Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
UOttawa (30,000)
CRM (2,000)
CRM 1300 (400)
Lecture 22

CRM 1300 Lecture Notes - Lecture 22: Preliminary Hearing, Clifford Olson, Parole Board Of Canada

Course Code
CRM 1300
Carolyn Gordon

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 9 pages of the document.
Chapter 12: Community Reintegration
Although community reintegration as part of a sentence (through parole or community
sanctions) have come under fire for being soft on criminals, it has been proven that sometimes
reintegration can be beneficial – some treatment programs have lessened recidivism
Robert Martinson’s two papers – the first one said that ‘nothing works’, the second admitted that
some programs can be beneficial – he concluded th-at when parolees and non-parolees were
compared, parole had at best only a delaying effect on recidivism
Discretion and Disparity
An issue raised by critics was that parole boards held too much discretionary power
Lack of criteria for predicting who was ready to be released or not
Parole authorities accused of not knowing enough about the criminal personality and of
making contradictory decisions
Difference between the sentence the judge hands down and the time the offender
actually serves in prison due to conditional release programs such as parole
Offenders serving longer sentences are more likely to get released on parole
Conditional Release in Canada
Remission (Included in the Penitentiary Act of 1868, abolished in 1961)
The earliest form of
Utilized a point system, allowing offenders to receive an early release at the max
rate of six days per months for good behaviour
Merit and demerit points
Later changed so that inmates could receive up to 10 days on having earned 72
days (being model inmates for a year) – potential to release inmates after they
have served ¾ of their time
Ticket-of-Leave Act (1899)
First piece of legislation involving parole
Inmates could gain a form of early release (known as clemency) that was
independent of earned remission
Gov. General had the power to release an inmate early under certain conditions
Introduced an administrative discretion of release
Between the early 1900s and 1958, this evolved into the modern parole system
The Parole Act (1958)
Authority now given to the new National Parole Board

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

The board evaluated written application forms, did not see need for interviews
Had no true set criteria
New legislation change: statutory term of parole supervision in the community before
completed sentence – at this time temporary absence (TA) was also introduced, allowing
the inmates to be released into the community for relatively short periods of time
Full Parole
The early release of an inmate from prison subject to conditions established by a parole board –
can be granted to inmates after they serve 1/3 of their sentence, unless the sentence otherwise
Reintegration Approach
Strong theoretical basis in rehabilitation
Offender seen as rehabilitated when they no longer pose a threat to the community and
therefore can live within it
Justification of conditional release programs under the argument that they prepare
offenders for reintegration back into society
Is essentially a process through which corrections officials provide offenders with
incentives to follow the rules of society
Balance the rights of the offender with the rights of law-abiding citizens
Most inmates released prior to end of sentence
Involves placing the offenders in the least restrictive setting possible
Can be revoked for public safety
Based on two assumptions: only most serious offenders should be sentenced to federal
incarceration and the use of alternative sanctions should be maximized
Takes the position that the key predictors of recidivism (antisocial, procriminal attitudes,
etc.) are known and that each individual offender must be assessed in terms of these
predictors so that programs can be developed that will enhance their reintegration to
Key predictors of recidivism
Theory of Risk Assessment
Focuses on the social psychology of criminal behaviour
Individual and social/situational factors combine to create values, cognitions, and
personality contexts that facilitate criminal behaviour

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Three factors: risk (supervision equal to risk), need (if correctional treatment services are
to reduce criminal recidivism, the criminogenic needs of offenders much be targeted),
and responsivity (has to do with selecting appropriate targets for change as well as
styles of service)
Needs can include changing antisocial attitudes, reducing antisocial peer associations,
and increasing self-control
Responsivity can be general or specific, specific dealing with things like race and gender
The Case Management Process
Case management is defined as a systematic process by which identified needs and
strengths of offenders are matched with selected services and resources in corrections
These essential objectives of this system are
Provide for the systematic monitoring of an offender during his confinement
Facilitate the graduated release of an offender back into the community
Prevent an offender from re-offending after he or
she has been released into the community
This system
1. Establishes a program for each inmate that
provides for a level of structure so that any
needs will be dealt with
2. Balances the protection of the community
with the need for offender rehabilitation
3. Prepares an inmate for successful reintegration
back into the community
4. Assists in effective supervision while an offender
is serving his or her conditional release program
5 Phases of Case Management Process
The Parole Board of Canada
Changes were made from the Parole Act
Offenders are now allowed to appear before the
parole board members, giving them the opportunity
to hear form the decision makers themselves
the reasons for their decision
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version