Cyber bullying in schools and the law : is there an effective means of addressing the power imbalance?

Cyber bullying – or bullying through the use of technology – is a growing phenomenon which is currently most commonly experienced by young people and the consequences manifested in schools. Cyber bullying shares many of the same attributes as face-to-face bullying such as a power imbalance and a sense of helplessness on the part of the target. Not surprisingly, targets of face-to-face bullying are increasingly turning to the law, and it is likely that targets of cyber bullying may also do so in an appropriate case. This article examines the various criminal, civil and vilification laws that may apply to cases of cyber bullying and assesses the likely effectiveness of these laws as a means of redressing that power imbalance between perpetrator and target.

“Show me a bad kid and I’ll show you a lousy parent” : making parents responsible for youth crime in Australian and Canadian contexts

In this article we survey relevant international literature on the issue of parental liability and responsibility for the crimes of young offenders. In addition, as a starting point for needed cross-jurisdictional research, we focus on different approaches that have been taken to making parents responsible for youth crime in Australia and Canada. This comparative analysis of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches is situated within a broader discussion of arguments about parental responsibility, the ‘punitive turn’ in youth justice, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. One unexpected finding of our literature survey is the relatively sparse attention given to the issue of parental responsibility for youth crime in legal and criminological literature compared to the attention it receives in the media and popular-public culture. In Part I we examine the different views that have been articulated in the social science literature for and against parental responsibility laws, along with arguments that have been made about why such laws have been enacted in an increasing number of Western countries in recent years. In Part II, we situate our comparative study of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches within a broader discussion of arguments about the ‘punitive turn’ in youth justice, responsibilisation, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. In Part III, we identify and examine the scope of different parental responsibility laws that have been enacted in Australia and Canada; noting significant differences in the manner and extent to which parental responsibility laws and policies have been invoked as part of the solution to dealing with youth crime. In our concluding discussion, in Part IV, we try to speculate on some of the reasons for these differences and set an agenda for needed future research on the topic.

Juvenile justice in Queensland and Canada : new legislation reflecting new directions

Due to their similar colonial histories and common law heritage, Australia and Canada provide an ideal comparative context for examining legislation reflecting new directions in the field of juvenile justice. Toward this end, this article compares the revised juvenile justice legislation which came into force in Queensland and Canada in 2003 (Canada, Youth Criminal Justice Act, enacted on 19 February 2002 and proclaimed in force 1 April 2003; Queensland, Juvenile Justice Act, amended 2003). There are a series of questions that could be addressed including: How similar and how sweeping have been the legislative changes introduced in each jurisdiction?; What are likely to be some of the effects of the implementation of these new legislative regimes?; and, how well does the legislation enacted in either jurisdiction address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children who have been caught up in juvenile justice systems? This article addresses mainly the first of these questions, offering a systematic comparison of recent Queensland and Canadian legislative changes. Although, due to the recentness of these changes, there is no data available to assess long-term effects, anecdotal evidence and preliminary research findings from our comparative study are offered to provide a start at answering the second question. We also offer critical yet sympathetic comments on the ability of legislation to address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children caught up in juvenile justice systems. Specifically, we conclude that while more than simple legislative responses are required to address the difficulties faced by youth offenders, and especially overrepresented Indigenous young offenders, the amended Queensland and new Canadian legislation appear to provide some needed reforms that can be used to help address some of these fundamental difficulties.

Narratives of mitigation : sentencing Indigenous criminal defendants in South Australia’s Higher Courts

In their statistical analyses of higher court sentencing in South Australia, Jeffries and Bond (2009) found evidence that Indigenous offenders were treated more leniently than non-Indigenous offenders, when they appeared before the court under similar numerical circumstances. Using a sample of narratives for criminal defendants convicted in South Australia’s higher courts, the current article extends Jeffries and Bond’s (2009) prior statistical work by drawing on the ‘focal concerns’ approach to establish whether, and in what ways, Indigeneity comes to exert a mitigating influence over sentencing. Results show that the sentencing stories of Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders differed in ways that may have reduced assessments of blameworthiness and risk for Indigenous defendants. In addition, judges highlighted a number of Indigenous-specific constraints that potentially could result in imprisonment being construed as an overly harsh and costly sentence for Indigenous offenders.

Automated symbolic and numeric procedure for manipulator rigid-body dynamic significance analysis and simplification

This paper describes an automated procedure for analysing the significance of each of the many terms in the equations of motion for a serial-link robot manipulator. Significance analysis provides insight into the rigid-body dynamic effects that are significant locally or globally in the manipulator's state space. Deleting those terms that do not contribute significantly to the total joint torque can greatly reduce the computational burden for online control, and a Monte-Carlo style simulation is used to investigate the errors thus introduced. The procedures described are a hybrid of symbolic and numeric techniques, and can be readily implemented using standard computer algebra packages.

An examination of the sentencing remarks of Indigenous and non-Indigenous criminal defendants in South Australia’s Higher Courts

Recent Australian research on Indigenous sentencing primarily explores whether disparities in sentencing outcomes exist. Little is known about how judges perceive or refer to Indigenous defendants and their histories, and how they interpret the circumstances of Indigenous defendants in justifying their sentencing decisions. Drawing on the ‘focal concerns’ approach, this study presents a narrative analysis of a sample of judges’ sentencing remarks for Indigenous and non-Indigenous criminal defendants convicted in South Australia’s Higher Courts. The analysis found that the sentencing stories of Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders differed in ways that possibly reduced assessments of blameworthiness and risk for Indigenous defendants.

Is it possible to dissociate ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ for foods in humans? A novel experimental procedure

Berridge's model (e.g. [Berridge KC. Food reward: Brain substrates of wanting and liking. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1996;20:1–25.; Berridge KC, Robinson T E. Parsing reward. Trends Neurosci 2003;26:507–513.; Berridge KC. Motivation concepts in behavioral neuroscience. Physiol Behav 2004;81:179–209]) outlines the brain substrates thought to mediate food reward with distinct ‘liking’ (hedonic/affective) and ‘wanting’ (incentive salience/motivation) components. Understanding the dual aspects of food reward could throw light on food choice, appetite control and overconsumption. The present study reports the development of a procedure to measure these processes in humans. A computer-based paradigm was used to assess ‘liking’ (through pleasantness ratings) and ‘wanting’ (through forced-choice photographic procedure) for foods that varied in fat (high or low) and taste (savoury or sweet). 60 participants completed the program when hungry and after an ad libitum meal. Findings indicate a state (hungry–satiated)-dependent, partial dissociation between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ for generic food categories. In the hungry state, participants ‘wanted’ high-fat savoury > low-fat savoury with no corresponding difference in ‘liking’, and ‘liked’ high-fat sweet > low-fat sweet but did not differ in ‘wanting’ for these foods. In the satiated state, participants ‘liked’, but did not ‘want’, high-fat savoury > low-fat savoury, and ‘wanted’ but did not ‘like’ low-fat sweet > high-fat sweet. More differences in ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ were observed when hungry than when satiated. This procedure provides the first step in proof of concept that ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ can be dissociated in humans and can be further developed for foods varying along different dimensions. Other experimental procedures may also be devised to separate ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’.

Researching crime and violence: Untold stories from the field

Undertaking empirical research on crime and violence can be a tricky enterprise fraught with ethical, methodological, intellectual and legal implications. This chapter takes readers on a reflective journey through the qualitative methodologies I used to research sex work in Kings Cross, miscarriages of justice, female delinquency, sexual violence, and violence in rural and regional settings over a period of nearly 30 years. Reflecting on these experiences, the chapter explores and analyses the reality of doing qualitative field research, the role of the researcher, the politics of subjectivity, the exercise of power, and the ‘muddiness’ of the research process, which is often overlooked in sanitised accounts of the research process (Byrne-Armstrong, Higgs and Horsfall, 2001; Davies, 2000).