An analysis of Manitoba Court of Appeal decisions in cases heard in the Winnipeg Family Violence Court, 1990-1992
Loading...
Date
2000-03-01T00:00:00Z
Authors
Jensen, Maureen Susan
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
In the following thesis the author analyzed legal decisions from a superior court, in the form of 46 Manitoba Court of Appeal decisions in cases heard in the Winnipeg Family Violence Court, 1990-1992, to determine whether the reforms contributed to justice for victims of family violence. Using the methodology of theoretically oriented content analysis 18 sentencing goals and factors commonly used in sentencing decisions in criminal cases were quantitatively and qualitatively assessed. The seriousness of the crime as defined by its impact on the victim was mentioned only 6 times in 34 sentencing decisions. By failing, in the vast majority of cases, to acknowledge the seriousness of the crime, the Court of Appeal reinforced and legitimized the minimization of family violence offences. The examination of conviction issues revealed that bias against finding the testimony of women and children to be credible, particularly in sexual assault cases, has persisted despite amendments enacted to remedy this bias. Recommendations are included. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)