Category: Crime Investigation

Circle Sentencing and Classical Criminology

Circle sentencing is the process whereby a criminal is tried and a verdict is produced through a communal process rather than the normal courts or judicial system. In circle sentencing, it is imperative that the criminal first plead guilty and be willing to participate in the process.

The process of circle sentencing is believed to alter the rights of defendants described in classical theory in several ways which will be outlined below. It is essential to note that the alteration of these rights can be either positive or negative, depending on the criminals dispensation or nature of crime.

According to classical criminology, the crime of an individual is regarded as a crime towards society that can only be punished by the society. Also, in classical criminology, the punishment is often awarded according to the crime and the individual traits of the criminal are not considered.

The general perspective and approach to crime in classical criminology means that two criminals who have committed a similar crime will have similar rights. This is irrespective of differences in their unique individualistic circumstances such as their psychological state or even social and financial status.

However, circle sentencing directly contradicts this since the process tends to be more individualistic in nature. Even though circle sentencing is carried out by society, the special circumstances surrounding the crime and the criminal are usually put into consideration.

This alters the rights of defendants described in classical theory since the punishment is no longer just served to fit the crime. It is also served in a measure that puts the individualistic factors surrounding the criminal himself into consideration.

This alteration is not a problem since the punishment resulting from circle sentencing will end up being more effective and comprehensive. As far as deterrence and criminal punishment is concerned, circle sentencing is an improvement to the classical theory of crime and punishment.

Positivist Criminology

Positivist criminology began in the 19^th century. This is whereby; unlike in the former classical models of crime that attributed criminal behavior to social factors, a criminal was pre-determined by various biological features. This theory was refined in the post-colonial era to constitute only the psychological traits of a criminal.

According to Freud, various psychological traits which are common in all criminals are usually a product of the parenting process. It is these psychological problems resulting from poor parenting practice that result into a child growing up with criminal tendencies.

Using this foundational Freudian premise, various positivist criminological theories were developed. It was believed that particular personality types and characteristics are directly attributable to crime. Various measurement methods were developed in order to identify, measure and classify certain traits associated with criminal behavior. It has become common to use standard scales, questionnaires and inventories to identify and classify criminal minds.

The latest trend in positivist criminology is what is referred to as profiling. Criminal profiling based on certain identifiable behavioral patterns and psychological markings is a common criminal identifying tactic in the United States.

Even though the effectiveness of the investigative methodology has not been scientifically proven, it has proven to be successful in several counts. It is not uncommon to find profiling, a positivist criminology concept, being used as a defense tactic in child sex abuse cases.

The use of positivist criminology and psychology has also been effectively applied in behavioral modification programs for offenders. Traits that have been successfully modified using this approach include certain cognitive distortions which have resulted in the prevention of recidivism. While evidence of the effectiveness of such approaches is unverifiable, the exceptions to the rule have not been enough to dismiss positivism as a criminological approach and theory.

Risk  A Gendered Phenomenon

The concept of risk or edgework is considered a gendered phenomenon in two main aspects. Initially, it was believed that males are more risk takers compared to females. However, further research revealed that this conclusion was merely due to the fact that the majority of criminals interviewed in the study were male offenders.

The gendered aspect of risk which has been verified is the fact that men and women participate in different types of risk-taking or edgework activities. The risk activities associated with male criminals often involve status and prestige-related activities.

These edgework activities in the male gender often involve the self-expression of ones dominance or anti-conformity to the structured life in the modern society. The male risk activities are often more dominant and easily recognizable compared to the female activities due to their verifiability.

For the female gender, the risk activities are usually related with their sexuality. The female is considered to be participating in edgework when they take sexual risks such as unsafe and indiscriminate sex. The other aspect of risk taking for the female is their resistance in violent relationships.

This is clearly evident in the women who continue to stay in a relationship that is both abusive and a risk to their own lives. This gendered aspect of risk in women is however not accurately verifiable because it is not always easy to determine whether those taking part in the risk activities are actually engaging in risk-taking or edgework.

In this essence thus, risk is a gendered activities because a stark difference still exists in the nature of edgework between the male and female criminals.

Forensic science is one of the accurate methods of collecting and analyzing evidence from a scene of a crime. Since courts require substantial evidence, investigators ought to use the most accurate forensic equipments and to follow all the necessary steps. Investigators use different approaches to collect biological evidence at the scene of a crime.

Chisum and Turvey posit, All biological evidence is subject to deterioration and requires a lot of care (2000, p. 23). Investigators may collect a number of biological evidence ranging from blood, hair, seminal fluid, to bones and organs. In case the investigators collect blood sample as their evidence, they do it using two five-milliliter tubes. Saferstein alleges, The blood should be collected in vacutainers with Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as anti coagulant (2000, p. 45).

On the other hand, if researchers are to collect a blood sample from a postmortem subject, they ought to get it from the non-body cavity areas such as heart or chief internal blood vessels (Saferstein, 2000, p. 46). For easy identification, researchers need to label all blood samples accordingly.

In case the researchers wish to collect liquid semen as their evidence, they use disposable pipettes or clean syringes to put it into disinfected tubes. Otherwise, they may use cotton wool to collect the liquid semen. They can use the cotton wool to absorb the semen, air-dry the content, and utilize it in forensic investigations.

In many cases, scientists use swabs to collect trace samples (Chisum & Turvey, 2000). The target area is rubbed severally using a moistened swab to collect biological traces. Nonetheless, moist swab may fail to collect adequate traces, therefore, calling for multiple swabs. Today, investigators use double swabbing technique to collect adequate traces.

After collecting traces from the crime scene, they are taken to laboratory for analysis. Analysts look for a number of clues that may help to identify the criminal. For instance, when analyzing blood sample, analysts look for the presence of genetic markers, which resemble those of the prime suspect.

If a crime involves beating or stabbing, chances of exchange of blood between the perpetrator and the casualty are high (Chisum & Turvey, 2000). Hence, analysts try to determine if the blood sample contains genetic markers that would help them identify the perpetrator. To substantiate a rape case, researchers look for traces of semen in the victim.

In the absence of semen, they look for traces of pre-ejaculation fluid. Investigators conduct a DeoxyriboNucleic Acid (DNA) test on the semen or pre-ejaculation fluid obtained from the victim and the results compared to those of the suspect. This helps to arrest the criminal involved in the crime (Houde, 1998).

Forensic evidence presented in court influences the judgment an attorney makes. Therefore, to make sure that the parties involved receive justice, forensic researchers need to be accurate in collecting and analyzing their evidence. One of the ways through which investigators may enhance accuracy of the results is by ensuring that they use disposable instruments to collect biological traces. Disposable instruments would minimize chances of contamination (Houde, 1998).

In addition, investigators ought to air-dry the collected fluid before packing to avoid chances of it reacting with the packaging material. One of the reasons why investigators fail to obtain accurate results is that, their biological traces contaminate the evidence (Houde, 1998).

To control this, investigators should make sure that they wear gloves to prevent the likelihood of touching the biological traces they intend to collect. Other mistakes that investigators need to avoid include, coughing, sneezing, or talking over the evidence. Coughing, sneezing or talking over the evidence might alter the results if the traces are exposed to investigators saliva (Houde, 1998).

Crime scene researchers may be asked to defend their findings in a court of law. In such a case, they would have to prove that their research observed all the necessary procedures. They would have to prove that investigations followed the outlined chain of custody (Kelly & Wearne, 1998).

The chain of custody starts after discovering the evidence and accounts for individuals that realized and gathered the evidence. Besides, it accounts for the method used to collect the evidence and the duration that every activity took. Investigators are advised to take photographs of the scene of crime before collecting evidence. The photographs help to, identify where the evidence was located inside the scene of crime and its relation to other paraphernalia found at the scene (Kelly & Wearne, 1998, p. 72).

Hence, researchers may include photographs to reinforce their evidence. Additionally, investigators would have to convince a judge that they followed all the guidelines when collecting biological traces. Presence of an expert witness would help the researchers in defending the integrity of their evidence.

An expert witness might help to elucidate the importance of the adduced evidence. Besides, the witness may help the investigators to bring out the relationship between their evidence and the case at hand (Kelly & Wearne, 1998). Consequently, to help in defending their research, investigators may go to an extent of looking for a third party. This would make the attorney adopt the evidence presented in a courtroom.

References

Chisum, W. & Turvey, B. (2000). Evidence Dynamics: Locards Exchange Principle & Crime Reconstruction. Journal of Behavioral Profiling, 1(1), 22-37.

Houde, J. (1998). Crime Lab: A guide for Nonscientists. Rolling Bay: Calico Press.

Kelly, J. & Wearne, P. (1998). Tainting Evidence: Inside the Scandals at the FBI Crime Lab. New York: Free Press.

Saferstein, R. (2000). Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Introduction

Proportions and probabilities are instrumental approaches in the analysis of statistics generated from criminal justice and criminology practice. During this evaluation process, probabilities are applied in scenarios of uncertainty, whereas proportions are used in situations where the outcome is certain (Gau, 2018). Empirical values and theoretical predictions play a critical role in the interpretation of criminology-related statistics.

For instance, empirical values arise from known and observable events or features, whereas theoretical predictions are generated from logical conclusions about a particular events outcome (Gau, 2018). Binomial presentation of data is a strategic approach in statistical criminology whereby the probability analysis regarding two possible sets of effects is performed (Gau, 2018). Normal distribution of data in crime-based statics refers to the presentation of data based on the inclination to the given distributions mean value.

Major Arguments

The author posits that the element of probability originates from the possibility that a given event shall happen in the stated circumstance (inferential-statistical approach). Gau (2018) further argues that the sum of a probability results in the value of 1.0. For instance, if a coin is tossed in the air, the probability of a tail result is (1/2), and that of a head result is (1/2); hence the summation is 1.0 (Gau, 2018). Another fundamental argument made by Gau (20180 is that there are two principal forms of data distribution in criminology statistics: standard (normal) and binomial. Binomial presentation applies to dichotomous (binary) variables that bear two probable outcomes.

On the other hand, the standard (normal) distribution method is suitable for continuous data sets that obey the normal curve pattern- associated with the z-scores (Gau, 2018). The author also contends that in the normal and binary patterns, the fundamental element is the theoretical- premises for mathematical and logical assumptions (Gau, 2018). Ultimately, he asserts that empirical distributions assume the abstract form; they can be analyzed and manipulated and are tangible.

Critique

The author should have considered sharing some in-depth information regarding the underlying relationship between the subjects background and criminal justice and criminology. The citation of practical examples (based on statistical tools) of landmark criminal cases conducted in the United States using appropriate research methods, including experimental and quantitative criminology, would be ideal. Furthermore, the author should have integrated modern statistical tools in line with computerized systems and software. He should have also considered the aspect of impression by using multiple images and designs to illustrate and demonstrate the statistical concepts.

Reference

Gau, J. M. (2018). Statistics for criminology and criminal justice. Sage Publications.

Crime is very difficult to explain and many criminologists have attempted to explain crime but none has come up with conclusive evidence about crime. Criminologists are accused of failing to achieve their goal because they are not willing to try new methods that are found in fundamental sciences (Beaver & Walsh 2008).

The biosocial method incorporates the help offered by the fundamental sciences. It integrates the traditional methods used in criminology with approaches used in biological sciences. Anyone who would have tried to bring up the question of using biological sciences in criminology would only have been met with opposition and derision. This was because sociology was used in training most criminologists and sociology denies claims made by other disciplines concerning crime. Furthermore most criminologists had poor training in biology and few were interested in changing their view point in criminology by learning other methods outside what they learnt in school. This was sad because biological sciences in ten years have helped in understanding of behavior than sociology has done for about fifty years (Beaver & Walsh 2008).

Nevertheless some criminologists are willing to embrace other disciplines to understand criminal behavior. The society set the stage for a crime to occur but crimes are executed by human beings who have genes, blood and brains and this entails biology. Not only does biosocial comes recognize the role the environment plays in influencing human behavior but also that the environment acts on different human materials. Therefore biosocial shows how similar environmental aspects influence human beings differently (Beaver & Walsh 2008).

Biosocial criminology is dynamic in that it explains human behavior in the different paths of development. Things that were meaningful at one point in their life may become meaningless for example approval from peers. On the other hand things that meant little to them previously may become very important to them later. The approach goes further, gives explanations why the changes occur at one point of their lives and not others. In addition the approach explains how different individuals are affected by these changes differently. Unlike traditional criminology theories that are static. They entail the notion that criminal behavior once initiated in a human being it will become self perpetuating and thus continuous (Beaver & Walsh 2008).

From research done criminal behavior has continuity. Antisocial behavior observed in childhood can be traced even in childhood. Researches done over a long period of time have shown that criminal behavior over continues over time. From the research it was observed that children involved in criminal behavior were more likely than those who did not have childhood delinquency to become adult offenders. Childhood delinquency acts as a prerequisite for criminal behavior later in adulthood. Stability was also observed between early belligerent behavior and criminality later in adulthood. The continuity in criminal behavior was observed across many countries therefore this can be said to be a universal behavior pattern. Wright (2008) noted that social bonds formed for self control in childhood resulted into bonds later into adulthood and if there was childhood delinquency in the childhood social bonds it a sign of adulthood offending. Later Wright (2008) found that social bonds and self control are connected when it comes to crime and those with low self esteem formed the bonds to make them feel that they were in control. To them crime was a way of showing that they are in control.

Continuity in criminal behavior is associated with negative opportunities for engaging in crime that adulthood permits. The young adults are lured into crime in the labor market and later they are convicted. While in incarceration they do not change their behavior which is always the intention of sending offenders to state correction centers. While in jail they learn new ways of doing crime when they join jail gangs and after they are released they continue the criminal behavior. This group finds it hard to find a job due to their felony history and if they are lucky to their job stability is reduced (Beaver & Walsh, 2008).

Criminal behavior is related to our genetic make up as well as the environment. Children who develop in violent environment are more likely to become violent later in life. This is because they expect people to treat them with violence and they therefore behave accordingly because this is the only way they know from what they have observed day in day out. Experiences in childhood organizes the brain development and the neural pathways laid down at this early stage are not altered later thus the child develops with a brain that is ready to be influenced by any antisocial behavior (Beaver & Walsh, 2008). Therefore violence and brain is related.

Adult criminal behavior in most cases needs a childhood that was antisocial though not all anti social children become adult offenders. However stability is attributed to genetic makeup and environment that remain stable over a period of life that may lead one to the path of crime. The biological and social processes in a human being become consistent and thus they are replicated throughout ones life though changes may occur that may move a person from one path to another. It can therefore be said that one may start on a wrong path when young and stay on that course.

References

Beaver, K.M. & Walsh, A. (2008). Contemporary Biosocial Criminology: New Directions in Theory and Research, New York: Taylor & Francis

Wright, J. Tibbetts, S. & Daigle, S. (2008). Criminals in the Making: Criminality across the life course, Los Angeles CA: SAGE.

Overview

Evidence  any object, item or statement, legally submitted to competent tribunal in order to establish matter of fact under investigation. (Fisher, 2004, p. 1).

Relevant Evidence  the evidence which have any tendency to affect the probability of the existence of a fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action. (FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE, 2006).

Evidences, evidence collection and the quality of evidence are directly related to the object of criminal investigation, i.e. winning convictions.

Evidence Collection

The evidences, although comprising of subgroups, can be divided into two main types:

• Physical evidences  evidence with an objective existence, i.e. has size, shape and dimension.
  • The collection of evidences implies:
    • General walkthrough of the crime scene;
    • Recording of the crime scene, photography or video;
    • Crime scene searches;
    • Recording transient evidence;
    • Establishing a chain of custody;
    • Preserving and identifying the evidences.
• Testimonial evidences  an evidence in a form of statement made under oath and usually given as a result of questioning.
  • The collection of evidences implies:
    • Interview;
    • Interrogation.

Examining Evidence

• Evidences are examined on the crime scene, and in case laboratory analysis is required, evidences are forwarded to servicing crime laboratory.
• Examination of physical evidences can be performed through two areas:
  • Identification determining the physical identity and the characteristics of the object.
  • Comparison  establishing common origin between known and unknown specimen.
• Comparison implies looking for characteristics of the examined specimen, which can be divided into two types:
  • Individual characteristics  characteristics that share a common point of origin, e.g. fingerprints.
  • Class characteristics  characteristics that are shared with a group of items, e.g. blood types. (Osterburg & Ward, 1997).

Information from Evidence

• The types of information evidences can provide depend on the type of examined evidences. Most physical evidences are needed to establish the association with a culprit if the investigation has one. The exceptions include:
  • Fingerprint, as the large data base can be used for comparison.
  • DNA samples, as similarly with blood data bases there are DNA banks.(American Law and Legal Information, 2009)
• Generally, the information obtained from physical evidences can provide the following information:
  • The species of origin, e.g. human and animal hair.
  • The relation of the specimen to the crime scene, e.g. domestic or international explosives.
  • Identification of the nature of the occurring events, e.g. semen, blood, and etc.
  • The relation of the suspect to the crime and the crime scene, e.g. blood, semen, and fingerprints.
  • The weapon of crime, e.g. the type of firearms based on cartridge case. (Osterburg & Ward, 1997).
• Testimonial evidences can provide information based on whether the questioned person is a victim, witness, informant or suspect, and accordingly, in case of the witnesses, the division might include primary or secondary witnesses. The information might include, but not limited to the following:
  • Eyewitness description and identification;
  • Modus operandi;
  • Motive;
  • Confession;
  • Psychological profiling.

Contamination Issues

• In addition to mishandling, and destruction, evidences are subject to contamination.
• Contamination can be defined as a concern for proper preservation of evidence. (Fisher, 2004, p. 12).
• Issues to consider regarding contamination related to the collection of evidence might include the following:
  • The contamination of the crime scene by people, animals and external elements which might alter or destruct the evidences.
  • Improper packaging of evidences prior to sending them to the laboratory.
  • Mixing of evidences leading to cross contamination of known and unknown specimen (Fisher, 2004, p. 157).
  • Contamination of evidences present on the bodies of the victims, due to improper medical aid.
  • Incorrect priorities when collecting evidences leading to the contamination or destruction of evidences. (Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation, 2000).

Types of Evidence

Physical evidence

• Direct physical evidence evidence that can be touched and evaluated tactually, e.g. weapon of murder.
• Forensic physical evidence  Evidence requiring scientific validation, e.g. DNA, blood, semen and etc.

Testimonial evidence

• Direct testimonial evidence  evidence obtained from testifying witnesses, e.g. primary witness.
• Circumstantial evidence  evidence obtained from non-eyewitness testimony, e.g. secondary witness (Becker, 2008, p. 1).

Relevant Issues

In addition to the accuracy of collecting the evidences and the efforts of preserving them an important notion should be paid to the formal procedures, which ensures the integrity of the collected evidences.

Such procedures include:

• Chain of custody  the custodians of evidence should maintain a chain of custody of all evidence collected.
• Maintaining the legality of obtaining evidences, e.g., a search warrant.

References

American Law and Legal Information. (2009). Police: Criminal Investigations  Sources Of Information And Evidence In Criminal Investigations. Net Industries. Web.

Becker, R. F. (2008). Criminal investigation (3rd ed.): Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Federal Rules of Evidence. (2006). U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. Web.

Fisher, B. A. J. (2004). Techniques of crime scene investigation (7th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Osterburg, J. W., & Ward, R. H. (1997). Criminal investigation : a method for reconstructing the past (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Pub. Co.

Swanson, C. R. (2006). Criminal investigation (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Technical Working Group on Crime Scene Investigation. (2000). Crime Scene Investigation. U.S. Department of Justice. Web.

After reading the article, it is notable that there are awesome highlights explaining the history, development, and evolution of crime in the society. The first thing that comes out clearly from the article is the nature of crime. Different criminal activities have existed in the society over the past centuries. For example, certain criminal activities such as robbery have been common. In the recent past, new criminal activities have emerged such as piracy and gunfights.

Some crimes such as slavery have reappeared in the form of kidnappings. It is because of this aspect of crime that new technologies scientific inquiries have emerged to understand the field of criminology much better. In the 18^th century, criminology emerged as a major field of study with different sociologists and scholars contributing a lot to the field. This eventually played a major role towards reforming criminal justice and law in Europe.

The other fascinating issue from the article is how crime has changed over the centuries. Crime and the definition of criminal acts and deviant behaviors are social products.

This means that the individuals in a specific society will define what should be a crime or not. Criminologists distinguish acts depending on the society and the existing political laws. It is also notable that the article explains how people identify certain acts to be bad because they have been prohibited in the society. This explains why there are some universal laws against acts such as assault, rape, and murder.

The author of the article goes further to present a fascinating point of interest. There are two models of criminal law. These include the consensus and the conflict models. The consensus model explains how a society describes what is wrong and then implements the most effective laws.

The conflict model, on the other hand, explains how criminology and criminal law originates from the interests or expectations of various politicians, interest groups, or leaders. This means that the definition of crime mainly reflects the expectations and views of the powerful people in a society.

The article also explores the problem of crime from a sociopolitical and economic perspective thus making it a frustrating moment. According to statistics, global crime has been on the rise since the Second World War. Crime continues to take new forms depending on technological changes and developments.

As well, crime is a major problem because it is hard to estimate its costs. A study by David Anderson indicated that the cost of crime is very high and affects the lives of people across the world. The article explains how crime affects people and increases the level of government expenditure to cater for prisoners, control crime, and policing. This is the reason why governments and societies should consider the best laws to address the problem of crime because it affects all people alike.

In our modern world, the article explains why crime continues to become a major challenge across the globe. Crime also has both sociological and psychological aspects thus making it full cost incalculable. That being the case, there should be new inquiries to define crime accurately and be able to address it because it is a major concern today. I would therefore recommend this article because it offers a wider range of views, insights, and understanding of crime as a major sociological issue affecting the world today.

In todays world, crime rates have increased steadily for various reasons. With economies of most countries going uphill, more money is earned, and a progressively high number of people are indulging in criminal activities like robbery. Criminology is the study of crime patterns using social, psychological, and biological aspects of a human being. Criminology identifies what drives a person to indulge in criminal related behaviors and the main reasons that influence criminal activities. It is assumed that the rise in criminal activities is due to social aspects of mankind. This shows that sociology has a big impact and role when it comes to crimes especially around the urban cities in Canada and their environs. There are theories that depict the reason as to why a person indulges in criminal activities especially in urban settings. These theories center on psychological, biological, and social aspects of a person. The most common aspect that facilitates a better understanding of why man partakes in criminal activities is sociology. Sociology is the identification and analysis of social behaviors, orders, disorders and changes in the society (Weisburd, Groff, & Yang, 2014). In criminology, there is the social structural theory that is subdivided into various theories. The most common theory that is used in most urban settings is the social disorganization theory.

The social disorganization theory was crafted by Henry McKay and Clifford Shaw in the year 1942. One of the reasons for the selection of this theory is that it looks into the influence of crime through poverty in the urban cities such as in Canada and the people who undertake criminal activities in the areas. Another reason is that the theorists of the social disorganization theory believe that the neighborhood of a person influences the idea of crime in him/her. The theorists, therefore, state that a person instigates crime through the place he/she dwells in. This is seen throughout poor neighborhoods where crime rates are high due to an increase in population and poor living standards of persons dwelling in these regions (Wong, 2012).

The third reason is that social disorganization theory identifies the residential position as the major factor in criminal activities. The theory stipulates that the location of a person is the driving force that facilitates crimes in urban settings. This is so when compared to the rise of insecurity amongst residential dwellers and middle-income residential places. One of the tenets of the theory is the belief that a criminals race, age, or gender does not influence criminal activities. This is ultimately true as crimes are done with people of different ages, races, and dissimilar genders. This shows that various groups of people do crime rates progressively from different levels of societies and convictions. Another tenet is that the social disorganization theory further suggests that factors such as unemployment and single-parent homes link to the increase in crime in urban settings. These factors result in poor living conditions and an insufficient amount of money that is evident in the homes of people who involve themselves with criminal activities (Kaylen & Pridemore, 2013). Another tenet is that dropping out of school is a factor that has an impact on crime. Lacking education means staying idle and this leads to a student mingling with criminals from the neighborhood thus being initiated to crime, which marks the onset of committing criminal activities. This is evident in most urban communities where they experience high rates of criminal activities that are undertaken by people from the lower side of the society.

The strength of the theory lies in the highlighting of crimes undertaken by a society affiliated with poverty and high joblessness rates. This identifies the inequality of social classes that is obvious in most countries. Such inequality is seen to be the determinant of crimes and other misdeeds. An additional strength of the theory is that it talks about the crimes in the neighborhoods that are typically ignored by the police force (de Looze, Janssen, Elgar, Craig, & Pickett, 2015). The theory shows the empowerment of a community could decrease criminal related activities. The theory stipulates that crime starts from the community and it can end through a community initiative. If a community scheme is undertaken, the rate of crime could be reduced as most idle persons will be kept busy with money-generating tasks and various forms of employment found, which could ultimately lead to low idleness rates. The downfall of the theory, however, is that it does not expound on serious felony related activities like corporate crimes and organized offenses. These crimes relate to stealing of large sums of money, drug-related activities, and murder. The theory only focuses on petty crimes and the reasons that lead to the commission of such misdeeds.

The major reason as to why social disorganization theory is important is because of a few factors. The theory depicts a community that is sidelined by others because of its class status. Class has and will always be a determinant of a society because of the beliefs that come with it. The society is always disadvantaged because of the gap between the poor and the rich as it gradually widens with the growth of the economy. The theory identifies the people who involve themselves with criminal activities due to poverty and lack of education (de Looze et al., 2015). This is evident in most low-end communities that observe such states. This is also identified with communities with similar status. Another reason behind the importance of the theory is location/residential place associated with the residents. It is undebatable that most urban cities and towns experience high rates of crimes. Most urban settings are surrounded by low-income neighborhoods, the underprivileged ones. These settings are plagued with the increase of criminal activities in and around the neighborhoods. The criminal activities, as supported by the theory, are undertaken by people from the underprivileged communities for sustainability. These reasons show the security concerns of a social class and the inequality of provisions in less privileged communities.

Community policing is one of the policies that can be identified in this theory. Community policing shows the unity of a community and the police to enforce better and secure neighborhoods that are free from crimes (de Looze et al., 2015). Problem-oriented policing is another policy that works effectively with the theory. Problem-oriented policing advocates for the discovery and resolution of problems that could otherwise harm a person or the society. This is effective in the theory as it is prudent for law enforcement agents to help a community in preventing acts of criminal activity from taking place and that would have affected not just the criminals but the entire society. The third policy is the Policing by Consent; this is affiliated to the theory by the support of the community to the law enforcement agencies. This policy identifies the role of a law enforcement agent and his position as regulation and security maintenance representative. The theory advocates for a strong law enforcement agency that facilitates excellent security services to the society and improvises ways that eliminate or maintain criminal activities amongst criminals at a low level. It is the work of the police to ensure communities live in peace and reduce the rates of criminal activities by apprehending the culprits.

References

de Looze, M., Janssen, I., Elgar, F. J., Craig, W., & Pickett, W. (2015). Neighbourhood crime and adolescent cannabis use in Canadian adolescents. Drug and alcohol dependence, 146, 68-74.

Kaylen, M. T., & Pridemore, W. A. (2013). Social disorganization and crime in rural communities the first direct test of the systemic model. British Journal of Criminology, 53(5), 905-923.

Weisburd, D., Groff, E. R., & Yang, S. M. (2014). The importance of both opportunity and social disorganization theory in a future research agenda to advance criminological theory and crime prevention at places. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 1(10), 12-15.

Wong, S. K. (2012). Youth crime and family disruption in Canadian municipalities: An adaptation of Shaw and McKays social disorganization theory. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 40(2), 100-114.

Introduction

The theory of broken windows is a theory in criminology that considers minor offenses not only as an indicator of the criminogenic situation but also as an active factor affecting the serious crime rate. The theory claims that the connivance of society to minor offenses, such as vandalism and others, directly provokes people to commit similar or more serious offenses (OBrien et al., 2019). There are different views on the theory of broken windows, but I am inclined to believe that there are more positive sides than critics.

Main body

Each individual lives in a specific social environment. And to change the situation, people need to apply efforts to change this environment. For example, actions to combat petty hooliganism have indeed reduced the crime rate in New York. As part of the criminal investigation program in many parts of New York, criminal activity was monitored on an ongoing basis, with the responsibility of the police in each district (Kamalu & Onyeozili, 2018). However, the study tracked a correlation, not a causal relationship, that would prove that acts of petty hooliganism push the same or other people to more serious crimes. On the other hand, there was no evidence that no third force would reduce or affect the number of serious crimes in the city. Indeed, the number of serious violations has decreased, but extraneous factors have not been investigated, and because of this, the theory of broken windows has been heavily criticized.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are arguments both for and against the broken windows theory, which may raise doubts about its effectiveness and applicability to different environments. However, the theory can be considered from different angles, highlighting the positive aspects of a particular situation. Reducing even minor crimes does not bring any negative consequences, so it is not necessary to track the relationship between light and serious crime in order to put the theory into practice in a particular city.

References

OBrien, D. T., Farrell, C., & Welsh, B. C. (2019). Broken (windows) theory: A meta-analysis of the evidence for the pathways from neighborhood disorder to resident health outcomes and behaviors. Social Science & Medicine, 228, 272-292. Web.

Kamalu, N. C., & Onyeozili, E. C. (2018). A critical analysis of the Broken Windows policing in New York city and its impact: Implications for the criminal justice system and the african american community. African Journal of Criminology & Justice Studies, 11(1), 71-90. Web.

Introduction

The role of politics in criminology and laws cannot be underestimated in the modern world. Bureaucracy is an essential part of the process of analyzing the evidence-based materials. This is the reason why the government significantly influences the approach of criminologists as it controls the standards of their work. The state officials establish rules that are hard to be changed in the short period of time that makes the implementations of innovations in this sphere a challenging issue. Historical past  values, traditions, and even customs  has a crucial impact on the functioning of the judicial system. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of the power structures on criminology and its approaches in the analysis of evidence and making decisions.

The Impact of Traditions in Judicial System

Throughout time communication between ordinary people and the representatives of the authorities were controlled by specific rules that played a significant role in establishing the relationships between the two groups. For example, if a person came before the judge to the court, he had more chances to win the process (Radizinowicz, 3). This action was considered as a demonstration of respect and, at the same time, submission.

The influence of the traditions and customs should not be underestimated as in the past it was the obligatory requirement to win a trial. Moreover, it increased the probability of the victory without any correlation with the committed crime itself (Radizinowicz, 3). In the circumstances of the modern world, where human dignity and the equity of people are highly evaluated values in developed countries, these rules are perceived as intolerant and discriminative. Nevertheless, it is necessary to point out that the formalities in communication with the representatives of the government still affect the judicial procedures (Fleury, 4). For instance, there are punishments for deviant and inappropriate behavior in the court. It is forbidden to talk in a loud way or to express personal opinions and suggestions. The customs and specific historical aspects have a noticeable impact on the behavior rules during the judicial process.

It is possible to suggest that the role of innovations is perceived in a particular way in the field of criminology. In earlier centuries physical punishments were one of the most widespread ways to solve the problem (Radizinowicz, 12). Nowadays in many countries this approach is forbidden. That is supposed to be the progress in this sphere. However, it is necessary to concentrate not only on specific actions but also on the methodology of the decision-making.

It can be assumed that the way of passing a judgement did not change in a significant way. The traditions of respect and the role of the political system are a part of the judicial system. Court depends on the governmental perspectives and rules established by the state officials in order to save the power and to control the inhabitants of the state. In conclusion, traditions did not change only in the process of decision-making performed by the judge but also in causes of the penalties. It leads to significant changes in the freedom of expression and the functioning of media sources.

There are fewer physical punishments but there still exist criminal cases concerning the freedom of speech and expression. People suffer because of tweeting or posting on Facebook inappropriate information and their personal opinion. Media functioning is influenced by the specific laws and total control of the government. It is necessary to point out that, in some situations, the freedom of speech leads to the decrease of the level of trust towards the government. That is why they have to control where and how people express their thoughts and ideas. In many countries the freedom of speech is often violated as there is no bargaining chip from the position of the nation.

Crime as a Demonstration of a Deviant Behavior

One of the most vital responsibilities of the government is providing safety and comfort to the citizens of the country. The court plays a crucial role in implementing this duty into real life. Patten claims that criminologists may even predict the specificity of the crimes and punishments taking into consideration the political situation and its changes in the state (32). The criminal act is considered as an example of deviant behavior. This idea helps the government to explain ordinary people why the judicial system is beneficial for their safety (Patten, 23). In this case, it is crucial to highlight that the state officials have the power to decide which behavior is not appropriate in the existing system of values and wealth (Fleury, 4). The government has a monopoly on the majority of rules and laws: it is hard to influence without being a part of governmental system.

Social and political sciences are crucial for investigating the processes in the sphere of criminology. Fleury maintains that crime control depends significantly on public policy. It is possible to assume that the society and the governmental system become less democratic as the freedom and the rights of people are regularly violated in the modern society. The representatives of the authorities often consider crime as a social harm. However, it is crucial to point out that these terms have diverse meanings (Hillyard, 9). The author of the article claims that the notion of social harm is not more legal than the offence, but it provides more justice and more objective overview of the situation (Hillyard, 23). In this case, the principles of public good should be taken into consideration.

If there is no harm to the inhabitants of the country, their comfort and safety, there is no need to perceive the action as a crime. Hillyard highlights the fact that criminology is based on radical and critical methods of examination (22). The political and historical factors must be analyzed in order to support this hypothesis. The authorities were always interested in supporting their power and establishing the rules and the laws that would be beneficial for their goals.

Evidence-based information should not be underestimated in the sphere of criminology. Barnes and his colleagues claim that the lack of objectivity in this field may be the consequence of the absence of the particular facts (384). Formal data cannot be verified; that is why criminologists have to make a narrative in order to understand the motivation of the criminal and investigate the plausibility of the offence and the verdict.

Conclusion

Government plays a crucial role in the judicial system in the 21^st century. On the one hand, the court is one of the most conservative places with laws and rules established centuries ago. On the other hand, the authorities control all the innovations in this field in order to save the power of making decisions and monitoring the verdicts. Criminologists have to pay more attention to statistics and its causes and consequences. Analyzing the narrative is crucial as it helps to verify the objectivity of the judge. The role of values and traditions is still high in this field, which decreases the level of equality and honesty. It is possible to suggest that the best solution to this issue would be restricting the access of the government to the decisions made by the judge and to the rules in the judicial system.

Works Cited

Barnes, James, et al. (2020). How Powerful is the Evidence in Criminology? On whether We Should Fear a Coming Crisis of Confidence. Justice Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 3, 2020, pp. 383409.

Fleury, Jean-Baptiste. Social Scientists on Crime After World War II.SSRN, 2019, pp. 230, Web.

Hillyard, Paddy, and Steve Tombs. From Crime to Social Harm? Crime, Law and Social Change, vol. 48, no. 2, 2007, pp. 925.

Patten, Daniel J. An Unfinished Journey: The Evolution of Crime Measurement in the United States. The Hilltop Review, vol. 8, no. 1, 2015, pp. 2334.

Radizinowicz, Leon. Ideology and Crime: A Study of Crime in Its Social and Historical Context. Heinemann Educational Books, 1966.

Theory Description

Criminology theories offer different reasoning for committing crimes. According to McGee, Farrington, Homel, and Piquero (2015), life-course criminology is one of the most used theoretical approaches to crime analysis. This perspective views ones criminal activities as a dynamic process influenced by various circumstances. According to this theory, people may start engaging in illegal activities because of their environment, influences, and living conditions.

Such aspects as ones childhood experiences, for instance, can impact his or her decision in the future. This theory states that different life events can change ones attitude and create specific behavior patterns that may lead to offending.

Life-course approach can differentiate some possible factors that affect ones life choices. First of all, individual characteristics are a broad category of factors that can impact a persons life (McGee et al., 2015). Second, ones family can also affect his or her development of offending behaviors. Hurtful childhood memories, poor relationships between family members, verbal and physical abuse, and parental patterns of criminal career can make a person engage in illegal activities.

Third, socio-economic factors are also critical in shaping ones personality. While they may not affect every person the same way, financial struggles, for example, can become a strong motivator for an individual to commit a crime. Other possible factors can include ones relationships, neighborhood, and age. The life-course theory does not consider each aspect in isolation, instead focusing on the combination of multiple factors and their connections with each other. Moreover, this approach does not rely solely on various inherent characteristics. It is interested in the fluidity of ones behavior and the process of change.

Supporting Article Analysis

The life-course branch of criminology is supported by many scholars as it chooses to employ a sophisticated approach to criminal behavior. For instance, Broidy et al. (2015) note that this theory can be considered the foundation of criminology as a whole because it offers a qualitative description of the behavioral patterns of offending. The article focuses on many personal traits of persons and also highlights the importance of such inherent characteristics as ones gender and race.

The authors point out that while other factors are also crucial to the process of developing offending behavior, ones ethnicity and gender can affect individuals life and, therefore, impact their life choices. In this case, these two characteristics are viewed as the basis of further life choices. The study by Broidy et al. (2015) analyzes a group of people who were born at the beginning of the 1980s. These individuals had contacts with the criminal justice system at some point in life.

The results of the study reveal a connection between ones demographics and offending behavior. While the patterns are not universal, some links can be seen. Authors conclude that ones ethnicity can affect his or her life. Thus, it also influences the risk of engaging in illegal activities. Cultural and societal pressures experienced by particular members of the society may drive them towards criminal behavior.

Furthermore, the authors show that these factors influence each other, gender often being a decisive element. This article states that the life-course theory can integrate many factors to create a framework for establishing and understanding peoples behavioral patterns. This argument is also supported in the study by Jennings, Rocque, Fox, Piquero, and Farrington (2016), who note that such taxonomy of offenders can help scholars identify patterns of improvement and deterioration of attitude. It also can help them create intervention and improvement activities that would allow people to recover from their hurtful behaviors.

Refuting Article Analysis

While many researchers support the usefulness of this theory and state that has a strong theoretic foundation, some of them argue that it does not address the aspect of ones resilience to the environment. Pratt (2016) proposes a different strategy that builds on some elements of the life-course theory but uses a different approach to peoples behavior. The author argues that it includes factors that the life-course perspective fails to acknowledge.

For example, he presents multiple arguments that show that the life-course theory may prove useless in addressing ones personality (Pratt, 2016). As a contrast, the scholar offers an approach which improves the original perspective with the concept of self-control. In this case, this notion is proposed by the author as a dynamic ability of a person who can change over time. It is also viewed as an essential part of the decision-making process. Therefore, the researcher attempts to prove the life-course theory is not valid on its own because it ignores a part of peoples personality.

The article outlines ten major propositions which prove that the self-control theory is more useful in the field of criminology than the life-course perspective. First few points state that self-control changes as an individual becomes older. While infants and children may have low self-control due to their level of development, young people are more susceptible to self-control depletion because of their temper. On the other hand, older people are capable of exercising self-regulation easier due to their life experiences.

This argument better explains the age-crime curve often used by criminologists (Pratt, 2016). The following propositions argue that negative experiences can be overcome with self-control. Individuals can also exercise self-regulation while trying to cope with life events that would significantly affect them otherwise. While the life-course theory may portray people as having no control over their decisions, this approach places more responsibility on individuals. This strategy also explains ones choice to engage with society and the quality of interactions a person can have with his or her friends, family, and colleagues.

Therefore, this article refutes the universal use of the life-choice theory, presenting an alternative which accounts for peoples ability to make decisions. While the original approach centers on the environment of a person, it fails to consider his or her individuality and personality that may not be influenced by outside sources. A similar theme is also represented in the article by Fox, Jennings, and Farrington (2015), who argue that the life-course perspective should include psychopathy and behavioral control into the factors of influence. It can be hard to analyze which parts of ones personality come from some internal traits and which are a result of nurture. Thus, this theory can exist alongside the original concept.

Conclusion

The life-course theory can be considered one of the fundamental approaches in criminology. It should be used to create crime control policies because it allows people to focus not only on the current motives and surroundings of a person but also on his or her deeper reasons for committing crimes. This approach goes beyond rationality and inherent nature of an individual and examines a complex structure that exists around every person. Although it may fail to recognize ones ability for self-regulation, it still offers significant information about ones behaviors. This theory is positive and focused on recovery, which also makes it highly valuable.

References

Broidy, L. M., Stewart, A. L., Thompson, C. M., Chrzanowski, A., Allard, T., & Dennison, S. M. (2015). Life course offending pathways across gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 1(2), 118-149.

Fox, B. H., Jennings, W. G., & Farrington, D. P. (2015). Bringing psychopathy into developmental and life-course criminology theories and research. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(4), 274-289.

Jennings, W. G., Rocque, M., Fox, B. H., Piquero, A. R., & Farrington, D. P. (2016). Can they recover? An assessment of adult adjustment problems among males in the abstainer, recovery, life-course persistent, and adolescence-limited pathways followed up to age 56 in the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development. Development and Psychopathology, 28(2), 537-549.

McGee, T. R., Farrington, D. P., Homel, R., & Piquero, A. R. (2015). Advancing knowledge about developmental and life-course criminology. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(3), 307-313.

Pratt, T. C. (2016). A self-control/life-course theory of criminal behavior. European Journal of Criminology, 13(1), 129-146.