Thinking About Crime: Goals for the Near Future

1. Thinking About Crime:Goals for the Near Future Anthony N. Doob Centre of Criminology University of Toronto Canadian Criminal Justice Association Congress: Halifax 29 October 2009

2. The Agenda (Conclusions) • Address crime problems where it matters • Don’t focus on the criminal justice system • Keep ‘recent’ patterns in mind when considering options • Serious problems with ‘deterrence’ and ‘incapacitation’ models of crime control • Don’t focus solely on ‘early detection’ as the solution • Punishment/imprisonment doesn’t explain ‘crime’ • Controlling imprisonment • Canada’s history • Current problems (remand) • Address real problems • Sentencing (including conditional release) • Think about ‘crime’ and ‘punishment’ separately

3. Start by looking at crime • Jurisdictional variation within Canada • No evidence of important increases – though look carefully at variation across provinces/ territories (and cities, and locations within cities?) • Crime ‘is’ local – neighbourhood effects • Provincial (and more local) variation

7. Addressing Crime: PopularApproaches (1) • Deterrence by way of harsher sentences • Studies on changes in sentencing • Studies on knowledge of relative severity • Impaired driving • The new 5 year minimum sentences • The logic of the deterrent impact of harsher sentences • Thinking about consequences of being punished • Perceive reasonable likelihood of apprehension and offend rather than focus on avoiding apprehension • Even if expect ‘normal punishment’ would offend • Know about the increase in punishment • Would have offended ‘for lower penalty’ – not for ‘increased’ penalty • Be careful about ‘testimonials’ from anyone on general or specific deterrence

8. Addressing Crime: PopularApproaches (2) • Incapacitation • Distribution of crime • Be wary of the assertion ‘majority of crime committed by small portion of people’ • Only those apprehended • Always retrospective assertions • Intervention in the lives of ‘at risk’ youths • problem of identifying • crime is broadly distributed • focus of policy vs. work on the individual • analogy with disease: prevention vs. treatment Could these account for the patterns of crime in the past 20 years?

9. The public policy debate on addressing crime • “Tough or not” • Inherently useless debate • Not driven by facts • Would never tolerate it in areas like health • Rarely deals with empirical realities • Almost never deals with ‘opportunity costs’ • Avoids • Real problems of crime and crime prevention • Real debates/ issues (e.g., opportunity costs)

10. Looking at “punishment” in the context of “crime” • Comparisons (on crime and punishment) • Not ‘ideal’ sophisticated research • Helps put assertions in context

19. What does “stability” mean? • Types of prisoners (sentenced, remand) • Distribution of prisoners across jurisdictions (provinces/ territories) • Relative number of prisoners in provincial and federal institutions • Trends and provincial policies

25. 2006 Platform (Federal Conservatives)“Stand up for Canada…“Stand up for Security” • “A Conservative government will protect our communities from crime by insisting on tougher sentences for serious and repeat crime and by tightening parole…. • “A Conservative government will • Introduce mandatory minimum prison sentences for… weapons offences…. • End conditional sentences for serious crimes… • Work for a constitutional amendment to forbid prisoners in federal institutions from voting in elections. • [and 11 other items in the area of crime]

26. Themes in Government Press Releases Related to Specific Bills (2006-7 – 39th Parliament, 1st Session) • “Our new government has made safe streets and communities a key priority…(C-9) • “We will restore confidence… and make our streets safer…” (C-10) • “It is time to implement effective preventative measures to safeguard communities..” (C-27) • “Protecting our children and youth from sexual exploitation is a key priority….” (C-22) • “Strengthening sentencing measures… prohibiting [conditional sentences] for those convicted of impaired driving causing…(C-23) • “Protecting Canadians must be the first priority of our bail system… (C-35)

27. Federal Crime Legislation, 2nd Session, 39th Parliament [October 2007 to September 2008] • Tough on Crime • C-2: “Tackling Violent Crime Bill” (Mandatory Minimum sentences, age of consent, drug impaired driving, bail, dang. offenders) – Royal Assent • C-25: Youth Criminal Justice Act: Deterrence and Denunciation; Bail. • C-26: Drug: Mandatory Minimums

28. C-2: Mandatory Minimum • Press release: “The use of a firearm in committing a serious offence will be subject to a significant sentence. If, for example, an offence is gang related, or if a restricted or prohibited firearm such as a handgun is used, the minimum penalty will be • 5 years on a first offence….” • No mention • Current 4 year minimum • Absence of change for rifles, shotguns

29. Conservative Platform, October 2008“Protecting the safety & security of Canadians” • Prevent gangs • Responsibility & Rehabilitation for YOs – deterrence based sentencing • Replace automatic release with earned parole • Ending House Arrest for Serious Crimes • Eliminating the ‘Faint hope’ clause • Getting tough with gangs and org. crime • Allowing Canadian victims to sue terrorists • Mandatory minimums on drug offences • Protecting pregnant women against violence • Tougher penalties for Impaired – death • End ineffective long-gun registry • All sex offenders in national registry, DNA sampling,

30. Will these make us safe?Empirical evidence: • “Deterrence based sentencing” • Controlled re-entry of prisoners • Harsher sentences • Mandatory minimums • Registration (DNA, Sex offender registries)

31. Final Example: C-25“Truth in Sentencing Act” (2009) • Government position: 1 day credit off sentence for each day in presentence custody • Justice Minister on the need to pass this bill: “I’m just telling them to fight crime in this country.” • Issue • Fighting crime • Increasing punitiveness • Reflecting conditions of imprisonment • Equity (Equivalence of pre- and post-sentence time

32. Making ‘time’ equivalent • Typical 90 day sentence • 30 days of remission • Serve 60 days of a 90 day sentence • Credit for time served in sentenced custody: 1.5 days for each day served 60 days in prison x 1.5 = 90 days sentence • Imagine a prisoner ‘deserving’ a 90 day sentence who has spent 60 days in pretrial detention. • 60 days in pretrial detention x 1.5 = 90 days • “Conditions” muddy the issue

33. Ultimate problem raised by C-25 • Meaning of a sentence of imprisonment • Time served (in reality) - approximately 1/3 to 2/3 (or in rare cases 100%) • Gradual release/ re-entry • Most to those least in need • Discretionary release almost ‘requires’ risk averse decisions • Contrast with YCJA

34. Conclusion • Crime – serious problem not amenable to ‘one-off’ solutions • General social (e.g., schools) policies • Don’t focus on ‘crime prevention’ programs alone • Don’t focus on criminal justice system • Punishment and Imprisonment • Incoherent set of principles (e.g., sentencing and conditional release • Parliament appears not to care about fair, predictable, coherent punishment system • Punishment (e.g., imprisonment rate) is under policy control • Not simply a case of harsh or lenient, tough or soft on crime. • Issue: Coherent policy • Left off the political agenda: Doing something about crime

35. End