Search results

High levels of need and complexity were identified in women referred to and accepted by the inreach team in HMP & YOI Bullwood Hall during the first two years of operation. They included mental health problems, personality disorder, substance misuse and social factors. During the first and second years of operation, there were 124 and 194 referrals respectively. Prevalence of substance misuse was high, and a large proportion of women were involved in multi‐drug use. Low mood was the most common reason for referral. The prevalence of intentional self‐injury was high, and was significantly associated with previous suicide attempts, history of abuse and personality disorder traits. A number of factors were identified that compromised effective through‐care to the community, including lack of accommodation and primary care access on release, and that disrupted the connectivity of care. These factors contributed to the social exclusion of this vulnerable group.

Although precise numbers are unknown, it is generally acknowledged that between 5‐10% of the offending population are people with learning disabilities. While there are few provisions that explicitly target defendants with learning disabilities there is a general recognition in law that defendants must be able to understand and participate effectively in the criminal proceedings of which they are a part. The implications of the principle of effective participation are that criminal prosecution may be deemed inappropriate for certain defendants with learning disabilities, in which case they may be diverted away from criminal justice and into health care. There is scope for a variety of measures to be put into place to support defendants with learning disabilities to maximise their chances of participating effectively. However, in terms of statutory provision, there is a lack of parity between vulnerable witnesses and vulnerable defendants. Further, the absence of effective screening procedures to identify defendants' learning disabilities means that their support needs often go unrecognised and unmet.

The role of the Probation Service in providing an information and assessment process to the courts is currently in a state of considerable flux. This paper, in reviewing the developments in Pre‐Sentence Report (PSR) writing by the Probation Service, suggests that for a number of reasons reports have become potentially contentious.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of liaison and diversion services working in the lower courts (also known as Magistrates’ courts) with regard to autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) and their assessment, in particular, the role of pre-sentence and psychiatric reports and interviews.

Current practice is described in the lower courts in the context of current legislation and procedures.

When writing reports, there is a need for expertise to offer an opinion on future risk, disposal and what needs to be in place to support people with ASDs. No assumptions should be made when reporting on the basis of an ASD diagnosis alone and each case must be assessed on its individual merits while ensuring that individual human rights are protected.

There is currently a sparse literature examining ASD in court settings. This paper seeks to clarify the current practice.

This chapter provides a genealogy of the Gladue–Ipeelee principle of special consideration of Indigenous circumstances at sentencing. The principle is codified in the 1996 statutory requirement that “all available sanctions other than imprisonment … should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders” (s. 718.2e of the Criminal Code of Canada). Using the Foucaultian genealogy method to produce a “history of the present,” this chapter eschews normative questions of how s. 718.2e has “failed” to reduce Indigenous over-incarceration to instead focus on how practices of “special consideration” reproduce settler-state paternalism. This chapter addresses three key components of the Gladue–Ipeelee principle: the collection of circumstances information, the characterization of those circumstances, and finally their consideration at sentencing. Part one focuses on questions of legitimacy and authority and explicates how authority and responsibility to produce Indigenous circumstances knowledge was transferred from the Department of Indian Affairs (DIA) to Indigenous Courtworker organizations in the late 1960s/early 1970s. Part two identifies how authority shapes problematization by examining the characterization of Indigenous circumstances in the two eras, finding that present-day Gladue reports articulate an Indigenous history and critique of colonialism as the root cause of Indigenous criminalization, whereas DIA reports prior to 1970 generally characterized this criminalization as a “failure to assimilate.” Part three focuses on the structural reproduction of power relations by exploring historical continuities in judicial and executive-branch consideration of Indigenous circumstances, suggesting that the Gladue–Ipeelee principle reinscribes a colonial “mercy” framework of diminished responsibility. The author discusses how the principle operates in the shadow of Indigenous over-incarceration as a form of state “recognition” and a technique of governance to encourage Indigenous participation in the settler justice system and suggests that the Gladue–Ipeelee principle produces a governing effect that reinforces settler-state authority by recirculating colonial practices and discourses of settler superiority.

Accessing and distributing child pornography is an emerging problem. This paper aims to examine the judicial sentencing decisions of child pornography cases and whether they differ from decisions of child molestation cases.

Using a legal database of Canadian court judgments, the study examined sentencing decisions of 50 child pornography and 50 child molestation cases, identifying variables that were present in the judges' reasons for their decision.

The results revealed a disparity in sentencing that favours incarceration rather than community sentences for child molesters over child pornography cases. Despite what appears to be lighter sentences for child pornography offenders, judges were more likely to sanction treatment and recommend restrictions in cases of child pornography than child molestation. In light of the absence of literature exploring sentencing disparity among child sexual offences, further directions and suggestions for practice are discussed.

The examination of the disparity of sentencing decisions for child molesters and child pornography offenders and the identified variables that may contribute to these decisions suggests that the judiciary views child pornography and child molestation offenders differently and are more punitive toward contact offenders. Such disparity has implications for the criminal justice system.

This study offers the first exploration of sentencing disparity and decisions on child pornography and child molestation cases in Canada.

The learning disability nursing role in the multi-professional Youth Offending Team (YOT) enables the recognition, acknowledgement and understanding of the needs of people entering the Criminal Justice System (CJS) and provides a platform to ensure appropriate identification, assessment, planning and delivery of care ensuring successful completion of the Order and subsequent recidivism and reduction in reoffending. The purpose of this paper is to share the experience of working with young people who have committed a crime and are found to have unmet or undiagnosed additional needs.

This paper seeks to consider how learning disability nursing skills compliment the range of expertise in the multi-professional YOT and discusses the case of a young woman and her experience of the CJS from pre-sentence to completion of the Order.

Working together enables effective care delivery to ensure the needs of the person are recognised, understood and acted upon and achieves a balance between welfare for the person and justice and understanding for the victim.

This paper’s value is to demonstrate that recognition of need enables the appropriate intervention and delivery of care. Through working together a reduction in young people returning into the CJS as well as building skills and understanding in staff working with young people with additional needs can be achieved.