Untitled Document PDF

CHAPTER TWO: Terms: Media Effects: When an individual has access to so much media, it becomes influential to them (young kids and violent video games) Active Audiences: Audiences that receive info from media and create a connection and meaning out of it– this allows the information to be processed d...

CHAPTER TWO: Terms: Media Effects: When an individual has access to so much media, it becomes influential to them (young kids and violent video games) Active Audiences: Audiences that receive info from media and create a connection and meaning out of it– this allows the information to be processed deeper and to apply critical thinking on narratives portrayed by the media. Critical Thinking: Understanding, processing, and judging information through claims, arguments, and conflicts through question and reasonProblem Frame: A narrative that simple to understand (there is a problem, needs a solution, gets solved)Moral Panics: Events that are made by media, politicians and ‘moral entrepreneurs’ that cause people/groups to be labeled as the CAUSE of social problems Moral Entrepreneurs: A person or a group that tries to influence people to maintain norms in society (can label behaviours as dominant, violent etc.) Folk Devils: People/ groups in folklore and media that were made to look like deviant individuals that caused social issues and didn’t belong in society – a scapegoat (black Londoners accused of mugging instead of admitting to high crime rates) Stereotyping: A general portrayal that exaggerates the traits/characteristics of a group or individual in a certain way (media, politicians, hate groups, all stereotype) Discourses: Types of languages, representation, and practice of creating and giving meaning (seen in several cultures). Media discourses represents youth and young offenders as ‘dangerous others.Other: Individual or group labeled differently and deviant because of their culture due to stereotyping Victims: An ideal victim is an individual that is given the status of victim. Characteristics include race, religion, gender, and age. Victims may face difficulty due to racism, ageism, able-ism, homophobia and misogyny. Victims of minorities are IGNORED compared to victims in the majority (white). Sousveillance: A member of society recording and witnessing abuse of power; holding the officer/police department at fault. Surveillance: Monitoring people of populations for control or care. When crime began to increase (60’s-70’s) the relationship between crime and media got strong. It is still a major debate to this day, whether violent media truly influences young children to be violent IRL. Cultural Criminology is something think links culture, crime, and crime control in a society Chapter 2: Criminal law: dynamic not static - Controls how crime is defined int odays society - Incldues history, morals, values, politics and economic conditions - Living concept govenrning most human interactions that we deem approprouate - Derived from common law and the canadian charter of rights and freedoms Origins of law: Code of hammurabi - class determined the severity of physical punishment, judges enfocred the laws. Eye for an eye. Mosaic code - belief was if you obey gods law you wil be protected. Basis for legal system today. Roman law - written rules to ensure the higher class did not have unlimited power Dark ages - superstition and fear of magic and satanic arts dominated thinking. Codes were lost. - Superstition fit well with stereotypes Confusion: - The loss of codes led to chaos before common laws evolved - After dark ages, the laws started to get more written down Proof - beyond a reasonable doubt Law: - Everyone entitled to representation - Innocent until proven guilty - Cant prosecute a case that was a while ago - If youre tried and found innocent you cant be retried for the same offense Simon Marshall - Falsely accused, and even though hes found guilty now he cant go back iot society due to the abuse he experienced through prison - Convicted for rape Section 1 - reasonsbale limits - guarentees righsts and freedoms Origins of common laws: - Common law developed in england - Foundation for canadas legal system - Standaridized laws and justice through consistency - Stare decisis - Precedent decided cases - Church and state did sometimes have a say in laws today Common laws: - Crimes against the person - Crime against propotery - Incomplete offences - Attempt - Conspiracy Statutory laws: - Reflect social conditions in society - Address issues of morality - Criminalization of opium - 1910 - Decriminalization of marijuana - 2018 - Judges would travel around the country, prisoner swould leave too Common law: - Law of the land in england - Regardless of social difference - Judge made laws developed from traditions, customs and case laws - Example, inchoate crime - scofeild case Statutory law:  - Replaced common law - Written laws passed by parliament with the common law in mind - Reflect existing social conditions and address issues of morality - Examples, decriminalization of marijuana The development of canadian law - - Prior to confederation in 1867 no standard legal system - British normal american act - fedeerla government enforced by provinces - 1868 - police act of canada created the dominion police - 1873 - north west mounted police established - 1892 - crimina code of canada - 1920 - royal canadian mounted police - Outdated laws still exist today Definition of crime: - A social rule is broken - A law exists for breaking it - A penalty is imposed for breaking it Actus reus: - Must be voluntary - Examples: taking money, failure to act or take proper precautions Mens rea: - Intentionally, knowingly and willingly - Types: transferred - a stranger killed while intening to kill a specific perosn - Consructuive - negligence or reckless behaviour Strict liability: - These type sof offences require the actus reus of an offense - Prosecution does not need to prove mens rea - Defendant needs to porve teht acted with reasonable or proper care - Offences are generally to do it with public welfare sucg as speeding, pollution of the environment, littering etc. Criminla defences - Ignorance or mistake - Not criminally responsible ofyour account - Intoxications - Duress - Necessity - self - defence - Entrapment Mistake or ignorance Excuse defence - Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Section 19, crininal code of canada - Government needs to make laws public  - Honest mistake or facts. Example: did not know the items you purchased were stolen good - Take all reasonable steps to ensure section 150, criminal code of canada - R vs ladue 1965 - R vs tolson 1889 NCR on account of mental disorder Excuse defense - Exemption of criminal responsibility. Section 16, criminal code of canada - Disposition range from communit supervision order to detention in a psychiatric facility until fit for release - Definition of mental disorder. Section 2, criminal canada - Burden of proof rests on the accused becasue everyone is assumed sane - Fitness to stand trial - understand court proceedings and instruct a lawyer - M’naughten rule - need to be able to establish right from wrong - R vs Swain 1991 Intoxication Excuse defence - Not a defence for general intent crimes such as assault and sexual assault - Bill C-72-1995- responsible for violent acts due to se Duress Justification defence - Forced or compelled by someone else to commit a crime - Immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death - Not part of a group planning to commit the offence Necessity Justification defence - Must break a law to prevent a greater evil from happening - Necessity does not justify the intentional killing of another person Self-defence - Offenders' actions were justified based on t victims' provocative behaviour - Justified in using enough force as reasonably necessary to protect yourself section 34; Entrapment - Law enforcement officers encouraged the commission of a crime that otherwise would not have been committed Chapter 2: Notes: Introduction to Early Legal Codes and the Origins of Law Early Legal Codes 1. Sumer (c. 2000 BCE): ○ One of the first written legal codes. ○ Code of Hammurabi (1792–1750 BCE, Babylon): Known for the principle of lex talionis ("an eye for an eye"). Punishments varied based on class; for example, a slave might be executed while a freeman might lose a limb. Judges strictly enforced laws, with local officials held accountable for apprehending criminals. 2. Mosaic Code (c. 1200 BCE): ○ Derived from a covenant between God and the Israelites. ○ Basis for Judeo-Christian teachings and modern legal systems. ○ Prohibited murder, theft, perjury, and adultery, mirroring current laws. 3. Other Early Codes: ○ Twelve Tables (451 BCE, Rome): Addressed debt, family relations, and property rights. ○ Contributions from Confucius, Muhammad, Solomon, and Lycurgus across different regions and eras. 4. Indigenous Traditions: Pre-colonial legal systems were also in effect in various parts of the world. Evolution of Crime, Punishment, and Law 1. Dark Ages (Post-Roman Empire): ○ Early legal codes disappeared. ○ Superstition and local customs dominated criminal regulation. 2. Feudal Period: ○ Crimes were often settled by wergild (compensation payments). ○ Guilt was determined by ordeals (e.g., placing hands in boiling water) or trial by combat. ○ Punishments were brutal, including executions, amputations, and public tortures. 3. Common Law in England: ○ Developed after the Norman Conquest (1066). ○ Royal judges held court circuits, applying consistent decisions based on precedent (stare decisis). ○ The jury system evolved, starting with local witnesses and transitioning into fact-finding panels. ○ Bushell’s case (1670) established the independence of juries, laying the foundation for modern judicial processes. Common Law and Statutory Law Common Law: Evolved from judicial decisions and case precedents, often covering crimes like murder, arson, and theft. Statutory Law: Replaced common law with written laws passed by government while incorporating older legal traditions. Notable Legal Terms: Lex talionis: Punishment based on retaliation. Wergild: Compensation paid to victims or their families under medieval law. Stare decisis: The legal principle that courts should follow precedent. Common law: Judge-made law developed through court decisions. Statutory law: Written laws enacted by government. Notes on Canadian Legal System 1. Evolution of Canadian Law: ○ Common Law: Originally influenced by British common law, Canadian law evolved post-Confederation. Before 1892, criminal justice was decentralized with military, companies, and frontier justice playing roles. The Criminal Code of 1892 marked the shift to codified law. ○ Statutory Law: Supplemented common law with specific legislation, such as drug-related laws (e.g., cannabis criminalized in 1923, decriminalized in 2018). 2. Influence of British Common Law: ○ Case Example: Rex v. Scofield (1784) led to the criminalization of attempts (inchoate crimes). Attempting illegal acts became a common-law crime, now codified in the Criminal Code of Canada (Section 24). ○ Social Control: Statutory laws reflected social, economic, and political contexts, often serving the ruling classes, as seen in the Waltham Black Act (1723) and Frame Breaking Act (1812), which criminalized activities that threatened elite interests. 3. Modern Criminal Code and Outdated Offences: ○ 1892 Criminal Code: Many offences from British law were codified, some outdated (e.g., dueling, pretending to practice witchcraft). ○ Changes Over Time: Offences like seduction under promise of marriage or furious driving were eventually repealed or amended, reflecting social changes. 4. Classification of Crimes: ○ Indictable vs. Summary Offences: Indictable offences (e.g., murder) are more serious, while summary offences (e.g., loitering) are minor. Indictable offences can involve a trial by judge or jury, and there’s no time limit for prosecution. ○ Mala In Se vs. Mala Prohibitum: Mala in se crimes (inherently evil, e.g., murder) vs. mala prohibitum (violations of societal rules, e.g., drug possession). These reflect both objective moral standards and shifting societal norms. 5. Civil vs. Criminal Law: ○ Civil Law: Involves torts like libel, slander, or personal injury, where the harmed party seeks compensation. ○ Criminal Law: Focuses on public wrongs where the state prosecutes the offender, with a higher burden of proof ("beyond a reasonable doubt"). ○ Dual Liability: An act can be both a crime and a tort (e.g., assault), leading to both criminal punishment and civil damages.  6. The Role of the RCMP: ○ Establishment: The North-West Mounted Police (NWMP) was formed in 1873 to maintain order in the west. In 1920, it became the RCMP. ○ Historical Controversy: The RCMP’s role in enforcing colonialist policies, particularly against Indigenous populations, has been subject to modern debate, especially following discoveries of unmarked graves at residential schools. These notes summarize the progression of Canadian legal structures, showcasing the interplay between common law, statutory law, and social influences. Societal Implications of Criminal Law 1. Maintaining Social Order Criminal law incorporates prohibitions against behaviors harmful to others: ○ Theft ○ Physical harm ○ Property damage Prevents actions that challenge government legitimacy: ○ Treason ○ Collaboration with enemies ○ Modern offenses like “environmental terrorism” Control is given to political authority, enforced by agents of the state. 2. Discouraging Revenge Delegates enforcement to prevent individuals from seeking personal retribution. Shifts the burden of retribution from individuals to the state. Oliver Wendell Holmes emphasized state punishment to avoid “private retribution.” Historical examples of communal justice in Canada: ○ Miners’ meetings in Yukon ○ Charivaris in Quebec ○ Fishery courts in Newfoundland ○ Vigilante justice in Ontario. 3. Expressing Public Opinion and Morality Reflects evolving public opinions and moral values. Mala in se crimes (e.g., murder, sexual assault) have universal prohibitions. Legislation evolves based on societal attitudes (e.g., gang membership, cannabis). Challenges in controlling public morality through law: ○ Gauging majority will ○ Respecting minority rights ○ Enforcing laws perceived as trivial. Historical context of vagrancy laws: ○ Originated to control labor and migration post-bubonic plague. ○ Aimed at maintaining social order and addressing community threats. ○ Current laws target specific behaviors related to criminal support. 4. Deterring Criminal Behavior General Deterrence: Aims to prevent crimes through the fear of punishment. ○ Historical public executions as warnings. ○ Modern deterrents include long prison sentences. Specific Deterrence: Targets individual offenders to prevent recidivism. ○ Based on the principle that the cost of crime outweighs its benefits. Ongoing debate over the effectiveness of deterrence: ○ Questions arise about the rationality of crime and the persistence of criminal behavior. These notes capture the essential functions and societal implications of criminal law as discussed in your provided text. If you need further details or modifications, feel free to ask! Here are the notes summarizing the key points regarding the violations of folkways and mores, the legal definition of a crime, and the elements of criminal liability: Violations of Folkways and Mores Social Control: Violations of folkways and mores (e.g., smoking in public) are controlled informally through social disapproval. Criminal Law Enforcement: In contrast, criminal law violators face physical coercion and punishment aimed at preventing repeat offenses. Common Punishments: ○ Fines ○ Community supervision or probation ○ Incarceration Death Penalty in Canada: ○ Last used in 1962, abolished in 1976. Electronic Surveillance: ○ Increasingly used as a specific deterrent; average Canadians are often captured on surveillance cameras multiple times a day. Maintaining Social Order Legal Systems: Designed to support and maintain social order by defining boundaries within society. Historical Context: ○ In medieval England, laws protected the feudal system by regulating property transfer and ownership. ○ Modern criminal law reflects societal needs and protects economic and political systems. Economic Stability: ○ Laws promoting punishment for property damage or theft support capitalist activities (contracts, banking).  Historical Cases: ○ The Carrier's case (1473) established that property rights must be protected through law, leading to prohibitions against fraud, embezzlement, and commercial theft. Inequality and Conflict: ○ The law can reproduce social inequalities (e.g., targeting homelessness, defining protests as terrorism). ○ Conflicts over the law can lead to questions of the justice system's legitimacy (e.g., wrongful convictions). Legal Definition of a Crime To legally define a crime, certain elements must be established: 1. Actus Reus (the guilty act): The physical act of committing a crime. 2. Mens Rea (the guilty mind): The intent to commit the crime. Actus Reus Definition: The voluntary action constituting the crime (e.g., taking someone's money, committing an act of violence). Involuntary Actions: ○ Actions not under voluntary control (e.g., sleepwalking) may absolve a person of criminal liability. ○ Example: Kenneth Parks acquitted for killing his mother-in-law while sleepwalking. Mens Rea Definition: Intent behind the criminal act, which can include: ○ Specific intent: Intent to achieve a specific outcome. ○ General intent: Intent to commit the act itself without specific purpose. Examples: ○ Ann stealing from Bill has the intent to steal (specific intent). ○ A reasonable person would foresee the consequences of their actions. Transferred Intent: If someone intends to harm one person but accidentally harms another, they can still be held liable for the unintended victim's injury (e.g., Stan intending to kill Larry but accidentally killing Jason). Strict Liability and Criminal Defences: Key Concepts Strict Liability  Definition: Crimes that do not require proof of mens rea (intent) for conviction; only actus reus (the act itself) needs to be proven. Common Contexts: ○ Public welfare offences ○ Health and safety regulations ○ Traffic laws (e.g., speeding) ○ Environmental regulations (e.g., pollution) Examples: ○ Speeding violations: A driver is guilty regardless of intent to exceed the limit. ○ Toxic waste dumping: Intent is not needed to establish guilt. Absolute Liability Definition: A subset of strict liability offences where intent cannot be used as a defence. Legal Context: Often deemed to violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Criminal Defences General Principles Defendants must refute elements of the crime. Various defences can be employed, including: ○ Denial of actus reus ○ Lack of mens rea ○ Justification or excuse defences Types of Defences 1. Ignorance or Mistake ○ General Rule: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. ○ Exceptions: Lack of knowledge about the enactment of a new law. Honest mistakes negating elements of a crime. ○ Notable Cases: Tolson (1889): Acquitted due to an honest mistake of fact. Ladue (1965): Ignorance rejected in a case of indecent interference with a corpse. 2. Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder (NCRMD) ○ Definition: An individual can be found NCRMD if they were unable to appreciate the nature of their act due to a mental disorder. ○ Mental disorder must be proven by the accused. ○ M’Naghten Rule: Insanity is established if the accused did not know the nature of their act or that it was wrong. 3. Intoxication ○ Self-induced intoxication generally does not excuse violent crimes. ○ Exceptions:  Involuntary intoxication (e.g., intoxicated by mistake). Voluntary intoxication can negate specific intent. ○ Notable Case: Otis (1978): Retrial ordered due to failure to consider intent. 4. Duress ○ Definition: Committing a crime under the threat of death or serious harm. ○ Does not apply to serious crimes like murder. ○ Notable Cases: Langlois (1993): Successfully argued duress in drug smuggling. R. v. Ryan (2008): Acquitted for acting under duress in an abusive relationship. 5. Necessity ○ Definition: Breaking the law to avoid a greater evil. ○ Not applicable for intentional killing (e.g., Dudley and Stephens). ○ Notable Case: Hartwell (1972): Actions during survival situation discussed. 6. Self-Defence ○ Justification for using reasonable force to protect oneself from harm. ○ Force must be proportional to the threat. ○ Notable Cases: Lavallee (1990): Established the “battered woman syndrome”. Berrigan (1998): Allowed self-defence in mistaken belief. 7. Entrapment ○ Defence arguing law enforcement induced the crime through trickery. ○ Distinction between providing opportunity vs. inducing a crime. ○ Important to show the defendant would not have committed the crime without police involvement. In-Notes: Criminal Law Developments in Canada 1. Cannabis Legislation R. v. Clay (2003): Supreme Court upheld Parliament's right to prohibit cannabis possession, despite evidence suggesting low harm. Bill C-10 (2004): Aimed to amend drug laws but failed to pass. CCJS Report: Drug crime rates decreased, primarily due to a decline in cannabis-related charges (2/3 of drug crimes). This shift led police to focus on serious offenses. Cannabis Act (2018): Decriminalized personal recreational use; individuals can possess up to 30 grams and grow four plants. Canada became the second country globally to legalize cannabis use. 2. Youth Justice System Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA, 2003): Replaced Young Offenders Act, aimed at addressing issues like high incarceration rates and inequitable treatment. ○ Key changes: End of transfers to adult court Lowered age for adult trial to 14 Emphasis on alternative sentencing (community programs)  Public Concern (2007): High-profile youth crimes raised fears about leniency in the system, leading to recommendations for better public protection. 3. Assisted Suicide Legal Challenges: The debate over assisted suicide has been ongoing since the 1992 Sue Rodriguez case; law changed in 2016 allowing medical assistance in dying (MAID). ○ 2017 Statistics: Almost 2,000 individuals chose MAID, mainly for terminal cancer. Global Context: Jurisdictions like Oregon, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Switzerland have also legalized assisted suicide. 4. Stalking Criminal Harassment (1993): Laws enacted to combat stalking behavior. Statistics: ○ 10% of Canadians admitted to stalking an ex-partner. ○ 11% of women reported being stalked in the last five years. Trends: ○ Increase in unwanted electronic communication (texts, social media). ○ Most stalkers are known to their victims (e.g., friends, partners). 5. Sex Offender Registration Legislation (2001-2004): Introduction of a sex offender registry in Ontario, followed by national laws requiring offenders to report to police. Dangerous Offender Designation: Crown can apply to classify offenders as dangerous based on prior convictions. 6. Corporate Homicide Bill C-45 (2004): Established corporate criminal liability for negligence, following the Westray Mine explosion. Canada aligns with countries like Australia and the UK in addressing workplace safety. 7. Ongoing Legal Evolution The law adapts to societal changes (e.g., decriminalization of cannabis, assisted dying). Emerging issues include technological crimes and environmental rights, as seen with Indigenous-led initiatives to protect natural resources. Summary of Criminal Law Purpose Defines outlawed behaviors; distinguishes between criminal and civil law. Enforces public opinion, deters crime, punishes offenders, and aims to reduce private retribution. Criminal law rooted in English common law; codified in the Criminal Code of Canada. Offenses categorized as indictable (serious crimes) or summary (minor offenses).