Revision Notes

Week 1
Politics of Crime
● Overview: The Politics of Crime examines the intersection between crime
and political processes, focusing on how criminal law reflects societal
values and influences governance. It explores the regulation of crime as a
significant political issue, particularly in electoral contexts like the War on
Drugs.
● Intersection of Crime and Politics:
○ Criminal law regulates not only harmful acts but also moral conduct

within society.
○ Political implications arise from defining certain behaviors as criminal

to maintain social order.

○ Elections often center around crime regulation policies, influencing

public perception and policy-making.

● Regulation of Crime:
○ Regulation is a major political question, impacting legislation and

enforcement strategies.
○ Policies surrounding crime can reflect broader political ideologies and

priorities.
○ The management of crime involves balancing public safety with civil

liberties.
● Political Questions in Crime:
○ Crime is often viewed through a political lens, affecting how laws are

created and enforced.

○ Certain crimes may be politically motivated or used to suppress

dissent (e.g., hate speech, sedition).

○ Understanding crime requires analyzing its socio-political context

rather than solely legal definitions.

● War on Drugs:
○ A prominent example of crime regulation as a political issue.
○ Involves debates over drug policy, law enforcement practices, and

social justice.
○ Reflects broader societal attitudes towards addiction, health, and

criminality.
White Collar Crime
● Overview: White collar crime refers to non-violent, financially motivated
crimes typically committed by business and government professionals.
These crimes often involve deceit and are characterized by their impact
on economic inequality and the perception of leniency in legal treatment
 compared to other types of crime.
● Economic Inequality:
○ Major political issue linked to perceptions of injustice in the legal

system.
○ White collar crimes contribute to widening economic disparities.
○ Public sentiment often views these crimes as less serious than street-

level offenses.
● Treatment of White Collar Crime:
○ Discussion on whether white collar crimes are treated more leniently

than violent crimes.

○ Examination of legal consequences and societal responses to

offenders.
○ Consideration of the influence of power and privilege in the

prosecution process.
● Insider Trading:
○ Defined as trading based on non-public information about a company.
○ Debate over its classification as a crime and its implications for

market fairness.
○ Ethical considerations surrounding insider knowledge and corporate

governance.
Hate Speech
● Overview: Hate speech refers to any form of communication that
disparages or discriminates against individuals or groups based on
attributes such as race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender.
The regulation and criminalization of hate speech raise significant legal
and ethical questions, particularly in democratic societies.
● Criminalization of Hate Speech:
○ Debate over whether hate speech should be criminalized.
○ Considerations include balancing free speech rights with the need to

protect individuals from harm.

○ Various countries have different approaches to defining and

penalizing hate speech.

● Regulation History:
○ Historical context of hate speech laws and their evolution over time.
○ Examination of key legislative changes and landmark cases

influencing hate speech regulation.

○ Impact of social movements and public opinion on the development of

hate speech laws.

● Comparison of Canadian and US Law:
○ Canada has specific laws criminalizing hate speech, emphasizing

protection against discrimination.

 ○ The U.S. generally prioritizes free speech under the First Amendment,
leading to fewer restrictions on hate speech.
○ Differences in legal definitions, enforcement, and societal implications
between the two countries.
Issues in Corrections
● Overview: Issues in corrections encompass the rationale behind
punishment, the evolution of penal institutions, and the ongoing debates
regarding their effectiveness and the need for reform. This field examines
whether current correctional practices achieve their intended goals and
explores arguments for improving these systems.
● Purpose of Punishment:
○ Justifications for punishment include deterrence, rehabilitation,

retribution, and societal protection.

○ Discussion on what punishment should achieve and its effectiveness

in achieving those goals.

● History of Penal Institutions:
○ Overview of the development of prisons and jails over time.
○ Examination of historical shifts in correctional philosophy and

practice.
○ Impact of political movements, such as the punitive turn in crime

control during the 1970s and 1980s.

● Arguments for Reform:
○ Critiques of current penal systems and their outcomes.
○ Advocacy for changes to improve rehabilitation and reduce

recidivism.
○ Consideration of alternative approaches to punishment and crime

prevention.
● Successes of Penal Institutions:
○ Analysis of effective programs and initiatives within penal systems.
○ Evaluation of success stories in rehabilitation and reintegration of

offenders.
○ Mixed results from various policies, including "get tough on crime"

strategies and the war on drugs.

Week 2
Elements of a Crime
● Overview: The elements of a crime consist of two primary components:
mens rea (the guilty mind) and actus reus (the guilty deed). Both must
occur simultaneously for an offense to be established, with the accused
enjoying the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.
 ● Mens Rea:
○ Refers to the mental state or intent of the individual committing the

crime.
○ Essential for establishing culpability; different crimes may require

varying levels of intent (e.g., negligence, recklessness, intention).

● Actus Reus:
○ Refers to the physical act or conduct that constitutes a criminal

offense.
○ Must be a voluntary action or omission leading to harm or damage.
● Presumption of Innocence:
○ Fundamental principle in criminal law stating that an accused is

considered innocent until proven guilty.

○ Two key aspects:

. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the

prosecution.
. The burden of proof lies with the Crown (prosecution), not the
accused.
○ If reasonable doubt exists after considering all evidence, the accused

is entitled to acquittal.
Criminal Process
● Overview: The criminal process encompasses the legal procedures and
principles involved in prosecuting individuals accused of crimes. It
includes various stages such as prosecution, trial, and the determination
of guilt or innocence, with a fundamental emphasis on the presumption of
innocence until proven guilty.
● Prosecution Process:
○ Initiation of charges by the state against an individual.
○ Involves gathering evidence, filing charges, and presenting the case

in court.
○ The prosecution bears the burden of proving the defendant's guilt

beyond a reasonable doubt.

● Trial Procedures:
○ Structured processes for conducting trials, including jury selection,

presentation of evidence, and witness testimonies.

○ Both sides (prosecution and defense) present their cases to an

impartial judge or jury.

○ Adherence to legal standards and rights outlined in the Charter is

crucial during trials.

● Burden of Proof:
○ The obligation to prove one's assertion; in criminal law, it lies with the

prosecution.
 ○ The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt," ensuring that any
uncertainty benefits the accused.
○ The principle of presumption of innocence protects defendants until
proven guilty.
Definition of Criminal Law
● Overview: Criminal law defines actions that are considered offenses
against the state or public and prescribes penalties for those offenses. It
serves to maintain public order, security, and morality through a
structured legal framework.
● Criminal Statute Identification:
○ Identifying criminal laws involves understanding their foundational

elements.
○ The Margarine Reference is a key case in determining what

constitutes a criminal law statute.

● Three-Part Test:
○ A valid criminal law must meet three criteria:

. Prohibition: Clearly defined behavior that is prohibited.

. Backed by a Penalty: There must be consequences for violating
the law.
. Valid Criminal Law Purpose: The law should serve a legitimate
purpose related to public peace, order, security, health, or
morality.
● Criminal Law Purpose:
○ The primary purposes of criminal law include:
◆ Protecting society from harmful behaviors.
◆ Deterring crime through punishment.
◆ Rehabilitating offenders.
◆ Ensuring justice and maintaining social order.
● Limits on the Criminal Law Power:
○ Questions arise regarding what constitutes a valid criminal law

beyond traditional purposes.

○ Considerations include the balance between individual rights and

societal protection.
● Provincial Authority:
○ Discussion on whether one level of government should solely

determine criminality.
○ Examination of the roles of federal and provincial governments in

shaping criminal law.

● Critical Reflections:
○ Is the justice system biased towards the Crown or the accused?
○ Are the powers of criminal law too broad, too narrow, or overly
 ○

influenced by political considerations?

Types of Offenses
● Overview: The criminal law categorizes offenses based on their severity
into three main types: indictable offenses, summary offenses, and hybrid
offenses. Each type has different legal processes and implications for
prosecution and defense.
● Indictable Offenses:
○ Most severe category of crimes (e.g., murder, theft over $5000, major

fraud).
○ Accused may choose to be charged in provincial or superior court.
○ Options include trial with or without a jury and the possibility of a

preliminary hearing.
● Summary Offenses:
○ Less severe crimes (e.g., minor theft, public intoxication).
○ Typically prosecuted in a simpler manner, often without a jury.
○ Generally result in lighter penalties compared to indictable offenses.
● Hybrid Offenses:
○ Can be prosecuted as either indictable or summary offenses,

depending on the Crown's decision.

○ The choice affects the process and potential outcomes for the

defendant.
○ More protections are available if proceeding through the Superior

Court process.
● Key Legal Principles:
○ Mens Rea: The guilty mind; intent to commit the crime.
○ Actus Reus: The guilty deed; the actual act of committing the

offense.
○ Both elements must occur simultaneously and be proven beyond a

reasonable doubt for a conviction.

○ The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Historical Context
● Overview: The historical context surrounding criminal law in Canada,
particularly through the Margarine Reference and related cases,
highlights the evolution of legal definitions and regulations. Key cases
illustrate the complexities of determining what constitutes a criminal act
and the legislative framework governing such determinations.
● Margarine Reference:
○ Officially known as "Reference re Validity of Section 5 (a) Dairy

Industry Act."
○ Prohibited the manufacture, importation, sale, or possession of

margarine made from non-dairy fats from 1886 to 1948.

 ○ Restrictions on yellow margarine persisted in many provinces until
2008 in Quebec.
● Board of Commerce Act:
○ Enacted in 1919, it aimed to regulate trade practices.
○ Lord Haldane's interpretation effectively froze the understanding of

criminal law to its status in 1867.

● Proprietary Articles Trade Association Case:
○ Decided in 1931, this case clarified that criminal law is defined by acts

prohibited under state authority with penal consequences.

○ Emphasized that the quality of an act cannot be determined intuitively

but must align with established legal standards.

● Health Regulation Context:
○ Related to the regulation of health, typically a provincial matter,

leading to divided court opinions.

○ Introduced the concept of “reasoned apprehension of harm” as part

of the Margarine Test for federal regulatory schemes deemed

criminal.
○ Lack of consensus among judges left some aspects of the law

unsettled.
● Definition of Criminal Law:
○ The Margarine Reference established a three-part test for identifying

criminal law statutes:

◆ A prohibition against certain acts.
◆ Backing by a penalty for violations.
◆ A valid criminal law purpose, which allows for broader

interpretations beyond strict limitations.

Legal Rights in the Charter
● Overview: The legal rights enshrined in the Charter protect individuals
from abuses of power by the state and ensure fair treatment under the
law. These rights encompass fundamental protections related to life,
liberty, security, and due process during legal proceedings.
● Right to Life and Liberty:
○ Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security.
○ Deprivation of these rights can only occur in accordance with

principles of fundamental justice.

● Protection Against Unreasonable Search:
○ Individuals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search or

seizure by authorities.
● Rights Upon Arrest:
○ Right to be informed promptly of reasons for arrest.
○ Right to retain and instruct counsel without delay.
 ○ Right to challenge the validity of detention through habeas corpus.
● Trial Rights:
○ Right to be informed of specific charges without unreasonable delay.
○ Right to a trial within a reasonable time.
○ Right not to testify against oneself.
○ Presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
○ Right to reasonable bail unless just cause is shown.
○ Right to trial by jury for serious offenses (imprisonment over five

years).
○ Protection against double jeopardy (being tried twice for the same

offense).
○ Right to benefit from lesser punishment if laws change post-offense.
○ Prohibition against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.
○ Witnesses have protection against self-incrimination in other

proceedings.
○ Right to interpreter assistance for those who do not understand the

language of the proceedings.

Week 3
Future of Corrections
● Overview: The future of corrections involves rethinking traditional
punitive approaches to criminal justice, focusing on reform and
rehabilitation. This includes exploring alternatives to incarceration,
restoring voting rights, and addressing changing societal attitudes
towards crime and punishment.
● Criminal Justice Reform:
○ Emphasis on reducing mass incarceration and addressing systemic

inequalities.
○ Focus on rehabilitation over punishment.
○ Legislative changes aimed at fairer sentencing practices.
● Alternatives to Prison:
○ Community service, probation, and restorative justice programs.
○ Diversion programs for first-time offenders or non-violent crimes.
○ Mental health and substance abuse treatment as alternatives to

incarceration.
● Restoration of Voting Rights:
○ Advocacy for the restoration of voting rights for felons post-

incarceration.
○ Discussion on the impact of disenfranchisement on communities and

democracy.
● Changing Attitudes Towards Crime:
 ○ Shift from a "get tough on crime" mentality to a more rehabilitative
approach.
○ Increased public awareness of the social and economic costs of mass
incarceration.
○ Growing support for policies that address root causes of crime, such
as poverty and lack of education.
Political and Social Context
● Overview: The political and social context surrounding crime has
evolved, particularly regarding the effectiveness of the "war on drugs"
and "tough on crime" policies. There is a growing consensus that these
approaches have failed, prompting discussions about alternative
strategies for addressing crime and its underlying causes.
● War on Drugs:
○ Increasing skepticism about the effectiveness of drug prohibition.
○ Calls for reform and alternative approaches to drug-related issues.
● Neoliberal Turn:
○ Shift towards individual responsibility over collective solutions.
○ Emphasis on personal accountability in addressing crime and social

issues.
● Personal Responsibility:
○ Focus on individuals making choices and taking responsibility for their

actions.
○ Critique of reliance on government intervention to solve societal

problems.
● Racial Overtones:
○ Historical context of crime perception influenced by racial and

biological stereotypes.
○ Ongoing discussions about how race impacts public policy and

criminal justice.
● Public Perception of Crime:
○ Fluctuations in public attitudes toward crime and punishment.
○ Influence of high crime rates in the 1970s/1980s leading to tougher

policies.
○ Current trends showing a shift away from punitive measures like

mandatory minimums and three strikes laws.

Theories of Crime
● Overview: Theories of crime seek to explain the causes and motivations
behind criminal behavior. They range from classical approaches
emphasizing rational choice and deterrence to more contemporary
theories that consider social, economic, and psychological factors
influencing criminality.
 ● Preclassical Theories:
○ Focused on supernatural explanations for crime.
○ Emphasized moral and religious dimensions rather than rational

thought.
● Classical Theories:
○ Originated with thinkers like Cesare Beccaria.
○ Emphasized deterrence through clear consequences for crime.
○ Advocated for justice systems based on reason and prevention rather

than punishment alone.

● Rational Choice Theory:
○ Assumes individuals make decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis.
○ Suggests that crime can be deterred by increasing the perceived

costs associated with criminal acts.

● Marxist Theory:
○ Views crime as a product of class struggle and socio-economic

inequalities.
○ Argues that laws reflect the interests of the ruling class, maintaining

their power and control over resources.

● Strain Theory:
○ Proposes that societal pressures and lack of legitimate means to

achieve goals lead individuals to commit crimes.

○ Highlights the disconnect between societal expectations and

available opportunities.
● Social Learning Theory:
○ Suggests that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with

others.
○ Emphasizes the role of reinforcement and modeling in developing

criminal behaviors.
● Integrative Theory:
○ Combines multiple factors (social, environmental, personal) to explain

criminal behavior.
○ Recognizes that no single theory can fully account for the complexity

of crime; considers life course events and situational contexts.

Incarceration and Punishment
● Overview: Incarceration and punishment refer to the systems and
philosophies surrounding the confinement of individuals as a response to
crime. Over time, these practices have evolved from punitive measures to
include various objectives such as incapacitation, deterrence, retribution,
and rehabilitation.
● Growth in Jails:
○ Significant increase in incarceration rates over recent decades.
 ○ Shift from treatment/support to warehousing offenders.
○ Reflects a punitive turn in corrections.
● Incapacitation:
○ Aims to prevent further crimes by removing offenders from society.
○ Focuses on keeping dangerous individuals away from potential

victims.
● Deterrence:
○ Seeks to discourage criminal behavior through the threat of

punishment.
○ Can be specific (targeting individual offenders) or general (aimed at

the public).
● Retribution:
○ Emphasizes punishment as a form of societal revenge for

wrongdoing.
○ Based on the belief that offenders deserve to be punished for their

actions.
● Rehabilitation:
○ Focuses on reforming offenders so they can reintegrate into society

successfully.
○ Historically less emphasized in modern correctional facilities.
● History of Incarceration:
○ Early forms of incarceration were temporary, primarily holding

individuals until trial.

○ Punishments were often brutal, including capital punishment and

flogging.
● Mass Incarceration:
○ Emerged in the 1970s with skepticism about prisons' ability to

rehabilitate.
○ "Tough on crime" policies led to overcrowded prisons focused on

control rather than rehabilitation.

○ Growth of supermax prisons designed for the most dangerous

offenders.
● Things to Think About:
○ Consider which theories of crime are most convincing.
○ Explore alternatives to the "get tough on crime" mentality.
○ Reflect on cultural factors influencing American attitudes toward

crime and punishment.

○ Investigate possible alternatives to prison as a form of punishment.

The Punitive Turn in Corrections

● Overview: The punitive turn in corrections refers to a shift towards
harsher sentencing and increased incarceration rates, influenced by
●

various criminological theories. This movement emphasizes deterrence

and punishment over rehabilitation, reflecting societal attitudes towards
crime and justice.
● Positivist Theories:
○ Focus on scientific methods to understand criminal behavior.
○ Suggest that crime is determined by factors beyond individual control

(e.g., biology, environment).

● Rational Choice Theory:
○ Assumes individuals make calculated decisions based on perceived

costs and benefits.

○ Emphasizes the importance of deterrence through clear

consequences for criminal actions.

● Criminology:
○ Study of crime, its causes, effects, and social impact.
○ Encompasses various theories explaining criminal behavior and

societal responses.
● Classical Theories:
○ Rooted in Enlightenment thinking; advocates for rationality in

understanding crime.
○ Emphasizes deterrence and proportional punishment as key to

preventing crime.
● Marxist Theory:
○ Views crime as a product of social inequality and capitalist structures.
○ Critiques punitive measures as tools for maintaining class power.
● Sociological Approaches:
○ Examines how social structures and relationships influence criminal

behavior.
○ Considers the role of community and societal norms in shaping crime.
● Strain Theory:
○ Proposes that societal pressures can lead individuals to commit

crimes when they cannot achieve culturally approved goals.

○ Highlights the disconnect between aspirations and means available to

achieve them.
● Social Learning Theory:
○ Suggests that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with

others.
○ Emphasizes the influence of peers and family on an individual's

likelihood to engage in crime.

● Integrative Theories:
○ Combine elements from multiple theories to provide a more

comprehensive understanding of crime.

○ Acknowledge the complexity of human behavior and societal
 ○

influences.
● Tough on Crime Movement:
○ Emerged in the 1970s/1980s advocating for stricter laws and harsher

penalties.
○ Reflects public sentiment favoring punitive measures over

rehabilitative approaches.
● Alternatives to Prison:
○ Explore options such as restorative justice, community service, and

rehabilitation programs.
○ Aim to address root causes of crime rather than solely focusing on

punishment.

Week 4
Sentencing Considerations
● Overview: Sentencing considerations involve the principles and factors
that courts must take into account when determining appropriate
sentences for offenders. This includes recognizing the unique
circumstances of individuals, particularly Indigenous offenders, and
exploring alternatives to imprisonment.
● Culturally Appropriate Sentencing:
○ Emphasizes understanding the unique backgrounds and systemic

factors affecting Indigenous offenders.

○ Incorporates Gladue Principles, which consider an offender's

Aboriginal heritage in sentencing decisions.

● Alternative Measures:
○ Focus on sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable and

consistent with the harm done.

○ Encourages restorative justice approaches that seek holistic solutions

involving both the individual and the community.

● Community-Based Options:
○ Promotes involvement of the community in the rehabilitation process.
○ Aims to create a supportive environment for offenders to reintegrate

successfully.
● Judicial Discretion:
○ Allows judges to exercise discretion in considering various factors

during sentencing.
○ Supports tailored sentences that reflect the specific circumstances of

each case, especially for marginalized groups.

Criminal Justice System
● Overview: The Criminal Justice System (CJS) encompasses the
institutions and processes established to enforce laws, adjudicate
 ●

criminal cases, and rehabilitate offenders. Recent initiatives focus on

diversifying the system, addressing disparities, and implementing
restorative practices, particularly for marginalized communities such as
Indigenous peoples.
● Court System Diversification:
○ Historical lack of diversity in courts; predominantly male and

monochromatic representation.
○ Shift towards inclusivity, with efforts to appoint diverse judges,

including women and minorities.

○ Supreme Court appointed its first female justice in 1982.
● Sentencing Practices:
○ Increased sensitivity in sentencing, especially for Indigenous

offenders.
○ Consideration of unique backgrounds and systemic factors

influencing offender behavior.

○ Movement towards alternative sentencing options that reflect

community values and needs.

● Gladue Principles:
○ Address overrepresentation of Indigenous individuals in the CJS due

to systemic discrimination and colonial history.

○ Emphasizes consideration of background factors in legal decision-

making.
○ Advocates for pre- and post-charge diversion and culturally

appropriate restorative justice measures.

● Restorative Justice:
○ Focuses on healing for both victims and offenders through

community involvement.
○ Aims for holistic responses to crime, fostering reconciliation and

understanding.
○ Encourages collaboration between individuals and communities to

restore balance.
● Pre-Trial Detention Disparities:
○ Examination of inequalities in pre-trial detention rates among different

demographic groups.
○ Calls for reforms to address biases and ensure fair treatment before

trial.
Systemic Discrimination
● Overview: Systemic discrimination refers to the ingrained policies and
practices within institutions that result in unequal treatment of certain
groups, often based on race or ethnicity. It contrasts with overt racism,
which is explicit and easily identifiable, making systemic issues more
 complex to address.
● Historical Context:
○ Long-standing history of racism in various systems, particularly in

criminal justice.
○ Historical injustices have contributed to current disparities faced by

minority and Indigenous populations.

● Impact on Indigenous Peoples:
○ Indigenous offenders face harsher treatment compared to white

counterparts.
○ Lower likelihood of being granted parole and higher rates of

incarceration.
○ Systemic barriers contribute to overrepresentation in the criminal

justice system.
● Statistical Evidence:
○ Statistics reveal significant disparities in treatment and outcomes for

minorities in the justice system.

○ Data supports claims of systemic discrimination, highlighting the

need for further examination and understanding.

● Overt vs. Systemic Racism:
○ Overt racism involves explicit prejudiced actions and beliefs, while

systemic racism is embedded in institutional practices.

○ Understanding the distinction is crucial for addressing the root

causes of discrimination and developing effective solutions.

Racial and Indigenous Issues in Criminal Justice
● Overview: Racial and Indigenous issues in criminal justice highlight the
systemic discrimination faced by minority groups, particularly Indigenous
peoples. This includes overrepresentation in incarceration rates, biases in
policing and sentencing, and the impact of historical injustices rooted in
colonialism.
● Indigenous Overrepresentation:
○ Indigenous peoples constitute about 2% of the population but

represent approximately 17-18% of incarcerated individuals.

○ The issue is complex and tied to systemic discrimination and colonial

history.
● Statistics on Indigenous Incarceration:
○ Significant disparities exist in incarceration rates between Indigenous

and non-Indigenous populations.

○ Studies indicate higher rates of incarceration for Indigenous

individuals compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts.

● Racism in Criminal Justice:
○ Systemic racism affects various stages of the criminal justice
 ○

process, from arrest to sentencing.

○ Indigenous and racialized individuals are often disproportionately

targeted by law enforcement.

● Prejudice and Discrimination:
○ Indigenous and minority groups face bias at the initial contact with

police.
○ Historical patterns show that Indigenous individuals are charged with

more crimes than non-Indigenous individuals.

○ Sentencing studies reveal that Indigenous offenders receive harsher

penalties even when controlling for prior records and offense types.
● Neoliberalism and Corrections:
○ The influence of neoliberal policies on corrections can exacerbate

inequalities within the criminal justice system.

○ Focus on privatization and profit may overlook the needs of

marginalized communities.
● Convict Leasing:
○ Historical practices like convict leasing have roots in racial

exploitation and continue to affect contemporary correctional

systems.
○ These practices perpetuate cycles of poverty and marginalization

among racialized groups.

● Intersectionality:
○ Understanding how race, class, gender, and other identities intersect

is crucial in addressing the complexities of criminal justice issues.

○ Intersectional analysis reveals compounded disadvantages faced by

Indigenous women and other marginalized groups within the system.

● Gladue Principles:
○ Emphasize consideration of unique background factors affecting

Indigenous individuals in legal proceedings.

○ Advocate for alternative measures and community-based options,

including culturally appropriate restorative justice processes.

Policy and Reform
● Overview: Policy and reform in the context of racial and Indigenous
issues focus on addressing systemic discrimination within institutions,
particularly in the criminal justice system. This includes implementing
measures like affirmative action, cultural awareness programs, and
indigenization to promote equity and inclusion for marginalized groups.
● Affirmative Action:
○ Hiring policies aimed at increasing representation of Indigenous

people and other racialized groups.

○ Creation of specialized units within organizations staffed by these
 ○

communities.
● Cultural Awareness Programs:
○ Initiatives designed to educate about and respect diverse cultures.
○ Involvement of elders or community leaders in program or policy

design.
● Indigenization in Justice:
○ Integration of traditional practices (e.g., sweat lodges, ceremonies)

into mainstream programs.

○ Translation of program information into Aboriginal languages to

enhance accessibility.
● Gladue Reports:
○ Used to inform sentencing decisions by considering unique

circumstances of Indigenous individuals.

○ Address factors such as:
◆ Impact of the residential school system.
◆ Lack of formal education.
◆ Living conditions of the accused.
◆ Experiences in child welfare and adoption systems.
◆ Effects of dislocation and dispossession of Indigenous peoples.
● Agenda:
○ Review overrepresentation of minorities in the criminal justice system.
○ Analyze court responses to diversity challenges.
○ Examine how Canadian justice has addressed race and Indigeneity in

sentencing and prosecution.

● Gladue Principles from DOJ:
○ Acknowledgment of systemic discrimination and colonial history

affecting Indigenous peoples.

○ Consideration of background factors leading to contact with the law

in decision-making.
○ Emphasis on pre- and post-charge diversion and culturally

appropriate restorative justice options for Indigenous individuals.

Week 5
Prison Economics
● Overview: Prison economics examines the financial and social
implications of incarceration within a society's political economy. It
encompasses the location of prisons, the role of private prisons, and the
challenges of post-prison rehabilitation, raising questions about the
effectiveness and morality of imprisonment as a form of punishment.
● Location of Prisons:
○ Considerations for placing prisons closer to urban areas to minimize
 ○

disruption for families and communities.

○ Impact on local economies and community dynamics.
● Private Prisons:
○ The growing role of private prisons in the U.S. and their influence on

incarceration rates and policies.

○ Ethical concerns regarding profit motives versus rehabilitation and

public safety.
○ Need for reevaluation of private prison systems and their impact on

justice.
● Post-Prison Rehabilitation:
○ Importance of effective rehabilitation programs to reduce recidivism.
○ Challenges faced by ex-convicts in securing employment and

reintegrating into society.

○ Strategies for successful reentry, including job training and support

services.
Issues in Corrections
● Overview: Issues in corrections encompass various challenges faced
within the prison system, including solitary confinement and
administrative segregation. These practices raise significant concerns
regarding their impact on inmates' mental health, recidivism rates, and
overall effectiveness of correctional facilities.
● Solitary Confinement:
○ Definition: A form of punishment where inmates are isolated from the

general population for extended periods.

○ Justification: Historically justified through religious beliefs, scientific

studies on sensory deprivation, and a shift towards punitive measures

over rehabilitation.
○ Legal Aspect: Decisions made by correctional facility administration

rather than courts.

● Administrative Segregation:
○ Similar to solitary confinement but often used for safety or

management reasons rather than punishment.

○ Involves separating inmates deemed a threat to themselves or others.
● Mental Health Challenges:
○ High prevalence of mental health issues among incarcerated

individuals exacerbated by isolation.

○ Solitary confinement can lead to severe psychological effects,

including anxiety, depression, and suicidal tendencies.

● Recidivism Rates:
○ Examination of how solitary confinement and administrative

segregation affect reoffending rates.

 ○ Concerns that harsh conditions may contribute to higher recidivism
due to lack of rehabilitation and social reintegration support.
Cost of Incarceration
● Overview: The cost of incarceration refers to the financial burden
associated with housing and managing prisoners in correctional facilities.
In Canada, annual costs can reach up to $115,000 per prisoner,
significantly impacting public budgets compared to median household
incomes.
● Annual Costs:
○ Estimated at $115,000 per year for each prisoner in higher security

settings.
○ Lower costs in provincial institutions, approximately $67,000 per year.
○ Costs are notably higher for female inmates.
● Comparison to Household Income:
○ Median household income in Canada (2016) was around $70,000,

often supporting multiple individuals.

○ Incarceration costs exceed the median household income, raising

questions about resource allocation.

● Prisoner Labor:
○ Discussion on the role of prisoner labor within the prison system.
○ Considerations include economic benefits versus ethical implications.
○ Examination of how prisoner labor contributes to the overall cost of

incarceration and its impact on rehabilitation efforts.

Reform Options
● Overview: Reform options in the criminal justice system aim to address
issues such as overcriminalization, mandatory minimum sentences, and
drug laws. These reforms seek to create a more just and effective legal
framework while considering the implications of current policies on prison
populations and societal well-being.
● Overcriminalization:
○ Concerns about excessive laws leading to unnecessary criminal

charges.
○ Example: Laws related to protests (e.g., Ottawa Truckers) raise

questions about their necessity.

○ Discussion on whether existing laws are needed or if they contribute

to systemic issues.
● Mandatory Minimums:
○ Popular sentencing policy that requires fixed minimum sentences for

certain crimes.
○ Raises constitutional and ethical questions regarding fairness and

justice.
 ○ Contributes to increased prison populations; debate on their
effectiveness and worth.
● Decriminalization:
○ The process of removing criminal penalties for specific acts,

particularly concerning drug use.

○ Example: Cannabis legalization highlights potential benefits of

decriminalization.
○ Consideration of alternative approaches to drug-related offenses

amidst ongoing issues like the opioid epidemic.

● Life Sentences:
○ Examination of life sentences without parole and their impact on

individuals and society.

○ Ethical considerations regarding rehabilitation versus punishment.
○ Discussion on the long-term consequences of life sentences on

inmates and families.

● Diversion Programs:
○ Alternatives to traditional prosecution aimed at redirecting offenders

away from incarceration.

○ Focus on rehabilitation and reducing recidivism through support

services.
○ Potential to alleviate pressure on the criminal justice system and

improve outcomes for offenders.

Purpose of Incarceration
● Overview: The purpose of incarceration encompasses various goals
aimed at addressing crime and its consequences. These include
incapacitating offenders, deterring future crimes, denouncing criminal
behavior, and rehabilitating individuals to reintegrate them into society.
● Incapacitation:
○ Prevents offenders from committing further crimes by removing them

from society.
○ Focuses on protecting the public from dangerous individuals.
● Deterrence:
○ Aims to discourage both the individual offender and the general

public from engaging in criminal behavior.

○ Can be specific (targeting the individual) or general (aimed at society

as a whole).
● Denunciation:
○ Serves to express societal condemnation of criminal acts.
○ Reinforces moral boundaries and societal norms through punishment.
● Rehabilitation:
○ Focuses on reforming offenders to reduce recidivism.
 ○ Includes educational programs, therapy, and vocational training to
prepare inmates for successful reintegration into society.
International Incarceration Rates
● Overview: International incarceration rates measure the number of
individuals imprisoned per 100,000 population across different countries.
These rates reflect various factors including crime rates, legal systems,
and societal attitudes towards punishment and rehabilitation.
● Comparison of Countries:
○ High Incarceration Rates:
◆ United States: 331 per 100,000
◆ El Salvador: 357 per 100,000
◆ Rwanda: 639 per 100,000
◆ Brazil: 572 per 100,000
○ Moderate Incarceration Rates:
◆ Russia: 160 per 100,000
◆ Australia: 122 per 100,000
◆ Spain: 121 per 100,000
◆ China: 104 per 100,000
○ Low Incarceration Rates:
◆ Canada: 93 per 100,000
◆ France: 69 per 100,000
◆ Germany: 68 per 100,000
◆ Denmark: 68 per 100,000
◆ Sweden: 68 per 100,000
◆ India: 35 per 100,000
● Historical Trends:
○ Growth in prison populations, particularly in the United States.
○ Examination of whether increased incarceration correlates with

reduced crime rates.

○ Discussion on reforms and current issues such as administrative

segregation (ad seg) and solitary confinement.

○ Consideration of broader questions regarding the effectiveness of

prisons and alternative approaches to justice.

Political Economy of Prisons
● Overview: The political economy of prisons examines how economic and
political factors shape the prison system, including the role of labor,
privatization, and societal impacts. It raises questions about the
effectiveness of imprisonment and explores alternatives to traditional
punitive measures.
● Prison Manufacturing:
○ Involves the production of goods by inmates, often at low wages.
 ○ Raises ethical concerns regarding exploitation and the quality of
products produced.
● Private Prisons:
○ Operated for profit, leading to debates on their impact on

incarceration rates and conditions.

○ Criticized for prioritizing profit over rehabilitation and inmate welfare.
● Convict Leasing:
○ Historical practice where prisoners are leased out for labor, often

under harsh conditions.

○ Seen as a form of modern slavery and exploitation of marginalized

populations.
● Transportation:
○ Refers to the movement of prisoners, historically used as a

punishment or means of managing overcrowding.

○ Raises issues related to human rights and the treatment of

transported individuals.
● Prison Economics:
○ Discussion on the placement of prisons near urban areas to minimize

disruption.
○ Economic implications of maintaining and operating prisons in various

communities.
● Major Questions:
○ Is imprisonment an effective solution for crime?
○ What reforms are necessary to improve the prison system?
○ Current issues include administrative segregation (ad seg) and

solitary confinement practices.

● Prisoners as Workers:
○ Consideration of the ethics and implications of using inmates as

laborers.
○ Debate on whether this practice benefits society or further

marginalizes incarcerated individuals.

Week 6
Comparative Analysis
● Overview: Comparative analysis involves evaluating and contrasting
different entities, such as countries or systems, to understand their
similarities and differences. In the context of youth crime and justice, it
examines how various approaches impact youth incarceration rates,
rehabilitation, and societal perceptions in Canada and the United States.
● Canada vs. United States:
○ Different legal frameworks for handling juvenile offenders.
 ○ Variations in punitive measures and rehabilitative approaches.
○ Impact of political movements on youth crime policies.
● International Trends:
○ Shifting global perspectives on youth justice.
○ Increasing focus on rehabilitation over punishment.
○ Influence of international human rights standards on national policies.
● Youth Incarceration Rates:
○ Comparison of statistics between Canada and the U.S.
○ Factors contributing to differing rates of youth incarceration.
○ Examination of recidivism rates and their implications for policy.
● Rehabilitation vs. Punishment:
○ Debate on the effectiveness of rehabilitative versus punitive

approaches.
○ Discussion on the long-term impacts of labeling and stigma

associated with juvenile delinquency.

○ Consideration of whether children should be treated differently due to

their developmental stage and culpability.

Concept of Childhood
● Overview: The concept of childhood has evolved significantly,
particularly after the Industrial Revolution. It reflects societal views on
children's needs and rights, leading to reforms in education and legal
systems that recognize children as distinct from adults with specific
requirements and protections.
● Historical Development:
○ Emergence of the modern concept of childhood post-Industrial

Revolution (~1750-1900).
○ Children were previously viewed as "small adults" rather than having

unique developmental needs.

● Parens Patriae:
○ Legal doctrine meaning "parent of the nation," emphasizing the

state's role in protecting children when parents fail to do so.

○ Reflects changing political attitudes towards child welfare and

responsibility.
● Legal Status of Childhood Offenders:
○ Development of a separate criminal justice system for minors.
○ Recognition of different levels of culpability based on age and

maturity.
● 19th Century Reforms:
○ Establishment of separate institutions for children, notably in

education.
○ Introduction of free compulsory education in the late 19th century.
 ○ Shift towards recognizing children's rights and needs within society.
Juvenile Justice System
● Overview: The Juvenile Justice System is designed to address offenses
committed by minors, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
It has evolved through various legislative reforms aimed at protecting
young offenders while promoting their reintegration into society.
● Legislative Reforms:
○ Historical acts include the Juvenile Offenders Act (1847), Youthful

Offenders Act (1854), and Industrial Schools Act (1857) in the UK.
○ Emphasis on education as a solution to juvenile delinquency.
○ Simplified trials intended to be less severe for young offenders

compared to adults.
● Young Offenders Act 1984:
○ Established a framework for dealing with youth offenders in Canada.
○ Focused on rehabilitation and reintegration of young offenders into

society.
● Youth Criminal Justice Act 2002:
○ Modern legislation replacing the Young Offenders Act.
○ Aims to "re-socialize youth" while ensuring public safety.
○ Sentences must not exceed those given to adults for similar offenses.
○ Prioritizes alternatives to incarceration and considers Indigenous

backgrounds.
○ Emphasizes family involvement in the re-entry process and police

discretion in charging decisions.

● Sentencing Practices:
○ Sentences should reflect the offender's responsibility and culpability.
○ Alternatives to jail are prioritized, including diversion programs and

educational opportunities.
● Rehabilitation Focus:
○ Strong emphasis on rehabilitating young offenders rather than

punitive measures.
○ Contextual factors influencing behavior are considered in the justice

process.
○ Public safety remains a key concern throughout the system.

Public Perception and Policy

● Overview: Public perception and policy regarding children, particularly in
the context of youth crime, involve complex discussions about culpability,
societal attitudes, and reform movements. These factors influence how
children are treated within the justice system and shape policies aimed at
addressing youth crime.
● Culpability of Children:
 ○ Debate on whether children should be considered less culpable for
their actions due to developmental differences.
○ Consideration of age and maturity in determining responsibility for

criminal behavior.
● Impact of Labeling:
○ The effects of labeling children as "delinquents" or "criminals" can

lead to stigmatization and affect their future opportunities.

○ Labels may reinforce negative behaviors and hinder rehabilitation

efforts.
● Societal Attitudes:
○ Variations in societal views on childhood and youth crime across

different cultures and regions.

○ Influence of public opinion on policy decisions related to juvenile

justice and child welfare.

● Reform Movements:
○ Historical and contemporary movements advocating for changes in

how youth offenders are treated by the legal system.

○ Emphasis on rehabilitation over punishment, reflecting a shift towards

understanding the needs of children and families.

● Questions for Reflection:
○ Should children be treated differently than adults in the justice

system?
○ Are current policies based on accurate assumptions about youth

crime and its causes?

○ What responsibilities do parents have in preventing youth crime, and

is it fair to hold them accountable?

Week 7
Public Policy and Cannabis
● Overview: The public policy surrounding cannabis involves balancing
taxation, health considerations, market impacts, and societal views. As
legalization spreads, governments face challenges in regulating the
industry while addressing public health and reducing black market
activity.
● Tax Agreements:
○ Need for effective tax structures to generate revenue from legal

cannabis sales.
○ Balancing tax rates to discourage black market competition while

ensuring profitability for legal producers.

○ Consideration of how taxes can fund public health initiatives related

to cannabis use.
 ● Public Health Considerations:
○ Establishing strict requirements for cannabis production and sale to

ensure consumer safety.

○ Addressing potential health risks associated with cannabis use,

including addiction and mental health issues.

○ Implementing educational campaigns about responsible use and

potential harms.
● Black Market Impact:
○ Legalization aims to reduce illegal cannabis trade but has faced

challenges in undercutting the black market.

○ Ongoing high levels of cannabis use despite legalization raise

questions about market effectiveness.

○ Regulatory conflicts between taxation, public health protection, and

illegal market competition.

● Societal Views:
○ Changing perceptions of cannabis as a health issue rather than solely

a criminal justice problem.

○ Mixed public reception regarding legalization; some regions have

seen lower interest in legal cannabis.

○ Historical context of cannabis within the broader war on drugs and its

implications for current policies.

Cannabis Legalization in Canada
● Overview: Cannabis legalization in Canada, effective October 17, 2018,
marked a significant cultural and social shift. It aimed to regulate
cannabis use, reduce illegal market activity, and address past injustices
related to drug offenses while balancing public health concerns.
● Historical Context:
○ Prohibition lasted for nearly 90 years before legalization.
○ In 2017, there were approximately 48,000 cannabis-related offenses

reported, predominantly for possession.

○ The enforcement of cannabis laws disproportionately affected

minorities and Indigenous communities.

● Public Perception:
○ 64% of Canadians support legalization.
○ About two-thirds of consumers are purchasing from legal sources.
○ There is strong public sentiment (70%) favoring pardons for

individuals with past cannabis-related offenses.

● Economic Impact:
○ Legalization has created a new industry with potential tax revenues.
○ Concerns exist regarding the balance between profit motives of

producers and public health implications.

 ○ Questions about supply adequacy arose during the initial rollout of
legalization.
● Health Regulations:
○ The government acknowledged limited health risks associated with

cannabis use.
○ Regulatory frameworks were established to ensure safe production

and distribution.
○ Ongoing debates about the impact on youth and community health

persist.
● Pardons for Past Offenses:
○ Public support exists for pardoning those previously convicted of

cannabis-related crimes.
○ This aspect aims to rectify historical injustices linked to cannabis

prohibition.
History of Drug Regulation
● Overview: The history of drug regulation has evolved significantly,
particularly in the 20th century, with key legislation aimed at controlling
substances and addressing public health concerns. Major acts like the
Pure Food and Drugs Act and the Harrison Narcotics Act laid the
groundwork for modern drug policies, which continue to evolve amid
ongoing debates about legalization and health approaches.
● Pure Food and Drugs Act (1906):
○ First federal law regulating food and drugs in the United States.
○ Aimed to prevent misbranding and adulteration of food and

pharmaceuticals.
● Harrison Narcotics Act (1914):
○ Legislation that restricted the sale and use of narcotics, including

heroin and cocaine, requiring prescriptions.

○ Marked a significant shift towards stricter control over certain drugs.
● War on Drugs:
○ Emerged in the 1970s, primarily under President Richard Nixon.
○ Focused on combating illegal drug use and trafficking, influenced by

concerns over military readiness during the Vietnam War.

○ Accusations of racial motivations behind drug enforcement policies.
● Prohibition:
○ Historical context of drug regulation; constitutional amendments

banned alcohol in the U.S.

○ Highlighted challenges in enforcing drug bans and the unintended

consequences of prohibitionist policies.

● Recent Controversies:
○ Shift in focus towards prescription drug abuse and discussions
 ○

around legalization.
○ Many countries are reconsidering criminalization in favor of treating
drug use as a public health issue.
○ Ongoing debate about the effectiveness of current drug policies and
their impact on society.
Modern Drug Issues
● Overview: Modern drug issues encompass the complexities surrounding
both legal and illegal drugs, focusing on the prescription drug crisis, calls
for reform in drug policy, and the ongoing debate between
decriminalization and legalization. The shift towards viewing drug use as
a health issue rather than solely a criminal one is gaining traction globally.
● Prescription Drug Crisis:
○ Increasing concerns over misuse and addiction to prescription

medications.
○ Highlighting the need for better regulation and monitoring of

prescriptions.
● Legal vs. Illegal Drugs:
○ Distinction between substances regulated by law (legal) and those

prohibited (illegal).
○ Discussion on how laws impact drug availability and public health.
● Calls for Reform:
○ Growing advocacy for treating drug use as a health issue rather than

a criminal justice problem.

○ Emphasis on decriminalization and increased access to treatment

options.
○ Recognition that decriminalization does not equate to legalization; it

focuses on reducing penalties while still regulating substance use.

● Decriminalization vs. Legalization:
○ Decriminalization: Reducing or eliminating criminal penalties for

drug possession/use, focusing on health interventions.

○ Legalization: Allowing regulated sale and use of certain drugs, often

accompanied by taxation and quality control measures.

○ Ongoing debates about the implications of each approach on society

and public health.

● Rise of the Pharmaceutical Age:
○ Historical context of drug regulation beginning with the Pure Food

and Drugs Act (1906) and Harrison Narcotics Act (1914) in the U.S.
○ Establishment of frameworks for controlling drug distribution and

usage.
● The Modern War on Drugs:
○ Initiated in the 1970s under President Nixon, aimed at combating drug
 ○

abuse and trafficking.

○ Criticized for its racial motivations and focus on criminalization over

treatment.
○ Acknowledgment of the dual approach of treatment and enforcement

during this period.

● Has the War on Drugs Failed?
○ Consensus on the failure of the war on drugs due to:
◆ Increased incarceration rates, particularly among minority

communities.
◆ Growth of smuggling and underground markets.
◆ Rise in the danger of available drugs.
◆ Erosion of respect for the law.
◆ Neglect of issues related to legal prescription drugs and their

impacts on society.
War on Drugs
● Overview: The War on Drugs refers to the U.S. government's campaign
against illegal drug use and trafficking, which began in the 1970s. It has
roots in earlier drug policies and has evolved through various political
eras, leading to significant social and legal consequences, including
increased incarceration rates.
● Historical Roots:
○ Emerged from earlier drug prohibition efforts, such as alcohol

prohibition.
○ Nixon's administration in the 1970s marked a formal declaration of the

War on Drugs.
○ Accusations of racial motivations behind drug policies.
● Political Fights:
○ Ongoing debates about drug policy effectiveness and societal impact.
○ Tensions between criminalization and treatment approaches.
○ Historical context includes previous attempts at regulating

substances.
● Reagan Era:
○ Increased focus on punitive measures against drug offenses.
○ Belief that drugs were eroding societal values and combat readiness.
○ Resulted in skyrocketing prison rates due to a shift towards

criminalization over treatment.

● Criminalization Focus:
○ Emphasis on law enforcement and punishment for drug-related

crimes.
○ Disproportionate impact on minority communities.
○ Shift away from rehabilitation and treatment options.
 ● Prison Rates:
○ Significant increase in incarceration rates linked to drug offenses.
○ Criticism regarding the effectiveness and fairness of the justice

system.
○ Contributes to broader discussions about systemic issues within the

penal system.
● Has the War on Drugs Failed?
○ Widespread agreement on its failure due to:
◆ Higher incarceration rates without reducing drug use.
◆ Increase in smuggling and underground markets.
◆ More dangerous drugs becoming prevalent.
◆ Erosion of respect for the law.
◆ Neglect of issues related to legal prescription drugs.
● Drugs and War:
○ Connection between military conflicts and drug exploitation.
○ Vietnam War played a crucial role in shaping modern drug policies.
○ Governments have historically used drug control as a tool during

wartime.
Race and Drug Prohibition
● Overview: The intersection of race and drug prohibition highlights how
racial fears and stereotypes have historically influenced the banning of
certain drugs. This connection has shaped policies around cannabis,
opiates, and cocaine, often reflecting societal anxieties about specific
racial groups.
● Racial Motivations:
○ Early cannabis bans were driven by fears surrounding Mexican

immigrants.
○ Opiate bans were influenced by concerns about the Asian community.
○ Cocaine prohibition was largely motivated by perceptions of Black

Americans.
● Cannabis Ban:
○ Linked to anti-Mexican sentiment in the early 20th century.
○ Became a focal point in the broader "war on drugs" narrative.
○ Viewed as part of public policy failures with harsh penalties.
● Opiate Ban:
○ Rooted in racial fears regarding Asian populations.
○ Reflects historical stigmatization and criminalization of users.
● Cocaine Ban:
○ Associated with racial biases against Black Americans.
○ Policies disproportionately affected communities of color.
● Recent Controversies:
 ○ Shift towards viewing drug use as a health issue rather than solely a
criminal one.
○ Ongoing debates about prescription drug problems and legalization

efforts.
○ Recognition that reducing criminal law enforcement may not fully

address underlying issues.

● The Modern War on Drugs:
○ Initiated in the 1970s under President Nixon, partly due to concerns

over troop readiness in Vietnam.

○ Accusations of racial motivations behind drug policies persist.
○ Emphasis on both treatment and criminalization in addressing drug

use.
● Cannabis in Context:
○ Part of the larger war on crime narrative, peaking mid-20th century.
○ Criticized for being a public policy disaster with severe punishments.
○ Despite its popularity, the approach to cannabis remains

controversial.
● Focus on Non-Deadly Drugs:
○ Political focus often on less deadly drugs like cannabis and LSD.
○ Prescription opiates are more lethal but receive less attention due to

political and cultural factors.

○ Racial overtones and counterculture associations shape public

perception and policy priorities.

Week 8
Principal-Agent Problem
● Overview: The Principal-Agent Problem arises when one party (the
agent) acts on behalf of another party (the principal), leading to potential
conflicts of interest. This issue is characterized by differing goals and
information asymmetries, which can result in trust issues and unethical
behavior.
● Trust Issues:
○ Trust is fundamental in relationships where one party relies on

another to act in their best interest.

○ Lack of trust can lead to fraud and exploitation within the principal-

agent dynamic.
● Information Asymmetry:
○ Agents often possess more information than principals, allowing them

to exploit this knowledge for personal gain.

○ This imbalance can hinder effective oversight and accountability.
● Implications in White Collar Crime:
 ○ The principal-agent problem is prevalent in various forms of white-
collar crime, including:
◆ Insider trading
◆ Ponzi schemes
◆ Pyramid schemes
◆ Churning
◆ Tax evasion
◆ Embezzlement
○ These crimes often stem from agents prioritizing their interests over
those of the principals they represent.
White Collar Crime
● Overview: White collar crime refers to non-violent illegal acts committed
for financial gain, typically by individuals in positions of trust and
authority. These crimes often involve deceit and concealment rather than
physical violence, impacting businesses, consumers, and the economy.
● Definition:
○ Illegal acts committed by non-physical means to obtain money or

property.
○ Involves deception to gain business or personal advantage.
● Historical Context:
○ Concept introduced by Edwin Sutherland in 1940, emphasizing crimes

committed by respectable individuals in their occupations.

○ Evolved definitions include occupational crime (individuals) and

corporate crime (corporations).

● Types of Offenders:
○ Individuals acting independently.
○ Employees committing fraud against employers.
○ Corporate officials engaging in unethical practices for the

corporation.
○ Merchants defrauding customers.
● Public Perception:
○ Historically viewed as less serious than violent crime, though

attitudes have shifted over time.

○ Increased awareness and concern during the punitive turn of the

1970s.
● Consequences:
○ Financial losses for victims, including individuals and corporations.
○ Legal repercussions for offenders, including fines and imprisonment.
○ Broader economic impacts, such as loss of consumer trust and

market instability.
Week 9
Political Dissent
● Overview: Political dissent refers to the expression of opposition or
disagreement with established political systems, policies, or authorities. It
often manifests through civil disobedience and can be justified under
certain conditions, impacting public perception and legal frameworks.
● Civil Disobedience:
○ Defined as a public, nonviolent act against the law aimed at

prompting change in laws or government policies.

○ Justification requires:
◆ Public awareness of the action.
◆ A dialogic effort to spur debate about the law.
◆ Acceptance of legal consequences for the action.
● Public Reaction:
○ Responses to political dissent can vary widely, influencing societal

norms and governmental responses.

○ The perception of dissenters can shift based on context, framing

them as activists or criminals.

● Justification of Actions:
○ Philosophers like John Rawls argue that civil disobedience is

justifiable when it adheres to specific criteria, emphasizing its public

and conscientious nature.
○ The balance between breaking the law and maintaining fidelity to the

law is crucial in assessing justification.

● Impact of Technology:
○ Digital technology has transformed the landscape of political dissent,

enabling rapid dissemination of information and mobilization of

support.
○ Online platforms can amplify dissenting voices but also pose risks of

misinformation and cyber-related offenses.

Legal Framework
● Overview: The legal framework surrounding state crimes encompasses
various laws and constitutional implications that govern the prosecution
of offenses against the state. It includes historical context, challenges in
prosecution, and specific legislation such as the CSIS Act, which defines
threats to national security.
● CSIS Act:
○ Defines "threat to the security of Canada" including activities aimed

at undermining the government.

○ Broad definition encompassing treason, sedition, and subversion.
 ● Constitutional Implications:
○ Many state crimes may not align with current constitutional

standards.
○ Concerns about legality and constitutionality of certain national

security laws post-9/11.

● Prosecution Challenges:
○ State crimes are infrequently prosecuted.
○ Various reasons suggest difficulties in applying existing laws

effectively.
● Historical Context:
○ Evolution of the concept of state crimes over time.
○ Reflection of class conflict and power dynamics as noted by theorists

like Engels.
○ Impact of significant events (e.g., September 11) on national security

laws and public perception.

State Crimes
● Overview: State crimes are actions committed by state officials or
institutions that violate human rights, laws, or ethical standards, often to
maintain the power and stability of the governing system. They reflect
underlying power dynamics and can be seen as a means of preserving
the state's authority rather than merely deterring individual misconduct.
● Conceptualization:
○ Viewed through various lenses, including Marxist theory which sees

them as reflections of class conflict.

○ Emphasizes the political nature of these crimes in maintaining social

order.
● Power Dynamics:
○ State crimes highlight the relationship between power and

governance.
○ They serve to protect the interests of those in power while

suppressing dissent.
● Historical Role:
○ Historically significant in shaping societal norms and legal

frameworks.
○ Often linked to national security and the preservation of the state.
● Types of State Crimes:
○ Common offenses include:
◆ Sedition
◆ Espionage
◆ Treason
◆ Insurrection
 ○ These crimes have existed across different societies throughout
history.
● Examples and Debates:
○ Various historical and contemporary examples illustrate the

complexities and implications of state crimes.

○ Ongoing debates focus on the moral and legal justifications for such

actions and their impact on society.

Types of State Crimes
● Overview: State crimes are offenses that threaten national security and
the integrity of the state. They encompass a range of actions, including
treason, sedition, espionage, and terrorism, which have been recognized
throughout history as significant threats to governance and societal
order.
● Treason:
○ Defined as betraying one’s country, particularly through attempts to

kill or overthrow the government.

○ High treason applies specifically during wartime.
● Sedition:
○ Involves inciting rebellion against authority or government.
○ Often linked to speech or actions that promote discontent or

resistance.
● Subversion:
○ Refers to efforts aimed at undermining the authority or power of the

state.
○ Can include activities that seek to disrupt governmental functions or

institutions.
● Sabotage:
○ The deliberate destruction or damage of property, especially in a way

that affects national security.

○ Often associated with acts intended to hinder military or economic

operations.
● Espionage:
○ The act of spying or gathering secret information, typically for military

or political advantage.
○ Involves both state-sponsored and individual actions against national

interests.
● Terrorism:
○ Use of violence or intimidation, especially against civilians, to achieve

political aims.
○ Considered a severe threat to state stability and public safety.
● Role of State Crimes in History:
 ○ Historically significant, these crimes reflect ongoing struggles for
power and control within societies.
○ They illustrate how states respond to perceived threats to their

authority and existence.

● Conceptualization of State Crimes:
○ Viewed through various lenses, including Marxist theory, which

interprets them as reflections of class conflict.

○ Emphasizes the political nature of these crimes as mechanisms for

preserving state power and social order.

Week 10
Crime and Poverty
● Overview: The relationship between crime and poverty is complex, with
longstanding beliefs that deprivation drives criminal behavior. However,
this perspective often leads to prejudice against the poor, who may be
unfairly labeled as criminals despite being more likely to be victims of
crime themselves.
● Link Between Crime and Poverty:
○ Deprivation as a potential motivator for criminal behavior.
○ Ongoing debate about the validity of the belief that poverty directly

causes crime.
○ Studies indicate a correlation between homelessness duration and

involvement in crime.
● Prejudice Against the Poor:
○ Stereotypes linking poverty with criminality contribute to societal

stigma.
○ Individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds face

discrimination and bias in legal contexts.

● Survival Crimes:
○ Many crimes committed by impoverished individuals are linked to

survival needs (e.g., property crimes).

○ The necessity to meet basic needs can drive individuals toward illegal

activities.
● Criminalization of Poverty:
○ Legal systems often impose penalties that disproportionately affect

the poor.
○ Basic necessities become financially burdensome, trapping

individuals in cycles of poverty.

○ Interaction between homelessness and imprisonment complicates the

issue, as released individuals may struggle to reintegrate into society.

● Agenda:
 ○ Examination of capitalism's role in perpetuating or alleviating crime
and poverty.
○ Discussion on policies like the Safe Streets Act and their implications
for marginalized communities.
○ Consideration of systemic issues contributing to the intersection of
crime and poverty.
Legal Framework
● Overview: The legal framework encompasses laws and policies that
govern societal behavior, particularly in relation to crime control and
public order. Key components include the Safe Streets Act, provincial
laws, quasi-criminal powers, and theories like Broken Windows Theory
that influence law enforcement strategies.
● Safe Streets Act:
○ Major provincial legislation introduced during Mike Harris's

premiership.
○ Aimed at addressing concerns about aggressive panhandling and

street solicitation.
○ Included offenses such as "Solicitation" and "Aggravated Solicitation"

to empower police action against certain behaviors on the streets.

● Provincial Laws:
○ Laws enacted by provincial governments that regulate various

aspects of public life, including crime prevention and urban

management.
○ Often intersect with federal laws but focus on local issues and

community standards.
● Quasi-Criminal Powers:
○ Powers exercised by provinces to enforce regulations that are not

strictly criminal but can impose penalties or restrictions.

○ Courts have generally upheld these powers, allowing for control over

behaviors associated with homelessness and urban disorder.

● Broken Windows Theory:
○ Proposed by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, suggesting that

maintaining and monitoring urban environments to prevent small

crimes helps deter larger ones.
○ Controversial theory; critics argue it may lead to over-policing and

discrimination against marginalized groups.

○ Emphasizes the importance of community perception in crime

prevention efforts.
Homelessness
● Overview: Homelessness is a complex social issue characterized by the
lack of stable housing, often linked to various socio-economic factors. It
 ●

intersects with crime, poverty, and systemic inequalities, particularly

affecting marginalized communities.
● Causes of Homelessness:
○ Economic instability and lack of affordable housing.
○ Mental health issues and substance abuse.
○ Family breakdowns and domestic violence.
○ Systemic barriers such as discrimination and inadequate social

services.
● Impact of Capitalism:
○ Debate on whether capitalism exacerbates homelessness or provides

solutions.
○ Economic policies can lead to increased inequality and reduced

access to basic needs.

● Crime and Poverty:
○ Connection between homelessness and crime; homeless individuals

may commit crimes for survival (e.g., property crimes).

○ Homeless people are also more likely to be victims of crime.
○ Interaction between imprisonment and homelessness; release from

prison can lead to increased risk of homelessness.

● Racial Dynamics:
○ Racialized individuals face higher rates of homelessness and

discrimination.
○ Unfair treatment by law enforcement and barriers in accessing

services.
○ Overrepresentation of racial minorities in the criminal justice system.
● Historical Context:
○ Historical policies and practices have contributed to systemic

inequalities leading to homelessness.

○ Ongoing issues related to race, gender, and economic status continue

to affect homeless populations today.

Social Issues
● Overview: Social issues encompass a range of problems affecting
individuals and communities, often requiring collective action for
resolution. Key areas include addiction and mental health, support for the
homeless, barriers to assistance, and community rights.
● Addiction and Mental Health:
○ Significant correlation between homelessness and mental health/

addiction issues.
○ Many homeless individuals face challenges in accessing appropriate

mental health services.

● Support for the Homeless:
 ○ Importance of providing stable housing and resources for those
experiencing homelessness.
○ Programs aimed at supporting individuals transitioning from

correctional facilities back into society.

● Barriers to Assistance:
○ Difficulty obtaining proper identification can hinder access to

services.
○ Intermittent availability of services complicates consistent support.
○ Not all service providers are equipped to handle complex mental

health or addiction issues.

● Community Rights:
○ Advocacy for the rights of marginalized populations, including the

homeless.
○ Emphasis on creating inclusive policies that address the needs of

vulnerable groups.
● Conclusion:
○ Addressing social issues requires comprehensive strategies that

consider the multifaceted nature of problems like homelessness,

addiction, and mental health.
○ Solutions should focus on systemic changes and improved support

systems.
Solutions to Homelessness
● Overview: Addressing homelessness requires a multifaceted approach
that includes pre-release programs, support services, political strategies,
and improving housing affordability. These solutions aim to provide
stability and resources for individuals transitioning out of incarceration
and those facing multidimensional challenges.
● Pre-Release Programs:
○ Support individuals leaving jail with stable housing options.
○ Facilitate access to necessary identification and resources before

release.
● Support Services:
○ Provide comprehensive assistance for mental health and addiction

issues.
○ Ensure service providers are equipped to handle multidimensional

problems faced by clients.

● Political Strategies:
○ Develop policies that address the root causes of homelessness and

crime.
○ Implement initiatives like the Safe Streets Act to improve community

safety and support.

 ● Housing Affordability:
○ Increase the availability of affordable housing options.
○ Advocate for policies that reduce barriers to accessing housing for

low-income individuals.
Barriers to Support:
● Difficulty obtaining proper identification can hinder access to services.
● Intermittent availability of services complicates consistent support.
● Not all service providers can adequately address complex client needs.
Interaction Between Homelessness and Crime:
● Many crimes committed by homeless individuals are survival-related
(e.g., property crimes).
● There is a notable connection between being released from prison and
becoming homeless.
● Long-term homelessness may correlate with increased involvement in
crime, but homeless individuals are also more likely to be victims of
crime.
Conclusion:
● The relationship between homelessness and crime is complex, involving
both individual circumstances and systemic factors. Effective solutions
must consider these interconnections to create sustainable change.

Week 11
Comparative Approaches to Hate Speech
● Overview: The comparative study of hate speech examines how different
countries, particularly Canada and the United States, approach the
regulation of hate speech. It also considers philosophical frameworks like
the Popperian paradox of intolerance, which argues that a tolerant
society must not tolerate intolerance.
● Canadian Approach:
○ Views certain expressions as "beyond the pale."
○ Aligns with the Popperian paradox: "You cannot tolerate the

intolerant."
○ Acceptable limits on freedom of speech are recognized; restrictions

can be upheld under Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and

Freedoms.
● US Approach:
○ Generally skeptical of laws restricting hate speech.
○ Emphasizes strong protections for free speech, even if it includes

hateful or intolerant expressions.

○ Less willingness to impose limitations compared to Canada.
● Popperian Paradox of Intolerance:
 ○ Suggests that in order to maintain a tolerant society, one must be
intolerant of intolerance.
○ Highlights the danger of allowing hate speech to flourish unchecked,

as it may lead to societal harm and exclusion.

● Justifications for Regulation:
○ Seen as the "thin edge of the wedge" leading to more severe

consequences, such as genocide.

○ Historical context shows that hate speech often precedes acts of

violence and exclusion against targeted groups.

○ Emphasizes the importance of early intervention to prevent escalation

from speech to action.

Theoretical Perspectives on Hate Speech
● Overview: Theoretical perspectives on hate speech explore the
underlying social, legal, and philosophical frameworks that inform its
understanding and regulation. Key theories include Social Identity Theory,
justifications for free speech, and the concept of a marketplace of ideas,
each contributing to the discourse surrounding hate speech and its
implications in society.
● Social Identity Theory:
○ Explains how individuals categorize themselves and others into

groups.
○ Highlights the role of group identity in fostering in-group favoritism

and out-group hostility.

○ Suggests that hate speech can emerge from perceived threats to

group identity.
● Justifications for Free Speech:
○ Democratic Process: Emphasizes the importance of free expression

in facilitating democratic engagement and debate.

○ Personal Liberty: Argues that freedom of speech is essential for

individual autonomy and self-expression.

○ Marketplace of Ideas: Proposes that all ideas should compete in an

open forum, allowing truth to emerge through public discourse.

● Marketplace of Ideas:
○ Concept where diverse opinions are exchanged freely, with the belief

that this leads to the discovery of truth.

○ Critiques suggest that hate speech undermines this marketplace by

silencing marginalized voices and promoting harmful ideologies.

● Justifications for Regulating Hate Speech:
○ Seen as a precursor to violence and discrimination; often viewed as

the "thin edge of the wedge."

○ Historical context shows that hate speech can lead to systematic
 ○

exclusion and violence against targeted groups.

○ Recognizes the potential for hate speech to dehumanize individuals,

leading to societal harm and conflict.

● Problems Associated with Hate Speech:
○ Facilitates the portrayal of certain groups as subhuman, enabling

discrimination and violence.

○ Can escalate from verbal denigration to physical action against

targeted groups.
○ Empirical evidence supports that arbitrary boundaries can lead to

negative stereotyping and prejudice.

Legal Framework for Hate Speech
● Overview: The legal framework for hate speech encompasses various
provisions aimed at preventing the incitement of hatred and violence
against identifiable groups. Key sections include those addressing
genocide advocacy, promoting hate, antisemitism, and available defenses
against hate speech charges.
● Section 318 - Advocating Genocide:
○ Criminalizes advocating or promoting genocide.
○ Punishable by up to five years imprisonment.
○ Defines genocide as acts intended to destroy an identifiable group

(e.g., killing members, inflicting harmful conditions).

○ Requires consent from the Attorney General to initiate proceedings.
● Section 319 - Promoting Hate:
○ Prohibits public statements that incite hatred against identifiable

groups likely to breach peace.

○ Offenders face up to two years imprisonment or summary conviction.
○ Applies to willful promotion of hatred in public settings, excluding

private conversations.
● Section 319(2.1) - Antisemitism:
○ Specifically addresses willful promotion of antisemitism through

condoning, denying, or downplaying the Holocaust.

○ Recognizes the unique historical context of antisemitism within hate

speech laws.
● Defenses to Hate Speech Charges:
○ Various defenses may be applicable, including freedom of expression

arguments.
○ Contextual considerations regarding intent and public interest may

influence outcomes.
● Justifications for Hate Speech Laws:
○ Seen as a preventive measure against the escalation towards violence

and genocide.
 ○ Acknowledges historical patterns where hate speech precedes acts
of mass violence.
○ Emphasizes the importance of protecting vulnerable groups from

systemic exclusion and dehumanization.

● Comparative Approaches:
○ Examines differences between Canadian and U.S. approaches to hate

speech regulation.
○ Canada has stricter laws focused on public discourse, while the U.S.

emphasizes free speech protections.

Case Law on Hate Speech
● Overview: Case law on hate speech examines legal precedents that
define and regulate expressions of hate, particularly in Canada and the
United States. Key cases illustrate the balance between freedom of
expression and the need to protect individuals from harm caused by hate
speech.
● R v Oakes:
○ Established a test for justifying limits on rights under Section 1 of the

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

○ Important for understanding how courts assess the validity of laws

restricting hate speech.

● R v Keegstra:
○ Involved a teacher promoting Holocaust denial and hatred against

Jews.
○ Found that his actions violated Section 2 of the Charter but were

justified under Section 1.

○ Defenses based on truth or good faith belief were rejected; intent was

to promote hatred.
● R v Zundel:
○ Addressed charges related to spreading false news about the

Holocaust.
○ Determined that laws violated Section 2(b) but could not be justified

under Section 1 due to vagueness of "false news."

○ Highlighted issues with historical origins of laws not aligning with

modern hate speech concerns.

● Snyder v Phelps:
○ U.S. Supreme Court case involving the Westboro Baptist Church's

protests at military funerals.

○ The court upheld their right to protest (8-1 decision), emphasizing

free speech protections even for offensive expressions.

○ Demonstrated the contrasting approach to hate speech regulation

compared to Canada.
Hate Crimes vs Hate Speech
● Overview: Hate crimes and hate speech are distinct concepts, with hate
crimes involving criminal acts motivated by bias against a minority group,
while hate speech refers to expressions that incite hatred or violence
against individuals based on their identity. Understanding the legal
implications and societal impacts of both is crucial for promoting equality
and justice.
● Aggravating Factors:
○ Hate crimes are considered more severe due to the motivation behind

them.
○ Courts may increase sentences if an offense is motivated by bias,

prejudice, or hate towards a protected group (e.g., race, religion,

sexual orientation).
● Criminal Defamation:
○ Involves making false statements that harm someone's reputation,

which can intersect with hate speech when targeting identifiable

groups.
○ Legal consequences may arise if such defamation is rooted in hate.
● Hate Speech Definition:
○ Not merely offensive language; it involves attacking the rights of

others to exist.
○ Criminalized when it willfully promotes hatred against identifiable

groups.
● Legal Provisions:
○ Laws vary by country regarding the regulation of hate speech and

hate crimes.
○ In some jurisdictions, hate speech undermines democratic ideals and

the rights of others, leading to potential legal repercussions.

● Public vs Private Speech:
○ Public speech may be subject to greater scrutiny under hate speech

laws compared to private speech.

○ The context and audience can influence whether speech is deemed

harmful or protected under free speech guarantees.

Historical Context of Hate Speech
● Overview: The historical context of hate speech reveals its role as a
precursor to genocides, notably in Nazi Germany. It highlights how media
has been used to propagate hate and justify violence against targeted
groups, with modern examples illustrating the ongoing relevance of this
issue.
● Cohen Committee Report:
○ Investigated the impact of hate speech on society.
 ○ Emphasized the need for legal frameworks to address hate speech as
a precursor to violence and genocide.
● Genocide Examples:
○ Historical instances where hate speech preceded mass violence.
○ Demonstrates patterns of dehumanization and exclusion leading to

genocide.
● Rwanda Genocide:
○ Hate speech played a significant role in inciting violence against the

Tutsi population.
○ Media outlets like Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM)

spread propaganda that fueled ethnic hatred.

● Myanmar and Social Media:
○ The Rohingya genocide highlighted the role of social media in

disseminating hate speech.

○ Platforms like Facebook were used to incite violence and

discrimination against the Rohingya community.

○ Illustrates that the danger lies in the content shared rather than the

platforms themselves.