Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Thursday, April 6. 2017

Today's schedule is D-C-B-A

D Block Criminology 12 - Today we'll look at corporate crime. Remember, not all business is bad but we do need to understand the "corporate view" of white collar criminal activity. What is it that makes a successful business person and what kind of ethical behaviour is valued by corporate culture? I'm going to show you a television show called White Collar. Before we do, however:

From USA network:

White Collar is about the unlikely partnership of a con artist and an FBI agent who have been playing cat and mouse for years. Neal Caffery (Matt Boomer), a charming criminal mastermind, is finally caught by his nemesis, FBI Agent Peter Burke (Tim DeKay). When Neal escapes from a maximum-security prison to find his long-lost love, Peter nabs him once again. Rather than returning to jail, Neal suggests an alternate plan: He'll provide his criminal expertise to assist the Feds in catching other elusive criminals in exchange for his eventual freedom. Initially wary, Peter quickly finds that Neal provides insight and intuition that can't be found on the right side of the law.

The episode I’d like you to show is called Hard Sell from season 1, which deals with stock manipulation and churning the value of stock in a boiler room (metaphor). From

The scam is a "pump and dump", in which a group of "junior Gordon Gekkos" is selling bad stock. The guy in charge buys a large amount of dollar stocks, and has his men inflate the price by selling it over the phone. When the price peaks, guy in charge dumps the stock and leaves the buyers holding worthless shares. The average person loses $30,000, and some victims have lost their homes. The boiler room is mobile, moving to a new location after each stock dump

I'll introduce to Edwin H. Sutherland's Differential Association Theory (he introduced the concept "white collar crime") and we'll see what we can find on the Internet about white collar crime....spoil alert LOTS!
National Check Fraud Center
Robert O. Keel White Collar Crime
Canadian Encyclopedia White Collar Crime
Federal Bureau of Investigation White Collar Crime Division
Understanding White Collar Crime
News Stories of White Collar Crime

C Block Social Studies 11 - You'll need to work through questions 1, 2 & 3 on page 39; 1 & 4 on page 42; and question 5 from page 47 in your Counterpoints text today. Yesterday we examined government propaganda and spent more time looking at the Suffragette movement (along with Nellie McClung and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union). Check out the Canadian War Museum First World War poster site here or the McGill War posters webpage here or the Canada at War enlistment posters here. For more on propaganda techniques in war check out:
Global Issues
Media Awareness Network
Propaganda Critic

Today you'll also need to choose a topic for  your guided inquiry project on World War One. The guided inquiry question you need to answer is:

What effect did (Your selected topic) in the First World War have on Canadian society and its status as a nation?

You’ll need to find specific primary source data that will help explain or show the impact your selected topic had on Canada using:

1. Original Documents (excerpts or translations acceptable): Diaries, speeches, manuscripts, letters, interviews, news film footage, autobiographies, maps, official records -OR-
2. Creative Works: Poetry, drama, novels, music, art

Possible topics include (but are not limited to):

1. War Poetry (ex: John McRae “In Flanders Fields”)
2. Canadian Expeditionary Force training (ex: CFB Valcartier, Borden, Petawawa, Hughes)
3. Enemy Aliens and Alien Internment Camps (ex: Nanaimo, Kapuskasing, Eaton, Vernon, Lethbridge)
4. Royal Canadian Navy (from 2 HMCS Niobe and HMCS Rainbow to 100 warships at Sidney & Halifax Nova Scotia)
5. Conscription & Conscientious Objectors (Henri Bourassa, Robert Borden and Wilfrid Laurier)
6. Women (Women’s Home Guard, Farmerettes, War Auxiliary, Suffragists - consider this article from CBC about women and the right to vote in BC, War Brides, Lady Hockeyists)
7. Girl Guides
8. Paying for the War (Victory Bonds, Income Tax, Canadian Patriotic Fund)
9. Social Welfare (Pensions, Unemployment Insurance, Minimum Wage, Soldier Settlement Act, Veteran Retraining, the War Amps, the Canadian Legion)
10. Food & Agriculture (Food rationing, Canada Food Board Soldiers of the Soil, Canadian Wheat Board)
11. Aviation (Fighting Aces William Barker, Billy Bishop, Harold Anthony “Doc” Oaks)
12. Imperial Munitions Board (Canadian Aeroplanes Ltd., chemicals, forging, munitions)
13. Inventions (Variable pitch propeller, Ross rifle, Hydrophone)
14. Canadian Expeditionary Force (Royal 22nd Regiment – the Van Doos, Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry, the League of Indians, No. 2 Construction Battalion, Canadian Forestry Corps)
15. Merchant Marine
16. Battles (2nd Battle of Ypres, Somme, Vimy Ridge, Passchendaele, Beaumont-Hamel, Hill 70 – Lens)
17. Canada’s 100 Days (Battles from Amiens, France, to Mons, Belgium)
18. Capturing the War (photography and art – Frederick Varley, A.Y. Jackson, Arthur Lismer, J.W. Beatty, C.W. Simpson)
19. Victoria Cross Winners (Pine Street – “Valour Road” Winnipeg: Freddy Hall, Leo Clarke, Robert Shankland)
20. The Halifax Explosion
21. Labour, Strikes and Wartime Profiteering
22. The Treaty of Versailles (Robert Borden)
23. Propaganda (government posters)
24. Technology and Modern Warfare (inception of submarine warfare, trench warfare, gas warfare, tank warfare, air combat, and psychological warfare)
Presentation Format

Decide on a format for your end-product by thinking about your interests and strengths, and what might be the most effective means of communicating the information that you have gathered and analysed. Ideas for output/end products include, but are not limited to: Brochure, Pamphlet, Poster, Chart, Report, Research Paper, Essay, Editorial, Letter, Panel Discussion, Debate, Speech, Oral Presentation, Song/Lyric, Drama, Movie Script, Video, Digital Presentation (Prezi or Power Point), Web Page, Blog, Audio, Story Map, Painting, Scrapbook, Cartoon, Magazine or Newspaper article, Collage, Exhibition or Diorama.

You choose what you're interested in looking at through the lens of the inquiry question (above) and select a presentation format that you feels best works for you and then see me.

B Block Law 12 - Today we'll go over property crimes (arson, theft, identity theft, B&E, possession of stolen goods and fraud). We'll go over the R. v. Foidart, 2005 case and examine what "colour of right" means.

Edwin Foidart was hired by a Winnipeg church to repair their existing pipe organ as part of a major restoration project. In order to do this, Foidart located and purchased a used organ for the church. He planned to use the parts to restore the church’s pipe organ. The used organ parts were temporarily stored in a garage on Foidart’s property. However, difficulties arose, and the church had to cancel the restoration project. As a result, Foidart was asked to return all the organ parts in his possession. Over time, church members discovered that not all the organ parts had been returned. Some of the parts were found in pipe organs belonging to other churches. The accused was eventually charged with theft over $5000. In his defence, Foidart argued that he had a colour of right to the pieces from the collection. However, he chose not to testify at his trial to this effect. The trial judge found Foidart guilty of theft, Since the judge had not heard from Foidart as to reasonable belief of colour of belief, he could not consider this defence in his decision. Foidart appealed to the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The issue before the court was whether the lack of evidence from the accused himself as to his belief in the ownership of the organ parts was fatal to his case. In a 3-0 decision, the court agreed with the initial trial judge and dismissed Foidart’s appeal.

I'll have you work on the following:

Jack and his friend Marcus want to roast hot dogs in Jack’s backyard. They dig a fire pit and start a small fire to cook their food. After they eat the hot dogs, they decide that they want to roast marshmallows. Jack goes into the house to find the marshmallows. While Jack is gone, Marcus decides that they need some music so he walks around to the front of the house to get his CDs from the car. While the boys are not attending the fire, the flames grow bigger. A wind blows an ember onto the neighbour’s property and ignites a pile of towels lying on the neighbour’s deck. Unfortunately, nobody saw the fire start and the neighbours are not home. Within a few minutes, the fire in the neighbour’s yard has spread to their house. Soon after that, Jack and Marcus see the flames and call the fire department. The fire department is able to put out the fire, but the neighbour’s property has sustained damage of about $5000.

1. Who is responsible for causing the fire?
2. Should the charge of arson be laid against Jack and/or Marcus?

And then you can finish yesterday's "Key Components of Criminal Code Offenses" worksheet.

A Block Introduction to Law 9/10 -  Today we'll look at the parties to an offense...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 an offence. 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 effect of being a party is that you are guilty of committing an offence – you can be a robber in any of the ways set out. It is not a separate offence. You criminal record will reflect that you were guilty of robbery, not abetting robbery.

After a bit we'll watch a Law & Order episode from season 10 called Loco Parentis. From sanitation workers find a teenage boy's body, the investigation leads to a school bully who displays an avid interest in martial-arts weapons, and whose father bought the murder weapon. The killer's father is found to have helped foster his son's violent behavior, so the DA's office charges him with murder on account of depraved indifference.

The legal definition of In Loco Parentis is: A person who, though not the natural parent, has acted as a parent to a child and may thus be liable to legal obligations as if he/she were a natural parent.

No comments: