The criminology provides theoretical supports on the basis
of rational choices with the emerging perspectives. The concept of prevention
of crime needs to examine the decision-making process of offenders. There are
certain decision-making process that needs to be examined for different
situations and to serve rational choices for the advocated theorist on the
basis of crime specific approach. The approach of the work is to reduce the particular
crime while having analysis and to prevent the cost benefit analysis to refrain
the crime. In case of rational choice the theoretical contribution is to
prevent crime and events. Tedeschi and
Felson developed related contribution theory for the social interactionist. The
element demonstrated coercive encounter and highlighted interaction of offender
the resulted outcome was based on the interaction. Cornish proposed the crime
script to develop crime commission process model and worked for the
comprehensive and prevention purpose (Cornish, Crimes as scripts).
The model
provides detailed and sequential template for ideal mapped measures. The
process of crime commission is focused on the interpersonal terms of crimes and
provides drug importation offending. The criminology for the drug importation depends
on the psychology, social evils and pathology and concerns are on the nature of
offense. In different cases of drug importation the crime commission process the
interpersonal focus is on the pathology. The drug importation commission
process can be distributed into different steps. In the present study the
framework adopted for the understanding is crime commission and the developed
script model described the model for the drug importation issues such as
protoscript. According to the definition the drug importation is an
interpersonal crime and the interaction component is offender that included
incorporation for the crime event regarding the framework of proposed script.
The template of the script defines the methodology for the situation prevention
of the crime and the measures can be mapped (Khera).
Script Analysis of criminology
The crime
control steps are often based on the rational choice perspectives and the
framework of theoretical crime model events. The decision process in the crime
event model is linked with the commission of certain specified crime. The
exercise for the procedural nature of the crime have certain conditions for the
commission so the activity should be goal orientated and contains the
sequential steps or the sub goals. The separate elements in the sequence and
procedure should be carried out in the required activity knowledge. The
successful performance issues should be considered in the crime event model and
depends on the selection of target as defied by Cornish (1994a and 1994b). All
the portions of script should analyze crime commission pro
In case of specified situations the
individual inclination should be adopted or the tried and tested nature of
desired outcomes. The viral inclination of the script considers the originated
cognitive services and the concept were tested by the computer designed
simulations for the hypothesized structures of knowledge and events. The whole
script describes the behavior of programs, memory conditions and the complete
guidance for the elicited program. The analysis conducted for the drug
importation problems presents all the proto script for the drug importation.
The offenders requires to go through the process named as manipulative process
in case of drug importation. The analysis of situation explored that before the
committing of such crimes the offender first have some interaction with the people
for instance in public locations, domestic locations, and some kind of institution.
They commit such offensive actions against their own processions. In some cases
the offenders have no interaction with the law and punishment before the
incident and of the step of analysis is missing in this case. The offender
sometimes spends lot of their time in hiding the drug material in their luggage
or under clothes.
Theoretical model of criminology
The strategies
applied by the offender are to develop a secure way of importation and to
facilitate the offender on the basis of trust and subsequent actions. The
strategies will be for the locations of drug importation and for this purpose
the offender promises to provide additional things in benefits for instance the
money packages to the drug importation. After developing the trust the offender
tries to take the drugs at different locations to commit the crime. Most of the
time the locations are home of importers , public locations such as airports , bars,
and vacant lots (globalization101.org).\
The
offender gives preference to his own house as it provides greater scope for the
management of risk and to control different situations then he offers money to
commit the drug importation. Most of the time the process of setting the
situation takes some time so the offender deals with the time and circumstances
to exploit the set and to have some time alone with the drug importer. The
preferences are given to the security to deal with chosen situations and with the
presence of capable more security. The criminal are the specified situations
that provides isolated conditions to the offender for drug importation. After
having first interaction with the offender the second step that offender
considers is to have cooperation of the drugs with the offender in such sort of
activities.
The
well-known process is related to desensitization that involves the gradual
understanding development for the offender in the drug importation. The context
of the strategies adopted by the offender develops the view so the drug
importation seem quite normal and obvious for both partners of the crime. It becomes
a game and a way for the normal family interaction that is expected by the
behavior of offender and the way to meet the criminal. The offender often
provides the gifts and money to the drug importation along with the occasional
violence (PRICE). The seduce of drug
importation become at the same pattern similar to the consensual association
between both the criminal and the offender. In many cases the offender spend a
large portion of the time with the criminals in order to know about their
motivation and the sources for the drug importation. The drug importation is
often adapted from others that do not understand the strategies and policies
developed by the offender to make a drug importation in the countries.
The general
situations are based on the strategies to have cooperation in the crime and drug
importation are mostly interrelated with each other. The effective and
necessary way is manipulation that enables the criminal to have intrusive
behavior about the drug importation. In case of the intrusive behavior of the criminal
it becomes easy for the offender to reach the spot therefore the crimes can be
distinguished in two processes such as proximate outcome of the event and terminal
outcome of the event. In case of the proximate outcome of the event the
offender spends the time sealing the material while on the other hand in case
of terminal outcomes the drug importation can be measured from the offender and
they require considerable time to spend. In case of terminal outcome the
offender have influence on other for the skills and their relative extends up
to certain limits for the cooperate willingness.
The nature of interaction between the offender in the crime
have influence on the adopted strategies that prevents the offender to disclose
them. The adoption of these strategies prevents by disclosure of next drug
importation. The offenders often have abilities to handle the disclosure
conditions for instance the strategies can be measured by drug importation process
and there are different ways to handle the situation till the interaction and
subsequent episodes. The privileges are based on the attention that regrets the
threatening and offenders actively plays the role for the offense and to reduce
the feedback loops in the process under consideration. The probable conditions
consist of resist form the drug importation and force the offender to reduce
the strategies for the adoption of these issues.
The court cases of criminology
The name of the case is R v Aujla 2015 ONCA 350,
Step1: collated court cases The quantity of drug was 37 kg
in this case two blame for the imported cocaine in the truck of the ice-cream.
supposed it was "blind
couriers". Both of them sentence for 10 and 12 years.
Step2: case filters Aujla and Riar were position in an
locale of the profitable storehouse at the edge of the crossing, their means of
transportation was examine. Both were manacle and known the correct to
guidance. The Aujla start choke and weeping and turn out to be ill. The test
judge rely on manner Aujla’s following he was under arrest one of cause to
reject his indication.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest of criminology
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Tools used
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Attempted
Premeditation
Step 4: Case summary of criminology
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
37 kg
|
Location
|
Highway
|
Actors involved
|
2 man
|
Transport
|
truck of the ice-cream
|
Security
|
it was "blind
couriers".
|
Others
|
sentence for 10 and 12 years
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Location type – CBD
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Method:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
3
Force used
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Commission:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Physical
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Exit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
-
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
The case name was R v
Dixon and Westover 2012 ONSC 4171,
Step 1: collected court cases in which two criminals are
combine to import the cocaine. They sentence for 6 years and 5 years
respectively.
Step 2: cases filters Dixon was responsible of scheme
to clean the profits of offense that were to be produce by the Conspiracy of these
Wooden Shoes. In this scheme, the Dixon was brokering the auction of the
cocaine which sends to Madrid, to someone who was from Netherlands.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Tools used
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Attempted
Premeditation
Step 4: case summary of criminology
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
37 kg
|
Location
|
Airport
|
Actors involved
|
2 men
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Guns
|
Others
|
5 years and 6 years
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix of criminology
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Entry:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Location type – shop
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Method:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Force used
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Victim resistance
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Case name is R v Kaneza2016 ABCA 411,
Step 1: collected court cases criminal was congested at
airport in Europe Edmonton flying. She was containing 2.92 kg heroin with
street value involving 1.7 million. She was 27 and at the instance of the crime
she had 3 children. She was sentence for 11year for importing and 7 for
trafficking.
Step 2: case filters
The complainant is likely to access figure of contradictory
accounts to refute information of the survival of importation of drug. These alteration
of her tale as she approach into ownership of the pack obtainable at examination,
were distrust by the examination arbitrator.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
heroin
|
Drug amount
|
2.92 kg
|
Location
|
airport in Europe Edmonton
|
Actors involved
|
2 men
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Drugs was in the luggage
|
Others
|
She was 27 and at the instance
of the crime she had 3 children. She was sentence for 11year for importing
and 7 for trafficking.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix of criminology
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
- Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Method:
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Force used
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Commission:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Stole cash
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Completed crime
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
The name of case is R v Robinson 2012 ONSC 1613,
Step 1: collected court data criminal was found culpable of cocaine
importing. She was under arrest at Airport of Toronto incoming from the Jamaica
transporting 3.532 kg cocaine. She was sentence for 8 years.
Step 2: case filters of criminology
Ms.
Robinson is explain as intelligent and affectionate person. A variety of persons
get in touch with for report of pre-sentence come to know that Ms. Robinson had
ended some of the deprived choices in the history and she act of aggravation because
of individual situation and material mistreatment
issues.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
3.532 kg
|
Location
|
Airport of Toronto
|
Actors involved
|
A women
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Sealed with body
|
Others
|
She was sentence for 8 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix of criminology
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Transport used
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Method:
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Force used
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Commission:
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Victim resistance
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Exit:
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Case name R v ASL 2017 ONSC 2055,
Step 1: collected court data the criminal was offender at
test of 3.9 kg opium import and sentence for 5 years.
Step 2: case filters of criminology
The criminal fly in the Airport of the Pearson on the similar
flight because Ms. Poursiamak. He goes throughout his original screening
at civilization with bureaucrat Matthew Schrock. Administrator resolute that Mr.
Asl be supposed to go to a minor examination, and manifest his customs announcement
card therefore.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest of criminology
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
opium
|
Drug amount
|
3.9 kg
|
Location
|
Airport
|
Actors involved
|
A man
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Sealed in the luggage
|
Others
|
sentence for 5 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix of criminology
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entry:
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Method:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Force used
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission:
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
-
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Verbal
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Physical
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Exit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
The case name is R v Madden 1996 CanLII 10288,
The case name is R v Madden 1996 CanLII 10288,
Step 1: collected court data criminal was wedged at airport
of Toronto recurring from Jamaica with 770 gr cocaine in luggage. She implore
culpable. She was 23 with no evidence. Sentence for 3 years.
Step 2: filter cases of criminology
She was shipping
a preserved carton of the cardboard that is likely to contain rum bottles which
she get hold of from the shop of the Duty Free in the Jamaica. Hidden on the underneath
of the container were 770 grams of cocaine wrap in document and brown ribbon.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest of criminology
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
770 gr
|
Location
|
airport of Toronto
|
Actors involved
|
A girl
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Guns
|
Others
|
sentence for 3 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Method:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Force used
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Commission:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Verbal
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
The name of case was R v Jones 2006 CanLII 28086,
Step 1: collected court data the criminal caught with 849 gr
of cocaine in the airport of Toronto from Jamaica. She was sentence for 40
months.
Step 2: case filters
He inwards at Toronto journey from the Jamaica that society
bureaucrat characterize as "far above the ground jeopardy for drugs. Associate
of supple Response group on responsibility to get together the journey and
question. A associate of the group questioned the blame at accidental after he approved
throughout the chief point of the Customs inspection. When he not build eye
contact and not be acquainted with the name of tour agency, she further sent him for minor examination.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
849 gr
|
Location
|
airport of Toronto
|
Actors involved
|
A girl
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
sealed
|
Others
|
sentence for 40 months.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Transport used
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Method:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Force used
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Commission:
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Verbal
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Case name is R v Alleyne 1998 CanLII 2116,
Step 1: collated case data criminal was a drug messenger. He
has no previous proof holding 2.5 power cocaine and sentence for 7 years.
Step 2: case filters
The Crown had establish further than a sensible doubt that complainant
intentionally import into the Canada considerable quantity of the drug cocaine establish
in the fake underneath of two great aluminium vessel concealed in his baggage.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
2.5 power
|
Location
|
airport of Toronto
|
Actors involved
|
A man
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Sealed in heavy material
|
Others
|
sentence for 7 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix of criminology
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Entry:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
Y
|
|
|
|
Y
|
Transport used
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Method:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Force used
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Commission:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Physical
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Name of case is R v Kandola 2012 BCSC 1042,
Name of case is R v Kandola 2012 BCSC 1042,
Step 1: Collated court data criminal working by CBSA - too
offender of guns importing with 208 kg of cocaine. He was sentence for 14
years.
Step 2: Case filters
According to the decision of the counsel, Kandola was stressed
at employment for the reason that of cultural environment. The Counsel put
forward that Kandola claim that he is likely to get more of the support from
his superior in trade with all of the confront.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
208 kg
|
Location
|
airport of Toronto
|
Actors involved
|
A man
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Guns
|
Others
|
sentence for 14 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Entry:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Transport used
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Method:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Force used
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Commission:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Stole items
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Verbal
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Exit:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
The name of the case is R v Von and Holtum 2013 BCCA 5549,
Step 1: collated court data the luggage handler at Airport
of Vancouver help out in 50kg cocaine importing and sentence for 12 years.
Step 2: cases filters
the manager then get back the luggage tags from trash.
Additional examination established a break of the reconciliation of the
passenger-baggage obligation as the luggage had plaid in Puerto Vallarta but traveler
on tags name not travelled on the journey.
Step 3. Consider Possible Areas of Interest
Location
Network/ Actors involved/ Cooffenders
Use of force
Methods used
Security measures at the location
Victim resistance
Offender response to victim
Transport used
Step 4: case summary
Drug type
|
Cocaine
|
Drug amount
|
50 kg
|
Location
|
airport of Vancouver
|
Actors involved
|
A man
|
Transport
|
Airplane
|
Security
|
Guns
|
Others
|
sentence for 12 years.
|
Step 5: Data collection in matrix
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
Premeditation
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Entry:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – shop
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Location type – CBD
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Actors – co-offenders
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – victim
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Actors – bystanders
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security measures – guardian
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Security measures – video surveillance
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Time of Day – night
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Transport used
|
-
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Method:
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Distraction
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Force used
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Commission:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole items
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Stole cash
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Victim resistance
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Verbal
|
-
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Physical
|
Y
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reaction to victim resistance
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Use of force
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Stopped/ desisted
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Exit:
|
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Completed crime
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Presentation Analysis of criminology
There are some practical goals that needs to be considered
for the crime scripts and enables the researchers to have understanding of
proposed measures of situations and works as crime commission process. The
situational measures in the process of the cases considered the mapped terms
for the drug importation by the proto script offending cases. The testing of
the situational prevention proposes some tests such as pretest and posttest on
the obvious ethical and mathematical terms and conditions for the drug
importation conditions of the offenders, the consequent considers proposed
methodology for the speculative stage prevention (Cornish, ‘The Procedural Analysis of
Offending and its Relevance). The intended conditions have no chances
to work with the circumstances and to represent the exhaustive lists. The
measurement of mapping situations describes the rate of potential for the
examination of all the process carried out by the crime commission process and
stimulated ways for thinking and understanding of the situation. The process
disrupts from the implementation and prevention tactics for the designed
conditions.
All the stages of
crime for the drug importation issues require offending presentation
techniques. The setting of offender for the first encountered is often in the
absence of the security and such conditions facilitates the offender to commit
the crime. The suspicious behavior of the offender should be identified by the
family members. The issue is often faced by single mother family setup and they
are more targeted family. The exercise of judgment must be done to reduce such
kind of issues for the drug importation. The motives of institutions should be
on the increases of place mangers to increase the knowledge of drug importation.
The strategies should be developed to discourage the offender and try to keep
the drug importation. The adopting strategies should be distinguished on the basis
of positive parenting behavior and negative parent behavior. The spending of
time with unknown people should be less for the drug importation particularly
the overnight trips should be reduced as these trips are particular symbols for
occurrence of such sort of incidents with the drug importation.
Variables
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
R v Aujla 2015 ONCA 350
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
R v Dixon and Westover 2012 ONSC 4171
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
R v Kaneza2016 ABCA 411
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
Y
|
case is R v Robinson 2012 ONSC 1613
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
R v ASL 2017 ONSC 2055
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
R v Madden 1996 CanLII 10288
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
case was R v Jones 2006 CanLII 28086
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
Y
|
R v Alleyne 1998 CanLII 2116
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
|
R v Kandola 2012 BCSC 1042
|
-
|
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
R v Von and Holtum
2013 BCCA 5549
|
-
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
Y
|
|
|
Location
type – shop
Techniques of Situational Prevention
|
Increase the Effort
|
Increase the Risks
|
Reduce Provocations
|
Prevent crime and events
|
Influence on the adopted strategies
|
Disclosure of next drug importation
|
Situation prevention
|
Increase the Effort
|
Support whistleblowers
|
Map can be measure
|
Separate enclosure
|
Influence on strategies
|
References of criminology
Cornish,
Derek B. "‘The Procedural Analysis of Offending and its Relevance." Crime
Prevention Studies 03.01 (1994a): 1-10.
—. "Crimes as scripts." Proceedings of the
International 03.01 (1994b): 1-10.
globalization101.org. Drug Importation and its Impact on the
World Pharmaceutical Market. 2 July 2005.
<http://www.globalization101.org/drug-importation-and-its-impact-on-the-world-pharmaceutical-market-2/>.
Khera, Yasmin. The Affordable and Safe Prescription Drug
Importation Act. 17 August 20-17.
<https://www.wepclinical.com/affordable-safe-prescription-drug-importation-act/>.
PRICE, LYDIA. A White Bronco? Too-Tight Gloves? A Guide to
the O.J. Simpson Murder Trial for Those Who Missed the '90s. 01 02 2016.
<http://people.com/crime/o-j-simpson-murder-trial-explained/>.