Sociology of Criminal Justice and Corrections PDF

Sociology of Criminal Justice and Corrections September 6th, 2024 What is a Crime? -deviation from societal norms -breaking a law (piece of legislation, laws made by people in power) -Dependent on the society/ societal relevant -based on some sort of morality (natural law- appeal to some sort of...

Sociology of Criminal Justice and Corrections September 6th, 2024 What is a Crime? -deviation from societal norms -breaking a law (piece of legislation, laws made by people in power) -Dependent on the society/ societal relevant -based on some sort of morality (natural law- appeal to some sort of higher power) -dependent on different definitions Six ways to define crime: 1.Breaking of a law- 2.Broader sense of morality, Social Harm Approach How are laws enforced, enacted or changed? Who defines What a Crime is? Pocket Criminal Code- prime document where all crime is written. Two separate concepts but related: Act- Crime is an illegal act that you do, burning stabbing etc. Failure to Act- Omissions are rarer in how frequently they are to be used and counted as crime but exist in certain situations; established duty of care to a person (i.e. doctors, parents to provide the necessity of life, lifeguards). Anti-Terrorism Act Controlled Drug and Substances Act Criminal Code: Federal Government is in charge of making criminal code within Canada and is outlined in section 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act 1867. The Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction of criminal code, to repeal them and amend laws. What is Crime and Why? Crime: act or omission that is prohibited by criminal law (Formal Legal Definition) Crime Occurs When: Commits an act and or fails to commit an act (actus reus) Has the intent to commit the act (Mens- Rea) Does not have a legal defence or justification for committing the act Violates a provision in criminal law General Intent- Mens Rea is assumed Assault and Drug Possession Intention to engage in a crime may not always line up nicely. Concurrence- The intention needs to line up at the same time as the action or violate some provision of law/legislation in prohibition. What is A Crime? Crime includes: The social construction- what do we choose to criminalize? The notion that the legal status of behaviours is not determined by the behaviour itself but is the result of the social response to the behaviour or to the persons or groups who are engaged in it. When social perception changes, legislation will follow. Ex. legalization of marijuana. The conception of crime comes down to a Venn diagram of economic, political and social concerns in which each overlap, and when there is an overlap, legislation changes occur. Laws that are coded are not always enforced and become zombie laws- technically illegal but do not invest money into prosecuting such laws (i.e. J-Walking). Social Construction of Crime What do we choose to criminalize? The notion that the legal status of behaviours is not determined by the behaviour itself, but is the result of the social response to the behaviour Aids in understanding what is/isn’t a crime Crime in one society may be an act of honor in another Crimes that are straight forward such as outlawing murder can become grey as we allow for the killing of others in self defense, of another, declared acts of war, legitimate by the state- police officers (Context in which behaviour occurs). Laws Versus Justice Law Set of formal rules to establish and maintain order and regulate behaviour Created and enforced by government Laws are enacted, repealed, modified Justice Concept based on fairness, morality, equality of all rights, to produce equitable outcomes and address social in-justices Can be interpreted differently Abstract, Broad Concept Equality, Equity and Justice Justice is an abstract conception to Equity or Equality. Goal of Justice System is to uphold legal systems and uphold the values within them. The Social Construction of Crime It is also important to distinguish between behaviours that may be considered deviant by broader society that may be considered deviant by a large portion of society and crimes. Deviance is behaviour that is contrary to the norms and values of the larger society. -informal social control; how we tell each other what ok behaviour is; i.e. manners, customs (tipping). It is a navigation of norms. May be frowned upon by the larger society. What is viewed as deviant changes overtime? Deviance rises to criminality through harm or destruction of property. 1950- expectation hat and gloves in church (customary expectation) The Social Construction of Crime Criminologists often conduct historical analyses to understand how the social, economic and political environment may influence legislation: The Rule of Law The essence of the rule of law dates to 1215 CE Source: Rule of Law Education Centre: Retrieved from https://www.ruleoflaw.org.au/principles. Under the contract, citizens would give up fundamental freedoms. In exchange, the state would be willing to protect your fundamental freedoms through legal prosecution. Within this framework there is certain frameworks that apply to everyone: No one is above the law. The English common law system had brought the contract over in the 16th century, and vast majority of Canada uses it as a base. Requirements of rule of law: accessible, cannot be applies retroactively, cannot guess. The state is required to prove that you did indeed commit such crime until proven innocence. Only people found guilty can be punished, The Canadian Legal System The Canadian Legal System is a common law system, with the exception of Quebec, which has a civil law system (based on the French) Common Law is law that is based on custom, tradition, practice and is generally written. Law that is based on tradition, custom and what is expected, unwritten set of rules and obligations. Canada has moved toward a more codified law through statute laws.  Precedent is a judicial decision that may be used as a standard in subsequent similar cases. The law cannot be customary, it needs to be a published written down prohibition through legislation. Ex. of Common Law- expectation of sentencing structure- guideline in punishment or what has been previously been given. The Sources of Criminal Law In Canada, there are two primary sources of criminal law: legislation and judicial decisions. State decisis is the principle whereby higher courts set precedents that lower courts must follow. Judicial decisions are slightly more powerful as decisions can invalidate legislation of circumstance calls for it. Judges are able to override judicial laws. Courts operate in a hierarchy system, the higher the court the ultimate decisions are made by who is more powerful. The supreme court of Canada binds the lower courts through stare decisis. Precedent is set horizontally and is set from top down, there can be horizontal precedent but is usually informant and not binding like vertical. The Constitution Act of 1867/ amendment in 1982 brought the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These are the two foundations to criminal law. Any new law that is passed must be consistent with these two foundations. Criminal Code of Canada (1892) (Common Law) Federal legislation that sets out criminal law, procedures for prosecuting federal offences, and sentences and procedures for the administration of justice the first complete criminal code was produces in 1892 under the leadership of Sir John Thompson. Types of Canadian Law Substantive law: Sets out the rights and obligations of each person on society. Includes the Criminal Code and legislation that defines criminal offences and penalties. Procedural law: Legal processes that protect and enforce the rights set out in substantive law. Example: procedures for arresting a person, selecting jury etc. Miranda Rights: outline of rights when arrested. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Enacted in 1982: Guarantees fundamental freedoms, legal rights, and equality of rights for all citizens of Canada. Including those accused of crimes; Ensures fundamental fairness during legal proceedings. All parts of the CJS must operate in a way that does not violate the charter but: Subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society- Section 1. Ex. freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly Sections of the charter: S2 Freedom of Expression S7 Right to life, liberty and security The first section declares that all rights are obtained BUT only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law in a democratic society. The Social Construction of Crime Moral Entrepreneurs Often play a key role in criminalizing certain activities. Are individuals, groups, or organizations who seek action against certain groups of people or certain behaviours and bring pressure on legislators to enact criminal statutes. One of the biggest movements was the prohibition of alcohol within the U.S In Canada the most famous examples are the MADD- At first it was to criminalize entirely, but disproportionally people were dying in accidents with drunk drivers- founded an advocacy group to campaign for tougher legislation against drunk driving. It had tremendous success for fatalities (80%). The important thing about moral entrepreneurs is about morality- there is a moral obligation to protect or serve something. Functions of the Criminal Law What is the criminal law supposed to do? What does it not do? It depends. The law depends on just about everything. Depending on what/ how we view the law, the purpose and goals of it can look different. It is defined by expectations The Origins and Application of the Criminal Law The differing perspectives on where criminal laws come from and how they are applied via the criminal justice system are reflected in two models. 1) Value Consensus Model 2) Conflict Model (Triangle View of Society) Value consensus model Views crime and punishment as a reflection of society’s commonly held values and limits of tolerance Assumes there is a consensus about what should be against the law. Law abiding citizens; assumed consensus of what should and shouldn’t be as the law (circle) Conflict Model Views crime and punishment as a reflection of the power and influence held by some groups (such as the rich) Highlights inequities and paradoxes within the system (triangle) Conflict model is a rejection of the value consensus model- some will be subject to the law more than others; the criminal justice system upholds and reproduces equity. The Conflict Model sees society as inherently in conflict with each-other. The criminal law is a tool of the state, powerful classes oppress everyone else. This perspective comes from Marxist criminology in the 1960’s- the belief is law is a fundamentally oppressive tool. Purpose of the CJS There is no one commonly used statement of purpose of the CJS, but would include: The notion of “justice” for all persons Including victims, offenders and the community Respecting the rights of victims and offenders Ensuring the safety and security of communities The procedure with criminal law itself, is in respect to the accused and their fundamental freedoms- creates tensions for the victim and justice. Frequently, consensus theorists would say that the goal would be to be absolute- should be the most intuitive thing to do; follow the law- although perimeters should be set to the public for legitimacy. Conflict theory believes that the criminal law provides the illusion of safety. The belief is that it may protect us from each other but does not protect from oppressive forces such as the state. Human apparatus- enforced, designed by humans, subjected to everyone (CJS) Within the system itself, individuals are convicted, accused, prosecuted, those who work in the system etc. The victim is at an interesting place, as they are treated as a witness to their own victimization. Without victimization prosecution does not happen and needs of the victim are ignored. Prosecutorial Independence Prosecutors must make decisions based on evidence, and not be fear of any other obligations- make decisions solely on the evidence. Their discretion is needed Police also have discretion but are most likely scrutinized. The Criminal Justice System The CJS includes: Crime prevention and crime reduction. Arrest and prosecution of suspects. Hearing of criminal cases by the courts. Sentencing and the administration and enforcement of court orders. Parole and other forms of conditional release. Supervision and assistance for ex-offenders released into the community. The Criminal Justice System uses the Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. - typically held between a 95-100 percent Criminal Justice Administration There are two competing perspectives on the values systems underlying the administration of criminal justice. 1. The Crime Control Model An orientation to criminal justice in which the protection of the community and the apprehension of offenders are paramount. Assembly line is needed (Russia, China etc.) 2.The Due Process Model An orientation to criminal justice in which the legal rights of individual citizens, including crime suspects, are paramount. Belief of the Due Process Model- better 10 guilty go free, rather than one non-guilty be prosecuted It should be seen as an obstacle course “Humans make mistakes” (Nordic) Role and Responsibility of Governments in the CJS Each level of government in Canada plays a role in the CJS The division of responsibilities between the federal and provincial governments was spelled out in the Constitution Act, 1867. The federal Government decides which behaviours constitute criminal offences The provincial/territorial governments are responsible for law enforcement and for administrating the justice system. The CJS System in Canada is the adversarial model An Adversarial System of Criminal Justice The Canadian criminal justice system is an adversarial system. In criminal cases, the defence lawyer and prosecutor present their cases before a neutral judge or jury The standard that must be met by the prosecution is proof beyond reasonable doubt. - there is no innocence In Europe/UK the Inquisitorial model is used as well as in most South American countries. There is no presumption of innocence, no right to remain silent. They mostly never use jury, but rather a panel of judges. Presumption of innocence An accused is innocent until proven guilty Burden of proof Crown must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt Innocent of Guilty Judge or jury will make decisions on the evidence Flow of Cases through the CJS Incident Police System Criminal Court System Corrections and Parole System Crime funnel Plea Bargain- An offender may make a deal/agree to plead guilty in an offence for consideration Wishes are non-binding in prosecuting the offence. Public Confidence and Trust The criminal justice system requires that the public have confidence and trust in it to be effective. Research suggests that Canadians may have only a “moderate” level of confidence in the criminal law and that many persons have a general lack of trust in the system. Most Canadians have very little understanding of the criminal justice system and how it works. They also tend to overestimate the amount of crime and the levels of violent crime. Accustomed to normalcy of united states laws and believe it applies. If you commit a crime in Canada, you will be provided with a defence lawyer- Canada does not have the same Many people self-represent themselves in court. Belief that long-term incarceration will help crime rates- not substantial Crime is still much lower than in the 1990-2000s. Re-visons history- adjudicate CJS by emotion or context. Media and Public Attitudes For most Canadians, news media stories are the primary source of information about the CJS, although there are other sources, including personal experience, movies, and shows accessed on television or the internet. These shows, however, may oversimplify complex issues of crime and criminal justice. They tend to be biased toward sensational crime and to simplify crime and justice issues, and the public for its part tends to generalize from specific events. Consequences of Unmet Expectations Figure 2.5 Source C.G Nicholl 1999. Community Policing, Community Justice and Restorative Justice Crime Dependence on the police and justice system Expectation of safety being delivered Expectation not met Clamour for more justice interventions, including tougher sentencing Fear persists Is the CJS Effective? There are many ways that effectiveness of the criminal justice system can be assessed. Public confidence and trust in the system The ability of the system to prevent and respond to crime The extent to which the system addresses the needs of crime victims and their families. The effectiveness of specific policies and programs, as measured by evaluation studies. Adherence of the system to the rule of law and the charter of rights and freedoms The extent to which the system treats all persons fairly under the law, without prejudice or discrimination. Deterrent Effects of the CJS Studies of the deterrent effect the criminal law suggest that the law can serve as a deterrent only when certain conditions are present. People must be aware that there are legal sanctions that will be applied if they engage in certain behaviours. There must be certainty of punishment. The sanction must be applied swiftly when a crime is committed. (The certainty principle) Relies on: Swiftness, Certainty and Proportionality - rarely effective in the current system in regard to rationality Chapter 3 Racism, Prejudice and Discrimination Prejudice is the un-sub stained, negative, pre-judgement of individuals and groups, generally on the basis of ethnicity, religion or race Discrimination is an action or a decision that treats a person or a group negatively for reasons such as their race, age or disability. Racism is prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s race is superior. Ex. Blondes have more fun- contextualize on individual matters, family values Difficult to provide action Not all discrimination is bad Discrimination becomes a problem when prejudice becomes a problem. Can be very insidious happen without awareness. Overt vs deliberate vs structural discrimination Ex. Redlining Cities maps- red, yellow and green Green- People of color, Indigenous dissuaded to buy a house- encouraged to buy somewhere else. Discrimination becomes embedded in the law overt discrimination struct Multiculturalism and Diversity Racism, discrimination, and inequality exist in Canadian society and within the CJS. Impacts on the experiences of the community, offenders, victims and CJS personnel. Historical and contemporary experiences of certain groups affect views of and experiences in the CJS. Gang investigations are much harder to solve than regular cases. Socio-economic status matters, as whether you get bail, remanded before trial- impact if you can leave work Immigration Status- not always viewed as trustworthy to believe in the CJS. Axis of Oppression Inequality is exacerbated based on class and can further disadvantage marginalized groups. Can include socio economic status. Inequality in Canada A key feature of Canadian society is inequality, particularly income inequality. The top 1 percent of the population earns 39.1 percent of the income. One million children live in low-income households. Gender inequality in the workplace costs Canada 150 billion a year. Women working full-time earn 74.2 cents for every dollar that full-time male workers make. Legacy of Colonization Many indigenous people live on the margins of Canadian Society. This is reflected by: Pervasive poverty High rates of unemployment Low levels of formal education, and High death rates from accidents and violence. On nearly every measure of health and well-being, Indigenous Peoples are much worse off than non- Indigenous persons. Domination, oppression, and colonization- brought upon, more and more Indigenous people are migrating towards cities as there is less opportunities on reservations. Return to Attawapiskat- reservation south part of James Bay near the Hudson’s Bay (Northern Ontario). For Midterm: 1,2,3,4 and 5 chapters- focus most heavily on chapter five...and the Legacy of Colonization The residential school system was operated by the federal government from the 1880’s until the 1900’s. 150,000 Indigenous children were sent to residential schools. The “60’s Scoop” saw 16,000 Indigenous children removed from their families. 16,000 Indigenous children were taken from the prairie province until 1980. 98 percent of all children in care within Manitoba are indigenous, Manitoba also has one of the highest apprehension rates across Canada. Disproportionally Indigenous communities are being fractured by the state, legacy and tentacles are still in-rooted in Canadian culture. The intergenerational impact of residential schools was identified by the TRC as a major factor in Indigenous persons; conflict with the law. The Case of Tina Fontaine Indigenous child of Manitoba, born within an indigenous community (Sagkeeng First Nation). Removed and returned alternately numerous times through CFS. Tina was last apprehended at age 10, and after the age of ten was placed in a series of group homes. Tina was a product of abusive nature from parents- father was ten years older. Tina was in a group home when she received the news her father was a victim of homicide. Despite being eligible, Tina never received counselling, supports or grief; she began using drugs and alcohol to cope. She is moved at 15 to Winnipeg through CFS in early 2014 and reconnects with her mother- her family attempts to retain care over her, ultimately not deemed a satisfactory plan. In July 2014, group homes are filled, and Tina is placed in a downtown hotel by herself. Several dozen children were placed in a hotel. Tina becomes missing in less than a month to go missing. She subsequently is found and picked up Aug /2014, returns to the hotel and is reported missing again the next day. Police is notified she is a missing person- beyond the lookout was put out (BOLO), on August 8/24, encounter Tina at a traffic stop, she cannot drive she is a passenger in a truck and the driver is drunk. The police identify Tina Fontaine but do not take her into custody or removed from the vehicle. Happens early 2-3 in the morning, by ten am she is found unconscious near U of W, she is taken to HSC and they ask her where she is living, next of kin- identifying she can be released to 62-year-old Raymond Cormier. Cormier was supplying her with drugs and alcohol, is also at this point engaging in sex trafficking of Tina. When asked where she can go, she identifies she can go back to the hotel room but do not have anyone supervising her. A day later on Aug 9/2014 she is reported missing once again, and at 1:30 PM on Aug 17, her body was found in the Red River. Time of death is said to be Aug 10. By the time her body is found, an autopsy is inconclusive. While a police investigation as well as a separate investigation by CFS, the human rights launched an inquiry and it had led to MMIWG (2016). Cormier was arrested and charged with 2nd degree murder in December 2015. Media attention focused on Tina in an un-incredibly sympathetic life- i.e. responsible for her on victimization, impulsivity etc. The media attention of this case was included in the inquiry of victimization on Indigenous women. CFS announced in MB that they would not use hotels to place vulnerable children 6 months after her death. CFS created “Tina Safe Haven” a semi crisis unit for Indigenous girls. Criminal trial of Cormier begins in 2018, pleads guilty but admits to knowing Fontaine. He argued he was no way responsible for her death, as her death was undetermined should not have been charged in the first place. Defense made the claim It could not have been him as death was undetermined. This was one of the biggest cases in Manitoba, but there is 100’s more just like this case. Indigenous women are overrepresented as victims in the CJS. Experiences of Indigenous Women Indigenous women face a number of unique challenges that may place them at risk. Stereotypes about Indigenous Women held by Canadians Gap in life expectancy between Indigenous and non-indigenous women Household crowding for Indigenous women (31 percent of Inuit, 14 percent FN, 3 percent of non- indigenous) Rates of unemployment among indigenous women are much more likely to live in households with incomes under the poverty line. Moral blameworthiness Stereotypes in-rooted in negativity against Indigenous Peoples Higher rates of violence and victimization are brought upon by lack of resources, distrust in law enforcement. CBC Article Indigenous women midwives- Read Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Police Powers The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has had significant impact in defining the powers of the police. Charter rights, combined with pre-existing legal rules, are designed to provide legal safeguards against the unlimited use of police power. -The charter is one of the most foundational documents for police on what they can and cannot do on their official duties. Prior to the charter, Canada had the 1960 Bill of rights (legislation) the supreme court had no jurisdiction to overrule. -When the charter became in 1982, they grandfathered the constitution into the bill of rights to overturn legislation. Any law that gets passed must be consistent with the charter for the supreme court to overturn it, unless it is withstanding law. Section 7 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Life, Liberty of a person is very vague, this section explains the rights to bodily autonomy. One of the most important decisions that came from sec 7 was on Abortion in 1988 (R v. Morgan-taller) In the 1980’s abortion had to be proved necessary- rape, unviable Morgan taller thought that the process of obtaining two doctor’s consent was un-necessarily restrictive- TAC He decided to proceed with abortion regardless of TAC. Arrested on Several jury trials- although guilty, jurors thought that the law that was broken should not be Right of Suspects to Remain Silent Falls under bodily autonomy- not compelled to speak. Under Canadian law, police officers have no formal powers to compel crime suspects to answer their questions- we do not compel individuals to speak with the state. Suspects have a right to remain silent, and police officers must inform them of that right. They must also inform suspects that any statements they do make may be used against them in a criminal trial- general principle is that section 7 applies when you are arrested The court reaffirmed the principle that the police can continue to question a suspect at length, even if the suspect repeatedly tries to invoke his or her right to silence (R v. Singh, 2007 SCC 48). Exceptions: This does not extend to situations where it would permit a citizen to obstruct a police officer from carrying out his or her duties. -Detainment S.9 -Informational Duty: Law enforcement has an informational duty to inform rights, do not have to check or verify that it is competently understood. Unless super cognitively impaired, police will wait that a guardian, legal representative or parent can be found but not always. Ex. arrested, maintaining innocence, the police tell you your rights you acknowledge it and the police begin to start questioning. If you speak, it constitutes a wavier against S.7- you cannot be compelled to speak. S.24(2)- admissibility Right to Silence applies fairly consistently, other when exceptions maybe apply. Video- This Professor exposed a huge flaw in the Justice system Simulate conscience of awareness of case Can be used to impute credibility Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Police Powers Section 7: Right to Silence Section 8: Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure. Section 9: Everyone has the right not to be arbitrary detained or imprisoned. R to b.f.f Arbitrary Detention – Case most used: R. V. Grant 2009 The first question for detention is to ask if you are free to leave or if you feel you are able to leave- ask! if the answer is no, it is a detainment. The second standard is if you feel you are free to leave. – Grant’s Psychological Detention Triggers section 9- Psychological Detention only permissible in grounds to arrest OR exigent circumstances (shooting, bomb threat, severe pressing rare emergencies) OR reasonable suspicion Grant Psychological Detention Grant is Black, walking by a school but the police report that he is “behaving suspiciously”. When police ask what was the suspicious behaviour, police say grant was walking in a high crime area and up to something shady. After being questioned, Grant gives his I.D but police say that he is nervous and touches something in his pocket. A police officer walks in front of him to obstruct his path. The Police institute a conversation with Mr. Grant. Mr. Grant eventually discloses that he has marijuana and a gun, he is arrested for possession and illegal weapon. The police try to justify his behaviour. The courts have held in situations that if a person in compelled by nature, they must inform you of your right to silence. The Scars of Stop and Frisk- Video Disproportionally stop and frisk target people of color. Too many people of color Why is there a higher hit rate on white folks? Observable position Pretext Policing The reason is not given, and a pretext is given. Power to Detain and Arrest Section 9: Everyone has the right not to be arbitrary detained or imprisoned. There is a distinction between arrest and detention. Detention occurs when a police officer “assumes control over the movement of a person by demand or direction that may have significant legal consequence and that prevents or impedes access to legal counsel. Psychological detention is still a detention. 1. When they are under a true legal obligation not to walk away from a police officer or other agent of the state. (explicit indication from the police such as “stay here-you can’t leave” and 2. 2. When they are reasonably believing that they have no option to walk away from the police officer or other agent of the state (implicit indication from the police such as several officers blocking the only exit) S.9-> S.24 (2) Enforcement mechanism (remedy) Section 24 (2) is to be used when there is a certified violation of a charter right. Remedies of the section that are most violated include S.1, S.7, S.8 or s.10b Judicial verification is needed for remedies. There is a three- step test (Grant test) created in 2009 to replace previous test in the 90’s called the stillman test. (A totality test) Three step test: 1. How important is the evidence to the Crown’s case? Is this the only piece of evidence in the trial? Is it just one piece of evidence in regard to numerous pieces? The more important piece of evidence, the more lenient the Judge will be to the Crown’s case in trial. In considering the crowns case we must also consider the seriousness of a breach to the charter. The more serious and agretious of state contact is considered. 2. The weight of impact on the breach in the adjudication of the breach. The more serious the agregious state contact, the higher the level of impact it is going to have on case adjutiication. 3. Societal Interest- How integral is the case to public confidence, public trust, and how muchwould an acquittal effect public confidence and trust negatively? The court must weigh all three factors when making a determination, and it is up to the trial judge yo make the final decision on the revelance at issue will be included or excluded at trial. The fundamental quesrion the court is to consuder is wether a reasonable person in the same situation would conclude that the admisnstration of jusrtoce will be brought into dispute. Presentation- Dr. James Gacek Growing, Aging, Dying: Ongoing Canadian Federal Correctional Challenges Search and Seizure Exceptions for warrant requirement -Search incident to arrest -Plain view (vehicle mainly) -Exigent Circumstances - Consent Search -Discarded item- No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Jay Z 55-54- Pretext Policing REP- Trunk locked, glove department locked=warrant Racial Profiling- “bad police bingo” K-9 License, Registration, Step out of the car PLAIN VIEW SEARCHES - If you are pulled over, the reason should be given to you. Reasonable Expectation of Privacy RFP Locked or encryption Partners house- i.e the Edwards case Lowest – None (Discarded) International Border Airport (Voluntary Surveillance) Midterm Chapter 1, 2,3, 5 15 multiple choice 1-3 3 Medium answer questions – 2 solid paragraphs Written questions will come more from chapter 5 All documentaries or videos could be tested No dates or theorists Know certain names/cases for long answer Example; Differences between prejudice, racism and profiling, Know difference between section 7,8 and 9 and 24(2) Know key terms at the end of each chapter Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Police Powers Section 10: Everyone has the right on arrest or detention a) To be informed promptly of the reasons therefor; b) B0 to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right immeadiately; and c) To have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful. 10 (B) 2 part – Inform and Implementation duty Need to be provided with a phone (1 call), Provided with a card to Bridges Duty Counsel, If material jeopardy changes- the degree of criminal compatability- need of reconsult In Canada there is limited ability to legal aid- it is subject to your asset and income management Non serious arrest- 18 months Serious-36 months Jordan Decision 2016- presumptive time limits