Monday, May 31. 2021

Today's class schedule is:

9:15 - 11:50 B Block Human Geography

12:30 - 3:05 C Block Legal Studies

B Block Human Geography - Today we'll try to answer the key question, "Why Do Folk and Popular Culture Face Sustainability Challenges?" The international diffusion of popular culture has led to two issues, both of which can be understood from geographic perspectives.

• First, the diffusion of popular culture may threaten the survival of traditional folk culture in many countries. 
• Second, popular culture may be less responsive to the diversity of local environments and consequently may generate adverse environmental impacts.

So we'll examine these two things today. We'll start with the potential loss of folk culture through assimilation which is a process of giving up cultural traditions and adopting social customs of the dominant culture of a place, acculturation which is a process of adjustment to the dominant culture of a place all while retaining features of a folk culture, and syncretism which is the creation of a new cultural feature through combining elements of two groups. See this site here. To help think of:




Or the story of Chanie Wenjack set to the music of Gord Downie (the Tragically Hip singer who died of brain cancer in 2017).

For the question, "How is the playing of golf and golf courses an example of a popular custom which is not generally in harmony with the local environment? "You may disagree if you like, however it is important to note that Golf courses account for more than 5.1 million acres of land worldwide and use 13 trillion gallons of water every year (not to mention pesticides and herbicides) Check out:

Golf is a giant board game damaging the planet: Time for it to go

Golf and the Environment

The case against golf

A Dangerous Game: Documentary Examines Environmental Impact of Luxury Golf Resorts

After we'll look at the creation of uniform landscapes, landscape pollution and resource depletion. We end with a big thinking question:

Placelessness and uniform landscapes …… With the spread of pop culture throughout Canada (specifically restaurants, gas stations, coffee shops, national chains), are cities throughout our country losing their local diversity?  Are we becoming a nation that looks the same no matter what city you are in?  Explain.

Consider this quote to help:

Stroll into your local Starbucks and you will find yourself part of a cultural experiment on a scale never seen before on this planet. In less than half a century, the coffee chain has grown from a single outlet in Seattle to nearly 20,000 shops in around 60 countries. Each year, its near identical stores serve cups of near identical coffee in near identical cups to hundreds of thousands of people. For the first time in history, your morning cappuccino is the same no matter whether you are sipping it in Tokyo, New York, Bangkok or Buenos Aires.

This is one example of many chains that populate many cities all across Canada...all where you can get the same product in a store that looks the same in a place that looks the same....same same same.

C Block Legal Studies - Today we will start by finishing the Law and Order Episode from Friday. After, we'll focus on the presentation of evidence (Crown first then Defence), the rules of evidence (including voire dire -  A Voir Dire is usually referred to a "trial within a trial". It is usually held during the Crown's case in order to determine the admissibility of evidence. For example, Voir Dires can be held to determine whether a confession is voluntary and admissible or whether it should be excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter. If the evidence heard in the Voir Dire is deemed to be admissible, counsel can agree not to repeat the evidence and the Voir Dire will form part of the evidence at trial. Two very common Voir Dires are a challenge to the admissibility of items seized in a search and a challenge to the admissibility accused confession to the police), and types of evidence (circumstantial, hearsay, privileged, and character).

Before a trial takes place, at the arraignment hearing, some of the things that will be discussed are:

• whether the prosecutor is proceeding summarily or by indictment;
• whether the prosecutor has made full disclosure (given all of the information the defense needs, like witnesses’ statements);
• the number of police, expert, and other witnesses that the prosecutor plans to call if the case goes to trial;
• the time estimate for the prosecutor’s case; and
• whether an interpreter is needed.

The arraignment hearing will likely be handled by a judicial case manager. At the hearing, the judicial case manager will ask how the defendant wants to plead. At this point, the defendant has three options:

• plead guilty (before a judge),
•  plead not guilty and set a date for trial, or
• ask for an adjournment

There are basically seven steps in every criminal trial:
1. The case is called.
2. The trial begins.
3. The judge makes the “exclusion of witness order” if asked by either the Crown or Defense.
4. The Crown prosecutor presents the Crown’s case. Defense may cross-examine (question) each witness called by the prosecutor.
5. Defense presents their case by calling witnesses and possibly the defendant speaking themselves.  The prosecutor can cross-examine Defense witnesses.
6. Both Defense and the prosecutor make closing submissions to the judge.
7. The judge makes a decision.

Witnesses must answer all questions put to them unless it is considered privileged. Privileged information includes:

i) discussions between a client and his or her lawyer in situations when the lawyer was acting in a professional capacity,
ii) any information tending to reveal the identity of a confidential police informant, unless disclosure is the only way to establish the innocence of the accused, and
iii) communication between spouses.

A witness is required either to swear an oath or to solemnly affirm that he or she will tell the truth. Section 16(3) of the Canada Evidence Act permits a witness who is able to communicate the evidence, but does not understand the nature of an oath or a solemn affirmation due to age (under 14 years) or insufficient mental capacity, to testify – as long as he or she promises to tell the truth.

The judge decides whether to admit or exclude evidence, as governed by the laws of evidence, case law, the Charter, the BC Evidence Act, the Canada Evidence Act, and the statute creating the offence. Evidence must be relevant to the facts in issue. The facts in issue are those that go to establishing the essential elements of the offence and any legal defence to that offence. Evidence may be presented with respect to other issues as well, such as the credibility of a witness, provided that the evidence does not offend the collateral evidence rule. 

Lastly, we'll be looking at the Criminal Code of Canada and we will focus our attention today on violent crimes - specifically the categories of homicide in Canada. We'll learn the difference between culpable and non-culpable homicide and examine the levels of murder (first and second degree) as well as manslaughter (voluntary and involuntary)…all done through an interpretive play involving my swivel chair, the floor and possibly a garbage can. 

R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46 

229 Culpable homicide is murder

(a) where the person who causes the death of a human being

• (i) means to cause his death, or
• (ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not;

(b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or

(c) if a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that they know is likely to cause death, and by doing so causes the death of a human being, even if they desire to effect their object without causing death or bodily harm to any human being.

231 (1) Murder is first degree murder or second degree murder.

(2) Murder is first degree murder when it is planned and deliberate.

(3) Contracted Murder is Murder in the First Degree

(4) Murder of peace officer is Murder in the First Degree

(5) Murder while Hijacking, sexual assault or kidnapping is Murder in the First Degree

(7) All murder that is not first degree murder is second degree murder.

232 (1) Culpable homicide that otherwise would be murder may be reduced to manslaughter if the person who committed it did so in the heat of passion caused by sudden provocation.

233 A female person commits infanticide when by a willful act or omission she causes the death of her newly-born child

234 Culpable homicide that is not murder or infanticide is manslaughter.

There is a mandatory minimum sentence of life imprisonment for being convicted of either first degree or second-degree murder. For first degree murder, life imprisonment comes with no possibility of parole for 25 years.  For second degree murder, life imprisonment comes with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 10 years. There is no minimum punishment for manslaughter, meaning that it carries a very wide sentencing range. If a firearm is used, however, a mandatory minimum punishment of four years is in effect. Otherwise, there is only the maximum, which is imprisonment for life.