Category: Criminal Behavior

Hate Crime Argumentative Essay

When is crime a hate crime? In the criminal world, there are numerous types of crime, in this assessment, I am going to explain what a hate crime is and whether a crime involving a personal hate element should increase the sentence time given to the offender. The most common reason for committing a crime is because the victim has something in their possession that motivates the offender to commit the crime. In terms of a hate crime, it’s more of a personal, opinion-based attack on who the victim appears to be that motivates the offender to commit the crime. An example of a hate crime is a crime against a particular individual based on their race, religion, transgender identity, disability, or sexuality. Courts in England have the power to add more time to the offender’s sentence if proven the offense was motivated by the reasons above.

Crime varies from different types of crime, here are the three hate crimes: verbal neglect, incitement to hatred, and physical neglect. When a individual acts threatening and aimed to stir up hate this is considered the offence of incitement to hatred. This could be in the form of words, videos, or pictures, online bullying, and includes personal information posted on websites. Physical assault is an offense so depending on the degree of the violence used the offender could be charged with bodily harm, common assault, or grievous bodily harm. Lastly, Verbal abuse, insults, or threats are somewhat common and harsh experiences for groups most targeted such as minority groups. Victims of verbal abuse are often unsure whether an offense has been committed, most victims do not realize they are victims in the eyes of the law. Some feel as if they were to report the incident it may get brushed off as not important. Though, there are laws in order to protect people from verbal abuse.

Hate crimes create a climate of fear within communities resulting in people being more disconnected from one another. Over the years hate crimes have only increased with more people reporting them, this is seen in an article (GOV.UK) ‘In 201819, there were 103,379 hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales, an increase of 10 percent compared with 201718 (94,121 offenses).’ This shows this issue is not being sorted as similar offenses are reoccurring. Then in more recent years such as March 2020, there were ‘105,090 hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales, an increase of 8 percent compared with the year ending March 2019 (97,446 offences). (GOV.UK). Are numbers increasing because there is no harsh punishment when it comes to hate crimes? Meaning it is officially known that if you are found guilty of committing murder you are automatically looking at a harsh sentence as opposed to someone who has inflicted pain and hate on another because of the offender’s beliefs or opinions. Therefore, committing a crime with a hate motivation should carry a sentence uplift because of the effects it can have on the victim. For example, if someone who is transgender is publicly attacked purely because the offender does not agree with transgender identity the victim may suffer with embarrassment, anxiety, depression, or paranoia.

Furthermore, the numbers of reports are large yet hate crimes are hugely under-reported in fear that no one will care, or no justice will be served. These reports are often inadequately dealt with by the authorities, statistics showed a majority of hate crimes were race hate crimes, but this is not anything new. A case from 1993 showed a boy Stephen Lawrence (18) murdered by four white males at a bus stop because of his race no justice was served until we saw very little improvement because in 2012 when only two of four criminals were sentenced. (CBBC Newsround) A large number of people believe not enough is being done within the justice system as we see in the news today no one is seeing justice being served within black communities. ‘around three-quarters of offenses (76%; 78,991 offenses) were a race hate crime.’ (GOV.UK). A sentence uplift can result in criminals going to prison for a hate crime instead of a non-custodial sentence which could be a fine or community service.

On the other hand, some could argue that offenders should not be given longer prison sentences as it is not constructive in terms of punishment. An example of minor offenses within hate crime could be a person being punched by someone, who was beforehand shouting racial slurs to them. That is considered a minor hate offense. So, in a case like this, the offender could be ordered to complete some type of community service or attend a humanity course (rehabilitation courses) which is constructively educating people, instead of ordering the offender to serve imprisonment. Another point that could be considered is how many times this person has offended. Meaning someone that has reoccurring convictions and offenses, maybe a longer sentence would be reasonable because the criminal is proving short punishments e.g., 28-day house arrest, and rehabilitation courses, a short sentence is not improving anything.

A hate incident is any act in which the victim is being discriminated against because of their, sexual orientation, disability, race, religion, or because they are transgender. Not all hate incidents will compare to criminal offenses e.g., more serious cases such as homicide, but it is equally important that these are reported and recorded by the police as records will show areas with high numbers of hate crimes. Prisons across England are overpopulated which shows that cases that are detrimental to society should be prioritised. Prison is not the solution to every criminal offense. Evidence of the hate aspect is not a requirement you do it does not need to be a personal attack against you, being a witness believing what you witnessed it is a hate crime is more than enough evidence.

In conclusion, I believe all hate crimes should be taken seriously and it is always important to report any type of incident even no matter how minor you think it is compared to the corruption that goes on in the world. This raises awareness to the rest of the world that hatred is a big issue within different communities. I also believe depending on how minor or serious the offence is this should depend on how harsh the punishment is. Meaning a minor incident equals productive punishment. I also think courts should push first-time offenders towards a more reforming program such as courses, and community service.

Essay on Martha Stewart White Collar Crime

Hello, my name is Kaitrin Polich, and the person I chose to do my research paper on is Martha Stewart. I researched her because I am interested in her and her work. I am interested in her because she is an incredible businesswoman who is very successful. Martha Stewart is an American media businesswoman. She is best known for her lifestyle brand consisting of television shows, cookware, cookbooks, and more.

Martha Stewart was born Martha Kostyra, on August 3, 1941, in Nutley, New Jersey. She was born the second of six children. At the age of 13, she started modeling. She appeared in fashion shows as well as print advertisements and television shows. While she was in high school she spent most of her time organizing birthday parties and babysitting.

Martha Stewart attended Barnard College in Manhattan. While there she earned a degree in European and architectural history in 1962. While at Barnard, she met a Yale law student, Andy Stewart, and they got married in 1961. Six years later, after having their first child, Alexis, Martha Stewart went to work as a stockbroker for the boutique firm of Monness, Williams, and Sidel. She worked there until 1972, when their whole family moved to Westport, Connecticut, and remodeled a farmhouse.

After she restored the farmhouse, she decided to focus on cooking. She started a catering business in the late 1970s, after starting her catering business she soon became known for her menus. Within only ten years her business became very popular and well known.

She then published her first book called Entertaining. Her book became a bestseller. She then published cookbooks and planning books. Along with her fame came a divorce. Her marriage to Andy ended in 1990. In 1991 she released her first magazine, Martha Stewart Living. Stewart’s lifestyle empire soon grew to include two magazines, a checkout-size recipe publication, a popular cable television show, a syndicated newspaper column, a series of how-to books, a radio show, an Internet site, and $763 million in annual retail sales.

Martha Stewart made financial headlines, in June of 2002, this time for rumors of insider trading. Stewart was under investigation for selling hundreds of shares of ImClone Systems just prior to the Food and Drug Administration’s refusal to approve the company’s new cancer drug. The value of the stock dropped markedly after the FDA’s announcement. Due to the investigation, Stewart resigned from the board of directors of the New York Stock Exchange in October, just four months after she had joined. In June 2003, a 41-page indictment charged Stewart with securities fraud, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, and making false statements to prosecutors and the FBI. She pleaded innocent to all charges and stepped down as chair and CEO of her Omnimedia empire. In February 2004, a judge dismissed the securities fraud charge, but a jury found her guilty of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and two counts of making false statements. Stewart was sentenced to five months in prison and fined $30,000 that July. She served the first part of her sentence at a minimum-security prison in Alderson, West Virginia, in October 2004.

Martha Stewart was released from prison on March 4, 2005, just after NBC announced she would host two new shows. Her shows were a daytime talk and how-to show. Stewart finished her sentence by serving five months of house arrest at her home in Bedford, New York. Stewart continues to be a television presence, appearing as a judge on Chopped, Bakeaway Camp, and more. In the fall of 2010, she launched a new series on PBS called Martha Stewart’s Cooking School. Which is still on the air today.

In conclusion, I chose Martha Stewart because she is a smart and successful woman. Martha Stewart is a formidable and extremely successful entrepreneur, who has built an entire product and media empire around her own image. Whilst she has been undoubtedly successful in her various pursuits, recent events bring to the forefront the need for the company to make significant strategic changes. These include moving away from one-person-centered product lines and an organization built around the personal image, to one that embodies the ideals Ms. Stewart represents, and recasting the company’s image in light of these changes so as to make it more competitive in the long term.

Essay on Ponzi Scheme White Collar Crime

The Ponzi Scheme

The Ponzi Scheme is a term commonly thrown around in the world of white-collar crime. It is an age-old game of borrowing from Peter to pay Paul – a form of fraud where people believe in a non-existent business or product and the money gathered from today’s investors would be used to repay the debts of those that came before (Darby, 1998). Typically, these investors are attracted by the promise of outrageous profit.

Time and again, people of all socio-economic backgrounds have fallen prey to such schemes demonstrating how many choose to abandon the voice of reason and succumb to a deal that always seems too good to be true. In this day and age, the Internet has then become a vehicle for con artists to cast their net wide and reach a larger group of victims with relative ease. However, it is undeniable that these schemes have been around for a long time and it can be said that many of today’s swindlers have taken their cue from a five-foot-two-inch Italian immigrant, Charles Ponzi.

Charles Ponzi and His Early Years

Born in 1992 in Italy, Charles Ponzi was the infamous con artist who shuffled money from new investors to pay the old ones. Ponzi was born to parents who both bore titles of aristocracy but were richer in reputation than in savings. He was immensely doted on by his mother, as she staked the family’s future on her little boy, hoping that he could restore the family to its former financial and social status. In his childhood, she often dreamt aloud about the grand future she aspired for him. Ponzi later went on to inherit a modest inheritance from his father and intended to follow his mother’s dreams by attending the University of Rome (Zuckoff, 2006).

However, instead of treating his academic career seriously, he was disillusioned by dreams of grandeur and stories about his aristocratic blood put in his head by his mother, he dug deep into his fast-dwindling inheritance in hopes of emulating his wealthy peers at the university. Ultimately, this led to bankruptcy, forcing him to drop out. He was later convinced by his uncle to leave Italy for America because he was from a good family and was refined and hence could easily be successful there.

Therefore, in November of 1903, 21-year-old Charles Ponzi arrived in Boston with little to nothing to his name after gambling away most of his remaining money on the voyage to the United States (Biography, 2019).

“I landed in this country with $2.50 in cash and $1 million in hopes and those hopes never left me,” Ponzi later told the New York Times.

He then worked a variety of odd jobs along the East Coast of America. He ended up getting into trouble for theft and cheating customers, moving to Canada and spending time in prison for passing a forged cheque (Trex, 2008) Ponzi then headed back to Boston in response to a newspaper ad for a merchandise broker who needed a clerk (Darby, 1998) where he met and married Rose Gnecco in February of 1918. Shortly after, Ponzi hit upon a scheme that allowed him to get rich using a loophole in the ‘International Postal Reply Coupons’ system.

The Original Ponzi Scheme

Since postal and exchange rates fluctuated, there was an opportunity for arbitrage – one simply had to purchase postal reply coupons at a lower price in another country, send them back to America to swap them out for local stamps of a higher value, and sell these stamps, making it possible to earn a substantial profit. This was perfectly legal and seemed like a clever way of gaming the system, and thus, Ponzi started his new business, the Securities Exchange Company. He would then go on to sell this idea to thousands of people. Ponzi claimed to have an elaborate network of representatives throughout Europe who were in charge of making bulk purchases of coupons and in turn, he would help people turn their coupon purchases into large profits. However, his claims were false, yet his alluring ability enabled him to sell this scheme to thousands and skimming funds for himself, allowing him to quickly climb the ranks to build the life of luxury that he had always dreamed of.

According to Dunn (2004), Ponzi’s genius lay in psychology and not finance. Ponzi understood that the way to get people to buy into his scheme was not to push too aggressively, but rather approach them systematically and strategically. He carefully cultivated his image as a man on the verge of huge fortunes, but one that was humble enough not to discuss his wealth in public – unless pressed. He tactically placed himself in specific situations such as neighborhood cafes and boccie games to come in contact with investors, often gifting them with generous amounts of good cigars and then rushing to meet his next ‘client’. After his victims were well primed, Ponzi would then introduce his scheme promising them 50 percent interest in 90 days.

Gradually, he personally recruited and trained agents to pitch his business to other potential investors, guaranteeing them ten percent commissions for every secured deal. Many of these agents then enlisted the help of “subagents” to gather the numbers. Soon, the first round of investors received their promised profits and word began to spread that Charles Ponzi was a ‘financial wizard’ (Dunn, 20004). Consequently, many clients chose to reinvest their profits, relieving Ponzi of actually having to make good on his promises.

However, an investigation was called to uncover the secret behind his scheme. Eventually, Charles Ponzi’s publicity agent released a report about the truth behind the Securities Exchange Company, which escalated the situation. In August 1920, Ponzi served a 14-year prison term and was charged with 86 counts of mail fraud and owed investors an estimated sum of $7 million.

Behind Ponzi – A Profile of the Con Artists and Their Victims

Research has shown that victims who fall prey to Ponzi schemes, firstly, share a deep sense of greed, yearning for the benefits of great power and wealth immediately (Frankel, 2012). Therefore, this group of people fell for Ponzi’s scheme due to their desire for an effective way to climb the social ladder. Secondly, these victims display signs of gullibility, falling prey to offers that are too good to be true. Additionally, this group tends to be drawn by hope, emotion, or fancy, which fits Ponzi’s modus operandi as well as his ability to portray a charming, steadfast sort of character (Frankel, 2008). Lastly, these victims tend to feel great pressure to retain or improve their social status. The promise of exclusivity combined with the possibility of making profits quickly drew in many potential investors. With more of their social circle being involved in the scheme, many victims also began to feel the need to invest more into it as well, just to one-up their peers. These factors hence placed thousands of people in this unique position, rendering them vulnerable to falling prey to Ponzi’s scheme.

On the other hand, a con artist’s personality includes not only the capacity to be able to commit a crime, lots of charm, and surprisingly, striking similarities with honest people, but it also often includes overwhelming ambitions and unrealistic dreams. This was especially clear in the case of Charles Ponzi, due to the years of brainwashing about the royal blood in his veins and dreams of grandeur fed by his mother during his childhood. Moreover, research has shown that con artists tend to exhibit narcissistic characteristics which manifests itself in a lack of empathy for their victims (Frankel, 2012). This was obvious in the case of Charles Ponzi as upon release he said:

“Even if they never got anything for it, it was cheap at that price. Without malice aforethought I have given them the best show that was ever staged in their territory since the landing of the Pilgrims!… It was easily worth fifteen million bucks to watch me put the thing over!” (Darby, 1998)

In Ponzi’s scheme, there was an evident display of these traits that allowed him to manipulate his victims. Furthermore, Ponzi often played the hero to the same people whom he was defrauding. During office hours, he would direct women to the front of queues as well as distribute coffee to those waiting (Darby, 1998), hence, planting doubts in those who were suspicious about Ponzi’s ploy, whilst reinforcing the fact that Ponzi was indeed trustworthy amongst the rest. This once again points to Ponzi’s ability to charm the masses into believing his scheme.

Using Strain Theory to Explain Ponzi

Strain theory deals with the idea of the American Dream. This is the dream where one is able to ‘make it’ and achieve abundant wealth and independence through their lives in the United States. Merton stated that for many, their primary goal was to achieve the American Dream and that the overriding goal was success, with money as a metric of it (Messner, 2004). The American Dream seemed especially prevalent in Charles Ponzi’s life. Prior to his decision to move to America, his uncle had repeatedly told Ponzi that “in the United States, the streets are actually paved with gold” (Lichtenstein, 2005). This led him to believe that by migrating to America, he would easily be able to find the fame and fortune that he was searching for his entire life.

Strain theory asserts that a disjunction between societal goals and one’s ability to achieve them produces crime. When individuals subscribe to the goal of the American Dream but experience difficulties in achieving it as they do not have legitimate means to, they experience strain, which refers to stress on institutional norms, which then lose their legitimacy and regulatory power in the eyes of these individuals (Robinson & Rogers, 2018). When Charles Ponzi first stepped foot on American shores, he was not met with the gold-lined streets his uncle told him about, but was in fact poor and had to wait and bus tables as well as paint signs in order to survive — reality was far from his expectations. The contrast was stark enough that Pomzi landed into trouble multiple times while desperately trying to close the gap. The strain that Ponzi experienced was further fuelled by his lifelong dreams of acquiring mass amounts of wealth, resulting in Ponzi leaping at the first opportunity to climb the ranks quickly, even if it meant that it was through illegitimate means.

At this juncture, it is crucial to note that while strain theory seemingly only involves those of a lower socio-economic class, it also applies to those of upper and middle economic status. Merton (1938) suggests that corruption, vice, fraud, and crime “becomes increasingly common when the emphasis on the culturally induced success goal becomes divorced from a coordinated institutional emphasis”. His strain theory, hence, can be easily applied to include white-collar crimes as seen from Ponzi’s inability to stop his scheme despite accumulating a large amount of wealth. Since the pursuit of the American Dream or monetary success is never-ending, the wealthy will always seek more, explaining why even the rich commit crimes of deviance.

Conclusion

Charles Ponzi has become synonymous with his infamous Ponzi scheme. He was able to rope thousands of investors into his scheme due to his ability to carefully prime them before approaching, turning on his charm and portraying himself as a generous gentleman. These traits lent credibility and trustworthiness to him as a business owner. Additionally, growing up, Ponzi had an unhealthy relationship with wealth and status which later resulted in an obsession with chasing the American Dream. He experienced strain due to the stark difference between the realities of his life and that of his expectations. Hence, a combination of these unique factors led to a life of deviance and the rise of Charles Ponzi the con artist.

In recent years, we have witnessed a resurgence in the number of Ponzi, with cases involving Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford. Personally, I think it would be interesting to examine how the Internet affords potential con artists easy avenues to reach out to a wide range of people that they might otherwise have no access to. This is especially true since Ponzi schemes tend to play on the innate human nature to want more in one’s life. Con artists take advantage of human greed and present potential investors with deals that seem too good to be true, yet charm them into believing otherwise. Therefore, perhaps even as Ponzi schemes evolve and change with the times, the profile of victims who fall for such ploys will always remain the same.

References

1. Biography. (2019, June 18). Charles Ponzi. Retrieved from https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/charles-ponzi.
2. Darby, M. (1998, December). In Ponzi We Trust. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-ponzi-we-trust-64016168/.
3. Dunn, D. H. (2004). Ponzi: The incredible true story of the king of financial cons. New York: Broadway Books.
4. Frankel, T. (2008). Trust and honesty: America’s business culture at a crossroads. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Frankel, T. (2012). A Profile of the Con Artists and their Victims. The Ponzi Scheme Puzzle. doi: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199926619.003.0005
6. Lichtenstein, A. (2005, March 13). A sympathetic look at the original Ponzi scheme. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2005-03-13-0503110445-story.html
7. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social Structure and Anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672. doi: 10.2307/2084686
8. Messner, S. F. (2004). An Institutional-Anomie Theory of Crime: Continuities and Elaborations in the Study of Social Structure and Anomie. Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie Sonderhefte Soziologie Der Kriminalität, 93–109. doi: 10.1007/978-3-322-80474-7_4
9. Robinson, M., & Rogers, J. (2018). Applying Contextual Anomie and Strain Theory to Recent Acts of Corporate Deviance. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Criminology, 10, 71–92.
10. Trex, E. (2008, December 23). Who was Ponzi — what the heck was his scheme? Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/12/23/mf.ponzi.scheme/
11. Zuckoff, M. (2006). Ponzis Scheme: The True Story of a Financial Legend. Random House.

Essay John Wayne Gacy Vs Ted Bundy

The 1970s was a time of evolution in the entertainment industry as well as mood rings and confusion caused by Richard Nixon’s resignation. Movies were booming, and pet rocks were smiling from ear to ear. In 1970, the Apollo 13 mission to the moon was successful and strides in NASA were being made. In 1974, “The Way We Were” by Barabara Streisand was the number-one song. Some of the most important developments of this time period were the police department, the criminal justice system, and the way higher-profile crimes were handled. This was also an age of revolution in the way crimes were investigated because murders were examined from a human perspective rather than a criminal one. Psycho-forensics was revolutionary in the determination that crime leaves a trail. What if these many psychopaths are leaving evidence based on personality? The ideas accumulated by the police force were forced to change by the eerie serial killer John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz, and Ted Bundy. In due time, these understandings evolved the department by creating a system with new improvements to benefit Americans’ safety.

When the 1970s began, the police department was evolving and becoming more efficient. At the beginning of this decade, the United States was impacted by the Newhall Massacre, an incident that occurred in Los Angeles, California, resulting in the death of 5 people. Following this, police departments nationally made decisions to protect the officers in their positions, assuming a more defensive role. According to author Phippen, “That day in 1970 began with a road-rage incident. A red two-door Pontiac Grand Prix cut off a couple in a Volkswagen on their way home. The man driving the Volkswagen followed the Pontiac until it eased to the shoulder abruptly. As it did, the Volkswagen driver, Jack Tidwell, yelled at the man in the Pontiac, Bobby Davis.” This narrative is to describe the scene of the massacre where an officer was eventually killed at the hand of a soon-to-be convoluted confrontation. This event provided tragic reasoning for the government to emphasize protection in its programs. The police department was also working towards new methods to help prevent crime rather than solve it. They determined that the preservation of their task force was pivotal. Kaste writes, “The crime waves of the 1970s and ’80s pushed police departments toward prevention strategies — broken-window patrols, more officer visibility in high-crime areas, stop-and-frisk — and solving crimes became secondary. In some instances, the clearance rates are one of those things that kind of snuck up on people.”

These methods were used to protect the people of America rather than deal with the aftermath. Congress also focused on the containment of crime in the United States by passing laws to prevent crime. Fortunately, these clauses were specific to situations involving the most heinous of crimes. “Congress approved the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. This law contained a section known as the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act or RICO. RICO has become a very effective tool in convicting members of organized criminal enterprises.” (FBI) This act was put in place to convict all the criminals involved in crimes rather than just the main heads of operation. This act worked to incarcerate not only pivotal members of crime but those working under them. The police force had made some changes to the department at the beginning of the decade, but the serial killers that arose in the 1970s would change their perspective on how the department should be run.

One of the serial killers to affect the homicide department was John Wayne Gacy, Killer Clown. Gacy was born in 1942 in Chicago, Illinois, where he lived with his mother and father. Growing up, his father was a raging alcoholic and very extremely abusive. “The son of Danish and Polish parents, Gacy and his siblings grew up with an alcoholic father who would beat the children with a razor strap if they were perceived to have misbehaved. His father physically assaulted Gacy’s mother as well.” (Editors) Coming from a damaged family, that carried onto his adult years when he began to build his own family. Biography.com editors write, “He was married and divorced twice and had two biological children (in addition to two stepdaughters).” (Editors) Although his home life was rugged, Gacy had a good reputation. He was, as Biography.com Editors wrote, “well-liked in his community”, and “became a self-made building contractor and Democratic precinct captain in the Chicago suburbs”. Although he may have seemed the relatively well-rounded man to an outsider, he was masking a murderous nature. As Editors wrote, John Wayne Gacy was a “serial killer and rapist who took the lives of at least 33 young males in Cook County, Illinois, burying most under his house.” For all 33 of his murders, He would dress up as a clown, and that is how the killer received his name as the Killer Clown. He was a member of the “Jolly Joker” clown club in Chicago and performed at events for money on occasion, so Gacy had easy access to clown attire. On some occurrences, Gacy “dressed as his alter egos ‘Pogo the Clown’ or ‘Patches the Clown.’” (Editors) He even lured in older victims with the promise of construction work, but then kidnapped them, raped, and tortured them before strangling them with his own hands. Gacy was eventually caught by Chicago Police Department and was put on trial on February 6, 1980 (Editors). Gacy’s defense wanted to argue the Insanity Plea. “With Gacy having confessed to the crimes, the arguments were focused on whether he could be declared insane and thus remitted to a state mental facility.” (Editors) The judge did not rule in favor of Gacy and sentenced Gacy to death by lethal injection due to the grievousness of their crimes. Gacy’s life ended on May 10, 1994. The Killer Clown was one of the first of many serial killers in the 1970s to open the eyes of the police force, but there were many more to follow as is the case with David Berkowitz and Ted Bundy.

Another example of a malignant serial killer of the 1970s is David Berkowitz. Born as Richard David Falco, in Brooklyn, New York, Berkowitz was a “difficult and occasionally violent child.” (David) These occurrences began after his adoptive mother passed away in 1967 and grew to be a larger problem when his adoptive father remarried and moved to Florida without him four years later. Immediately after his father’s leaving, “Berkowitz joined the army, and he became an excellent marksman before he left the service in 1974.” (David) Five years after returning from the service, he attempted his first murder which would be the first of many. Jenkins wrote, “Claiming he was driven by demons, Berkowitz attempted to murder a woman in December 1975, but she survived several stab wounds.” Although his first attempt was unsuccessful, he tried again in July 1976, murdered his first woman, and “over the next year he attacked several couples, claiming five more victims.” (David). Berkowitz began calling himself “Son of Sam”, in reference to a demon who believed he lived inside his neighbor’s labrador retriever. Berkowitz “sent letters to New York newspapers, signing them “Son of Sam,” to scare people and draw attention to his work. By July 1977, Berkowitz had murdered six people and injured seven others, but on August 10, 1977, he was arrested, 11 days after his last murder. Jenkins wrote, “His capture was the result of careful police work, which involved sorting through a confusing maze of reports of suspicious persons.” The police department made Berkowitz their most likely suspect after matching the witnesses’ descriptions and receiving a parking ticket near the scene of one of the shootings. After being arrested, Berkowitz quickly confessed to many murders, as well as attempted murders, and on May 8, 1978, he pled guilty. In June of 1978, he was sentenced to 365 years in prison. He is still serving his time in the Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County, New York.

As notorious as the Son of Sam was, he was not the most frightening prolific serial killer to live and thrive in the 1970s. Ted Bundy– a notorious serial killer who has made an impact so large that it has carried on into the modern era– was born and raised in Burlington, Vermont. Jenkins writes, “Bundy had a difficult childhood; he had a strained relationship with his stepfather, and his shyness made him a frequent target of bullying.” Bundy had been born during a difficult time in his mother’s life; she was unmarried and young and that humiliated her deeply religious parents. Jenkins further writes, “Bundy was raised as the adopted son of his grandparents and was told that his mother was his sister.” As he grew older, he began to show his psychotic tendencies by peering into neighbors’ windows. Museum states, “In interviews, he recalled being antisocial and wandering the streets looking for discarded pornography or open windows through which he could spy on unsuspecting women; he also had an extensive juvenile record for theft that was dismissed when he turned 18.” Bundy went to college at the University of Washington where he got his degree in psychology in 1972; he had been accepted into law school, but he could never receive his degree. While attending college, he fell in love with a girl he had been seeing, but their relationship did not work out, and Bundy was devastated. This relationship created a pattern in Bundy’s murders: “attractive students, with long, dark hair.” (Ted) The debate on how many murders Ted Bundy committed is unanswered, although he confessed to 36 killings, many believe that the final tally was closer to 100 or more. Bundy moved on many occurrences during the time of his crimes, “first near his home in Washington, then moving east to Utah, Colorado, and finally in Florida.” (Museum) Bundy raped all of his victims and killed them in malignant ways. Museum further writes, “Bundy was able to rape and murder scores of women this way. He typically strangled or bludgeoned his victims as well as mutilated them after death. He then prolonged the events by returning to visit the corpses at their dump sites or even taking them home in order to gain further sexual gratification. In some cases, he even shockingly displayed their decapitated heads in his apartment and slept with their corpses until putrefaction made it unbearable.” In the photo of Ted Bundy’s supplies for his murders and the photo of the deceased Linda Ann Healy, one of the first victims killed by Bundy, he depicts how gruel and insensitive he is to murder. He has tools such as a wrench, a flashlight, rope, a screwdriver, handcuffs, gloves, and a mask, but with these small tools, he completed devastating crimes. On the second side of the photo is the body of one of his victims decapitated, and the head was later found in Bundy’s apartment in Seattle. Bundy was first arrested in Utah after being pulled over by police for speeding; after the officer saw Bundy’s supplies in the backseat, the officer arrested him for the possession of these items, and they suspected him of murder cases that had been opened in the area with no lead. He was arrested for the kidnapping of one of the victims who, as Biography.com Writers wrote, “escaped his clutches”, and was sentenced to 1-15 years in jail. Bundy is infamous for his many escapes from police custody. “Bundy escaped from prison twice in 1977. The first time, he was indicted on murder charges for the death of a young Colorado woman and decided to act as his own lawyer in the case. During a trip to the courthouse library, he jumped out a window and made his first escape. He was captured eight days later.” (Writers) Bundy acted as his own lawyer because he believed that he had been to law school, passed the bar, and became a defense attorney, but this was not the case. Bundy had never made it to law school but believed that he had because of his sociopathic tendencies. After being recaptured, Bundy found another way to escape. Writers from Biography.com write, “In December, Bundy escaped from custody again. He climbed out of a hole he made in the ceiling of his cell, having dropped more than 30 pounds to fit through the small opening. Authorities did not discover that Bundy was missing for 15 hours, giving the serial killer a big head start on the police.” After his second escape, Bundy made his runaway to Florida and continued to prey on young women at Florida State University. On the night of January 14, 1978, Bundy broke into the Chi Omega sorority house at Florida State University. He attacked four of the young female residents, killing two of them.” A month later, he kidnapped, raped, and murdered a 12-year-old girl named Kimberly Leach, which is said to be believed that she was his last murder before being recaptured in February of 1978. Biography.com Writers further states, “The most damning evidence connecting Bundy to the two Chi Omega murders at FSU were bite marks on one of the bodies, which were a definitive match to Bundy.” Bundy left bite marks on a victim and bit the nipple of one of his victims, which ultimately led police to him because his dental records were recorded. This evidence incriminated Bundy, and he faced trial in July 1979 where he was sentenced to death on three separate murder charges. He was executed in 1989. John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz, and Ted Bundy revolutionized the police force and gave the police department focuses to improve in years to come.

In 1979, the police force and homicide department were making new strides toward a more efficient investigation process. Capitol states, “In 1979, President Jimmy Carter signed Public Law No. 96152, establishing a chief of police for the United States Capitol Police.” Carter led the United States Capitol Police to find ways to solve murder cases such as the ones stated, while also keeping his officers safe. Another development added after the many killings committed by John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz, and Ted Bundy, was the introduction of fingerprinting. FBI writes, “The FBI Laboratory Division pioneered the use of laser technology to detect latent ‘crime scene fingerprints. This date marks the first successful use of lasers to detect latent prints on case evidence.” This development has benefited the homicide department for many years now, but this discovery and the research that followed were first conducted in 1979 to help identify the suspects and sentence the real culprits.

Many things attributed to the 1970s being a time of transition and sensationalism in America. Movies, music, art, and pop culture were all in flux and– in some ways– innovation morphed into much-needed radicalization. One of the most important developments was the investigation and criminalization of heinous crimes, such as serial murder. By attempting to not only humanize the crimes but also the criminals, the FBI, CIA, and local police forces were able to expand their analyses and create an entirely new way to approach investigations. Ultimately, these new analyses evolved criminal investigation and built the modern-day building blocks for finding and establishing an entirely new approach to looking at atrocious crimes.

Cause and Effect Essay on Divorce

Introduction

In Canada, divorce rates are rising, and we fear that they will continue to rise. Since the 1960s and 1080s, a divorce has been easier to obtain. With legalizing divorce, it has also been more socially acceptable overall (Butterfield, 2017). Factors that researchers have seen that impact marriage and lead to a divorce include low incomes, poverty, youthful marriages, and risk factors for divorce. As well as, when people see that divorce is easy to obtain, they have a lower threshold of tolerance when their marriage does not add up to their standards anymore (Butterfield, 2017). In 2015, reports showed that in adults 50 and older, there were more divorce rates than those of younger ages (Crouch, 2007). Another interesting statistic is between 2003 and 2011, this was considered a place of “lifetime risk” of divorce, where 38-40% of Canadians divorced before their 30th wedding anniversary (Butterfield, 2017). As well, second and third marriages in Canada are also more likely to end in divorce. Since the rate shows that divorce occurs before the 30th wedding anniversary, it is typically said that marriages last up to only 13.7 years (Butterfield, 2017). However, these divorce rates are not just numbers. When kids are involved, divorce has a large impact on them. Therefore, researchers see a strong relationship between juvenile delinquents and divorced parents. For instance, of the juvenile criminals, 75% of them are from broken homes (Crouch, 2007). Out of the broken homes, most of them are single mothers raising children. This can lead to youth criminality because if young men are growing up in a house without a father, it has been seen that they are more likely to end up in jail than those who come from a heterosexual family (mother and father/maternal and parental influences) (Crouch, 2007).

A Brief Overview of Divorce over the years

The origins of what we call modern divorce come from the same values that eventually got put above the marital relationship of all personal and familial commitments. This is in terms of the concentration of emotion, passion, personal identity, and self-validation in the couple’s relationship and the reduction of emotional attachments (Coontz, 2007). In today’s day and age in terms of relationships, the causes of divorce may be seen as differential factors that include: psychological characteristics of the spouse that do not coincide with the other spouse, to monetary stressors (Coontz, 2007). However, in the bigger picture, the past made marriage the central idea and commitment to a relationship (Coontz, 2007). In today’s day and age, you can make a commitment without marriage, but most people have the traditional idea that marriage is a must.

It was back in the Enlightenment days, that marriage was seen to be based on love and companionship (Coontz, 2007). After those enlightenment days, conservatives in that era warned people that in traditional marriages, love would be the death of marriage (Coontz, 2007). As people were led to believe that notion, they would marry only appropriate mates of society. Back in that time of the 18th century, the concerns of the conservatives were that poor people would be given the right to marry (Coontz, 2007). The conservatives were afraid of the idea of poor people having the right to be married because they loved each other, instead of seeing that love was the danger (Coontz, 2007).

From those days, the social conservative’s predictions were made too soon. Access to divorce laws was easily obtainable almost immediately by many supports, and the French Revolution temporarily made divorce easier than it would be until the 1970s era was around, the increase in divorce rates went up gradually in this time (Coontz, 2007). The idea of divorce spread and judges all around became more in-depth on a case-to-case basis towards couples who wanted a divorce (Coontz, 2007). In America, however, fewer than half the states accepted the fact that abuse was the only reason for a divorce before 1840. After that time, however, abuse became to be less of a strong reason, and by 1860 more states allowed divorce in cases of not being healthy enough to live with the spouse (Coontz, 2007). To put it in perspective, between 1880 and 1890, the United States experienced a high increase in divorce (Coontz, 2007). Even a professor at Cornell University predicted that by 1980, more marriages would end in divorce rather than death, and he was only off by 10 years (Coontz, 2007).

Some factors that lead to divorce, provided by Butterfield (2017) include ideas like people are getting married at younger ages and are growing apart faster. This could be from career changes, and moving to another city for work which could trigger a separation from the ideological love that they once had. Some factors that some partners go through are emotional, psychological, physical, or financial abuse during the years, and then decide to separate for the sake of themselves and their children (Butterfield, 2017). The factor that a lot of researchers also see is that couples stay together for a lot of years, but then they decide to separate on the idea that they have been unhappy in the marriage for a long time and that not being together would bring back their happiness. As well as, people separate when they see a financial opening. Meaning when real estate goes up, or after receiving an inheritance (Butterfield, 2017).

Psychological Impact of Divorce on Youth

A family is supposed to be one of the most comforting and emotionally stable forces in a person’s life (Wright & Wright, 1995). They are supposed to teach children to understand what is unacceptable behavior, to delay gratification, and to respect other people around them, regardless of who they are (Wright & Wright, 1995). Well, that is what families are supposed to teach their children, however, it seems like more and more, families are teaching aggressive, antisocial, and violent behavior (Wright & Wright, 1995). That is why we are seeing more development of youth delinquents.

Children who are neglected by their parents, go through life with a lot of parental conflict, are not supervised correctly, and are at a larger risk of becoming delinquent at young ages (Wright & Wright, 1995) This can also go another way, that if a child is being troublesome or aggressive, then they can be rejected easily by their parents which leads into the cycle again. However, not all children in homes like that follow down the same path. Research does confirm that children who are raised in supportive, affectionate, and two-parent homes are less likely to become delinquents (Wright & Wright, 1995). The single-parent families, (in particular mother-only families) raise more delinquent children than two-parent families. The studies show that parenting practices account for most, but not all, of the differences between the two groups (Wright & Wright, 1995).

In 2009, was a survey produced that asked about 1,000 teenagers, in the age of youth, to share their opinions on divorce (Jolivet, 2012). The survey presented their attitudes, thoughts, and feelings about divorce and family issues. The teenagers that were surveyed were both from marriages and divorced homes (Jolivet, 2012). Ultimately the message received from the children is that they wanted their parents to stay together, but if that was not possible, to keep them out of their conflict (Jolivet, 2012). When the teens were asked what they wanted their parents to know, they said that the divorce hurt, and sucked and that they don’t want to be blamed for it or be caught in the middle of the divorce or the relationship between the two parents. (Jolivet, 2012).

In the article, Jolivet (2012), explains that studies have shown that the effects of consistent conflict on children lead to feelings of: “ chronic stress, insecurity, and agitation; shame, self-blame, and guilt; a chronic sense of helplessness; fears for their own physical safety; a sense of rejection, neglect, and lack of interest in the well-being” (Jolivet, 2012). However, the research also shows that the effect of high-conflict divorce on children roughly doubles in the rate of behavioral and emotional adjustment problems (Jolivet, 2012).

Specifically, psychological scholars, suggest that children who experience family conflict at home and are in a hostile home environment increase stress and anxiety, which leads to a lower psychological adjustment to the environment they are in and are presented with negative life outcomes (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). Also, there is an association between parental divorce and negative outcomes that can be explained by the parental absence. Parental absence is predicted to be related to negative outcomes because there is a removal of a resource from the home that leads to a lower income, less supervision of the children, less parental attention and support, and a decrease in attachment to their parents because of the lack attention and support (Boccio & Beaver, 2019).

Having absent parents also falls in line with several criminological theories that have been seen to help explain the relationship between parental divorce and delinquent behavior (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). Control theory for instance is used in suggestions that experiencing parental divorce has a big impact on the bonds that are supposed to form between parents and their children. This lack of bond would increase the likelihood that children will engage in deviant behavior (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). Also, adding to that point, removing a parent from the household reduces the ability for both parents to have control over their Child’s behavior- freeing the child to engage in deviant or criminal activities. (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). Another theory that can be used to explain the relationship between divorce and youth delinquency is the social learning theory. This can help explain the relationship because, when children are from divorced families, and there is a lack of parental supervision, the children/youths may spend more time with delinquent peers (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). On the other side of things, strain theory, which falls more towards conflict in families, strain theory suggests that parental divorce exposes children to strain (both psychologically and physically) and, therefore, increases the likelihood that they will engage in deviant behavior (Boccio & Beaver, 2019).

With every relationship between two factors, there are always different explanations and outcomes. For example, it is possible that parents who get divorce, are highly different from parents who do not divorce, and with the situation being so different, not all children will have the same outcome in life (Boccio & Beaver, 2019). Parents who get divorced, for example, could be more likely to have stronger tempers (for reasons such as genetics or socialization), which increases the likelihood of engaging in criminal behaviors (Boccio & Beaver, 2019).

Relation of divorce to delinquent youths

As early as the 1960s, research has shown a considerably higher rate of incidents of family conflict among youths convicted of criminal offenses than among the non-criminal youth population (Juby & Farrington, 2001). Interestingly enough, one American researcher in the 1950s found that a large part of the relationship might have to do with the difference in treatment by the police and the courts. This can be explained because two-parent homes were seen to be better at providing better supervision, youths from these homes were less likely to be seen in court than those who come from conflicted families (Juby &Farrington, 2001).

In Juby & Farrington (2001), they explain that there are life course theories to help explain the relationship between delinquents and divorce. The theories show that divorce is a process that is characterized by a lot of potentially stressful experiences that begin before the actual separation of the parents and the stressors continue after the process is done (Juby & Farrington, 2001). The theories also suggest that it is not just one type of stressor, but it is the number of negative events that can come from the problems of the children involved in the divorce (Juby & Farrington, 2001). However, in terms of a criminological aspect, family disruption itself is a huge risk factor for youth delinquency. Especially those children under the age of 5, they are at a higher risk of delinquency than those children who had experienced family disruption at an older age (Juby & Farrington, 2001).

Not only is it the disruption of the family itself, but there is also a high correlation between juvenile delinquency and trauma. It has been seen that those youths with a juvenile justice system record, have been found more likely to have experienced multiple forms of trauma, with more than half reporting exposure to multiple types of trauma each year (Baglivio & Epps, 2016).

Specifically, with respect to the numbers, in a comparison of over 90,000 official criminal youths, have been placed in Child Protection Services due to parental conflict and abuse, as well as foster care placement has been shown to make a high contribution to the risk for delinquency (Baglivio & Epps, 2016). Another point Baglivio & Epps (2016) make is that the differences in criminal youths between those exposed to parental divorce and those from intact families have not decreased, despite the increase they saw in social acceptability and prevalence of divorce in recent decades (Baglivio & Epps, 2016). This was an interesting point made because they looked at adoptive and biological families to back the point up, and they found that the relationship with criminal youths was driven by the parental divorce experience.

From a study done by van de Weijer et al (2015), it was found that children from one-parent families are at a larger risk of dropping out of school, leaving the labor force, becoming pregnant as a teen, and having a lower psychological well-being. This is in correlation to those children from two-parent families. As we know, dropping out of school and not working are both risk factors for delinquency. Even previous studies have presented, consistently, that divorce also leads to their children being antisocial, which then leads to criminal behavior (van de Weijer et al, 2015). To make the point stand higher, research shows that youth criminality occurs more often among children with divorced parents than among children with married parents (van de Weijer et al, 2015).

The relationship between the idea that divorced (or single-parent family), and children’s behavior problems can be tied into a few theoretical perspectives (van de Weijer et al, 2015). According to the research from van de Weijer et al (2015), the movement from a two-parent, to a one-parent family might also lead to a loss of income, and parental and community resources, which then causes problems in the family as there are strains put on the single parent. The research argues that one-parent families who have less income, since there is only one parent providing and earning the income, show fewer expenses that can be shared (van de Weijer et al, 2015). Since parental divorce decreased resources, fathers who live in a separate house due to the divorce, are seen to have less contact with their children, which young children look at as a lack of commitment to them, trust, and less supervision of the child itself (van de Weijer et al, 2015).

Since single parents have more expenses, and fewer resources, single mothers or single fathers cannot afford to reside in good communities, with resources for their children (van de Weijer et al, 2015). Fewer resources for the children back up the idea that they will most likely drop out of school, and it will lead to a lot of antisocial problems as adolescents. Even when the children have no outside-of-school activities because the parents can’t afford them, or have the time to get them there, it shows that one-parent families don’t have the time, are less supportive of their children, has little to no rules or complete harsh discipline, and they engage in more conflict with their children because they have no significant other to take their anger out on (van de Weijer et al, 2015).

Conclusion

To conclude, we can now see that divorce has a large impact on a child, and can be a risk factor when leading kids into delinquent activities. When looking at the numbers, divorce rates are not just numbers we analyze. When kids are involved, divorce has a large impact on them, whether it be psychological or physical. Researchers see a strong relationship between juvenile delinquents and divorced parents. For instance, of the juvenile criminals, 75% of them are from broken homes (Crouch, 2007). Out of the broken homes, most of them are single mothers raising children. This can lead to youth criminality because if young men are growing up in a house without a father, these young men are seen to be more likely to end up in jail, than those who come from a traditional home (mother and father/maternal and parental influences) (Crouch, 2007). Along with risk factors, we see that criminological theories such as; social leaning, strain, and social bond theories all help explain the relationship between divorce and youth criminality. Therefore, there is a strong relationship between the two factors, and we are not seeing a change in the numbers as long as divorce rates increase.

Bibliography

1. Baglivio, T. M., Epps, N. (2015). The interrelatedness of adverse childhood experiences among high-risk juvenile offenders. Youth, Violence and Juvenile Justice, 14 (3), 179-198.
2. Boccio, M. C., Beaver, M. K. (2019). The influence of family structure on delinquent behavior. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 17 (1), 88-106.
3. Butterfield, M. (2017). Divorce Statistics in Canada: A snapshot. Retrieved on March 3rd, 2019, from: https://www.butterfieldlaw.ca/divorce-statistics-in-canada-a-snapshot/
4. Coontz, S. (2007). The origins of modern divorce. Family Process, 46 (1), 1-10.
5. Crouch, J. (2007). Divorce Statistics and Studies Blog, Divorce rates: Understanding Divorce Rates. Retrieved from http://www.divorcereform.org/crime.html, on January 30th, 2019.
6. Howell, N. (2015). A link between single-parent families and crime. School of Graduate and Continuing Studies, 1-95.
7. Juby, T., Farrington, P. H. (2001). Disentangling the link between disrupted families and delinquency. The British Journal of Criminology, 41 (1), 22-40.
8. Jolivet, R. K. (2012). The psychological impact of divorce on children: what is a family lawyer to do? American Journal of Family Law, 25 (4), 175-183.
9. Van de Weijer, G.A. S., Thornberry, P. T., Bijleveld, C.J.H. C., Blokland, A.J. A. (2015). The effects of parental divorce on the intergenerational transmission of crime. Societies, 5, 89-108.
10. Wright, N. K., Wright, E. K. (1995). Family life and Delinquency and crime: A policymakers’ guide to the literature. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1-61.

Cause and Effect Essay on Serial Killers

Are serial killers made? Does abuse make serial killers?

One social factor is whether the serial killer has been abused. Many studies have found that there is a link between serial killers and abuse. A study by Mitchell and Aamodt in 2005 wanted to find the rate of abuse in a sample of convicted serial killers compared to a sample in the general population. They found that 36% of serial killers were physically abused, 26% of serial killers were sexually abused and 50% of people were psychologically abused. They also found that 32% of Serial killers were not abused. They found that 6% of the general population was physically abused, 3% was sexually abused and 2% was psychologically abused. They found that 70% of people were not abused. As a result, serial killers are more likely to have child abuse than the general population. This suggests that serial killer behavior might be caused by abuse as there is a higher percentage of people who are abused that are serial killers than the general population.

Does Maltreatment from the mother cause serial killer behavior?

Maltreatment from the mother causes serial killer behavior because we are weird to feel the bond between them is so incredibly fundamental to our survival and then when that person who is the number one priority in infancy betrays us and is stressful to the child. This suggests that serial killer behavior is caused by maltreatment from the mother because

Case Study

Henry Lucas was born on 23rd August 1936 in Blacksburg, Virginia. His dad was an alcoholic and a former railroad employee who had lost his legs in a train accident. His mother was a violent prostitute who would beat Henry Lucas and his half-brother for sometimes no reason. When Henry was a teenager, Henry was introduced to bestiality and killing animals for pleasure. When in a fight with his half-brother, he injured his eyes and did not get it looked at for 3 days. As a result, his eye became infected, and he had to have a glass eye. In 1951, Lucas killed a girl because she wanted to make sexual advances. However, he said he did not kill the girl later. He was then convicted of many accounts of burglary in 1954. He was sentenced to 6 years. He escaped prison, however, was recaptured. In late 1959, he moved to Michigan to live with Opal, his half-sister. Lucas got engaged in Michigan. However, when his mother came to visit Henry for Christmas, his mother was not happy with his son’s fiancee and told him to move back to Virginia. Henry did not want to move back to Michigan, and he argued with his mother. On 12th January 1960, Henry stabbed his mother with a knife. Henry claimed that he was in bed and then woken up by his mother and his mother beat him with a broom. After killing his mother, he drove back to Virginia in a stolen car. He then drove back to Michigan, however, was arrested in Ohio. Henry said he killed his mother in self-defense however, this was not believed, and he was charged with second-degree murder with 20 – 40 years in prison. He was released on 22nd August 1975 after serving 15 years. After being released from prison, he traveled around the American South, and he met Ottis Toole. Henry claims to have an affair with Ottis’ niece, Frieda Powell. During this time, Henry killed hundreds of people. After Henry agreed to go to Florida, Frieda and Henry argued at a petrol station in Bowie and Frieda left with a trucker. In June 1983, Lucas was arrested for a firearm violation, however, was later charged with the murder of 82-year-old Kate Rich and the murder of Frieda. Henry claims that the police stripped him naked, did not allow him to contact a lawyer, did not allow bedding and a cigarette, and was in a cold cell. After four days, he confessed to all his crimes in order to get better treatment. At the end of his statement, he wrote ‘I am not allowed to contact anyone I’m alone in here by myself and still can’t talk to a lawyer on this I have no rights so what can I do to convince you all about this.’ The forensic evidence has been condemned as being inconclusive from Kate’s and Freieda’s murder. They found a bone fragment from a burning wood stove that is believed to be Rich’s. They also found a mostly complete skeleton that matched Frieda’s age and size. However, the coroner stopped identifying the bones before positively identifying them. He pleaded guilty to the murders of Kate and Freida. He also stated that he ‘killed about a hundred women’ as well. Lucas said, ‘If they were going to make me confess to one, I didn’t do, then I was going to confess to everything.’ Henry was then taken from state to state to talk to different police agencies to help solve lots of unsolved murders. In November 1983, Henry was transferred to a jail in Williamson County Texas. There was a task force created called the Lucas Task Force. The task force officially cleared Henry of 213 murders due to his confessions. Henry claims the only reason he confessed to all the murders was to improve his condition as he said he received different treatment that was not given to other prisoners. For example, he said he was allowed to wander the police stations, and taken to restaurants and cafes. In Huntington, Henry confessed to the murder of a man that was previously ruled as a suicide. The widow received a large life insurance settlement that was earlier denied. However, the ranger, Phil Ryan became worried about the veracity of Henry’s confessions Ryan would tell Henry about fictional crimes and Henry would say he had some involvement in them. When Henry confessed to a crime, a case file would be sent to the Lucas Task Force. Henry would be questioned and sometimes allowed to read the case file. As a result, he could use information that only the police had and use it in interviews. Henry claimed that Henry was part of a cannibalistic cult called ‘The Hand of Death.’ He said that he killed Jimmy Hoffa and gave poison to Jim Jones, the cult leader. The Texas Attorney’s office issued a study in 1986 as a result of the methodology of the Lucas Task for and the reports about the Lucas Task Force. Most of the report was a timeline of Henry’s claimed murders. Also in the report, they compared the murders Henry claimed to have committed to reliable sources about where Henry was at the time of the crime. They found that where the crimes were and where the reliable source said Henry did not match up, so they were unsure whether he committed the crime or not. One example is on 10th August 1977, Henry claimed to have murdered Curby Reeves in Smith County, Texas, however, he was working a full shift at the Kaolin Mushroom Company in Kaolin, Pennsylvania, which is backed by the payroll records. Another example is on 20th March 1979, Henry claimed he murdered Elaine Tollet, however, as seen in the medical records, Henry was in a hospital in Bluefield, West Virginia. Another example is Henry claimed to have been involved in a robbery-murder however, Chris Piazza, at the time, a prosecutor in Little Rock, Arkansas said that ‘the testimony of Henry Lee Lucas … is dubious, to say the least’ and ‘inaccurate in nearly every detail.’ Henry was convicted of 11 crimes. He was sentenced to death for the murder of an unidentified woman, who got the name ‘Orange Socks’ as it was the only item of clothing she was wearing. She was found on Halloween 1979 in Williamson County in Texas. Henry’s confession was recorded, however, showed signs of being edited, as a result, some people believed that the police removed the parts that showed they were telling Lucas about the crimes. Dan Morales said that it was highly unlikely that Henry murdered the woman named Orange Socks. He was also skeptical of the Lucas Report, however, he then ended up supporting it. Cecil Kuykendall, the Williamson County prosecutor, thought that Henry was not a suspect because his confessions showed he was not a suspect and there was evidence that Henry was in Florida working as a roofer, when ‘orange sock’ was killed. Henry told Shelladay, that he confessed to murder as legal suicide and that he just wanted to die. Henry said he was in deep regret and sorrow for giving false confessions, saying that he ‘was not aware how crooked they [Texas authorities] were until it was too late.’ Also, The Houston Chronicle article also said that Henry gave confessions for several reasons, for example, improving his conditions, wanting to embarrass the police, and feeling guilty about killing Powell and Rich. Mattox was aware that some of his confessions might not be true. In 1999 in the Rafael Resendez-Ramirez case, he said I hope they do not start pinning him [Henry] on every crime that happens near a railroad track.’ Ottis Toole, Henry’s supposed confederate, died from cirrhosis of the Liver in September 1996 while serving six life sentences in a Florida prison. In 1998, the Texas Board of Pardon and Parole voted to recommend changing Henry’s death sentence to life imprisonment. George W Bush, the then-governor agreed to change his death sentence to life imprisonment, the only time he changed a sentence in his entire time of being governor. On 13th March 2001, Henry Lucas died in prison from heart failure aged 64. This suggests that serial killers are made because he committed crimes and might be linked to the abuse he suffered when he was a kid. As a result, this shows that if someone is abused when they are young, there is a chance they could become a serial killer.

Does being raised without a father cause serial killer behavior?

The absence of a father is the single most cause of a crime. Boys are three times more likely to go to jail if they don’t have a father than peers who do have intact families. Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation said that children are two times more likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime if they don’t have a father and they are also three times more likely to go to jail by the age of 30 than children that live in intact families. This causes serial killer behavior because this crime could be murder and if the person is more likely to do this more than once so are more likely to become serial killers.

Does a parent’s fight cause serial killer behavior?

In the 1950s, Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, Harvard professors, did a study and found that one-third of boys from their sample from boys from houses with spouse abuse were likely to commit crimes. The number of criminal behaviors was higher in intact families with a higher amount of conflict and neglect compared to a broken home that does not have conflict. This causes serial killer behavior because if the boys come from houses with spouse abuse, they are more likely to commit crimes, which could be murder, as a result, if they commit several murders they become a serial killers and are more likely to because they are more likely to commit a crime.

Do parents break up cause serial killer behavior?

If a child’s parents break up within the first five years of a child’s life, the child is at risk of becoming a criminal. Most marriages usually end after about three to four years, so a large proportion of very young children see and go through the emotional pain of the start and the end of marital dissolution. This is also the time when the children are most vulnerable to disruptions in their emotional attachment to their parents, which impacts them when they become teenagers and mature. Teenagers in blended or divorced families also tend to have more behavioral problems. This causes serial killer behavior because if their parent’s breakup when their child is under 5, the child could have behavioral problems and these behavioral problems could cause them to become a serial killer.

Does Being in a stepfamily cause serial killer behavior?

Issues in families where at least one of the parents is biologically the parent of the child (stepfamilies) can also have serious effects. A professor of Criminology at California Sate University, Jil Leslie Rosenbaum, in a study she conducted for the California Youth Authority of female delinquents says ‘In the two-parent families examined in this study a great deal of conflict was present. Of these parents, 71% fought regularly about their children. The conflict usually came from one set of children who belong to one parent having a bad influence over the set of children who belong to the other parent as in the conflict there was ‘his,’ ‘hers’ and ‘theirs’ present. the type of punishment invoked, or one particular child receiving too much attention.’

There are much higher rates of conflict outside married families that are intact. The rate of behavioral and emotional problems in children is more than double in stepfamilies. As a result, this shows that there are major effects on the amount of teenage crime due to the marriage arrangement of parents.

This causes serial killer behavior because if 71% of parents fought, this could cause double the emotional problems in stepfamilies and behavioral problems, Behavioral problems could be linked to serial killer behavior, which would then be more likely to cause them to become serial killer.

Does the influence of criminal parents cause serial killer behaviors?

Violent children usually come from violent parents. In 2007, over 1.5 million children had a father in prison and 147,000 children had a mother in prison. The children who are violent are the most likely to have seen violence and conflict between their parents. Also, they are more likely to commit many different types of crimes (become ‘versatile’ criminals) and are more likely to commit serious violent crimes. This causes serial killer behavior because if they have parents that have committed crimes, this crime could be murder and if they commit more than one murder, they will become a serial killer.

Does the Neighbourhood cause serial killer behavior?

Family violence that happens inside the family is one of the major contributors to teenage violence in socially disorganized neighborhoods. The neighborhood itself is, includes the youth’s violent peers who are also rooted in their own broken families) is the other powerful reason, especially for a person who is more likely to commit a crime, and its culture of violence and aggression then is more likely to happen in schools. This causes serial killer behavior because if they live in a neighbourhood that has a lot of serial killers in it, the person is more likely to become a serial killer.

Does the quality of parenting cause serial killer behavior?

When a child’s emotional attachment is to their parent, it helps them to become a well-adjusted adult, as a result, if a parent rejects a child, it can have major negative effects. A professor of sociology at the Lowa State University, found that ‘Rejected children tend to distrust and attribute malevolent motives to others, with the result being a defensive, if not aggressive, approach to peer interactions… Such [rejecting] parents not only fail to model and reinforce prosocial behavior, but they actually provide training in aggressive noncompliant behavior. This causes serial killer behavior because if a child does not become a well-adjusted adult,

When a family rejects a child, which is the child’s first and most fundamental ‘community’ it sets the stage for another social tragedy. Children who have been rejected are more likely to gradually drop out of normal community life. Professor Simons continues: ‘Parental rejection… increased the probability of a youth’s involvement in a deviant peer group, reliance upon an avoidant coping style, and use of substances.’ Many other studies in the professional literature also find this. Parents and children bonding is important to help protect against youth violence. This causes serial killer behavior because if the person is more violent, this could mean the child could commit violent crimes like murder and if they commit a lot of murders, they will become a serial killer.

Conclusion

Overall, I think that serial killers are born, however, I think that serial killers can be influenced by what they experience when they are a child but cannot cause them to become serial killers. I think that there must be something there that can create a serial killer inside some people. This is because not everyone who is abused becomes a serial killer and if serial killers were made, most people who were abused would become serial killers. However, I do believe that nurture factors can help to make someone into a serial killer and that some serial killers would not be serial killers due to their past. However, I also believe that upbringing affects whether someone becomes a serial killer or not because if they are not taught how to behave properly as a child, they might not become a serial killer as they would have known how to behave and what is right or wrong. An example is a serial killer whose father was also a serial killer, as a result, the serial killer was not taught when he was young that murdering people was wrong so would kill people and not realize what he was doing was wrong.

Definition Essay on Cyber Crime

Cybercrime also called PC crime, is the use of a PC as a tool to further illegal ends, together with committing fraud, trafficking in infant pornography and highbrow property, stealing identities, or violating privacy. Cybercrime, especially via the Internet, has grown in importance as the PC has grown to be principal to trade, leisure, and government.

Because of the early and full-size adoption of computer systems and the Internet in the United States, most of the earliest sufferers and villains of cybercrime have been Americans. By the twenty-first century, hardly a hamlet remained anywhere in the international that had not been touched by using cybercrime of 1 type or some other.

Cybercrime, or Computer-orientated crime, is a crime that involves a PC and a network. The computer can also have been used in the fee of a crime, or it may be the goal. Cybercrimes may be defined as ‘Offences that are dedicated against individuals or companies of individuals with a crook reason to deliberately damage the popularity of the sufferer or cause physical or mental damage, or loss, to the sufferer directly or in a roundabout way, the usage of contemporary telecommunication networks which includes the Internet (networks including chat rooms, emails, be aware boards and corporations) and mobile phones (Bluetooth/SMS/MMS)’. Cybercrime might also threaten a person or a country’s security and monetary fitness.

There rectangular degree numerous examples of styles of cybercrimes that happened throughout the planet. A number of the cases are—

• The extortion was done with the aid of the dominant PC put together
• Unapproved get right of entry to or trade of facts or utility
• Protected innovation prison that consists of programming robbery
• Modern spying and access to or offense of laptop materials
• Composing or spreading laptop infections or malware
• Carefully diffusing baby erotic pastime

Discussion

Here incidences of cybercrimes rectangular degree being referred to shed lightweight on the steps that must be taken as a precaution.

Example 1: Attack on Indian Atomic Energy Plant

The cyberattack took area on Kundankulam powerhouse in province associate degree Indian state. The cyber attackers have been supposed to be operating from D.P.R.K. As mentioned. The Kundankulam atomic energy plant was designed with the help of the Russian authorities. It’s quite an expected nuclear power plant undertaking in India. The North Korean cyber aggressor took crucial information and data concerning this nuclear electricity plant. The reality is that the operation space is hugely related to the government area of the Kundankulam atomic strength plant. However, as per the report of officials of the potential plant, the operation area can’t be hacked by way of any hacker from any nook of the planet. However, the release of VirusTotal, intently held by means of Google’s discern agency Alphabet famous for the attack taking region from the govt space of the plant due to the fact the frame area is hooked up with the operational vicinity. The crucial facts and records concerning the technique of installing an atomic electricity plant were hacked and felony fully via the hacker. It’s expected that critical steps are going to be taken by way of the officials of the Kundankulam nuclear electricity plant to restore the data know-how the information and information.

Example 2: UIDAI Aadhaar hacked

From 2018 to center 2019, the crucial data and information of the UIDAI were hacked and compromised by some unidentified folks. It’s genuine that over an hour of the Indian voters maintaining the card rectangular degree the victim of such hackings. It ends up lots of prone because the aadhaar card is connected to every sector of the people like the bank, PAN card, and different respectable sports. Therefore, the banking information too has been compromised in the course of that amount. As per the government officers, 210 government websites are hacked at night. Except for this, the nameless merchandiser was promoting to sell the aadhaar card towards 500INR. The question arises. However, one unidentified character will sell any such sensitive ID card over WhatsApp. Later on, the govt has regarded the explanations behind such hacking.

Additionally, the government thenceforth has taken several steps concerning the safety of the Indian parents but as their sensitive and susceptible private info. Therefore, it is discernible that the government isn’t in any such grip to grow the quick help to the oldsters. It’s really useful to shield the records protection and breaching coverage a number of disturbing to live its parents safe.

Conclusion

It’s cited the type of cyber attacks that take place all throughout the planet regularly. The government should take preventative measures in opposition to cyber aggressors. It’s determined that cyber attackers square degree the fame to the one whose facts and know-how square degree criminal. Therefore, the parents need to be privy to giving exceptional men and women their info. The govt should implement stressful movements and construct a few arduous regulations towards cyber aggressors. Except for these, the cash establishments UN employer rectangular measure less careful over preserving their privateness coverage must recognize each detail of cyber assaultive systems. The cyber attackers compromise the information the data of the groups and distinct people by way of taking many techniques like phishing, hacking, software program system piracy, and masses of numerous ways wherein. Therefore, it’s the duty of every person and authority to confirm protection over the statistics and knowledge.

Crime as a Social Problem: Essay

A crime is an offense by a person by action or omission that is punishable by law. Most crimes are dealt with by fines or prison sentences. The person who commits a crime is then prosecuted by the state or commonwealth. According to the Legal Services Commission of South Australia, there are 4 principles of criminal law: 1) innocent until proven guilty, i.e. every person charged with a crime is assumed to be innocent until otherwise stated, a judge/jury has to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt this person has committed the offense; 2) the burden of proof, where the prosecution must prove a person charged with an offense is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; 3) the right to remain silent, i.e. a person who is arrested for suspicion of an offense has the right to not answer police questions in particular cases where the police officer asks for name and address and gives false or won’t cooperate, it can be seen as another offense; 4) double jeopardy, which means a person cannot be charged twice for a crime where he has been found not guilty. Two elements of a criminal offense are the prohibited conduct and the mental element, the prosecution must show both elements are present to prove the person is guilty of committing an offense. An exemption case would be the likes of strict liability offenses, these are offenses required by the prohibited conduct element and not the mental. Crimes are split into two parts: summary and indictable convictions. Summary convictions are less serious than indictable offenses and are usually not carried with a prison sentence.

According to Hester and Eglin (1992), social problems are defined as the activities of individuals or groups who make assertions of grievances and claims concerning some putative conditions. Social problems are what people are concerned about at present and what they think should be done about the problem. Some forms of social problems have only arisen recently but have always existed as a problem, such as child abuse which only became recognized as a social problem in the early 1960s, and the likes of mugging a person only became recognized as a social problem in the 1970s, even though both crimes existed before then, they were only brought into concern during those timeframes. Sociological problems are defined as concerns that encourage sociological inquiry; the concerns are used by sociologists who are thinking deeply about different theoretical perspectives. The primary concern for sociologists is social order. Our interest in crime has more to do with sociology rather than looking for a way to fix it, in other words, punishment. The primary question in crime is what causes it and how can we stop it. The main problems with crime by people who believe crime to be a social problem are how crimes are increasing and becoming more violent, even though there has been more money invested into solving crimes and harsher penalties are being carried out.

Some sociologists view crime as a social problem because of the connection between sociology and criminology. Criminology is the study of crime and factors associated with criminal behavior; if we can understand the behavior, we can have an estimate of when it can occur and try ways to prevent a crime from happening. “Let us state quite categorically that the major task of radical criminology is to seek a solution to the problem of crime, and that of a socialist policy is to substantially reduce the crime rate”, stated Young (1986) (cited in Hester and Eglin, 1992). Lombroso studied biological criminology in the 19th century, which included criminals who were identified by their body shape, eyes, etc. Eysenck studied psychological criminology during the 20th century, which included the criminal’s personality such as introversion and extraversion, as well as insanity.

Hester and Eglin (1992) state sociological views of criminal behavior have to do with the difference in how a normal person’s and a criminal person’s environment they were brought into affected. Hilbert (1989) links deviant behavior to access to opportunities. In Sutherland’s theory in 1939, he stated there is a link between society and criminal behavior because there is exposure to ‘definitions favorable to violation of law’. The correction criminology social problem theory of crime is failing due to the attitude to do something about a crime, in other words, to enforce punishment, due to the assumption that people show a failure to appreciate the socially important character of crime as a form of both social action and human behavior and due to correctional criminology taking for granted the goal of a crime before identifying that crime is socially defined and relative. In correctional criminology, two factors of crime are: social action is intersubjectively important and crime is socially constructed.

Sociological approaches involve symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, and structural conflict theory. Symbolic interactionism looks at how acts are not criminal themselves, it is the criminal property associated with them, stating crime to be a matter of social definition. It looks at social interactions with others, looks at other people’s behavior and identifies it as criminal, and looks at how acts by a person are interpreted. Ethnomethodology looks at members of society; it looks at the recipient’s design and it looks at the social actor. The structural conflict perspective, which looks at any social fact, the structure of society more known as conflict of interests, it looks at different classes, including power, gender, and race, and their conflicts, and it looks at sociological analysis such as social and political change.

According to Henry (2009), social construction is about the idea that social reality has no independent existence outside the human mind, humans interact with the world and create images of what they believe to be reality. Some social constructionists believe primary reality to exist, and when the idea of social construction is created, it also defines reality to some level because humans are defining situations as real, they are real in relevance. Crime is an example of a social reality. We as groups construct deconstruct and replace with a less harmful reality. There are many varieties of social constructionist theory such as personal construct theory and social constructionist theory, there is also a question of to what extent social reality can be changed by humans freeing themselves from their social constructions. Crime, in this perspective, is seen as a behavior defined by individuals who have the power and authority to make laws that distinguish behavior to be offensive and to make a punishment for such behavior. The extent of crime varies in different societies, but Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn (1952) from their studies found that no society accepts lying, stealing, violence, and incest. The effect of the social construction of crime and the existence of moral panic increases crime rates in particular types of crimes due to the public discussion in the media, resulting in public awareness of behavior which increases the number of crimes reported to the police.

Harold Garfinkel (1967), who studied ethnomethodology, focused on how social order, social institutions, and social structure came about through interactions with people and everyday lives. Through their studies, they became familiar with behavior that is unacceptable or deviant, as well as normal. Ethnomethodologists’ studies distinguish people as deviants or offenders, they are trying to understand what becomes of a crime rather than people who behave as deviants and participate in radical social constructionism. Ethnomethodologists don’t just use human interactions in their studies but as well as their analysis from the constitutive process. Ethnomethodologists were focused on ways of interpretation through routine practices, whereas Herbert Blumer and George Herbert Mead were focused on John Dewey’s view of human interactions with the environment. Dewey’s (1969) demonstration showed that rather than humans being fixed to objective roles, statuses, etc., social meaning had to do with the interaction between others. According to Mead (1934), human identity was created by one’s emergent sense of self and an internalized sense of social self. Blumer in (1969) stated that people act toward each other and the world around them.

According to Durkheim and his theory of crime (2013), crime is unavoidable because people are socialized differently than others, and someone with poor socialization may think differently making them deviant due to their values and morals being different than mainstream society, and due to large cities and mixed cultures and lifestyles, there are subcultures which also might not have the same value and morals as mainstream society. Another factor to crime being unavoidable is that anomie exists which causes people to do their own thing, where, Durkheim believes, this has an impact on high levels of crime and deviance. Even though crime is bad for society, Durkheim believed that no crime is bad for society. These are two examples he uses to prove this: boundary maintenance (the purpose of the law and justice system is to decrease crimes and warn citizens of the consequence of breaking the law) and adaptation and change (when a person acts out as in goes against society, they are allowing the society to adapt and grow because they are challenging standard society. Durkheim may be criticized for his views because crime is necessarily a bad thing, but Durkheim does not state that crime needs to be in society to function, etc. “Imagine a community of saints in an exemplary and perfect monastery. In it, crime as such will be unknown, but faults that appear venial to the ordinary person will arouse the same scandal as does normal crime in ordinary consciences. If therefore that community has the power to judge and punish, it will term such acts criminal and deal with them as such” (Durkheim, 1982).

Throughout my essay, I have analyzed crime as a social problem. A final question arises: to what extent should sociologists attempt to combat the ‘social problem of crime’? I think sociologists should analyze people’s interactions with others and record them to prevent a certain person from acting in a deviant way and committing a crime, they should then inform the police to keep watch on the person with deviant behavior.

Essay on Nelson Mandela

The recent Rivonia trial which concluded on June 12 1964 brought about the sentence of Nelson Mandela as well as nine other members of the African National Congress to life imprisonment. In October 1963, Mandela (along with Walter Sisulu, and Govan Mbeki) and his other colleagues were tried for treason, sabotage, and conspiracy against the apartheid administration of South Africa. This trial, which was covered extensively by the South African Daily, featured an extremely misleading speech by the leader of the African National Congress (ANC). In his speech, Mandela tried to justify his unruly actions against the South African government with claims of “white supremacy” and “racial discrimination.” These claims were gravely insufficient to justify his actions and many other crimes committed against the South African administration.

In his speech, Mandela attempted to give excuses for his non-compliance with the state of emergency and the declaration of the ANC as unlawful by saying that Africans were not part of the government. Shockingly, such a violent and dark conspiracy could be justified primarily because a few blacks were not part of the law-making process. It is even more shocking that Mandela – who presents himself to be an advocate for peace – could resort to such violent procedures to prove his point. His acts of terrorism also make one question whether Mandela’s ideal state of equality will truly be beneficial to the people of South Africa. His other actions of mass destruction, kidnapping, and trying to influence the South African administration also make one question his true intentions. His acts of violence were not fruitful from the outcome of the trial. Instead, the Sharpeville shooting of 1960 led to the loss of lives and property. An element of hypocrisy can also be observed in his condemnation of the violence in South Africa, yet through his acts of terrorism, he continues to widen the scale of violent attacks. It is also clear that the aim of “equality” is primarily a façade for the destruction of the democratic procedures of the government of South Africa.

Nelson Mandela’s speech constantly features him playing the victim card of the situation of Africans for his benefit. He makes statements about the economic situations of the typical black man in South Africa which also do not provide adequate justifications for his numerous crimes against the South African government. For example, Mandela constantly loathes the treatment of Africans when compared to whites in terms of education, health, and employment. He might have correctly stated that South Africa is the richest nation in Africa, but he presumes insignificant the possibility that blacks in South Africa will probably be among the richest blacks in the world. The Republic of South Africa accounts for about forty-three percent of the mineral production output of Africa. This makes the citizens of South Africa comparatively in a better position than those in other African countries. He overshadowed his criminal acts with pleas of insignificant importance.

Apart from the crimes of treason, sabotage, and conspiracy, Mandela and his colleagues are also guilty of espionage. In trying to overthrow the government, the members of the African National Congress also agreed to leak sensitive information about the current administration to harm the administration. Their plans were not only to overthrow the government but to leak and spread false information about the South African leaders. Before this illicit plan could come to fruition, an anonymous whistleblower exposed to the South African Daily their plans before the arrangement reached a broader scope. This is one of the many dangers Mandela and his group could have brought upon our beloved country.

It can be observed that justice has taken its course seeing as the most prominent members of the ANC, including Nelson Mandela, have been sentenced to life imprisonment. This shows that any person truly guilty offence committed against the government of a country will fully face the wrath of the law. Espionage and terrorism are severe offenses that should not be taken lightly. I hope that others guilty of such crimes will also be dealt with justly.

Unemployment and Crime Essay

Northern Mexico is notorious for high crime as a result of inequality (Enamorado et al., 2016). Drawing on empirical evidence of the link between education and crime reduction (Jonck et al., 2015; Chioda et al. 2016), the vision of this project is to reduce crime among adolescents, by increasing upper secondary school attendance, improving the quality of learning, and increasing completion rates of upper secondary school. To achieve these objectives, a two-pronged approach comprising a conditional cash transfer (CCT) program and a school-based management system will be implemented over three years in the targeted area.

Introduction

The narratives around education, cash transfers, school governance, and crime in Mexico are varied and at times contradictory. Mexico, a middle-income country and member of the OECD (Source, year OECD, 2014) has been lauded for its cash transfer and school governance programs (Corona and Gammage, 2017, Parker, 2017, World Bank, 2017), which have been replicated around the world, crime and inequality in Mexico persist (Enamorado, 2016; Leenen and Cervantes-Trejo, 2014; World Bank, 2013). Mexico’s extreme poverty rates have fallen only 2 percentage points between 1992 and 2012. At 14% in 2012, raters were more than double those of Brazil, a country that experienced a far greater decline in poverty levels (Troyano and Martin, 2017).

In a 2016 study, Enamorado et al. found a link between income inequity and violent crime in the period of Mexico’s drug war. The authors demonstrate that a one-point increment in the Gini coefficient between 2007 and 2010 results in a 36% increase in the number of drug-related homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. This project seeks to address inequality, and thereby crime, in Mexico by investing in education.

A considerable breadth of literature has examined the links between education, inequality, and crime. Notably, Lochner and Morretti (2004) study the impact of crime and education, finding that a 1% increase in the proportion of male students in the USA reduces youth crime by around 1.9%. The arguments for education can be classified into these broad, related, categories; education promotes social cohesion, education increases income, and education reduces unemployment.

The role of education in strengthening social cohesion by promoting respect for diverse social groups and fostering participation is highlighted by Novelli et al. (2015). Redo (2008) posits that education leads to crime reduction due to the increased belief in the state that results from a positive experience of schooling. Tendetnik et al. (2018) expand on this argument, demonstrating that mass primary and secondary education seemingly acts to mitigate state fragility. Thyne (2006, cited in Redo, 2008) points out that education gives people tools with which they can resolve disputes peacefully. In a large-scale statistical analysis of the determinants of civil war, Thyne finds that increases from 1 standard deviation below to 1 standard deviation above the mean for primary enrollment, educational expenditure, adult literacy, and secondary male enrollment decreased the probability of civil war onset between 43% and 73%.

Beyond the important role education plays in fostering the social contract, education is critical to increasing employment and income, and thereby reducing inequality. Educational inequality, as measured by skill inequality, is positively correlated with violent crime and political unrest (Green et al., 2006). Decreased access to secondary and tertiary education is linked with frustration and unemployment among youth, making them more susceptible to crime or violence (World Bank, 2005). Ellis and Walsh (2005, cited in Redo, 2008) synthesize 80 studies from Europe, North America, and other countries to show a correlation between crime and unemployment. Thorbecke and Charumilind find that inequality of income positively impacts crime rates (2002). Breton (2013) demonstrates that the marginal return on investment in schooling is more than 50% for the least educated countries. Several studies deal specifically with the socioeconomic outcomes of education in developing countries. Rates of return for education on workers in Thailand were found to be between 14 and 16%, demonstrating the ability of education to improve incomes (Warunsiri and McNown, 2010). Psacharopoulos studies rates of return to education around the world and affirms that continent-wide aggregate social and private rates of returns are significant (cited in Bennell, 1996). The rollout of universal primary education (UPA) in Uganda is regarded as a strong tool in redressing inequality and reducing poverty levels (Nakabugo, 2008). Further, Keats finds that the implementation of UPA in Uganda has downstream impacts on labor market outcomes and household wealth (2018). For these reasons, this project focuses on improving educational outcomes in northern Mexico.

Summary of the case

In a study of education and crime engagement in South Africa, Jonck et al. conclude that crime rates are positively correlated with a dichotomized society and levels of social marginalization (2015). They find that the central reasons for violence are unemployment and income inequality and recommend investments aimed at increasing upper secondary school completion rates (completing grade 12). Most of the incarcerated surveyed in the study had a medium level of education, with 46% of those incarcerated for economic crimes and 47% of those for contact crimes having only completed primary school. In the inverse, being highly educated (completion of grade 12 and above) decreased the likelihood of being incarcerated. Using lessons learned in South Africa, this project targets upper secondary school completion as a means to reduce crime in northern Mexico.

Project Objectives and Vision

This project has the ultimate vision of thriving communities in Northern Mexico that are free from crime, in which every young person can complete school and access employment.

The project objectives are to:

1. Increase upper secondary school attendance by increasing the number of households in targeted regions of northern Mexico receiving conditional cash transfers.
2. Improve the quality of learning in targeted schools of northern Mexico by implementing a school-based management system.
3. Increase completion rates of students in targeted upper secondary schools of northern Mexico by improving the quality of learning and supporting poor families to consistently enable adolescents to attend school through conditional cash transfers.