SOCI 249 - Crime and Society Lecture Notes PDF

SOCI 249 - Crime and Society Lecture 1 - Jan. 10th -​ What is crime?​ -​ If it breaks the law -​ If it harms individuals or society -​ We tend to assume crime and harm go together -​ Key principles of underlying what goes into the bucket of cr...

SOCI 249 - Crime and Society Lecture 1 - Jan. 10th -​ What is crime?​ -​ If it breaks the law -​ If it harms individuals or society -​ We tend to assume crime and harm go together -​ Key principles of underlying what goes into the bucket of criminal law -​ Can do very harmful things without it being considered criminal law -​ Historically, harmful behaviour against others was treated as a private matter -​ Gradually, certain harmful acts became defined as criminal -​ These harmful acts are considered harms against society as a whole -​ As such, the state is responsible for enforcing ad prosecuting those who commit these harmful acts -​ Without a state or government, crime does not exist -​ To get crime, we need to have a sovereign or a state to enact justice for these harmful acts -​ Legal definition: -​ Conduct that is prohibited by law and subject to a penal sanction (if in dispute, must target a “public evil” or some harm to society) -​ In Canada, prohibitions are the result of a legislative process that is intensely political -​ Police and judiciary are required to enforce the laws regardless of their own personal view -​ The Marginae crisis of 1949 -​ In The US, people buying margarine had to buy ones that was green or purple. The dairy industry was worried that margarine sales would harm their sales so they enacted laws to try to stop the sale of margarine. In 1989, the SSC decided that it didn’t fall under the criminal act therefore removing the laws restricting margarine. -​ There are 2 different approaches to crime: -​ Objectivist-legalistic approach -​ Our criminal justice system is modelled on this approach -​ Laws are considered a reflection of widely shared symptoms and beliefs codified into legal statutes -​ “Vale consensus” position or “normative” position -​ Simply, crime is something that is against the law (crime has an “objective reality”) -​ Criminality is limited to itl legal construction (whatever is against the law)  -​ According to the view, the goal of criminologists is to analyze criminality (where behaviour violates criminal law) and answer the question “what are the causes of criminal behaviour”. This approach to defining crime informs many theories of crime, where (1) criminal law is taken to reflect a social agreeme (2) those who violate it are seen as deviant, and (3) the question then becomes: what makes them (criminals) different from others? -​ Biological theories (e.g., Lombroso) -​ Psychological theories (e.g.,Cleckley)- -​ Some sociological explanations of offending (e.g.,Gottfredson and Hirschi) -​ Social-reaction approach -​ Criminal Law -​ Three broad categories: 1.​ Crimes against the person (e.g., homicide and sexual assault); also called violent crime; 2.​ Property crime (e.g., theft over $5000 and breaking and entering); and 3.​ Offences that are wrong, with no obvious victim (e.g., living off the avails of prostitution, illegal drug use); sometimes called public order crimes or victimless crimes -​ Crime comic -​ Makes, prints, publishes, distributes, sells or has in his possession for the purpose of publication, distribution or circulation -​ Time in the 40s where people were worried about the effect crime comic books would have on children -​ In the 80s, the Charter of Rights caused it to be harder to prosecute a person for a crime comic -​ The Charter invalidates the crime comic law -​ Zombie law -​ Laws that might exist in paper but don’t exist in practice -​ Mark Vader - convicted murderer who got free because the judge was relying on piece of criminal code that was invalid -​ In 2018, zombie laws got cleaned up and clearly marked - impacts of charter of rights ​ Empowers judges to declare invalid any legislation that infringes on an individual’s rights -​ SC has ruled many criminal laws invalid )abortion laws, prostitution laws) -​ To be found guilty of a crime, we need: -​ Actus reus -​ “Evil” act -​ Mens rea -​ “Evil” mind -​ Actus reus and mens rea need to be shown beyond a reasonable doubt for a person to be convicted -​ An accused may not be convicted of a crime unless it can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:  -​ That a particular event or state of affairs was “caused” by the accused person’s conduct )actus reus); and -​ That this conduct was simultaneously accompanied by a certain state of mind (mens rea) -​ Anyone involved in a crime can be found guilty of committing it -​ Children under 12 and some people who “suffer from a mental disorder” are unable to form mens rea and are therefore not held criminally responsible for their actions -​ Subjective mens rea: -​ Accused deliberately intended to bring about consequences prohibited by law -​ Objective mens rea: -​ A person should be convicted because a reasonable person would have appreciated that his/her conduct created a risk of harm and would have taken action to avoid this -​ Inchoate crime: -​ When a person attempts to bring about a crime that is unsuccessful in doing so -​ Incredibly rare type of crime -​ Is difficult and problematic -​ Three types of criminal code inchoate offences: -​ Criminal attempt: an individual takes some form of action that manifests the intention to commit a crime -​ Conspiracy: an individual enters into an agreement to help another commit a crime -​ Counselling: procuring, soliciting, or inciting another to commit a crime -​ Offence types in Canada fall into two main categories: 1.​ Summary offenses (less serious; e.g., causing a disturbance) 2.​ Indictable offenses (serious; e.g., murder, assault with a weapon) -​ Pleas bargaining - negotiation between accused or their counsel and Crown prosecutor Lecture 2 - Jan. 15 -​ Criminal justice in Canada -​ Indigenous Peoples has different legal systems/legal traditions -​ Based on different sets of customs and practices than Western legal systems -​ Different understandings of legal concepts such as property, evidence, and how justice is administered -​ They also existed and were passed on in oral form - not codified (written down) like Western system are -​ Elders and cultural ceremonies played central roles -​ Potlatch - people would get together and people in the community who had a lot, would distribute to others. A gift giving ceremony. It was criminalized by the Canadian government. Went against aims to civilize Indigenous peoples (convert them into christianity) -​ Crime and social relation -​ The development of labelling theory by Howard Becker in the 1960s and later by the various “critical criminologies” in the 1970s led to a questioning of the objectivist-legalistic approach: -​ Definition of crime needs to be less narrow -​ The law is not a reflection of consensus in society regarding what is should be a crime -​ There is no consensus in society regarding what is deviant behaviour -​ Howard Becker: -​ No act is inherently deviant or criminal -​ Social groups make the rules and apply them to behaviours and consequently create deviance -​ Deviance and crime are “socially constructed” -​ “The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied; deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label” -​ The label deviant is the social/societal reaction to deviance -​ Deviance involves the violation of a rule or regulation or law -​ These rules vary across societies and groups -​ There is nothing inherent in any act that makes it unlawful -​ It is up to society to decide -​ Social constructionism: examining the processes through which social problems (crime, deviance) are defined and responded to -​ Meaning of deviance and crime varies across social and cultural contexts (and time) -​ There is no universally condemned acts (e.g., killing) -​ There is nothing inherent in the act that determines whether it is criminal (this is the outcome of a social process) -​ Harm is not always a predictor whether a behaviour gets to be defined as deviant or criminal -​ Deviance: when sociologists study deviance, we study various kinds of rule-breaking, and the people, conditions, and behaviours targeted for “social control” (forms of disapproval, including dirty looks, shaming, exclusions, and imprisonment) -​ Lots of ways people are told they are breaking the law and the rules in ways that the law and law enforcement is not involved in -​ People are more concerned with the disapproval of their peers and their parents than they are with getting arrested -​ Crime is not an objective condition -​ Social deviance is a continuous variable that ranges from the most serious to the least serious acts in any society -​ Is crime always deviant? -​ Sharing passwords, jaywalking, cannabis -​ Is deviance always criminal? -​ No, there is many kinds of deviant behavior that is not against the law  -​ “Conflict criminologists” or “critical criminologists” focus on the entire law-making process -​ Conflict theory sees society as a site of conflict between groups with opposing interests (ie. economic classes, like property-owning, bourgeoisie and the proletariat) -​ What becomes law and which behaviours are criminalized is the result of social conflict -​ ‘Critical’ definitions of crime generally include concepts such as social class, race, and gender and examine the power imbalances that exist between different groups in society -​ Moral regulation (Micheal Foucalt): social regulation of behaviour is based on moral regulation (not social consensus) -​ Importance of social institutions in generating social discipline and self-regulation -​ Criminologists need to ask, “whose morals are being regulated, and by whom?” -​ Moral entrepreneurs (H. Becker) and Politics: -​ New rules to govern something that has been identified as “bad” -​ Media portrayals of Crime in Canada -​ Mass media accounts of crime play an integral role in how we understand the social reality of crime -​ These tend to depict: -​ Personal fear and risk in which violence is commonplace; -​ Sympathetic portrayal of victims; and -​ Victims let down by a justice system perceived as being too soft on criminals -​ Media’s misrepresentation of crime has consequences. -​ It influences public perceptions -​ The amount of crime can be overestimated -​ Fear of crime is higher than the risk of victimization -​ There are public calls of government to tighten laws -​ Media coverage may contribute to (some) crime -​ Media coverage does not examine the social and structural reasons behind crime -​ Research on presentation of crime in mass media shows: -​ 1. Public knowledge about crime and justice is derived largely from the mass media -​ 2. The way crime is portrayed in the media differs from home crime is measured and defined officially -​ Decreasing consumption of mass media is replaced by increased importance of new media/ social media but difficult to track how this leads to changing crime awareness -​ Crime and moral panics -​ Stanley Cohen examined the impact the media played in shaping how crime was defined in England during the late 1960s (Mods v. Rockers) -​ Moral panic: “ A condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as threat to the societal values and interests”  -​ Role of the media is central. Media needs to be involved in order to create an issue. -​ Media promoting misconceptions can have an impact on what the public believes should be done to confront crime, which is used by politicians to further their own agendas, often focused on law and order Momo: -​ Parental fears - kids are online, doing who-knows-what Satanic Panic: -​ fear/anxiety control (nuclear apocalypse) -​ Daycares (what is happening in these daycares?) -​ Religious shifts -​ D&D -​ Child abuse Lecture 3 - Jan.17th -​ Policing depends on public legitimacy, which is threatened by violence, criminality, and misconduct -​ Legitimacy = they are meant to be there. It is in the public interest. -​ Appreciate some of the systemic (and cultural) reasons why certain forms of misconduct can occur, with a particular focus on police investigations -​ Recognize that the police are a highly visible actor (and more visible than ever), but other (private) actors carry out a great deal of policing work -​ Police were invented in the 1800s in London by Sir Robert Peele -​ Polis = police/politics -​ Modern Policing -​ Throughout human history, when societies have been organized into states, rulers have sometimes created specialized groups to “police” social relations. However, disputes and harm between people were usually the responsibility of (‘private’) individuals/families to address -​ The police as we know them have only been associated with crime control since the 19th century -​ “Peelian” policing: “Citizens in uniform” -​ Uneven Policing -​ A “racial gap” in trust of the police (minority groups are often “overpoliced”, and may have reasons to be fearful of policing) -​ In early Canada, ethnic divisions often played out along Protestant/Catholic lines. In the 20th century, growing numbers of “visible minorities” and Indigenous persons become “overrepresented” in the justice system -​ Long history in Canada of blaming crime on immigrants -​ Bloody Code -​ Could be put to death by stealing a piece of fruit -​ In the early 19th century -​ Happened before the modern police -​ Police property -​ Groups in society that are seen as a problem for police to deal with -​ Responsibility of police to manage -​ Refers to the poor in the early 1800s -​ Other police property: PMI (People with Mental Illnesses), Protestors -​ Visibility of policing -​ The modern (uniformed) police was meant to be highly visible -​ Sometimes police carry out “undercover” investigations that would be impossible in uniform. Governments also maintain “secret police” that specialize in “high policing” or political crimes - collecting evidence to prevent major events (terrorism, revolution) -​ The carriers its own potential for harm: The Nuttall/Korody investigation, agent provocateurs, Mark Kennedy and undercover relationships, loss of trust/democratic chill -​ Policing Canada -​ In Canada, police have enjoyed relative legitimacy since their 19th century origins, and become a national symbol recognized around the world (Mounties) -​ (1800s) -​ 1. Uniformed municipal police maintaining order and enforcing laws in the cities. Becoming gatekeepers of criminal justice -​ 2. A mounted police (NWMP, later RCMP). Originally deployed to secure the Western frontier -​ Later develops into rural policing and the federal government’s security and intelligence arm -​ Post confederation (late 1800s), two competing styles of policing: -​ Municipal policing: relatively democratic, depends on municipal taxes, variation across the country in organization ad targets of policing (mostly public order offenses, like drunkenness, and disproportionately targeting the poor) -​ Territorial (NWMP and RCMP): authoritarian, based on a paramilitary model (adopted from Royal Irish Constabulary [RIC]). Controlled by the federal government -​ Established to secure the North-West Territories (for settlement) in the 1870s, following concerns about Americans violence and insertions against First Nations (in today’s Southern Alberta) -​ In 1974, 300 police embark on the “great march” west, and after near-disaster, begin establishing forts -​ NWMP emerges into RCMP (1919) -​ No longer securing the frontier, survives as a rural policing agency (contracted out to cities like Kelowna) and as the federal government’s domestic national security force -​ RCMP deals with cross-jurisdictional some very serious crime -​ 1900s/20th century:  -​ In the cities, shift away from walking the “beat”, to patrol cars and responding to citizen calls -​ Thanks to radios, police became more responsive to calls. -​ Police are joined by numerous other social services - no longer governing morality and poverty as directly, but some populations remain more policed than others -​ police : monopoly on the legitimate use of force (sovereign power, as i Weber), but many other roles -​ Theoretical Approaches (marquis) -​ Whig/liberal/consensus view (mainstream): Police are disinterested public servants who fight crime and preserve order. Criminals are a deviant sub-group from whom the public must be protected. Police serve the public (rather than elites), and are necessary -​ Critical/conflict (often Marxist-inspired): Policing serves certain groups at the expense of others. Rise of policing is linked to commercial trade, industrial revolution, (racial) capitalism. Policing disciplines the working class, targets marginalized groups, benefiting ethnic majorities, men, and those who own capital -​ Police and (Zero) Tolerance -​ Particularly in the 1990s, places like New York saw severe policing and punishment policies -​ These policies (punishing minor infractions, policing “disorder”, and stiff penalties) came with negative consequences that fell predominantly on the poor and racialized - also negatively affected police legitimacy among those groups Lecture 4 - Jan. 22nd -​ Police Culture -​ -​ Policing agencies have their own cultures/subcultures -​ This is more so the case than other professions, because police work (despite its Peelian origins) is carried out through separation from the larger society -​ This can lead to insularity - police officers largely socializing with one another, feeling that others do not or cannot understand the reality of their job -​ Emphasis on discipline (military roots) and conformity -​ There have been intentional efforts to change police culture, different agencies vary significantly, and today’s police culture is not what it once was -​ Robert Reiner suggests that cop culture is characterized by the following core features: 1.​ Suspicion: a product of the need to keep a lookout for trouble and because some people continually lie to them. Police need to see through dishonesty to achieve their sense of mission and consequently suspicion becomes a strong element of their subculture 2.​ Isolation/solidarity: Police officers tend to mix mostly with other officers due to their strong subculture and unorthodox work hours that inhibit out-of-work interaction with non-police. Police also need to be able to rely  on one another in the face of adversity and danger, and so they develop a strong solidarity between them 3.​ Moral and political conservatism: 80% of UK police are politically conservative, which is tied into the problematic morality their work engages them with 4.​ Old fashioned machismo: police continue to hold an action centered, hard drinking culture akin to traditional working class masculinity 5.​ Pragmatism: Police do not have the time or resources to debate the philosophical detail of crime fighting, rather they need to make quick snap decisions on the spot, often looking toward short-term goals of getting ‘a result’ or just getting through their shift -​ Reiner’s argument that most police work is ‘boring, messy, petty, trivial, and venal’. Much police work is not thus seen as ‘real’ police work by the police. Moreover, knowledge of how to do police work is viewed by officers as honed through practice at the ‘sharp end’ out on the streets on the need to become a good practical copper. -​ Visibility and Legitimacy -​ Policing is more visible than ever before; police are regularly filmed on duty, and these videos can be widely shared, leading to consequences in situations that would have previously escaped attention -​ Knowledge of police misconduct can threaten the legitimacy of police, which is vital in a democratic society. When the police lack legitimacy, people may be less likely to follow laws, and may call for institutional reforms -​ #BlackLivesMatter and Defunding the police -​ Waves of BLM protests (especially 2013-2016 and 2020), in the U.S. and internationally have followed in response to police killings of (mostly) Black men, sometimes on camera -​ This led to calls to defund the police, and a broader discussion of the role of police in society (whether there are other approaches or actors who could be used instead). While police culture and training have been affected, structural reforms have been minor. -​ Police Deviance and Criminality -​ Police also commit crimes. “Misconduct” may be rare or systematic. The power of police officers gives them many opportunities to commit crimes or engage in abuse. Police often blame their “bad apples”, but these are problems that require a systemic (sociological) view -​ Accountability mechanisms vary depending on the force, but crimes and misconduct are often handled internally, unless they are brought to public attention -​ Wrongful Convictions/Criminal Investigations -​ Successful investigations are key to obtaining convictions -​ High-tech (CSI) forensic techniques are less used than questioning witnesses and interrogating suspects. Issues of honesty and deception are therefore key, as are how police are trained to gather evidence (ie. reid technique)  -​ Police and prosecutors can manipulate cases to achieve certain ends, which can result in wrongful conviction (is. Illegally withholding evidence from the defence). -​ Why do people admit to a crime they didn’t commit? -​ inability/reluctance to admit wrongdoing -​ Lack of lawyer/unawareness of rights -​ Vulnerability of suspects -​ Death penalty -​ Lack of recordings -​ Long and intense interrogations -​ “Tunnel vision” -​ Starts with a theory of the crime and focuses on only making that theory true -​ Reid Technique -​ Police deception -​ Still relevant in the US and Canada -​ Dominant technique that police investigators were trained to carry out investigations -​ 1. Investigators determine guilt -​ 2. Obtain the confession -​ Privatization and Pluralization -​ Private security now outnumber the police (since 1970s), and exist in a gray area of authority and power (legally, they have no police powers, but they may act as if they do) -​ The primary role of private security is the protection of private property, but have increasingly hired (by government or public bodies) for roles that the police would otherwise carry out -​ Conclusion -​ Police are justified as crime-fighters protecting the public. Indeed, crime is often a problem for marginalized people, and police are often in a position to help -​ More critical perspectives focus on “who benefits” from the police, and how harms/benefits are not evenly distributed -​ Police play many roles, and non-police are often engaged in policing -​ Public views of police have become more critical as police violence and misconduct have become more visible, but police still enjoy mainstream legitimacy and public support in Canada Lecture 5 - Jan. 24th -​ Police Property -​ This concept refers to when the dominant powers of society (in the economy, polity, etc.) leave the problems of [particular groups] to the police. -​ Eg. unhouse populations, drug users, protestors, and mental health issues -​ Public Order and Safety  -​ While also relevant to protest policing (to be covered later), the mandate to protect “public order” (order maintenance) has been important to police since their inception -​ This may or may-not involve crime fighting (or fighting specific public order offences: vagrancy [archaic], public drunkenness, urination, graffiti, vandalism) -​ Mental health is also policed under the justification of public safety (which also covers disaster management): preventing people from being dangerous to themselves or others -​ Much of policing of mental health happens in situations where a person (PMI) has not actually committed a crime. However, consider if Someone commits a horrific violent crime while they were “out of their mind” - existing in a different reality from you or me -​ Not Criminally Responsible for a crime on account of a Mental Disorder (NRCMD) -​ One has to be able to appreciate the quality and nature of an act or omission or know it was wrong -​ A “mental disorder” means that the accused lacks the capacity to appreciate the nature of the act being committed -​ An NCRMD accused may be granted: -​ 1. An absolute discharge -​ 2. A conditional discharge -​ 3. An order holding them in custody in a psychiatric facility -​ People with NRCMD are less likely to commit offence again once released than people in the normal criminal justice system Lecture 6 - Jan.29 -​ The Demonic Era -​ Looking at European context, middle ages onwards -​ Clergy and religious ideas influenced how more mundane crimes were dealt with -​ Logic is that God is going to decide -​ Some interference in determining if someone is guilty or not -​ Trial by lake -​ If someone sank, not guilty - not full of sin -​ If someone did not sink, guilty - full of sin -​ The Social Contract -​ In his text Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes (1651) discussed the “natural state” of humanity where life in a pre-social state of nature was “nasty, brutish, short” -​ Hobbes argued that the fear of violent death acts as a force on human beings to enter into a social contract with each other and leads to the formation of the state -​ Hobbes on human behaviour: -​ The first principle of human behaviour is egoism or self-interest, which is the root of all social conflict -​ That state serves a protective function -​ Member of society must give up their natural rights and give absolute authority to the state in return got its protection  -​ Locke has a less pessimistic view of human nature, but also argues for a social contract, where individuals sacrifice some freedom in exchange for rights and protection Enlightenment-era (late 1600s onward) a.​ “Scientific revolution” and change in thinking b.​ Ideas shifted to explanation based on reason and the scientific method (observation/demonstration) c.​ The idea that people were self-determining entities was called rationalism i.​ Free will and rational thought were deemed the basic building blocks of human activity and social organization ​ The Bloody Code -​ The Classical School of Criminology d.​ Two main figures, both philosophers and jurists and both credited with forming the classical school of criminology i.​ Italian Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) published An Essay on Crimes and Punishments (1864) ii.​ English Jeremy Bentham B(1748-1832) wrote An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1780) On final - anything that bridges two topics together, ie. Drugs and Police, Mental Health and Police -​ Cesare Beccaria (1764) -​ Every act of authority of one man over another, for which there is not an absolute necessity, is tyrannical. It is upon this then, that the sovereign’s right to punish crime is founded; that is, upon the necessity of defending the public liberty, entrusted to his care from the usurpation of individuals; and punishments are just in proportion, as the liberty, preserved by the sovereign, is sacred and valuable. -​ He is saying that it is unjust. Punishments need to be proportional to the crime. Principle of proportionality. -​ If every individual is bound to society, society is equally bound to him, by a contract, which from its nature, equally binds both parties. The violation of this compact by any individual, is an introduction to anarchy. -​ The sovereign, who represents the society itself, can only make general laws to bind the members; but it belongs not to him to judge whether any individual has violated the social compact, or incurred the punishment in consequence. For in this case, there are two parties, one represented by the sovereign, who insists upon the violation of the contract, and the other is the person accused, who denies it. It is necessary then that there should be a third person to decide this contest; that is to say, a judge, or magistrate -​ The separation between the lawmakers and the judges or the sovereign. -​ There needs to be a third person - a judge. -​ Beccaria’s ideas: -​ Punishment should be formulated for the purpose of deterrence and punishment of criminals should be swift and certain -​ If punishment followed too long after the act, or if it was unlikely to happen at all, then the law would not be an effective deterrent to crime -​ The punishment should fit the crime -​ Criminals are national, free-willed decision makers who choose to commit crimes, yet who can be deterred by the threat of punishment -​ Can distinguish individual (specific and general deterrence -​ The Classical Theory of Crime -​ Specific reforms: -​ Stop executing people for minor offences -​ Criminal matters should be dealt with in public according to the dictates of the law -​ Laws should be accessible to all -​ Separate the lawmaking power of the legislature from the role of judges -​ Laws to be set by legislatures while judges determined guilt and administered punishment -​ Assessing the Contributions of the Classical School -​ The Classical School of Legal Reform -​ These reforms provided the foundation for the modern criminal justice system: -​ Equality before the law -​ Guarantee of one’s rights -​ Establishment of fixed penalties -​ Due process safeguards -​ Separation of judicial and legislative systems -​ Inflexible laws can result in injustice -​ Equal treatment is all well and good when everyone is equal (a rational calculation to steal looks different for those on poverty) -​ A response to arbitrary and barbaric punishments of the time, elements of classical school of criminology still present in contemporary administration of criminal justice -​ Justice and Reason -​ Criminal Code, section 43: Every school teacher, parent, or person standing in the place of a parent is justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances -​ Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 8: Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure -​ Limitations of the Classical School  -​ Classical school premised on a theory of deterrence -​ However, punishment rarely swift or certain -​ More severe punishments are not sufficient to deter many criminal offenders -​ Classical theorists view of free and rational human being ignores the objective realities faced by individuals as they make their choices -​ E.g., individuals experience inequalities and other factors that may influence their decision to commit a crime -​ Neoclassical Theory -​ Sought more flexibility in the justice system, such as individualizing sentences to take into account: -​ The physical and social environment in which crime takes place -​ Offender characteristics (e.g., age) -​ Mitigating circumstances (mental competence) -​ Motive -​ From Lombrosian Atavism to Modern Biocriminology -​ Positivist school of thought emerged in the nineteenth century -​ The application of the scientific method to the study of the human condition -​ Positivists believed human behavior was determined by forces beyond the control of the individual behaviour that could not be prevented by sheer willpower or moral training) -​ Positivists criticized the classical school for being unscientific and based on unsystematic observation -​ Early positivist thinking: Some basis in Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859) and the belief in the theory of natural selection (evolution) -​ Social Darwinism (mis)interprets this to mean that the “fittest” humans should succeed and that one can be more/less evolved (naturally, this makes the people already in charge superior [more evolved], while deviants are naturally inferior [atavistic]) -​ Central figure in positivist criminology, with focus on biology and anthropology: Italian medical doctor Cesare Lombrosos (1835-1909) -​ In Criminal Man (1861), Lombroso outlined his perspective on crime and criminals -​ Criminals were biological throwbacks or “atavists” -​ The causes of criminal behaviour are rooted in biological makeup, and those who display visible primitive, ape-like characteristics are specifically predisposed to crime -​ Criminals were born, not made -​ Lombroso reached his conclusions based on what he claimed was scientific research  -​A comparison of incarcerated criminals with a control group of Italian soldiers -​ He reported significant differences in the incidence of these atavistic characteristics between the two groups -​ Criminals were deemed to be lower on the evolutionary scale than non-criminals -​ Criticisms of Lombroso’s research: -​ Statistical techniques were inadequate -​ State of atavism simply does not exist -​ Physical attributes may have been observed as a result of their incarceration e.g., inadequate nutrition and poor hygiene) -​ No well-accepted studies have explained variation in crime rates on the basis of biological variation alone -​ Through the 20th century, there have continued to be sociobiological explanations of crime: Human behaviour can be explained according to evolutionary principles -​ The argument is that certain individuals have a predisposition towards criminality, and that this can somehow be “read” from the body (ie. DNA, facial features) -​ Despite no scientific basis and racist implications, this kind of phrenology continues to reappear in the area of AI and Big Data The Contribution of the Positive School -​ Classical theorists said punishment should fit the crime, but Lombroso said punishment should fit the criminal -​ As such, he called for different treatment in the justice system for different kinds of criminals -​ Born criminals should be incarcerated to protect society -​ But they should be treated leniently as that have no control over their behaviour -​ Psychology of Crime -​ Psychological theories of criminal behaviour focus on the individual, but modern psychological explanations about crime contend that criminals are made - Interacting with social environment is key -​ Psychoanalytic theory -​ Social learning theory -​ Aggressive behaviour is learned through a series of psychological thought processes and perceptions (we observe and imitate what we see, responding to rewards and punishments) -​ Criticisms:  -​ The research literature reveals a complex relationship between viewing violence and actually engaging in aggression -​ Media’s effect on violent behavior has often been exaggerated (increasingly violent media coincides with declining crime rates) -​ Psychopathy Lecture 7 - Jan. 31 -​ The reality of crime differs from perceptions that is largely shaped by the media -​ We get to the empirical reality of crime by systematically collecting observable data on crime -​ There are different ways to measure crime: -​ Official statistics, self-report surveys, victimization surveys, and observational accounts -​ Criminology is not simply about describing the nature of crime is society, it must explain and understand the nature of crime using the most reliable and valid information possible -​ There is no one technique available that can successfully fulfill this need -​ Official Statistics -​ Most countries in the world measure their crime rates -​ When crime data are collected by the police, they are called “official crime statistics” or “police-reported crime statistics” -​ Crime measured this what falls under the objective-legalistic definition -​ Statistics Canada is the federal government agency that collects, analyzes, and makes available data; its division that specializes on crime and justice is the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (CCJS) -​ Police in Canada submit crime data to the CCJS in Ottawa every year, using the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) system -​ The Uniform Crime Reporting UCR) System -​ Relies on reports of crime by the police -​ Crime data in Canada have been systematically collected since 1962 -​ About 1,200 police detachments submit crime data to the Canadian center of Justice Statistics (CCJS) every year -​ Usually publishes less than a year after the data were collected -​ The three general categories in the UCR: -​ Violent crime (e.g., homicide, robbery, assault) -​ Property crime (e.g., breaking and entering, arson) -​ Other Criminal Code violations (e.g., disturbing the peace, impaired driving -​ UCR data represent “crimes known to the police” -​ ‘Second Generation’ UCR: UCR2 survey collects data on victims and accused persons - “incident-based” reporting (since 1988) -​ In creality, not all crimes know to police are counted:  -​UCR survey classifies incidents according to the most serious offence (MSO) -​ Also, police can behave differently when a crime is reported to them (ie. pre-2018 not reporting sexual assault allegations police decide are unfounded) -​ Scenario: -​ A criminal incident involves breaking and entering + assault -​ Which one is counted according to the MSO rule? Assault; breaking and entering is not counted -​ The MSO is considered the offence that carries the longest maximum sentence under the criminal code -​ Violent offences always take precedence over non-violent offenses -​ As a result of the MSO scoring rule, less serious offences are undercounted by the aggregate survey -​ Not all crimes known to police show up in official statistics Implications: -​ Deflates total crime count -​ Inflates serious crimes as percentage of total -​ Not enough qualitative data about crimes are recorded to use a sophisticated scale of seriousness (sorted according to maximum sentence) -​ Yearly counts of crime are reported as absolute numbers and as rates -​ Unlike the unemployment rate, which is displayed as per 100 (=persent), the crime rate is displayed per 100,000 population (number of crimes per 100,000 of general population) -​ Crime rate calculation: -​ # of police-reported crimes x 100,000 —--------------------------------- = crime rate per 100,000 Population size -​ Regular crime rate does not capture seriousness of police-reported crime -​ Thus, the Police-Reported Crime Severity index (PRCSI) was introduced in 2009: -​ Each type of offence is assigned a weight derived from actual sentences handed down by courts in all provinces and territories -​ More serious crimes are assigned higher weights, less serious offences lower weights -​ As a result, when all crimes are included, more serious offences have a greater impact on changes in the index  -​ Aside from actual changes in crime rates, official crime statistics/police-reported crime statistics can vary from year to year for additional reasons, such as changes in: -​ Legislation: just like a certain behaviour becoming a crime might lead to numbers going up in subsequent ways, a behavior becoming decriminalized, will lead to the rates going down (e.g., youth Criminal Justice Act or more recently, the legalization of marijuana) -​ Human and fiscal resources (people, money): a police detachment has available affects police’s ability to record reported crime -​ Policing priorities: regarding enforcement of certain crimes and in certain neighbourhoods -​ Concerns: -​ Police/official crime statistics should be treated with caution: -​ Not all police departments submit statistics (vast majority do) -​ Not all crimes reported make it into UCR -​ People may noy report crimes to the police for several reasons: -​ No insurance coverage -​ Fear of retaliation -​ Economic dependence on perpetrator -​ Belief that nothing would be accomplished by having police involved -​ Offence is trivial or not serious enough to warrant reporting -​ May not realize that they have been victimized -​ Cost of time and money or belief that reporting would not lead to anything -​ Fear or lack of trust in police or judicial system -​ The crime funnel affects police-recorded crime rate -​ The further into the CJS system, the greater the attrition (crimes “fall out”) -​ Self-report surveys -​ Questionnaires from anonymous respondents about offences they have committed over a selected period of time -​ Collected by researchers (not police or a government agency) -​ The intention is to capture information about crimes that may not have come to the attention of the police -​ Additionally, demographic characteristics of participants are also collected, such as age, gender, etc.  -​ This enables researchers to develop or test explanations about causes of crime (theory generation or testing) -​ Prior to modern self-report surveys, most information about crime relied on police or statistics from prisons: -​ The majority of the people who got caught and authorities had information on were poor, young males -​ One of the first self-report surveys on crime and delinquency was conducted by porterfield (1943) among college students in Texas -​ Subsequent self-report surveys continued to on delinquent behaviour and social class/socio-economic status -​ Results consistently challenged conventional wisdom of the time that crime was connected to low socioeconomic status -​ The overrepresentation of poorer individuals may have less to do with their levels of criminality and more to do with practices by police and other components of the criminal justice system -​ Two very important issues for all surveys -​ Reliability: the extent to which a measurement procedure produces the same results on repeated trials -​ Validity: the accuracy of a measure in relation to the concept that one is attempting to measure -​ Requires careful attention to how we define what we are measuring, and sampling (how we draw select info/participants from a larger population) -​ Victimization Surveys -​ Started in 1981 by Statistics Canada at the Canadian Urban Victimization Survey (CUVS) -​ Now, stats Canada’s General Social Survey (GSS) contains information on victimization of individuals and households -​ It shows that only approximately one-third of criminal incidents come to the attention of the police, even less for certain crimes (e.g., sexual assault) -​ Based on random probability samples; conducted over the phone -​ Victimization rate is displayed as per 1,000 population -​ Results show much higher rates of victimization for certain groups: e.g., violent victimization rates for members of LGBTQ25 community are 3x as high as for people not part of this community -​ Limitations of the GSS -​ Conducted every 5 years (most recent was 2019 with report released in fall 2021) -​ Normally excludes those under the age of 16  -​ Relies on the ability of respondents to accurately place their victimization experiences in the proper time frame (known as “telescoping”) -​ Relatively small number of individuals from crime-prone/at-risk communities are included (groups most vulnerable to crime are socially excluded and disadvantaged populations, not well represented in the data) -​ Unable to collect information about crimes where there is no clearly identifiable offender (e.g., prostitution, drug use, and illegal gambling) -​ Small-scale victimization surveys conducted in Canada that address many of the criticisms above include: -​ DeKeseredy et al. (2003) on eastern Ontario public housing residents -​ Gaetz (2004) on homeless youth -​ They find that victimization rates for vulnerable/marginalized populations are much higher than the rates in the GSS. (public housing residents are more more likely (3x) to experience break-ins, homeless populations are much more likely to experience violent victimization) -​ Observational Accounts -​ Also referred to as observational research, observational methods, observational studies or ethnography or participant observation -​ Researchers interact with individuals face-to-face in natural settings to gather information about crime -​ Not conducted to establish how much crime there is -​ They are more valid than UCR data, self-report, or victimization surveys -​ Conducted on a relatively small scale, researchers can gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of crime and victimization -​ Focus is often on lawbreakers but also on the people who make and enforce our laws -​ Observational methods are useful for collecting information from individuals in marginalized groups -​ Examples of criminological observational researcher conducted in Canada: -​ Outlaw biker gang in western Canada (Wolf 1991) -​ Punk rock subcultures in BC (Baron 1989) and Ontario (Dumas 2003) -​ “Squeegee kids” in Toronto -​ Male sex workers in toronto -​ Detectives on the job  -​ Practitioners of “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) -​ Private security industry -​ Limitations of observational research -​ Generalized or inferences about the level and character of crime in a larger population cannot be made -​ Researchers may be putting themselves in dangerous situations -​ Can take very long -​ Requires detailed and often lengthy ethics approval process at universities -​ Regardless of how it is done, there is no ideal method to measure crime -​ The research method to study a particular behaviour and the people who engages in it should be chosen based on how well this method helps answer the research questions -​