A Block Law 9/10 - Today you'll continue our look at criminal forensics by getting
fingerprinted. We will all get one set of fingers (and thumb) on one hand
fingerprinted (our non dominant hand) by using graphite pencils and scotch tape.
You will need to identify whether or not your prints are loops, arches, or
whorls and then place them up on the blackboard. We will then count up the total
number of loops, arches, and whorls for each finger (and thumb) for the class
and graph the data.B Block Social Studies 10 - Friday to I asked you to define the following: Family Compact, United Empire Loyalist, Clergy Reserves, Assembly, and Governor and then to work on the two questions on the "Get to the Source: The Family Compact" section on page 53 of Horizons. You'll have a bit of time to finish that work up and then we are going to work on the four causes of discontent in Upper Canada that led to the Rebellion of 1837. We'll look at the colonial government structure (Governor appointed members of the Executive and Legislative Councils that routinely ignored the wishes of the elected Assembly) and the ruling colonial elite (Anglican Church, the wealthy United Empire Loyalists and the business people, bankers, lawyers and military leaders that formed the Family Compact). We'll also look at the problem of land distribution (only 10% of all land in the colony was being farmed while the remaining land was being held on the possibility of accruing wealth for the Family Compact and the Anglican Church) and Transport (canals like the Welland Canal and not roads).
C Block Criminology 12 - Today we are going to the library to work on our next blog / journal entry. Below, you'll find a question on hypermasculinity, male socialization, and sexual assault. I will need you to answer that question and then find a news story about a sexual assault. You will need to try to explain the motivation and roots of the behaviour of the assaulter in the story.
Explain how sexual behaviour could be socialized in males. Do you think that males who commit sexual assault are "hypermasculine"? Why and where do men learn "hypermasculine" behaviour?
The factors that predispose men to commit sexual assault include evolutionary factors, male socialization, psychological abnormality, and social learning. Most criminologists believe that rape is not sexually motivated. The evolutionary and biological factors of males suggest that sexual assault may be instinctual and developed over the ages in an effort to perpetuate the species. This notion holds that men who are sexually aggressive will have a reproductive edge over their more passive peers. Conversely, the male socialization view argues that men are socialized to be the aggressors and expect to be sexually active with many women. Sexual insecurity, then, may then lead some men to commit sexual assault to bolster their self-image. Hypermasculine men typically have a callous sexual attitude and believe that violence is manly. Finally, another view is that men learn to commit sexual assaults as they learn any other behaviour.
Before you write your blog for the day PLEASE read this article: "The conversation you must have with your sons" AND this article "Why campuses are too often the scene of sex crimes".
Then, think about the media we are exposed to in youth...Check out the official Miss Representation website. Use information from the "Sext Up Kids" documentary question we watched on Friday to help you with your entry today.
D Block Law 12 - Today we're going to review the types of criminal offenses (summary conviction, indictable, hybrid) from yesterday and then shift into the elements of a crime (with special attention focused on the Mens Rea - intent, knowledge, and recklessness). Actus Reus and Mens Rea come from Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea which is Latin for “the act will not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty.” To help us understand these concepts we'll look at the R. v. Parks (1992) case as well as the R. v. Williams (2003) case. In terms of the Williams case, another example of an HIV related aggravated sexual assault case involved former CFL athlete Trevis Smith. A review of the decision (sentenced to five and a half years in 2007 and was paroled in 2010) can be found here at CBC News. In terms of Wilful Blindness, because of the Sansregret case, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the concepts of recklessness and wilful blindness are not the same and that it is wise to keep the two concepts separate. The court then defined each concept as follows (Stuart: 211):
- Recklessness involves knowledge of a danger or risk and persistence in a course of conduct which creates a risk that the prohibited result will occur,
- Wilful blindness arises where a person who has become aware of the need for some inquiry declines to make the inquiry because he does not wish to know the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment