Search

Drawing upon historical developments and legal interpretations of “crimes against nature” as it relates to bestiality, this paper endeavors to promote further discussions surrounding the conception of “natural” and/or extant law, by which an understanding of historical and modern objections to crimes against nature opens them up to the critique of thin-universalism—that is, that despite disparate socio-moral fundaments, laws of prohibition coalesce around evangelical totalities. We contend that a paradigm shift in respect of naturalness is necessitated—naturalness should be packaged and represented, in part, by the empirical. Thus, conceptions of vulnerability and sentience rooted in social scientific understandings and in hospitable forms of rights protections ought to provide a new understanding of governance of the natural. In turn, this naturalness ought to be reflected in law so long as the boundaries we propose are not unduly transgressed. If unnatural acts like bestiality have their prohibitions in the legal tethering points of Judeo-Christian and, later Victorian roots, the new natural law ought to be apprised of rights-based constitutionalism and informed by green criminological and animal rights logics. Law, apprised of these ethics, would evolve to expand protections for animals, human and non-human alike. Laws based on the new naturalness could protect species and environments as evidence demands.

Research SummaryIn our article, we attend to the implied outlooks (“philosophies” in the sense of operative practical discourses and assumptions) and the competing ethical concerns that animate differing views on privatizing corrections. We consider some normative arguments and empirical observations that have been mobilized for and against privatization since the inception of the modern version of this debate in the late 1980s, and we seek to place these in the context of accounts of penal problems over that contentious period. We argue that a multidimensional approach to understanding the sociology of punishment and in particular how certain forms of punishment persist, survive, and thrive is required when considering the privatization of corrections. In using such an approach, we raise quizzical questions regarding the pairing together of punishment and privatization, and as a result, we seek to sharpen the discussion about future prospects.Policy ImplicationsGreater attention must be paid toward public involvement, knowledge, and understanding about penal policies. With particular regard to the involvement of private‐sector actors and interests, this has implications both at the initial contract negotiation stages of expanding correctional privatization as well as at the rescission of such contracts. The impact of penal arrangements on the dignity and integrity of offenders—especially but not only prison inmates—their loved ones and communities, and wider considerations of public interest are abiding and unresolved concerns, and privatization policies must be evaluated in light of these.

Reflecting on new trans prisoner placement policies within Canadian federal prisons, in light of recent changes instigated under the Canadian Liberal Trudeau government, we provide knowledge from cisgender correctional officer (CO) recruits regarding these policy changes and underscore their views of working with officers who identify as transgender. Canada’s new policies recognize the presence of trans prisoners and create new protocols accordingly, simultaneously challenging some of the foundational tenets of the carceral system. While overwhelming support exists from cisgender recruits for their trans colleagues, support among a relative minority of COs is contingent upon notions like safety and security grounded in a dominantly cisgender prison culture; a culture we situate within the wider context of an unsettled correctional prison culture.

Copyright © 2020 Ricciardelli, Carleton, Gacek and Groll. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. Mental health challenges appear to be extremely prolific and challenging for correctional service employees, affecting persons working in community, institutional, and administrative correctional services. Focusing specifically on correctional workers employed by the Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General, we shed light on their interpretations of the complexities of their occupational work and of how their work affects staff. Using a qualitative thematic approach to data analyses, we show that participants (n = 67) encounter barriers to treatment seeking, which they describe as tremendous, starting with benefits, wages, and shift work. We let the voices of staff elucidate what is needed to create a healthier correctional workforce. Recommendations include more training opportunities and programs; quarterly, semiannual, or annual appointments with a mental health professional who can assess changes in the mental health status of employees; offsite assessments to ensure confidentiality; and team building opportunities to reduce interpersonal conflict at work and increase moral by improving the work environment. The research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research catalyst Grant #162534. Faculty yes

The expansion and diffusion of the ‘carceral state’ – understood here as the set of institutional configurations and actors that prioritise punishment, containment, detention, and/or incarceration as a means of treating poverty and marginalisation – is a looming contemporary concern. It seems probable that confluent interests from the commercial, governmental, and civil society sectors will, in the absence of robust interrogation, continue to extend the scope of penal supervision in the lives and communities of already marginalised people. Drawing upon a wide range of literature our chapter critically queries the pairing of punishment and the marketisation of criminal justice. For example, is the extension of electronic monitoring simply a convenient use of a handy technology? Or does it involve the inadequately examined delegation of the state’s power to punish? We call into question the troubling relationship between claims of market-as-accountability versus democratic decision-making. By questioning the interpenetration of these interests, our intention is to re-ignite public conversation concerning the legitimacy of current penal developments and to call attention to some alternative paths.

Canadian public safety personnel (e.g., correctional workers, firefighters) experience potential stressors as a function of their occupation. Occupational stressors can include organizational (e.g., job context) and operational (e.g., job content) elements. Operational stressors (e.g., exposures to potentially psychologically traumatic events) may be inevitable, but opportunities may exist to mitigate other occupational stressors for public safety personnel. Research exploring the diverse forms of stress among public safety personnel remains sparse. In our current qualitative study we provide insights into how public safety personnel interpret occupational stressors. We use a semi-grounded thematic approach to analyze what public safety personnel reported when asked to further comment on occupational stress or their work experiences in two open-ended comment fields of an online survey. We provide a more comprehensive understanding of how public safety personnel experience occupational stress and the stressors that are unique to their occupations. Beyond known operational stressors, our respondents (n = 1238, n = 828) reported substantial difficulties with organizational (interpersonal work relationship dynamics, workload distribution, resources, and administrative obligations) and operational (vigilance, work location, interacting with the public) stressors. Some operational stressors are inevitable, but other occupational stressors can be mitigated to better support our public safety personnel.

Dutch national police recently became the world’s first force to train eagles to combat the growing rise of drones within the Netherlands. Partnering with an eagle-training security firm, Guard From Above, both organizations believe using eagles to intercept and retrieve drones is the most effective countermeasure to handle rogue drones in the skies. This paper questions whether such a police operation to increase air security respects the rights of the eagles and ensures the animals’ protection from unreasonable injury, harm and suffering. Such an examination lies at the intersection of green criminological perspectives and critical security studies’ scholarship, an intersection of which I consider more thoroughly. By implementing a qualitative media analysis, this paper examines twenty media reports detailing the facts of the Dutch ‘Flying Squad.’ I contend that police agencies in the West must seriously consider such eagle initiatives as intrusive, harmful practices. The findings suggest that c...

Since launching in 2016, the Robsoncrim research cluster at the Faculty of Law, University of Manitoba, has continued to develop a unique interdisciplinary platform for the advancement of research and teaching in the criminal law. Robsoncrim.com has now hosted over 350 Blawgs, 5 with contributions from across the country and beyond. Our cluster has over 30,000 tweet impressions a month and our website has delivered almost 600 reads in the past twelve months. We are as delighted as we are humbled to continue delivering quality academic content that embraces and unites academic discussion around the criminal law. Our team of collaborators extends from coast to coast and is comprised of top academics in their respective crim fields.Our goal remains to provide a leading national and international forum for scholars of criminal law, criminology and criminal justice to engage in dialogue. Too often, these disciplines hide in silos, afraid to engage in cross- disciplinary exchanges. We believe that high quality publications in these disciplines, and indeed, other cognate disciplines, ought to exist in dialogue. We view this as crucial to enhancing justice knowledge: theory and practice, policy and planning, and even, in resistance to injustice. We strive to break down the barriers that keep these works in disciplinary pigeon holes. This is, of course, an ambitious path to embark upon, but the two volumes we have released this year represent another incremental step towards our goals. We hope you enjoy these volumes, and we thank our interdisciplinary collaborator team, our editorial team, our student editors and all of the MLJ staff.

In R. v. Labaye, the Supreme Court revised the test for Criminal Code offences involving indecency and obscenity, replacing the previous community standards of tolerance test. Despite the Supreme Court’s demand for positive knowledge of (risk of) harm, the Labaye test still largely protects a normative vision of society rather than promoting human sexuality and freedom of expression. The judiciary post-Labaye continue to fill evidentiary vacuums with circumstantial evidence and intangible harms, informed by judicial tastes rather than empirical harm. Labaye has also become a discursive construct that is explicative of harm in other public law arenas. This article reveals the inconsistencies in applications of the Labaye test and considers whether a more principled definition of harm is needed in indecency and obscenity cases and beyond.

This paper contributes to the criminology of genocide through examination of settler colonial destruction within the broader context of what we term ‘genocidal carcerality’. We employ this term to examine the ways in which space is implicated in the physical, biological, and cultural destruction of group life. In this paper, our purpose is not to create a typology of genocidal carcerality, but rather to demonstrate the multiplicity of spatial strategies at work within any genocidal context, with specific focus on Indian Residential Schools. In so doing, we critique attempts to reduce genocidal carcerality to a single spatial form, such as the camp. We illustrate our main points through a case study of the Fort Alexander Indian Residential School in Manitoba, Canada.

The regulation of animals in North America should be apprised of evolving socialities. As the judiciary encounters situations of contestation between humans and animals in adjudication, it should take notice of the emergence of animal recognition in Western societies. Law is apprised of sociality, can absorb social information, and may, at times, reflect how citizens view issues of justice. What was once innocent behavior can be reconstituted as criminal through the adjudicative exercise (and vice versa). In this Paper, we investigate socio-legal constructions of ‘the animal’ in two recent North American adjudications. In two recent cases, R. v. D.L.W. and State v. Newcomb, the Supreme Court of Canada and the Oregon Supreme Court contested what it means to be an animal in situations of bestiality and animal welfare investigations respectively. We argue that the jurisprudence in Canada and the United States should begin to incrementally shift towards progressive conceptions of animal existence. Such an understanding would (re)consider animals as beings, capable of worth and dignity – as more than expendable property. In light of a relative void of modern animal welfare legislation in North American jurisdictions, let alone animal bills of rights, the judicial decision remains the most likely site of progress for animal advocacy.

In Philip K. Dick’s short story Minority Report, the institution of Precrime punishes people with imprisonment for crimes they would have committed had they not been prevented. With Dick’s allegorical inspiration, the authors of Criminal Law and Precrime: Legal Studies in Canadian Punishment and Surveillance in Anticipation of Criminal Guilt posit that recent developments in Canadian law indicate a trend toward imposing punitive measures at increasingly earlier stages of the prosecutorial process. The result is a potentially new field of criminal management that could be characterized as "precrime"—particularly the use of the law as a technology of surveillance and prevention since "terror" became a justification for intervention. The authors note that as risk management logics (based in actuarial sciences) have shifted to precautionary ones (based in administrative sciences), the law has responded by developing techniques in the arena of criminal regulation in light of the "war on terror": the need to ensure security, the proliferation of digital data, and the development of drones, social networking, and cloud storage to gather personal data. The authors view shifts in criminal investigation; the substantive criminal law of sexual expression, conduct, and work; and civil forfeiture as emblematic of precrime populism. The unifying theme of these techniques is that they occur prior to state-identified crime, arise out of a precautionary philosophy, and seek to presume (or circumvent) criminality. The book is a provocative read for scholars and students in criminal law, policing, and surveillance, as well as for those interested in how areas of law, such as immigration, health, and anti-terrorism, are mobilizing the logics of risk and surveillance in new ways that emphasize precaution. The authors invite legal scholars to place the analytical lens of precrime on criminal and regulatory practices in Canada as well as other Western nations across the globe.