Category: Criminal Behavior

Introduction

Criminal and deviant behavior is an important topic of research in psychology, including the environmental influences and genetic influences on deviant behavior. This is important to understand because if we get a better understanding of when deviant behavior starts then maybe we can give that person help to prevent them from engaging in future criminal activities. Does a person’s genes that are inherited or the environment they grew up in lead to deviant/criminal behavior? Research seems consistent in recognizing that heritability influences adult behavior more than environmental influences, but that for children and adolescents the environment is the most significant factor influencing their behavior (Rhee & Waldman, 2002). So, we see some consistencies in both environmental influences and genes and how they play a role in developing those behavior traits. Research further states that both play a role in deviant and criminal behavior and how there is an interaction between genes and environmental influences that leads to this behavior. This research paper will go over what is nature vs nurture, how social skills are acquired through the social environment (Baker et, al. 2019) a few studies on how it relates to a few theories such as Criminology theory, Biological theories, and Social Process Theory. I will define the difference between criminal behavior and deviant behavior. Then, this paper will talk about how genetics and how its role plays in the influence on early-onset than late-onset delinquency (McGue, M. et, al. 2000) and how criminality is associated with it. Last, well see how environmental influences and peer groups impact our behavior too. With research and studies, the conclusion is that environmental influences and genes can lead to us behaving in ways that can be considered deviant and could lead to criminal activity.

Nature versus Nurture

Nature versus nurture has been associated with questions such as: Do life experiences or inherited traits play a role in shaping your personality? Do genes or environmental factors influence your behavior? The main topic of this debate is, which contributes more to the human development of genetic inheritance or environmental factors? Nature is genes and hereditary factors that help make up who we are, which can include our personality characteristics and physical characteristics which are things that are passed down from our parents. Nurture is environmental variables that can impact who we are, how we were raised, our relationship with others, our culture, and childhood experiences. This debate is vital to the question, do genetics or environmental factors lead to deviant behavior? The process of how genes and environmental factors work together to influence behavior is “Behavioral Genetics”. How can we measure such influences and genetic traits? Through experiments we do. Twins studies have been very popular in testing theories and measuring behavior patterns. Three additional sources that most researchers cite when gathering information about both genetic and environmental influences are twin, family, and adoption studies (Tehrani & Mednick, 2000). with twin studies you can use a behavior genetic research method that includes a comparison of the similarity in identical twins (monozygotic; MZ) and fraternal twins(dizygotic; DZ). However, some have concluded that there is not enough evidence from these twin, family, and adoption studies to profess that genetics do play a role in antisocial or criminal behavior (Lowenstein, 2003).

Social skills

Social skills are thought to be acquired through parents, but the biopsychosocial model shows the importance of genetic influences and gene environmental interactions. A study conducted by (Baker et, al.2019) using the nature vs nurture model of social development wanted to see how social skills were developed by parenting in children. The study consisted of 110 children, 44.5% female along with their parents to see biologically plausible independent and interactive associations. They observed positive and negative parenting throughout the early stages of childhood in early school years ages 6-9. What they found was that the SS vs SL/LL, 5-HTTLPR genotype predicted social skills. Whereas “parenting behavior moderated these associations wherein putative GxE effects differed by developmental timing and social skills domain”. ( Barker et, al.2019) They say that good parenting at 6 is concurrent with their prediction of overall good social skills with the SL/LL genotypes but not SS. But, for the SS good parenting predicted growth in social responsibility while negative parenting predicted social cooperation. With 5-HTTLPR their findings found that 5-HTTLPR may flag differential sensitivities to nurturing styles and examples of social turn of events, which may assist with advising focused on intercession ways to deal with improve individual climate fit.

Criminology Theory

Criminology is the study of why people commit crimes and why they act in specific circumstances. The debate over the causes of crime is an old one, the potential for criminal behavior has been viewed by some as being stamped on people at birth for reasons of heredity while others have maintained that criminals are made, not born. (Jones 2005) By understanding why an individual commits a crime, one can create approaches to control crime or try and rehabilitate that person. There are numerous theories in criminology. Some trait wrongdoing to the individual; they accept that an individual loads the upsides and downsides and settles on a decision whether to carry out a crime. Others trust the community must guarantee that their citizens don’t carry out crime by offering them a free safe place to live. Some learn that a few people have inactive characteristics that will decide how they will respond when placed in certain contrary conditions. By reviewing these studies/theories and applying them to people, maybe psychologists can help criminals from doing crimes over and over again and instead help in their recovery. Criminology has four groups of theories that are related to the topic they are: classical theories, biological theories, psychological theories, and social theories of crime. Next, this paper will be talking about the biological theory and how it applies to the genetic aspect of the development of crime and delinquency.

Biological Theory

Biological theories of crime are the biological nature of humans which determines if they will commit crime or not. It’s the physical and biological characteristics of criminals and non-criminals, it’s used to determine criminals from non-criminals with respect to their genetics, physical constitution, or neurology. Many genes may affect brain functioning in ways that either increase or reduce the chances of individuals learning various complex behavior patterns (Wilcox et, al. 2014). We saw from the earlier study that children learn from their parents and the environment. If a child witnesses’ violence and aggression then the probability of them acting in those ways are high. Addiction has been an example of biological traits that have been passed down from generation to generation and have been called “Hereditary”. Sometimes a child is exposed later in life to the drug then finds themselves addicted to it. This is because there can be a gene that can be associated with an addicted personality, once they are exposed to the drug, life of crime and deviant behavior may occur. Another interesting thing about the biological theory from (Rapin,2002) is that any person, talented or handicapped, whose social skills have been severely deficient since very early childhood, who started to talk late or whose communicative use of language is inadequate, and who perseverates and lacks cognitive and behavioral flexibility meets the diagnostic criteria for an autistic-spectrum disorder. This can explain how people grow up to do unexplainable crimes and severe crimes such as murder.

Social Process Theory

Social Process theory tries to show how people become criminals. It shows criminality in how people interact with various institutions, organizations, and society. This theory examines how criminal behavior is learned through others. People from all walks of life can have the potential to become criminals if they have destructive social relationships. This theory has three branches: social learning, social control, and labeling theory. This theory focuses on criminal behavior as learned behavior. For this theory to be completely tested would require that all the associations a person has ever had, be recorded and analyzed from the standpoint of the individual, which is clearly impossible (Conklin, 1989).

The influence on early-onset than late-onset delinquency

( McGue, M. et, al (2000). Proposed that early-onset delinquency has an underlying genetic influence that manifests in problems related to inhibition, whereas late-onset delinquency is more environmentally mediated. They conducted a study involving 11-year-old twins that consisted of 36 early starters, 85 late starters, and a 25 nondelinquent control group. They compared them to inhibition and peer group measures. What they found was that the early starters had more behavioral, psychological, and emotional problems related to inhibition than the control group and late starters. Further researched indicated that an increase in antisocial behavior in the late starter group just before their delinquency onset. Then the family history data and twin analysis showed that greater genetic influence in the early-onset as suppose to the late-onset delinquency.

Environmental Influences

It has been established that genetics do influence antisocial behavior or criminal behavior, genes can influence disorders and personality traits. But evidence has been found that environmental influences through peers and family can too, have a great impact. Many factors have an impact on a child’s path to crime or antisocial behavior such as the family’s education, poverty, and family structure. Research on the relationship between family environment and child behavior characterizes a child’s well-being with a positive and caring parent-child relationship, a stimulating home environment, and consistent disciplinary techniques (Schmitz, 2003). If a household doesn’t have these qualities, then the outcome of deviant behavior is highly likely. Families who don’t have strong bonds and have poor communication most likely will have a child that shows aggressive/criminal behavior. It can be concluded that less fortunate families who have many children, who all aren’t able to be punished, disciplined or given equal positive attention, will engage in some sort of antisocial or delinquent behavior. Also, another sign of future deviant criminal behavior is if abuse or neglect took place during childhood. Statistic’s shows that children are at a fifty percent greater risk of engaging in criminal acts if they were neglected or abused (Holmes et al., 2001). Peer groups are said to be a big factor as well in the development of delinquent/criminal behavior. For example, when children are in preschool and if there are signs of aggressive behavior towards their peers, they might be labeled already an outcast. In return, this creates poor peer relationships and those children will likely hang around other children with the same label. These relationships could continue into adulthood and the similar tendencies of these individuals create an environment in which they influence one another and push the problem towards criminal or violent behavior (Holmes et al., 2001).

Conclusion

There is overwhelmed evidence that concludes that both genetics and environmental influences are the causes of delinquent/criminal behavior. Nature vs Nurture helped us to see how genes help make up who we are and how nurture can impact who we are. Also, how important social skills are, how they are acquired through childhood and how they can have an influence on us. Then we saw how the criminology theory helped us to understand why people commit crimes and how they acted in specific circumstances. The biological theory explained the hereditary factors which are associated with genetics and how they can impact us as well to a life a crime. The social process theory showed us how people become criminals and how environmental influences and peer groups play a huge role in how we would behave in the future. What we can ultimately conclude is genes can possibly predict our future behavior to some degree and our environmental influences too could predict our behavior. Being a twin and also a person who has been interested in this topic, perhaps maybe because I can relate to it. I too am a firm believer in both of these being a factor in if we would live a life a crime. I had a great childhood and a lovely mother, but my father had substance abuse problems that I can say I endured at one point in my life. But I was able to correct it, and move on. Also, once I got out of high school, I had some trouble with the law, but again was able to correct it by changing the places I would hang out in, and the company I kept around. So, in a sense, I tested these theories, lived through them, and can say both are contributing factors.

Social media has developed rapidly over the past 20 years, from Instagram and Snapchat to Messenger and WhatsApp, social media keeps changing. A fascinating study by the New York Times consumer insight group revealed the motivations of using social media. These include a desire to reveal entertaining content to others, define themselves, help causes and to feel involved. 94% of users have social media to share information and support great causes like cancer. Almost a quarter of the world’s population is now on Facebook, that’s about 2 billion users worldwide. Social media brings likeminded people together which allows communities and groups to grow online. Some groups can be related to health issues where others can be about making memes. Without social media, social, ethical, environmental and political issues would have minimal visibility. This increase in knowledge has shifted the political power from a few to the masses.

However, although social media is showing everyone what’s happening around the world it is making everyone lazy and not much change is occurring. Some say that social media allows people to express their concerns without actually having to do anything. A 2013 study by the University Of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business found that when people are given the option of “liking” a social cause, they use it as an excuse to opt-out of doing anything about.

It’s easier to say something mean or rude to someone online than in real life. Not only do you not have to see them you don’t have to deal with any repercussions (most of the time). Similarly, people have a lot less privacy now with the introduction of social media. Celebrities are among those most affected by this. Anyone can snap a picture of them on the beach or in a restaurant and in no time, everyone will know where they are. Also, it encourages people to form and cherish digital friendships over actual friendships. Snapchat is a prime example of this. People can send pictures of videos everyday which creates a “streak” between them. The term ‘friend’ on social media lacks the intimacy of real friendships, where people know each other and want to frequently interact face to face.

Social media has also long been blamed for many hate crimes regarding our world today including racial, sexual orientation and disability.

Before getting into the details of hate crimes, it is imperative to understand hate crimes from the definition although it has many definitions. For easy understanding, hate crimes are any offense based on the disability, sexuality, religion, and values of the victims. Hate crimes have many angles as it depends entirely on who or the purpose of the hate crime such as, sentencing, reporting, and conceptual purpose.

The first type of hate crime is racial hate crime. Racial hate crime is the most dominant in the public order offenses in term of the number and statistics as many people fall victims of this hate crime. For example, in Australia, the number of racial hate crimes recorded between 2018 and 2019 dropped drastically to 31486 as compared to 2015, which was at 42,554. This drop was due to many campaigns and civic education by the government to the people and the pressure from the international communities. The racial hate crime is so common, since it does not cause physical harm to the victims, but it has mental and emotional damage to the victims.

Another type of hate crime is the sexual orientation and gender, People in the society today are declaring their sexual orientation as gay, lesbian or straight. However, other people do not like to have their sexual orientation known which might lead to confusion of a persons’ sexuality. Hate crime again sexuality arises when a victim is mistaken as one who belongs to a given sexual orientation, which is against his or her actual sexual orientation. In 2018 and 2019, sexual orientation crimes rose from 312 to 357 offenses. This increase was due to the varying changes in definition and incidences by people as people realised the development of sexual and gender hate crimes.

Finally, disability hate crime is another category of hate crime. This hate crime varies as it depends entirely on the definition of the disability. People with mental impairment, physical disability or visual impairment are the victims of this hate crime as they consistently face stigmatisation from society.

It’s said that information is power and in today’s world, this power is distributed among everyone and not just a selected few. Everyone knows what’s happening in the world, whose destroying trees or which countries are launching nukes. This spread of information helps everyone make educated decisions based on what’s happening and not just what they’re told. However, social media results in hate crimes in today’s society including racial, sexual orientation and disability. Hate crimes have adverse effects on these victims and sometimes can lead to the death of the victims if they do not get help. Educating the people on hate crimes is important, as it will help reduce stigmatisation and prevalence of the crime since people will be aware of hate crime and its consequences. Thus, our relationship with what’s real and fake are slowly being changed from face to face and physical to digital.

The word “friends” is also losing its meaning.

On the night of January 19, 2013, a teenager 15-year-old call Nehemiah Griego shot and killed his father, Greg Griego, 51- year-old, his mother, Sarah, 40- year-old his brother Zephania, 9- year-old; and his sisters Jael, 5- year-old, and Angelina, 2- year-old. (Metro UK news)

The first person Nehemiah Grieg killed was his mother. He waited for his mother to fall asleep, and then the child took a 22 caliber rifle and shot her. Next to her sleeping mother was her 9-year-old brother, Zephaniah. Nehemiah woke him up, told him that his mother was dead and caused the boy to see his mother dead and then killed him. After this, the younger sisters of Nehemiah, Jael and Angelina realized that something was wrong and hid in their rooms until the boy killed them too. (Albuquerque Journal).

The teenager waited five hours for his father to return from work, to complete the massacre, waited hidden in the bathroom, and as soon as the father entered the house when passing through the bathroom the young man shoots (Albuquerque newspaper).

The adolescent told the authorities after killing his family, showed no regret and even mentioned, according to the police that he would kill again. He expressed the desire to continue to kill anyone and eventually end up dead afterward.

Initially, in the juvenile court, Griego would suffer a juvenile sentence, and that he would be under custody until he turned 21 years old. But 11 days before his trial, the Court of Appeal ordered a new mechanization hearing. A week after that hearing, Griego was transferred to Hart, who finally pronounced the sentence. Griego now faces 200 years. (Albuquerque Journal).

According to the allegations of lawyers and police, Griego’s childhood was marked by abuse at home mainly by his father, so the young man suffered a traumatic brain injury as a result of mistreatment and beatings. They also described Griego’s church-linked childhood. Griego develops it into a problem of anger that led to mass murder. (APP News).

After that, in recent years Griego has been in hundreds of hours of individual, group and family therapy, according to his lawyer, Taylor. Griego has also obtained a high school diploma and has begun attending community college and vocational classes. ‘Nehemiah’s latest psychological assessment confirms substantial progress and readiness for reintegration into society,’ Taylor said in a statement (APP news). The behaviors of Nehemiah Griego are inserted in psychological science with two perspectives: Developmental Psychology and Cognitive Psychology.

Developmental Psychology is mainly a scientific approach, which aims to explain how children and adults change over time (Lerner, Lewin-Bizan, & Warren, 2011). Most uniquely, it is a field that looks at change over time and what instigated those changes (Miller, 2011).

The discipline itself has two main goals: to describe the behavior at each point in the person’s development and to identify the causal factors involved in producing changes in behavior (Vasta et al. 1998). Developmental psychology as a field has informed many other subfields of psychology as well including educational psychology, child psychopathology, and forensic developmental psychology.

The case of Nehemiah Griego can be analyzed from a perspective of developmental psychology because he lived an aggressive childhood marked by his father’s violence. This traumatic fact aroused a revolt and violence within Nehemiah Griego that made him unload by killing his family.

In contrast, cognitive psychology refers to the study of human mental processes and their role in thinking, feeling, and behaving. Perception, memory, acquisition of knowledge and expertise, comprehension and production of language, problem-solving, creativity, decision making, and reasoning are some of the broad categories of such study. Cognitive psychology focused on ‘cool’ cognition and left the study of ‘hot’ cognition—thoughts infused with emotion—to other areas such as social, personality, and clinical psychology (Phelps, 2006).

We can link the Nehemiah Griego case to the structure of weapons knowledge. Griego used his father’s gun to kill his family, he had seen it before and this may have aroused a feeling of fear because he thought his father could use it against him since he mistreated him. And that fear turned to anger and that could be one of the reasons for the massacre. ‘ Weapon ‘ concepts (e.g., gun, sword, club) are linked closely to aggression-and hostility-related concepts in semantic memory because of their similarity in meaning and their close association in common experience.

The connection between these two perspectives is in the fact that he had a difficult childhood marked by mistreatment and for having access to weapons that awaken him aggression concepts of anger, which makes the connection with pain and hurt.

These perspectives fit into Nehemiah Griego’s behavior and play a very important role in understanding the case from a broader perspective and in taking a psychological approach.

Referências

1. 1998, V. e. (2 de Dec de 2014). Developmental Psychology: An Introduction. (B. Research, Ed.) In https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Developmental-Psychology-An-Introduction-FKVSX49JP9L5
2. A. Anderson, A. J. (s.d.). DOES THE GUN PULL THE TRIGGER? (g. s. e.g., Ed.) University of Missouri, Colombia. In https://cumoodle.coventry.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/2973023/mod_resource/content/0/Example%20Cognitive%20%20Social%20Psychology%20paper%20-%20Does%20the%20Gun%20Pull%20the%20Trigger.pdf
3. ELISE KAPLAN / JOURNAL STAFF WRITER. (9th de August de 2019). Nehemiah Griego to be sentenced as an adult. Albuquerque Journal. In https://www.abqjournal.com/1351976/nehemiah-griego-to-be-sentenced-as-an-adult.html
4. HUDETZ, M. (16 de March de 2018). Man who killed his family as a teen is ordered to adult jail. AP NEWS. In https://www.apnews.com/48159cf958a146a69a6066a8e889034a
5. Jacob Genious. (17 de Oct de 2017). METRO NEWS JOURNAL. In https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/17/remorseless-killer-who-shot-his-mother-father-brother-and-two-sisters-says-he-doesnt-want-to-go-to-jail-10936540/
6. KATY BARNITZ / JOURNAL STAFF WRITER. (15th de October de 2019 ). Judge delays sentencing for Nehemiah Griego. Albuquerque Journal. In https://www.abqjournal.com/1378821/sentencing-hearing-underway-for-nehemiah-griego.html
7. Lerner, L.-B. &. (2 de Dec de 2014). Developmental Psychology: An Introduction. (B. Research, Ed.) p. 12 Pages. Obtido de https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Developmental-Psychology-An-Introduction-FKVSX49JP9L5
8. Miller. (2 de Dec de 2014). Developmental Psychology: An Introduction. (B. Research, Ed.) In https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Developmental-Psychology-An-Introduction-FKVSX49JP9L5
9. Phelps, 2. (2015). Cognitive Psychology. Em S. McLeod (Ed.). Simply Psychology. In https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive.html

Heartless monster(s), that is all anyone can think of when someone commits a crime against a loved one. A few moments after however, the thoughts shift from describing the criminal less than human out of anger and grief, to a moment of confusion, making one wonder, “Why would someone commit a crime like this.” The answer to that universal question of why someone commits a crime lies in criminology, the study of criminal behavior. According to criminology research experts from Kent State University “criminologists and experts across related fields such as healthcare, sociology and psychology work toward an understanding of the causes of criminal behavior, both by proposing new theories and testing existing ones”(from para. 2 of Source 1). The most popular theories they have come across include “Rational Choice Theory,” which is the belief that criminals weigh the consequences, and rewards of a crime, to eventually come to a conclusion that committing the crime is “worth it”, giving the criminal a form of choice to commit the crime, “Social Learning Theory,” “Labeling Theory,” and “Biological Theory.” Despite what these theories suggest, I believe that in almost all situations, no matter the background, or mental status, someone has a choice to commit a crime, and should still be held accountable for committing a crime. When it comes to the punishment though, the defendant should be judged depending and based on other factors in the situation.

Along with “Rational Choice Theory,” another popular criminal behavior theory is known as “Social Learning Theory,” which theorizes that criminals or both directly, and indirectly taught to be criminals. That being said, “Social Learning Theory” splits these criminals into those who are taught, directly and indirectly. This theory begs the question though, if the criminals are “taught” to commit the crime, who is liable? The teacher, or the student? To answer this question the entire circumstance must be investigated, such as whether it was the student was directly or indirectly taught. Studies from Saul McLeod from simplypsychology.org has shown that a form of directly teaching criminals to be criminals was through “reinforcement or punishment,”(para. 10, Source 2) which means someone is taught to do something by being given a reward when they do it, and being punished when not doing it. Although people, especially parents use this to teach right from wrong, the consequences of using this method is that the parents or in this case “criminals” might be teaching the underling that doing a crime is the “right” thing to do. Can this form of teaching be punishable? The quick and controversial answer is yes and no because although the adult figure is encouraging crime, the criminal who decides to do the crime is liable because in the end that individual chose to do it which is linked directly to “Rational Choice Theory.” Next a form of indirectly teaching someone to commit a crime is through observation. According to McLeod, “Children pay attention to some of these people (models) and encode their behavior. At a later time they may imitate (i.e., copy) the behavior they have observed”(para. 3, Source 2). This situation is much easier to examine because of the nature, that whomever the child is imitating, is unknowingly teaching the child. Therefore the “teacher” is not liable at all if the child does, or does not do the crime. This again goes back to the fact that whether the child does the crime or not falls on the child’s own judgment, and choice to commit the crime. Along with the effects that a mentor or adult figure might have on a child or adolescent, society as a whole might affect someone through the “Label Theory.”

The third among the popular criminal behavior theories is “Label Theory.” This theory states that a child with a criminal record, who is designated as “a “whore,” or a “junkie,” or a “thief””(p.48-49, Source 3), will continue to commit crimes because of the horrible effect labeling puts on the child. These are just a few of the examples of such labeling, but the effect is the same, for it makes the individual more likely to commit the crime as “the individual internalizes and accepts this label.” In terms of “Label Theory,” the question can be asked, who is at fault, for if the community is in a way involved with the creation of a criminal by labeling the criminal, does that at all make the community liable? No, the community is not liable. This is because of the fact that although the community was a crucial part of the criminal doing the crime, the criminal chose to do the crime, and in the end that is all the courts need to know to prosecute someone. With “Label Theory,” and “Social Learning Theory” showing the psychological effects of how society and adult figures can shape an individual, “Biological Theory” talks about people who are born into criminals based on their genetics.

The last of the popular theories experts have come up with is the “Biological Theory,” which theorizes that some criminals do crimes because of genetic conditions, such as increase in hormones, or mental illnesses. Through a study on inmates “elevated levels of hormones- specifically, testosterone, which controls secondary sex characteristiccs and has been associated with aggression”(p. 46, Source 3), experts have been able to conclude that because these hormones are linked to voilent crimes. Although these hormones were not the sole cause of the crime, does it instill that because the individual was born with these hormones that they can be exempt from the crimes they have committed? Theses hormones do not exempt the criminals from their crimes because although the hormones have seemed linked to violent crimes, there has been no evidence of these hormones actually causing the crime. The second part of the “Biological Theory” involves mental illnesses. Throughout the last century as light has been shined on the importance of mental illnesses and how they affect an individual, especially in cases of crime. Unlike the situation with hormones, society has accepted that in the case of mental illnesses an individual is capable of unknowingly committing a crime. The government uses the “M.Naghten rule”(p. 81, Source 3) which is a way for the government to measure how insane someone was when committing a crime. If the individual could not control themselves when they committed the crime is he/she liable? The quick answer is no they are not liable, but they are however still acknowledged to have committed the crime. This means that no punishment would be given, which has made mental illnesses into an excuse in court after committing a crime. This being said unless the mental illnesses completely barred the individual from not committing the crime, they should still be punished.

It is important for high school students who are interested in going into the criminal justice system to be educated on the field and the different careers made available to them. Careers in the criminal justice field are in high demand by United States citizens for both increased protection and better prison facilities. According to Johnson (1998), “students interested in working in the criminal justice system have many careers from which to choose, including policing, corrections, and the judiciary” (para. 1). Those who study law enforcement, and the courts will be eager to progress those systems. Within the criminal justice system individuals will learn about investigation, operations and even so much as first aid. There is also an importance of recognizing the use of force and avoiding police brutality. Though there are different careers to choose from, students will have the opportunity to better comprehend the criminal justice system and whether or not it is the right field for them.

First there are the general principles and best practices inside of this system to go over. Insanity defense standards involves an individual treated justly when receiving consequences for their wrongdoing. It has to be proven that the person in question committed a crime. It also has to be proven that the person in question, has the mentality to commit the crime consciously. According to Miller (2013), “note that not guilty by reason of insanity is not an excusatory or mitigating factor; it is literally a verdict of not guilty, as if the defendant did not to do it at all” (p. 86). This is when psychological evaluations come into place and goes hand in hand with the criminal justice system. Another principle centers on the awareness of criminal actions is not evenly distributed among the different ethnic groups

Let’s utilize a bucket as a metaphor displaying the demand for law enforcement within the community. There are three categories that could change the bucket and the level of water inside. Employees could possibly be leaked through a hole from the outcome of harassment. New recruitments might be prevented from flowing from the sink of new supply. Due to the possibility of work broadening, the bucket might enlarge. The bucket metaphor provides an image that an organization can run, in fact lack employees when it is functioning its full complement of present law enforcement (Wilson, 2010). It is important to realize there are both pros and cons to being a police officer. Individuals who desire to work in the criminal justice system, want to be able to help others in the community. Inside of this career are dangerous encounters but also good retirement and health benefits. On the downside in some locations the salaries are low and take part in the challenge of new recruitments. Job qualities like power, authority and a military environment were rarely the reason for a person to go into law enforcement (Castaneda et al., 2010). With recruitment, some see this as an opportunity and a door to other opportunities.

Conclusion

Though there are different careers to choose from, students will have the opportunity to better comprehend the criminal justice system and whether or not it is the right field for them. There are some differences present for the female and male gender who want a law enforcement career. Females compared to males were almost twice as likely to specify that working for a criminal justice agency in another department was the reason for being motivated to be an officer. A technique in recruiting women is having them start in jobs within the department. A low percentage of women shared that general advertising motivated them to want to have a law enforcement career. It is essential to be aware of the different techniques to recruit both genders.

References

1. Castaneda, L. W., Ridgeway, G., Rand Infrastructure, S. and E. (Organization), & United States. (2010). Today’s Police and Sheriff Recruits: Insights from the Newest Members of America’s Law Enforcement Community. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
2. Laura Werber. Castaneda Greg Ridgeway 1973-; Rand Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment (Organization); United States. Department of Justice. Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. 2010
3. Miller, L. (2013). Psychological evaluations in the criminal justice system: Basic principles and best practices. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18(1), 83-91.
4. Johnson, L. (1998). Preparing students for criminal justice careers. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 67(9), 21-24. Retrieved from https://csuglobal.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.csuglobal.idm.oclc.org/docview/204121346?accountid=38569
5. Wilson, Jeremy M. Police Recruitment and Retention for the New Millennium: The State of Knowledge. RAND Corporation, 2010.

Imagine it, you have found the love of your life! He is tall, great head of hair, gorgeous eyes and a smile that could charm the pants off anyone. You could not be happier or more in love. Then, not long after your wedding day, everything changes. He is soon monitoring your every action. Giving you permission to whom you can and cannot speak to. Insulting you, and lastly begins to get physical. You make up excuses, telling yourself, family and friends ‘he is acting this way because he is stressed’, ‘he did not mean to hurt me, it was an accident’, ‘I pushed him too far’, and all the while he is telling you ‘he loves you’, ‘it will not happen again’, or that ‘he will change’. Unfortunately, this a norm for many women. Some battered women are trapped in the endless violent cycle. Some escape, constantly living in fear that their abuser will find them. Some are murdered during a violent attack. Some fight back, and while defending themselves, end up injuring or killing their attacker. Throughout this paper the battered women’s defense will be examined. Firstly, it will be determined what the threshold is to be considered a ‘battered woman’. It will then be discussed how the battered woman defense came into force, when this defense is considered valid, and lastly how this defense affected battered women throughout the justice system.

Lenore Walker describes battered women’s syndrome as “an act that has been committed and is necessary to protect themselves, or their loved ones – usually children” (Walker, 2002, p. 321). It is often used in a court proceeding to show the judge and the jury what the woman’s state of mind would have been at the time of the murder, as they typically do not occur in the traditional fashion that one might think of. This means that typically the man is sleeping, and is not participating in a physical assault on the woman at the time of the crime. According to Walker, prior to this defense, there was no defense for this type of crime and women were advised by their lawyers to plead guilty. During this time if a defense was given, it was usually in the form of an insanity plea (Walker, 2002, p. 321).

Many of these women claim that they committed these acts due to feelings of terror and desperation (Bartollas & van Wormer, 2014, p. 240). Meaning that they feel there is no other escape that is available to them other than to take another person’s life – often times a person they have loved, shared memories, or even made a family with – or risk having their life ended at the hands of their partner. The abused womans’ only escape is to use force in self-defense.

Despite the defense, in a 2012 report done by the National Institute of Justice, it has been found that one in every four women will be physically assaulted by a partner, or an ex-partner in her life-time (Bartollas & van Wormer, 2014, p. 229). This number seems quite high, and something ought to be done about the high levels of attacks women are encountering throughout their lives, more so on the end of law enforcement. There are several cases where the woman has reached out for help regarding death threats, assaults etc from partners/ ex-partners. Due to the process, lack of past reports, retracted charges, some women are often murdered before enforcement sees that they were in real danger. As a result of poor resources for battered women, over fifty percent of all women who are killed in the United States are murdered by previously violent husbands, usually when they attempt to terminate the relationship (Walker, 2002, p. 334).

Currently, in most Countries, it is against normative social values for a man to ‘beat’ their wife/ partner. However, historically, there was a time where a man had a right to behave in such a way towards a woman. So long as the violent act was not excessive, and rather used to correct unwanted behaviour, it was deemed acceptable (Bartollas & van Wormer, 2014, p. 227). These were the days where women were seen as chattel rather than as people, and a marriage certificate was proof that the man had ownership of his wife, which was indoctrinated by the English Common law. However, it took until the early 1980’s for this defense to receive some acceptance within the court system. As the defense became more and more popular, it became clear to attorney’s, health practitioners and psychologist the full extent to which the woman was affected by these violent attacks (Walker, 2002, p. 322).

It is said that Battered Woman Syndrome is a sub-category of Post-Traumatic Stress Dissorder (PTSD). It is a collection of thoughts, feelings, and actions that logically follow a frightening experience, where one could expect the experience to repeat (Walker, 2002, p. 327). PTSD is a diagnostic category found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and is often what military persons are diagnosed with upon return from intense combat. Many of the military persons who are diagnosed with PTSD often receive extensive therapy and medication in order to attempt to retrain their brain to refrain from the fight aspect of our innate ‘fight or flight’ response, and instead process the situation and access it, knowing that they are safe, and no longer in danger of repeated traumatic experiences. Battered women do not have access to this type of treatment due to social stigma’s placed upon them. Most see it as a private civil issue that does not require intervention.

In 1994 the Violence Against Women Act was enacted in the United States. This Act is federal legislation that provides and prevention and prosecution of violent crimes against women and children, and those who became victims as a result of said crimes (Bartollas & van Wormer, 2014, p. 228). This Act was to allow the public to recognize the severity of domestic crimes happening all around them. It was to raise awareness about the effects of violence, sexual assault and stalking of women and the hands of their partner. Similarly, across Canada, several provinces have enacted their own legislation that pertains to the protection of women when dealing with abusive partners. Many of these provincial legislations define domestic violence to include: physical abuse, threats and property damage, forcible confinement, and/ or sexual abuse (Girard, 2006, p. 1). In 2000 a provincial act was brought to the table in Ontario called the Domestic Violence Protection Act, which was put in place to better protect he victims of domestic violence. This Bill was introduced by the Progressive Conservative Party during the time that Mike Harris was in office. Although the Bill passed the stages in becoming a legislative document, it was never enacted.

According to Walker, a psychologist is to examine the battered woman to determine her state of mind at the time she retaliated, attacking/ killing her abuser. The psychologist first needs to determine if the woman was battered. This could be done by looking into past hospital records, out cries to family/ friends about the abuse, and or past police reports. Secondly, the psychologist is to determine if the abuse caused the development of Battered Woman Syndrome. Lastly, how that impacted on the woman’s state of mind at the time of the attack for which she is now being charged with. Was she angry? Was she in fear for her life (not necessarily in that exact moment)? The crime itself is closely investigated. Any and all evidence is gone over carefully as to access the defense appropriately.

Walker defines self-defense as ‘the use of equal force or the least amount of force necessary to repel danger when the person reasonably perceives that they are in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death (Walker, 2002, pg. 323). Walker then goes onto state how the legal definitions and interpretations of these words are highly important, due to the fact that should one of the standards not be met, the entire testimony may be inadmissible. According to an article published in 2012, there is a distinct difference between how woman who kill their abuser are criminally punished (Sheehy, Stubbs & Tolmie, 2012). Typically, those convicted of first or second degree murder face a life sentence. The relevant difference between first and second degree murder with respect to battered women who kill it whether or not they planned their attack versus hiring a hit man (Sheehy et al, 2012). This differences is important as it will help the judge and jury during deliberation and sentencing, as well as parole eligibility.

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada held a case that became a significant impact on domestic violence. As a result of the R v Ryan case, there is more clarity on the defense of duress, as well as it shed a light on the ways in which society and the criminal justice system responds to cases of domestic violence. The appellant, Nicole Ryan (now Doucet) had suffered through years of abuse at the hands of her husband. Weekly, he would taunt her, threaten her, physically assault her, often times threatened to kill her and stating he would kill both her, and their daughter should she attempt to leave him. Ms. Ryan feared for her life and her daughters’ life and decided she would hire a hitman. Unfortunately, the hitman she hired happened to be an undercover police man and she was subsequently arrested and charged with counselling the commission of an offence not committed, contrary to the Canadian Criminal Code (McQuigg, 2013 p. 186). Upon trial it was decided that Ms. Ryan was in fact a victim and the only way out of the violent cycle was, in her mind, to kill her husband as all other avenues (local authorities) had been contacted to aide her and made it known to her that this was a ‘civil matter’ and not a criminal one.

Obviously not in agreement, the Crown appealed and was met with the same unanimous decision. Despite the fact that the Crown attempted to alter the case against Ms. Ryan, claiming duress was now not valid, the Court rejected the argument stating that ‘the purpose of the defense of duress is to absolve individuals of criminal liability in situations which their conduct is morally involuntary’ (R v Ryan, 2013). The Crown then appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, where it was decided that the defense of duress was not a valid defense in this case. Although it was not a valid defense, the Courts agreed that the abuse suffered had taken a toll on Ms. Ryan and decided they would not subject her to a new trial, ordering a stay of proceedings. In addition, the Courts noted that had Ms. Ryan had received assistants from local law authorities, it is likely that the crime would not have been committed.

It is easy to see the impact domestic abuse has on a person. As previously stated, many women who attempt to seek help are often met with little to no avail. Our society turns a blind eye to women who claim their abused. They are stigmatized and often shamed into feeling it is their fault. Many women are never able to escape out of fear for their lives, loved ones, or simply because they have nowhere to go, or funds available to relocate. Unfortunately, those who have never experienced the terror and abuse have this notion that the solution is easy, just leave. What those people do not know is that these partners strip the women of all of their dignity, self-worth, confidence etc and make is so as though the woman is convinced that no one would believe them if they went to the authorities. The abused women loose contact with friends and family and become isolated and eventually prisoners of their own homes as a result of the psychological and emotional abuse.

In conclusion, it is not always black and white when it comes to using the battered women’s defense. It takes psychological testing and analysis to render the woman to have had valid reasoning to murder her attacker. Despite years of abuse, threats, bruises, there is still no guarantee that a court will find her defense valid, resulting in a lengthy imprisonment. As seen throughout the paper, there are many factors that contribute to the defense being valid, and how the courts navigate through the controversial matters. Local law authorities need to create a better approach to handling domestic abuse cases/ claims as this would drastically alter the outcomes for the women, and save several lives. Without this change, I fear that women will continue to have to validate their reasoning for getting the courage to fight back and regain their dignity. In addition, communities need to come together and create more shelters and funding for women who are able to escape. These women could be our mothers, our sisters, our daughters. They need all the help we can give, with zero judgment.

References

1. Bartollas, C. & van Warmer, K. (2014). Women and the Criminal Justice System (4th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson
2. Domestic Violence Protection Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 33 – Bill 117
3. Girard, A., ‘Ontario Domestic Violence Protection Act: An analysis of discourse.’ (2006). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2931
4. McQuigg, R. (2013) The Canadian Supreme Court and Domestic Violence: R v Ryan, 2013 SCC 3
5. Sheehy, E., Stubbs, J., Tolmie, J., (2012) Battered women charged with homicide in Australia, Canada and New Zealand: How do they fare? Sage Journals 45(3)
6. Walker, L. E., (2012) Battered Women Syndrome and Self-Defense, 6 Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub, 312 – 334. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol6/iss2/3

When thinking about criminal behaviour, one would name murder, rape and assault. Those are the crimes most people are afraid of. But those are not the most prevailing ones. White Collar Crime, first coined in 1939, defined as criminal behaviour committed by a higher social class is the most common type. Money laundering and insider trading are the first ones that come to mind as those can easily be associated with the stereotype of a rich, upper-class men. White collar crime is financially motivated, non-violent but has a tremendous impact on society. Measuring the damage that white collar crime does to society is quite hard, still the FBI estimates costs between $300 to $660 billion, per year (Friedrichs. 2009). White collar crime is far more costly than conventional criminal behaviour, some argue even 50 times (Friedrichs. 2009), has negative health effects and is deadlier (Lynch, Michalowski. 2006).

What is the origin for white collar crime? Are there certain physical, personal or social factors that are prevailing? Is it dependent on background, employment or age? How can one determine risk factors, and most important, what are ways to prevent criminal behaviour? The following paper aims at answering all those questions and gives a broader picture about the most prevailing and underestimated type of crime.

One way to predict crime is using biological indicators, such as biomarkers as genes or brain scans. This helps predicting the likelihood of crime engagement and thus can be used for preventive purpose via biological interventions, or less formally, brain-active drugs. (Sing et al. 2013). Scientists usually tend to focus on biomarkers that show aggression or low self-control as those are linked with murder or other conventional crimes. Because of that, little scientific research has been conducted about white collar crime and studies as well as papers discussing this issue only developed in recent years, even though reasons to prevent this kind of criminal behaviour are significant. Focusing on predicting and preventing conventional crime has led to intensifying the already existing unequal research resource allocation between both crime types and made white collar crime seem even more unpredictable.

In order to clarify the terminology, a few comments will follow. The terms used from now on are “white collar crime” (criminal behaviour by a higher income group) and “blue collar crime” (referring to crime committed by a lower social class). Common white collar crimes except the ones mentioned above are fraud, identity theft and bribery. In this paper, white collar crimes are characterized violence free, but still illegal and harmful activities. Important to note is, that the terminology is not definite, as a blue collar crime could still be committed by an upper-class person, it rather developed from historical class associations.

How can we measure the Costs of White Collar Crime?

For blue collar crime, the measurement seems straightforward. One method would be to use the forgone lifetime earnings in order to come up with a number. For white collar crime, this is much harder. One factor playing an important role is the broad spectrum of incidents that are (or not) related with each other. This uncertainty goes in line with the cost estimates, ranging from $250 billion (Friedrichs. 2009) to $1 trillion (Ragatz et al. 2012) annually. What is also often overlooked is the lethality of white collar crime. Taking the inflation of cancer drug prices for higher profits as an example. Not only the financial costs, but also the costs to humans and society are hard to measure. Taking asbestos as another example, this formally marketed “magic mineral” has caused more than 100,000 deaths and over a million disability adjusted life years, according to the WHO in 2015. Even though insiders were aware of the health risks in the first half of the 20th century (Smith 2005).

Not only the private sector, also the government has to face consequences of white collar crime, taking money laundering, corruption or tax evasion as an example. One recent legal case about this topic was US government v. Siemens Bangladesh in 2008, where the later admitted bribery towards Bangladeshi officials in order to be the preferred candidate for public contracts. The payments that have been in the lower million USD seem pretty small compared with the previous estimated numbers, however this money has a totally different local purchasing power and could have been used for health treatments, building houses or sending children to school. That being said, one might conclude that white collar crimes create circumstances which could foster the development of blue collar ones.

Scientific Focus on Blue Collar Crime

When describing criminal behaviour in literature or movies, stereotypes are mostly minorities, urban and young men and crimes like assault or robbery. Thus, scientific research and data is mostly focused on markers that act as indicators for behaviour associated with those crimes such as violence or impulsiveness (Buckholtz, Meyer-Lindenberg. 2009). One theory could be, that biomarkers that are associated with blue collar crime are the same for white collar crime, as it was argued that a central element behind all crime is low-self control (Gottfredson, Hirschi. 1990). Risk seeking and shot-term perspective thus seem common factors for both kinds of criminal behaviour. However, multiple studies showed that corporate crimes are unrelated to deficits in self control (Simpson, Piquerro. 2002), and even attributed brain superiorities to them (Raine et al. 2012). This leads to the conclusion that white collar criminals invest in careful calculation, develop complex plans and rather not engage in impulsive action. According to a recent study, white collar criminals even score higher on measures of psychopathy when compared to the blue collar group (Ragatz et al. 2012).

So why is there such a low amount of research regarding white collar crime, while the research for biomarkers that are brought into association with blue collar crime was already successful? Biomarker research for blue collar crime has been fruitful, making more researchers likely to investigate this topic further. One example would be the MAOA gene, (when combined with maltreatment in childhood) which is linked to risk-taking (Caspi et al. 2002) and can be a good predictor of (conventional) crime. This – in contrast – is not the case for white collar crime, simply because motives appear to be more diverse and individual to each situation. To say it pretty harsh, it seems as if researchers intentionally did not invest into white collar crime research just because it seems unlikely that they will be successful.

Biomarkers for White Collar Crime

Driven by the already unequal allocated research resources between both types of crime, there is way less data on biomarkers or indicators than can predict white collar crime. So why not take an already known marker and check for indication?

One example would be poverty, as this is often found as a driver for violent offending (and thus blue collar crimes) among young people (McAra, McVie. 2016) as it fosters inequality. Homelessness is also another marker that is associated with people in prison, as the Ministry of Justice in the United Kingdom found out in 2012. It seems like people being caught for blue collar crime already start with a societal disadvantage in their lives which stands in contrast to the upper-class living standard that the stereotype of a white collar criminal pictures. But once again, it is definitely the wrong conclusion to label people as potential criminals due to the background they are coming from and have no power in changing.

For investigating biomarkers especially for white collar crime further, one has to differentiate between crimes that either have been committed by an in individual or an organization of people. As the later one is highly complex, I will now focus on the first group of criminal behaviour. With explaining characteristics of an individual, one might also conclude for group behaviour which will allow us to kill two birds with one stone.

Even though some white collar criminals seem to master manipulation and perform strongly in callous affect (Babiak, Hare 2007), this only matches two of the four characteristics of a clinical psychopath (the missing ones are erratic lifestyle and anti-social behaviour, according to Williams et al. 2007). As those characteristics are seen as helpful for a successful career in business or politics (Babiak 2006), it is not surprising that white collar criminals are often on a good track-record in their organization. “Bad” characteristics such as egocentricity or narcissisity can be mistaken as highly self-confident and a short-term sight might seem creative and visioning (Babiak 2006). Corporate psychopaths, characterized by the two markers mentioned above make up around 3-6% of business managers (Babiak et al. 2010). Another study found out that certain markers associated with psychopathy were more common within managers than in psychopathic patients treated in a clinic. Charm and egocentricity were a few of them (Board and Fritzon. 2005). Important to note is that the two groups (clinical psychopathic patients and managers) were differentiated by the non-existence of anti-social behaviour and erratic markers within the latter group, making them less likely to be impulsive, short-sighted and aggressive in a physical way. One even suggests than corporate psychopaths have played a role in the financial crisis 2007. Boddy (2011) suggests that changes in the employment process over four decades have put corporate psychopaths the possibility to step up in senior positions from where they used personal interests to create the crisis.

Besides the corporate world, politics is another field where white collar crime occur. Especially within countries where no strong observation and control process for politicians is present, political psychopaths can create a lot of harm.

Predict and Prevent White Collar Crime

As we now know about the characteristics of corporate psychopaths, paying attention to those characteristics during hiring processes seems as a good method to prevent white collar crimes. Such tests are already existing, but unfortunately only for a low number of professions, such as nuclear power plant operators as those can cause massive harm (Lowman 1989). So why not invent testing for other positions? Unfortunately, this process is not so easy. First, those tests consume a lot of time, resources and money. As profitability and cost effectiveness are important factors for cooperations, it is just too expensive to perform tests for every new hire, as one cannot predict whether an individual will be able to rise to a senior position or not. Second, people having traits that are found in corporate psychopaths are often good actors as they are strong in interpersonal manipulation. Thus, they are highly likely to pass those tests. Third, one would need highly skilled experts that perform those tests as it is extremely hard to differentiate a high level of self-confidence and egocentricity.

Brain imaging techniques have been used to examine the brains of psychopaths and even found correlations. Weekend connections between areas in the brain that are responsible for rewards and decision making found in people that have scored high on psychopathic measures can partly explain the tendency to neglect consequences and overvalue the immediate reward (Hosking et al. 2017). Even though those markers have been identified, it is today not fully clear how clear and predictive they are to clinical psychopathy (Hardcastle 2013). As even clinical psychopathy (which clearly has experienced more research than corporate psychopathy) struggles with clear indications, it is no surprise that brain imaging for corporate psychopathy cannot be generalistically indicative.

Nevertheless, the previous identified characteristic of callous affect appears to be heritable and may be a reliable biomarker (Viding, McCrory. 2013). I have unfortunately not found a study that investigates egocentricity, but one that researched narcissism, in particular high cortisol levels which are marginally related with narcissism (Reinhard et al. 2012). Heritability as well as hormone levels thus seem as biomarkers that correlate with corporate psychopathy. With further investments in research, I am fully convinced that this assumption will be found out to be more reliable.

Using the Results for Hiring Processes

With more emphasis allocated to above mentioned biomarkers for an entry to senior roles in politics and corporates, I am sure that a more healthy and trustworthy system can be created. A specific allocation of bioprediction to certain roles would thus save time and resources. Of course, highly skilled experts have to perform those tests on a case by case basis, as characteristics such as being charming even in stressful situations might be indicative of corporate psychopathy, but is highly desirable for certain roles that involve spontaneous engagement (Dutton. 2013). Thus, in order not to exclude good candidates, an automated system is definitely the wrong way to go. A way to test qualities of candidates “on the job” would simply be a higher level of monitoring, which is definitely wanted and desirable for senior roles in politics and the corporate industry. One would kill two birds with one stone. It is highly important to reduce the number of “false positives”, so that the newly implemented testing system does not create more harm than it is helpful. Of course it is inevitable to completely exclude the existence of such results which makes it even more important to implement only tests with a low degree of “false positives” and not base a decision on a single indication. Taking biomarkers as a way to deprioritize instead of exclude candidates seems as the way to go.

Concluding Words and Limitations

Research on white collar crimes and corporate psychopaths is definitely behind the one for blue collar crimes and clinical psychopathy, even though white collar crimes come with bigger costs and impact to society. Because of this, it is now the time to invest more time, work-power and resources to the latter in order to revert the unequal relationship. With more papers and studies, results will be more reliable, indicative and useful for both the political and corporate world.

As with all results, correlation does not mean causation. Findings have to be handled with care and decisions should be data driven. I am fully convinced that with an increasing investment in white collar crime research we will be able to improve hiring and step-up processes, predict risks and prevent incidents as well as crisis. Lastly, until this knowledge is collected, monitoring and increased oversight is the way to go and will for sure not be harmful. The positions that can create the biggest harm and damage in both politics and corporates currently are watched way too less, so checking processes will prove itself as a useful measure for the transition period.

Despite being a relatively new phenomenon, hate crime historically served as the “final solution”. It was enforced in the Second World War to “ethnic cleanse” Jews and was enacted in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. In this paper, I will first define crime, and how hate crime falls within its category. Secondly, I will implement sociological theories, such as Strain Theory, Doing Difference theory, and Self-Control to analyze the topic. By exploring the material between strain, difference and self-control enable a more comprehensive and constructive vision of hate crime. I will also reference a case study from Canada in order to call upon the field of sociology to engage on the key issues of hate crime.

Crime is defined as acts prohibited by law and punishable by sanctions. No act is legally considered a crime unless it is prohibited by law. Therefore, crime is defined as a violation of the criminal law enforced by the state (Spencer & Mohr, 2006a). In sociology, it’s defined as “deviant behaviour which violates the normative conduct of how humans ought to behave”.

Offenders have the opportunity to inflict violence and incite fear upon intended targeted groups — directly or indirectly. Therefore it is suggested to be more severe in comparison to non-hate crimes. Researchers had raised concerns on how hate crimes should be defined. In order to define it, we must ask, “how do we define prejudice in the criminal context, and secondly, what prejudices deserve criminal attention?” (Jacobs and Potter, 1998). Hate is omnipresent throughout the world, but we must establish what is legal and what is punishable by law. Section two of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of expression to all Canadians, however, these freedoms contain limitations. Publicly expressed opinions must be reasonable and within the public interest. Therefore prejudices that’s deemed damaging to the social cohesiveness of society — racism, homophobia, and anti-religious views are deemed unacceptable.

The number of visible minority groups is expected to increase by 2036. Despite, Canada’s reputation as a multicultural and diverse country, victimization surveys and police reported that numbers of hate crimes had surged. According to Statistics Canada, 2018 reported a momentary decrease in hate crime rates in comparison to 2017, however, the figures disclosed that Ontario and Quebec’s numbers continued to increase every year.

As one of the leading provinces for hate crime, Quebec is regarded as unsafe for members of different backgrounds and LGBT. The Quebec shooting was noted as the worst hate crime to occur in Canadian history. In late January 2017, an armed shooter released fire and murdered six men in the mosque. Arguments were raised whether his actions stemmed from hatred or deep-seated racism, however, his lawyer argued his offence was invoked due to his mental illness and his desire of wanting to suicide. Therefore, was his actions caused by racism towards Muslims or his lack of self-control?

Individuals who haven’t and will not commit hate crimes have wondered what influences such people to commit such heinous actions. Although it remains relatively limited, empirical studies have proceeded to uncover the background traits of perpetrators (Byers et al. 1999) and their primary motivation to commit hate crimes. Using 169 hate crime case reports from the Boston Police Department, McDevitt et al. (2002) developed a typology that divided hate offenders into the following categories: “thrill”, “defensive”, “retaliatory”, and “mission”.

Despite methodological limitations to their study, it still remains the most comprehensive study that allows institutions to classify individuals and personality traits who are prone to commit hate crimes. They suggested that offenders who acted upon the thrill of offending were impulsive people, however, it’s unclear within hate crime literature why offenders seek out thrill in the first place. McDevitt et al. (2002:308) reported interviews with police investigators that thrill motivated hate crimes is “triggered by an immature desire to display power and experience a rush at the expense of someone else. However, this still does not explain why some young men wish to experience such a rush while other similarly immature young men do not.

In addition, “retaliators” are citizens who act in defence to protect their geographical space and their socio-economic security from a perceived threat to their territory. Minority groups are seen as “invaders” – who should be denied the right of extracting any resources from the land of their ancestors. Events such as 9/11 caused perpetrators to seek vengeance and secure their land from “ingroups”. The most extremist forms are “mission offenders” who purposely hunt down and attack victims. These individuals lack self-control and this will be further discussed in this paper.

Due to inequalities in income, education, and other capacities, many citizens are unable to achieve the goals set within capitalist societies. As a result, individuals who desire material possessions suffer a strain (Merton, 1968). Agnew (1992) expanded on the theory and suggested three types of strains that “caused inclination towards crime”. He argued that “others may prevent individuals from achieving their positively valued goals. Secondly, those who suffer from a strain may wish to remove or threaten to remove positively valued stimuli that individuals possess, and lastly, they may present or threaten to present individuals with negative valued stimulus — verbal insults or physical assaults” (Agnew et al, 2002:44). Therefore, if someone realises that their expected goals are limited by someone else, they may react in irritation, and be persuaded to adopt illegitimate means to attain their goals.

Both Merton’s and Agnew’s conception of strain uncovered negative sentiments committed against minority groups. Due to socio-economic insecurity in the perpetrator’s life, they are blinded by the belief minority groups, specifically, the Asian community receive preferential treatment. Feeling victimised, they blame foreigners for their instability and use ethnic groups as scapegoats.

Barbara Perry (2001) argued that strain theory was insufficient since it couldn’t explain why the most atrocious hate crimes were committed by economic and political giants. Although it is factual that many hate offenders will be socio-economically disadvantaged, others will come from a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds (Sibbitt 1997). “Hate offenders may be employers, state agency workers, and even leaders of political parties”.

Perry (2001) argued that hate crime is better understood as an extreme form of discrimination. He states that within modern society, power hierarchies are constituted by dominance over “difference”. The difference has been used to construct social hierarchies relevant to gender, race, sexuality, and class. Ironically, the notion of “difference” results from people belonging to groups with members of the same and similar identity characteristics as them. People become bonded to their cultural and ethnic identity through a common interest – entraining why hegemonic forms exist. Those who fall outside society’s construction of identity are seen as “different” (Perry 2001). Those who are deemed different are resisted because they are feared.

Doing difference encompasses many types of hate crime (Perry). However, it too failed to explain why racist and anti-immigrant motivated incidents are committed by socio-economic strain (Gadd et al. 2005; Ray and Smith 2002). Since both theories are absent of essential elements, it is better to explain determinants of a hate crime when these theories are synthesised. Hottfredson and Hirschi (1990) argued that low-self control is the underlying cause of crime. If the opportunity is present for those who lack self-control, these individuals will act on impulse and commit to the act. However, someone with a tolerant level would not engage in criminal activities. It is important to note that, the formation of self-control is fostered within environmental factors — family and friends. Therefore, views of prejudice, racism, and hatred can be nurtured and normalized through parents and media.

Both Strain and Doing Difference theory proved socio-structural and socio-economic factors incline perpetrators to commit hate crimes, however, it fails to explain why some individuals who suffer from the same circumstances do not commit offences. Self-control does give a relatively good portrait of hate-crime perpetrators — young men lacking self-control, lack of education, or employment. However, research has not proven why some particular areas have more hate crime rates compared to others. In addition, hate crime remains enormously underreported. This means that the motives and background traits of all hate offenders cannot be held accountable, since there is no random sampling that can be done on perpetrators. Calling upon the field of sociology, I believe that these three theories developed great advancements for hate crime, however, the suggested theories do not explain “all types of prejudice motivated behaviours”, and perhaps they may build upon it. Furthermore, victimization is currently reported through the means of police reports. It is essential to understand that rates may be manipulated by these power elites, and cases may not be considered due to their own prejudice towards minority groups as well. There needs to be a better method. Actions must be taken in order to stop the predicament from how vastly it’s increasing.

Introduction to Ted Bundy: America’s Infamous Serial Killer

Theodore Robert Bundy also known and better known as Ted Bundy the imfiness America serial killer. Bundy committed countless crimes from theft and peeping, all the way to the kidnapping, rape, and murder of at least 36 young women. Ted also managed to escape from prison not once but twice. Ted Bundy was an outstandly brilliant person, it is too bad he used his smarts to carry out mass crimes rather than help the world for the good.

Early Life and Troubled Beginnings

Theodore Robert Bundy was born on November 24, 1946, in Burlington, Vermont. Ted was the son to Eleanor Louise Cowel, whom many called Louise. Louise gave birth to Ted at age 22 out of wedlock. Therefore he grew up in the shame of his mother’s sins, as a “illegitimate child.” The identity of Ted’s biological father is unclear and may never be known. Yet many believe it could be Lloyd Marshall or Jack Worthington or even possibly his grandfather, Samuel Cowell. Ted and Louise moved to Philadelphia and he was adopted by his grandparents in hopes to hide what had happened. Growing up Ted was told his mother was actually his sister. A couple years later Ted moved with his mom to Tacoma, Washington. Soon Louise married Johnnie Bundy and he became Ted’s stepfather. Although Ted took his last name, he seemed to think very little of Johnnie. It is safe to say that just like many other perpetrators of the law Ted did not have a good father figure to look up to. Statistics say that children who lived in a fatherless home are 50% more likely to commit a crime.

Bundy’s Academic Pursuits and Psychological Transformation

As a toddler Ted became fascinated with knives. Through his school days he made good grades yet he did not do well socially. Then in his teenage years, Bundy’s evil started to show as he would often steal and peep into others windows, especially that of young women as they changed. Ted attended the University of Washington where he earned his degree in psychology. He graduated in 1972. While in college Bundy fell for a pretty girl with long dark hair. After their breakup Ted was extremely devastated. Later on most of Bundy’s victims would resemble her. In the early 1970’s Ted transformed himself into the ideal American man. Becoming more confident outwardly, along with being more prominent in both social and political activities. Bundy was accepted into law school in Utah in 1972, however he never earned his degree. Due to the fact that was when he started his murdering spree.

The Onset of Bundy’s Criminal Activities

Ted Bundy most likely started his rampage around 1974. Bundy would lure young women into his tan 1968 Volkswagen Beetle by pretending to be hurt and asked for their help, their kindness causing the death of them. From there Ted would push them in his car kidnapping them. Bundy’s kills were very gruesome and included the rape and beating of victims before their eventual death. What Ted did after is arguably worse. Bundy was a necrophiliac, meaning he was sexually attracted and commited sexual acts with his dead bodies of his victims. After killing his victims he would return to their bodies, brush their hair, along with apply makeup to their face, and have sex with them. Bundy also decapitated 12 known victims. Ted confessed to the murders of 36 young women across multiple states including Washington, Oregon, Utah, Colorado, Idaho, and Florida in the 1970’s. Although in his confessions he never said “I,” he always said “the killer” and describe detailed descriptions of the crimes. Louise, like most loving mothers, only saw the best in her son. Refusing to believe the alleged charges against him, but later changed her mind after he confessed. Experts believe the true total of Bundy’s victims may be closer to 100 or even more. The actual number may never be known.

Ted Bundy ramage is believed to have started in Seattle, Washington. Experts say that Bundy’s first victim was 18 year old Karen Sparks, a University of Washington State student. Sparks was attacked by Bundy in her sleep on January 4, 1974. After going into Karen’s basement bedroom, Bundy tore a rod from her bed frame and began beating her with it. Then he rammed the metal rod into her vagina. Sparks is one of the lucky ones though as she managed to survive after her 10 day coma and had no memory of the attack. Teds next victim was 21-year old Lynda Ann Healey. Healey also attended the University of Washington State and was very well liked as she gave the weather report at a local radio station. This time Bundy took the extra key from her mailbox and bludgeoned her. Then changed her out of her pajamas and into fresh clothes, all while she was unconscious. Ted then inserted himself into the investigation by calling the police and said the person who killed Karen Sparks was the same person that took Lynda Healey. Donna Gail Mason, a 19 year old, was killed on her way to a campus concert at Evergreen State College. Her body was never found yet, Ted later admitted to killing her and burning her skull in his girlfriend’s, Elizabeth Klopfer, fireplace. Susan Elaine Rancount was 18 years old and went to Central Washington State College. She unlike Bundy’s other victims, was blond haired and blue eyed. No one really knows what happened but after a massive search. They discovered that other students remember being approached by a man named Ted with his arm in a sling. Bundy then moved his ramage to Oregon where first killed Roberta Kathleen Parks. She was taken between her school, Oregon State, and a coffee shop. Her body was later found with many others on Taylor Mountain in Washington. Brenda Ball and Georgann Hawkins were also that of Bundy’s victims. Both of them were last seen talking to a man with some type of handicap. In July 1974 Bundy took two girls in broad daylight in the same day from Lake Sammamish State Park, both Janice Ott and Denise Naslun. A witness reported that they saw a man with his left arm in a sling ask a woman for help with a sailboat. When she said yes Ted lead her to the car, by the time she realized there was no sailboat it was too late. Nancy Wilcox was a 16 year old cheerleader who vanished in October 1974, and was last seen riding in a Volkswagen Bug. After Bundy offered Rhonda Stapley a ride, he took her to Big Cottonwood Canyon. There he repeatedly raped and strangled her. She was only able to escape when Bundy turned his back to her and she ran for her life to a nearby river. Ted even posed as a police office, named “Rosewood.” Carol DaRonch was walking around a mall and was approached by “Officer Rosewood” telling her that her car was broken into and needed to come with him down to the station. She willingly went with him then realized what was happening. She broke out of the car despite both the handcuffs and gun to the head, and finding a couple driving nearby. Debi Kent was abducted a few hours later, but this time Bundy dropped the key matching the handcuffs found on DaRonch in the parking lot. Her parents still to this day leave the porch light on for her. Bundy continued killing in Janaury 1975 as he murder many young women in Colorado and Idaho then he came back to Utah. Ted then moved his rage to Florida when he escaped from prison. The murders and beatings at the Chi Omega sorority at Florida State University are his most gruesome. First Ted walked into Margeret Bowman’s room hitting and killing her with a piece of firewood. Bundy proceeded into Lisa Levy’s room. There he beat, strangled, tore one of her nipples off, deeply bit into her left butt cheek, and using a bottle of hairspray raped her. Then Bundy beat both Karen Chandler and Kathy Kleiner with a club yet both survived but suffered permanent damage. After that Ted went on to beat Cheryl Thomas. Although she survived it the attack left her permanently deaf and ended her dance career. Lastly Bundy killed 12 year old Kimberly Leach.

Capture, Trials, and Escapes

In 1975 while attending the University of Utah, Bundy was pulled over by police. The police searched his 1968 Volkswagen Beetle and Ted was arrested for the possession of a crowbar, face mask, rope, and handcuffs. He was then linked to many more sinister crimes. Again in 1975 Bundy was arrested but this time for the kidnapping of Carol DaRonch, a young Colorado women that managed to escape. Ted was convicted and received a 1-15 year sentence. Ted somehow managed to escape from prison not once but twice. The first time Bundy jumped out of a courthouse library widow, while he was acting as his own lawyer. Bundy roamed free for eight days and then was captured by police. Ted escaped the second time by crawling out of a hole he made in his prison cell. In order to fit through the small opening, Ted had to lose more than 30 pounds. Bundy then made his way to Tallahassee, Florida. Where he broke in and attacked four girls, then killing two of them at Florida State University’s Chi Omega sorority house on January 14, 1978. Also on January 9, 1978 Ted kidnapped and killed 12 year old Kimberly Leach. This marked the end of Bundy’s rampage as he was pulled over by police the next month.

The Final Arrest and Bundy’s Execution

The biggest single piece of evidence prosecutors had against Bundy was the bite marks authorities found on the bodies of the sorority sisters, as that matched that of Bundy’s. Ted’s cleverness, charm, and attractiveness allured the media making him like that of a celebrity during his trail. Bundy was convicted for the murder of the two Chi Omega girls and given the death sentence twice as punishment. He received yet another death sentence for the kidnapping and killing of Kimberly Leach. Bundy attempted to take his case all the way to the Supreme Court but was denied. Ted fought against the crimes placed on him but was found guilty. He spent nine years on Florida’s death row appealing his death sentence. Bundy even managed to buy time as he offered information on multiple unsolved murders. Yet justice was served on January 24, 1989 at about 7:00am in Florida State Prisons electric chair, known as “Old Sparky.” Bundy was said to have died with a smile on his face. As crowds cheered and set fireworks after Ted was executed. Before he died he stated that his wishes were to be cremated and have his ashes scattered in the Cascade Mountains of Washington State. Where he murdered many of his victims.

Bundy’s Personal Life and Psychological Profile

In 1969 Bundy met a young single mother named Elizabeth Kloepfer. Elizabeth and Ted started their six year long relationship in a Seattle bar. Elizabeth had problems of her own as she struggled with alcoholism. When Kloepfer became suspicious of Bundy’s whereabouts and behavior, he used his charm to ease her. Finally Elizabeth called the police concerning Ted but they did not believe her. She later went back with evidence. When she found out all that Bundy had done she ended things with him. Bundy later called her from jail telling her he had tried to kill her. After Elizabeth, Ted then moved on to Carole Boone who he met many years ago from working together. Bundy proposed to Boone in a courtroom in front of a judge during a phase of his trail. Boone said yes making it a legal marriage in the state of Florida. Together they had a daughter named Rose Bundy in 1982. Not much is known about Rose today. Carole divorced Ted three years before his execution when she realized he really was guilty.

While researching my serial killer, Ted Bundy, one of the most interesting things I learned was that although yes Bundy was a serial killer. In college he also worked at a suicide hotline in Seattle. So while he did hurt and kill numerous amount of young women, he helped save many lives. Seattle Police Department nominated Ted for the director of the Seattle Crime Prevention Advisory Committee.

References

1. Buy Clean Washington. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.carbonleadershipforum.org/projects/buy-clean-washington/
2. Eleanor Louise Cowell. (2019, August 21). Retrieved from https://crimepiperblog.wordpress.com/tag/eleanor-louise-cowell/
3. Harfenist, E. (2019, January 31). Was Ted Bundy A Necrophile? Inside His Last Disturbing Confession. Retrieved from https://www.oxygen.com/martinis-murder/was-ted-bundy-a-necrophile-inside-his-last-disturbing-confession
4. Hodge, M. (2019, January 17). How Ted Bundy’s execution was celebrated by hundreds outside prison. Retrieved from https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8202022/ted-bundy-execution-electric-chair-netflix-conversation-with-a-killer/
5. Kennedy, J. (2019, February 01). 10 Things Netflix’s Ted Bundy Documentary Left Out. Retrieved from https://whatculture.com/tv/10-things-netflix-s-ted-bundy-documentary-left-out?page=5
6. Margaritoff, M. (2019, May 08). Carole Ann Boone Married Ted Bundy Literally In The Middle Of His Trial – Then Had His Baby. Retrieved from https://allthatsinteresting.com/carole-ann-boone-ted-bundy-wife
7. Margaritoff, M. (2019, July 09). Meet Elizabeth Kloepfer: The Woman Who Survived A Relationship With Ted Bundy. Retrieved from https://allthatsinteresting.com/elizabeth-kloepfer-kendall-ted-bundy-girlfriend
8. Margaritoff, M. (2019, June 16). Rose Bundy Is The Only Child Of Serial Killer Ted Bundy – And She Was Conceived On Death Row. Retrieved from https://allthatsinteresting.com/rose-bundy-ted-bundy-daughter
9. Mental Health Resources in Vermont. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.rtor.org/directory/mental-health-vermont/
10. Ted Bundy. (2019, December 13). Retrieved from https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/ted-bundy
11. Washington State University: WSU: The College Board. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-university-search/washington-state-university
12. Brides of bundy ted bundy victim collage. (2013, December 06). Retrieved from https://theodorerobertcowellnelsonbundy.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/ted-bundy-myths/brides-of-bundy-ted-bundy-victim-collage/

The term “white collar crime” evokes an image of a well-dressed businessman involved in espionage or insider trading. But in reality, white collar crimes can include everything from tax evasion to forgery. If you have been charged with any type of white collar crime, it is in your best interest to contact a defense attorney with extensive experience in this particular area of law.

At Davis & Cannon, LLP, our legal team has been providing comprehensive legal services to residents of Gillette, Cheyenne, Sheridan and all of Wyoming for more than 70 years. We have successfully defended countless clients against charges for white collar crimes.

What is a White Collar Crime?

Although this term applies to a wide variety of offenses, white collar crimes typically involve deceit-based activity that results in, or is motivated by, financial gain. The most common white collar crimes we defend include:

Fraud

When an individual purposely deceives another for personal or financial gain, his/her actions may constitute fraud. This criminal offense comes in many forms, and can be a misdemeanor or a felony.

Forgery is one example of fraud. When someone alters the writing of another without that person’s consent, it is forgery. Signing an account holder’s name to an unsigned check and cashing it, without consent, is a very clear example of forgery in action. Depending on the type and severity of forgery committed, the offense could be a misdemeanor with up to six months in jail, or a felony offense punishable by hefty fines and up to 10 years imprisonment.

Other examples of fraud include writing false statements to obtain credit or property, money laundering, and sports bribery used to influence the outcome of an athletic event.

Embezzlement

The crime of embezzlement typically occurs when an individual entrusted with the financial affairs of another mismanages or steals money or property for personal financial gain. The distinction between stealing money via embezzlement and stealing money through fraud or bank robbery, for example, is that the embezzler was granted legal access to the money or property in question.

Embezzlement frequently involves a family member who is caring for a relative, a corporate employee with access to company funds, and other professionals who deal with investor money. Basically, anyone in a position of trust who steals another’s money for their own financial gain is likely engaged in the crime of embezzlement.

Extortion

Commonly referred to as blackmail, extortion is the act of obtaining property (usually money) by use of force, or by threatening someone. If an individual forces another to relinquish property against his will, he/she may be guilty of extortion. A conviction of extortion requires the use or threat of bodily injury, or the threat of serious public humiliation or ridicule.

The penalties for extortion are dependent on the type and severity of the offense and whether the individual has prior criminal history. In most cases, however, extortion is a felony offense punishable by between five and 25 years in prison.

Perjury

“I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” If a person recites this oath in court and proceeds to willfully lie to the court, it is a felony offense called perjury. Penalties for perjury vary widely based on circumstances of the case and prior criminal history, but include hefty fines and up to five years in prison.

RICO Claims

In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in an effort to fight organized crime. Under RICO, individuals can be prosecuted for racketeering activities involved in a criminal enterprise. Prosecutable offenses include money laundering, illegal gambling, drug trafficking, embezzlement, counterfeiting, and more.

Why You Need a White Collar Crimes Defense Attorney

Because of the perceived “sophisticated nature” of white collar crimes, courts can be particularly harsh when it comes to sentencing. If you’ve been charged with embezzlement, forgery, money laundering, tax evasion, or perjury, you need an attorney experienced in these types of cases.

As with any type of crime, many defenses against white collar crime charges exist. The most common of these defenses is lack of intent. If, for example, you were mismanaging funds entrusted to you by another, but the mismanagement was accidental, an experienced attorney may be able to get the charges against you dropped. Entrapment, wherein you are persuaded by an undercover agent to engage in criminal activity that you wouldn’t have otherwise participated in, is another common defense against white collar crimes.

Contact Davis & Cannon, LLP Today

If you have been charged with a white collar crime, the skilled legal team at Davis & Cannon, LLP can help. We will analyze the details of your case to determine the most appropriate legal strategy for your unique situation, gathering necessary evidence and building a strong case in your favor. Do not go through this difficult time alone. We are here to help you protect your rights, and keep your record clean. Contact Davis & Cannon, LLP at _____ today for a free and confidential consultation about your case.