This project asks you to apply what you have learned to the interview/interrogation of Dennis Oland (link is below).

Tackle this project only after reading and digesting the Module 2 readings and films, including the Norfolk Four and the Oland Murder episodes 1-2.

The Crown asked Justice Morrison to deem the first part of the statement as voluntary so that it would be admissible; the Defense objected and argued it was not voluntary. It was a psychological detention, said the defense. See, for example:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/dennis-oland-police-statement-video-charter-1.4921956).

Justice Morrison's ruling on this issue is attached. Read it carefully.

Suppose Justice Morrison contacts you and asks you for your expert opinion on whether the psychological science supports his ruling. Read the Alceste and Kassin (2021) paper (attached). Considering the results of the Alceste and Kassin (2021) paper, did Justice Morrison make an accurate decision? Did he get it right on the science front?

bear the psychological research you learned about in the Alceste and Kassin (2021) article and Module 2 to the Oland case. In other words, apply what you learned to educate Justice Morrison on the Oland case, highlighting the factors (or phenomena) that you read about that are relevant to this situation (focus primarily on the Alceste & Kassin paper).

There are 2 parts to this project: Part 1: the rough draft (which will get you started) and Part 2: the final submission.

After you've read & digested all the Module 2 content (including 2 films and all the readings), do this:

1. Read this assignment in its entirety. What does this project entail? What are you being asked to do?
2. Read the Alceste & Kassin (2021) paper carefully. What did they set out to do? What were their 3 hypotheses/research questions? How did they set out to answer them? Describe the 4 groups that comprised their sample. What methods did they use to conduct their research? Describe the different vignettes used. What did they find in relation to people's perceptions of the suspect's freedom (and whether they were free to leave)? What were their key findings and conclusions? What are some of the implications of their findings?
3. Read Justice Morrison's ruling carefully. How did he arrive at the decision of whether Mr. Oland's rights were violated regarding the police caution and his right to counsel? How did Justice Morrison decide whether Mr. Oland was psychologically detained? You'll notice that Justice Morrison discusses the evidence before him in light of other Canadian decisions. Notice how he considers the Oickle factors in relation to this case. Notice how he uses the "reasonable person" standard.

Part 1 (rough draft): The rough draft consists of your responses to the issues/questions raised in # a, b, and c above (about 2-3 paragraphs for each response). Label your responses (for example, a)....b)....etc.)