Criminology - Entire lecture notes for the semester PDF

Preview

Summary

CRIMINOLOGYLecture 1- Missing, Intro into criminologyLecture 2- 11/09/Classical Criminology The foundation of the school of criminology  History/ organce of criminology  Started in the 18th Century- enlightened era and industrial revolution. Feudal system- pyramid structure, with monarchy at the ...

Description

CRIMINOLOGY Lecture 1- Missing, Intro into criminology Lecture 2- 11/09/2017 Classical Criminology   

The foundation of the school of criminology History/ organce of criminology Started in the 18th Century- enlightened era and industrial revolution. Feudal systempyramid structure, with monarchy at the top, then solider and noble men, serfs at the bottom. The king owned everything gave some to noble men who then gave to serfs to farm the land but didn’t really owe it so money always travelled upwards. You were stuck at the position you were at so if once a serf always a serf.

Criminal Justice System in the 18th Century      



   



     

The centre of the criminal justice system in the ancien regime was the public execution: the theatre of punishment. Physical punishment was used as both a method of punishment and as a form of inquisition to establish an accused’s guilt or innocence. At the time, the law represented the will of the sovereign: therefore it was the sovereign’s right to punish. Punishment was also strongly linked with religion. The purpose of punishment was revenge/restoration. The public execution was a ceremony by which a momentarily injured sovereign was reconstituted by manifesting its power at its most spectacular. It reaffirmed the ‘dissymmetry of forces’ between the sovereign and the subject. The criminal procedure right up to the imposition of the sentence remained a secret. It was only then that the people were allowed view the power of the sovereign as it imposed punishment. The ceremony of punishment was an exercise in terror. The aim was to make everyone aware through the body of the criminal of the unrestrained presence of the sovereign. “The execution did not re-establish justice; it reactivated power”, Foucault, ‘Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison.’ The aim was to make an example, not only by making people aware that the slightest offence was likely to be punished, but by arousing feelings of terror by the spectacle of power letting the crowd’s anger fall upon the guilty person. Theatre of criminal justice, mechanism for dealing with crimes- hanging in public. Regardless of what you did always hung. Done for the drama. Send a message to everyone. Regular theatre. Purpose of criminal justice was to punish the body now more punishment of the mind Trials did not exist they were always bias. Laws were not written down. No trial procedure There was no degeneration of punishment, no different punishments for different crimes Monarchy wanted to show people the punishment for commit a crime to defer others from doing it. Crimes were crimes against the monarchy. Punishment was barbaric Crime was very high. They had no surveillance so nearly by change who got caught.

  

Pardon system- monarchy can sometimes allowed to give pardon to some people. Perhaps well-liked person in society. This is where most of defences deprived from. Everyone was to attend these punishment, message was to leave that you do not mess with the monarchy. Even put animals on trial to send message of terror and fear. Extreme and violent era.

Why didn’t they change the punishment for different crimes? Why not change the system?   

Message of fear, people would have a lot if fear even if crime small would face grave punishment To show the power of the monarchy. Power of sovereignty against the ordinary of the people. Mechanism of communication with regular people.

Why did it become problematic?      



People began to relate to people being hung they would boo. Instead of generating fear they were generating anger towards the monarchy. The process was ambiguous. A lot of people were dying at a very young age. A lot of illness. High death rate, low birth rate. People were exposed to a lot of death, public de sensitised. Cruel and inhumane Became political danger, concern that people were bonding together over their hatred towards the monarchy. Concerned for an uprising. A centre of illegality- so much crime was going on at theatre of punishment. Fights broke out. A lot of pick pocketing. Suppose to be showing people not commit crime while so many crimes occurring while it was happening. Not the deterrence they planned for it to be. An ineffective economy of power

The Enlightenment Era        

Enlightenment theorists opposed public executions and all other inhumane and cruel punishments. The movement believed that reason and experience rather than faith and superstition should replace the excesses and corruptions of feudal society. Came many philosophies came along The birth of democratic state. Alongside enlightenment era came the industrial era. Capitalism become dominate framework to rule the state. Mechanism of criminal justice were no longer working so more into new ones. How to deal with it were changing Enlightenment theorist opposed public execution and all other inhumane and cruel punishments Interested in reason and experience rather than faith and superstition should replace the excesses and corruption of feudal system. Wanted rational thinking. Better than the extremities of the monarchy.

Proposed two theories’ 1. The Doctrine of the Social Contract 2. The Doctrine of Free Will (Rational Choice Theory)

The Doctrine of Social Contract 



    

Thomas Hobbs- the war of all against all. If we didn’t sign up to this social contract then you don’t want to abide by the rules. Then everyone will break rules so everyone in it for themselves. So, while capitalism is good we need rules. We give up some of our freedom for certain rules and limits. Gives order and governance. Society held together by a contact between citizens and property owners- even in social contract era it still distinguished between citizen and property owners, property owners were rulers. So, enlightenment era still entrenched in those who had and those who did not. This required the establishment of a government authority- the foundation of our society today. Just a concept, shouldn’t take it too serious as even though supposed to maintain equality there is still inequality in society Thomas Hobbes believed that society was based on the nasty and brutish fact of bellum omnium contra omnes (the war of all against all). Enlightenment philosophers stated that society was held together by a contract between citizens and property owners. This required the establishment of a governmental authority.

The Doctrine of Free Will  

         

Freedom was man’s natural state, but the development of society had led to dependence on others, and restricted this freedom. The doctrine of free will states that all individuals rationally and freely choose to engage in the social contract. This is a utilitarian view that is based on the ideology of the “greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.” Under the doctrine of free will, those that break the social contract, destroy the happiness of others and decide to pursue ”harmful pleasures” should be punished for their wrongdoing. Thomas Aquinas, a religious philosopher, believed that people who commit crime, commit sin, therefore, in punishing, the State takes the place of God. This link between religion and crime was opposed by the Enlightenment philosophers with their notions of free will and the social contract. We are born free. Free will is man nature state. Freedoms are being restricted All individuals have rational sign up for these restrictions for our own benefits Doctrine to do with individuals not free will. Utilitarian view- “greatness happiness for the greatness number of people”- use extreme techniques against to help save several people is this okay? Bomb example Issues1. if can bend law for one situation then could continuously do it then law isn’t the same and this will begin to happen regularly. 2. If you have it wrong person may not have been involved then torturing them for the wrong reason. 3. Against the UN convention. 4. A lot of people don’t fall within the majority so then they are not the greatness number of people. So, can’t always be majority rule 5. Can lead to extreme methods



So, a lot of the time utilitarian method doesn’t work, we do use it in society today.

Cesare Beccaria “Of crimes and Punishments    

“no man every freely sacrificed a portion of his personal liberty merely on behalf of the common good” The right to punish deprives from the need to defend the private usurpations by individuals A lot of high offended associated with property offenders. These were the greatness crimes Their proposal became very much adopted.

The Consequences of the social contract 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8. 9.

Only the laws can decree punishment for crimes There must be a third party to judge the truth of the fact Punishment must not be too severe Judges in criminal cases cannot have authority to interpret laws, as they are not legislators. Not the system today judges today can interpret the laws. This is the first time we see separation of powers. Laws should not be obscure- how could you know the law is not written down? Laws need to be communicated to the people. They should be understandably to the public. The mildness of punishments- punishment should be mild shouldn’t be extreme should exceed the crime in the first place. Punishment there to out weight the benefit of the crime. Punishment just enough not to do it again, no benefit in the end Promptness of Punishment- crime and punishment happen in closeness with each other. Promptness can sometimes be delayed by right to trial. The certainty of the Punishment- You know if you commit a crime that there is high chance that you will be caught. Nowadays no certainty of punishment. Proportionality between crimes and punishment. Still a concept today. Need for balance. Could look at it like a profit and loss account. Punishment needs to be fair.

Rational choice theory- if all the above occur it should deter citizens from committing crime. They believed they could eliminate crime all together. Does this work though? No as for the most people don’t always make rational decisions, what is rational to one person is not rational to others. When arguments break out can you think rationally? Jeremy Bentham   



A profit and loss analysis- there is a correlation between the two Believed that crimes could be prevented using positives or negative sanctions Said sometimes shouldn’t punish at all new concept at this time. Times when not to punish: 1. Groundless 2. Inefficacious 3. Unprofitable or too expensive 4. Needless- no point to it. Four rules of utility- when writing the rules what is your framework for when crime is worthwhile 1. Ultimate goal is prevention of crime 2. A person about to commit a crime should be persuaded by the very threat of punishment either not to commit that crime at all or to commit lesser offencethis is the start of deterrence. This is still used in criminal justice now. Problem?

Deterrence and punishment difficult to established. Data suggested deterrence is a good concept but isn’t good when looking at public behaviour. People who go to prison mostly end up re committing. Difficult to know what punishment is for crimes as it can depend on case by case basis so can’t know the punishment you’d get 3. A person who has decided to commit a crime should be persuaded by the threat of punishment to do no more mischief than is necessary 4. Legislators should try to prevent crimes as cheapy as possible. The Birth of the Prison  

   

It’s about order and discipline. This wasn’t just in the prison this was how the society all together was organised. The Panopticon- the way the prison was structured. This structure allowed for surveillance of the of the whole prison. The first use of the power of surveillance. Colum in the middle with the cells arranged in a circle around it to allow for 24-hour surveillance. Had a curtain on them to even when not watching gave idea could be monitored. Very expensive to build so not exactly what Bentham wanted to achieve. Was classical criminology a progressive criminology? More progressive than the barbarism of the theatre of punishment Did Bentham and Beccaria preserve a class system bases on inequality? Preserved inequality as it was about balancing rights of landowner and citizens and richer people owned land Was the aim to punish less or to punish better? Many more people were being punished but subjected to much mild type of punishment Were Bentham and Beccaria policies based on humane reform? Not against capital punishment once it was fair and efficient

Lecture 3- 18/09/17

The Return of Classical Criminology Neo: Classical Criminology     

Routine Activities Rational Choice Situational Crime Prevention Deterrence WE live in consumer lifestyle which effects all areas of society even crime how we deal with it etc.

The crisis of classicism on the 19th Century      

They believed their solution could solve crime problem, get rid of crime all together. It did not generate the reduction in crime as they had hoped, crime was on a rise. The failure of the new institutions based on the rationally of classical to regulate the dangerous class. Dangerous classes of crime may be different depending on time and society. Even though building up institution still a lot of poverty a big difference between poor and rich. Dangerous class? A term to describe members of the working classes, the unemployed

      

A continued and growing presence in urban areas of poor, unemployed and working-class thieves. The beginning of collecting of data on people including crime, crime statistics came about and had high rates and prison didn’t seem to be working. This led to fear of criminality among law-abiding citizens The official crime rate (from 1815 onwards) lent support to public opinion which viewed crime as increasing. The failure of imprisonment to regulate the dangerous classes, the problem of recidivism. Led to an examination of whether and how offenders could be returned to society effectively Prison acting at a deterrence wasn’t working at the time as when they came out still commit crime and learning how to commit crimes and commit them even better

The Emergence of the positivist criminology      



Development of the scientific method gathering facts and information. Before info not as reliable looked at info and made antidot now measure more efficiently and scientifically. Quantitate measures were being done on how and why people acted certain was and then predict it. Looking at patterns in people’s behaviour. A search for causes within individuals (rather than focusing on the free will and rationality of all members of the society) Sought to quantify human behaviour. Can see who is going to be a criminal and who’s not. Different to classical criminology now looking at the why individual commit crimes. Not look saw that it was free will to commit crime there were factors that caused them to commit crimes Aims to uncover, explain and predict ways in which observable facts occur in uniform patterns

Phrenology and Franz Joseph Gall         

Certain parts of the brain effect certain behaviours. Certain parts of the brain effected criminal behaviour. Concerned with the size and shape of the skull (popular from the mid-1700s to mid-1800s) Gall believed that there were three major regions of the brain governing three types of behaviours and personality: Intellectual, moral, and lower The lower type was associated with criminal behaviour and would be largest amongst criminals. Phrenologists believed that the size and shape of the skull corresponded to the brain’s size and shape Based on biological determinism it clashed with the dominance of classical theories at the time. You are born and you grow up and you happen to have a larger lower part of the brain which means you’re more likely to be a criminal. This is predetermined before birth. Couldn’t examine the brain internal so all done external with touch and feeling of the head.

Lambert Quetelet (1796-1874) of the development of the propensity to crime  

An astronomer, mathematician, statistician and sociologist Findings on social distribution

The constancy of crime rates over time = The ratio of unknown crimes to recorded crimes was constant. o ‘One passes from one year to the other with the sad perspective of seeing the same crimes reproduced in the same order and bringing with them the same penalties’. Might seem obvious to us but revolutionary then There is so much crime and there is a percentage of crimes that we don’t know There is a relationship between those who appear in the system and those who don’t. Criminal propensities and the causes of crime Even if individuals have free will criminal behaviours obeys scientific laws- system doesn’t matter crime still occur. Disproportionate presence of certain categories involved in crime (young males, impoverished and unemployed) Important casual factor: the unequal distribution of wealth Criminal propensity linked with age and sex Age Propensity strongest amongst 21-25 Sex male/ Female ration of crimes 100/26 All these statements relevant today, any could be true today Causes of crime o Accidental causes (wars, famines, natural disasters)- if life turned upside down no longer care o Variable causes (free will, personality) o Constant causes (age, gender, occupation) “every social state presupposes, then, a certain number and a certain order of crimes these merely the necessary consequences of its organisation. Society prepares crime, and the guilty are only the instruments y which it is executed” “Quetelet’s placement of criminal behaviour in a formal structure of causality was a remarkable advance over the unsystematic speculations of his contemporaries. His intuition that society somehow caused crime marked a profound theoretical departure from the crude realism of public opinion and classical criminology.” (Beirne and Messerchmidt) Crime is because of how we organise ourselves. Statistics ad bioldy- implications for what he was saying. We all have ability to commit crime but doesn’t often translate. Crime is hereditary. Went to very extremes with this statement Statistics and biology: o ‘every man… has a certain propensity to break the laws” but the criminal propensities of the “average man” were rarely, if ever, translated into criminal actions’. o Crime was a “pestilential germ… contagious…[sometimes] hereditary.” o Contrasted the virtues of the average law-abiding citizen with the criminality of vagabonds, vagrants, ‘primitives’, gypsies, ‘inferior classes’, certain races with ‘inferior moral stock’ and persons of low moral character o Unhealthy morality manifest in biological defects: ‘Crime was a pestilential germ… contagious… [sometimes] hereditary’. o

           





  

Biological Positivism: Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909)  

Write book the born criminal, bases in the scientific analysis of the individual criminal. For this book, he went into prisons and interviewed criminals. Compared habitual delinquents and savages.

      

He looked at people post mortem of criminals to get scientific info on them. Used this for his book. It is a scientific method but also with the dramatics of the time. This was taking extremely serious v important at the time wouldn’t be taken serious today. Criminologist and physician The Born Criminal: Based on the scientific analysis of the individual criminal ‘many of the characteristics found in savages, and among the coloured races, are also to be found in habitual delinquents’. Lombros had a revelation while conducting a post-mortem of a c...