14-15 , can consent if individual is less than 5 years older than them.
- For ages 12-13, can consent if individual is 2 years older or more.
- If in context where age is reasonably assumed, person would not get convicted
Describe the justification defense of duress
Accused claims that they involuntarily commited an offense because they (or family / friends) were being threatened with present, or future harm
- Ex : “Rob this bank, or I’ll shoot you”
- Ex : Forcing someone to help dispose of a body
Describe the justification of necessity
Accused claims they voluntarily comitted an offense to prevent a greater harm from happening
- Does not apply if killing to canibalise to not die of hunger
- Ex : Speeding because wife in labour
Describe the justification defense of self defense
Accused argues that they inflicted harm on another person to protect themselves or others
- Threat must be imminent
- Only reasonable force is used
What is battered woman syndrome and what case inspired it?
R. v. Lavallee - Angelique Lavallee was being abused by her partner, she hid in the closet and he hit her, he gave her a shotgun and told her to use it. She shot him while he was walking away.
- Battered woman syndrome defense (falls under self defense) is an act of violence that arises in a situation of domestic abuse
- Must be ongoing
Describe the justification defense of entrapment
When the police use leading or manipulative techniques to induce an individual into carrying out an offense
- Providing opportunity is not entrapment
- Inducing an individual to commit an offense they would not have otherwise is entrapment
Describe the justification of provocation
The accused claims they were provoked into a violent reaction (adultry, insults, racism, etc.)
- Applied until 2015
- Changes : the provoking act must be an indictable offense
- Can only apply if the crime of second degree - murder is what was provoked
- Partial defense : the charge of second degree murder is reduced to manslaughter
What is police interrogation and what are it’s purposes
When police bring in an individual, for questioning
- Main : To get a confession from the suspect
Other :
- To provide police with incriminating statements
- Discover stolen property / victims
- To identify accomplices
- To indicate suspects involvement in other cases
Explain legal representation during interrogations
- Do not have the right to have a lawyer present during
- Legal consult beforehand allowed.
- After legal consult, interrogation begins
- Lawyers allowed to be present if minor is being interrogated
What are some rights of the suspect and restrictions of the interrogator ?
- Suspect can choose to remain silent (police can continue to question them)
- Lies during interrogation are obstruction of justice
- Police are allowed to lie during interrogation
- Cannot fabricate evidence
- Accused does not have to provide a DNA sample (need warrant or consent)
- Polygraph is not admissible in court (must be voluntary)
- Police not required to record interrogations in Canada
List the interrogation strategies
- Conditioning strategy
- De-emphasizing strategy
- Persuasion strategy
Describe the conditioning strategy
Interrogator encourages the suspect to relax and trust the interrogator
- (voice, body language, making personal connections, offering food, informal small talk, telling them you’re on the same team)
Describe the de-emphasizing strategy
Encourages the suspect to think about others
- (how this situation will impact others, having empathy for others). Goal is to make the suspect feel empathy
Describe the persuasion strategy
To encourage the suspect to talk so that their side can be heard
What are the different policing eras and when did they happen?
Pre modern (before 1820)
Political era (1820-1940)
Professional/ traditional era (1940 - 1980)
Community policing era (1980 to present)
Describe the pre-modern era (before 1820)
- Established by Indigenous people as a response to wrongdoing
- Disputes resolved by tribal leaders
- Varies according to region (different concepts of reconciliation and healing)
- Often used the restorative approach
- Shame and ostracism as a preventative measure
- Some harsher punishment (death sentence and banishment)
Describe the political era (1820-1940)
- Politicians were central in police services
- Mayors and council members often directed chief of police according to their will
- If chief didn’t comply, they could be replaced
- Officers wouldn’t stay long in the field (low morale)
- Based on French and English municipal services
- Inconsistent and mostly only in small towns
- Municipal police officers were poorly trained, overworked and lacked benefits, responded to minor offenses
- Provincial police meant to ensure sovereignty
Describe the professional era (1940-1980)
- Gradually replaced political
- Objective, reliant on science, and free from political interference
- Used new tech (communications)
- Standardization (fixed hours, equipment, detention practices) and training makes service consistent. Less individual variation
- Some officers were represented by police unions
Describe the community policing era (1980-present)
- Police advisory boards were established
- Focus on citizen involvement, problem solving approach (preventing crime), decentralization (decision making closer to the front lines, patrols done on foot/bike)
- Not favored by most officers (prefer traditional approach)
- Best in healthy neighborhoods vs. unhealthy (have low trust in police)
- Challenges : changes in crime due to tech, policing becoming more expensive
What is a wrongful conviction and what is the #1 reason people are wrongfully convicted of crimes
1 reason : eye witness testimony
Innocent people convicted of commiting crimes
