Criminology

(Purpose). Evaluating truthfulness is an integral part of any forensic assessment. Unfortunately, the motives underlying the use of deceptive strategies by offenders and how these may be mediated by personality are not well established, particularly in adolescent samples. Accordingly, the aim of the present study was to identify different deception‐related motivations in a sample of juvenile offenders, with special emphasis placed on the relationship between these motivations and psychopathic traits. (Methods.) Archived file and videotaped information for 60 Canadian federal juvenile offenders were reviewed in order to identify real‐life (spontaneous) patterns of deceptive motivations. (Results.) It was found that there were significant differences between the low, medium, and high groups across psychopathic traits for the motivations of (1) lies to obtain a reward; (2) to heighten self‐presentation; and (3) for duping delight. (Conclusions.) Not only were juvenile offenders found to lie for a variety of reasons, but also psychopathy was found to mediate the specific motivational patterns leading to offender perpetrated deception. The relevance of these findings to the assessment of truthfulness in offender populations is discussed.

When legal challenges to research confidentiality arise, researchers are expected to resist while the institutions that approve their research provide legal support to enable that resistance. Although researchers have done their part, university administrators have been much less consistent doing theirs. Canada’s federal policy now affirms university administrations “must” provide independent legal representation and “encourages” them to develop policies that articulate how they will do so. A national survey of Research Ethics Board (REB) Chairs and administrators found only one such policy, which turned our attention to factors that impeded creation of others like it. Administrative inertia, a lack of clear lines of responsibility, and resource issues top the list of justifications respondents offered. Implications for researchers, REBs, and university administrators are discussed.

Sentencing in Canada is beset by many problems yet one weakness stands above the rest: the disproportionately high rates of Aboriginal incarceration. This article documents current and historical trends in levels of Aboriginal incarceration at the provincial/territorial and federal levels since 1978. We pay particular attention to the years following two important Supreme Court judgments (in 2001 and 2012) which directed courts to use custody with greater restraint when sentencing an Aboriginal offender. The primary data derive from the annual Adult Correctional Services (ACS) Survey conducted by Statistics Canada. In 2014, Aboriginal persons accounted for just over one quarter of all provincial and territorial admissions, significantly higher than the percentage recorded in 1978 (16%). In fact, over the last 20 years all jurisdictions save one have experienced an increase in the percentage of Aboriginal admissions to provincial correctional institutions. Despite judgments from the Supreme and provincial courts of appeal, and a number of other remedial interventions such as the creation of so-called ‘Gladue’ courts and an alternate form of custody served in the community, the problem of Aboriginal over-incarceration has worsened, not improved.