Soc-2510 Criminology Notes PDF

SOC-2510: CRIMINOLOGY NOTES MIGUEL REYES Criminological Theories Criminological Theories Critical Race Theory (CRT) Intellectual movement and analytical framework that examines how race and racism intersect with law, society, and power structure. Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci Oper...

SOC-2510: CRIMINOLOGY NOTES MIGUEL REYES Criminological Theories Criminological Theories Critical Race Theory (CRT) Intellectual movement and analytical framework that examines how race and racism intersect with law, society, and power structure. Hegemony by Antonio Gramsci Operates through ideologies, culture, and institutions. ○ Can shape people’s beliefs and values to align with the interests of the ruling class. Explains how power and dominance are maintained in society not just through force, but through consent and cultural leadership. This idea has become a cornerstone in critical theory, political science, and cultural studies. Social Bond Theory Looks at our connection to society. ○ Strong connection = less likely to commit crime. ○ Weak connection = more likely to commit crime. “People with a weak connection feel as if they have “nothing to lose.” Criminological Theories Sexual Drive Theory If not controlled, crime could be committed. General Theory of Crime Theory is commonly referred to as the self-control theory of crime. Life Course Theory Framework within criminology and sociology that examines how life events, transitions, and social changes influences an individual’s trajectory over their lifespan, including their engagement in criminal or deviant behaviour. ○ Why would somebody engage in crime? ○ Why would somebody stop engaging in crime? Consensus Theory Criminal laws represent consensus within a society about what acts should be prohibited. Criminological Theories Class Conflict Theory Views laws as a tool used by the ruling class to maintain their privileged position by keeping “common people” under control. ○ E.g., in Iran, the government is using laws to suppress protesters, some of whom are being executed. The laws likely benefiting the government leaders who want to stay in power. Group Conflict Theory Views laws as the result of a political process. ○ Involves conflict between different interest groups. E.g., Liberals vs. Conservatives. E.g., environmental protection vs. business interests. CRIME, CRIMINALS, & CRIMINOLOGY Part I Definition of Law: A set of rules, assigned by the government, for all of society to follow and obey. Why enforce laws? Rules (laws) are there to prevent or address harmful behaviours, resulting from deviance – that is, deviation/departure from social expectations. Societies and groups cannot function without social norms, rules, regulations, or laws. Definition of DEVIANCE: Any behaviour that goes against social norms or rules of society. Canada Without Laws: Crime – What is it Legally? Historically, harmful behaviour Gradually, certain harmful acts became defined against others was treated as a as criminal. private matter. These acts are considered against all of society. The state/province responsible for enforcing and prosecuting those who commit these harmful acts. Crime – What is it Legally? (Cont’d) Most common definition Criminal Code of of crime is legalistic: Canada: In Canada, crimes are defined primarily by The legal definition of crime: the Criminal Code of Canada. We can talk of a crime when criminal An (intentional or reckless) act or laws are violated. omission that violates criminal law and is ○ Regulatory violations are punishable. technically not a crime unless criminal law violations are Definition of OMISSION: Failure to do involved. something (e.g., not feeding your E.g., breaking a workplace safety rule, as well as causing child). harm through negligence. The Shifting Nature of Crime Crimes are socially defined, so it is highly contested. ○ E.g., the legalization of cannabis – shows how crimes are socially defined, as what a was once illegal and stigmatized is now legal and normalized in Canada and many other countries. The law defining some acts as crime is not completely arbitrary (random) in most countries (despite national differences). ○ In other words, some criminal acts are frowned upon pretty much everywhere. E.g., murder, robbery, sexual abuse, child labour, etc. The Shifting Nature of Crime (Cont’d) Crime falls under deviance – involves violating social norms, rules, regulations, and laws. Depending on where we are from, the laws are shaped based on cultural and societal norms and values. ○ Some laws in Canada can be “less serious” in other countries. E.g., Rape is not as serious of a crime in India than Canada. Example of Previous Slide (Adultery) Adultery in Canada Adultery in Saudi Arabia Not a crime. A crime. State and religion are connected. State and religion are separate. ○ Adultery is strictly prohibited in Islam. Classification of Crimes ENGLISH (and American) laws use: CANADIAN law uses: - Felonies (most serious crimes), and - Indictable offences (most serious of - Misdemeanors (less serious crimes). offences, such as terrorism). - Summary conviction offences (less serious offences, such as public nudity). - Penalty is not more than 2 years in jail and/or a $5,000 fine. Human Rights Violation as Crime? For some scholars, there should be a broad definition of crime. Herman and Julia Schwendinger’s (1970) broader definition of crime: ○ Crime should be defined based on human rights, rather than legal status. ○ If an act violates someone’s rights to the necessities of life, it should be considered a crime. ○ Government policies that create harm should be considered crimes. E.g., poverty and homelessness. ○ Imperialism, sexism, racism, and homophobia are very harmful, and thus should be considered a crime. Why Some Gov’t Policies are “Crimes” If a government policy violates people’s basic rights, such as food, shelter, and safety, it should be considered a crime. ○ E.g., Laws limiting access to housing. Policies that restrict affordable housing development can lead to widespread homelessness. Explanation: These laws harm people’s right to shelter, causing unnecessary suffering and inequality. ○ E.g., Neglecting healthcare access. Cutting funding for essential healthcare programs, leaving vulnerable populations without medical care. Explanation: This denies people their right to health and causes preventable suffering and deaths. These examples show how some policies, while technically legal, can cause significant harm and violate human rights, aligning with the Schwendingers’ broader definition of crime. Is White-Collar Crime Really a Crime? White-collar crime is often overlooked because it doesn’t fit the traditional idea of crime. According to Sutherland: 1. Criminal law focus on misleading – only looking at street crimes (e.g., theft or assault). makes it seem like crime is only a lower-class issue. 2. White-collar crimes are ignored – many middle- and upper-class people commit crimes in business (e.g., fraud or embezzlement). Often handled outside criminal courts. 3. Criminologists overlooked it – these crimes aren’t always treated like regular crimes, they were often neglected in studies about crime. This shows that crime happens across all social classes, not just among the poor. For Criminological Research Purposes, Who is a Criminal? Not all social harms are criminal. Not all criminal acts are harmful. Who should be defined as criminal? ○ Should include someone who: Has been charged with a criminal offence but was not convicted? Has committed a crime but not been charged? Has been convicted of violating workplace safety laws after an employee was killed on the job? Someone who is underage? Reflection Questions Why are some acts defined as criminal? Why are some not sanctioned at all? Why are others dealt with under other types of legislation? Part II Crime is Socially Defined Crime is a violation of criminal laws without defence. ○ The law varies across societies and groups (e.g., what is defined as a crime in Canada may not be so elsewhere). It is up to society to define certain acts as crime. Socially defined = the rules (laws) can change. Thus, what constitutes crime can change. ○ They change over time because laws and societal views evolve. E.g., liquor consumption, sexual acts by LGBTQ, marijuana consumption. Who Makes the Rules? Crime is highly contested because different people and groups have varying opinions on what should be considered a crime. ○ Factors include; culture, values, and political beliefs influence these opinions. The definition of crime can often benefit powerful groups in society. ○ Laws may be created or enforced in ways that protect the interests of those with more power, such as the wealthy or political elites. ○ This can lead to certain actions being labeled as crimes, while others that harm vulnerable groups may not be treated the same, resulting in inequality in how crime is defined and punished. We will consider conflict versus consensus theoretical perspectives on law. ○ To serve the interest of everybody in society. The Consensus Approach Consensus Theory: criminal laws represent Laws are a codification of values shared by consensus within a society about what acts most members of society. should be prohibited. This theory is supported by polls indicating there is a broad agreement about many laws and the seriousness of various criminal offences. CONCLUSION: Laws represent the will of most people of the people in particular society. The Conflict Approach Conflict theorists reject the idea that laws reflect a consensus in society. The Conflict Approach (Cont’d) Class Conflict Theory Group Conflict Theory Views laws as a tool used by the Views laws as the result of a political ruling class to maintain their process. privileged position by keeping ○ Involves conflict between “common people” under control. different interest groups. ○ E.g., in Iran, the government is E.g., Liberals vs. using laws to suppress Conservatives. protesters, some of whom are being executed. The laws likely benefiting the government leaders who want to stay in power. Part III What is Criminology? Systematic/scientific study of crime as a social Understanding/documenting its causes and phenomenon. effects and how society responds to it. Goal: to develop a body of knowledge to inform For Sutherland and Cressey (1960), criminology crime control and prevention policies and includes the “process of: practices. - Making laws, - Breaking laws, and - Reacting to the breaking of laws.” 6 Major Areas of Criminology 1. The Definition of Crime and Criminals: - What acts are defined as crime? - Who should be considered a “criminal?” 2. The Origins of Role of the Law: - Helps us understand why certain acts are considered criminal. 3. The Social Distribution of Crime: - Traits of people who commit crime. - Temporal and regional trends. 4. The Causation of Crime: - What are the causes of crime and criminality? - Why do some people commit crimes while others live more law-abiding lives? - Those are the central focus of criminology. 5. Patterns of Criminal Behaviour: - Who are the offenders? Victims? - Under what circumstances does crime occur? 6. Societal Reactions to Crime: - Historically, societies have responded to crime in many different ways. Emerging Fields of Criminology 1. Green Criminology – criminology should also focus on harmful actions against non-human animals and the physical environment. 2. Terrorism Studies – “the deliberate use or the threat to use violence against civilians in order to attain political, ideological, and religious goals (Ganor, 2002, 288).” 3. Surveillance Studies – the belief that people are constantly under surveillance to self-regulate their actions. Social Reactions to Crime Historically, societies have responded to crime In Canada, The Constitution Act 1867 determines in many different ways. how people charged with crimes are dealt with. In Canada, normally law violators are processed Criminologists have studied these institutions through the criminal justice system that extensively. includes the police, courts, and corrections systems. Brief History of Criminal Law Personal Justice Public Justice Few or no formal laws in early days. Shift from personal to public justice, which began with William the Conqueror. - Based from England. *Why does the state get money from fines? The Mental Element in Crime (MENS REA) Mens Rea: The intent to commit a crime. Intention Knowledge Reckless GENERAL INTENT – e.g., intent to assault. SPECIFIC INTENT – general + the desire to accomplish some goal (e.g., to cause death, steal, etc.). Intent Crime = Act + Intent E.g., break and enter – everyone who breaks and enters a place with intent to commit an indictable offence therein is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment. Everyone commits robbery who… assaults any person with intent to steal from him/her. Everyone who, in committing an assault… causes bodily harm to the complainant is guilty of an indictable offence. The trial is supposed to establish that the act committed had an intent, and whether it is guilty or not guilty. Knowledge Everyone commits perjury who, being a witness in a judicial proceeding, with intent to mislead gives false evidence, knowing that the evidence was false. Recklessness Would any “reasonable person” commit the same harmful action? - Not whether the accused actually intended those consequences. General Principles of Criminal Liability LAW IS BASED ON PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. TO BE A CRIME MUST HAVE BOTH ACT AND INTENT. ○ Cannot be punished for thoughts (usually). E.g., freedom of speech. ○ Cannot be punished if the act is not intentional (unless reckless). Strict Liability Offences Absolute or strict liability offenses An exception to requirement of intent – most often in regulatory offenses. Verdun-Jones Case: Defenses to Criminal Charges “Technical” defenses (evidence not legally obtained, etc.) ○ E.g., making someone confess cannot be physically forced. ○ E.g., searching a house without a warrant. Age – must be 12 years old. Insanity (NCRMD). ○ If the person who committed a crime has a mental illness. Intoxication. Consent. Justification. Mistake of the fact. ○ E.g., you take someone else’s jacket thinking it’s your own. Self-defence. ○ Take into account all circumstances. Were there any other ways to prevent the attacker from harming you? The use of force should be proportionate. Defenses Duress – committing a crime because they were forced to do so by a threat of harm or death to themselves or others. They were not acting willingly but under pressure. Necessity – committing a crime to prevent a greater harm from happening. They did it because they had no other choice to avoid a serious situation. Insanity Defence Not Criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. Insanity Defence (Willard Case) McNaughton Rules At the time of the actm the accused was labouring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind that: 1. Did not know the nature and quality of the act OR 2. Did not know the act was wrong. - Insanity defence difficulties: 1. State of mind at the time of offense. 2. Is a legal term, not a medical one. Intoxication General and specific intent. Intoxication can negate specific intent. However, individuals will still be found guilty of lesser charges. ○ E.g., manslaughter instead of murder. Makes no sense psychologically, but exists for policy reasons. Criminal Defenses Consent ○ Cannot consent to be killed (mercy killing is unlawful). ○ Consent is often an issue in sexual assault cases. Mistake of Fact ○ Refers only to mistakes of fact. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. ○ Means you did not know the real facts of the situation. Self Defence Force cannot be intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm. Is no more than necessary to enable him/her to defend him/herself (proportionality). ○ E.g., self defence is not getting slapped in the face and then shooting them with a gun in return while as they walk away. Threat must be immediate. Self Defence (Nelson Case) Self Defence (The Battered Wife Syndrome) Lavelle case. Fearing attack and possible death, Lavallee (who was in an abusive common-law relationship with Kevin Rust) was acquitted based on self-defence after killing her husband by shooting him. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that when a woman kills an abusive partner and raises the plea of self-defence, the trial court may expert testimony concerning the “battered wife syndrome.”