Geography 12 - You should be working on your Orting High School case study assignment. Remember:
Business and community leaders in the city of Orting in Pierce County, Washington State, wish to build a new high school to accommodate and encourage the local population explosion. (Orting is only 30-40 minutes commuting time from the rapidly growing Tacoma and Seattle metropolitan areas.) However, Pierce County officials have refused permission to build the high school on county lands because they feel the location is hazardous. Geological surveys show that both Orting and the proposed high school site are on top of solidified mudflows that originated on the slopes of nearby Mount Rainier. Based on the location of older flows around Mount Rainier and on experience gained from observing mudflows during the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, county officials argue that any new mudflow coming down the valley could easily destroy the high school and anybody who happened to be in it. County officials have also passed an ordinance forbidding high-density housing (like tract-home developments) on county lands, claiming that there are not sufficient roads out of the city to allow for emergency evacuation. The ordinance has upset local developers. City leaders counter that warning from a system of acoustic sensors (which have not yet been built) would give students enough time to evacuate the school, if necessary. The city has tried three separate times to pass a bond issue enabling the high school to be built on city lands but has not been successful.
Representatives from both the city and the county have appealed to your geographic consulting company to provide them with the facts and potential risks of the situation and to provide your recommendations on the possibility of building the high school. Your possible recommendations could include building on the proposed site, build on a nearby site, or do not build on any site. You will need to provide sound reasoning for your decisions, which need to provide the balanced perspective that makes geographers in such high demand. In your company’s report to the city of Orting and Pierce County officials, you must include the following information:
- A description of the geographic location & physical site of Orting
- An explanation of subduction and why the Cascade volcanoes exist
- A brief volcanic history of Mt. Rainier
- A list and explanation of the potential hazards of Mt. Rainier
- The specific risks to the town of Orting
- Your recommendations as to the building of the new high school
Law 12 - Here is the work we would be doing this week...
- Please read through "Parties to an Offence" in the All About Law text from pages 131-133 (Aiding or Abetting and Accessory After the Fact) and complete questions 1-3 on page 133.
- Please read through "Our Criminal Court System" from pages 134-136 and complete questions 1-5 on page 138
- REVIEWING KEY TERMS - Match the key terms below with their corresponding description:
2. arraign
3. Criminal Code
4. criminal offence
5. criminalizing
6. decriminalizing
7. hybrid offence
8. impartiality
9. indictable offence
10. legalizing
11. mens rea
12. preliminary hearing
13. prosecute
14. summary conviction offence
___ a) a court procedure to determine if the Crown has enough evidence to take the case to trial
___ b) a serious crime that carries more severe penalties; tried in a provincial supreme court
___ c) when an act or behaviour is no longer in the Criminal Code or illegal in any way
___ d) the main source of criminal law in Canada
___ e) Latin phrase meaning “a wrongful action”
___ f) when the federal government adds an act or behaviour to the Criminal Code
___ g) a minor criminal offence that is tried in a provincial court
___ h) judges should be open-minded and not biased for or against the person on trial
___ i) Latin phrase meaning “a guilty mind”
___ j) the criminal charges are read to the accused in court who enters a plea of guilty or not
guilty
___ k) an offence that is listed in the Criminal Code
___ l) in criminal law, when a person is brought to trial by the Crown attorney
___ m) an offence that the Crown can prosecute as either an indictable or summary offence
___ n) an act or behaviour that is no longer considered to be a crime, but is still subject to
certain legal restrictions and penalties
- STRUCTURE OF THE CANADIAN COURT SYSTEM - Read each scenario and determine what court would address the issue.
2. An issue of national importance has been dealt with by the provincial supreme court and the provincial court of appeal. The party that lost at the court of appeal wants the issue reconsidered.
3. A trial is being held about an intellectual property matter.
4. The Crown thinks that a sentence given in the provincial supreme court for a person convicted of sexual assault is too lenient and is appealing the sentence.
5. A person is charged with the indictable offence of aggravated assault and is having his preliminary hearing.
6. A person is on trial for the indictable offence of impaired driving causing death.
7. A person loses his copyright case and wants to have the decision reviewed by a higher court.
8. A person was convicted of a summary conviction offence and is appealing the decision.
9. The provincial court of appeal makes a decision. What courts are bound to follow that decision?
10. In a split decision, the court of appeal affirms the conviction of a person charged with murder. The convicted individual wants the case considered by a higher court.
Help can be found in your text book and on the links below
Your Laws - Parties to an Offence
Department of Justice Parties to an Offence
From the Halton District School Board in Ontario:
The Perpetrator: is the person who actually commits the criminal offence. When more than one person is directly involved in committing a crime, they are called co-perpetrators. In every case, the person actually has to be present at the scene of the offence to be identified as either a perpetrator of co-perpetrator. A person who commits an offence, aids a person to commit an offence, or abets a person in committing an offence is defined as a party to an offence under section 21 of the Criminal Code.
Aiding and Abetting: Aiding means helping a perpetrator commit a crime. To aid the perpetrator, one does not have to be present when the offence is committed. Abet means to encourage without actually providing physical assistance. Two things must be proved before an accused can be convicted of being a party by aiding or abetting. The first is that the accused had knowledge that the other intended to commit anoffence. The second is that the accused aided or abetted the other. Mere presence at the scene is not conclusive evidence of aiding or abetting. Under section 21(2), a person who plans an offence is just as guilty as a person who actually commits the offence. However, a person is not guilty if his/her action is not intended to assist in the commission of an offence.
Counselling: The separate offence of counselling, (s. 22), is similar to abetting but is much broader in scope. Counselling includes the acts of advising, recommending, persuading or recruiting another person to commit an offence (procuring, soliciting or inciting"). A person who counsels does not have to be present at the scene of the crime.
Accessories After the Fact: The Criminal Code provides a penalty for a person who is an accessory after the fact as outlined in section 23. Knowingly assisting a person who has committed a crime to escape capture includes providing food, clothing, or shelter to the offender. One exception to his law is the favoured relationship between a legally married couple. A man or woman cannot be held responsible for assisting in the escape of a spouse and someone escaping with a spouse. An accessory after the fact is one who receives, comforts or assists any one who has been a party to an offence in order to enable him/her to escape, knowing him/her to be a party thereto. There are three constituent elements of the offence of being an accessory after the fact: knowledge that a crime has been committed; an intent to assist the criminal to escape; and an act or omission intended to aid a criminal.
The Criminal Court System in Canada
Provincial Courts — Criminal Division (example: the British Columbia Provincial Court)
This is the trial court that most students will be familiar with as it involves the finding of facts, witness testimony, and the introduction of evidence. If a mistake is made at this stage, then an appeal can be made to a higher court. This court:
• arraigns the accused (reads the charge and enters the plea) in all criminal cases
• holds preliminary hearings for most severe indictable offences, where the accused elects to have the case tried in a higher court
• hears and tries criminal summary conviction cases and the least serious indictable offences such as theft under $5000
The judges in this court are appointed by the provincial governments.
Provincial Superior Court — Appeals and Trials (example: the British Columbia Supreme Court)
This court is the court of first appeal with respect to criminal cases arising in the provincial court. This court:
• tries the more severe crimes such as manslaughter and sexual assault, and the most severe indictable offences such as murder and armed robbery
• hears criminal appeals in summary conviction cases
• sets provincial precedent; decisions must be followed by provincial court judges in that province
• can be composed of a judge alone or a judge and jury
The judges in this court are appointed by the federal government.
Provincial Court of Appeal (example: the British Columbia Court of Appeal)
This is the highest court and the final court of appeal in the province. Many appeals stop here as the Supreme Court of Canada accepts only appeals that are deemed to be of great importance. Appeals are heard by three or more judges, depending on the case. Their decisions may be either unanimous or majority judgments. Split two-to-one judgments are not uncommon. When the court releases its decision, it also provides explanations for the majority vote, and dissenting judges provide their reasons for disagreeing. This court:
• hears appeals from the trial division of provincial superior courts
• sets provincial precedent; decisions must be followed by all judges in that province
• has three to five judges to hear all appeals
The judges in this court are appointed by the federal government.
Federal Courts
This is Canada’s national court system that hears legal disputes with the federal government. In 2003, the former Federal Court of Canada was separated into two distinct courts: the Federal Court, and the Federal Court of Appeal. The Federal Court has jurisdiction over cases involving federal government boards, tribunals and commissions, and issues within federal jurisdiction. These include immigration and citizenship matters, and intellectual property (such as copyright and trademark issues), as well as cases involving the federal government. The Federal Court of Appeal hears appeals of decisions by the Federal Court. Decisions of this court may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. Both the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal have regional offices in all major cities in Canada, although the judges and the main court facilities are located in Ottawa.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) is the final court of appeal in our country. Even though the SCC is the highest court in the land, not all parties — individuals, organizations, or even governments — have the right to appeal to it. Before it agrees to hear an appeal, the court determines if the issue is of great importance or if a question of law must be decided or interpreted. However, there is an automatic right of appeal when there is a split decision from a provincial court of appeal. Like the provincial courts of appeal, the SCC may be either unanimous or split. The Supreme Court of Canada:
• has unlimited jurisdiction in criminal matters
• hears appeals from provincial appeal courts and the Federal Court of Appeal
• hears cases of national importance (for example, interprets the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or clarifies a criminal law matter)
• generally grants leave (permission) before the appeal will be heard
• sets a national precedent in its judgments; these decisions must be followed by all judges in all courts of Canada
The nine judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the federal government and can serve until age 75.
Social Studies 11 - From Ms Krahn...
In hopes of not falling behind this week, I am posting assignments that we would be working on in class this week.
Here is a link to the handout that was given out on Friday, March 3: http://www.box.com/s/6if1dvcoyqoku2vbt2sq
On the handout you will see the pages you will need to read in Counterpoints, definitions you will need to know, and two questions to answer.
The topics to know include the Collapse of the Central Powers, the last Hundred Days of the War, Armistice, Paris Peace Conference, Treaty of Versailles, League of Nations, and the effect of the war on Canada.
Here are some links to help you out with the information:
Collapse of Central Powers: http://www.sparknotes.com/history/european/ww1/section11.rhtml
Last Hundred Days: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Days_Offensive
Armistice Day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice_Day
Paris Peace Conference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Conference,_1919
Treaty of Versailles: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/treaty_of_versailles.htm
League of Nations: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/leagueofnations.htm
Effect of the War on Canada: http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/exhibitions/guerre/war-impact-e.aspx
Also, here are some video links if you are interested in seeing the process on film.
Hundred Days Offensive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShRA8HRMR4Q
NFB documentaries on WWI: http://www.nfb.ca/playlist/world-war-I-armistice/
Paris Peace Conference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShRA8HRMR4Q
No comments:
Post a Comment