Overview
This unit introduces you to the investigation of crime within the framework of Australian law. The social role of policing and the structure of police services are examined in depth, particularly in the context of ethics and oversight mechanisms. The historical transformations of police services are explored in order to understand the evolving nature of policing as social demands and relevant technologies also change. The scope of the power of investigation, the discretion whether or not to prosecute and the criminal adjudicatory process are considered. This unit also introduces the tools used to analyse crime and how such analysis informs decisions and interventions in the criminal justice system.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2021
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student evaluation survey
Some students felt that there was too much trying to be achieved in a limited timeframe of the lecture.
Reflecting upon the time allocation of the lectured deliver, some teaching contents will be transformed into self-learning materials in pre-lecture. More weekly videos for the unit content will be created. This will generate more time for workshops and challenges during the lecture.
Feedback from Student email
Students were greatly satisfied with the feedback given to their assignments because it can also be used in future assignments.
Personalised feedback on the assignments will continue to be given.
Feedback from Class discussion
Students liked the workshops designed to enhance academic skills.
Given this unit is a mandatory unit for the first-year students, these will be fine-tuned for the next offering.
- Analyse police organisations and practice in order to critique how the law governs the procedures for investigation of crime
- Explain how the criminal law balances the rights of the individual and the State
- Discuss the links between criminal theories and models of criminal analysis
- Identify patterns in criminal data and the appropriate response for crime prevention.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||
| 2 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Communication | ||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | ||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | ||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | ||||
| 5 - Team Work | ||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | ||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | ||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | ||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | ||||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | ||||
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
| Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| 1 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||||||||
| 2 - Written Assessment - 40% | ||||||||||
| 3 - Written Assessment - 30% | ||||||||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: American Psychological Association 7th Edition (APA 7th edition)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
m.suzuki@cqu.edu.au
s.colbran@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction
Chapter
· Richards J. (2010, December 29). Native Police, Retrieved from http://www.qhatlas.com.au/content/native-police.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Police structure
Chapter
· Bayley, D. H. (1979). Police function, structure, and control in Western Europe and North America: Comparative and historical studies. Crime and Justice, 1, 109-144.
· Ransely, J. & Mazerolle, L. (2009). Policing in an era of uncertainty. Police Practice and Research, 20(4), 365-381. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15614260802586335.
· Stenning, P. (2000). Powers and Accountability of Private Police, European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 8, 325-353. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1008729129953.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Police powers
Chapter
· Queensland Government (2000). Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000. https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2000-005.
· Farmer, C. (2017). Upholding whose right? Discretionary police powers to punish, collective ‘pre-victimisation’ and the dilution of individual rights. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 5(4), 493–509. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0004865816660351.
· McElhone, M. (2017). ‘Now they’re extraordinary powers’: Firearms prohibition orders and warrantless search powers in New South Wales. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 28(3), 329-338. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2017.12036078.
· Walsh, T. & Taylor, M. (2007). ‘You're Not Welcome Here’: Police move-on powers and discrimination law, University New South Wales Law Journal, 30(1), 151-173. http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/article/youre-not-welcome-here-police-move-on-powers-and-discrimination-law/.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Police accountability
Chapter
· The Fitzgerald Inquiry (1989). https://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/about-us/our-history/fitzgerald-inquiry.
· Chan, J. (1999). Governing police practice: Limits of the new accountability. The British Journal of Sociology, 50(2), 251-270. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-4446.1999.00251.x.
· Porter, L. & Warrender, C. (2009). A multivariate model of police deviance: examining the nature of corruption, crime and misconduct. Policing & Society, 19(1), 79-99. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10439460802457719.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Criminal offenses
Chapter
· Qld Criminal Code Act (1899). https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009.
· Loughnan, A. (2010). Drink spiking and rock throwing: The creation and construction of criminal offences in the current era. Alternative Law Journal, 35(10), 18-21. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1037969X1003500104.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Assessment 1 Essay Plan (500-word, 30% weighting)
Due 9 April 2021 9am AEST
Essay plan Due: Week 5 Friday (9 Apr 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Criminal trial
Chapter
· Colvin, E. (2017). Bail justices in Victoria: Perceptions and experiences. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 29(2), 123-136. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2017.12036091.
· Langford, I. (2009). Fair trial: The history of an idea. Journal of Human Rights, 8(1): 37–52, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14754830902765857.
· Paterson, J. M., van Golde, C., Devery, C. Cowdery, N. & Kemp, R. (2018). iWitnessed: Capturing contemporaneous accounts to enhance witness evidence, Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 29(3), 273-281. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2018.12036102.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Defences
Chapter
· Green, J. (1989). A provocation defence for battered women who kill. Adelaide Law Review, 12(2), 145-163. http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/journals/AdelLawRw/1989/10.html.
· O'Donovan, K. (1991). Defences for battered women who kill, Journal of Law and Society, 18(2), 219-240.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Short essays (1500 words, 40%)
Due 20 April 2020 9am AEST.
Short essays Due: Week 7 Friday (30 Apr 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Module/Topic
Sentencing
Chapter
· Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council (2019). Sentencing Spotlights. https://www.sentencingcouncil.qld.gov.au/research/sentencing-spotlight.
· Thorburn, H. & Weatherburn, D. (2018). Effect of Indigenous status on sentence outcomes for serious assault offences. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 51(3), 434–453. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0004865817748179.
· Ellis, S., Gately, N., Rogers, S. & Horrigan, A. (2018). Give them a chance: Attitudes to sentencing young offenders in Western Australia. Youth Justice, 18(2), 169-187. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1473225418791660.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Appealing sentences
Chapter
· Atkins, B. M. (1991). Party capability theory as an explanation for intervention behaviour in the English Court of Appeal. American Journal of Political Science, 35(4), 881-903. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2111498?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
· Corns, C. (2018). Leave to appeal in criminal cases: The Victorian model. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 29(1): 39-56. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2017.12036084.
· Songer, D. R. & Sheehan, R. S. (1992). Who wins on appeal? Upperdogs and underdogs in the United States Courts of Appeal. American Journal of Political Science, 36(1), 235-258. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2111431?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Justice and injustices
Chapter
· Walker, J. & McDonald, D. (1995). The over-representation of Indigenous people in custody in Australia. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 47: 1-6. https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi47.
· Diemer, K. Ross, S., Humphreys, C. & Healey, L. (2016). A ‘double edged sword’: Discretion and compulsion in policing in domestic violence. Police Practice and Research, 18(4): 339-35. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15614263.2016.1230853.
· Murphy, K. & Cherney, A. (2012). Understanding cooperation with police in a diverse society. British Journal of Criminology, 52(1): 181-201. https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/52/1/181/373099.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Corrections
Chapter
· The Howard League (2007). The Principles and limits of the penal system. London, UK: The Howard League. https://howardleague.org/publications/the-principles-and-limits-of-the-penal-system/.
· White, R. (2004). Community corrections and restorative justice. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 16(1), 42-56. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10345329.2004.12036304.
· Wood, W. R. (2015). Why restorative justice will not reduce incarceration. British Journal of Criminology, 55(5), 883-900. https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/55/5/883/478399.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
Review
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Academic essay (1500 words, 30%)
Due 4 June 2021 9am AEST.
Academic essay Due: Week 12 Friday (4 June 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
Module/Topic
None.
Chapter
None.
Events and Submissions/Topic
None.
1 Written Assessment
This assessment has four tasks. First, students will choose one of the three essay questions provided (1. Colonisation impacted the high incarceration rate among Indigenous people. 2. Arresting the perpetrators is effective in preventing domestic violence. 3. What offenders would need would be rehabilitation than punishment.) Second, students will provide three grounds to support the essay position. Third, students identify six scholarly sources to support their grounds. Finally, students link the sources to identified to their grounds and essay position. A Word template is provided to complete this assessment. Essay plan needs to be 500 words.
Week 5 Friday (9 Apr 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Week 7 Friday (30 Apr 2021)
Assessment criteria consist of four sections. Argument/reasoning is assessed by whether students provide relevant key grounds for their essay position and whether they provide logical reasoning linking evidence to grounds. Content/source is assessed by whether students use relevant sources and whether they use quality academic sources. Structure/focus is assessed by whether the template is used appropriately and whether students directly address the question and take a position. Referencing/presentation is assessed by whether students provide citations properly and whether they have clear and readable formatting and presentation.
No submission method provided.
- Analyse police organisations and practice in order to critique how the law governs the procedures for investigation of crime
- Explain how the criminal law balances the rights of the individual and the State
- Discuss the links between criminal theories and models of criminal analysis
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
2 Written Assessment
Students answer three of the four questions provided below.
- Why is there a court hierarchy?
- What are the advantages and disadvantages of Domestic Violence courts?
- What are the strengths and weaknesses of the adversarial system?
- Why are there protections during questioning by police?
Students write a 500-word response to each question. The total word count is 1500 words.
The writing needs to be an essay format, although Introduction and Conclusion are not required for this assignment. Bullet points should be avoided unless necessary.
Answers need to be supported by sources. Referencing is to be strictly APA. Only authoritative references should be used. Lecture materials are not to be used as part of the reference list. A minimum of 2 references per question is required.
A more detailed Assessment Instruction is provided in Moodle.
Week 7 Friday (30 Apr 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Week 9 Friday (14 May 2021)
There are four assessment criteria. Structure & Argument is assessed by whether students directly address the questions and whether students mount a coherent and logical argument by integrating information from various sources. Content is assessed by whether students explain all relevant key terms and concepts and whether they provide a concise overview of the topic by referring to a sufficient range of key sources to show understanding of the topics. Referencing is assessed by whether students use the APA style correctly and whether they provide in-text referencing for all arguments. Presentation is assessed by whether students have clear and readable formatting and whether they conform with word length requirements. A more detailed assessment criteria sheet is provided in Moodle.
No submission method provided.
- Identify patterns in criminal data and the appropriate response for crime prevention.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
- Information Literacy
3 Written Assessment
Students discuss one of three statements provided below.
1. Colonisation impacted the high incarceration rate among Indigenous people
2. Arresting the perpetrators is effective in preventing domestic violence.
3. What offenders need would be rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Based on Assessment 1 Essay Plan and the feedback given, students write a 1500-word response to the chosen statement.
Answers are to be in essay format. That is, they are to have a brief introduction, be written in paragraphs addressing each element of the question and have a brief conclusion. Bullet points should be avoided unless necessary.
Answers need to be supported by sources. Referencing is to be strictly APA. Only authoritative references should be used. Lecture materials are not to be used as part of the reference list.
A more detailed Assessment Instruction is provided in Moodle.
Week 12 Friday (4 June 2021) 9:00 am AEST
Exam Week Friday (18 June 2021)
There are four assessment criteria. Structure and argument are assessed by whether students provide a logical essay structure and whether they integrate information from various sources to supports their grounds. Content is assessed by whether students explain all relevant key terms by referring to a sufficient range of academic references and whether they draw explicit links between key literature and the grounds to the question. Referencing is assessed by whether they provide in-text referencing for all the arguments with APA style and whether they appropriately paraphrase source materials. Presentation is assessed by whether students have clear and readable formatting and whether they conform with word length requirements. A more detailed assessment criteria sheet is provided in Moodle.
No submission method provided.
- Analyse police organisations and practice in order to critique how the law governs the procedures for investigation of crime
- Explain how the criminal law balances the rights of the individual and the State
- Discuss the links between criminal theories and models of criminal analysis
- Identify patterns in criminal data and the appropriate response for crime prevention.
- Communication
- Problem Solving
- Critical Thinking
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
