Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
74 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Jury Duty
|
To presume innocent until proven guilty
|
|
|
Case Types
|
1) Summary Offences
2) Indictable Offences 3) Hybrid Offences |
|
|
Summary Offences
|
- Lenient cases
- Judges only - Max: $5000 or 6 months in jail |
|
|
Indictable Offences
|
- Max: life in prison
- Serious crimes: break and enter, murder, assault - Jury required |
|
|
Hybrid Offences
|
May be prosecuted summarily or as an indictment
|
|
|
Characteristics of a Jury
|
Representativeness – represents the community
Impartiality – lack of bias |
|
|
Functions of a Jury (Dr. Henry Morgentaler)
|
- 12 heads are better than one
- Protect against out of date laws - Increase knowledge of justice system - Part of democracy - Conscience of the community |
|
|
Methods for Studying Decision-Making
|
- Post-trial interviews
- Archives (collection of historical documents or records providing information about a group of people) - Field Studies (high external validity) - Simulation (high external validity) |
|
|
External Validity
|
Extent to which the results of a study can be generalized to other situations and to other people
|
|
|
Jury Nullification
|
- Jurors may choose to ignore the law
- Occurs in a trial when a jury acquits a defendant, even though the members of the jury believe the defendant to be guilty of the charges |
|
|
Chaos Theory (Meissner, Brigham, Pfeifer)
|
A field of study in mathematics, withapplications in several disciplines including meteorology, sociology, physics,engineering, economics, biology, and philosophy
|
|
|
Methods of Reducing Juror Bias
|
1) Change of venue
2) Adjournment 3) Challenge for cause |
|
|
Challenge for Cause
|
1) Two persons selected from jury pool to become triers (a person or body responsible for investigating and deciding a case judicially)
2) Third person evaluated as prospective juror 3) Lawyer/judge question the juror 4) Triers discuss and reach unanimous decision whether juror is impartial 5) Juror dismissed OR becomes juror and replaces one trier (who is dismissed) |
|
|
Mathematical Model
|
- Precise and testable, but probably too optimistic
- Use of algebraic equations |
|
|
Explanation Model
|
Intuitively appealing, compelling verbal account
|
|
|
Impact of Jury Size
|
- Unanimous Juries: more likely to hang, take longer
- Larger Juries: more likely to have at least one non-white member and deliberate longer |
|
|
Polarization
|
Jurors become more extreme in their initial position after discussion
|
|
|
Leniency Bias
|
Evidence-driven vs. Verdict-driven
|
|
|
Fitness to Stand Trial
|
- Goal is to determine whether it interferes with their ability to perform legal tasks - To see if they are eligible to stand trial |
|
|
Defining Fitness (R vs. Pritchard 1836)
|
- Is the accused able to assist in his or her defence?
- Does the accused understand his or her role in the proceedings? - Does the accused understand the nature of the proceedings? |
|
|
Assessment of Unfit
|
- If fit, the trial will continue
- If unfit, assessment will take place - Can take between 5 to 30 days for assessment orders - Assessment will typically be conducted by apsychiatrist |
|
|
Type of Tests for Unfit
|
1) FIT-R
2) MacCAT-CA |
|
|
FIT-R
|
- Semi-structured interview
- Identify mental illness - Cover main issues in Section 2 - Works as a screening device - Understanding of proceedings E.g.,possible pleas - Understanding of consequences E.g.,range of penalties - Communicative with counsel E.g.,strategies |
|
|
MacCAT-CA
|
- Structuredinterview
- Fitnessto plead guilty - Fitnessto go to trial - Questionsgrouped in 3 categories - Worksas a screening device - Understandingof legal system - Reasonability - Understandingof own legal situation |
|
|
Treatment of Unfit
|
- Individuals found unfit are typically held inhospital prior to trial
- Goal is to restore individual to fitness withas little delay as possible - Medication is the primary form of treatment(sometimes requiring a treatment order) - If individual remains unfit they are eitherdetained in a hospital or conditionally discharged |
|
|
Defining Criminal Responsibility: M'Naghten Standard (Cognitive)
|
At the time of the crime: Must suffer from a defect of reason and must not knowthe nature of the act or must not understand that it was wrong
|
|
|
Irresistible Impulse Test (Volitional)
|
- Accused could have the cognitive knowledge of what is right and what is wrong
- Butstill not be responsible if their illness results in an inability to control behaviour |
|
|
ALI Standard (Cognitive/Volitional)
|
Notresponsible if the accused lacks the capacity to appreciate the criminality ofthe act or to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law
|
|
|
Guilty but Mentally Ill (GBMI)
|
Mentallyill but also guilty of the crime Treatmentuntil they are declared sane
Prisonfor same term as other offenders |
|
|
Problems with Criminal Responsibility
|
- Insanity is a legal concept not a medical orpsychological one
- Definition of insanity may vary fromjurisdiction to jurisdiction - Retrospective assessment has to be conductedstate of mind |
|
|
Procedure for NCRMD (Not Criminally Responsible R. v. Swain 1991)
|
Not legally responsible while suffering from a disorder that rendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature of the act or incapable of knowing thatthe act was wrong
|
|
|
Assessment & Treatment issues with NCRMD
|
- Only the defence can raise the issue, unlessthe verdict of guilty has been handed down
- However, the prosecution can deal with theissue once the defence raises it - Responsibility is assessed using anassessment instrument - Can take between 30 and 60 days forassessment orders |
|
|
R-CRAS
|
- Identifies insanity
- 5 topics: 1) Organicity 2) Psychopathology 3) Cognitive control 4) Behavioural control 5) Reliability of the report |
|
|
MSE
|
- Identifies non-sanity
- Covers 3 topics: 1) General psychological history 2) Mental state at time of offence 3) Current mental status |
|
|
Treatments
|
- Forensic hospital or absolute or conditional discharge
- Medication is the primary form of treatment - If sent to a forensic hospital the disposition time will be “capped” |
|
|
Sentencing
|
Impositions of a legal sanction on persons convicted of an offence
|
|
|
Goals/Purposes of Sentencing
|
- Denunciation
- Specific deterrence - General deterrence - Incapacitation - Rehabilitation - Reparation - Promote responsibility |
|
|
Principles of Sentencing
|
- A sentence must be proportionate to thegravity of the offence
- A sentence must be proportionate to theresponsibility of the offender - A sentence should not deprive the offender ofliberty if at all possible |
|
|
Sentencing Options
|
- Absolute discharge
- Reparation - Fines - Community service - Conditional sentences - Imprisonment |
|
|
Sentencing Disparity
|
- Variation in sentences handed down for similarcrimes with similar circumstances Systematic,unsystematic
|
|
|
The Death Penalty
|
- In Canada:
- DP abolished in 1976/1999 - In US: - 32 states still permit the DP - 1403 executions to date since reinstatement in 1976 - 3054 inmates on death row in 2014 |
|
|
Against Death Penalty
|
- Does not act as a deterrent
- Is expensive - Is biased - Is handed down to the innocent |
|
|
Public Attitudes Towards the Criminal Justice System
|
- Generally feel that offenders are treated too leniently in terms of sentencing
- Generally do not have a lot of confidence in our CJS - Currently– reasonable level of confidence in comparison to other countries - Varies depending on CJS component - Generally support a range of alternative sentencing practices |
|
|
Offender Treatment: Meta-analysis (effect size)
|
- Statistical aggregation of the results ofmany independent studies
- Goal: integrate the findings of many studies - Primary unit of analysis is effect size: - Reflectsthe degree to which the comparison and treatment groups differ on a particularmeasure |
|
|
Principles of ECT
|
1) Risk Principle
2) Need Principle 3) Responsivity Principle |
|
|
Risk Principle
|
- Criminal risk can be predicted
- Higher levels of service should be provided to higher risk cases |
|
|
Need Principle
|
Interventionsshould target criminological needs rather than non criminogenic needs
|
|
|
Responsivity Principle
|
- Refersto delivering treatment programs in a style and mode that is matched to theability and learning style of the offender
- Matchservice to: - Whatwe know generally about offenders (general responsivity) - Individualdifferences of offenders (specific responsivity) |
|
|
Examples of Criminogenic Needs
|
- Changing antisocial attitudes
- Reducing antisocial peer associations - Substance abuse |
|
|
Examples of Non-Criminogenic Needs
|
- Increasing self esteem
- Physical training - Fear of official punishment (scared straight) - Focusing on vague emotional/personal problems |
|
|
Goals of Risk Assessment
|
Risk assessment aims to find ways tomake sure assessment is:
1)Accurate 2)Transparent 3)Consistent |
|
|
Risk Prediction
|
Likelihood that an offender will reoffend
|
|
|
Risk Management
|
Interventions/strategies to manage an offender's risk
|
|
|
Unstructured Clinical Judgement
|
- Subjectivelyselect, analyze and interpret risk factors
- Advantages: - Flexible - Idiographic(takes into account individual risk factors) - Disadvantages: - Inconsistent - Lowaccuracy |
|
|
Actuarial
|
- Collectpre-specified risk factors and enter them into a statistical model thatcombines and weights them
- Providesclinician with a “risk estimate” (probability of re-offending/recidivism) - Advantages: - Consistent - Highaccuracy Disadvantages: - Nomothetic(does not take into account individual risk factors) - Staticrisk factors only - Validityacross different samples |
|
|
Structured Clinical/Professional Judgement
|
- Collectpre-specified (empirically-informed) risk factors while adding in any casespecific details
- Finalassessment of risk is a clinical judgement (informed by empirical risk factors) - Advantages: - Flexible - Nomothetic-idiographic - Disadvantages: - Moderateaccuracy - Lessaccurate than actuarial - Clinicaljudgement does not add value - Lessconsistent than actuarial - |
|
|
Psychopathy and Serial Killers
|
- Most serial killers are psychopaths, but mostpsychopaths are not serial killers
- Serial killers are often described aspsychopathic - Most killers are not psychopaths |
|
|
Psychopaths in General Population
|
Population: 100%
Psychopaths: 1% |
|
|
Psychopaths in Prison Populations
|
Population: 100%
Psychopaths in prison: 10-25% |
|
|
Psychopaths as Killers of Police Officers
|
Population: 100%
Psychopaths as killers of cops: 44% |
|
|
PCL-R
|
- 20 items scored using:
- Semi structured interview - File information - 3 point scale - Total ranges from 0-40 |
|
|
Defining Features of Psychopathy
|
- A personality disorder characterized by
- An arrogant, deceitful interpersonal style - Deficient effective experiences - Impulsive and irresponsible - Early onset and diverse antisocial behaviours |
|
|
Defining Features
|
1) PLC-R Interpersonal Features
2) PLC-R Effective Features 3) PLC-R Lifestyle Features |
|
|
PLC-R (Psychopathy) Interpersonal Features
|
- Glib/superficially
- Grandiose, inflated self worth - Manipulative |
|
|
PLC-R Effective Features
|
- Shallow emotions
- Lack of guilt - Callous |
|
|
PLC-R Lifestyle Features
|
- Impulsive
- Irresponsible - Poor anger control - Criminal behaviours |
|
|
Implications of Psychopathy for CJS
|
Courtroom, instrumental vs. reactive homicides (police), recidivism (parole decision making)
|
|
|
Treatments of Psychopaths
|
- What do we treat?
- Personality traits or behaviours? - Clinicians believe psychopaths are difficultto treat - 176 treated patients/146 untreated patients - Follow-up period = 10 years |
|
|
Social Therapy Unit
|
- Minimum2 year treatment program
- Fosterresponsibility and empathy - Limitedprofessional contact - Entryto program non voluntary |
|
|
What Makes Psychopaths Tick?
|
- We don't know
- Not the sole result of poor parenting or abusive experiences - Some clues from neuroscience |
|
|
Psychopathy and Affect Language
|
- They know the words but not the music
- They know only the dictionary meaning ofwords - "They can learn to use ordinary words.. andto reproduce the pantomime of feeling.. but the feeling itself does not come topass” |
|
|
Lexical Decision Task
|
Words have both denotative (explicit, literal) and connotative (implicit, implied) meanings
|
|
|
Results
|
1)Activation in non psychopaths is widespread and primarily anterior
2)Activation in psychopaths is more localized to posteriors regions 3)Implies that psychopaths perform the task in a superficial manner |
|
|
Startle Blink
|
- Reflexoccurs when something unexpected occurs
- Primedif person is in negative emotional state or feeling threatened - Reducedif person is in positive emotional state |
