Crime Definition & Criminology PDF

DEFINE CRIME: ​ What makes something a crime? Why should some behaviour be made into a crime? ○​ harms individuals or society. ○​ Crime and harm go together, one of the principles that underlines the bucket of law. But there are things that are harmful but not cr...

DEFINE CRIME: ​ What makes something a crime? Why should some behaviour be made into a crime? ○​ harms individuals or society. ○​ Crime and harm go together, one of the principles that underlines the bucket of law. But there are things that are harmful but not criminal. You can be abusive without crossing the threshold of criminal law. WHAT IS CRIMINOLOGY? ​ Victimless crimes like drug use: you're causing harm to yourself but it doesn't necessarily make it a crime. ○​ Maybe you are fueling a drug economy. ○​ Point is there is always a way to make something a broader social harm crime. ○​ We typically equate crime with harm, but there are many forms of crime that are not harmful, and there is harm that is not crime. WHAT IS CRIME? ​ (1) Generally speaking, in societies (particularly European ones from which our legal system derived), if someone hurt you it was your responsibility to get justice. ​ (2-4) gradually those behaviours get categorized as harmful to a society as a whole, and the state/sovereign/crown is responsible for prosecution. Key point: without the state or the idea of a government that is in charge of crime, crime does not exist. You need to have something like the state to treat these acts as harm for bodies- the state is required for this idea of crime to exist. OBJECTIVIST-LEGALISTIC APPROACH ​ (1-2)Crime is defined as what is written as being against the law. ○​ there is an assumption of agreement on what behavior is acceptable and unacceptable. ​ If somebody is doing that goes against the norm, that goes against society's expectations. ​ The main question to answer is why? What causes people to do things to go against that social consensus. CONT ​ Deviance: behaviour that goes against some sort of norm. ​ This approach assumes that crimes can be defined by looking at a law that reflects a consensus, and going against it is something deviant that has a reason why: ○​ Bio, psycho, soci. ​ These all attempt a general explanation of crime. We can find some underlying element or explanation that would answer this question for us. WHAT IS A CRIME: ​ In terms of determining what a crime is: crime is inherently political. It is the process of political decisions. ​ Criminal law is a federal responsibility. ​ Margarine: relates to the margarine reference of 1949. Margarine was regulated as part of criminal law. There were rules about it. In some states you could buy margarine but it had to be a different colour. Dairy industry was upset that margarine was going to cut into their butter profits. ○​ Eventually in 1949 a court of law in Canada decided margarine does not fall under criminal law. ○​ Lesson here is that the government passes law: it is a political process. Citizens have a say but ultimately in deciding if something is a crime or not, it is up to the courts. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN CANADA: ​ Criminal code: is where all the crimes can be found listed. Things can be added or taken away. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN CANADA: ​ Civil law: people suing each other. Harms that are the responsibility of the party to bring forward. ​ Administrative: for the government to follow the law as well; to fight discrimination for example. ​ Regulatory: huge and very specific rules that cover specific industries. ​ Criminal law: the burden to be found guilty of a crime is higher than for the other ones. To be guilty of a crime, that guilt has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt- which is not the case for the other types of law. ○​ The reason for that is that the “public evils” and consequences of criminal law are more severe than the other laws. You could go to jail for life or get a criminal record. CHARITY TAX SHAM: ​ Many industries have their own regulator or are allowed to regulate themselves. ​ Argument is that the supreme court is the one to decide where that line is drawn between whether something is a crime or not. EVERYONE COMMITS AN OFFENCE WHO: ​ Up until 2018 it was a crime to own any comic book that displays crime in it. ​ Why did the police not arrest people who owned them, or raid the bookstore that sold them? ○​ Part of it: not in the public issue. ○​ Process of execution: a waste of time to go through the process. Is it really in the interest of cops to go out and clear the bookstore? And what would happen if they tried? It is a moral panic. There was a time in the 1940s where people were upset by the violent effects of comic books. ​ In the 1980s: the canadian charter of rights and freedoms; in some ways the higher law of the land. Laws cannot violate the charter of rights, for they would be unconstitutional. A person would have to be charged, then they would fight to change the law. That never happened; police wasn't interested and nobody was gettin prosecuted ​ This is an example of a Zombie Law; might be a crime but realistically nobody will be charged, etc. ○​ They might exist on paper but don't exist in practice. They stagger on until put out of misery. ○​ The problem is that it's not in the political interest to appeal to change the law and get rid of the zombie laws. Nobody wants to touch them politically. IMPACT OF CHARTER OF RIGHTS ​ It changed things in the sense that laws can be invalidated if they didn't align with the charter of rights and freedoms. ​ The supreme court ultimately decides whether or not something should be a crime after the politicians have passed their bills. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN CANADA CONTD ​ Need two elements to see if something is a crime: 1.​ Actus reus: to commit the crime 2.​ Mens rea: intentionality and mental processes. BECOMING A PARTY TO A CRIMINAL OFFENCE:  ​ To be found guilty for a crime, you don't have to be the main person responsible for the crime, you just have to participate in it in some way. ○​ You can be prosecuted for murder or assault because you participated. ​ Michal Briscue was sentenced to life because he participated in the murder- because a reasonable person could have predicted what would have happened. INCHOATE OFFENCES: ​ The actual act that is a crime hasn't really happened/played out. Attempted murder. ​ Weather an attempt, a conspiracy, a plan. ​ Problematic: ○​ Where do you draw the line? ○​ How do you get evidence? ​ Some crimes are so harmful that we need to stop them before they take place. ○​ Requires a lot of surveillance. VIDEO: -​ John- a muslim convert. Life is a mess. They don't have a stable living situation. Starts saying dangerous things. -​ Surveillance cost a lot of money. So they had to get somewhere. They bring in an undercover cop, they get guidance on how to build bombs, etc. eventually John and his wife go and plant the bombs. They then get convicted. Later released because the argument was that they wouldn't have been convicted if the RCMP didn't push him. -​ When it comes to terrorism, there is an intense pressure to not allow this to happen, so the police need to step in. they had to crank things up a notch. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN CANADA CONT -​ Don't need to know the difference between summary and indictable offenses. -​ Do need to know: one of the things you can do is go to court and sit and observe. CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN CANADA, CONT’D Potlatch: -​ Indigenous practice carried out by indigenous- often in the winter months. -​ A ceremony with different layers and aspects. -​ This practice was actually criminalized- Canadian government. Connected to capitalism, christianity, and assimilation. Encouraging people to adopt privatization. 2) CRIME AND SOCIAL REACTION- The second approach. ​ More broadly a sociology approach. CONT ​ Studying the process of how deviance is constructed- who decides what? What sorts of deviance are served? ​ Pushing against a common sense, objectivist, legalistic perspective. ​ There is nothing in the act that is inherently deviant, it has to be socially constructed ○​ They're not natural givens, they don't exist prior to a social process.  ○​ From this perspective, deviance is attached to behaviours. CONT ​ When we say that something is not innate, it means that something can be constructed differently. Things can vary from place to place, etc. ​ 5: being poor used to be a crime. Homosexuality. Laws have changed. DEVIANCE; ​ Social control: how people respond to what they see as deviance. ​ Often more effective ways of governing behaviour. People are often much more concerned about disapproval of peers and parents than getting arrested for something. Crime and Social Control CONT ​ Pyramid: various kinds of actions that can have varying levels of consensus. ​ Conflict crimes: treated as crimes but there soem debated around them CONT ​ Is deviance always criminal? No, there are behaviours that are definitely not against the law ​ Is a crime always deviant? Jaywalking? Answer can still be no. CONT ​ There are processes by which these lines get drawn and redrawn. CONT ​ One of the perspectives that takes this seriously is critical criminology; an umbrella term inclusive of things of conflict theory/perspective on society- seeing society as a battlefield between groups with different interests, and they are struggling with one another. Marxism analysis of capitalism- class struggles. ○​ Useful in answering questions as to why there are so many laws that are interested in protecting private property. ○​ From this perspective, the law is seen as protecting particular groups- probably those in power. CONT ​ Moral regulation; broadly speaking, law and crime is just one mode of regulation. ​ One answer to how some things are defined as deviant or criminal is this notion of moral entrepreneurs ○​ They are key individuals who participate in the creation of rules. MEDIA PORTRAYALS OF CRIME IN SOCIETY ​ Where most people's opinions about crimes come from. ○​ It becomes our filter that ends up shaping particular kinds of beliefs. ​ Why might people always believe that crime is getting worse? Depictions in the news media/  ​ Why might the media promote a view of increasing crime severity- ○​ Fear driver's engagement. MEDIA REPRESENTATION CONSEQUENCES; ​ MEDIA COVERAGE may contribute to some crime: mass shootings, spree shooting; clear cases where its recognized that these acts are driven by the media environment. They are not universal around the world but can be a cultural phenomena. CONT: ​ Unsure if mass media contributes to misrepresentations. CRIME AND MORAL PANICS ​ Moral panic: ○​ Problem is identified. ○​ Police attract attention to a problem ○​ Main point: in this concept of moral panic, the role of the media is central. You need the media to create something that didn't exist before. Media coverage fueled a change and led people to identify with these groups that may have not been identified before. MORAL PANICS IN CANADA ​ Momo- became an actual thing because everyone was exposed to the story. ​ Why did the momo become a moral panic ○​ Parental fears; kids are online, doing who-knows-what. ​ Happened because of a social shift; kids are online more and parents are not. VIDEO; CLASSIC case of modern panic; the satanic panic of the 80s and 90s; ​ Manhattan beach; mother noticed her son was having nightmares and difficulty settling down. ​ Teachers accused of abusing the children. ​ Charges mounted on the evening news; charge of CP, sacrificing children, Satanic panic: ​ fear/anxiety; seeking control. ​ About daycares; a relatively new phenomenon. Women are going to work and need a place to put their kids in the daytime. But can you trust the daycares? ​ Religious shifts; people are not going to church. Evangelical christianity is rising. ​ Child abuse; being recognized now as an actual phenomenon in the 80s. ​ Exam: it's these underlying social shifts that manifest in this explosion of fear and allegations. CRITICISMS OF THE MORAL PANIC PERSPECTIVE ​ Can paint a simplistic picture of how the media works. ○​ Not all media play this fear fabricating role. KNOW the concepts of Folk devils!! THE POLICE ​ The invention of the police is pretty recent. Model of policing stemmed from England in the 1920’s. LEARNING OBJECTIVES ​ Legitimacy: when we accept that something has a right to exist: government, police. Accepting they are part of society and they play a certain role and they have our support. ​ When they are behaving badly, it threatens their legitimacy. ​ Creating legitimacy was essential when it comes to police. HISTORICAL ORIGINS AND CONTINUITIES ​ “Police “ is a recent invention but policing is not as new. ​ Police comes from the word polis; which is where police and politics comes from MODERN POLICING: ​ There were laws and rules, and if someone broke the rules, it was generally your responsibility to seek justice; it was a private matter. Law enforcement protected the interest of the wealthy ​ 1900’s development of police under Robert Peel; “were gonna create a police force, that is gonna go after the criminals, thieves, bandits, and causing problems”. ○​ To recruit citizens working class that were going to serve and protect; to look after common interests. ​ The creation of the police in England was driven by public order. VIDEO: ​ Criminal law was characterized as the Bloody code- offences that were punishable by death were more than 200. Hoped that behaviour would change if they would impose the harshest punishment ​ Bloody code had failed to stand. ​ The riot act: allows for the government to kill anyone on the street after some time of riots. ​ Peel advocated the creation of a police force: tried to convince people that police would control crime and not people. ​ Why were people opposed? ○​ The fear of a standing army. ○​ They were scared it was just the government trying to get hold of the people. ​ Who was targeted by these new police? Where did most of their attention go? ​ Police property: refers to groups in society that are basically seen as a problem for the police to deal with. Responsibility for the police to manage; poor.  ○​ Poverty was seen as a problem for the police to be responsible for. Being poor was seen as a moral failing. ○​ People with mental illness are also being police property. ○​ Protests and rioters: job of police to manage those political uprising. UNEVEN POLICING ​ Policing has always been unevenly applied and has focused more on kinds of law breaking. ○​ Early days in canada it was abut sex work, drugs, violence. ○​ Just trying to maintain order and making sure the streets were not overrun with violence; but a lot of this was unevenly applied; ​ Poor ​ Immigrants ​ Indigenous people PROTEST/PUBLIC ORDER POLICING ​ You recognize this as a foundational aspect of where policing comes from. ​ High (protests, social movements, national security) vs low policing. VISIBILITY OF POLICING ​ Key element: police would be in uniform, visible, identifiable. ​ When you don't know who the police are, lines may be crossed and legitimacy may be threatened. ​ Mark kennedy; British police undercover spying on environmental activists and trying to get environmental groups to cross a line. POLICING CANADA ​ We have police officers as our national symbol. The mounties have historically been celebrated, painting a virtuous picture of their roles in settlement etc. POLICING CANADA 1800S ​ Two kinds of policing in canada ○​ 1. Municipal police forces: they are democratically accountable through those municipal authorities. ​ Munipally funded. Have their jurisdiction limited to the city they operate in. ○​ Mounties: ways for the Canadian state to project sovereignty and control over the West. ​ Baked on a paramilitary model. ​ Similar to the army in terms of recruitment and training. ​ Effectively under federal control. ​ Federal level stuff; national security, organized crime, etc. ​ Today we recognize the RCMP as our municipal police force.  ​ A shift from what we recognize as policing today: more patrolling from cars. We used to have police call boxes when people didn't have phones. WHAT DO POLICE DO? WHAT IS THEIR JOB? -​ To maintain social order and social contract (give up some of our freedom from the protection of the state) -​ Law enforcement; the common sense answer. VIDEO POLICE: -​ Community support -​ Counselling -​ Noise complaints; not criminal law -​ Peace-keeping -​ Domestic calls -​ The vast majority of the time they are acting as social workers and counselors. -​ Report writing. They are basically information workers. They are taking information in and producing outputs. -​ problem-solving= you call the police when you have a problem and don't know where else to turn. POLICE: -​ THE ONE THING that they do that others can't: violence. A state is sovereign if they can control others, especially with violence. THEORETICAL APPROACHES: 1.​ Consensus a.​ To protect and serve the public 2.​ critical/conflict a.​ Marxist influenced b.​ Asks the question: whose interest does the police serve? Serving some interests more than others. Sees society more of a struggle between certain groups rather than a unified body with conflicts. POLICE AND ZERO TOLERANCE. ​ Seemed to work out because crime rates fell, but they also fell in cities that were not practicing these policing. ​ The consequences of stopping mainly marginalized groups hurt the police-society relationship (racism, black lives matter movement). POLICE CULTURE: ​ RCMP has more military roots. ​ Police have their own occupational cultures, a world within a world. With the origins of policing, the idea was that these would be citizens in uniform; a vision of NOT a top-down society, but rather drawn and representatives.  ○​ In reality, they are separate, removed. They have to stick together because of safety. ​ Policing is a bureaucracy: defined as hierarchies with roles and ranks. ​ Things have changed, but its still possible to make generalizations: ○​ A conservative orientation meant to uphold the social order. ○​ There is a gendered aspect to policing: a male dominated profession. Violence: only police have the ability to legitimately use violence in our society, and women and minorities have traditionally been excluded from this environment. INSTITUTIONAL RACISM: ​ Doesn't necessarily mean that there is a lot of racism in an institution ​ Evidence of institutional racism: over incarceration or over arrests of minorities. Who do we see behind bars? How are the ratios of demographics matching up? \ ​ Outcomes in the course: different types of sentencing in comparison of groups; who is treated worse and where does bias creep in? ​ The idea that the rules, policies, and how things are arranged can encourage racism, people don't necessarily have to be racist themselves. ○​ Bias can be the result of a logistic system that's set up by someone some time. Systematically disadvantaged people from certain backgrounds. ​ Sometimes it does indeed involve racist individuals, but it can also be how the system is structured, its rules, policies, etc. ​ Can also manifest in terms of how the police treat victims (who is taken seriously as a victim?): missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. ○​ Chelsea poreman: not taken seriously as a victim; due to systemic racism and some victims being prioritized over others. VISIBILITY AND LEGITIMACY ​ We live in an age where we are all walking around with cameras in our pockets; meaning that police are increasingly being surveilled ○​ This can affect the legitimacy of police and their role in society. ​ Black lives matter movement: caused people to actually question the role of police in society. ​ Can we defund the police? It was attempted in numerous cities, but broadly speaking the police remained in place. ​ But it has changed the awareness of police officers: fills them with a level of anxiety, and it is now part of their training. POLICE DEVIANCE AND CRIMINALITY: ​ Their position of power and authority opens up lots of opportunities for police to do bad things. ​ Their power also allows for them to get different types of discipline and exemptions. WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS/CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS ​ Investigations are mainly about talking to people ​ Main form of evidence is what information is given by people, and their testimony. ​ Historically the best way to confirm a conviction is through a confession. VIDEO:  ​ Inability or reluctance to admit to wrongdoings from the police ○​ Rationalizing the things they do as being necessary. ​ Lack of lawyer (a lawyer could have helped the suspects cases). ​ Peoples unawareness of rights ​ Vulnerability of suspects; people associated with the navy; used to top-down hierarchical ​ Reid technique: the technique involved in obtaining these confessions. ○​ The dominant technique by which police investigators were trained to carry out investigations in the US and Canada for many years; this has changed recently. ○​ Involves two stages: ​ 1. Investigators determine guilt; who did it? Reading behavioural cues and body language. Problem is you can give interrogators false confidence that they can easily spot violence. ​ 2. Obtain confession through whatever means you can. You can lie, offer a way out, minimize the crime. ​ Threats and leverage using the death penalty. Police will tell you they know you did it, but if you confess, they won't go through with a death penalty. ​ Psychological aspect: long and intense interrogations ​ Lack of recordings; you can't go back and show how the suspects were coerced. ​ Tunnel views: starting with a particular speculation of the crime. Police have a theory of what happened, and they are not willing to entertain notions outside of that, and when confronted with contrary evidence, they try to find ways to push that evidence away. ​ Police deception PRIVATIZATION AND PLURALIZATION ​ A historic shift that's happened since the 1970’s in the growth of private policing ​ The number of private security guards now is greater than the public ones. ​ Security guards: expected to do a lot more that officers ○​ Don't have authority to use force ○​ Area of significant legal liability if you are a security guard. ○​ Can find themselves in danger POLICING MENTAL HEALTH ​ Vast majority of violent crimes are not carried out by strangers having a mental crisis: most violent crimes are carried out by someone you know. ​ Violent crimes based on PMI receive more coverage in the news media; why? ○​ Unpredictable nature: stigma around mental health ○​ Shock is more newsworthy ○​ Wanting to rationalize these events: fear around these crimes has to do with not being able to predict why and who. Terms to be familiar with : Ethnography: -​ Interviews -​ Close-observation Police Property  ​ Groups or problems that become the responsibility of police to deal with. ​ PMI is one of these groups ​ Historical context: how did mental illness become police property: ○​ The problem of policing skid row: people who are unhoused at the margins of society, there is both mental illness and substance use. ○​ DE-INSTITUTIONALIZATION: 1970s onward: the first big investigative stories come out showing conditions to these institutions. ​ Confinement of “mad” people. Locked up, put away, and forgotten about. ​ 1970s there is an exposure of those conditions: a push to shut down those sites. The ways in which persons with mental Illness engage with people Crime Main justifications with dealing with PMI: 1.​ Public safety a.​ Involves keeping people safe b.​ Keeping people from being a danger to themselves and others. 2.​ Public order a.​ It's about maintaining a certain sense of acceptable behaviour in public space. 3.​ Crime ​ It is often the case that police don't know when a call is PMI ○​ They are often required to be the coercive arm of the system. ○​ Making quick decisions about what kind of call is in question. If someone is apprehended under the mental health act, it is a provincial problem. They can be taken to the hospital and then might end up in the psychiatric unit. NCRMP: video: ​ Less than 1%of people with a CRMP reoffend with a violent offence. ​ A variety of outcomes from being mentally ill: ○​ You can be confined ​ There are to be period assessments to see if a person is still a risk. This reassessment is to ensure they can be discharged. BE AWARE of the different logic at play here compared to the criminal justice system: TREATMENT not punishment. ​ Concerns are seen as a health issue not a crime issue that deserves punishment of justice. ○​ A conditional discharge ○​ Or an absolute discharge. Shifts today:  ​ Drug use ○​ Now they are seen as a health problem. Except very recently the line has shifted again to criminalization. ​ Police property ​ The police are not the best body to be dealing with these complex problems CHAPTER 3: DEMONIC AREA: ​ Looking at the European context from the middle ages and onwards. ​ MAIN TAKEAWAY: ideas around crime and sin were very closely related. It was a view of social order dominated by religious notions. ​ Clergy and religious ideas influence how more mundane crimes are dealt with. VIDEO: ​ If you were suspected of a crime you were subjected to a ritualized test: God would help the innocent but not the guilty. If you failed you were punished. ​ Ordeals were supervised by the clergy. ​ Priest called upon God to not hurt the innocent but only the guilty. ​ Water: sinking indicated innocence and floating was a sin. ​ Factors that determined what sent you to an ordeal: ○​ No factual proof, or evidence ​ Ordeals were often used as a threat to get people to confess. Trial by combat The things that connects these ordeals together: ​ Even though you might have two people in trial by combat fighting, or fire, or water- the logic is that God is going to decide: a divine judgement and interference that is going to reveal if this person is guilty or not. You are ultimately standing in the eyes of God who will determine the outcome. THE SOCIAL CONTRACT: ​ Thomas hobbes; in the absence of a state, everyone will pursue their own interests. ○​ A depiction of a society without a recognized authority. ​ People will come together to agree to give up some of their freedom in exchange for protection from the sovereign. The state is there to protect and represent the social body. ​ Locke: rosier view. He thought we were blank slates: tabula rasa. He also saw a role for the state to take action for the good of everyone. Often attributed to being the founder of liberalism. ENLIGHTENMENT-ERA  ​ An increasing emphasis on people exercising free will and making decisions on a rational basis. ○​ Elevating rationalism as a form of action. THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY: -​ Two main figures: credited with forming the classical school of criminology -​ This school of criminology provides a more rational basis of justice and deterrence. 1.​ Cesare Beccaria a.​ To limit the exercise of power: the justice system is an overreach: and unjust. Should only be reduced to what is necessary and applies. Only to how severe the crime is. b.​ If the sovereign overreaches, they are going to be seen as illegitimate. The sovereign makes laws but does not actually judge whether they break the law. c.​ The principle of deterrence: punishment should be formulated for the purpose of deterrence: i.​ And punishment has to be proportional: SWIFT And CERTAIN d.​ Punishment should fit the crime 2.​ Jeremy Bentham The strange case of the law video: What the criminal justice system used to look like ​ Emphasis on harsh punishment: will lead to lawful behaviour and preventing criminality. ​ All numbers of offences punishable by death. More than 200 offences punishable by death by the end of the century. ○​ System was named the bloody code. ​ The idea that the accused had a right to a defence wasn't a thing yet. They believed the innocent could prove themselves innocent with no issue. ​ Pious perjury: the role of the jury to render the liability of suspects down so as not to charge them with a criminal offence; and hence the death sentence. ASSESSING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL: ​ Inflexible laws can result in injustice ○​ So context matters; we shouldn't focus on the act but also what was happening in the person's head. ​ Equal treatment is good when everyone is equal, but that's not the case. JUSTICE AND REASON: -​ Rational and reasonable conduct as something we should aspire to. LIMITATIONS OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL: -​ Punishment is rarely swift and certain -​ And we are not always rational individuals making choices like that. Neoclassical theory -​ Rejected the notion of free will -​ Recognized that there can be other factors; so he fought for more context and flexibility and motive. -​ More of a focus on the person rather than the crime itself. Lombrosian atavism to modern biocriminology: -​ Pushed against classical school assumptions and rejected the free will argument. -​ Took a very scientific approach. -​ Influence from Darwin and the theory of evolution: we can be either less or more evolved. -​ Criminals are lower on this progressive evolutionary scale. -​ Biology causes crime according to this view; and therefore its not your fault if you are a criminal. -​ Anytime someone needs to make generalizations about criminals; you got look at people in jail. IDEAS OVERALL: -​ You are born as a criminal so you shouldn't be punished for it. We havent moved past this yet, there are many modern ideas of how this is happening today. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CRIME: -​ Focus on the individuals SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY: -​ We learn to commit crimes based on what we see: we model and imitate ​ -​ Has very little scientific support -​ Midterms: trends; crime rates and crime trends There is no one explanation for crime; anything that can be politically decided that is crime; -​ We need multiple theories to cover certain kinds of crime -​ Also need different methods CHAPTER 2- MEASURING CRIME -​ In canada we rely on the Canadian centre for justice statistics -​ Took a while to build this standardised system: UCR system UCR -​ Police have to send out the summaries of crimes once a month  -​The crimes that police are aware of and know they have been committed. Raises a gap: what about the crimes they don't know about -​ Other gaps: how these crimes get counted -​ Reducing things to numbers means you are reducing the complexity of information. -​ When it comes to measuring crime, if they put somebody under arrest it is likely that there are multiple charges and crimes committed; the challenge is do you count all of those crimes, what are the consequences of that. Going to shift numbers: -​ SO they decided on the MSO: only counting the most serious offence/crime. -​ Ranked based on the amount of sentencing and punishments. MSO- Consequences of following these rules. -​ When following these rules, then you end up dropping the less serious crimes -​ Inflating serious crimes as the percentage of the total -​ You're not recording qualitative data about what actually happened. KNOW: how the ucr works: police having to report crimes coming to their attention -​ If they follow the MSO rule: what happens. Crime rate: -​ Total number of police reported crime X 100,000 then divide it by the population size. -​ Can compare results over time, and variation from place to place. -​ Crime rate doesn't tell us the severity of the crime Police-reported crime severity index: -​ Used to find out changes in crime severity. Kelowna; -​ No longer the most crime ridden city in canada. Have a sense of the overall trend in canada when it comes to crime rate -​ Crime rate and Csi graphs are following a similar pattern -​ Broad trend: steady increase in crime rate, peaking in the early 90s. -​ THEN a decline happens -​ Overall trend; crime went up, peaked in early 90s, declined until around 2014, and has been up and down without a clear trend ever since. Other thing affecting crime rate: -​ What the police are up to: the types of crimes the police are recording. These numbers come from the police. They can only work with what's given to them too. -​ People's willingness to report crime. -​ Some crimes are more reliable indicators than others: -​ Homicide and murder; people often steadily report this. What causes changes in the crime rate? -​ Maybe theres more or less crimes but we can't assume that -​ Crime rate tells you a lot about other things going on: legal changes, policing practices, police priorities. Systemic inequality example: uncovered through investigative journaling -​ Percentage of sexual assault cases deemed to be “unfounded”- not having enough to consider it a crime across canada. -​ Most big cities have unfounded rates of 10% -​ Smaller towns had percentages in the 30% -​ Explanation: how police handle sexual assault reports and allegations vary VOYEURISM CASE: 2021 -​ In the commons building; someone is filming a girl in the next stall under the divider. -​ Student confronted the guy in the next stall, called friends, and waited for him. Then I went to SVPRO on campus. -​ RCMP got involved, took the report, some follow up after, police talked to the guy and they didn't seem concerned, she went back to SVPRO and they disagreed. So more follow up happened. -​ In the end; police did their job and got a conviction because she took notes on everything, and got the media involved, so they stepped up. WHEN CRIME GETS POLITICAL: -​ When there is political pressure, government and police forces find ways to manipulate and adjust the numbers. -​ Reporting and investigating less crimes -any time that crime stats get political and politicians connect police officers career outcomes- people will find ways to make the numbers go up or down as desired. They will break the rules in one way or another. GOODHART'S LAW -​ Anytime a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. Official statistics UCR: -​ Similar pattern for sexual assault cases. -​ Huge uptake on sexual assault in the 1980’s -​ Why? Growing awareness of sexual assault as a problem, feminine activism. -​ Huge legal and cultural changes: definitions of sexual assault was expanded. You don't need so many requirements to prove. -​ Another huge explosion in 2015 due to the ME TOO movement. -​ Broadly speaking, people are more willing to report abuse in the workplace and police are under more pressure to take things seriously. Ways in which trying to address gaps in reports: 1.​ Self report surveys: a.​ Meant to move around limitations by asking people about crimes they have committed b.​ Not relying on victims to come forward or the police c.​ Getting a broader picture of things that might have escaped the attention of police. d.​ LIMITATIONS: i.​ Sometimes people don't know they broke the law ii.​ Serious crime: probably not going to be self reported. e.​ Exceptions: surveys about drug use are pretty extensive. i.​ Programs to try to measure drug use in teens/highschool students. f.​ One of the findings from these kinds of stats is that they are more distributed across society than we might assume. i.​ Not only marginalized people who we see in prison. Middle and upper class crimes escaping police attention. CONCEPTS TO KNOW: When measuring crimes you want to come up with measures that are both VALID AND RELIABLE. -​ They overlap. 1.​ Reliability a.​ If you do the same thing, are you going to get consistent results b.​ Consider representative samples, and generalizability. 2.​ Validity a.​ Are you actually measuring what you want to measure? NOW= -​ Statistics canada's general social survey contains info on victimization of individuals and household 2. VICTIMIZATION SURVEYS -​ Asking questions such as: did any of this happen to you? Did you go to the police? -​ Stats Canada then creates graphs to visualize criminality and victimization. -​ LIMITATIONS; -​ Not knowing you are a victim -​ Certain communities are hard to reach -​ Vulnerable groups (unhoused, no address) -​ No one is going to come forward and talk about being a victim of illegal things  3.​ OBSERVATIONAL ACCOUNTS (ethnography) a.​ HAGGERTY reading i.​ Challenges to doing this kind of work, and benefits 1.​ Benefits: a.​ Getting to see things that are hidden from eye view b.​ Rich data c.​ These groups tend to be painted out as the bad guys, so you can provide a humanistic view of those people. 2.​ Challenges: a.​ Subjectivity and bias; can be argued to be both a challenge and a benefit. b.​ Ethics- MAJOR challenge c.​ Ethnographers personal characteristics; to do this kind of work. d.​ Consent and ethics board approval- liability and trying to manage risks. e.​ Ultimately, all these challenges come down to VALIDITY: social desirability and RELIABILITY/generalizability. f.​ A LOT of work/data. g.​ Trust/Access. ii.​ Ethnography involves detailed observation, participation, spending time in a given place with a group of people. FUTURE OF POLICING VIDEO; -​ Supposed to demonstrate key issues and highlight where we can expect some things to happen. ​ Crime follows a pattern, the pattern is input into a computer system to create predictions ○​ Hope is to prevent crimes and get there before it happens. ​ Predictive policing: a lot of policing is reactive, this on the other hand is trying to get ahead of the crime and anticipate the crime. Has two basic forms: ○​ GEOGRAPHICALLY FOCUSED: Allocate resources: exemplifies by Predpol ​ Does something that police do as a core part of being in a police department; help allocate resources. ​ Deciding how many officers to deploy where. ○​ INDIVIDUALLY FOCUSED: target “risky” individuals: ​ Trying to flag who the individuals are that could be a risk and targeting them. ​ Police could go to them and give a warning, or when they do run into them, the system lets them know their risk level. ​ Problem with this kind of approach: ○​ Criminals will react and will not be where they think they’re going to be. ○​ “Black box” - not understanding how the program works and just taking its facts without questioning it. ○​ Worth to think about the input that is going in to the machines ​ Humans still have to collect the data; human factors and human biases. ​ Police recorded crimes ○​ Systems can become a form of racial profiling and create systemic biases. ○​ Becoming a feedback loop ​ Creates a feedback loop that results in some neighborhoods and areas being overpoliced (can also happen to an individual) more likely to be stopped and searched, be accused, be found out for crimes. Keeps people in the cycle of criminalization. Reinforcing systemic patterns