Governing Through Remorse: The Discursive Framing of Dangerous Offenders in Canada

This article examines the emotional terrain and discursive frames that govern the constitution of those subject to the “dangerous offender” (DO) designation in Canada. Focusing on the emotion of remorse, we discuss four narratives involving individuals who went through the DO hearing process, gaining significant media attention. Asking what role Indigeneity and other factors play in how the media discuss the emotional comportment of DOs, we examine the persistence of particular discursive frames in these narratives, and the counter-frames that challenge or disrupt dominant understandings of what it is appropriate to feel. The expression of emotion, and its interpretation, can be critical to the outcome of cases, criminalized people/survivor stigmatization, and normalization of punishment and may also motivate community mobilization and prompt policy change. Yet, emotion, and how it may be performed and interpreted differently, is not well understood or discussed in these narratives.

Understanding the Link Between Race/Ethnicity, Drug Offending, and Juvenile Court Outcomes

Compared with criminal sentencing decisions, limited research has assessed the impact of an imagery of a “dangerous” offender on the interrelationships between race/ethnicity and juvenile court outcomes. Applying base premises from Steen, Engen, and Gainey’s perspective concerning the dangerous drug offender stereotype, the present study examines the case outcomes of White, Black, and Hispanic youth charged with drug offenses and who match the stereotype of a “dangerous drug offender” (male drug seller with a prior record). Findings suggest that youth who fully matched the stereotype were more likely to receive harsher dispositions compared with those who have some or none of the characteristics, but the magnitude of these effects for Whites did not exceed those of Blacks and Hispanics.

Locking up those Dangerous Indians for Good: An Examination of Canadian Dangerous Offender Legislation as Applied to Aboriginal Persons

This article examines the systemic reasons behind Aboriginal over-representation as Dangerous Offenders (DO) subject to indefinite detention. Colonialism has left behind various social traumas that continue to devastate Aboriginal communities. It is not surprising that significant numbers of Aboriginal persons accumulate lengthy violent criminal histories such that they come under the radar of the DO regime. One approach this article will stress is a call for greater emphasis on preventative social programming, and less emphasis on incarceration after the fact. This may lead to less Aboriginal over-incarceration generally, but also less Aboriginal over-representation as DOs, and less demand on resources over the long run. Secondly, the article also includes a review of case law where Aboriginal accused have been subjected to DO determinations. The conclusion is that courts are placing greater priority on the avoidance of harm to the public, to the point of marginalizing meaningful consideration of the background circumstances of Aboriginal accused, and of different approaches to long-term supervision that are grounded in Aboriginal cultures and may be more cost-effective. The article calls for greater judicial awareness and sensitivity towards the alternatives, as well as the development of an Aboriginal-specific risk assessment instrument that stresses dynamic instead of static factors.