Online Chapter: Youth Justice in Canada

Police officers skate with a youth at the opening of the Regent Park skating rink in Toronto. Why might positive experiences with police officers help discourage criminal behaviour in youth?

(rmnoa357/Shutterstock.com) Online Chapter: Youth Justice in Canada

Learning Outline After reading this chapter, you will be able to • Describe current trends in youth crime • Identify the differences between the Juvenile Delinquents Act, the Young Offenders Act, and the Youth Criminal Justice Act • Provide some reasons why sentences for youth are mitigated • Describe the involvement of youth in serious and violent crimes • Identify the pathways to girls’ involvement in crime 2

Case Study Youth Involved in Homicide

Brett Wiese, a University of Calgary student, was stabbed to death on 12 January 2013 after a group of young people who had been kicked out of a house party “returned with a ‘posse’” to carry out a “revenge-motivated assault” (Martin, 2015). Wiese was stabbed seven times, another partygoer was severely wounded, and several others were assaulted. Jazlyn Radke, who was 17 years old at the time, was found guilty of second- degree murder, two counts of assault, and one count of aggravated assault for her role in the offences. According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (2015), Radke had been kicked out of the party but she “refused to go and was scream- Mitchell Harkes, the 19-year-old who was sentenced to ing, swearing and swinging at partygoers before life imprisonment along with Radke, is shown here being vowing to return.” arrested. The public is generally understanding of youth Although the murder occurred in January 2013, who commit minor crimes but is less forgiving of youth and Radke was convicted in April 2014, the sen- who commit violent offences. Although sentences for tencing did not occur until May 2015. Radke was youth are often mitigated due to factors such as lack sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge ruled of maturity, youth convicted of murder will be under the that Radke can stay in a youth custody facility until supervision of the Correctional Service of Canada for the remainder of their lives. she turns 21 years of age, and then she will be transferred to a Correctional Service of Canada prison. Because she was under 18 years of age at Like any other Canadian sentenced to life impris- the time of the offence, Radke will have to serve at onment, she will be under correctional supervision least seven years before she can apply for parole. for the rest of her life.

Criti cal Questions

1. It has been said that justice delayed is justice 3. Does the gender of the offender in a mur- denied. Can you think of reasons why it is pref- der case change your perceptions about the erable for the youth justice system to move amount or type of punishment the offender slowly in these types of cases? should receive? 2. Why do we hold punitive feelings toward young people who commit serious and violent crimes? Youth Justice in Canada 3

Introduction

It is not uncommon for youth to engage in some minor criminal offe ces such as shoplifting, theft, vandalism, trespassing, drug use, or mischief. In addition, there are a variety of actions that are considered lawful for adults but not for youth, such as drinking alcohol, gambling, run- ning away from home, skipping classes, or buying tobacco products. Young people caught engaging in these acts are rarely arrested, but the police will typically caution them or bring them home to face their parents. Many officers are reluctant to go through with an arrest because of the lifelong consequences an arrest or conviction can have on an individual, including for minor offe ces. Even supporters of “tough on crime” punishments are often sympathetic toward young people who have committed minor offe ces. As a result, justice system officials have developed alternative measures programs to divert young minor offe ders from the formal justice system. Our positive or sympathetic feelings toward youth are challenged by young people who have Photo Hansen/iStock Shane Vincent © repeatedly appeared before the courts and con- A police officer arrests a female youth in this photo. tinue to reoffe d. But support for juvenile re- Rates of crime committed by youthful offenders have habilitation is generally fairly high, even in cases been decreasing since the mid-1990s, and homicides of violent or repeat offe ders. Mays and Ruddell committed by youth are at the lowest level since the (2015, p. 279) found that over three-quarters 1980s. Although those statistics suggest that current strategies to control youth crime are successful, some of respondents in seven US polls conducted people are still pessimistic about youth involved in between 1998 and 2011 supported placing crime. juvenile offe ders in rehabilitative programs— delinquents An and Americans tend to be more punitive than outdated term for young Canadians. Yet, there are also Canadians who awareness by the 1850s that children and youth people who believe that young people who have committed are diffe ent than adults in terms of behavioural have committed criminal acts. violent offe ces should be treated similarly to development. Youth were acknowledged as being adult offe ders by “locking them up and throw- less mature and more impulsive, having poorer status offence Under ing away the key.” This raises the question of decision-making skills, and lacking sophistication the Juvenile whether youth should be treated the same as compared to adults. As a result, the sentences that Delinquents Act, adults in the justice system. this term refers youth received for committing crimes were often to actions In the past, Canadian juvenile delinquents mitigated due to their immaturity. Bernard and that were not (an outdated term for young people who have Kurlychek (2010) observe that children less than considered crimes for committed a criminal act or a status offe ce— seven years of age were seldom held criminally adults but were which is an act that is unlawful for a youth but responsible because they lacked the maturity to unlawful for youth, such legal for an adult, such as drinking alcohol) were diffe entiate between right and wrong. Criminal as drinking treated much like adults, but there was growing sentences for youngsters aged eight to fourteen alcohol. 4 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

were also mitigated in many jurisdictions. Older the following: How much crime do young offe d- adolescents, however, were often treated the same ers commit? How serious are these offe ces? What as adults. Pfeifer and Leighton-Brown (2007) are the characteristics of these youthful offe ders? report how three British Columbia brothers and Figure 1 shows that the number of youth court a co-accused were hanged on 31 January 1881 for cases in Canada has been declining for over two their involvement in a murder even though three decades. There were fewer than 40,000 youth court of them were under 18 years of age at the time of cases in 2013–2014, which is a decrease of over the offe ce. one-half since 1991–1992 (Statistics Canada, 2015). In the pages that follow, a short discussion of What is remarkable about this decrease is that the youth crime in Canada is presented, as examin- size of the youth population (aged 12 to 17 years) ing the volume and seriousness of youth crime is increased during that time. While fewer youth a first step in understanding and then solving the may be involved in crime, there might be other problem. This discussion is followed by a descrip- explanations for this decrease, including the fact tion of the evolution of the youth justice system that alternative measures programs can reduce the in Canada since 1908. An overview of Canada’s number of youth appearing before the courts. youth laws is provided, and boxed features pay The types of offe ces for which youth are appear- special attention to topics such as adolescent brain ing in court can shed light on the seriousness of development, Aboriginal youth in the justice youth crime, and the “top 10” most common youth system, and pathways to crime for young female court cases are presented in Figure 2. According offe ders. to Alam (2015), the most common offe ce is theft, which accounts for 11.7 per cent of all cases, and the seven non-violent offe ces represent almost one- Youth Crime in Canada half (47.2 per cent) of all cases. These findings sug- In developing responses to crime, there are several gest that most youth offe ces are relatively minor questions that need to be considered, including (see Department of Justice, 2004). When assessing the seriousness of youth crime, we can also consider the youth Crime Severity Index, which is shown in Figure 3. This figure shows that the volume and severity of youth crime (overall) and violent youth crime have been decreasing since 1998 (Allen & Superle, 2016). Although Figures 1 to 3 represent all youth crimes, the public is also very concerned about homicide rates. The number of youth aged 12 to 17 years accused of homicide is presented in Figure 4. The homicide rate fluctuated during the 30 years from 1983 to 2013, but it has been on a downward trend since 2009. As Cotter (2014) reports, in the past decade there were an average of 35 to 40 youths accused of involvement in homicide

Colin McConnell/Toronto Star via Getty Images offe ces each year. That number dropped to 24 youths accused of murder in 2014 (Miladinovic The photograph above shows a youth courtroom in Toronto. Although there has been a decline in the number of youth court cases over the past two decades, & Mulligan, 2015). Because violent youth offe d- some of the youth appearing before the courts have unstable lifestyles that ing tends to be a group offe ce—two or three make it difficult for judges to return them to the community on bail. youths are sometimes involved in the murder of one victim—it is likely that there are fewer than Youth Justice in Canada 5

100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000

Number of cases 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 Year Fuig re 1 | Total Number of Cases before Youth Courts, Canada, 1991–2014 Source: Adapted from Statistics Canada (2015b).

14 11.7 12 10 9.1 7.8 8 7.2 5.7 6.0 6.2 6 4.7 4.8

Cases (%) 3.9 4 2 0

Theft Robbery Mischief property Major assault Fail to comply Uttering threats Possess stolen Drug possession Break and enterCommon assault Types of offences Fuig re 2 | Ten Most Common Youth Court Cases, 2013–2014 Source: Adapted from Alam (2015).

24 actual victims. Allen and Superle (2016, p. 12) in crimes involving more than one offe der. It is note that “from 2005 to 2014, 60 per cent of youth rare to have more than two offe ders involved, accused in homicides were co-offe ders compared and most adult group offe ces are related to to 35 per cent of adults.” drugs or property crimes (Carrington et al., One aspect of crime that diffe s between 2013). juvenile and adult offe ders is the group nature Some of the youth crime occurring in groups of adolescent offe ding (Allen & Superle, 2016). is gang related. Public Safety Canada (2007, p. 2) Carrington, Brennan, Matarazzo, and Radulescu surveyed data collected by police organizations (2013, p. 3) examined Canadian crime statistics and estimated that there were 434 gangs in the and found that offe ces involving more than one country and about 7,000 youth involved in offe der were over twice as common for youth these groups. Gangs tend to form along racial or (44 per cent) than for adults (19 per cent). As ethnic lines and few have a diverse membership. individuals age, they are less likely to be involved Public Safety Canada (2007, p. 2) reports that 6 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

120

100

0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Year Youth CSI Youth violent CSI Fuig re 3 | Youth Crime Severity Index, Canada, 1998–2014 Source: Adapted from Statistics Canada (2015a).

3.5

2.5

1.5

1 Rate per 100,000 youth 0.5

0 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 Year Fuig re 4 | Canadian Youth (Ages 12 to 17 Years) Accused of Homicide, 1983–2013 Source: Adapted from Cotter (2014).

“the largest proportion of youth gang members increases, there is often a growth in gun-related are African Canadian (25 per cent) followed by violence as well (Trinh, 2015). Allen and Superle First Nations (21 per cent) and Caucasian (18 per (2016, p. 12) note that “from 2005 to 2014, 29 per cent).” Those proportions vary across the coun- cent of homicides involving a youth accused were try: African-Canadian gangs are more likely to identifi d as gang related, a much larger propor- be encountered in Ontario, Aboriginal gangs tion than was found among homicides involving are more prevalent in the Prairies, and Asian or adult accused (14 per cent).” Indo-Canadian gangs are more active in British One question that is difficult to answer is why Columbia. Gangs have engaged in the drug trade, youth join these groups. While some youth turn prostitution, and other criminal activities. As to gangs due to parental neglect or because they the money involved in these criminal enterprises lack positive supports in their lives, others grow Youth Justice in Canada 7

up in gang-involved families. Furthermore, youth living on the street are at a relatively high risk of joining a gang (Marshall, DeBeck, Simo, Kerr, & Wood, 2015). Gang lifestyles often feature “a live for the moment” mindset. Tom Walker, a Toronto social worker and gang expert, reports the following: “A lot of the kids I work with, they think they’re going to be dead before they’re 18, 19. They’re not looking at the future, they’re looking at living today” (as cited in Steele, 2015). This lack of future orientation combined with the allure of drugs, guns, and money, in addition to group support, makes it difficult for members to exit gangs.

As a result, it is easier to develop strategies to pre- Henry Stancu/Toronto Star via Getty Images vent at-risk youth from joining gangs in the first place, and a number of gang resistance programs There are an estimated 7,000 youth gang members in Canada. Some of these youth are very dangerous, especially when they carry firearms and have been developed throughout the country are involved in gang-related activities such as the drug trade or prostitution. (Public Safety Canada, 2015; van Rassel, 2015). Although youth in gangs represent a relatively small proportion of all youth involved in crime, serious crimes, there has been a downward trend gang members are responsible for a dispropor- in homicide rates since 2009, and the youth mur- tionately high amount of crime, and gangs are dif- der rate per 100,000 youth in 2014 was less than ficult to eradicate. In some cases, youth gangs are it was in 1983. Yet, every year tens of thousands associated with adult gangs or criminal organiza- of youth appear in youth courts, and a com- tions that have existed for generations (Schneider, mon question is, why does youth crime occur? 2009). Witnesses are often fearful of being vic- In this chapter’s “A Closer Look” box, the issue timized by gang members, and it is difficult for of adolescent brain development is addressed as the police to obtain information about some one explanation for the involvement of youth in gang-related crimes. Adult gang members have crime. also attempted to intimidate the police (Gomez Figure 5 shows the number of Canadians del Prado, 2011), and the Hells Angels Motorcycle accused of crimes in 2014 per 100,000 residents in Club was implicated in the 1997 murder of two the population. The results indicate that involve- Quebec correctional officers. In order to increase ment in crime increases during early adolescence, the punishments for gang members and organized peaks during the teenage years and early adult- crime offe ders involved in crime, the govern- hood, and then decreases throughout adulthood: age–crime curve ment enacted legislation in 1997 and strengthened social scientists call this an age–crime curve. Involvement in those laws in 2001. Allen and Superle (2016) note that there are some crime increases during early Despite the fact that some youth are involved diffe ences in terms of involvement in crime: for adolescence, in gangs, we have much to feel optimistic about example, theft and robbery offe ces peak at age peaks during when it comes to youth crime. The youth Crime 16, whereas mari-juana possession peaks at age the teenage years and early Severity Index and the violent Crime Severity 18. Involvement in sexual offe ces peaks at age 15, adulthood, and Index have been decreasing over the long term, and the likelihood of being accused of a sex crime then decreases throughout and the number of youth court cases is also declines with age (Allen & Superle, 2016). Figure 6 adulthood decreasing. When youth do appear before the shows the rates of individuals accused of crimes by (some criminologists courts, over one-half of the cases are for relatively age group for 2014. Allen (2016) found that indi- call this “aging minor non-violent offe ces. When it comes to viduals aged 18 to 24 years have the highest rate of out” of crime). 8 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

A Closer Look Adolescent Brain Development and Crime Anybody who has spent time with teenagers knows respond: “I don’t know.” Because of their that they are generally less mature than adults and lack of judgment and foresight, youths tend are more likely to engage in impulsive and unpredict- to be poor criminals as well, and, at least able behaviours. Some teenagers have problems in comparison to adults, are relatively easy controlling their anger (e.g., temper tantrums) and to apprehend. Often youths who commit lack self-control. They may be negatively influenced horrible murders will boast of their deeds by peers, test authority, engage in risky behaviours to their friends, or even take their friends such as alcohol or drug use, and have a “live for the to see the body of the victim, making their moment” orientation rather than planning for the arrest inevitable. This is not to argue that future. Taken together, these traits result in some adolescent offenders should not be mor- youth making very poor decisions. Cohen and Casey ally or legally accountable for their crim- (2014) observe that adolescent brain development inal acts, but only that their accountability may be responsible for pushing adolescents toward should, in general, be more limited than is highly emotional situations, which may also con- the case for adults. (p. 3) tribute to becoming involved in violence. Although we know that peer pressure pushes adolescents Although the differences between adult and youth toward involvement in crime, there might also be a behaviour have long been recognized, in the past biological basis for those behaviours. For instance, there was not much scientific evidence to tell us a fear of rejection “may draw a teen to engage in why these differences existed. behaviors, including illegal activity, even when they We know today that there is a biological basis know better” (Cohen & Casey, 2014, p. 64). for immaturity. Medical research shows that the As you will recall from Chapter 4, age is an parts of the brain that are responsible for impulse excuse defence for involvement in crime, and imma- control, judgment, future planning, and other fac- turity is the core notion that led to the development tors about being legally responsible are not fully of a separate youth justice system. This issue of im- formed until we are in our twenties (American Bar maturity raises the question of whether we should Association, 2004, p. 2; Steinberg, Cauffman, & give similar punishments to youth and adults con- Monahan, 2015). Brain development in the fron- victed of the same type of offence, given that youth tal lobes does not finish until individuals have have less ability to control their behaviours. Jones passed their teenage years. According to the (2015) reminds us that children are not “minia- American Bar Association (2004, p. 1), “the evi- ture adults” and should not be treated as such by dence now is strong that the brain does not cease the justice system. Bala (2003) notes that youth to mature until the early 20s in those relevant have less foresight into their own behaviours, and parts that govern impulsivity, judgment, planning he observes the following: for the future, [and] foresight of consequences.” Given those facts, we can explain some ado- Youths who are apprehended and asked lescent behaviour as a function of biological why they committed a crime most commonly development.

involvement in crime, whereas adults aged 35 and Although some youth populations across the older have the lowest. In terms of overall involve- globe may have a somewhat diffe ent involvement ment in crime, there are also gender diffe ences, in crime, the results shown in Figures 5 and 6 have and males are more likely to commit a dispro- remained fairly consistent throughout history portionate number of offe ces (Federal Bureau of (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010). As a result, there Investigation, 2003). are two facts about youth crime that we need to Youth Justice in Canada 9

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000 Rate per 100,000 population 0 8379757167635955514743393531272319151173 87 Age Fu ig re 5 | Age–Crime Curve: Canadians Accused of Crimes, 2014 Source: Adapted from Allen & Superle (2016).

6,000 5,428 5,000 4,712 4,322 4,022 4,000

3,000

2,000 1,480 1,000 Rate per 100,000 population 0 12–17 18–24 25–29 30–34 35 and older Age group (years) Fuig re 6 | Rates of Individuals Accused of Crimes by Age Group, 2014 Source: Adapted from Allen (2016). acknowledge: (a) most serious offe ces are commit- The Evolution of Youth ted by young males, and (b) most individuals will Justice in Canada age out of crime and delinquency—meaning that people will generally engage in fewer offe ces as For the past 200 years, there has been a grow- they get older, and by age 24 or 25 most people are ing interest in responding to the unmet needs unlikely to become involved in crime. The trouble of youth in order to reduce their involvement in is that some people will continue to engage in crime. Prior to the 1800s, there may have been less criminal activities, and it is very difficult to predict need for a separate youth justice system as seri- which offe ders will continue to commit crimes. ous crimes and delinquency committed by youth These observations have implications for the justice were rare. Most people lived on farms or in small system because wherever the population of young settlements, and informal social control was often males is high, crime rates will also be elevated, and eff ctive in controlling behaviour. In addition, a small percentage of these individuals will con- youth living in the countryside typically worked tinue to commit offe ces throughout their entire from morning to night on family farms, and they lives. were often married by 16 or 17 years of age and 10 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

became parents soon after, leaving very little time the prison on Île aux Noix, Quebec, was described or opportunity to engage in crime. as follows: During the late 1800s and early 1900s, living conditions were harsh and large numbers of young a Reformatory Prison for Juvenile Criminals, where they would be free from the corrupt- people were abandoned by their families. Tens of ing influences derived from their associa- thousands of orphaned youth arrived in Canada tion with hardened criminals, and where from Europe. Many of them were placed with fam- by a proper system of discipline, education, indentured ilies as indentured servants, where they would moral and religious instruction, they might servants Included work for several years and then be granted their be weaned from the evil habits which time abandoned freedom. However, not all youth were able to con- could have hardly yet hardened their youth- or orphaned structively occupy their time. The Department of ful minds to. (Ryerson & Hodgins, 1859, p. 2) children who immigrated to Justice (2004) describes juvenile crime by the late Canada and 1860s as follows: The idea of developing a separate justice sys- were placed with families tem for youth was becoming increasingly pop- for several Much of the crime was minor in nature; ular in Canada and led to the development of years until they it was manifested in urban more than in national-level legislation in 1908. could “work rural areas; and boys committed crime in off” the costs of their travel to larger numbers than girls. . . . In any large The Juvenile Delinquents Act, Canada. community young boys and girls were to 1908 to 1984 be found loitering around the streets, idle, neglected and undisciplined. Many chil- Although the provincial and federal governments dren suffe ed from a lack of proper diet, had enacted legislation to confront juvenile delin- malnutrition, unsanitary living conditions, quency, the first truly national-level youth strategy drunken and dissolute parents and inade- in Canada was the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA), quate or no medical care. Parental neglect which was introduced in 1908. The JDA reflected also contributed to such personal and social the social service interests of reformers who advo- problems as truancy, lack of interest in cated for a separate youth justice system. Section schooling, mental and emotional difficul- 38 of the JDA prioritized the treatment and reha- ties, and crime. (p. 4) bilitation of young people by stating that “as far as practicable every juvenile delinquent shall be Houston (1972, p. 259) notes that while the problem of youth delinquency was growing in treated not as a criminal, but as a misdirected and cities, most offe ces committed by youth were misguided child, and one needing aid, encour- relatively minor, including vagrancy, disorderly agement, help and assistance.” The focus of the conduct, and intoxication. legislation was on responding to the needs of the Because there was no national-level legislation offe ders rather than focusing on the offe ce(s) to confront youth crime prior to 1908, each prov- they committed. As a result, the overall philoso- ince developed a strategy to manage delinquency. phy was to act “in the best interests of the child.” As there was no separate juvenile justice system, Despite the best intentions of the reformers youthful offe ders were brought before adult of youth justice, there were shortcomings of the criminal courts. Police also rounded up children JDA. Leon (1977) observes that this legislation who had not committed a crime but were at risk attempted to manage child welfare (e.g., the court of delinquency because they were begging on responded to the problems of abused, neglected, the streets, were not in school, or were otherwise out of their parents’ control. Some youth lacked and dependent children) and the criminal and proper supervision because they were neglected risky behaviours of youth—which could include or orphaned. These delinquent youth, status failing to attend school, drinking alcohol, or offe ders, or other at-risk youth were sometimes being incorrigible or unmanageable (known as placed together in reformatories. For instance, status offe ces). Youth could be removed from Youth Justice in Canada 11

A Comparative View The First Juvenile Courts

Although the movement to develop formal responses to delinquency was occurring in all English-speaking common-law nations, the first juvenile court was founded in Chicago in 1899. The establishment of a separate justice system that recognized the special needs of youth was popular with policy-makers, and by 1908 a separate youth justice system was introduced in Canada. Leon (1977, p. 72) called this juvenile justice system “a product of a diverse social reform movement dedi- cated to ‘saving’ or ‘rescuing’ children from what were perceived to be undesirable and In addition to provincial authorities, a number of charitable organizations harmful aspects of life.” provided services to delinquent youth. In 1911, five sisters of the Soeurs du US juvenile courts attempted to blend Bon-Pasteur order established the first of a series of homes for delinquent the powers of criminal courts with those of a and neglected girls in Winnipeg. Woloschuk (2006) notes that in the 1910s, social service agency that could attend to the delinquent girls spent an average of 16 months in a program that was needs of abused, neglected, dependent, and intended to build their academic skills and prepare them for employment. delinquent youth. Many of the youth who came The programs were based on “the idea that girls’ morality could be before these courts were from poor families, ‘preserved’ through religious training and discipline” (Woloschuk, 2006). and they were often socially and educationally The photo above shows two girls participating in the fencing program at the Marymound reformatory in Winnipeg. disadvantaged. Given those challenging conditions, these youth were thought to require support and assistance rather than punishment. In fact, the US juvenile court was founded on The juvenile justice system had to confront a the concept of parens patriae (a legal concept small number of youth who had committed vio- from British chancery courts) that enabled the lent offe ces, such as homicide. Some of these courts to act in loco parentis—in other words, youth were sent to training schools (another training to take the place of the parents if they were term for reformatories), but they could not be schools Secure not doing a proper job. Youths needed protec- placements that held past their twenty-first birthday. One prob- were similar tion: sometimes from others and sometimes lem was that older youth, for instance a 17-year- to today’s from themselves (Leon, 1977). secure custody old, could be placed in a training school for only facilities four years prior to release—and some people (also called reformatories felt that was too short of a sentence for killing or industrial their homes and placed into custody for these someone. In order to address that shortcoming, schools). acts, and the conditions in some of the facilities youth over 14 years of age who committed seri- were grim: mortality rates were high, conditions ous offe ces could be transferred to adult courts. were austere, and children were sometimes vic- If they were found guilty, they were given adult timized by the staff. In addition, ideas about sentences, including the possibility of receiving correctional rehabilitation were not very well the death penalty. developed, and the rehabilitative activities in An alternative problem was that some youth these institutions were often limited to education accused of non-criminal acts, such as being out and keeping youth busy through work. of parental control, could be placed in a training 12 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

that youth awaiting court dates were to be kept apart from adults, and the “proceedings were also to be private and neither the names of the accused nor their parents could be published.” Given the fact that the JDA dealt with abused, neglected, and dependent children, the JDA did not have a lower age limit, and as a result, pre- teens could be placed in custody. Another shortcoming of the JDA was that many youth did not have access to counsel to ensure that their rights were protected—even though their lib- erty was at stake—and “judges often did not follow the rules of evidence or procedure applicable to trials in adult court” (Bala & Lilles, 1984, p. 73). Karpoff and Vaughan (1962, iii) found that over 95 per cent Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press Gunn/The Canadian Frank of youth appeared before juvenile courts without Sentences for youth could be very harsh when transferred to adult courts. a lawyer. Policy-makers were not very concerned In 1959, 14-year-old Steven Truscott was sentenced to death for the murder about the rights of these young people who were of a female classmate. His sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, “being helped and not punished,” although tens of and he was paroled from prison in 1969. Truscott had always maintained thousands were incarcerated. A growing number his innocence, and in 2007 he was acquitted of the murder, and a year later of youth were labelled as delinquent between 1927 he was awarded $6.5 million in compensation from the province of Ontario. and 1969, and about 10 per cent of them were incarcerated in training schools or placed in indefinite school or reformatory for an indefinite term: detention (Statistics Canada, 2014). youth would be released on their twenty-first The Young Offenders Act, birthday or after convincing the facility staff that they had made rehabilitative progress. In 1984 to 2003 both Canada and the United States, many young By the 1960s, there was growing discontent women were placed in youth correctional facil- with the JDA and there was a failed attempt to ities for experimenting with their sexuality— replace the act in 1970. One of the shortcomings their parents and the juvenile court judges were of the JDA was its focus on both child welfare more concerned about unwanted pregnancies and criminal behaviour, and the JDA did a poor than about the stigma of being placed in a train- job of responding to both issues. That short- ing school. coming was corrected with the introduction of There was also interprovincial variation on the Young Offenders Act (YOA) in 1984, which the upper age limit of the court’s jurisdiction. dealt with youth involved in criminal matters. Prior to 1984, an individual became an adult at Bala and Lilles (1984, p. 73) observe that “the 18 years of age in Manitoba and Quebec, at 17 Y.O.A. marks a shift from the welfare approach years in Newfoundland and British Columbia, of the J.D.A. to one recognizing accountability of and at 16 years in the remaining provinces young persons for their offe ces and accepting (Bala & Lilles, 1984). In other words, a 16-year- the need for society to be protected from illegal old shoplifter in Nova Scotia was considered an behaviour.” In addition, youth had due process adult, but a 17-year-old who committed the same protections guaranteed under section 11, which offe ce in Quebec was considered a juvenile was important given the immaturity of youth and would therefore not have an adult criminal and their vulnerability to punishments. The 1982 record. The Department of Justice (2004) notes enactment of the Canadian Charter of Rights Youth Justice in Canada 13

and Freedoms also made it necessary to ensure shortcomings of the YOA, including “the overuse equality rights—such as standardizing the age of of the courts and incarceration in less serious adult responsibility. The YOA also had a lower age cases, disparity and unfairness in sentencing, a limit. Youth had to be 12 years old in order to be lack of eff ctive reintegration of young people charged with an offe ce, although cases of seri- released from custody, and the need to better take ous or persistent offe ders under that age were into account the interests of victims” (Department often referred to other social service agencies by of Justice, 2013, p. 1). Kuehn and Corrado (2011, the police. p. 223) observe that the YCJA is a three-tiered sys- It was not long, however, before some of the tem that involves the following components: limitations of the YOA became apparent. One controversial aspect of the YOA was the maximum First, minimal or no interventions for minor sentence length of three years in custody, and the offe ces (diversion); youth who commit only way to manage very serious offe ders, such as minor (even multiple) offe ces or are first- older youth convicted of murder, was to transfer time offe ders, are generally to be dealt them to adult courts. There was also criticism that with outside the formal court system in the community (e.g., Extrajudicial Measures the YOA led to the overuse of incarceration. One and Extrajudicial Sanctions). Second, youth reason for placing youth behind bars was a lack courts imposing “intermediate” sanctions of community-based alternatives to custody. In (e.g., probation and short term custody and some respects, the YOA was a victim of bad timing supervision sentences) for offe ders who are because it was introduced when rates of violent neither first-time offe ders nor serious and youth crime were increasing throughout North violent offe ders. . . . Third, the possibility of America, and the rate of Canadian youth accused adult sentences for serious and violent offe d- of homicide peaked in 1994–5 (although the rate ers. These sentences are restricted to cases was also high for several years from 2006 to 2009). where a youth sentence would not be of suf- Between 1908 and 2002, Canada introduced ficient length to hold the youth accountable. two national-level responses to reduce youth crime. Although both the JDA and the YOA had Although Kuehn and Corrado (2011) sum- their strengths, the biggest challenge was to marized the manner in which youth are sanctioned develop one model that could respond to the bulk in the YCJA, the actual declaration of principles is of youth crime, which consists of relatively minor outlined in section 3 of the act, and these princi- offe ces, and also respond to the rare events of ples are summarized as follows: serious and violent crime. In addition, the sys- a. the protection of the public; tem that was designed to respond to youth crime b. the use of a separate justice system had to manage difficult cases where individuals for youth that is based on diminished would continue to commit offe ces even though blameworthiness; they had received treatment and support from the c. the use of fair and proportionate sanc- youth justice system. The legislative response to tions; and manage those two distinct groups was the Youth d. the acknowledgement of due process pro- Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). tections for youth. The Youth Criminal Justice Act, Reviewing these principles can shed light on the 2003 to Present priorities of the reformers responsible for intro- The YCJA is the legislation that currently deter- ducing this legislation. The tension between reha- mines how offe ders aged 12 to 17 years will be bilitation and punishment is also evident in these treated by the justice system. The YCJA was intro- principles. For example, the YCJA highlights the duced on 1 April 2003 to respond to a number of importance of holding youth accountable for their 14 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

actions, but it also addresses the importance of youth accused of violent offe ces in detention their rehabilitation. While these two concepts are or custody. Furthermore, publication bans on not inconsistent with each other, achieving both naming youth can be lifted in certain circum- outcomes for a single youth is easier said than stances, including in cases of youth involved done. in violent offe ces such as homicide. The YCJA The YCJA was amended in 2012 to make pun- also requires prosecutors to seek adult sentences ishments more severe for serious offe ders. These for youth aged 14 and older who are involved in amendments emphasized the protection of soci- homicide, attempted murder, or aggravated sex- ety and removed some of the barriers to placing ual assault (Department of Justice, 2012, p. 1).

T able 1 | Comparison of the Federal Laws in Canada’s Youth Justice System Juvenile Delinquents Act Young Offenders Act Youth Criminal Justice Act Introduced 1908 1984 2003 Lower age limit None 12 years 12 years Upper age limit 16, 17, or 18 years 17 years 17 years (depending on the province) Focus Child welfare and youth Youth crime Youth crime crime Offences Federal offences (e.g., Federal offences Federal offences Criminal Code offences) as well as provincial and municipal offences Alternative measures/ No formal mention in the Identified in the act Prioritized in the act diversion act (although often done informally) Right to counsel No Yes Yes Right to trial No Yes—trials only for youth Yes—jury trials for youth charged with murder charged with murder or for youth who could receive an adult sentence Victim participation None Yes—minimal (e.g., victims Yes—victims have greater can make a victim impact participation in the statement) process and are more informed Transfers to adult court Yes Yes No—court may impose allowed an adult sentence if the youth committed a serious and violent offence and is over 14 years of age Maximum sentence in Until the youth turned 21 3 years custody 10 years for first-degree youth court years of age murder (maximum 6 years in custody, followed by community supervision) Maximum sentence in Death penalty until 1976; Life imprisonment Life imprisonment adult court life imprisonment Sentences Indeterminate Determinate Determinate Courtrooms Closed to public Open to public Open to public Names publicized No No Yes—for some violent offenders Youth Justice in Canada 15

The youth court judge must decide on whether likelihood of being charged increases with the an adult sentence is appropriate. seriousness of the offe ce, the willingness of the The 2012 amendments to the YCJA are the victim(s) to participate in the investigation, and to latest steps that increase the likelihood that some extent the demeanour of the offe der (e.g., Is harsh punishments can be imposed on seri- the individual cooperative and respectful, or is the ous or violent youthful offenders. For ex- individual confrontational and angry?). In other ample, although the YOA was introduced in words, less serious offe ces carried out by polite 1984, amendments were made in 1986, 1992, and youth are less likely to result in a court appear- 1995 to make it easier to transfer youth to adult ance than are serious offe ces. Figure 8 shows the courts, extend the length of custody sentences, steps that might happen if a youth is charged with as well as increase the sanctions for offenders a crime. convicted of first- and second-degree murder Crown prosecutors screen the cases of youth (Department of Justice, 2004). Table 1 shows the who are charged, and they can caution them, refer key differences between the three federal acts them to an extrajudicial sanction program (dis- related to youth justice. It is noteworthy that cussed in the next section), or schedule a court under the YOA, youth benefited from having date. At this point, the Crown can proceed in more due process protections, including being an adult court or a youth court, but referrals to represented by counsel, receiving determinate adult courts are rare unless the youth is accused sentences (sentences that have a release date), of a serious offe ce—and those referrals can be and having access to trials. These benefits were, appealed by the youth. The process is similar to however, offset by the possibility of receiv- what occurs in adult courts (see Chapter 7), as ing very harsh sentences. Ruddell and Gileno judges may order a pre-sentence report for those (2013) found that 35 offenders under the age of who are convicted or for those who plead guilty. 18 years were admitted to Correctional Service Once the judge has reviewed these documents, of Canada penitentiaries between 1984 and the youth will be sentenced. Unlike pre-sentence 2005. They also estimated that the total num- reports prepared for adults, a youth’s report ber of youth sent to prison was actually higher requires interviews with family members that because their data did not count persons who specifically investigate the age, maturity, charac- committed offences at the age of 16 or 17 years ter, and attitude of the youth, as well as the youth’s old but were admitted after they turned 18 years willingness to make amends. These requirements of age—which is a very real possibility given are outlined in section 40(2) of the YCJA. One the lengthy case processing times for homicide diffe ence between the YOA and the YCJA is the offences. This was shown in the Jazlyn Radke requirement for probation officers preparing these case study at the beginning of this chapter. reports to consider alternatives to custody so that sentences are the least restrictive and are propor- Case Flow of a Young Offender tionate to the seriousness of the offe ce (section 38.2). The probation official must also consider through the Justice System the special circumstances of Aboriginal youth. A youth’s involvement in the justice system starts Given those requirements, these investigations when the police believe that the youth has bro- and reports can take a long time to complete, and ken the law—and at that point, an officer can judges typically give the probation staff about a proceed informally (e.g., by taking no action or month to produce the reports. by issuing a warning), refer the youth to a pro- Youth may be detained in custody until their gram, or charge the youth with an offe ce. Figure court dates, but this is considered a last resort 7 traces the steps that might happen if the police due to the impact that detention can have on suspect that a youth has committed a crime. The individuals, such as interrupting their schooling 16 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

and family life. Moreover, there is evidence not have a safe or stable home, they can live with to suggest that mixing low-risk and high-risk a responsible adult who is able to take care of youth might be criminogenic and actually push them—youth can participate in the placement as low-risk youth further toward crime (Mendel, a judicial interim release. 2011). According to section 29(2) of the YCJA, The Correctional Services Program (2016) youth should not be detained unless they have reports that on any given day there are about 1,040 been charged with a serious offe ce, have shown Canadian youth in custody and over half of them a pattern of re-offe ding (or have outstanding (53.9 per cent) are being held on pre-trial detention charges), or pose a risk of failing to appear in (also called remand). Generally, these periods of court or a risk to public safety. If the youth do detention are short, and 81 per cent of youth were

If the police think I’ve committed a crime

Did the police stop NO YES or question you?

The police might still The police ask you to stop and charge you answer questions

You have 4 important rights when talking to the police: To know if and To not why the police say anything won’t let you go

To speak to To speak to an a lawyer adult you trust

Are you charged NO YES with a crime?

The police charge you if they’ve The police decide not decided no other options are to do anything more appropriate OR

The police give you a warning or a caution

The police refer you to extrajudicial measures and you agree You’re charged and a Crown attorney reviwes your charge

You’re not charged (See the flowchart “If I’m charged with a crime”)

Fuig re 7 | Youth Accused of Crime Flowchart Source: Community Legal Education Ontario (2015). Youth Justice in Canada 17

If I’m charged with a crime

The Crown attorney reviews your charge (This happens throughout the process)

Does the Crown attorney NO continue with the charge? YES

Your charge is stayed, You might have to go to court withdrawn, or dismissed several times before your trail

Your charge is withdrawn because the About bail Crown attorney cautions you or offers you You’II have a bail hearing if the police conditions like taking part in community keep you in custody after they arrest you service or an informal program A bail hearing must happen within OR 24 hours of when you’re arrested

The Crown attorney refers youn to At a bail hearing, a judge of justice of the extrajudicial sanctions and you agree peace decides if the police can keep you in custody or must let you go

About pleading guilty

You complete You don’t complete You can plead guilty at any point the program the program in this process

Your charge is stayed, withdrawn, Your trial or dismissed

You’re found not guilty, which is also You’re found guilty called acquitted

A pre-sentence report might be prepared for the judge

You have a sentencing hearing

You get a sentence The court can order more than one types of sentence. Examples of youth sentences are probation, a reprimand, a ne, and a custodial sentence, which is sometimes called time in jail.

Fuig re 8 | Youth Charged with Crime Flowchart Source: Community Legal Education Ontario (2015). 18 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

incarcerated for less than one month. Longer peri- the youth (or to his or her parents), or the ods of detention are usually associated with more officer may ask to meet at the police sta- serious offe ces, as these cases take longer to com- tion to discuss the youth’s behaviour. plete. Alam (2015) reports that while the median 4. Referral: Youth are sometimes referred case processing time (the time between the first and to community-based treatment that last appearance) in youth courts was about 120 days, might be related to their offe ding. For serious cases took much longer, and the median case example, if a youth has an alcohol prob- processing time was 611 days for homicide offe ces. lem that leads to involvement in theft, a referral for an alcohol assessment may be appropriate. Youth Criminal Justice Act 5. Crown caution: As noted in Figure 7, the Sanctions Crown prosecutor might decide to caution the youth after the case has been trans- Extrajudicial Sanctions ferred to the prosecution unit. One of the most significant diffe ences between the 6. Extrajudicial sanction: These sanctions YOA and the YCJA, in terms of confronting delin- are the most formal and involve participa- quent behaviour, is the YCJA’s emphasis on using tion in programs established by the prov- extrajudicial measures. The YOA allowed for alter- inces, which may involve some restorative native measures, which Bala and Lilles (1984, p. 2) justice approaches such as volunteer work, define as “measures other than judicial proceedings community service work, or making some under this Act used to deal with a young person form of compensation to the victim(s). alleged to have committed an offe ce.” Carrington and Schulenberg (2004, p. 220) note, however, Participation in more formal extrajudicial that provinces were not compelled to implement measures programs is restricted to those who alternative measures programs. These researchers accept responsibility for the offe ce, and the observed that after the YOA was introduced, there youth’s parents must be aware of their child’s was a decrease in the use of informal alternatives to participation. As with other community-based the youth court and an increase in the use of cus- programs, some youth will fail to fulfill the expec- tody (Carrington and Schulenberg, 2004, p. 220). In tations of the extrajudicial measures programs contrast with the YOA, the YCJA requires the police and that can lead to a court appearance. There is to consider extrajudicial measures before a youth also a possibility that more formal sanctions such is charged. Like alternative measures, extrajudicial as imposing a sentence of probation will occur. measures are intended to hold youth accountable Community-Based Sanctions but avoid court appearances, which could label or otherwise stigmatize the youth. Probation is the most common sentence imposed The Department of Justice (2015, p. 1) identifi s by youth courts, and it is imposed in 58 per cent of the following six extrajudicial measures: cases (Alam, 2015). Similar to adult probation (discussed in Chapter 10), youth probation permits 1. Taking no further action: The police officer the youth to live in the community while abiding takes no response to a complaint or incident. by a number of conditions including keeping the 2. Police warning: The officer informally peace and reporting to the youth court or proba- warns the youth that his or her continued tion office when required. Most judges also impose wrongdoing will result in more formal additional conditions on the youth’s probation, interventions. such as restrictions on residency (the youth’s res- 3. Police caution: The officer takes a more idence must be approved by a community youth formal approach and may write a letter to worker) or a curfew. Community supervision Youth Justice in Canada 19

is a fairly broad category that can include sanc- acts for which an adult could receive a term of bail supervision Allows a youth tions such as deferred custody and supervision, life imprisonment. For serious violent offe ces accused of intensive support and supervision programs, fine such as attempted murder, manslaughter, and a crime to remain in the option programs, restitution orders, compensa- aggravated sexual assault, the court orders the community even tion, as well as community service and personal amount of time to be served in custody and in though there may be a lack service (Perreault, 2014). These youth sanctions the community. of specialized are typically very similar to those imposed on Most community youth workers (youth mental health adults, and there is no meaningful diffe ence in probation officers) supervise caseloads that are or child welfare services that he fine option programs, restitution orders, or bail somewhat smaller than the caseloads of officers or she requires. supervision for youth or adults; these activities for who work with adults. The issue of specializa- personal service both offe der groups are often run from a single tion addressed in Chapter 10 is also evident in order Requires office. some urban areas, where officers might have a youth offender to Bail supervision is when a person accused smaller caseloads that include youth with spe- compensate the of a crime is monitored in the community, and cial needs (e.g., mental health problems) or crime victims through work the YCJA is clear that a youth cannot be detained specific types of offe ders such as sex offe d- supervised by a because of a lack of community-based child wel- ers. Kuehn and Corrado (2011) report that the youth probation fare or mental health services. Restitution, for complexity of youth probation work increased officer. example, occurs when a youth reimburses the after the YCJA was introduced. Moreover, there intensive support and supervision victim(s) for economic damage, such as when a is often a lack of resources to support commu- Enhanced homeowner’s door is broken during a residential nity-based sentences. As a result, a key role in a supervision that is provided to break and enter. A personal service order, by con- community youth worker’s job is to collaborate youth who are trast, involves the offe der compensating the vic- with workers in other systems to access health, considered to tim(s) by completing labour under the supervision educational, social, and psychological services be at high risk or to have high of a community youth worker. (Umamaheswar, 2012). needs.

The Department of Justice (2013, p. 12) defines The youth justice system attempts to reduce deferred custody several community-based sanctions to address stigmatizing youth by forbidding the media to Provides youth crime. An intensive support and super- report the names of youth appearing in court youth with an opportunity vision order is similar to intensive supervision (one exception is for those convicted of homi- to serve their probation for adults and “provides closer moni- cide). Unlike in the JDA era, however, youth custodial sentence in the toring and more support than a probation order” courts are open to the public. A youth’s friends, community, but (Department of Justice, 2013, p. 12). Deferred classmates, and victims are able to witness what if they do not abide by the custody is a sentencing option that is similar to happens in court, and those individuals can talk conditions of a conditional sentence for adults and “allows a to others about the offe ce and the offe der—so their release, judges can young person who would otherwise be sentenced what happens to a youth offe der is seldom a order the youth to custody to serve the sentence in the com- secret. to serve the munity under conditions. If the conditions are Involvement in the youth justice system will also remainder of their sentence violated, the young person can be sent to custody” result in a youth record, and while the file is active in custody.

(Department of Justice, 2013, p. 12). (e.g., the youth is on probation), the record is con- community youth Last, there is the community portion of a cus- sidered open (e.g., accessible to the police). These workers Prepare todial sentence, which is very similar to parole. records can be closed once a youth has fulfilled all pre-sentence reports for the Most youth will serve two-thirds of a custody of the conditions of his or her sentence and waited court, monitor sentence within a facility and the remaining a period of three years for a summary conviction youth on bail supervision, one-third in the community. Given the split or five years for an indictable offe ce. If youths are and supervise between custody and community, the most time convicted as adults, their record will stay open for youth on probation. that a youth can serve in custody is two years the remainder of their life (unless they obtain a for most regular crimes, but three years for record suspension; see Chapter 10 for more details). 20 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

Open Custody return to the facility in the evenings. Some youth also participate in treatment or rehabilitative Each province and territory operates custody activities while serving their sentences. In keep- facilities to house sentenced and remanded youth ing with the community nature of these facilities, (those awaiting court appearances). Facilities go by two names: open and secure custody. Open cus- most of these rehabilitative programs are offe ed tody facilities are often small homes (e.g., with 10 by government agencies and youth are escorted to to 15 beds) located in residential communities that their appointments. Some larger facilities deliver have limited security (e.g., there are no fences or their own programs, and they might address com- hardened confinement cells, and the exterior doors mon problems such as anger management or sub- of the building might be locked only at night). stance abuse. Youth are also expected to complete These facilities offer a bridge between the com- chores within the facility. Unlike adult facilities, munity and more restrictive custody placements. there are very few youth custody facilities—either They closely resemble group homes, and some open or secure custody—that require the residents group homes may have beds designated for youth to wear “uniforms,” and most youth wear their serving an open custody sentence. Open custody street clothes. facilities can be directly operated by the provin- Many provinces also place youth in private cial or territorial governments although provinces homes that have been designated as open cus- also fund non-profit agencies, such as the John tody facilities. These operations go by diffe ent Howard Society or Salvation Army, or they fund names across Canada (e.g., community custody Aboriginal communities to provide these services. homes in Newfoundland and Labrador, and open Most youth placed in open custody facilities go custody homes in Saskatchewan). These open cus- to school or are employed during the day and then tody homes offer a home-like environment for the Richard Marjan/The StarPhoenix. Material republished with the express permission of the StarPhoenix, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

Youth custody facilities tend to be much smaller than their adult counterparts, and those offering open custody seldom have much security—there are no fences and few locked doors. Yarrow Youth Farm was a provincially operated open custody facility that was shut down in 2015. Located on the outskirts of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, it held 14 low-risk youth in a secluded setting. Many small open custody facilities are located in residential neighbourhoods, which is not always popular with neighbours worried about their property values. Lower numbers of incarcerated youth have resulted in the closure of a number of youth facilities throughout the country. Youth Justice in Canada 21

young person, and, ideally, the offe der is treated intended to prevent tampering: toilets are made of as a family member who benefits from consistent stainless steel, and beds, dining room tables, and parenting from a positive role model. These com- chairs are often bolted to the floor to prevent them munity homes are sometimes located in rural from being used as weapons. Whereas most open areas, and they can enable youth to live close custody facilities have unlocked doors during the to their families as larger provincially operated day, secure custody operations are closed to the facilities may be hours away from their homes. public and the doors between diffe ent units are locked to prevent a disturbance on one living unit Secure Custody from spreading throughout the entire facility. Secure custody facilities offer a higher level of Another factor that diffe entiates adult and security than open custody facilities. They are youth operations is that the ratio of staff members intended to prevent escapes and provide a safe to residents is higher in a youth facility. A single environment for residents who present a greater correctional officer might supervise a living unit risk to public safety, such as youth who have of 40 to 50 adult inmates whereas a youth facility escaped from open custody, those with seri- staff member might supervise only 10 youth ous charges, and repeat offe ders. Youth who inmates. The greater need for staff is a result of the are remanded to custody are typically placed in increased volatility and unpredictability of youth. secure custody facilities to ensure that they appear Ruddell (2009, p. 10) observes that “youth in cor- in court. In addition, long-term sentenced youth rectional facilities also tend to have higher than are also placed in these facilities. As these youth average rates of alcohol and drug dependency, require more extensive education, recreational Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), oppo- activities, and rehabilitative programming, these sitional defiance disorder, anxiety, depression, facilities will typically have classrooms and gyms, and learning difficulties . . . [and that] these fac- and some facilities also offer employment-ori- tors often contribute to higher levels of institu- ented programs operated out of workshops and tional misconduct.” Moreover, there is also the commercial kitchens. expectation that the staff will keep the residents Secure custody institutions often have more constructively occupied, and this might include in common with adult correctional facilities than participating in recreational and treatment- group homes or open custody facilities because oriented activities. they tend to be large buildings surrounded A review of youth court statistics reveals that with high wire fences to deter potential escapes. the number of youth placed in open and secure cus- Residents are placed in living units that typically tody facilities has dropped since the introduction hold between 10 and 20 youth. Some facilities of the YCJA. Aboriginal youth, however, continue resemble a dorm-like setting (e.g., 20 residents to be overrepresented in these youth correctional will sleep in one room), although most facil- populations. The Correctional Services Program ities today feature rooms with a single bed or (2015) reports that “for the nine reporting jurisdic- two beds. Recently built youth facilities are con- tions, Aboriginal youth accounted for 41 per cent structed using the new generation design, similar of all admissions while representing 7 per cent of to the adult correctional facilities described in the youth population in these same jurisdictions” Chapter 9. The facilities typically have open spaces (Alberta, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Saskatchewan for education, recreation, and dining, with indi- were missing from these analyses). The disparity vidual bedrooms arranged around the perimeter between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people was of the living units. Although juvenile placements greater when it came to girls, and 53 per cent of all are intended to be more homelike than adult admissions to correctional systems were Aboriginal prisons, a tour of a secure custody facility would girls, while Aboriginal males accounted for 38 reveal that many of the fixtures and furniture are per cent of all admissions (Correctional Services 22 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

There is no clear reason for the overrepresentation of Aboriginal youth in the justice system. Most scholars suggest that key factors include a greater involvement in crime, bias on the part of justice system officials, and the marginalization of Aboriginal people, which makes it difficult to escape the cycle of crime and violence. A report released by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015, p. 1) also reminds us of the long-term impact of colonial practices that attempted to “eliminate Aboriginal governments; ignore Aboriginal rights; terminate the Treaties; and, through a process of assimilation, cause Aboriginal peoples to cease to

Rick Madonik/Toronto Star via Getty Images exist as distinct legal, social, cultural, religious, and racial entities in Canada.” Many of the challenges Youth placed in secure custody facilities often feel depressed given the lack of freedom due to high levels of security. Some youth experience stressful that some Aboriginal people face today are linked interactions with other youth (many of whom are serious and violent to the practice of forcing Aboriginal children into offenders), and some live far away from family members, making it difficult residential schools, which disrupted their family to have visits. Despite the best efforts of the staff members, these facilities and community relationships. Aguiar and Halseth can be dangerous places for some youth. (2015, p. 5) observe that “residential schools eroded and undermined all aspects of well-being for Aboriginal peoples through disruption of the Program, 2015). Although the focus of these court structure, cohesion and quality of family life; loss statistics is on Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal of cultural identity; diminished parenting skills; youth, we have very little understanding of whether and low self-esteem and self-concept problems” for other racial disparities exist, such as an overrepre- those who directly experienced those schools as sentation of African-Canadian youth. well as their descendants.

Myth or Reality Aboriginal Youth: Factors in Criminality Some scholars believe that Aboriginal youth are differences between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal disproportionately involved in the justice sys- youth, and they observed the following: tem because of over-policing or bias in the system (Comack, 2012). Yet, other factors might also be Caucasian incarcerated young offenders responsible for the overrepresentation of Aboriginal came from adverse family situations, includ- youth in the justice system. Are Aboriginal youth, ing experienced physical and sexual abuse, for example, more likely to participate in activities criminal activity, and substance abuse his- that get them incarcerated? Are their behaviours tories. However, incarcerated Aboriginal young and motivations similar to non-Aboriginal youth? offenders had statistically significant and . . . In order to better understand the factors that con- higher inter-generational family adversity.” tribute to the incarceration of Aboriginal youth, (Corrado et al., 2014, p. 52) Corrado, Kuehn, and Margaritescu (2014) examined the criminal histories and characteristics of Corrado and colleagues (2014, p. 56) suggest 404 youths incarcerated in a British Columbia youth that targeting problems such as “poverty, chronic facility between 2005 and 2009. These research- ill health, mental illness, intrafamily abuse, and ers found that there were more similarities than intimate community violence” are steps that Youth Justice in Canada 23

could be taken to respond to the problem of intergenerational trauma that was identified by overrepresentation of incarcerated Aboriginal Aguiar and Halseth (2015) and the Truth and youth. These factors are also related to the Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015).

Race, Class, and Gender Pathways to Female Youth Crime Some of the early interventions that were devel- behaviour escalates and then decreases as oped for girls in the justice system were ineffective they age out of crime by early adulthood. in responding to their distinctive needs because Youth in this pathway seldom engage in these programs failed to acknowledge that girls and serious or violent offences, although some women become involved in crime in different ways develop substance abuse problems and long- than male offenders. We know that girls and women term involvement in crime. have far less involvement in crime, but we now • Normal or situational female offenders: understand that females who commit crime often These women become involved in crime have different pathways to becoming offenders. after the teen years although few are vio- Being aware of these gender differences is import- lent offenders. They seldom have serious ant because the interventions that young women psychological problems, histories of early require can be different from those that work for abuse, or school problems. males. We have to remember that when it comes to • Victimized, socially withdrawn, and treating offenders, “one size does not fit all.” depressed offenders: Girls who were phys- The subject of how and why young women ically and sexually victimized at young ages become offenders has received considerable experience trauma that can lead to “social recent attention. Feminist scholars link involve- withdrawal, mistrust, hostility, depression, ment in crime to early trauma such as caregiver drug abuse, and crime” (Brennan et al., abuse and witnessing violence, long-term men- 2012, p. 1485). tal health problems (including post-traumatic • Socialized offenders and socially marginal- stress disorder), intimate partner violence, ized groups: Female offenders often come substance abuse, the inability to access com- from marginalized populations who are poor munity resources, and poverty (see DeHart, Lynch, and lack formal education. Some are raised Belknap, Dass-Brailsford, & Green, 2014; Jones, in dysfunctional or disorganized families Brown, Wanamaker, & Greiner, 2014). Jones and and have failed to overcome ineffective par- colleagues (2014, p. 116) observe that “follow- enting, material deprivation, or alternative ing a history of childhood abuse and neglect, the subcultures. young woman attempts to flee her abusive envi- • Chronic serious offenders: These long-term ronment, turns to substance abuse in an effort to offenders often have histories of early phys- cope with early trauma, and ultimately becomes ical and sexual abuse. They often present entrenched in a life of prostitution and petty crime challenges throughout their lives by acting in an effort to fulfill survival needs.” out as children, demonstrating problems Researchers have developed a number of with school, and experiencing conflict with different models to explain girls’ criminality. The family members. Researchers have iden- following points summarize Brennan, Breitenach, tified traits such as impulsivity and low Dieterich, Salisbury, and Van Voorhis’s (2012, pp. self-control in these women. 1484–5) five broad pathways to crime: There are some arguments in the research • Adolescent limited pathway: Girls become literature about the actual number of pathways involved in crime during the adolescent that result in girls’ criminality, but there is agree- years, and like male offenders, their crim-inal ment that girls’ involvement in crime often starts 24 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

during the teen years and is different than what these offenders, . . . [which has] implications for occurs for males. Mays and Ruddell (2015, p. the development of community-based and insti- 159) observe that “we have to acknowledge tutional correctional programs specifically for that no single intervention will work with all of women offenders.”

Summary timing as youth crime rates increased throughout North America and then started to decline The review of crime trends discussed in this chapter prior to the introduction of the most recent shows that the number of youth appearing before youth justice legislation, the YCJA in 2003. the courts has decreased and that most youth are Kuehn and Corrado (2011) observe that the accused of non-violent offe ces. Even the biggest YCJA offers three ranges of sanctions that can supporters of the crime control model express respond to those accused of less serious offences some positive feelings toward youth offe ders as well as violent youth offenders. A review of and support policies that divert minor offe ders court and custody statistics shows that the from the formal justice system. Most of us made number of youth appearing before the courts mistakes growing up, and saddling a youth with a has decreased, and so has the use of custody. criminal record for a minor offe ce creates more Although we have made some headway in terms problems than it solves, especially when that of reducing the number of youth who are behind record creates long-term barriers to employment. bars since the YCJA was introduced in 2003, there Some youth, however, are not able to take advan- are still some challenges to overcome. Aboriginal tage of the leniency that was extended to them and youth remain overrepresented in custody popu- they continue to engage in crime. Others commit lations. In addition, the programs developed for serious and violent offe ces. These are the youth youth, especially for girls, do not always take into that challenge the public’s patience and create the account their distinctive needs and pathways to most significant challenges for the justice system crime. Regardless of the type of youth justice leg- and lawmakers. Although the public believes that islation that is introduced, one common failing is these youth should “know better,” the latest brain that we seldom have enough health, educational, research shows that there is a biological basis to and social service resources to support the eff rts youth immaturity, impulsiveness, and a “live for of the youth justice system. These limitations are the moment” orientation that can lead to tragedies. multiplied in some rural areas, where access to Canada has experimented with three differ- medical, educational, and social services is further ent approaches to youth justice beginning with limited. Although the costs of providing holistic the JDA introduced in 1908. The first model was or wraparound services can be significant, there based almost entirely on the notion of rehabili- are substantial benefits. Cohen and Piquero (2009, tating at-risk youth, although most Canadians p. 25) estimate the “value of saving a 14-year-old cost-benefit would agree that the JDA fell short on protect- high risk juvenile from a life of crime to range analyses An ing the rights of children or actually providing from $2.6 and $5.3 million.” Cost-benefit analyses approach to estimating them with the services they need to reform. can be used to estimate the costs of justice system the costs of The introduction of the YOA in 1984 extended interventions, such as diffe ent types of treat- justice system interventions, due process protections to youth, but it also led ment, and to compare those costs to the benefits such as to the overuse of custody, and its three-year in reduced crime. There is a growing interest in different types of treatment, maximum sentence failed to inspire public applying cost-benefit analyses to adult and youth and comparing confidence (although youth accused of serious justice interventions, and studies consistently show those costs to the benefits in offences could be transferred to adult courts). that some programs are very eff ctive at reducing reduced crime. In some respects, the YOA was a victim of bad youth crime (see Lee, Aos, & Pennucci, 2015). Youth Justice in Canada 25

Review Questions 1. Describe how the volume and seriousness of 4. Describe how the YCJA provides a graduated youth crime has changed over the past two approach to respond to a range of minor decades. to serious crimes committed by youthful 2. What are the main differences between the offenders. Juvenile Delinquents Act, the Young Offenders 5. Describe the different pathways to girls’ Act, and the Youth Criminal Justice Act? involvement in crime. 3. Provide some reasons why youth are not held as accountable for their involvement in crime as are adults.

D iscussion Questions 1. List some reasons why a youth under 18 years increase the maximum age limit from 17 to 19 of age involved in a homicide should receive a years of age? life sentence. 4. Researchers have found that saving one 2. Would you support a youth justice policy high-risk youth from a life of crime saves that does not formally punish first-time taxpayers millions of dollars over the life of non-violent offenders? How does a “doing the individual. What are some of the costs to nothing” practice contrast with extrajudicial taxpayers, victims, and society for an offender measures? who continues to commit crime? 3. Research shows that the parts of the brain 5. Rural offenders typically have limited access responsible for reasoning and maturity do not to rehabilitative services that respond to their fully develop until a person is in their twenties. unmet needs. Given that fact, should rural Given that fact, should the YCJA be changed to offenders receive less severe punishments?

Internet Sites The US Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Statistics Canada provides a detailed flowchart of Prevention has been supporting the study of girls’ youth court statistics in Canada. The chart sum- delinquency. They report on the efforts of the marizes the total number of cases broken down by Girls Study Group, which is a group of prominent the different decisions and sentences. researchers who identify the distinctive path- http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/ ways to crime and the most promising strategies 2015001/article/14224/c-g/c-g10-eng.htm to respond to the unmet needs of these young women. http://www.ojjdp.gov/programs/girlsdelinquency .html 26

Celebrated Cases of Crime in Canada

A number of high-profile crimes throughout history have shocked and intrigued Canadians. In addition to drawing our attention, these rare but dramatic cases can lead to changes in criminal justice policies and practices. 1833 In the reportedly last fatal duel in Canada, John Wilson shoots and kills Robert Lyon outside of Perth, Ontario; Wilson was acquitted at trial and later became a federal politician. 1838 Samuel Lount and Peter Matthews are hanged for treason for their role in the 1837 Upper Canada Rebellion. 1869 Patrick James Whelan is hanged for the assassination of Thomas D’Arcy McGee, a Member of Parliament and Father of Confederation. 1873 The Cypress Hills Massacre involves the murder of some two dozen Aboriginal people at the hands of US and Canadian hunters and whisky traders. 1880 Five members of the Donnelly family from Ontario (called the “Black Donnellys”), who were allegedly involved in a series of crimes and conflict with neighbours, are killed by a group of vigilantes. 1885 Louis Riel is executed for treason for his role in the North-West Rebellion. 1919 Th e Winnipeg General Strike ends with violence after police on horseback charge into a demon- stration, killing two protestors and wounding 35 to 45 others. 1932 Albert Johnson, known as the “Mad Trapper,” is killed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Yukon. 1941 Nine Inuit people are killed as a result of a “religious frenzy” in the Belcher Islands Massacre. 1945 Igor Gouzenko, a clerk with the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa, defects with evidence of Soviet spy- ing in Canada. 1949 The biggest mass murder in Canadian history occurs when a bomb explodes on a plane, killing 23 people; Albert Guay and two co-accused were found guilty of planning the attack in order to kill Guay’s wife, and they were hanged for their involvement in the crime. 1959 St even Truscott, a 14-year-old from Ontario, is sentenced to death for the sexual assault and murder of a 12-year-old classmate; his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and he was later exonerated. 1962 Canada’s last executions are carried out in Toronto’s Don Jail. 1970 The murder of Quebec Labour Minister Pierre Laporte and the kidnapping of British Trade Commissioner James Cross by a Quebec separatist group lead to the invocation of the War Measures Act and the deployment of armed soldiers on Canadian streets. 1981 Clifford Olson, a serial killer who murdered 11 children, is paid $10,000 by the police for each body that was recovered (he died in prison in 2011). 1985 Air India Flight 182 explodes several hours after taking off, killing all 329 people on board. 1989 Marc Lépine kills 14 women and wounds another 14 individuals at École Polytechnique in Montreal before committing suicide. 1992 Ni ne miners working in Yellowknife’s Giant Mine were killed in an explosion that was deliberately set during a strike. Celebrated Cases of Crime in Canada 27

1995 Paul Bernardo is convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and aggravated sexual assaults, and it is suspected that he carried out other homicides and sexual assaults; his wife and co- accused, Karla Homolka, struck a controversial plea bargain with the Crown and was released from prison in 2005. 1996 Mark Chahal kills nine members of his estranged wife’s family before committing suicide. 2001 Robert Latimer enters prison after his conviction for second-degree murder in the 1993 mercy killing of his daughter. 2005 Four RCMP officers are murdered in Mayerthorpe, Alberta, marking the largest one-day loss of officers in Canadian history. 2006 Eight Bandidos Motorcycle Club members are killed on an Ontario farm. 2007 Robert Pickton is found guilty of six counts of second-degree murder and is suspected of being involved in dozens of other homicides. 2010 Colonel Russell Williams, commander of Canada’s largest military air force base, is convicted of two counts of first-degree murder, forcible confinement, sexual assault, and 82 break-and-enter offences. 2012 Mohammad Shafia and two co-accused (his wife and son) are convicted of first-degree murder in the honour killing of his three daughters and his first wife from a polygamous household. 2014 Luka Magnotta is convicted of the gruesome first-degree murder of an international student. 28

Milestones in Canadian Policing

The following timeline highlights some important milestones that helped to shape policing in Canada. 1651 A security force is established in Quebec City. 1688 The Hudson’s Bay Company establishes forts in the colony; its employees engage in dispute resolution and law enforcement. 1729 The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, considered to be the first police service in Canada, is established. 1791 High constables are authorized to maintain order in Upper and Lower Canada. 1829 Modern policing methods are established in London, England, with the introduction of the Metropolitan Police Act 1829 and the Metropolitan Police Force, which serve as a model for Canadian police services. 1838 Police services are established in Montreal and Quebec City. 1843 The National Harbours Board Police is established to police the waterfronts. 1868 The Dominion Police is established. 1870 Quebec establishes a provincial police force, now known as the Sûreté du Québec. 1873 The North West Mounted Police is formed to police western Canada (the force changed its name to the Royal North West Mounted Police in 1904). 1886 The first Canadian Pacific Railway police officers are hired. 1887 The first woman joins the Toronto Police Department as a police matron. 1905 The RCMP contracts with Alberta and Saskatchewan to provide rural policing. 1905 The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police is established (as the Chief Constables Association of Canada). 1908 The Government of Canada approves the fingerprint system. 1909 The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) is founded (uniforms were not issued until 1910). 1910 Four RCMP officers die in what is called the “lost patrol” from Yukon to the Northwest Territories. 1911 The first Aboriginal officer in Canada is hired by the Edmonton Police Service. 1911 The first police motorcycles are deployed in Toronto. 1912 The first women police officers in Canada are appointed in Vancouver. 1913 Women police officers are hired in the Toronto Police Department. 1919 An airplane is used for the first time in a criminal pursuit in Canada by the Edmonton Police Service to pursue a suspect who killed a police officer. 1919 The first patrol cars are used in Niagara Falls. 1920 The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) is officially formed by amalgamating the Royal North West Mounted Police and the Dominion Police services. 1933 The Police Association of Ontario is formed. 1935 The first in-car radios are introduced in Toronto (one-way only from dispatcher to car). 1935 The Newfoundland Ranger Force is established (disbanded in 1950). 1937 The RCMP acquire aircraft to establish the RCMP Air Services. 1945 The salary range for Toronto policewomen is the same as policemen. 1952 A helicopter is used for the first time in a Toronto police investigation during the search for a bank robber. Milestones in Canadian Policing 29

1959 The first emergency number in Canada is introduced in Winnipeg (the number 999 was originally used, but it was changed to 911 in 1972). 1963 Fern Alexander is the first woman appointed to the rank of inspector in Canada for the Toronto Police Service. 1972 The Canadian Police Information Centre is established, providing a central police database in Canada. 1974 The RCMP and the OPP swear in their first female recruits. 1990 The Oka Crisis pits the police and military against Aboriginal people. 1991 Th e First Nations Policing Policy is introduced, which authorizes the federal and provincial governments to provide funding for First Nations to establish their own police services. 1993 Police in Ontario are authorized to use semi-automatic pistols (to replace revolvers). 1994 Le nna Bradburn becomes Canada’s first municipal female police chief for the Guelph Police Service. 1995 Christine Silverberg becomes the first female chief of the Calgary Police Service. 2001 The 9/11 attacks in the US result in a large emphasis on anti-terrorism investigations. 2005 Four RCMP officers are killed in Mayerthorpe, Alberta, marking the largest one-day loss of officers in RCMP history. 2006 Beverley Busson is appointed as the first woman commissioner of theRCMP . 2007 William Elliott is appointed as the first civilian commissioner of the RCMP. 30

Surviving a Life Sentence of Imprisonment One Day at a Time

If you met David in a mall, in a coffee shop, or on the street, he is like many other greying and stout older men in their sixties who are shopping or waiting for friends or family members. What distinguishes him from others is that he is serving a life sentence for the sexual assault and murder of a young girl and the sexual assault of two preteen girls. This short narrative is based on an interview with David that focused on his experiences as a Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) prisoner and his efforts to survive a life sentence of imprisonment that was imposed on him in 1981. Although it may be very difficult for us to feel empathy for somebody who has committed such serious crimes, his story helps us to understand the day-to-day realities of life behind bars, the effort to survive decades in prison, and the struggle to make positive changes in one’s life. Prior to his sentencing, David was remanded in a provincial facility for about a year. While he had previously served several short sentences in provincial custody for non-violent offences, this time was very different because his case had received considerable media attention. David was a pariah in the facility: other inmates threatened his life, tried to provoke fights with him, tormented him, and threw cups of urine at him (called “gassing” in corrections). As a result of these threats, he was placed in a maximum-security unit for his safety, and he was released from his cell only when no other inmates were present. He says that he tried to “keep a low profile,” and the high point of his days occurred when his family members visited. Although David had confessed to the police that he had carried out the murder, a trial was still held in which his lawyer attempted to mitigate David’s responsibility given his mental health. A media account reported that he had an IQ of 77, and David said that he had been “in special education classes throughout school.” The insanity plea was unsuccessful, and a life sentence was imposed. Realizing that he had to serve 25 years in prison before he could even apply for parole, David ques- tioned his future: “That is a long time,” he recalls thinking. “How am I going to do it?” Shortly after being sentenced, he was transported to a maximum-security prison in another province, which was an eight-hour drive from his family. His first few months were spent on an intake unit where he was classi- fied (assessed for the most appropriate living unit within the institution), and he was assaulted by other prisoners during this time. Once assigned to a unit, he lasted only one day before being threatened by inmates who had learned of his crimes. A prisoner told him that he had to move or he “would ‘get it’ tonight.” David requested placement in segregation for his own protection, and he remained in a high-security cell by himself for almost three years. David reports that he passed the time by “watching TV, sleeping, and spending one hour per day in a ‘cage’ for exercise.” He says that he “just tried to get through the day” and did not “look too far ahead.” Members of the prison’s inmate committee—prisoners who belong to formal groups that provide input to the staff on prison operations—encouraged David to leave his segregation cell and work in the kitchen unit with 60 other offenders (all of them lived together on the same unit). He was told that nobody would bother him given the “family-like” atmosphere of that unit. He eventually left segregation and worked in the kitchen for the next 13 years. David says that during that time he tried to maintain a low profile and the other inmates accepted him. He worked almost every day and was not involved in any serious incidents although he witnessed assaults, including other prisoners being stabbed. Some offenders Surviving a Life Sentence of Imprisonment One Day at a Time 31

who witness incidents of prison violence develop post-traumatic stress disorder, which can make serving time in prison even more difficult. Prisoners generally say that there are few “high points” behind bars, but some days are better than others. David’s family members were able to visit him two times per year, and he had regular phone contact with them. When working in the kitchen, he enjoyed preparing and eating steak and perogies (a type of dumpling). He says that he became friendly with some of the correctional officers and that they would call him by his first name rather than his surname. Despite those positive memories, David says that he “wouldn’t wish prison on his worst enemy.” Now in his early forties, David reports that his “feelings were negative most of the time.” He believed that he “would never get out” and that “there was no light at the end of the tunnel.” He says that all he could do was focus on survival and try to avoid the prison negativity (e.g., the “prison talk” that included swearing and the constant criticism of offenders, outsiders, and staff). In order to avoid thinking about his life, he worked additional shifts in the kitchen and watched a lot of TV, but he says that he “didn’t think about his victims a lot.” Eventually he was assessed as a medium-security risk, and he was placed on a unit with fewer restrictions. David’s low-profile prison life was disrupted when he had to fight off three inmates who had cornered him in an empty dining room: all three men were carrying blades (homemade knives made from metal that are called “shanks”). He was able to fend off his assailants with a heavy broom, but to this day he does not know why he was attacked—and he never reported the assault. David says that this incident caused him a lot of stress, and shortly after the attack he requested a move to the mental health unit, where he stayed for several months. Eventually he was transferred to a CSC psychiatric facility and remained there for eight months. While at the psychiatric facility, David participated in a number of rehabilitative programs, including programs for sex offenders, anger management, and family violence. He says that this was the start- ing point for his change, and he explains that the insight he gained into his attitudes, behaviours, and offences were a “turning point in his life.” He learned how his upbringing and being molested at age seven or eight years influenced his attitudes and behaviours. David credits the CSC nurses for helping him to develop this insight, and he says, “People went out of their way to help me.” During this time, he began to develop more empathy for his victims and a better understanding of the consequences of his actions. David eventually returned to the prison where he was originally admitted. He slowly earned more trust from the correctional officers, although he was denied a minimum-security classification that would give him more freedom. Although making some progress, David reports that he had growing feelings of hope- lessness and he nearly died in a suicide attempt after cutting his wrists and throat. After the attempt, he was given large doses of powerful prescription psychotropic drugs (which affect a person’s mental state). These medications also impaired his mobility, and he says, “I could hardly stand up,” although the dosages were gradually reduced. The suicide attempt was followed by a three-year stay in the prison’s mental health unit. Although David continued to live in the mental health unit, he worked within the prison and was given more responsible jobs, and he was ultimately permitted to work outside of the facility. After nearly 23 years behind bars, David was transferred to a minimum-security facility that had less physical security than the prison (such as tall fences or locked doors). As part of his community re-entry plan, he was escorted by correctional officers to a job with the Salvation Army twice a week, and he also attended sex offender maintenance classes—where participants are able to apply what they learned in their sex offender program classes. David reports that he really enjoyed interacting with people who had nothing to do with the prison. Although he enjoyed these new freedoms, he says that entering the community after such a long time behind bars made him nervous and even going to a 7-Eleven store “was scary.” Several television news crews visited the Salvation Army store where he worked. Despite the fact that his crimes had occurred more than a quarter-century earlier, his offences were still considered newsworthy. 32 Exploring Criminal Justice in Canada

Parole decisions are made by the Parole Board of Canada, which is an agency that is independent of the CSC. Although David was eligible to apply for day parole in 2003 (day parole is a placement in a community-based halfway house prior to being granted full parole), he did not apply for day parole until 2008, after serving nearly five years in the minimum-security facility. By that time, he had the support of the prison staff members and his parole officer. In terms of applying for parole, he says, “I felt I did every- thing I needed to do.” He had participated in rehabilitative programs for over a decade, avoided trouble within the institutions, worked in increasingly responsible jobs within the prison, and slowly earned the trust of the correctional officers and prison staff. The prison staff members prepared David for the hearing and explained the fact that his victim’s family members would be making statements opposing his application. At his 1981 sentencing, only the victim’s mother provided a victim impact statement, but at the parole hearing, the mother and six other family members made statements about how their lives were changed because of their loss. It was the first time David heard these statements, and his parole officer cautioned him not to have contact with any of the victim’s family members at the hearing. Altogether, the hearing lasted four hours. David learned that day that his application for day parole was successful and he was soon after transferred to a CSC community-based facility in another city. Being granted day parole drew the attention of the media, and the case was reported on television along with descriptions of the crimes he committed over 25 years before the hearing. Even though he was eligible to go into the community, he was not allowed to leave the facility for two months. Day parole is usually a relatively short-term placement where the offender lives in a supervised setting and has restricted access to the community. Most day parolees stay in these facilities for several months to a year or so, but those with life sentences are a special case. David had resided in the same facility for over seven years at the time of the interview, and he does not anticipate any changes in the near future. Although he is eligible to apply for full parole, he does not feel that it would be granted if he applied. In the meantime, the Parole Board of Canada reviews David’s case every three months, and they can end his day parole at any time if they assess that he represents a threat to public safety. Although David says that he is grateful for his current living arrangements, he expresses frustration of being “labelled and blackballed” by society. His prior offences, committed over 35 years ago, are still a barrier to getting work, and his movements are restricted: he cannot be in places frequented by children (unless escorted) and he must abide by the rules of the halfway house. Breaching the conditions of his release could result in an immediate return to prison, and he could serve years in prison before being eligible to return to day parole—and the Parole Board of Canada does not have to approve an application. At this point, David has no family support: his parents and siblings are all dead, and he does not have any contact with his nieces or nephews. He was not able to attend the funerals of any of his family members. Looking back at the decades he spent behind bars, David says he does not know how he made it. For the past few years, he has received support from a small group of community members who accompany him on outings and have extended their friendship. He reports, “I don’t know what I would have done without them.” When asked about his life, he says, “I am not the same person,” and “I changed every aspect of my life.” Although he wishes that he had a job and could lead a less restrictive life, he “accepts the way things are.” With respect to crime, David says that he does not represent a risk to the public, and when it comes to harming another person, he says, “It won’t happen again.” Regardless of whether he lives in a community or a custody setting, he will remain under correctional supervision for the rest of his life. Glossary

age–crime curve Involvement in crime increases during early adoles- delinquents An outdated term for young people who have committed cence, peaks during the teenage years and early adulthood, and criminal acts. then decreases throughout adulthood (some criminologists call indentured servants Included abandoned or orphaned children who this “aging out” of crime). immigrated to Canada and were placed with families for sev- bail supervision Allows a youth accused of a crime to remain in the eral years until they could “work off” the costs of their travel to community even though there may be a lack of specialized mental Canada. health or child welfare services that he or she requires. intensive support and supervision Enhanced supervision that is provided community youth workers Prepare pre-sentence reports for the court, to youth who are considered to be at high risk or to have high monitor youth on bail supervision, and supervise youth on needs. probation. personal service order Requires a youth offender to compensate the cost-benefit analyses An approach to estimating the costs of justice crime victims through work supervised by a youth probation system interventions, such as different types of treatment, and officer. comparing those costs to the benefits in reduced crime. status offence Under the Juvenile Delinquents Act, this term refers to deferred custody Provides youth with an opportunity to serve their actions that were not considered crimes for adults but were unlaw- custodial sentence in the community, but if they do not abide by ful for youth, such as drinking alcohol. the conditions of their release, judges can order the youth to serve training schools Secure placements that were similar to today’s secure the remainder of their sentence in custody. custody facilities (also called reformatories or industrial schools). References

Aguiar, W., & Halseth, R. (2015). Aboriginal peoples and historic Department of Justice. (2004). The evolution of juvenile justice in trauma: The processes of intergenerational transmission. Prince Canada. Ottawa, ON: Author. George, BC: National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health. Department of Justice. (2013). The Youth Criminal Justice Act: Alam, S. (2015). Youth court statistics in Canada, 2013/2014. Ottawa, Summary and background. Ottawa, ON: Author. ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Department of Justice. (2015). Extrajudicial measures. Ottawa, ON: Allen, M. (2016). Young adult offenders in Canada, 2014. Ottawa, Author. ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2003). Age-specific arrest rates Allen, M. K., & Superle, T. (2016). Youth crime in Canada, 2014. and race-specific arrest rates for selected offenses, 1993–2001. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Washington, DC: Author. American Bar Association. (2004). Adolescence, brain development Gomez del Prado, G. (2011). Outlaw motorcycle gangs’ attempted and legal culpability. Washington, DC: Author. intimidation of Quebec’s police forces. Police Practice and Bala, N. (2003). Youth criminal justice law. Concord, ON: Irwin Law. Research, 12(1), 66–80. Bala, N., & Lilles, H. (1984). The Young Offenders Act annotated. Houston, S. E. (1972). Victorian origins of juvenile delinquency: Don Mills, ON: Richard De Boo Publishers. A Canadian experience. History of Education Quarterly, 12(3), Bernard, T., & Kurlychek, M. (2010). The cycle of juvenile justice 254–280. (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Jones, B. (2015). Accepting that children are not miniature Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. (2015, January 13). Brett adults: A comparative analysis of recent youth criminal justice Wiese’s friends share emotional impact statements at murder developments in Canada and the United States. Canadian trial. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/ Criminal Law Review, 19(1), 95–113. brett-wiese-s-friends-share-emotional-impact-statements-at- Jones, N. J., Brown, S. L., Wanamaker, K. A., & Greiner, L. E. (2014). murder-trial-1.2899195 A quantitative exploration of gendered pathways to crime Carrington, P. J., Brennan, S., Matarazzo, A., & Radulescu, M. in a sample of male and female juvenile offenders. Feminist (2013). Co-offending in Canada, 2011. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Criminology, 9(2), 113–136. Centre for Justice Statistics. Ryerson, E., & Hodgins, J. G. (Eds.). (1859). The reformatory prisons Carrington, P. J., & Schulenberg, J. L. (2004). Introduction: The Youth and kindred institutions for Upper and Lower Canada. Journal Criminal Justice Act—A new era in Canadian juvenile justice? of Education for Upper Canada, 12(1), 1–2. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 46(3), Karpoff, J. C., & Vaughan, J. S. (1962). Legal aid for juveniles in 219–224. Canada. Unpublished thesis, School of Social Work, University Cohen, A. O., & Casey, B. J. (2014). Rewiring juvenile justice: of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. The intersection of developmental neuroscience and legal policy. Kuehn, S., & Corrado, R. R. (2011). Youth probation officers’ Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(2), 63–65. interpretation and implementation of the Youth Criminal Justice Cohen, M. A., & Piquero, A. R. (2009). New evidence on the monetary Act: A case study of youth justice in Canada. International value of saving a high risk youth. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 35(3), 25(1), 25–49. 221–241. Comack, E. (2012). Racialized policing: Aboriginal people’s Lee, S., Aos, S., Pennucci, A. (2015). What works and what does not? encounters with the police.Winnipeg, MB: Fernwood publishing. Benefit-cost findings from WSIPP. Olympia, WA: Washington Corrado, R. R., Kuehn, S., & Margaritescu, I. (2014). Policy issues State Institute for Public Policy. regarding the overrepresentation of incarcerated Aboriginal Leon, J. S. (1977). The development of Canadian juvenile justice: young offenders in a Canadian context. Youth Justice, 14(1), 40–62. A background for reform. Osgood Hall Law Journal, 15(1), 71–106. Correctional Services Program. (2015). Youth correctional statistics Marshall, B. D. L., DeBeck, K., Simo, A., Kerr, T., & Wood, E. (2015). in Canada, 2013/2014. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Center for Justice Gang involvement among street-involved youth in a Canadian Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85- setting: A gender-based analysis. Public Health, 129(1), 74–77. 002-x/2015001/article/14164-eng.htm Martin, K. (2015, January 12). Young Calgary man’s killer cries Correctional Services Program. (2016). Youth correctional statistics at sentencing hearing as family and friends read victim in Canada, 2014/2015. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Center for Justice impact statements. Calgary Sun. Retrieved from http://www Statistics. .calgarysun.com/2015/01/12/young-calgary-mans-killer-cries- Cotter, A. (2014). Homicide in Canada, 2013. Ottawa, ON: Canadian at-sentencing-hearing-as-family-and-friends-read-victim- Centre for Justice Statistics. impact-statements DeHart, D., Lynch, S., Belknap, J., Dass-Brailsford, P., & Green, B. Mays, G. L., & Ruddell, R. (2015). Making sense of criminal justice: (2014). Life history models of female offending: The roles of serious Policies and practices (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. mental illness and trauma in women’s pathways to jail. Psychology Mendel, R. A. (2011). No place for kids: The case for reducing juvenile of Women Quarterly, 38(1), 138–151. incarceration. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation. References 35

Miladinovic, Z., & Mulligan, L. (2015). Homicide in Canada, 2014. Statistics Canada. (2015b). Youth courts, number of cases and Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. charges by type of decision (CANSIM Table 252-0064). Retrieved Perreault, S. (2014). Admissions to youth correctional services in from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26 Canada, 2011/2012. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Steele, A. (2015, February 27). Deal with youth trauma to deal with Statistics. gang problems, says social worker. CBC News. Retrieved from Pfeifer, J., & Leyton-Brown, K. (2007). Death by rope: Volume One, http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/deal-with-youth-trauma- 1867 to 1923. Regina, SK: Centax Books. to-deal-with-gang-problems-says-social-worker-1.2976479 Public Safety Canada. (2007). Youth gangs in Canada: What do we Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., & Monahan, K. (2015, March). know? Ottawa, ON: Author. Psychosocial maturity and desistance from crime in a sample Public Safety Canada. (2015). Building the evidence: Crime of serious juvenile offenders. Juvenile Justice Bulletin, pp. 1–12. prevention in action—The X-roads crime prevention program. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/248391.pdf Ottawa, ON: Author. Trinh, J. (2015, February 3). Ottawa’s gang violence result of power Ruddell, R. (2009). Juvenile corrections: An overview. In R. Ruddell struggles over drug trade, rivalries. CBC News. Retrieved from & M. O. Thomas (Eds.), Juvenile corrections (pp. 1–22). Richmond, http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-s-gang-violence- KY: Newgate Press. result-of-power-struggles-over-drug-trade-rivalries-1.2940201 Ruddell, R., & Gileno, J. (2013). Lifers admitted as juveniles in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Honouring Canadian prison population. Youth Justice, 13(3), 234–248. the truth, reconciling for the future. Winnipeg, MB: Author. Schneider, S. (2009). Iced: The story of organized crime in Canada. Umamaheswar, J. (2012). Bringing hope and change: A study of youth Mississauga, ON: John Wiley & Sons Canada. probation officers in Toronto. International Journal of Offender Statistics Canada. (2007). Age-crime curves for the combined 1987 Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(9), 1158–1182. and 1990 birth cohorts, by sex. Retrieved from http://www van Rassel, J. (2015, February 10). Gang prevention program making .statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-561-m/2007009/figures/4053957-eng.htm a difference, study says. Calgary Herald. Retrieved from http:// Statistics Canada. (2014). Juveniles adjudged delinquent, Canada, calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/gang-prevention-program- 1927 to 1973. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11- making-a-difference-study-says 516-x/sectionz/4147446-eng.htm#4 Woloschuk, T. (2006, February). A promise of redemption: The Statistics Canada. (2015a). Crime severity index and weighted Soeurs du Bon Pasteur and delinquent girls in Winnipeg, clearance rates (CANSIM Table 252-0052). Retrieved from http:// 1911–1948. Manitoba History, 51. Retrieved from http://www www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26 .mhs.mb.ca/docs/mb_history/51/marymound.shtml