Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Canadian criminal justice system
The Canadian criminal justice system
The Canadian criminal justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Canadian criminal justice system
Introduction to Canadian Criminal Justice
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation Introduction to Canadian Criminal Justice
In criminal justice, the offender is sentenced according to such as the magnitude of the crime committed, the harm caused, offender’s age, and type of the offense. Hybrid criminal offenses are crimes for the prosecutor has the alternatives of charging the victim through indictment or summary conviction (Nicol & Valiquet, 2013). Through indictment, the prosecutor goes serious about the crime in question and develops a severe punishment. On the other hand, the prosecutor may find the offense less serious and advocate for light sentencing. Either way, sentencing aim to achieve rehabilitation, deterrence, denunciation or segregation. If the sentencing practices do not fall into this category, then it is not worth the purpose. The paper describes the Canadian ways of sentencing hybrid criminal offenses taking into account the past and present life of the offender.
The Hybrid Criminal Offense
A crime such as the operation of an impaired vehicle, aircraft, or other vessels constitutes a hybrid criminal offense since it has the dual character of being either indictable or convicted by the crown. In the above case, the prosecutor has only two options in charging the case. Unless the defense attorney
…show more content…
The offense is found in part III of the Canadian Criminal Code, and it concerns the offenses against persons and reputation. The crime is classified as a hybrid criminal offense since it a dual character in the sense that it can result in no bodily harm or may constitute some bodily harm or even death (Sentencing Advisory Council. 2017). In the first instance of the case, the offender can charge with the summary conviction while in the second instance, the sentence is arguable. Though the criminal code advocates for indictable sentencing, the charges can be
Denunciation is a condemnation or criticism of another’s actions (O’Regan, Reid, 2013). Through Bourque’s sentence, Gunn condemned Bourque’s actions and sent a message to society that his crimes were extremely heinous and will not be tolerated. Similarly, his sentence was retribution-based, as retribution is the belief that the severity of the sentence should depend on the seriousness of the crime and not the seriousness of the individual (O’Regan, Reid, 2013). This is demonstrated by Bourque’s precedent defining sentence, his lack of parole eligibility and its corresponding disregard for Bourque’s individual needs as an offender. Cameron Gunn’s retribution-focused thinking was also demonstrated in Bourque’s trial, as he argued that Bourque’s crimes were “among the most heinous this country has seen and they warranted a sentence that would give precedence over rehabilitation” (MacDonald 2014). In addition to focusing Bourque’s sentence on the theoretical principles of denunciation and retribution, Gunn also focused his sentence on deterrence, specifically general deterrence, as it is meant to discourage all other potential offenders from committing crimes (O’Regan, Reid, 2013). In Bourque’s case, the severity of his sentence and corresponding lack of parole eligibility is
The purpose of this report is to provide the courts and judges in the matter of Martin A. case an overview and critical analysis of his case through the evaluation process of Youth Court Action Planning Plan (YCAPP). Before discussing Martin A., it is a good idea to understand the roles and functions of the YCAPP. Over the course of history, the Canadian legal system has always struggled with successfully dealing with youth offenders until the introduction of youth criminal justice act in 2003. Youth criminal justice act has reduced the number of cases, charges, and convictions against the youth hence resulting in a much more efficient way to deal with youth crime across the country (Department of justice, 2017). A vital component
How to appropriately and fairly carry out criminal justice matters is something that every country struggles with. A major reason for this struggle is the fallibility of the justice system. It is acceptable to concede that the possibility of human error in every case and investigation may lead to a wrongful conviction. In the case of David Milgaard, however, Canada's Criminal Justice System not only erred, but failed grievously, resulting in millions of dollars wasted, in a loss of public confidence in the system, and most tragically, in the robbery of two decades of one man's life. Factors including, but not limited to, the social context at the time of the crime, the social perception of deviance, the influence of the media, and the misconduct of investigating police and prosecution played a substantial role in the subsequent miscarriage of justice.
Wrongful conviction is an issue that has plagued the Canadian Justice System since it came to be. It is an issue that is hard to sort out between horrific crimes and society’s desire to find truth and justice. Incidences of wrongful conviction hit close to home right here in Saskatchewan as well as across the entire nation. Experts claim “each miscarriage of justice, however, deals a blow to society’s confidence in the legal justice system” (Schmalleger, Volk, 2014, 131). Professionals in the criminal justice field such as police, forensic analyst, and prosecutors must all be held accountable for their implications in wrongful convictions. There are several reasons for wrongful convictions such as racial bias, false confessions, jailhouse informants, eyewitness error, erroneous forensic science, inappropriate, professional and institutional misconduct and scientific limitations that society possessed prior to the technological revolution (Roberts, Grossman, 2012, 253 – 259). The introduction of more advanced DNA analysis has been able to clear names and prevent these incidences from occurring as often. As well as the formation of foundations such as The Association of Defense for the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC). Unfortunately, mistakes made in the Canadian Justice System have serious life altering repercussions for everyone that is involved. Both systematic and personal issues arise that require deeper and more intense analysis.
This paper will be focusing on the controversial issue of mandatory minimum sentences in Canada. There has been much debate over this topic, as it has quickly become implemented for the sentencing of drug offenders, drug-related crimes and banned firearm offences. I will argue that every case that comes through the criminal justice system is different and deserves a fair trial with a sentence that is not already determined for them. There have been many cases where the judge has no discretion in the sentence due to the mandatory minimum sentences pre-determined for the case, no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors were. I will argue that the mandatory minimum sentences in Canada should be reduced or eliminated as they result in very few positive outcomes for the offender and society, increase recidivism rates, are very expensive, and in many cases are detrimental and unjust. Throughout this essay I will discuss two main cases that represent an unjust sentencing outcome due to the mandatory minimum sentencing laws. I will stress how it should be the discretion of the judge to individualize the sentences based on the offender’s mitigating factors, aggravating factors and background. Leroy Smickle is the first case discussed through the essay, which ended with the judge striking down the mandatory minimum sentences in Ontario due to the possession of a loaded gun. Robert Latimer was also a highly controversial Canadian case about a father who killed his mentally disabled daughter out of compassion to end her severe suffering. I will be using many academic articles throughout this essay to give empirical support to the overall argument.
Society has long since operated on a system of reward and punishment. That is, when good deeds are done or a person behaves in a desired way they SP are rewarded, or conversely punished when behaviour does not meet the societal norms. Those who defy these norms and commit crime are often punished by organized governmental justice systems through the use of penitentiaries, where prisoners carry out their sentences. The main goals of sentencing include deterrence, safety of the public, retribution, rehabilitation, punishment and respect for the law (Government of Canada, 2013). However, the type of justice system in place within a state or country greatly influences the aims and mandates of prisons and in turn targets different aspects of sentencing goals. Justice systems commonly focus on either rehabilitative or retributive measures.
middle of paper ... ..., 1-5. Bibliography: References Burr, G., Wong, S., Veen, S. & Gu, D. (2000, June). Three strikes and you're out: An investigation of false positive rates using a Canadian sample. Federal Probation, 64, 3-7. Martin, D. (1995, September 13).
The Canadian Justice system is run like a well-oiled machine. It is based on the fair and humane treatment of suspects who remain innocent until proven guilty. There is one big question that has been debated since July 14th, 1976 - should the death penalty have been abolished in Canada? The new younger generation of Canadians seems to agree with me that the death penalty should be resurrected in Canada.
Wrongful convictions in Canada is a very sensitive and disturbing topic that has created concerns as to why individuals are being wrongfully convicted. As people in Canada read about cases involving wrongful conviction, such as Guy Paul Morin, Rubin Carter and David Millguard, it often undermines their faith in the criminal justice system. Tunnel vision, the use of questionable DNA evidence, and eyewitness misidentification are the three main causes of wrongful convictions in Canada. Recognizing and addressing these concerns has led to a reduction in cases of wrongful convictions in Canada.
In today’s Canadian society, it is certain that criminal law is to serve and protect and its fundamental purpose is to prevent crime and punish offenders. However, there have been cases where criminal law has punished the offender who turned out to be innocent. A conviction is needed to show that the system is not in disrepute and to keep order and people safe in society. If a criminal cannot be caught then people will look down upon the system in disgrace. In many cases, officers will arrest an individual who fits a certain description that they know will lead to an arrest and conviction. In the case of Guy Paul Morin it shows how the system failed in aiding the innocent who abide to the law. The law is established to protect those who are innocent from being targeted because of the law.
As noted by Allen (2016), measures that are implemented outside the courtrooms, especially in a formal procedure, may lead to the provision of accurate as well as timely considerations for youth crime. As such, Canada is keen in the reinforcement of these regulations, as they determine both short and long-term judicial solutions. Most importantly, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) in Canada plays a major role in the implementation of extrajudicial measures as they may affirm to the occurrence of future issues. According to the Government of Canada (2015a), this calls for an attempt to channel out or divert such offenders from the mainstream justice system to a lesser formal way of dealing with the offenses. This paper attempts to investigate the appropriateness of the extrajudicial measures in Canada, and the reason behind why we established these provisions of the YCJA. It also illustrates an example of a Canadian case, which questions the extrajudicial measures. This discussion canvasses the main argument as for or against the extrajudicial measures in Canada through the adoption of recommendations to the Canadian Government about the proper situations in which such processes should be used.
In the year 1970, the Canadian government founded the Law Reform Commission of Canada to ensure the progression of law making and to make recommendations for legal changes . The Law Reform Commission of Canada is constantly importing and suggesting proposals towards the criminal code of Canada. During the year of 1985, t...
Welsh, B., & Irving, M. (2005). Crime and punishment in Canada, 1981-1999. Crime and Justice, 33, 247-294. Retrieved from http://library.mtroyal.ca:2063/stable/3488337?&Search=yes&searchText=canada&searchText=crime&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dcrime%2Bin%2Bcanada%26acc%3Don%26wc%3Don&prevSearch=&item=18&ttl=33894&returnArticleService=showFullText
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 27, 343-360. http://ccj.sagepub.com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/content/27/3/342
Sacco, V.F and Kennedy, L.W (2011). The Criminal Event: An Introduction to Criminology in Canada. Toronto Cengage Learning.