Midterm Exam #1 Flashcards
3 Major Agencies of Canadian CJS
- The Police: Enforcement and crime prevention
- The Courts: Adjunction and legal proceedings
- The Correctional System: Punishment and rehabilitation
CJS
Criminal Justice System
What is Crime?
Varied approaches exist due to the complexities of crime & societal norms
The 3 Primary Types of Definitions of Crime
- Legal Definitions
- Social Definitions
- Constructionist Definitions
Legal Definitions
2 commonly used legal definitions of crime
1. Crime occurs when a law is broken
2. A crime only takes place when a person has been deemed guilty of a crime and punished accordingly
Challenges with Legal Definitions
Not every individual violates the law is caught and punished
Many crimes are unprosecuted even if identified by authorities
Social Definitions
Defines crime as violation of social norms
Views crime as causing social injury or harm, it would be controlled
Constructionist Definitions
Some sociologists contest the existence and clarity of norms
Question the utility of approaches that neglect the reality that norms vary across time and place
Crime is the result of social interaction; negotiated process among the police and Crown prosecutors
A Negotiated Process
Criminal behavior isn’t always self-evident as one might expect
Key Observations (Remain and Leighton Criminologists):
Most Americans have admitted to engaging in crime, but there exists class and racial bias in the administration of crime
Only certain individuals are arrested/prosecuted, revealing the negotiated aspects of identifying crime
For example, if a corporate product leads to someone’s death, most of the time nobody’s held accountable - for some reason, define crime as something between individuals - when it comes to corporations, it gets muddied, and can pretty much only fine them
The 3 Main Objectives of Canadian criminal justice system
- Control Crime - maintain a level of crime
- Prevent Crime - is it possible to completely prevent crime? Need more pain to eliminate want to engage in crime
- Maintain Justice - Expected to deliver fair outcomes
What is Criminal Justice
An abstract and contentious concept
Many Canadians adhere to justice model of criminal justice
Justice Model of Criminal Justice
- Guilt, innocence, and the sentence should be administered fairly with available evidence
- Punishment should fit the crime
- Like cases should be treated alike and different cases differently - rather subjective
Core Values (Justice Model)
- Fair administration of guilt, innocence and sentencing
- Proportionate punishment for the crime
- Equal treatment of similar cases; differing treatment for dissimilar cases
Home Invasion vs Break and Enter
Home invasion - doesn’t matter if people are home
Break and enter - when nobody is home and theft occurs
2 Types of Law
Public law/criminal law - rules for individuals to abide by in society
Private law - relationships between individual actors (legal contracts)
OJ Simpson dealt with both
Criminal Code of Canada
Criminal law isn’t a static - its constantly changing (prostitution laws)
Is over 1,100 pages- has to be reviewed at least twice a year
Problems regarding it - McCann (2010) case might’ve resulted in mistrial given the judge used a provision that had been struck down
There are still laws restricting witchcraft, water skiing after dark and attending an immoral theatrical performance
Travis Vader gets life sentence for murdering an elderly couple - judge ended up lessening the charge, reduced sentence to manslaughter instead of second degree murder
Prostitution Laws
Were struck down in 2013 - selling sex isn’t illegal - however new legislation allows police to investigate advertising of sexual services, trafficking and purchasing of sexual services
Classifying Crime
2 general categories used to differentiate seriousness of crime
Mala prohibita: Behavior that’s prohibited by law
Mala in se: Behavior that’s immoral/evil
Criminal code differentiates between seriousness of crime specifically with reference to summary offences (misdemeanours) and indictable offences (felonies)
Who has the ability to determine what the charges should be?
The crown prosecutor
Police officers role is to investigate and get as much evidence
Summary Offences
Jail sentence of up to 2 years or 5,000$ fine
Indictable Offences
Can result in life imprisonment
Hybrid Offences/Dual Offences
Cases where crown prosecutor decides whether the case should be treated as a summary/indictable offence (sexual offences, break and entering)
Levels of Police
3 levels of police agencies in Canada: Municipal, provincial and federal
Most police work at municipal level
in 2015 - 68,700 police officers in Canada
The Courts
Canadian courts are based on English common-law
Include 2 parties working in adversarial system heard before an impartial judge - “winner takes all” - 1 person wins and 1 loses
Each may be represented by their own lawyer
4 Levels of Courts in Canada
- The Supreme Court of Canada - Final say
- The Court of Appeal - Appeals from Superior and Provincial courts
- Superior Court - Dealing with serious crimes
- Provincial Court - Busiest court dealing with less serious offences - characterized as dispensing “assembly-line justice”
The Adversarial System
Both Parties: Prosecutor and defendant hope to win any given court cases - expected to give each other all pivotal evidence
Prosecutor is initially concerned that justice be done
trial is heard by impartial fact finder - the judge
Discretion and Discrimination
Discretion: Freedom to decide what should be done in a particular situation
Each key actor in Canadian justice system has discretion
Sometime difficult to know when appropriate discretion is used, or when discrimination is taking place
Corrections
~37,000 adults and over 1,000 youths incarcerated in correctional facilities in any given day in Canada
Over 110,000 people serving alternative sentences ex community sentences
Most serious offenders (punishments over 2 years of incarceration) are held by the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)
Incarceration
Offenders may by incarcerated in provincial/federal institutions - depends on seriousness of crime
Most offenders in Canada don’t serve out their full sentence - they frequently receive parole/statutory release
Jurisdiction Based on Sentence Severity
Offenders may be incarcerated in provincial/federal institutions (dependent upon the seriousness of the crime)
Federal Institutions: Sentences over 2 years (managed by Correctional Service of Canada) (Indictable offences/Felonies)
Provincial Institutions: Lesser sentences (Summary offenses/Misdemeanors)
Sentence Completion
Many offenders don’t serve full sentences, benefiting from parole/statutory release
Sources of Discretion in the CJS
- Victims
- Police
- Bail Hearings
- Prosecution
- Sentencing
Discretion - Victims
Victims may not report crimes
Reasons victims man not report crimes (General Social Survey 2010):
Incident was deemed unimportant
Belief that police couldn’t help
Resolution of the situation personally
Perception of the issue as too personal
Discretion - Police
Police may choose not to lay charges against suspects
Police exercise discretion in deciding to lay charges
Cases may be dismissed as “unfounded”/minor
Almost half of all criminal suspects weren’t processed to the next stage even when the police believed that a crime had been perpetrated. This represents the greatest source of loss in the system. For example, sometimes the Crown Prosecutor doesn’t consider it worth it to go through full court proceedings in cases where the defendant is clearly going to win/get off easy. Court can be expensive, so sometimes that isn’t worth it depending on rare cases
Discretion - Bail Hearings
A temporary release from jail for a defendant awaiting trial, in exchange for security. It usually requires money to make the exchange
Evidence has shown that those denied bail are much less likely to be acquitted and more likely to be found guilty
Those denied bail are also more likely to incur longer prison sentences
Discretion - Prosecution
The time between the laying of arrest and when the prosecution decides to proceed generates the greatest amount of contrition
Charges may be stayed due to:
Insufficient evidence
Victims’ unwillingness to testify
Deals between police and the accused
Discretion - Sentencing
Sentencing decisions can be influenced by extra-legal factors such as the accused’s characteristics
Indigenous peoples, particularly First Nations, are disproportionately sentenced to imprisonment compared to White individuals
2 Contrasting Models to Represent Values withing the CJS
Crime Control Model:
Focus - Suppression of criminal activity
Emphasizes speed, efficiency and incarceration for guilty individuals
Operates on the presumption of guilt, assuming police primarily target guilty parties
Represents a “get tough on crime” philosophy
Due Process Model:
Focus - Protection of suspects’ rights
Ensures fairness at every stage to prevent wrongful convictions
Operates on presumption of innocence, emphasizing the necessity of safeguarding individuals from systemic errors
Theoretical Perspective
The Canadian CJS aims to prosecute all crimes and treat all individuals fairly
Reality: Much criminal activity goes undetected/unprosecuted and many identified cases don’t result in conviction/incarceration
Main Types of Crime reported to Police
Violent Crime, Property Crime, Prostitution, Counterfeiting, terrorist offences
Define CUCRS and Identify their Shortcomings
The Uniform Crime Reporting system launched in 1961
Designed to generate reliable crime stats
Applies standard definitions to all offences
implemented in 1988 and fully operational in 1992
Collected incident-based data rather than summary
Allowed for Data on:
victim’s age, sex, victim-accused relationship, level of injury, type of weapon causing injury, drup/alcohol use
accused’s age, sex, type of charges laid/recommended, drug/alcohol use
UCR2 consists of reports from fewer police services
many criticisms against police-generated crime stats
Much crime isn’t reported
Weighting of crimes: decrease in crimes is nullified by increase in others
Recording Problems:
Non-violent crimes, 1 incident is counted for each incident
Violent crimes, a separate incident is recorded for each victim
Crime Stats
frequently based on reports to police, self-reports and victimization reports
None are deemed entirely accurate
Victimization Data
UCR deemed problematic
lack of reporting issue (50%)
in 2009 88% of sexual assault crimes were unreported, 77% for household thefts and 66% for property thefts
Surveys:
Help estimate unrecorded crime
Explain why victims don’t report crimes
Provide info about impact of crime on victims
Identify populations at risk of being victimized
7 Types of Racism
Interpersonal:
Hate-explicit, designed to cause fear/anxiety
Polite-couched in a congenial fashion
Subliminal /unconscious-unknown to the actor
Institutional:
Systemic-unintentional and pervasive
Systemic-intentional
Cultural:
Everyday-language
Ideological-racialized ideas that we possess as a culture
Racism
Prejudice: Refers to rigid and generalized ideas and beliefs about a group of people
Discrimination: Refers to practices that deny groups equal access to societal rewards
Indigenous Persons
Experience victimization at a rate more than double the national average
4% of national population, Indigenous persons comprise 27% of homicide victims in 2009
Conditions Required to Find a Person Guilty of Rape - Before 1983
Complaint had to be female
Accused had to be male
Complaint and accused weren’t married
Sexual intercourse occurred
Act of intercourse occurred without consent of the woman
Bill C-127
In 1983 Government implemented bill to deal with problems contained in legislation about sexual assault
3 Levels and Types of Sexual Assault (Bill C-127)
Level 1: Cases where victim endured least amount of physical injury (10 years max punishment)
Level 2: Use of weapon, threats to use weapon/bodily harm (14 years max)
Level 3: Wounding, maiming, disfiguring/endangering life of victim (life imprisonment)
Controversial Aspect of Bill C-127
Victim’s sexual history
Unfair to accused
Seaboyer; R. v. Gayme (1991)
C-127 1994
“extreme drunkenness” defence implemented and removed a year later
C-127 1997
Restricted full disclosure of records
2 stage process where judge would determine whether the victim’s records would be disclosed to defense
1st stage: Accused must convince the trial judge that documents are likely relevant to his/her defense
2nd stage: Judge must consider whether its necessary in interests of justice for defense to view them
Common Reasons for Ordering Production of Complaint’s Records in Sexual Assault Cases
Potential prejudice to dignity and right to privacy
Defendant’s right to full answer and defense
Reasonable expectation of privacy
Probative value of record
