Category: Crime

Introduction

There is a myriad of criminology theories whose cardinal goal is the attempted explanation of crime, perpetrators, and victims. Social deviance is not a new concept to man and criminology has its roots in the original civilizations in the world that first established laws to govern the societies that they inhabited. As such, truly it is no wonder that elements such as the social contract are a common denominator between law and criminology.

This paper shall comprehensively discuss some key elements of criminology, viz. theories of crime, victims of crime, recidivism or desistance, and the measurement of crime. Towards this end, the data presented is an amalgamation of numerous articles and other literature hubs consulted for research purposes and adequately cited within the text.

Explanation of the theories of crime

Crime is an interesting element in society. Dating back to Adam and Eve, the two broke a law that had been set for compliance and as a result, they suffered the promised consequences. This trend followed through with Cain who murdered his brother Abel, and then the Jews with their Torah all the way down to contemporary legal systems and institutions that form the pinnacle of order in today’s society.

The allusion to Christianity is a calculated move for crime has an element of morality in it and it is just as effective would have been an allusion to Islam or Atheism. Theories of crime are based on various possible perspectives on crime that have been investigated and empirical data drawn to support their accuracy or validity. They are theories as opposed to facts for they could yet be disproved.

However, in the meantime, they have been used to explain criminology for close to two centuries now and continue to do so. Additionally, some of them are actually theories used to explain other phenomena, but borrowed into criminology for the sole purpose of shedding further light on a general aspect of crime that is shared by another phenomenon. An illustration of this aspect would be the learning theory, which is a psychological theory that is originally, and still in most forums, used to explain behavioral development in general, but criminology enlists it as a learning theory for how crime is learnt by delinquents.

Theories that explain crime

Crime theories are numerous and diversified and they include psychological theories such as learning theories, intelligence theories, personality trait theories, psychopathic theories, cognitive and social development theories, positivist, classical, anomie – institutional anomie and feminism. Others include critical, social disorganization, differential association, control, general strain and deterrence among others. It is imperative to note that some of these theories are swallowed up in the initial five, and so for the purposes of this paper, only the fundamental aspects of these theories shall be discussed.

Classical theory

This theory posits that crime is a free willed choice, which occurs when the benefits far outweigh the costs of procuring them and people put their personal interests first. It denotes a lack of effective punishments and has close ties with the theories of deterrence and rational choice. The father of this school of thought is Beccaria. Deterrence and rational choice advance the classical theory by positing that crime is based on rationality, which means that criminals weigh the benefits versus the costs of a certain criminal act before proceeding to commit it.

In this case, the cost is punishment, and the more immediate and severe the punishment, the more deterrent it would be. Conversely, if the benefits outweigh the costs, so that for instance such a criminal through experience or observation has delayed or totally avoided punishment, it shall mean that there will be an escalation in the commission of such a crime.

Positivist theory

This theory mirrors legal positivism for it holds crime to be “determined”, which means that it is a positive action. For further explanation on what exactly causes crime, Lombroso looks to biological defaults in the subject. The validity of this theory is maintained by the later preference for psychological or sociological factors as the source of enlightenment as far as crime is concerned. This theory forms an umbrella for the psychopathic theory among others and other contributors to the same include Guerry and Quatelet.

Differential Associations / Social learning / sub cultural theories

These theories converge on the premise of learnt behavior. Consequently, they posit that if a person associates with a particular group of individuals that either openly embrace crime or are subjective about some form of crime being justified, then the individual shall become indoctrinated with this form of thinking and thus become a criminal. If such an individual is a delinquent, then interaction with antisocial contemporaries shall result in the commission of criminal activities.

Additionally, these theories posit that if such conduct is repeated, then it becomes reinforced and this move leads to an escalation of the crime rate in a given place. Subscribers of this theory include Sutherland and Cressey, Wolfgang and Ferrracuti, Akers, and Anderson. It is also worth mentioning an overlap exists among between theories and the cognitive and social learning theories that shall be discussed below. These differences and similarities shall be outlined and addressed sufficiently.

Anomie Institutional-Anomie theory

This theory captures the United States of America’s conundrum quite succinctly. In fact, it has its origin in the US as it is premised on the concept of the ‘American Dream’. It posits that if a society becomes obsessed with the concept of a dream, the economic institutions become dominant and norms are weakened as people strive to achieve and live the dream. During the ensuing anarchy, family ties, which are inherently crucial for the strengthening of a society’s morality, are loosened and even cut out and the result is anarchy without guiding norms meaning that the crime rate escalates as people set out to do whatever it takes to live the dream.

Strain / General Strain theory

For better understanding, strain in this case could range from emotional to economical. Nevertheless, regardless of one’s perspective, strain leads to stress, which then evokes different reactions from different people with different backgrounds or mental states. This theory, to some extent, overlaps with the control theory that shall be discussed later in this paper for the inherent differences in people are responsible for different reactions to similar occurrences.

Consequently, in the same instance, one person may react by getting angry, another by getting frustrated, and another by seeing an opportunity and feeling optimistic. The negative responses to strain could lead to an outcome of crime. Within this mix is also the issue of covariance and co-morbidity, so that at times when drugs and alcohol are introduced as negative stimuli to deal with the strain, chances of resorting to crime are high. Theorists in this school of thought include Cohen, Agnew, Cloward and Ohlin.

Critical theory

This theory blames capitalism and opines that inequality in the division of power and resources cause crime as the wealthy minorities seek to exploit the struggling majority and so at some point, some of the poor majority resort to crime as a revolutionary tool. It is noteworthy that many scholars in criminology treat this theory with misgivings for it does not say that in a capitalist system, crime is justified by the reigning inequality. Critical theorists of this theory include Bonger, Quinney, and Greenberg.

Psychological theories

Learning theory

Summarily, this theory underscores the study of the circumstance under which a response and a cause stimulus become connected (Miller & Dollard, 1941, p. 81). For effective learning to ensue, there should be modeling, instruction, and self-persuasion culminating in the adoption of a new behavior, which over time, due to repetition, becomes reinforced (Moore, 2011, p. 236). Additionally, even if such learning is through observation of peers or parents, it shall still be reinforced in the individual.

The collateral hypothesis of “vicarious reinforcement” posits that if a delinquent or criminal gains a lot of recognition and attention from being deviant, other peers shall observe this trend and strive to achieve the same status or credit by being criminal. Learning theories have the most evidence in the form of empirical data and so they are the most reliable theories in criminology.

Intelligence theories

It is important to begin by pointing out that these theories are inherently flawed with controversy as regards the actual relation between intelligence and crime. The shortage of empiric data to straighten out the multiple controversies is also noteworthy. However, the position is that there is definitely a connection between intelligence and crime. Initially, the assumption was that criminals have a low IQ.

However, this assumption was proved to be erroneous and presently, the position is that the crux of this theory turns on school of performance. In this case, students who perform poorly at school, for whatever reasons, have reduced chances of excelling in the highly competitive world out of school (Koenen et al., 2006). Consequently, they start by shutting out the school controls and becoming regular detainees at detention. This element in effect means that whatever control or values they should have learnt from school, they shall not learn. They end up receiving harsh treatment from teachers and peers and eventfully they miss legal employment opportunities or pro-social relationships. This aspect forces them to seek a replacement of the lost social control or support and they find it in deviance.

Personality Trait theories

This theory defines criminal or delinquent behavior as an external manifestation of an internal disease, or pathology. Under this premise, there is the psychodynamic – psychoanalytic theory and the personality trait theory. The theories posit that the human personality is made of “the id, the ego, and the superego” (Caudill, 1997, p.76). The clash between the id and the ego culminates in a destabilized state of mind, which in turn triggers the operation of defense mechanisms to cope. These changes are reinforced over time and mastered by the system to form a personality type, which is made up of distinguished characteristics. This knowledge is essential for the development of intervention strategies to prevent an individual from adopting criminal or delinquent traits.

Psychopathic Theories

These theories are used in the definition of more serious delinquent acts or crimes. They opine that such action is the physical manifestation of a mental illness, but this assertion is construed differently from the position taken in personality trait theories. The key difference is psychopathic theories is the focus on a state of being or a mental disorder as the cause of a criminal act as opposed to the personality trait theories that capitulate on individual traits in a particular person. The crux of such disorders is the Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) as diagnosed by the DSM –IV scales (Shoemaker, 2005; Siegel et al., 2006).

Intrinsic intrigues of these theories include the observation that APD is predominantly a male disorder and so the question remains; how would this theory explain crime by women. The effect here is similar to the categorization of personality traits for with psychopathic theories, there is a cluster of personality types and behavioral characteristics. However, the problem with this categorization is the labeling of people, which could easily have adverse effects (Pfohl, 1994).

Developmental Theories (Cognitive and Social Development)

These theories are a rather elaborate position, which alleges that there are different stages of mental development during which different types of thinking ensues and sometimes this development could breed delinquency (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996). An illustration of this assertion is the increased rebellious attitude of teenagers during adolescence regardless of race, sex, or education level. This scenario gives one a lot to consider with regard to the idea that crime at one’s teens makes such an individual more susceptible to committing a crime in his or her adulthood (Siegel et al., 2006). However, this theory is an exception as opposed to generalization. All these theories are inherently different, yet again, all of them can be used to supplement and compliment the others for a wholesome understanding of crime.

What is the role of the victim in the criminal justice process?

The victim of crime is the entire reason why the criminal justice process is carried out. The process exists as a manner of righting wrongs or atrocities committed by criminals and delinquents against innocent victims. Consequently, the victim of crime grants justification for the existence of the criminal justice process as the recipient of the retribution that shall be meted out on the criminal by the system.

Nevertheless, the victim of the crime has some preordained obligations too, which if executed, shall serve to lubricate the wheels of justice. The first responsibility is the reporting of criminal occurrences to the authorities so that investigations can begin and a suspect arrested (Kilpatrick, Beatty, & Howley, 1998, p. 2). Next, the victim has to participate in the judicial proceedings by offering all the cooperation required of him or her by the prosecutor and other players.

Finally, in a bid to help in improving the judicial system, the victim could offer his or her input on the delivery of judicial services, particularly with regard to such a victim’s satisfaction with the justice proffered as well as the services by the judicial officials throughout the trial. These services include the relaying of notifications on dates, places, and times among others. The opinion of the victim with regard to the satisfactory of the judicial proceedings is significant for if a victim is dissatisfied with the proceedings, such a victim is likely to share his or her negative sentiments with other victims and that would seriously jeopardize the credibility of the judicial system.

How are the victim’s rights protected?

A victim’s rights are protected through several steps, first of which is the promulgation of the necessary laws. In 1982, “the Presidential Task Force issued a Final Report on Victims of Crime that was rent with imbalances of unrivalled proportions between the rights of accused persons versus the right of crime victims” (Pfohl, 1994, p.86). In a bid to restore a state of equilibrium, the committee proposed that a constitutional amendment be introduced to cater for the right to be present and to herd at all stages of the judicial proceedings.

However, this quest failed and as a result, states went on a rampage of promulgating the relevant statutory as well as constitutional provisions to secure victims of crimes’ rights. At the federal level, “the Victims’ Rights and Protection Act came into force in 1990 to cater for the victims of federal crimes and so the trend is that there are both statutory and constitutional provisions that are meant to protect crime victims throughout the United States” (Pfohl, 1994, p.86).

Therefore, legislation is one of the ways of ensuring protection of victims’ rights. However, legislation alone cannot ensure the protection of victims’ rights. In addition to this element, the policymakers have to warn themselves about the mediating factors such as knowledge, resources, and the lack of efficient enforcing mechanisms to ensure those victims’ rights. If the victims are not aware that they have rights then they shall not follow up the same rights.

If the staff members at the judicial offices are not aware of victims’ rights, they shall not know to extend the same to the victims. The matter of resources is with regard to adequate funding to extend to victims their rights. Finally, with regard to enforcement mechanisms, there is a need to install self-monitoring systems to ensure that the system works without any inhibitions. The system should work in compliance with the procedural rules established to protect victims’ rights.

What is a chronic offender and what can be done to decrease their criminality

A chronic offender is one who persistently commits a crime and so the chances of conviction and imprisonment are always high. He or she is a habitual offender, but is distinguished from a serial offender who is specific in his or her line of crime. Chronic offenders have some inherent characteristics such as a lack of the willpower to desist, which is better understood by looking at the necessary characteristics in a criminal who is more likely to desist as compared to others who are not (Koenen et al., 2006).

Researchers have pinpointed four variables, viz. hope and self-efficacy, shame and remorse, internalizing stigma, and alternative identities. A brief explanation of these aspects is necessary; hope refers to the belief that one can be reformed. It is necessary for an ex-convict to believe that he or she can be reformed for the next part of the change to take place. The second step requires a feeling of shame or remorse for the wrongs so far committed.

However, it is necessary to ensure that the kind of shame experienced is healthy, which means that it should be reiterative shame as opposed to stigmatizing shame (Moore, 2011, p. 238). The difference between the two is that with reiterative shame, the offenders are apologetic and embarrassed for their actions, but they do not lose their self worth. However, with stigmatizing shame, the offender is ashamed of both the act and the actor and this aspect is destructive.

Internalizing stigma refers to the concept of believing that the rest of the society is against you and so this belief makes one to lose courage in subsisting with the rest of the community after re-entry (Sellin, 1931, p. 338). Finally, the alternative identity allows ex-convicts to create new titles for themselves such as ‘provider’ or ‘family man’. This move is helpful, as the society shall view this person as being more responsible.

In the quest to make this strategy work for the criminals’ benefit, it would be helpful to institutionalize these theories and make a working system. That move would for instance include counseling the inmates before they leave the penitentiary. It would also be beneficial to create a sort of controlled society for immediate posting of ex-convicts before they rejoin the rest of the integrated society.

What are the common ways of measuring crime in the USA?

One can employ disparate ways of measuring crime in the USA including self-reporting, uniform crime reports, and the national prison statistics. Of all these, self reporting is the most popular, and thus it is as well the most efficient. The idea is to report on the phenomenological relationships amongst variables with the least bias possible. Such bias is not easy to ignore especially when using the formal reported information for this information, in the form of police reports and court files, is far removed from the actual occurrence of the crime and so it is relayed in the biased perspective of a bystander (Thornberry & Krohn, 2000, p. 35).

Self-reporting is popular as it involves a one-on- one interaction with the criminal or the delinquent of the drug abuser giving a personal account of how, why, when, and where s/he committed the ‘unreported’ criminal act. Sellin (1931) posits, “The value of a crime rate, for index purposes, decreases as the distance from the crime itself in terms of procedure increases” (p. 337). Consequently, self reporting seems to be the best masurement scheme for crime.

Since its initiation half a century back, it has undergone tremenduous improvements such as an increase in the comprehensiveness of its breadth, seriousnness of the measurement scales, and it has become more reliable and valid. It has test and retest mechanisms to ensure reliability (Thornberry & Krohn, 2000, p. 35). However, the challenge of cooperative respondents remains. Finally, the introduction of the use of audio assisted computerized interviews appears to be promisisng especially for more sensitive kind of reporting.

Conclusion

This paper has looked into the state of criminology. It began with the definition of present theories and proceded to look into victims of crime their rights and protections, then touched on recidivism before concluding with measurement of crime. In this light, it its clear that the view that crime is indeed a mental element with co-morbidities existing between crime and mental disorders or crime and drug and subtance abuse. In case of such covariance, the likelihood to engge in criminal escapades becomes heightened.

Reference List

Caudill, D. (1997). Lacan and the Subject of Law: Toward a Psychoanalytic Critical Legal Theory. New York, NY: Humanity Books.

Catalano, R., & Hawkins, J. (1996). The Social Development Model: A theory of Antisocial Behavior. In J. Hawkins (ed.), Delinquency and Crime, Current Theories (pp. 67-91). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kilpatrick, D., Beatty, D., & Howley, S. (1998). The Rights of Crime Victims—Does Legal Protection Make a Difference? Research Brief: National Institute of Justice, 12(34), 1-12.

Koenen, K., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T., Rijsdijk, F., & Taylor, A. (2006). Genetic influences on the Overlap between Low IQ and Antisocial Behaviors in Young Children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115 (4), 787 -797.

Miller, N., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social Learning and Imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Moore, M. (2011). Psychological Theories of Crime and Delinquency. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21, 226–239.

Pfohl, S. (1994). Image of Devince and Social Control: A Sociological History. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Sellin, T. (1931). The basis of a crime index. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 22, 335–356.

Shoemaker, D. (2005). Theories of Delinquency: An Examination of Explnations of Delinquent Behaviors. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Siegel, L., Welsh, B., & Senna, J. (2006). Juvenile Delinquency: Theory Practice and Law. Belmont, CA: Thomson / Wadsworth.

Thornberry, T., & Krohn, M. (2000). Measurement and analysis of crime and justice: The Self-Report Method for Measuring Delinquency and Crime. Journal of Criminal Justice, 4, 34-85.

Introduction

The rising rate of crime is a very serious issue that cannot be overlooked by any country. The rising rate of crime goes to show that the values instilled in children by their parents have been long forgotten. Every day there are numerous instances of crime taking place across the globe, No country is free from crime, it does matter where a person is, he/she is ought to witness a criminal activity be it on a small scale or for that matter on a large scale basis. Small scale crimes include petty crimes like robbery etc on the other hand large scale crimes include murders etc. This paper will throw light upon the financial cost of crime to society and it will also focus upon the implications that the criminal faces after committing the crime.

“According to a United Nations report posted by MSNBC, the United States is the leading country in financial loss due to violent crimes; the cost estimated around 45 billion dollars. During a time of recession, this information sheds more light on the impact crime has on our society. Combined with the very real struggle law enforcement agencies face to retain employees and maintain budgets, the report signals a very serious factor degrading our communities.” (US Crime Affects Economy, 15 October 2008).

The US leads in terms of the financial loss incurred by a country because of criminal activities. There are so many gangs in the US that operate depending on the area which they are in; many a time gang wars take place to satisfy the egos of the members of various gangs.

When a gang war or for that matter a crime takes place, it directly affects the economy of the country, this can be understood by an example, if a gang member attempts to kill a person in the US, it will surely damage some property of either public or the private sector resulting in property damage, in addition to this the medical attention given towards the affected person will also be viewed as a financial loss to the economy because it was due to a senseless act, had it been because of a natural disaster then the case would have been different altogether but since it is because of a crime, it will also contribute towards the financial loss incurred by the economy of a country.

Affect of Crime on the Salaries of Professionals

From the above information, it is very clear that the US suffers the most from the criminal activities within the country. This also affects the salaries of professionals involved in dealing with criminals. When the crime rate is high in a country, the government will be forced to train and recruit more policemen to deal with the situation and in this case, again the country would suffer financial losses because of training and recruiting more policemen than required.

The whole process of training and recruitment will cost millions of $ and hence the economy of the country will suffer. On the other hand, if the crime rate is low in a country, the government need not spend so much on the salaries of policemen and the same money can be utilized to make sure that the economy of the country develops, in other words, it can be spent on the welfare of the people. The same is the case with the salaries drawn by judges and other top officials who deal with criminals, the higher the rate of crime in a country, the more financial losses the country will face.

Effects of Crime on the person Harmed

A criminal activity changes the life of a person who has been affected by it forever. He/she gets into serious trouble, for instance, if the crime committed is an attempt to murder, it may require immediate medical attention which would surely cost a hefty amount of money to the harmed person. So the first aspect is the financial aspect, the harmed person loses a lot of money for no mistake of his/her. The medical attention alone will cost so much that it becomes too much to afford for some people and in addition to it the cost of the medicines required for recovery will also cost the harmed person very dearly.

The next important point is the mental balance of the harmed person, after being a victim of a crime as an attempt to murder; the mental balance of the harmed person will change forever. He/she will never be the same person again. Drastic changes in thinking and actions will take place, for instance, the harmed person will never be able to eat as peacefully as he/she used to before the crime. Another thing is that the person will never be able to get peaceful sleep at night, something or the other will surely disturb the sleep of the harmed person. Because of improper eating habits and lack of sleep the person may fall ill, so the health of the harmed person gets seriously affected after the crime.

The recreational activities of the person will stop for a long time. This can be understood with the help of an example, before the crime the harmed person used to go to the theatre to catch up with the new movies, but all changes after the crime, the harmed person will never go to the theatre again fearing the consequences of the same. So another thing which can be made out is that it restricts the free movement of the harmed person.

Another big change that usually takes place after a crime is that the harmed person will have to take time off his schedule to meet doctors, counselors, lawyers, etc. So this also affects the mindset of that particular individual. The family members of the harmed person also get adversely affected by the same, the mother or the father of the harmed person usually suffer from insomnia which is lack of sleep at night, the same will also have an inevitable effect on their health and they may fall seriously ill. So it can be made out that the life of the harmed person changes once and for all after the crime and in addition to this, it also adversely affects the family members of the harmed person.

Conclusion

After reading the financial cost of crime to society and the mental trauma that crime gives to the harmed person and his/her family, it is highly recommended to stay miles apart from committing a criminal activity. The life of the criminal and the life of the harmed person change forever and the changes are for the worse. The criminal suffers the consequences and bears the brunt of the law. Severe punishments are handed out to those who indulge in serious offenses like murders, rapes, etc.

As far as the life of the harmed person is concerned, the crime changes the whole mindset of the harmed person and restricts him/her from so many things which would not have been restricted had the crime not taken place. So it is highly unadvisable to involve oneself in any criminal activity, staying away from criminal activity will ensure prosperity and happiness. Now it is for the people to decide what they want, regret or prosperity.

References

US Crime Affects Economy. In Crime. Suite 101. Web.

First Perspective

Sentence 1 envisages retributive punishment in the form of chemical castration, possibly through the use of depo provera injections to repress testosterone production by male testis, thus smothering the offender’s primate sexual urges. (Boseley).

It also involves intensive counseling sessions, electronic monitoring by use of bracelets and ten years probation. He also has to bear more than half of the cost of community correction, pay compensation to the victims and provide child support to the mother of his child. He may be released from chemical castration after four years, based on favorable reports from his probation authorities.

Reaction of Utilitarian

This advocate would look in terms of how the sentence awarded could provide future benefits to the psyche of the offender, in particular, and society in general. In other words, whether the punishment handed down would reform the lawbreaker and could help him lead a socially useful life.

Reaction of Desert/retributive Advocate

A deserts sentence would be in terms of weighting the crimes committed by the offender and making sure that he gets the punishment he deserves. To put it mildly, in this case, the offender does not seem to have been punished, but rewarded. There is nothing in this sentence to even suggest that three victims whom he had brutally sexually violated have received justice. The case of retributive advocate is even stronger. A retributive advocate looks at the past, the crimes, its settings and its commission and his main concern would be in terms of the fact that infliction of punishment need to be governed by what the wrongdoer deserves, rather than the accruing social benefits or good that may arise out of his conviction. (Pojman P 113).

Both the deserts and retributive lawyer could demand a more deterrent sentence.

The writer’s thoughts about this sentence

This is a classic case of sexual recidivism where a man has sexually assaulted two women with impunity, but has been arrested after his third sexual crime.

He needs to be punished for each of his felonies, including housebreaking and willful sexual molestation and assaults under separate Sections of the law.. The concept of fundamental justice is premised on the foundation that societal norms need to be honoured. Thus, any undue benefits gained through violation of societal norms need to be redressed, and even punished, in order to maintain the tenets of equity, law and good conscience.

In this case, it is believed that concurrent jail sentences would be in order.

Second Perspective

Possible Sentence 2 envisages three concurrent 10 year sentencing in State Prison with parole after 8 years.

Reaction of Utilitarian

He would look in terms of how the 10 year sentence would reform the convict and help him lead a normal life after release. The absence of rehabilitation in form of probation is conspicuous in this sentence.

Reaction of Desert/retributive Advocate

The deserts theory believes that punishments need to commensurate with the level and intensity of the committed crime. Therefore, in real terms, the offender needs to be punished for all three crimes. Again a retributive advocate would consider the background, nature and commission of each felony and would consider the rationale of the sentences and its justification in relation to the crimes committed.

The writer’s thoughts about this sentence

The moral rubric which governs society is based on liberty, utility and justice. (Pojman P 14).

It expounds that each person should given his/her due through a life of harmony and regard for fellow humans. Crimes occur when this delicate balance is upset and it becomes necessary in such cases to redefine the legal process through punishment and retributive action. This is not based on vendetta or revenge, but the need to provide social order to human existence and future protection of living beings.

In this case, although the offender has been a third time offender and his actions speak of cold-blooded, pre-mediated and calculated attacks on his victims after housebreaking. Thus, it cannot be argued that his actions occurred during fits of passion or sexual depravation. It was unfortunate for him to have been arrested the third time round, since had this not occurred, his sexual escapades could have continued.

It is necessary that a stronger sentence be served in propensity with his crimes.

Third Perspective

Possible Sentence 3 envisages three consecutive life sentences in State Prison, eligible for parole after ten years each( that is 30 years), before being eligible for parole.

Reaction of Utilitarian

The utilitarian would consider that life sentence would be a strong sentence since 30 years in jail would almost draw out the offender’s lifetime. Even with parole at the end of 30 years, he would not be able to enter the social mainstream even if he were reformed after that period. The utilitarian may have felt that this sentence would have been more appropriate for murder convicts and not sexual offenders.

Reaction of Desert/retributive Advocate

Although the offender is accused of sexual assaults on three occasions, the modus operandi of the three crimes have been similar. Moreover, no physical harm has been perpetrated on the three victims. Under desert/retributive justice it is important that the correct amount of punishment in commensuration with the crimes be imposed. Therefore the life sentences could be commuted to 30 years imprisonment in jail, with parole after this period is served.

The writer’s thoughts about this sentence

This offender does not deserve life sentencing since his crimes have been limited to sexual offences only. If a life term was to be pronounced it would be severe on him, considering the extent of his misdemeanours. Again, there would be no legal difference between him and hardened killers who serve life sentences for capital offences, like murders, rapes, etc.

Considering the nature of his offences it would be in the fitness of things to pronounce:

1. Chemical castration to avoid the possibilities of future sexual offences in jail
2. Life sentence commuted to 30 years imprisonment with parole after this period.

This sentence is not punitive since it seeks only to reform the offender and not offer opportunities under which he would be at liberty to indulge in such sexual offences in future. It is also designed to provide succor to the victims whose lives may have been diminished due to his actions.

Justice seeks to restore the fact that the independence and free living of innocent people can only be secured by long seclusion of proven criminals.

Compare Commutative and Retributive Justice in this case

In this case, the aspect of commutative justice could be seen in terms of the fact that a life sentencing would be too harsh for the offender, since it would not commensurate with his misdeeds and it would rank with more grievous crimes. Similarly, retributive justice seeks to provide only that degree of punishment that the offender deserves and not higher than it. Commutative justice seeks to provide answers to how” individuals should be treated in a given class of actions and transactions.” (Rights and Justice in International Relations). In your opinion, “What is Justice,” in this case? Do you lean toward Utilitarian, Desert, Retrubutive, Commutative or another theory in your personal view of justice?

It is necessary that justice in this case would be more in terms of protecting society rather than pronouncing punishment to the offender. While sexual offences are no doubt felonious, the circumstances under which they were committed in this case is suggestive of a pathological disorder which needs complete psychiatrically evaluation.

If the offender is found to be of normal mental and psychological heath, it is necessary that he serves his punishment. In the event there are indications to prove mental instability, it is necessary that his mental health needs to be restored before further criminal proceeding are instituted. In such a case, it would be necessary to consider even utilarian, commutative justice or distributive justice as possible options.

While justice claims that criminals need to be punished according to the gravity of their crimes, in the event of supervening factors, these factors also need to be considered by Courts before passing a final verdict.

Further, according to the U.S. Code, the purposes of sentencing, interalia, are to reproduce the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense besides affording active preclusion of criminal behavior in future. (Allbenbaugh). It is necessary that these salient aspects are upheld in this case trial also.

Works Cited

Boseley, Sarah. What’s chemical castration? guardian. 2007. Web.

Pojman, Louis P. Theories of punishment. Course Smart Reader. 2008. Web.

Pojman, Louis P. Course Smart Reader. 2008. Web.

Rights and Justice in International Relations. Open Learn: Learning Space. 2008. Web.

Allbenbaugh, Mark H. What Sentence for Osama Bin Laden and Other Terrorists? A Crucial but Neglected Question. Findlaw. 2001. Web.

Introduction

An inchoate crime is defined as the incomplete, incipient, anticipatory or preliminary act, which implies that a person was inclined to commit a crime but never got to the “complete” completion of committing the crime (Chapter 939, 2009).

Inchoate crimes were traditionally considered misdemeanors (Incomplete [inchoate] crimes, 2007). However, as drug crime, white-collar crimes and organized crimes became more prevalent over the years and the need to empower the justice system to handle the crime, the inchoate crimes assumed a new recognition as felonies (Chapter 939, 2009).

The Doctrine of Merger stipulates the rules that are to be followed by the law enforcement officer and prosecutors when handling inchoate crimes. For starters, a person can only be charged with either the inchoate crime or Choate crime, but not both. Secondly, inchoate crimes ideally attract lesser penalties than Choate crimes.

Third, the inchoate crimes should have a clear intent and the mens rea (intent) element of the same should be clearly spelled out (Inchoate Crimes. n.d.). The courts require that intent be distinguished from criminal negligence and recklessness. The final rule is that the inchoate crime must have a lacking substantial step in order to complete the crime (chapter 939, 2009).

Elements under common law

Initially, the common Law recognized three categories of inchoate crimes: 1) attempted crimes; 2) conspiracy crimes; and 3) solicitation crimes. Over the years however, the Common Law has accepted the unlawful possession of stolen good, or things that may pose a threat to public safety (e.g. gun arsenal & bomb materials) as an inchoate crime. Offences based on the notion of preparation to commit a crime are also recognized as inchoate crimes.

The attempt element is about the person who intended to commit a crime failing to do so for any reason, which could include human intervention or the failure on his or her part. The Inchoate law on attempt is intended to nip violence. Since there is no crime referred as “attempt”, common law as well as statutes allow the word ‘attempt’ to be put before the targeted crime (Incomplete [inchoate] crimes, 2007).

Some of the doctrine applicable to the attempt element include the physical-proximity doctrine, where time and space are the main considerations, Probable-distance approach, where the court may have to decide whether the attempt would indeed have led to a crime were it not for the intervention of a third party; the equivocality approach, which examines whether the attempt could have had any other result rather than the crime; and the substantial-steps test in the penal code model, which is recommended to examine corroborating evidence in order to verify or concur a criminal intent (Incomplete [inchoate] crimes, 2007).

The courts also check the reasons offered given on why the attempt did not lead to a crime. The considerations include legal impossibilities, where a case is out rightly dismissed; factual impossibilities, where the facts do not add up, and renunciation, where the defendant proves to the court that he/she abandoned his intent to commit crime for moral reasons, and may be the fear of being apprehended for the same (Husak, 2002).

Elements under current Wisconsin statute

In Sub Chapter II of the Wisconsin Statutes, the state classified inchoate crimes under three categories: Solicitation, Conspiracy and Attempt.

In regard to solicitation, the statutes states that any person who advices someone else to undertake a criminal activity, with the full intention of committing a felony is guilty of an inchoate crime. Depending on the intensity of the crime committed by the solicited party, the person charged with an inchoate crime can be guilty of class H, Class F or class I felonies.

Class F attracts a maximum fine of $50,000 or a 15 years maximum imprisonment or both, While Class H felonies attract a maximum fine of $10,000 or 6 years maximum imprisonment or both. Class I on the other hand, attracts a $10,000 maximum fine or 3 ½ years maximum imprisonment or both (Inchoate crimes, n.d.).

Under the conspiracy element in the Wisconsin Statutes, conspiracy is defined as the agreement or combination of forces by two individuals with the intent of committing a crime. Even though one of the parties does not act to effect the object of the crime, the absent party may still be fined, imprisoned or both depending on the outcomes of the completed crimes.

The only exception is when the penalty is life imprisonment, in which case the absent conspiring party is convicted of a class B felony (a maximum of 60 years imprisonment). Conspiracy can be among people who intend to commit a crime, or unilateral conspiracy, where only the defendant had the intention to commit a crime (Inchoate crimes, n.d.).

The attempt element in Wisconsin Statutes is defines as the trial to commit a felon or crime. The statutes require proof that the actor had all intent to commit the crime and attain a specific result. It must also be proven that the actor would have committed the offense were it not for the intervention of another person. The maximum penalty for such inchoate crimes includes half the applicable penalty for the complete crime or felon (Inchoate crimes, n.d.).

Comparison of elements

Under common law, conspiracy has three elements namely: 1) more than one person; 2) an agreement to undertake a crime; and 3) An open or overt plan intended to carry out the crime. Notably, conspiracy under the common law is only identifiable by the courts when at least two parties are involved (Inchoate offences, 2009).

This is unlike the Wisconsin statutes which recognize that there could be unilateral conspiracy. The provisions under common law mean that a person cannot be charged with conspiracy unless a second person agrees to be part of the crime. In this case, a proof of agreement between the two must be verified. In Wisconsin however, the poof of agreement is not a necessary item in prosecutions.

Solicitation and attempt elements do not differ under the Common law and Wisconsin statutes. Criminal attempt in both common and Wisconsin Statutes must contain the elements of specific intent, actions that proof that a person had actually initiated the first steps to committing a crime and the failure of the person to commit the crime.

In a conspiracy case, any of the defendants can plead their defense by proving that they undertook all necessary actions in order to stop actions that could lead to the crime that was initially intended during the conspiracy. The Defendant can also prove that he or she tried stopping an ongoing crime, which was as a result of the earlier decision to conspire with another party.

The defendant can also prove that he or she tried to convince, or halt the action of the co-conspirators by reporting the crime to the authorities (Chapter 939, 2009).

Reasons for changes in elements

The change in the conspiracy element in Wisconsin statutes was based on the question of sufficient interest that makes people in agreement co-conspirators in an action for purposes of getting “a stake” in the criminal activity. Under § 939.31 of the Wisconsin statutes, the conduct of an individual or the agreement between people serve the same purpose when the crime is committed.

Under the Statutes, a person cannot be convicted as a conspiring party and a party to “any” crime. Compared to 18 USC §371, the Wisconsin conspiracy Statute seems to address the “intent of a committed crime, while the Common law conspiracy provision seems to address the conspiring parties “to committing offences”.

While distinguishing the Wisconsin statutes from the federal statutes, the Court of appeals draw the distinction on the fact that the common law statute does not consider the underlying crime objective. Instead, the common law gives a static penalty to people who conspire to commit “any” offence. § 939.31 of the Wisconsin statutes on the other hand tie the underlying crime with the conspiracy and therefore issues a penalty based on the same. (Clerk of the United States court of Appeals for the Seventh circuit. 2004)

Suggestions for new changes

Wisconsin could consider substituting the word “criminal” in the conspiracy element with the word “unlawful”. This argument is founded on the fact that “unlawful” has a wider meaning than “criminal”. This will then allow the law enforcers to purse acts done after the conspiratorial agreement between two or more parties, which would in turn allow the authorities to uncover the original conspiring agreement.

Conclusion

The burden of proof in inchoate crimes largely lies with the prosecutor who must prove to the court that indeed there was an inchoate crime that was committed. This is not always easy, especially because the prosecutor is required to prove that the defendant intended to commit a crime, but the crime was in reality not committed.

References

Chapter 939. (2009). Crimes- General provisions. Web.

Husak, D. (2002). The Criminal law as lat resort. Web.

Inchoate Crimes. Preliminary Draft No. 2. Web.

Incomplete [inchoate] crimes. (2007). “Be not ashamed of mistakes, and thus make them crimes”. Web.

Inchoate Offences (2009). Conspiracy, § 939.31 – Impossibility of Fulfilling Objective. Web.

Clerk of the United States court of Appeals for the Seventh circuit. (2004). United States of America v. Miscellaneous Firearms, Explosives, Destructive Devices and Ammunition. Web.

Crime Prevention and the Classical School of Criminology

The notion of the classical school of criminology refers to the period of Enlightenment (18th century). This notion is based on the utilitarian and social-contract philosophical outlooks. The developers of the classical school of criminology believed that humans are calculating animals and there is an indirect dependency between the criminal justice system and the premises of illicit behavior (Marzbali, Abdullah, Razak, & Tilaki, 2012). Nonetheless, it was considered a deterrent only if the punishment was proportional and in line with the severity of the crime. The key focus of this theory is the rationality of the made decision. The outlooks on the severity of the crime and appropriate punishment rely on the subjective views of the decision-makers. This school of criminology also implied that the policies on punishments and rewards should be reviewed constantly. The core idea of the classical school of criminology is that crime prevention is better than punishment activities that take place after the illicit event (Siegel, 2015). The authors of the classical notion of criminology broke explained the crime prevention procedure as a process that depends on several ideas inherent in the philosophy of the classical school of criminology. They pointed out the probability of the crime, the swiftness of the crime and punishment, and how much damage is done to the victim.

The Major Components of the Classical School of Crime Causation

The major components of the classical school of crime causation are the basic principles of criminology. The first principle states that any given individual is in full right to acting by their will and rationality. The second principle claims that the verdict concerning the rationality of the committed crime should be contingent on the evaluation of the outcomes of the illicit activity and the benefits of the crime (if any). The third principle dwells on the fact that the severity of the punishment should be chosen in a way that would deter other wrongdoers and ultimately reduce the occurrence of criminal activity. The fourth principle elaborates on the content of the third principle and expands it by stating that the punishment should be instantaneous to prevent crimes but adequate to comply with the essentials of criminal justice. These four components support the idea that the crimes are committed based on one’s free will and personal choice. Nonetheless, this criminological approach may lead to subjective outcomes that blame the individual and not society en bloc. Even though the majority of people can distinguish between right and wrong, there is almost no evidence supporting the idea that individuals commit crimes due to their rational thinking or free will. Quite contrarily, the desire to get involved in illegal activity can be generated by a hopeless situation or irrational thinking (for instance, “I will not get caught”).

The Specific and General Deterrence

General deterrence is a term that describes the overall influence of lawful punishments on the community. Specific deterrence is a term relating to the influence of the legal punishments on those particular individuals who were detained (Kleck & Barnes, 2013). Nonetheless, there is a more significant difference between the two instances of deterrence. The notion of general deterrence is a summary of the perceptions concerning the enforcement of laws and the risk of punishment (after the event of violating the law). The notion of species is the consequence of real-life experience including detention, court trials, and consequential penalties or punishment. The law enforcement agencies commonly rely on the notion of general deterrence while maintaining a high level of the subjective risk of detention among criminals. The subjective risk connected to the general and specific types of deterrence is dependent on several factors (Crawford & Evans, 2012). These factors include the presence of publicity, the unpredictability of the situation, some various extra (less evident) activities, and the focus on the locations that are exploited by the wrongdoers the most. The application of these factors in practice is challenged by the regional differences and social norms, but the overall effect of both general and specific deterrence is evident.

Discussion of Risk and Rewards about Conventional Crimes and the Rational Choice Theory

Rational choice theory is a far-reaching version of the deterrence theory. Its essentials include not only different types of risks (official and unofficial punishment) but other factors as well. The general assumptions concerning the rationality and self-centeredness of human beings are met in both of the theories. The rational choice theory adepts believe that criminal conduct is triggered by the rewards which cannot be achieved using noncriminal behavior (Wright, Caspi, Moffitt, & Paternoster, 2004). The risk and rationality of the decision are not evaluated by the wrongdoer due to their subjective view of the situation. The rational choice theory is directly linked to the process of reducing crime rates. The core four actions that could be taken to reduce illicit activity are the increase in crime costs, the promotion of noncriminal behavior, the decrease in profitability of the crime, and reduction of the costs of law-abiding conduct. It may happen that the risks and rewards will overlap each other (for example, if we increase the costs of the crime we have to be ready for a decrease in unlawful activity). The basic elements of the rational choice theory can be utilized to evaluate the cause of the crime and prevent similar delinquencies in the future.

References

Crawford, A., & Evans, K. (2012). Crime prevention and community safety. Oxford Journal of Criminology, 3(44), 769-805.

Kleck, G., & Barnes, J. C. (2013). Deterrence and macro-level perceptions of punishment risks. Crime & Delinquency, 59(7), 1006-1035.

Marzbali, M., Abdullah, A., Razak, N., & Tilaki, M. (2012). The influence of crime prevention through environmental design on victimisation and fear of crime. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(2), 79-88.

Siegel, L. J. (2015). Criminology: The core (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Wright, B., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T., & Paternoster, R. (2004). Does the perceived risk of punishment deter criminally prone individuals? Rational choice, self-control, and crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41(2), 180-213.

Introduction

Any study on violent crime is of paramount importance to humanity. This is because violent crimes have continued to cause fear, trauma, severe suffering and brutal deaths in many societies of the world and thus demeaning the sanctity of life and also making the world to be a jungle where it is only the strongest who survives. For the purpose of my study the violent crime of interest will be rape and sexual assault.

This is the most common violent which has mostly continued to destroy the lives of women and girls in general because they perceived and made to believe so by the society that they are weak and any man can take advantage over their bodies. Even though there have been a few cases of boy child being molested and even a few men becoming victims of rape and sexual assault it has not caused great alarm since these cases are rare and quite insignificant (“Sexual Assault”, 2006, p. 1).

The subject of rape and sexual assault against women and girl child is of great interest to all mankind who has respect to human life.

Most of rape are said to been committed by very close members of the family and friends and only a few cases are as a result abuse by total strangers and this explains why most of rape cases and sexual assault end up unreported to the relevant authorities for action since the victims fells a lot of shame to report these instances and also at the same time they think that nobody will believe them and in some cases the victim may also want to protect the offenders most especially in the cases where the close family members and friends are involved.

In this case we are going to look at a certain social problem which is rape and sexual assault its extent and impact it has caused to mankind. We are also going to look at the causes and possible solutions to rape and sexual assault and see also if we can apply the sociological concepts to address these problems. Finally we will see how different theories such as functionalist, conflicts and symbolic interactions can be used to describe these issues of rape and sexual assault.

Impacts

The impact of rape and sexual assault are very severe to an extent of even causing disorientation in ones sexual patterns and even somebody undergoing permanent effects of trauma which can be experienced for their entire live. The impacts can be categorized in to various stages. Firstly, there are those impacts felt immediately before the rape or the sexual assault is carried on the victim and these includes great feelings of fear and anger towards the person perpetrator of crime.

This can also lead to adoption to a controlled way of response. Secondly, there are those impacts felt immediately after the occurrence the act of rape or sexual assault and these includes mostly the physical harm on the victim which is mainly associated with pains in the stomach, throat, legs and also the arms. Also the victim can have uncomfortable sleep patterns which can be associated with crying during the sleep and this may result to decreased levels of appetite which can be very harmful to the health of the victim.

Other impacts can be short term and they can include great feeling of shame and blaming themselves on what happened and thus instilling feeling of guilt. The victim can also have great desire to seek for revage against the offenders because they feel highly degraded by such acts of rape and sexual assault and this can make the victims to have strong instant changes in their moods (“Violent Crimes”, 2006, p. 1).

Also the victim can as well undergo some long term effects such as having great desire to move away in the transfer to other schools where the victim thinks she will be in a position to escape the reality of what happened to her. The long term effects can also include the development of phobias and fears. The victims will also experience sleeplessness associated with nightmares and frequent dreams. The worst of all is that the victims may take very long to regain their normal sexual orientations.

Causes

One of the common causes can be the cultural aspects which are at the fore front in instigating the rape and sexual assault. This is because the culture in our societies has made us think that the women do not mean what they say on matters of sex and thus their no can be interpreted to mean yes to sex since they are reluctant to say yes in order to avoid being perceived as loose on matters of sex.

This makes some men to think that by forcing women to sex will spare them from losing their reputation for not being seen as loose ladies and at the same time giving a chance to enjoy sex. Also some men can force themselves on women for fear of being seen as if they are gay and also to spare their ladies which they want to start dating the feeling of thinking that they are not attractive.

There are a lot of myths regarding the rape which has made people to put little concern in dealing with cases of rape and the sexual assault. Some of this includes the misconception that rape is a crime of passion which is not the case since the main motive of rape is the desire to dominate over a lady and control her.

The second misconception is that it is not possible to rape someone who is unwilling thus those who are raped are usually too willing. This is not since women are threatened with violence and most of the victims have suffered injuries while trying to resist with some meeting their deaths in the process of resisting rape.

Solutions

The best solutions to these social problems are to ensure that all people and especially women and girl child take maximum preventive cares where possible.

One of the preventive measures can include the fact that the victims should follow their instincts especially when approached by a suspicious person they should make appropriate action to avoid the instances of rape or sexual assaults. Also the women in general should avoid going to dangerous places alone at night and if it is not avoidable they should be accompanied by somebody.

It is also recommended for women to undergo some training to acquire some skills for self defense. Also the culture should socialize its people in a way that women’s sexual rights are protected and respected and women’s to be truthful to their feelings and not saying no when they do not mean it to avoid being misunderstood by men and society at large (“Forcible Rape”, 2006, p. 1).

The men should have a clear understanding that if they force women to have sexual affairs with them this is rape regardless of whether they are forcing their wives or their friends and they should refrain from such actions of crime.

Concepts

Here the most significant concept of sociology is what sociologists can term as deviant. In this case the moral values of and expectations of a give society are compromised and the society for one reason or the other can reward these deviations in a positive or negative manner.

For example a person who commits an act of rape or sexual assault sometimes can be punished by the society or the society can decide to keep quiet and thus in such circumstances the perpetrator of these crimes can tend to believe that the society has come to accept and tolerate such acts.

This can create a society where by those who practice crimes on others are seen as heroes and thus a lot of youth may adopt such behaviors and because of this reason when a particular crime happen the perpetrators should be severely punished and the whole society to curse such acts whether if they are done by their family members or not.

Theories

Our first theory is the symbolic interactionism which emphasizes that people acquire behavior as a result of socializing with others by interacting through symbols and gestures and thus learning to attach meaning to various symbols. For example through interaction various societies have come to generalize that women may say no on matters of sex when they do not mean no and thus facilitating cases of rape.

Secondly, the other theory is the functionalist in which society is seen as a structure with various norms and also some vices as well which constitute the deviation from moral standards and thus the occurrence of various crimes such as rape (Hawkins, 2003, p. 31). Thirdly, the other theory is the conflict theory which stipulates the existence of inequality all aspects of life and thus explaining the existence of bad people and good people as well.

Conclusion

It is very clear that the responsibility of eliminating violent crime lies on the hands of each and every person as an individual and as a society at large. This is because for crimes such as rape and sexual assault to stop all men must learn to respect and appreciate women and girl child in particular. In this case we have addressed rape and sexual assault and its impact together with possible causes and solutions and finally we have seen various theories which explain such social problems.

Reference List

Crime in the United States. (2006). Forcible Rape. Web.

Crime in the United States. (2006). Violent Crime. Web.

Hawkins, F. (2003). Violent Crimes: assessing race and ethnic differences. California. Barnes & Noble.

Sexual Assault. (2006). What is sexual assault? Web.

Introduction

The President and Congress, through the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP), has established and amended the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), or the act that addresses the issues of juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice. To be able to address the said issues more specifically, OJJDP was further divided into seven (7) components, which are the Research and Program Development Division, Training and Technical Assistance Division, Special Emphasis Division, State Relations and Assistance Division, Information Dissemination Unit, Concentration of Federal Efforts Program and Missing Exploited Children’s Program (Griffin et al., 1998).

According to the amended act, there are some instances when a juvenile is sent for adult criminal prosecution. Their cases are transferred from juvenile courts to adult courts through different state transfer mechanisms, which are the Waiver, Direct File and Statutory Exclusion. Waiver provisions allow the decision to transfer the juvenile case to be made by the State’s juvenile courts. There are three (3) types of Waivers. The Discretionary Waiver, which depends upon the Juvenile Court Judge’s discretion of waiving the juvenile case (standards for this waiver are for the best interests of the child and the public), the Mandatory Waiver, which provides certain age, offence, or other criteria to be met by the case, and the Presumptive Waiver, which designates certain groups of cases that makes them rebuttably presumed as appropriate. Another transfer mechanism, the Direct File, allow the decision to transfer the juvenile case to be made by the prosecutor. Last but not least, the Statutory Exclusion allows the decision to transfer the juvenile case to be set forth by the State’s jurisdictions (Griffin et al., 1998).

Juveniles (people below 17 years old) being tried as an adult is a long debate that would touch the issues of child care, the values and morals of treating a child who has done a wrongful act, and all the ethics related to it. When we say “to try a juvenile like an adult”, we mean having them be put on trial like an ordinary adult would be, with the possibilities of facing the same sentences, fines and other sanctions an ordinary adult being tried would have (Thompson, 2006). The nature of OJJDP, when it comes to ages and crimes, differ from one state to another (Griffin et al., 1998).

Discussion

Different perspectives on justice

The first perspective or viewpoint that I would like to present regarding trying juveniles as adults are from the juvenile suspect’s end. In the juvenile’s end, there is a big possibility that in their time of being tried like an adult, they would have “…the stigmatization and other negative effects of labelling juveniles as convicted felons, the sense of resentment and injustice…about being tried and punished as adults, the learning of criminal mores and behaviour while incarcerated with adult offenders, (and be the victims of) decreased focus on rehabilitation and family support in the adult system” (Redding, 2008, p. 7). As addressed on the OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, there are OJJDP-funded studies that led them to realize that there is a dramatic increase in the percentage of juveniles recommitting the offence/crime who have been transferred from the juvenile court to the adult court, as manifested by the data of 40% against 35% on overall recommitted offences/crimes, 24% against 16% on violent offences, 11% against 9% on drug offences, and 14% against 10% on property offences (Redding, 2008). Based on these data, it is evident that juveniles don’t agree to this policy, and as a rebellion and protest, they tend to recommit the crime. When they start to feel and absorb the idea that they are being tried the way the public and the court treat ordinary criminals, they would feel discriminated against and overwhelmed by the fact that their youth is now being exploited. What’s worse is the fact that by this time, they know very well that their future already tampers, and the possibility of renewing life is hampered.

The next perspective that I would like to present is from the victim’s (juvenile or adult) end. According to The Denver’s City Attorney’s Office, generally, victims of juvenile offences/crimes usually feel that the juvenile offenders underserve the sanctions of their actions (2008). The victims are often overlooked by the people who look at the juvenile justice system by merely subjecting the juvenile’s sake. Their offences are only secondary and worse; the sanctions are only at the least of their concerns. In short, victims agree with the policy of trying juveniles like adults because it is no longer the issue of who is being tried; the concern is who has suffered the offence/crime. Since in juvenile justice, the cases are sealed easily, sentences are less severe, and incarcerations are shorter compared to the trial in adult courts (Thompson, 2006), their cry for justice is usually not heard or is only met halfway. It is a disadvantage, though, that the juvenile case is heard in the adult courts when the public attending the case starts to have sympathy for the minor because of his immature capability to be tried like an ordinary criminal (Thompson, 2006). Yet, it is still improper to subject the sake of the offender/criminal at the time when he/she has done something grave that only adult people can do.

The third perspective that’s important to present is the defence attorney’s viewpoint. In this case, the trial of juveniles as adults is an advantage to defence attorneys. Obviously, adult crimes are more common than juvenile offences, making more practising defence attorneys in adult cases rather than juvenile cases. When a juvenile case is transferred to the adult courts, the defence attorney will then find it easier to defend the case since he is more familiar with the rules and regulations in that division. It is also even more likely that he’ll be able to defend further and cross-examine the victim because there is a jury in the adult court, while there is none in the juvenile court (Virginia’s Judicial System, 2003). He’ll be able to present everything that his client has to show because he has more time to convince the people in the court and the public that his client is innocent.

Given the perspective of the defending attorney, now we’ll try to examine the viewpoint of the prosecuting attorney. Still the same as with the victim’s viewpoint, the transfer of juvenile cases to adult courts is an advantage to the prosecuting attorney. Since they are on the side of the victim, the possibility that they will receive a just evaluation of the cases, amidst the fact that the offender is a juvenile, is regarded with a lot of possibilities. The prosecuting attorney’s goal is to win the case and send the offender to jail. And given the fact that the juvenile is tried on an adult court that has a jury, as contrasted to a juvenile court where the judge is the only one who has the power to decide over the case (Virginia’s Judicial System, 2003), there is a great assumption that the evidence will be presented. Equally, the public will be able to give their judgment accordingly, and his client will be heard sufficiently. The prosecuting team also has the great chance that the treatment inside the courtroom is fair (given that the offender is a juvenile) if the public won’t look at the juvenile as an incompetent offender whose case is being heard in an inappropriate court. Also, since the trial in an adult court is far more lengthy than that of the trial in a juvenile court, the prosecuting attorney, therefore, has all the time to all necessary evidence needed to win the case.

The fifth perspective that is as important as the previous viewpoints are the judge’s perspective. The judge’s responsibilities in a juvenile court are basically the same as that of the adult court, which is to ensure truth inside the court. Yet, in an adult court, the judge is there to hear the jury’s decision over the case. I’d say that trying a juvenile in an adult court is a disadvantage for the judge. Primarily, the reason for this is that the judge now has an extra responsibility of ensuring that the child is treated accordingly and usually treated far from the way the adult court treats an ordinary criminal. The judge has to take into consideration that the case was transferred from juvenile courts because of the fact that the case is too serious about being heard in the juvenile courts, yet the defendant is also too immature to be tried in an adult court. The judge has to be keen on instances when the juvenile is starting to feel intimidated and verbally abused inside the courtroom because he may be too young to know everything that a defendant must know in having his case heard in a courtroom.

Last but not least, among the important perspectives that need to be cited in terms of trying juveniles as adults, the public’s viewpoint will now be discussed. I think the public will disagree with the fact that juveniles will be tried like adults. The usual feelings are sympathy and empathy out of the thinking that the child’s future is being affected by misconduct that is otherwise correctable by more shallow sanctions in the juvenile courts. Following various cultures, mores, beliefs, traditions and even religions pertaining to the issue of punishing criminals and many law-related debates, the public will most likely disagree with this policy. It has been mentioned earlier in this essay that there is a big possibility that the public will have more sympathy for minors being treated in adult courts than in juvenile courts due to the fact that the latter hears juvenile cases more often (Thompson, 2006), it then implies that they’d prefer the juvenile to be tried in a juvenile court. It is not uncommon to hear comments like “There are more serious cases and punishable criminals who deserve to be heard compared to him” from the public in these instances, and rather than thinking that the juveniles are basically ordinary criminals who only happen to be young at age, their opinions for a fair justice will be diverted to feelings of sympathy.

A personal view on the issue

Following many readings related to trying juveniles as adults, I firmly believe that transferring juvenile cases to adult courts is not a helpful idea for many reasons.

Basically, one of the reasons why a defendant’s case is heard is to be able to punish him and correct his wrongfully act. If this is the case, then transferring juvenile cases to adult courts is not helpful in terms of the juvenile’s sake, because as mentioned, the growing percentage of recidivism of juvenile offenders doesn’t give a mark up for the policy. Instead of rehabilitating them towards a changed attitude and ideals and reshaping him so he could establish a more productive life, he is immersed with criminals who would only exploit further his mind. Thus he develops a more irreversible structure of life. Instead of mingling with other detainees in juvenile detention centres who probably have less severe offences, he is exposed to a variety of serious felonies that make him think that there are worse people around him and thus give him the curiosity to explore more the criminal world. And definitely, there is an increased probability that support groups are scarce because of the prohibitions being practised in an adult court, making him impossible to develop a sense of self-esteem and self-confidence, which are crucial during these times (Redding, 2008).

According to Tom Head, the purpose of hearing cases and giving sanctions to criminals accordingly is to protect the public from criminals (2008). There are a variety of ways by which the judicial system achieves these purposes: by sending the criminals to prison and having them pay their fines ensures that justice is attained; by engaging them in many productive tasks make them regain self-fulfilment in jails and decreases the possibility that they will resort back to the wrong action in the future. These are the things on which the judicial system should be focusing onto: the ways to protect the public yet ensuring that the offenders are still living a humane life. What the juvenile tried as the adult policy is bringing about is only having the juveniles suffer the sanctions of their crimes and not taking into consideration their welfare. To think that the youth is a critical period of growth of humans, the future of the juvenile offenders are ignored, suppressed and abandoned by the OJJDP.

Conclusion

There are a lot of things to consider in deciding whether OJJDP will mark an improvement or failure in the judicial system. We have to regard all sides and opinions to be able to arrive at a concrete idea.

Since we are speaking of juveniles, it is important to know that youth is a training ground in a human’s life. Whatever he/she experiences in his younger years greatly influence what he is most likely going to be when he grows up. In view of this, I can defend that juveniles must not be tried as adults, and instead, their cases shall stay in the juvenile courts for their benefit.

There are still many reasons to cite, yet however complicated, it all boils down to a single plea: to save the lives of the youth and rehabilitate them at an early stage so they could become better citizens in their adulthood.

References

Denver City Attorney’s Office. “Juvenile Court: As a victim what should you be aware of?” 2008. City and Country of Denver.

Griffin, Patrick; Torbet, Patricia; and Szymanski, Linda. “Trying Juveniles as Adults in Criminal Court: An Analysis of State Transfer Provisions” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1998. 2008. Web.

Head, Tom. “Department of Justice Report: Trying Juveniles as Adults Does More Harm Than Good” 2008. Web.

Redding, Richard. “Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency?” OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin. 2008: 5 – 7.

Juvenile Justice Clearing House. 2008. Web.

Thompson, Steve. “Trying Juveniles as Adults Q&A” 2006. Web.

Virginia’s Judicial System. “The Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court” 2003. Web.

Hate Crimes

The criminal behavior based on the criterion of sexual orientation. Likely the most widespread and recognizable reason for hate crime besides race.

Hostility based on religion. Usually less visible that the crimes based on race and sexuality, and not recognized unanimously across the US, but steadily showing up in statistics

Crimes triggered by gender identity and gender expression

Discrimination based on disability

Each of the examples is chosen for a different reason. The homosexuality is an important issue as it is complicated by the homosexual threat and homosexual panic used in defense of the suspects tried for murder (Gerstenfeld, 2013). The gender identity as a cause of hate crime presents a challenging case as it is limited by the current lack of understanding of the phenomenon. The religion-based crimes are often conducted by organized groups. Finally, the disability hate crimes are legally recognized in 31 states but have no firm scholarly basis (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Crime v Deviant Behavior

Deviant behavior is the one that differs from the established social norms. It does not necessarily constitute a crime unless it explicitly or implicitly violates the formal law, which is the sole requirement for it to become criminal. In some extreme cases, the social norms may contradict the law, with the most prominent examples being the racial discrimination and violence towards the black population: it was accepted and encouraged despite being unconstitutional.

A criminal act towards a group is an action that violates any part of the common law. It may or may not be considered deviant, but in most of the cases, the social norms align with the official legal requirements. For instance, firing an employee based on his disability is illegal in 31 states (Gerstenfeld, 2013), but is only considered a deviant act elsewhere.

Victims Fail to Report Hate Crimes

1. Fear of retaliation for reporting a crime. This reason is possibly the most substantiated one. Unlike the personal beliefs or the shame, the retaliation is a real, feasible threat.

2. Distrust in law enforcement as an effective measure. This reason is important because it presents the best opportunity for mitigation. It mostly depends on the actions of the organization and thus can be overturned by success rates and improved communication, unlike the shame of reporting, which is determined largely by the social environment.

3. Lack of knowledge about hate crime. It depends on literacy and awareness and thus listed third, but still indicates a weak point which could be alleviated relatively easily.

All three reasons illustrate insufficient success rates of law enforcement in victim protection, functioning, and communication, respectively.

Factors Influence Law Enforcement

1.1. Excessive emphasis on hate crimes. Being a relatively novel approach, the hate crime phenomenon enjoys greater attention and, as a result, officers are more likely to report it after deliberately searching for the attributes which may otherwise be overlooked.

1.2. Inconsistencies in classification. The differences in codification exhibited by different departments lead to higher report instances in certain areas.

1.3. Lack of understanding of the matter. In some cases, the official directives are misinterpreted and ignored, leading to occasional false reports. The two latter causes can be resolved through personnel training, making them a priority.

2.1. The impression that the issue is not the job of the police, which hampers the reputation of law enforcement regarding the effectiveness of operations.

2.2. The lack of concern for the matter. An especially disturbing trend indicative of the problem being present among the officers.

2.3. Lack of reward. Easily correctable and thus demanding immediate attention.

The Development of Prejudice

Some factors may contribute to its development. For instance, my mother comes from the authoritarian family and relies on most of the decisions on my father. This setting may contribute to the image of weak and insecure women. Besides, racial stereotypes sometimes emerge in the family discussions.

Both factors are not persistent, so it would be enough to comment on some of the controversial remarks in a non-intrusive and discreet manner or voice a counterargument, preferably that not leading to conflict. Also, the jokes containing potentially sensitive content could be discouraged (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

It is hard to determine whether school or family is more important in prejudice prevention, but school certainly has a more aggressive impact on a child. Thus, it is less controllable and demands greater resource allocation, while the family relies more on cooperation. Thus, both are important but require a different approach.

Major Hate Groups

The three major hate groups identified in the textbook are the Ku Klux Klan, the racist skinheads, and the racist militias.

The focus of hate for the Ku Klux Klan is the disruption of the established order by the racial minorities. While some of the Klans are associated with fundamentalist Christian groups such as the Church of Identity, they focus on the deprivation of the privileges, both real and imagined, resulting from the granting of equal rights to all citizens. Militia groups are mostly politically-oriented and deem the minorities as an obstacle towards “good governance” as they see it. Finally, the skinheads focus the hate on the ideological side of racism and incorporate racist attitudes as aligning with their preferred “working class” aesthetics.

The common core of hatred for all three groups is the racial minorities, although the causality is greatest for the Ku Klux Klan.

Becoming a Victim

The potential victims are people who would benefit from additional protection. However, the amendment of existing laws may not be a good solution to the problem. The hate crime legislation is currently complex enough to create controversies in the legal area and complicate the functioning of the law enforcement organizations. The expansion of the list poses the problems of the lack of definitions of certain victim groups, gaps in understanding of the phenomena, and the mounting discrepancies associated with the implementation of the hate crime laws in the police practices.

Some of the groups in question are already included in the existing laws. For instance, people with disabilities are legally recognized as hate crime victims (Gerstenfeld, 2013), and some ethnic groups, such as Muslims, fall within categories outlined by the current legislature.

Advocacy Groups

The common theme for the goals of advocacy groups is struggling with intolerance, although their focus, scope, and methods often differ.

Most of the groups, including the smallest and youngest ones, have a list of achievements, such as lobbying a certain law, providing necessary support to a certain minority group, or unearthing important information and thus raising awareness. However, the weight of such operations is not easily determined, so it is unclear whether their achievements can be perceived as proof of their effectiveness.

As the groups have one ultimate goal, they often follow the same path, target the same perpetrators, and use similar strategies in courts. Their scope also differs. For instance, the Southern Poverty Law Center currently includes poverty, immigration, race, religion, and gender identification into their area of competence, while smaller organizations can focus on a single issue. Thus, their cooperation is limited.

Mediation v Diversity Training

1. Restorative justice presumes the resolution of the initial dispute: the successful mediation results in the dissipation of the conflict.

2. Direct involvement of the offender guarantees the perception of equal terms, which removes the pressure of the external authority (the law or social norm)

3. The mediation leads to long-term effects and ensures the transformation of the social climate.

The concept of restorative justice is appealing because of its strategic value, outlined in the third point. However, its use is extremely limited to the nature of a crime, the involvement of parties, and the psychological readiness of both sides to engage in a fruitful conversation. Besides, it still does not have firm scholarly support (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Diversity training would be a better option as it is preventive rather than mitigating, but its success is still not confirmed by the studies, so its reliability is questionable.

Hate Crimes Defined as Terrorism

Ultimately, terrorism is a purposeful act or threat of violence which has a certain objective, such as facilitating compliance or demoralization by demonstrating power, whereas a hate crime is an act based on certain prejudices towards certain groups. Theoretically, they are not the same, but in practice, the line is blurred because they often choose the same targets and resort to the same tactics.

For instance, Oklahoma City Bombing is classified as a terrorist act but is clearly led by the prejudice against the corrupt government and thus can be considered as that triggered by hate. Conversely, the public executions of blacks by Ku Klux Klan members are recognized as hate crimes but were conducted in part to signal their intentions and instill fear. Thus, terrorism and hate crimes utilize the same methods, but for somewhat different reasons.

Reference

Gerstenfeld, P. (2013). Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Hate crime occurs when a perpetrator commits a crime to an individual due to his or her social inclination. The group of people who fall victims of hate crimes includes people of different racial groups, sexual orientations, religion, gender identity and those of different ethnic backgrounds.

Incidents of hate crimes involve any of the following acts: arson, malicious damage to property, murder, physical assault, verbal abuse among others. Hate crimes have been prevalent in America throughout its history but are currently on a downward trend. As at 2010, most acts of hate crimes targeted blacks. In 2010, the FBI recorded 8,208 hate crimes out of which were 48% related to race issues (Jacobs & Potter, 2008).

This paper seeks to compare hate crimes in the two metropolitan areas of the New York City and Los Angeles. By 2008, New York had an estimated population of over 8.3 million. On its part, the area of Los Angeles had an estimated population of ten million. Those two metropolitans are densely populated with people with different ethnical and cultural backgrounds and diverse religious beliefs. More so, income distribution in both New York and Los Angeles is largely unequal among the populations (Jacobs & Potter, 2008).

The two areas experience substantively high hate crime rates. In 2007, 727 agencies from Los Angeles participated in a hate crime survey. Out of this, only 276 agencies completed their reports. As a rule of thumb, each hate crime had to indicate the motive of the offense. In the report, 674 incidences were due to race identity, 204 incidences happened because of religious and cultural beliefs, whereas 263 incidences were due to sexual orientation. In addition, there were 3 attacks on disabled individuals and a further 253 incidences of hate crime associated with ethnicity (Behind the Numbers, n. d.).

In the New York metropolitan area, a similar survey was held and 273-law enforcement agencies participate in it. Out of this, 29 agencies reported their statistical findings. The report indicated four hundred and ninety three hate crime incidents. The report classified these offenses according to the bias motivation.

From the findings, 126 incidences were because of racial inclination, 271 due to religious and cultural beliefs, whereas 73 incidences were due to sexual orientations. In addition, there were 22 incidences based on ethnicity prejudices and 1 case involving disabled people (New York. Hate Crime Incidents, n.d.).

From the statistics above, it is evident that California recorded a much higher number of hate crime incidences as compared to Los Angeles. However, it is important to note that a smaller number of agencies participated in the study that was based in New York than those that were taken in California (Jacobs et al 2008). As well, the study fetched a smaller population in New York (8000000), compared to Los Angeles’ over 10 million population. Los Angeles reported 1409 cases in 2002.

In 2004, Los Angeles reported 1397 cases, and a further 1400 cases in 2007. This represents a stagnant growth in hate crime statistics for the Los Angeles metropolitan area. On the other hand, crime statistics from New York indicates a rise in hate crime too. The year 2008 data indicate 596 incidents as compared to 510 and 454 in 2007 and 2004 respectively (Fetzer & Fernandez-Lanier, 2009).

The two metropolitan areas indicate a considerable amount of hate crimes, which should be contained. Although the traditional form of hate crime (usually against the blacks) is declining, there are emerging trends of hate crimes targeting the “new” minority groups that are the gay and lesbian communities.

It is notable that recent developments in America have led to an average decline of this crime. The election of Barrack Obama to the United States presidency affected the way people viewed the traditional minority groups, especially the African Americans. This explains the fall in crime against the black Americans.

However, the gay and lesbian community has been under repeated attacks from the conservationists. Luckily, all of the two discussed metropolitan areas have put into place laws that prevent hate crime. One can rest assured that with the current legislation, and civil campaigns against hate crimes, the cases of hate crimes will reduce in the future.

References

Behind the Numbers: Hate Crimes Task Force Nets Results. The FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Web.

Fetzer, M., & Fernandez-Lanier, A. (2009). Division of Criminal Justice Services. Hate Crime in New York State 2008 Annual Report. Web.

Jacobs, J.T. & Potter, K. (2008). Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.

New York. Hate Crime Incidents. The FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation. Web.

Brief Summary

The authors of the article “Is it important to examine crime trends at a local “micro” level?” provide evidence concerning the importance of analyzing macro-level trends (Groff, Weisburd, & Yang, 2010). At the same time, they acknowledge the archetypal model which presupposes that criminology should be focused on large area tendencies. The investigation of these trends will lead to the discovery of new inclinations that are based on the ecological traditions of micro areas (Groff et al., 2010). The most important conclusion of this study is that small-area findings should be analyzed irrespective of the trends that are identified within bigger areas. This study broadens our knowledge in terms of the criminal patterns that are found in micro areas and helps us to comprehend the structure of the concentration of delinquencies better. In other words, the authors of the study noticed that there are several trends at the micro level that have to be re-evaluated and explained about the geographic inconsistency (Groff et al., 2010). The researchers believe that future investigation will help to gain more insight into the criminal patterns and characteristics that are inherent in the micro areas vulnerable to high crime rates.

Criminological Theories and Crime Trends

The two criminological theories that perfectly correlate with the current crime rates are the theories of social control and rational choice. The former is one of the most powerful theories that were developed throughout the history of criminological science. The basis of this theory presupposes that the majority of the crimes can be prevented by legal limitations imposed by the government (Anderson, 2015). Overall, this theory positively affects crime causation and the decrease in the number of delinquencies is visible. If we connect this theory to the article, we may notice that the theory of social control has very little to do with the local crimes when they are evaluated outside the statewide or nationwide trends. The theory of rational choice also positively affected the crime rates on a national scale. The connection between this theory and local crimes is much more evident. The contingency may be explained by peer pressure, socioeconomic factors, and psychosocial trends inherent in the local citizens including poverty, family structure, increased anxiety, excessive self-confidence, and discontent with the political regime (Wagner, 2013). The impact of each of these factors varies from one locality to another, but the key finding is that we should use a different scale to assess the impact of delinquencies on the US society within smaller areas, especially in poor neighborhoods.

Classical Crime Causation and Crime Trends

The ideas of the classical crime causation theory perfectly reflect the realities of small areas that are exposed to high crime rates. In these localities, delinquent decisions are made based on free will (Siegel, 2015). Under the impact of numerous circumstances of varying gravity, the citizens have to deal with the situations that may be perceived as imminent triggers of criminal behavior. The classical theory of crime causation reflects the current crime trends (Anderson, 2015). If we connect it to the reviewed article, we may notice that it also supports the ideas inherent in the aforementioned criminological theories. The issue of an increased number of crimes is contingent on an extensive array of psychosocial and socioeconomic factors (Wagner, 2013). Therefore, it is crucial to be consistent with the punishments and continue promoting them as deterrents for the crimes.

References

Anderson, J. F. (2015). Criminological theories: Understanding crime in America. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Groff, E., Weisburd, D., & Yang, S. (2010). Is it important to examine crime trends at a local “micro” level? A longitudinal analysis of street to street variability in crime trajectories. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 26(1), 7-32.

Siegel, L. J. (2015). Criminology: The core (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Wagner, W. E. (2013). Practice of research in criminology and criminal justice. New York, NY: Sage.