Study Guides (251,973)
CA (122,955)
York (10,229)
CRIM (158)
CRIM 2652 (38)
annapratt (4)

CRIM 2652 Midterm: lectures for test 3

7 Pages

Course Code
CRIM 2652

This preview shows pages 1 and half of page 2. Sign up to view the full 7 pages of the document.

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade. are saying about us

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
FEB 2: SENTENCING - sentencing / funnel = cases fall out + original charges - sentencing / net = targeted populations become laid are dropped overrepresented
 - 1996 reforms = prison to be used as a last resort - prison punishment nexus: when we think of punishment, we think of prisons - studies: limits + counter-productive effects of prison as punishment - lack of consistency + few official rules to guide sentencing by judges - sentencing: (1) must be legal, (2) imposed by judge, (3) can only follow a criminal conviction - nature + duration is decided at the sentencing stage - 3 questions of the sentencing process
 - 1) in + out decision — sanctions community or - 2) type of sanctions — specific - custodial based? 3) quantum of scale — length of sentence 
 - 2 phases 
 - 1) justifying punishment — identifying reasons + goals of it - 2) choosing the sanction — proportionality 
 - s 718 — lays out the purpose of sentencing to guide sentencing discretion - 718.1 — fundamental principle - sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of offence + degree of responsibility of offender - 718.2 — other sentencing principles (aggravating factors, motivation, consistency) - ex. sentences should be least restrictive (d) + prison should be used as a last resort (e) - 2 rationales of sentencing BACKWARD LOOKING RATIONALES FORWARD LOOKING RATIONALES - retributive justice - retorative justice — utilitarian + consequentialist - focus on past - focus on future - retribution + blameworthiness - denunciation — educating others about undesirability - NI4NI - get what you deserve - vs. arm + leg - rehabilitation - proportionality + society denunciation - incapacitation - unable to commit more crime 4 rationales
 - retribution (+ - deterrence (specific + - incapacitation denunciation) general) - rehabilitation 
 1) retribution + denunciation - “just desert”: severity of offence + degree of responsibility of offender - concerns about lack of justice associated w extreme retribution - focus not only on offence/harm/severity, but also on moral culpability/responsibility - denunciation aimed @ community as education to be gained from the sentence - critique - approach focuses solely on past offence — not offender, risk of re, mitigating, etc - no punishment for future objectives - not justifying punishment by the fact that crime wont be committed as in prison - transfers discretion from judges to parliament - standardized sentences limit (vs. eliminate) discretion ▯1 2) deterrence
 - future oriented — focus on safe society - specific or general — ex. exemplary sentence 
 - critiques - rational choice — assumes crime = choice + free will maximizing pleasure - certainty (in effectiveness) vs. penalty — little evidence it works 100% + for who/what? 3) incapacitation 
 - focus on community safety - ex. taking license away, impounding car, death - separation of the offender from community penalty, prison, etc
 - critiques - costly ($ + social) - $ taken away from crime reducing programs - more time in prison = less engagement after — no job, community, support, etc - effects of producing a future criminal - criminogenic — crimes happen in prison 2 - prediction - incapacitation based on assessment of their future - underpins D.Offender legislation where someone can be a DO based on past incidents + future predictions 4) rehabilitation - medical model based — diagnosis needed - restore offender to community as law abiding citizen - focus on offender vs. offence - critique - paradoxical - rehabilitation must fix - ex. attending anger management classes assumes criminality is caused by inability to control emotions — doesn't take other factors into account - rehab sentence can be longer + more harsh - incarceration (good behaviour, parole) vs. treatment (not leaving til fixed) - hard to measure - can be more punitive — ex. AA meetings for a chronic drinker - challenges 
 - how to match objective with sanction - sentencing disparities + discrimination 
 - formal and informal knowledge FEB 9: PRISONS + RESTORATIVE ALTERNATIVES - restorative sentencing process involve victims, offender, community, etc - s 718 (a) - to provide reparation for harm done to victims or to the community - s 718(b) - to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders + acknowledgement of the harm done to the victim + community Rise of Restorative Initiatives since 1970s - most law enforcement agencies have a restorative justice unit - due to public’s disillusionment with the effectiveness of the CJS — - esp. by victims ▯2 - interests not considered, exclusion except for being a witness, no input, not enough info + communication - structurally excluded: crime is committed against the state concerns regarding CJS + Offenders - encourages passivity + guilty pleas — some detachment + guilty = lenient sentences - change dynamics at play between victims and offenders in the process - crime and offender objectified — offender has to show remorse - few opportunities for appreciating impact or genuine acceptance of responsibility Restorative aims + ideals 
 - repair harm - victim involved - restore social bonds - community involved - inclusionary + collaborative problem solving - offender accepts responsibility
 - promote harmony - community: who is it? who participates? - hierarchies of power, sexism + discrimination - FN: sentencing circles apply restorative justice when making decisions — family conferencing in DV cases - not a safe place for FN women and children - what about offender’s rights? charter - CAN’s rates of incarceration have risen after building the first penitentiary (1800s) - what prisons don’t do - deterrence? - no deterrence, just decapacitation - if they’re not achieving traditional objectives, then what are they doing? 
 - incapacitation? - rehabilitation?
 - what prisons do - prisons as “total institutions” — erving goffman - prisons are a verity of social institutions — ex. monasteries, prisoner camps, etc - lack of individualism - stripped of personal belongings — not part of society - hierarchy, authority, + control - controlled objects dependent on those with authority for everything - status degradation ceremonies - create dependencies and social distance - sub-culture of resistance + prison - informal knowledge about how to never get around, etc - guards exercise recipe knowledge in dealing with constrains of the institution - has psychological effects — Zimbardo - as total institutions, they can be seen as having their own psychology - environment of prison creates dangerous or problematic populations other than being places that house them - this dynamic then reproduces criminals - lord of the flies effect 
 - inexperienced guards - individuals resist control over them - little instruction - systems based on opposed interests - extraordinary power - double bunking = hostility + harm 
 - limited oversight ▯3 - relatively recent development - emergence linked to capitalism - debtors’ prisons — potentially allowed to leave during day - threw someone in prison because they owed $ >> made them unable to pay off debts - 16th c: Hay + emergence of workhouses - places where people had no home/money/jobs and were sent to engage in hard about - idea that poverty and immorality were linked to criminality - wanted to teach the poor the value of industriousness - 18th c: bloody code established punishment and offences — 200+ capital offences added - reason why these were punishab;e by debt was because there were no intermediate sanctions between imposing death penalty - 18th c: idea of housing convicted criminals came - quakers house of correction + walnut street jail - quakers proposed houses of correction as a more humane response to crime - these would be spiritual places where convicts could conteplate deeds + compensate for the har
More Less
Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

Only pages 1 and half of page 2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.