Criminal Justice, Need a tutor to start this project for a total of 4 PAPERS due over next 10 weeks

timer Asked: Apr 9th, 2017

Question description

Assignment 1: Topic Selection and Proposal

The topic for the Research Project should be selected in Week One and delivered by the end of Week Two. Students should choose a topic that interests and challenges them, one that they see as a problem or challenge. In order to satisfy the requirements, students must select a topic from the textbook, explain why they chose the topic, and describe the intent of their research. The Topic Selection and Proposal assignment further provides students with an opportunity to receive feedback from the instructor before completing additional work.

Information at the following link is helpful in completing this assignment:

Write a three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:

  1. Select a topic from the textbook that you want to explore in greater depth.
  2. Provide an explanation as to why the topic needs to be researched and the problems and challenges that exist.
  3. Analyze the topic, and describe the intended outcome of your research.
  4. Describe the approach or actions that you will take in conducting your research.
  5. Use at least three (3) scholarly sources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia,, and general websites do not qualify as scholarly.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must conform to the APA formatting requirements. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

  • Use technology and information resources to research issues in crime and criminal behavior.
  • Write clearly and concisely about criminal justice topics using proper writing mechanics and APA conventions.

Attached are some chapters from the book to help chose a topic and start the process of this semester assignment.

FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Criminology Fads and Fashions in Crime The Emergence of Criminology Crime and Deviance Sumner’s Types of Norms Crime File 1.1 The FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita Social Change and the Emergence of Law Consensus Versus Conflict Versus Interactionist Model of Law Crime File 1.2 Crimes of the Twentieth Century Crime and Criminal Law Who Defines Crime? Criminological Definitions Crime File 1.3 What Is Crime? The Crime Problem The Cost of Crime Summary Key Concepts Review Questions Web Sources Web Exercises Selected Readings xx chapter 1 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Introduction Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary individuals. Crimes, properly so-called, will there be unknown; but faults which appear venial to the layman will create there the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary consciousness. —Émile Durkheim (1895/1950, pp. 68–69) Crime is a sociopolitical artifact, not a natural phenomenon. . . . We can have as much or as little crime as we please, depending on what we choose to count as criminal. —Herbert Packer (1968, p. 364) Criminology Remorseless suicidal terrorists hijack four airplanes and, with all passengers aboard, are successful in crashing two of these into the World Trade Center and one into the Pentagon, murdering nearly 3,000 people in the worst terrorist attack in history. A disturbed student at Virginia Tech University kills 32 in the worst mass murder in U.S. history. Major corporations and their accounting firms conspire and cause a major stock market plunge, losing stockholders billions of dollars. What all of these events have in common is that they refer to various forms of criminal behavior; as we have just begun the twenty-first century, we can only guess what new, unforeseen horrors await us. The field that addresses this issue of crime and criminal behavior and attempts to define, explain, and predict it is criminology. Criminology is generally defined as the science or discipline that studies crime and criminal behavior. Specifically, the field of criminology concentrates on forms of criminal behavior, the causes of crime, the definition of criminality, and the societal reaction to criminal activity; related areas of inquiry may include juvenile delinquency and victimology (the study of victims). While there is considerable overlap between criminology and criminal justice, criminology shows a greater interest in the causal explanations of crime, whereas criminal justice is more occupied with practical, applied concerns, such as technical aspects of policing and corrections. In reality, the fields are highly complementary and interrelated, as indicated by overlapping membership in the two professional organizations representative of the fields: the American Society of Criminology and the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences. If you tell your friends that you are taking a course in criminology, many will assume that you are a budding Sherlock Holmes, on your way to becoming a master detective trained in investigating crime scenes. That describes the field of criminalistics (the scientific evaluation of physical evidence), which is sometimes confused in the media and public mind with criminology. Criminology is more concerned with analyzing the phenomena of crime and criminality, in performing scientifically accurate studies, and in developing sound theoretical explanations of crime and criminal behavior. It is hoped that such criminological knowledge and Author Podcast 1.1 Listen to the author’s podcast for this chapter. 1 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 2 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY scientific research can inform and direct public policies to solve some crime problems. The major concentration in this text will be on the central areas of criminal behavior, research methodology, and criminological theory. Of particular interest will be the exploration of crime typologies, the attempt to classify various criminal activity and criminals by type. Fads and Fashions in Crime Video Link 1.1 View a video about modern pirates. Video Link 1.2 View a video about Prohibition. Photo 1.1 Group portrait of a police department liquor squad posing with cases of confiscated alcohol and distilling equipment during Prohibition. A variety of crimes were of major concern in the past but appear in modern societies only in old movies on the late show. Train robbery, piracy, stagecoach robbery, cattle rustling, gunfights such as that at the O.K. Corral, and grave robbery have some modern remnants, but for the most part have disappeared. Some of these practices have reappeared in different forms. In the seventies, South Vietnamese “boat people” attempting to escape from their homeland were robbed, raped, and murdered by Thai pirates. In the early twenty-first century, pirates operating off the coast of Somalia took over ships and held their occupants for ransom. Brink’s trucks have replaced stagecoaches, and semitrailer trucks full of prepared beef are hijacked instead of herds of live cattle. Post–Civil War gangs of Wild West robbers such as those of Doc Holliday, Jesse James, the Daltons, Black Bart, the Younger brothers, and Butch Cassidy disappeared with the settlement of the frontier only to reappear on wheels during the Depression of the thirties in the persons of such infamous characters as John Dillinger, “Pretty Boy” Floyd, the Barrows, Bonnie Parker, and the Ma Barker gang. Mobile, organized gangs of bank robbers have largely faded into a quaint, unsavory history; they are now replaced by cybercriminals who can commit global electronic robbery. Skyjacking, a major problem in the sixties, was virtually eliminated as a result of better security measures, only to reappear in the United States in the early eighties as an attempt by Cuban refugees to escape their homeland or by suicidal terrorists to wreak mass destruction. The skyjacking of four jumbo jets with the intention of using them as weapons of international terrorism represented the horrific events of 9/11. Kidnapping, a major concern in the United States in the thirties (as illustrated by the famous Lindbergh case), is less of a concern today despite the rash of child kidnappings by noncustodial parents. On the other hand, since the seventies, kidnapping has become a major crime in Italy, as best illustrated by the highly publicized kidnapping of billionaire J. Paul Getty’s grandson; the kidnappers mailed one of the young man’s ears to a daily newspaper to impress upon the family the seriousness of their intentions. In 1995 in Colombia, a kidnapping was reported every 6 hours. This was believed to have been precipitated by huge income disparities and inefficient police. The United States, by contrast, has experienced fewer than 12 kidnappings for ransom every year (Brooke, 1995, p. A7). Slavery continues to be practiced in the form of human trafficking. Nostalgic views of the past tend to romanticize bygone violence or suppress its memory. Most apt to be forgotten are conditions of the past that more than match any chronicle of horrors of the present. Crime File 1.1 examines the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives” list and includes photographs of the most wanted criminals. The Emergence of Criminology French sociologist Auguste Comte (1798–1857) viewed the progression of knowledge as consisting of three stages, from the predominantly theological explanations to metaphysical (philosophical) approaches to scientific FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction explanations (Comte, 1851/1877). Prior to the emergence of modern criminal law in the eighteenth century, religion was the primary basis of social control beyond kinship organization. Theological explanations used supernatural or otherworldly bases for understanding reality. Recall, for instance, the papal condemnation of Galileo for heretically questioning biblical descriptions of the earth and celestial objects. In the metaphysical stage, philosophy sought secular (worldly) events to provide understanding through a new spirit of inquiry— rationality and logical argument. The two features of the scientific stage combined this rational spirit of investigation with the scientific method, emphasizing empiricism or experimentation. The scientific orientation emphasized measurement, observation, proof, replication (repetition of observation), and verification (analyzing the validity of observations). Systematic application of the scientific method enabled humankind to unlock many of the mysteries of the ages. At first, breakthroughs in knowledge took place in the physical sciences; more recently, changes have also begun to occur in the social sciences, such as sociology and criminology. Since the scientific method provided major understanding and the ability to predict and control physical reality, the hope is that these same methods are applicable to and will prove useful in the social sciences. While many view criminology as a science, others, such as Sutherland and Cressey (1974), view it as an art similar to medicine, a field based on many sciences and disciplines. Criminology as a field of inquiry had its beginnings in Europe in the late 1700s in the writings of various philosophers, physicians, physical scientists, sociologists, and social scientists. Much of the early theory was heavily couched in biological frameworks that have largely been abandoned by modern American criminology until recently. Criminology emerged along with eighteenth-century criminal law. In fact, it was the early writings of Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794), especially his famous essay On Crimes and Punishments (1963), which was first published in 1764, that led to the reform of criminal law in Western Europe. Despite its European roots, most of the major developments in modern criminology took place in the United States. Criminology was closely linked with the development of sociology, gaining its place on the U.S. academic scene between 1920 and 1940. Criminology had been largely a subdiscipline of sociology; even though criminology is interdisciplinary in focus, sociologists have devoted the most attention to the issue of criminality. Since the 1960s, criminology has emerged as a discipline in its own right. The earliest U.S. textbooks in the field were by Maurice Parmelee, John Gillin, Philip Parsons, and Fred Hayes, but it was the text and later writings of Edwin H. Sutherland, the acknowledged “dean of criminology,” that received the most deserved recognition. 3 Handbook Article Link 1.1 Read an article on criminology as social science. Crime and Deviance Deviance or deviant behavior may refer to a broad range of activities that the majority in society may view as eccentric, dangerous, annoying, bizarre, outlandish, gross, abhorrent, and the like. It refers to behavior that is outside the range of normal societal toleration. Definitions of deviance are relative to the time, the place, and the person(s) making the evaluation, and some acts are more universally defined than others. For instance, in the mid-nineteenth century in the United States, bathing in a tub was considered immoral as well as unhealthy. All societies have cultural values—practices and beliefs that are prized by or believed to be of benefit to the group. For instance, despite cultural relativity in defining deviance, anthropologists have identified a number of cultural universals—practices or customs that in general form exist in all known cultures. All cultures that have been studied look dimly on indiscriminate lying, cheating, stealing, and killing. Societies protect their values by creating norms, which are basically rules or prescribed modes of conduct. Video Link 1.3 View a video on the pornography industry. Sumner’s Types of Norms Early American sociologist William Graham Sumner, in his classic work Folkways (1906), identifies three types of norms: folkways, mores, and laws. These norms reflect the values of a given culture; some norms are regarded by its members as more important than others. Folkways are the least serious norms and refer to usages, traditions, customs, or niceties that are preferred, but are not subject to serious sanctions: manners, etiquette, and dress styles, for example. The character Reb Tevye in the musical Fiddler on the Roof, when learning that his daughter has rejected the marriage mate chosen by the matchmaker, wails, “Tradition— without our traditions, our lives would be as shaky as . . . a fiddler on the roof.” Recognizing changing times or folkways, however, he ultimately accepts his daughter’s decision to choose her own mate. Mores refer to more Audio Link 1.1 Listen to a discussion of norms of civil behavior. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 4 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 1.1 The FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives In 1950, a news reporter asked the FBI for the 10 worst “tough guys” that they were hunting. The resulting publicity was so great that the list became an official FBI program. It satisfied the public’s hunger for details about notorious criminals and served as a means of exposing fugitives and encouraging citizen participation. The FBI claims that since the program’s initiation, 134 of the “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives” have been apprehended as a result of citizen recognition. Perhaps the most memorable case was the arrest of bank robber Willie Sutton when a clothing salesman recognized him on the New York City subway. After the citizen’s story was run in The New York Times, mobster Albert Anastasia had the salesman killed because, as he stated, “I hate squealers.” The list has reflected very well the social climate of various time periods in the United States. The 1950s list consisted primarily of bank robbers, burglars, and car thieves, while the 1960s version featured revolutionaries and radicals. The 1970s list was dominated by organized criminals and terrorists, and while this emphasis continues, serial murderers and drug-related offenders abound in later lists. A recent “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives” list features the following: Eric Justin Toth—wanted for possession of and production of child pornography. Adam Christopher Mayes—wanted for aggravated kidnapping and first-degree murder, died of a selfinflicted gunshot wound while being pursued by authorities. Jason Derek Brown—wanted for murder and armed robbery. Joe Luis Saenz—wanted for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, murder, kidnapping, rape, and parole violation. Glen Stewart Godwin—wanted for unlawful flight to avoid confinement, murder, escape from prison. Robert William Fischer—wanted for allegedly killing his wife and two young children and then blowing up the house. Semion Magilovich—wanted for defrauding thousands of investors of more than $150 million. Eduardo Ravelo—wanted for racketeering activities, conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, and conspiracy to possess and distribute heroin, cocaine, and marihuana. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction Alexis Flores—wanted for unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, kidnapping, and murder. Victor Manuel Gerena—wanted for bank robbery, unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, armed robbery, and theft from an interstate shipment. Sources: “In Demand for 50 Years: The FBI’s ‘Most Wanted’ List: Good Publicity, and a History of Success,” by J. Glasser, March 20, 2000, U.S. News and World Report, p. 60. Web Research Project Visit the FBI website and examine the latest “Ten Most Wanted Fugitives” list. Are any of the people the same as in our “Crime File” section? If yes, do they differ in any way from the Crime File above? Are any of them women or white-collar criminals? While visiting the FBI site, look up “Headline Archive: Top Ten Quiz on the Top Ten Program” and see how many questions you can answer correctly. FIGURE 1.1      FBI 100 Famous Faces Quiz They are heroes and villains alike, from the full sweep of our history. How many can you name? To find out, see our answers on the following pages. And read up on these figures and their connections to the FBI. Good luck! (Continued) 5 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 6 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Answers to Figure 1.1 (Continued)      1.  Ted Kaczynski, a.k.a. the Unabomber, who killed three people and terrorized the nation for 17 years before he was arrested in 1996.        2.  John Dillinger, the notorious gangster whose death at the hand of FBI agents in the summer of 1934 helped make Hoover’s “G-Men” a household name.        3.  John Glover, FBI agent, who became the first African American to head an FBI field office when he was named Special Agent in Charge in Milwaukee in 1979. He later became Executive Assistant Director at FBI Headquarters.        4.  Clarence Kelly, who served as FBI Director following J. Edgar Hoover’s death, guiding the Bureau through some difficult days of criticism and change.         5.  Charles Appel, the FBI agent who helped give birth to the Bureau’s first technical laboratory, forerunner of today’s FBI Laboratory.    6. & 7.  Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who were caught by the FBI during the Cold War passing American secrets on the atomic bomb to the Soviets.    8. & 9.  Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, played by David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson, a pair of FBI agents who investigated the supernatural in the 1990s TV series The X-Files.       10.  Jack Graham, a disturbed delinquent who packed a dynamite bomb in his mother’s suitcase, killing her and all on board a flight out of Denver in 1955.      11.  Patty Hearst, the young heiress whose dramatic kidnapping by the Symbionese Liberation Army in 1974 and subsequent involvement in bank robberies stunned the nation.      12.  John Gotti, a.k.a. the “Teflon Don,” the infamous Mafioso who eluded the law for years until the FBI and its partners put him away for good in 1992.       13.  J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI Director who served from 1924 to 1972—nearly a half century—shaping the Bureau into a more professional and capable organization. 14. & 16.  Bonnie and Clyde, the love-struck crime couple who robbed and murdered their way across the Midwest before being gunned down by a band of lawmen in 1934.      15. Alger Hiss, a government official and Soviet spy who was convicted of perjury in 1950.       17.  Alaska Davidson, who served as a Bureau special agent from 1922 to 1924. Davidson and two contemporaries in the 1920s—Lenore Houston and Jessie Duckstein—are a few of the women known to have served as FBI agents before 1972.      18.  Usama bin Laden, terrorist leader of al-Qaeda who had been wanted for his role in several major attacks on the United States, including the simultaneous strikes of 9/11. [Bin Laden was killed by a team of U.S. Navy SEALs in May of 2011.]      19.  George “Machine Gun” Kelly, the gangster who—according to legend—cried, “Don’t shoot, G-Men, don’t shoot,” when surrounded by Bureau agents in 1933. Whether he actually said it or not, the “G-Men” nickname eventually became synonymous with special agents of the FBI.      20.  James Amos, Teddy Roosevelt’s confidant and bodyguard, who later became a Bureau special agent, serving from 1921 to 1953.      21.  Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., the iconic face of the FBI from 1965 to 1974, when he starred as Inspector Lewis Erskine in the prime-time TV show The FBI.      22.  Mark Felt, Deputy Director of the FBI during the Watergate years who later admitted that he was “Deep Throat,” an infamous source of leaks to the press on the investigation.      23.  Helen Gandy, who served as the personal secretary of Director Hoover during his nearly five decades at the helm, becoming almost as well known as the Director himself.      24.  Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated President John F. Kennedy in Dallas in November 1963 before being murdered by Jack Ruby. Despite many conspiracy theories to the contrary, the FBI’s massive investigation found that Oswald acted alone. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction 7      25.  Timothy McVeigh, who committed the worst act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history when he bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995, killing 168 people and injuring several hundred more.      26.  Velvalee Dickinson, the so-called “Doll Woman,” who used her doll shop on Madison Avenue in New York City to send coded messages revealing U.S. military secrets to the Japanese during World War II.      27.  Al Capone, the legendary gangster who ruled an empire of crime in the Windy City during the 1920s until law enforcement (with help from the FBI) sent him to Alcatraz in 1931.      28.  Charles Bonaparte, Teddy Roosevelt’s progressive Attorney General who launched a force of special agents on July 26, 1908, marking the beginning of the organization that would become the FBI.      29.  Alvin Karpis, a cunning crook who teamed with the Barker brothers and became one of the FBI’s most hunted gangsters during the 1930s.      30.  Charles Arthur “Pretty Boy” Floyd, another Depression-era gangster who took part in the infamous “Kansas City Massacre” before being tracked down and killed by Bureau agents in 1934.      31.  Edwin Shanahan, the first Bureau special agent to die in the line of duty after being shot by a car thief named Martin Durkin in 1925.      32.  Jimmy Stewart, the famous actor who played an amiable, hardworking agent named Chip Hardesty in the 1959 movie The FBI Story.      33.  Robert Hanssen, FBI agent turned Soviet mole who was arrested for espionage in February 2001 and later sent to prison for life.      34.  Lester Gillis, a.k.a. “Baby Face Nelson,” a psychopathic killer and prolific bank robber who lost his life in a deadly gunfight with Bureau agents in 1934.      35.  Charles “Lucky” Luciano, the Sicilian mobster who is credited with making the American Mafia what it is today before being deported to Italy in 1946.      36.  D. B. Cooper, the mysterious mid-air hijacker who jumped from a plane with $200,000 in stolen cash on a stormy November night in 1970 and has never been seen again.      37.  Kate “Ma” Barker, mother of the notorious outlaws Herman, Lloyd, Arthur, and Fred Barker, who lost her life in a fierce firefight with Bureau agents in Florida in 1935.      38.  James Earl Ray, who was tracked down by the FBI and convicted of the 1968 murder of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.      39.  A KKK member. The FBI has battled this band of hate-mongers since the early 1920s, when we put away Imperial Kleagle Edward Clarke.      40.  Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and wanted terrorist who was ultimately arrested in Pakistan in 1995 and brought to justice in the United States. Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation. serious customs that involve moral judgments as well as sanctions (rewards or punishments). The mores cover prohibitions against behaviors that are felt to be seriously threatening to a group’s way of life. Our previous examples of lying, cheating, stealing, and killing are most certainly included in the mores. Both folkways and mores are examples of informal modes of social control and are characteristic of small, homogeneous cultures that feature simple technology and wide-scale consensus. Laws represent formal modes of control, codified rules of behavior. If one accepts the consensus model of law (to be discussed shortly), laws represent an institutionalization or “crystallization” of the mores. Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita We have already identified deviant acts as those that violate group expectations and crime as any act that violates criminal law. Crime and its definition are social products. Society (human groups) decides what is a crime and what is not. Journal Article Link 1.1 Read an article about the evolution of social norms. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 8 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Photo 1.2 Drug abuse is an example of overcriminalization. Journal Article Link 1.1 Read an article about the evolution of social norms. Criminologists make the distinction between acts mala prohibita and acts mala in se. Acts that are defined as mala prohibita refer to those that are “bad because they have been prohibited.” That is, such acts are not viewed as bad in themselves but are violations because the law defines them as such. Traffic violations, gambling, and infractions of various municipal ordinances might serve as examples. Such laws are viewed as assisting human groups in making life more predictable and orderly, but disobedience carries little stigma other than (usually) fines. The criminalization of such acts might be v iewed as institutionalization of folkways. On the other hand, acts mala in se are “acts that are bad in themselves,” forbidden behaviors for which there is wide-scale consensus on the mores for prohibition. The universality of laws against murder, rape, assault, and the like, irrespective of political or economic systems, bears witness to the lack of societal conflict in institutionalizing such laws. One can note that not all deviant acts are criminal, nor are all criminal acts necessarily deviant, assuming that laws against many acts mala prohibita are commonly violated. Definitions of criminal activity may exhibit both undercriminalization and overcriminalization. Undercriminalization refers to the fact that the criminal law fails to prohibit acts that many feel are mala in se. Elements of corporate violence, racism, structured inequality, and systematic wrongdoing by political officials are examples. Overcriminalization involves the overextension of criminal law to cover acts that are inappropriately or not responsibly enforced by such measures. Examples are the legislation of morality and attempts to regulate personal conduct that does not involve a clear victim (drug abuse, sexual conduct, and the like). Social Change and the Emergence of Law Western societies have undergone a long-term evolutionary development from sacred or Gemeinschaft societies to secular or Gesellschaft societies (H. Becker, 1950; Toennies, 1957). Gemeinschaft societies are simple, communal, relatively homogeneous societies that lack an extensive division of labor and are also characterized by normative consensus. Social control is assured by the family, extended kinship groups, and the community through informal modes of control: the folkways and mores. Such societies lack and do not need formally codified laws since sacred tradition, the lack of change, and cultural similarity and isolation assure a degree of understanding and control. Gesellschaft societies are complex, associational, more individualistic, and heterogeneous (pluralistic). They are characterized by secularity, an extensive division of labor, and (in free societies) a variety of moral views and political pressure groups. Social control is attempted by formal means— codified laws administered by bureaucratic agencies of the state. Complex societies must rely more and more on such formal controls. As the mores or informal modes of control become weaker, the need for laws becomes greater. For example, as the family as an agent of social control becomes weaker, much of its responsibility is passed on to the state. Sumner (1906) suggested a general maxim: If laws do not have the support of, or are not in agreement with, the mores of a particular culture, they will be ineffective. The introduction of changes or new laws in society can be explored using Merton’s (1961) concepts of manifest and latent functions. The classic example is what has been described as “the noble experiment,” the Prohibition Era in the United States. Manifest functions are intended, planned, or anticipated consequences of introduced changes or of existing social arrangements. In perhaps the last gasp of rural Protestant religious power in the United States, one group managed to pressure Congress into passing the Eighteenth Amendment prohibiting alcohol in 1919. Alcohol abuse was (and still FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 9 Chapter 1. Introduction is) a major problem, and the well-intended goal was for it to be stamped out by totally forbidding alcohol consumption by law. Latent functions entail unintended or unanticipated consequences, ones that may have either positive or negative outcomes. The latent functions of Prohibition included increased corruption, disobedience, and public disrespect for the law. By eliminating legitimate suppliers of a commodity in high public demand, the state in effect created a monopoly for illegitimate entrepreneurs. It was Prohibition that converted small, localized gangs into large, powerful, and wealthy regional and even national organized criminal syndicates. Laws are by no means the most efficient means of social control; the passage of more and more laws may indicate that social solidarity and informal modes of control in the society are weakening. The police and the criminal justice system become the agents or agencies of last resort. Many people view crime as an evil intrusion into an otherwise healthy society, whereas increased crime levels may be latent functions of increased freedom, affluence, competition, and other desirable manifest functions in society. Sociologist Émile Durkheim (1950) suggested that crime may be a normality, a positive product, a functional necessity in a healthy society. As reflected in the quotation with which we began this chapter, Durkheim’s theory of the functional necessity of crime proposes that wrongdoing or crime serves to force societal members to react, condemn, and thus establish the borders of society and reconfirm its values. It is this organized resentment that upholds social solidarity. The phrase “crime of the century” seems to be perennially used to refer to the latest dramatic crime. Crime File 1.2 explores crimes to which this label was attached over this past century. Consensus Versus Conflict Versus Interactionist Model of Law The consensus model of the origin of criminal law envisions it as arising from agreement among the members of a society as to what constitutes wrongdoing. Reflecting the social contract theory of Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau, criminal law is viewed, as in our previous discussion of Sumner, as a “crystallization of the mores,” reflecting social values that are commonly held within the society. The conflict model, on the other hand, sees the criminal law as originating in the conflict of interests of different groups. In this view, the definition of crime is assumed to reflect the wishes of the most powerful interest groups, who gain the assistance of the state in opposing rival groups. The criminal law, then, is used primarily to control the behavior of the “defective, dependent, and delinquent,” the dangerous classes (Skolnick & Currie, 1988, p. 2); the crimes of the wealthy are very often not even covered. While the consensus model views criminal law as a mechanism of social control, the conflict approach sees the law as a means of preserving the status quo on behalf of the powerful. A third model of law is the interactionist model, which takes its name from the symbolic interactionist school of criminology. This school of thought views humans as responding to abstract meanings and symbols as well as to concrete meanings. According to George Herbert Mead (1934), even the mind and self-consciousness are social creations. Reflected in labeling theory (see Chapter 8), criminality is viewed as a label or stigma attached by a societal reaction that is subject to shifting standards. Laws are viewed as reflecting moral entrepreneurship on the part of labelers. Photo 1.3 The Criminals Hall of Fame showcases wax replicas of notorious criminals throughout history. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 10 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 1.2 Crimes of the Twentieth Century Every year, it seems some particularly notorious or atrocious crime occurs that is described by the media as “the crime of the century.” Now that the twentieth century is over, we might take stock of some that have been candidates., an Internet service specializing in crime news, chose the “Ten Crimes of the Century” based on input from its editors, historians, criminal justice experts, and users who voted in its poll, as well as those answering its telephone survey. The “Ten Crimes of the Century” from the APBnews .com survey, listed chronologically, were as follows: President McKinley’s assassination The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre The Lindbergh baby kidnapping The Rosenbergs’ spy trial President Kennedy’s assassination Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination The Watergate break-in Audio Link 1.2 Listen to a court reporter discuss memorable trials. Video Link 1.4 View a video on the O. J. Simpson trial. The Ted Bundy serial killings The O. J. Simpson trial The Oklahoma City bombing The assassination of President William McKinley in 1901 by Leon Czolgosz was a political crime in support of a hoped-for class revolt, while the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre by the Capone mob in the 1920s illustrated the ascendancy of ruthless organized crime groups during Prohibition. The tragic kidnapping and murder of the Lindbergh baby led to legislation designating kidnapping as a federal offense. The trial and subsequent execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, native-born Americans who betrayed their country by giving America’s atomic secrets to the Soviets, solidified the Cold War. The assassinations of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and 5 years later of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., gave rise to numerous conspiracy theories that secret, sinister forces were responsible. The Watergate affair in the 1970s would lead to the first forced resignation of an elected president in disgrace in American history, and it remains the benchmark against which all political scandals are compared. Ted Bundy, the serial killer, represents just one of a number of bizarre multiple killers who seemed to proliferate in post–World War II America. The O. J. Simpson murder trial, in which a former National Football League star was found not guilty of murdering his ex-wife and her friend, despite considerable evidence to the contrary, exemplifies the numbers of celebrity cases that have attracted public attention over the years. Finally, the Oklahoma City terrorist bombing (and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which is not listed) demonstrated the growing vulnerability to terrorism in modern society. The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing represented the worst terrorist attack, in terms of casualties, on American soil up to that time. It also punctuated for a complacent America the fact that “it can happen here.” In its “Crime Stories of the Century,” U.S. News and World Report included the following: Murder of Stanford White Execution of IWW leader Joe Hill St. Valentine’s Day Massacre Lindbergh kidnapping Rosenberg spy case FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction 11 Lynching of Emmett Till Charles Manson murders “Son of Sam” killings Jeffrey Dahmer, cannibal While the U.S. News list includes many of the same entries as that of, it also includes lesser-known events such as the high-society murder of Stanford White, a prominent architect, due to a romantic dispute. The execution of labor leader Joe Hill, of the radical union International Workers of the World, for allegedly killing company owners, exemplifies the labor unrest in the early twentieth century. Other additions are more serial murders: those of Manson; “Son of Sam” Berkowitz; and Jeffrey Dahmer, the personification of our worst nightmares. Many of these acts changed the country, inspired new laws, mesmerized a nation waiting for a verdict, or tore at the American collective conscience. While we might not agree with the specific selection of “crimes of the century,” most candidates share a celebrity quality, bizarre violent characteristics, or political implications. In fact, of those listed on the APB list, 6 of the 10 involved political crime, that is, crime for ideological purposes by those supporting a cause. The remainder illustrated organized crime, celebrity involvement (Lindbergh and Simpson), or bizarre violence (Bundy). Bundy seems to be a stand-in for any number of monsters of multiple murder in the twentieth century. Note also that the list is of crimes in the United States and does not include crimes such as Hitler’s Holocaust, for example. While the fascinating and mesmerizing nature of these crimes gives them a timeless quality that still enthralls the public—a dance macabre that appalls yet entices—it is their rare, atypical quality that gives them notoriety. The typical picture of crime in most societies is far less dramatic, but often just as deadly, traumatic, or fear-inspiring. Domestic violence, rape, robbery, murder, burglary, and theft bring crime up close and personal to its victims and will be more the subject of this text. Source: List of “crime stories” taken from “Crime Stories of the Century,” by A. Cannon, U.S. News and World Report, December 6, 1999. Web Research Project What do you think was the “Crime of the Twentieth Century”? Visit the Web and see if you can find other nominees for a “Top Ten Crimes of the Century” list. Visit and find an interesting investigation that they have posted on their site. Crime and Criminal Law A purist legal view of crime would define it as violation of criminal law. No matter how morally outrageous or unacceptable an act, it is not a crime unless defined as such by criminal law. Vernon Fox (1985) indicates, “Crime is a sociopolitical event rather than a clinical condition. . . . It is not a clinical or medical condition which can be diagnosed and specifically treated” (p. 28). In this view, which is technically correct, unless an act is specifically prohibited by criminal law, it is not a crime. There are four characteristics of criminal law: 1. It is assumed by political authority. The state assumes the role of plaintiff, or the party bringing charges. Murder, for example, is no longer just an offense against a person, but is also a crime against the state. In fact, the state prohibits individual revenge in such matters; perpetrators must pay their debt to society, not to the individual wronged. 2. It must be specific, defining both the offense and the prescribed punishment. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 12 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY 3. The law is uniformly applied. That is, equal punishment and fairness for all, irrespective of social position, are intended. 4. The law contains penal sanctions enforced by punishments administered by the state (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974, pp. 4–7). Criminal law has very specific criteria: “Crime is an intentional act or omission in violation of criminal law (statutory and case law), committed without defense or justification, and sanctioned by the state as a felony or misdemeanor” (Tappan, 1960, p. 10). Felonies generally refer to offenses punishable by a year or more in a state or federal prison, whereas misdemeanors are less serious offenses punished by less than a year in jail. Some specific criteria that must be met in the U.S. criminal law in order for an act to be considered a crime include the following: 1. The act is prohibited by law and contains legally prescribed punishments. Nullum crimen sine lege (no crime without law) is the Latin expression, which can be expanded to include the notion that ex post facto (after-the-fact) laws are inappropriate. The act must be forbidden by law in advance of the act. 2. A criminal act, actus reus (the act itself, or the physical element), must have taken place. 3. Social harm of a conscious, voluntary nature is required. There must be injury to the state or to people. 4. The act is performed intentionally (although cases of negligence and omission may be exceptions). Mens rea (criminal intent or “guilty mind”) is important in establishing guilt. A person who may have committed a criminal act (for example, John Hinckley, who shot former president Ronald Reagan) may be found not guilty under certain conditions, such as insanity or a history of mental disturbance. 5. The voluntary misconduct must be causally related to the harm. It must be shown that the decision or act directly or indirectly caused harm. Handbook Article Link 1.2 Read an article about the social construction of law. Crimes were originally considered to be private matters: The offended party had to seek private compensation or revenge. Later, only offenses committed against the king and, still later, the king’s subjects were considered crimes. When compensation developed, fines were levied on behalf of the king (the state), thus making the state the wronged party. In addition to being defined by legislative statute (statutory law), criminality may also be interpreted by means of case law (common law). In contrast to laws enacted by legislatures, common law is based on judicial decision, with its roots in precedence, or previous decisions. In addition, administrative law, as enforced by federal regulatory agencies, may carry criminal penalties for offenders. Thus, criminal law provisions may be contained in statutory law, common law, and administrative law. Crime File 1.3 describes some typical legal definitions of crime in the United States. Who Defines Crime? Criminological Definitions Since crime was previously defined as any violation of criminal law, should criminologists restrict their inquiry solely to acts so defined? Should the subject matter of criminology be decided by lawyers and politicians? This would relegate the field of criminology to a position as status quo handmaiden of political systems. Hitler’s genocide or Stalin’s purges were accepted conduct within their political ideological systems. Criminologists must study the deviants—the criminals—as well as the social structural contexts that define them. Skolnick and Currie (1988), in examining the analysis of social problems, state, In spite of its claim to political neutrality, the social science of the 1960s typically focused on the symptoms of social ills, rather than their sources: criminals, rather than the laws; the mentally ill, rather than the quality of life; the culture of the poor, rather than the decisions of the rich; the “pathology” of the ghetto, rather than problems of the economy. (p. 11) FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction 13 Crime File 1.3 What Is Crime? Crimes are defined by law. In this report, we define crime as all behaviors and acts for which a society provides formally sanctioned punishment. In the United States, what is criminal is specified in the written law, primarily state statutes. What is included in the definition of crime varies among federal, state, and local jurisdictions. Criminologists devote a great deal of attention to defining crime in both general and specific terms. This definitional process is the first step toward the goal of obtaining accurate crime statistics. To provide additional perspectives on crime, it is sometimes viewed in ways other than those suggested by the standard legal definitions. Such alternatives define crime in terms of the type of victim (child abuse), the type of offender (white-collar crime), the object of the crime (property crime), or the method of criminal activity (organized crime). Such definitions usually cover one or more of the standard legal definitions. For example, organized crime may include fraud, extortion, assault, or homicide. What is considered criminal by society changes over time. Some types of events, such as murder, robbery, and burglary, have been defined as crimes for centuries. Such crimes are part of the common law definition of crime. Other types of conduct traditionally have not been viewed as crimes. As social values and mores change, society has codified some conduct as criminal while decriminalizing other conduct. The recent movement toward increased “criminalization” of drunk driving is an example of such change. New technology also results in new types of conduct not anticipated by the law. Changes in the law may be needed to define and sanction these types of conduct. For example, the introduction of computers has added to the criminal codes in many states so that acts such as the destruction of programs or data could be defined as crimes. What are some other common crimes in the United States? Drug abuse violations. Offenses relating to growing, manufacturing, making, possessing, using, selling, or distributing narcotic and dangerous nonnarcotic drugs. A distinction is made between possession and sale/manufacturing. Sex offenses. In current statistical usage, the name of a broad category of varying content, usually consisting of all offenses having a sexual element except for forcible rape and commercial sex offenses, which are defined separately. Fraud offenses. The crime type comprising offenses sharing the elements of practice of deceit or intentional misrepresentation of fact, with the intent of unlawfully depriving a person of his or her property or legal rights. Drunkenness. Public intoxication, except “driving under the influence.” Disturbing the peace. Unlawful interruption of the peace, quiet, or order of a community, including offenses called “disorderly conduct,” “vagrancy,” “loitering,” “unlawful assembly,” and “riot.” Driving under the influence. Driving or operating any vehicle or common carrier while drunk or under the influence of liquor or drugs. Liquor law offenses. State or local liquor law violations, except drunkenness and driving under the influence. Federal violations are excluded. Gambling. Unlawful staking or wagering of money or other thing of value on a game of chance or on an uncertain event. (Continued) Audio Link 1.3 Listen to a discussion on free enterprise and the development of criminal law. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 14 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY (Continued) Kidnapping. Transportation or confinement of a person without authority of law and without his or her consent, or of a minor without the consent of his or her guardian. Vandalism. Destroying or damaging, or attempting to destroy or damage, the property of another without his or her consent, or public property—except by burning, which is arson. Public order offenses. Violations of the peace or order of the community or threats to the public health through unacceptable public conduct, interference with governmental authority, or violation of civil rights or liberties. Weapons offenses, bribery, escape, and tax law violations, for example, are included in this category. How do violent crimes differ from property crimes? The outcome of a criminal event determines whether it is a property crime or a violent crime. Violent crime refers to events such as homicide, rape, and assault that may result in injury to a person. Robbery is also considered a violent crime because it involves the use or threat of force against a person. Property crimes are unlawful acts with the intent of gaining property not involving the use or threat of force against an individual. Larceny and motor vehicle theft are examples of property crimes. In the National Crime Survey (NCS), a distinction is also made between crimes against persons (violent crimes and personal larceny) and crimes against households (property crimes, including household larceny). How do felonies differ from misdemeanors? Criminal offenses are also classified according to how they are handled by the criminal justice system. Most jurisdictions recognize two classes of offenses: felonies and misdemeanors. Felonies are not distinguished from misdemeanors in the same way in all jurisdictions, but most states define felonies as offenses punishable by a year or more in a state prison. The most serious crimes are never misdemeanors, and the most minor offenses are never felonies. Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, BJS Dictionary of Criminal Justice Data Terminology, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1981); Bureau of Justice Statistics, BJS Criminal Victimization in the U.S. (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,1985); FBI, Crime in the United States 1985 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1985); Bureau of Justice Statistics, Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, March 1988), pp. 2–3. Web Research Project Visit What perspective on the criminal law have you gained by visiting this site? Audio Link 1.4 Listen to a discussion of overcriminalization. A sociological view of crime does not restrict its concept of criminality to those convicted of crime in a legal sense. Were we to restrict analysis of crime solely to the legal definition in most countries, we would discuss primarily “crime in the streets” and ignore “crime in the suites.” We would study the poor, dumb, slow criminal and conclude that low IQs and inferior genetics cause crime; we would ignore the fast, smart, slick violator and the possibility that maybe Ivy League educations and working on Wall Street or for the defense industry also cause crime. Hyperbole is useful at times for effect, and obviously we must not loosely throw around the label criminal, but neither should we ignore dangerous acts that do great harm, simply because the criminal justice system chooses to ignore them. The Crime Problem Radzinowicz and King (1977), in commenting on the relentless international upsurge in crime in the latter decades of the twentieth century, indicate, FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction 15 No national characteristics, no political regime, no system of law, police punishment, treatment, or even terror, has rendered a country exempt from crime. . . . What is indisputable is that new and much higher levels of crime become established as a reflex of affluence. (pp. 3–5) Despite rival explanations such as problems with statistics, there has been an obvious increase in crime internationally since World War II. The Cost of Crime It is difficult, if not impossible, to measure the economic costs of crime. Estimates of the actual financial operation take us into the “megabucks” range where notions such as “give or take a few billion dollars” stagger the imagination and numb us to the reality of the amounts we are Photo 1.4 really talking about. Young men in gangs embody the public perception of crime in the streets. In this photo, In 1992 in Los Angeles, riots broke out in from Suffolk County, New York, a police officer of the anti-gang unit questions two suspects response to a jury verdict of not guilty for police on Long Island in October 2005. The suspects are members of the “Bloods.” officers accused of the brutal videotaped beating of Rodney King. Those riots resulted in one of the bloodiest occurrences of civil unrest in the United States in recent history. Fifty-three people were killed, more than 2,000 were injured, 15,000 were arrested, and property damage was estimated at nearly $800 million. Although far less dramatic, losses at the nation’s savings and loan companies in the eighties and early nineties are estimated to have cost the American taxpayer $500 billion, or the equivalent of 625 Los Angeles riots. The National Center for Victims of Crime (2011) gives the following estimates for the cost of crime in the United States: for 2008 (latest available at the time), $1.19 billion for violent crime and $16.2 billion for property crime; for 2010, $456 million for robbery, $6.1 billion for larceny theft, and $4.6 billion for burglaries. Video Link 1.5 View a video on the cost of crime. Video Link 1.6 View a video on the L.A. riots in 1992. Photo 1.5 A man passes in front of a line of police officers during the 1992 L.A. riots that broke out in the aftermath of the Rodney King beating. Losses at the nation’s savings and loan institutions cost the American taxpayers an estimated $500 billion, or 625 L.A. riots. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 16 Journal Article Link 1.2 Read an article about the costs of sexual violence. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY While recent estimates rank the sale of illegal narcotics as the criminal world’s greatest source of income, there is a problem with such assessments. These estimates do not even begin to measure the full impact of corporate price-fixing and other criminal activities. Added to these costs are economic costs incurred by victims of crime and the costs of running the criminal justice system. Not considered at all in these economic estimates are the social and psychological costs to society and to crime victims. Fear, mistrust, a curtailing of public activity, and a decline in the quality of life are but a few of the inestimable impacts of crime on society. Horror stories abound of the impact of crime on the forgotten figure in the criminal justice equation—the crime victim. As stated earlier, the costly Los Angeles riots of 1992 were dwarfed by the cost of the collapse of the nation’s savings and loans. Summary Criminology is the science or discipline that studies crime and criminal behavior. Major areas of investigation include criminal behavior, etiology (theories of crime causation), and the sociology of law and societal reaction; related areas include juvenile delinquency and victimology. Criminology also shares with the field of criminal justice the areas of policing, the courts, and corrections. Knowledge is defined as one’s understanding of reality. This understanding is made possible through the creation of symbols or abstractions. Comte identified three stages in the progression of knowledge: the theological, metaphysical (philosophical), and scientific. Science combines the spirit of rationality of philosophy with the scientific method, which is characterized by the search for empirical proof. Criminology and sociology are more recent applicants for the scientific credentials already enjoyed by the physical sciences. Having its origins in the eighteenth century in Europe, particularly in the writing of Beccaria, who was influential in codifying modern law, criminology has largely become a twentieth-century U.S. discipline. This is particularly reflected in the work of Sutherland, who has been identified as “the dean of criminology.” Deviant behavior refers to activities that fall outside the range of normal societal toleration. Definitions of such activities are relative to time, place, and persons. Values are practices or beliefs that are prized in society and that are protected by norms, which are rules or prescribed modes of conduct. Sumner, in his classic work Folkways, identifies three types of norms: folkways, mores, and laws. While folkways are less serious customs or traditions, mores are serious norms that contain moral evaluations as well as penal sanctions. Both folkways and mores are examples of informal modes of control. Laws—codified rules of behavior—represent formal methods of attempting to assure social control. Acts mala prohibita are ones that are “bad because they are prohibited,” such as vagrancy and gambling; acts mala in se refer to those that are “bad in themselves,” such as murder, rape, and the like. While not all criminal acts are viewed as deviant, neither are all deviant acts criminal. Undercriminalization involves the failure of the law to cover acts mala in se, while overcriminalization entails overextension of the law to cover acts that may more effectively be enforced through the mores. As societies undergo transition from Gemeinschaft (communal, sacred societies) to Gesellschaft (associational, secular societies), they must rely more on formal agencies of control. In order to be effective, laws require the support of the mores. Manifest functions are intended or planned consequences of social arrangements, whereas latent functions refer to unintended or unanticipated consequences. While the manifest function of Prohibition was to eliminate alcohol abuse, its latent functions were to encourage corruption, organized crime, and public disrespect. Durkheim viewed crime as a normal condition in society that served a positive function by the reactions it developed to encourage reaffirmation of values. Crime, a violation of criminal law, is characterized by politicality, specificity, uniformity, and sanctions. In explaining the origin of criminal law, the consensus model views it as reflecting agreement or public will, while the conflict model claims that it represents the interest of the most powerful group(s) in society. In reality, criminal law reflects elements of both models. For official purposes, crimes are identified as felonies, misdemeanors, and (in some states) summary offenses (minor crimes that may be tried without benefit of jury). Although there is variation by state in the actual assignment to categories, a felony refers to more serious crime that bears a penalty of at least 1 year in a state prison, whereas a misdemeanor is a less serious offense subject to a small fine or short imprisonment. The issue of “Who defines crime?” should not be answered simply by accepting current definitions, since to do so would permit others to define criminology’s subject matter. The crime problem is a growing international concern; the costs of crime are economic (which can only be estimated), psychological, and social in nature. The full social costs are inestimable. Criminology on the Web Log on to the Web-based student study site at for author-created podcasts, eFlashcards, quizzes, and more. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 1. Introduction 17 KEY CONCEPTS Conflict Model of Law Consensus Model of Law Costs of Crime Crime Criminal Law Criminology Deviance Felonies Folkways Functional Necessity of Crime (Durkheim) Gemeinschaft Gesellschaft Interactionist model of law Latent Functions Laws Mala in Se Mala Prohibita Manifest Functions Misdemeanors Mores Norms Overcriminalization Progression of Knowledge Undercriminalization REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. What are some crimes that were not much regarded as problems in the past but are currently? Conversely, what are some crimes that were problems in the past and no longer loom as major concerns? Do you have any predictions of emerging, future crimes? 2. Besides Prohibition, what are some other social policies that have contained latent functions? 3. Do you think the American criminal justice system reflects a consensus or conflict model of law? Explain and defend your judgments. 4. Why don’t criminologists simply use the legal classifications of criminals in their studies of crime and criminal behavior? 5. What are the differences among criminal law, statutory law, case law, civil law, and administrative law? WEB SOURCES Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences National Criminal Justice Reference Service American Society of Criminology National Institute of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) truTV Online (formerly Court TV) Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) World Factbook of Criminal Justice Systems WEB EXERCISES Using this chapter’s recommended websites, explore the field of criminology. 3. Of what use is the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS)? 1. What are the largest professional associations in the field, and what did you find out about them? 4. What type of information did you find on truTV Online? 2. What types of information are available on government sites such as the Bureau of Justice Statistics, CIA, National Institute of Justice, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention? 5. What information does the World Factbook of Criminal Justice Systems include on countries throughout the world? 6. Using your Web browser, search NCJRS for “FBI’s Most Wanted” and “Crimes of the Century.” Did you turn up anything new? FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 18 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY SELECTED READINGS Robert Bohm. (1987). “The Myths About Criminology and Criminal Justice: A Review,” Justice Quarterly, 4, 631–642. This classic article reviews the many works on, and claims about, myths in criminology and criminal justice. A review such as this of misconceptions in criminology is an excellent means by which to assess the state of current knowledge in the field. In this small volume, the authors build on Robert Merton’s concept of anomie or strain theory by speaking to the development of an institutionalization of deviant means in American society. According to this theory, legitimate institutions begin to adopt illegal means of achieving their competitive objectives. Elliott Currie. (1985). Confronting Crime: Why There Is So Much Crime in America and What We Can Do About It. New York: Pantheon. Elliott Currie has remained a consistent voice of liberal thought in the area of crime policy. He challenges conservative beliefs of crime, which tend to be defeatist and tend to ignore the role of structural conditions such as inequality and discrimination in crime causation. Carl E. Pope, Rick Lovell, and Steven G. Brandl, editors. (2001). Voices From the Field: Readings in Criminal Justice Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. This collection features 18 articles on research on a variety of criminological issues. It underlines the point that research in criminology stresses scientific analysis over mere opinion. John R. Fuller and Eric W. Hickey, editors. (1999). Controversial Issues in Criminology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Fuller and Hickey provide an excellent collection of 14 articles, each featuring a debate between two criminologists. Don Gibbons. (1979). The Criminological Enterprise: Theories and Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. In this slim volume, Don Gibbons offers a very readable history of criminological thought that provides undergraduates with an excellent overview of the history of the development of criminology and criminological theory. Philip Jenkins. (1984). Crime and Justice: Issues and Ideas. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. This book by one of the most lucid writers in criminology provides an engaging, original, and scholarly discussion of a number of criminological controversies such as serial murders and moral panics. Steven F. Messner and Richard Rosenfeld. (2013). Crime and the American Dream (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Jeffrey Reiman. (2010). The Rich Get Rich and the Poor Get Prison (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Reiman’s work is an acknowledged classic in the field that documents the continuing inequality in the U.S. criminal justice system. His analysis serves as an excellent illustration of the conflict model in criminology. Frank R. Scarpitti, Amie Nielson, and J. Mitchell Miller, editors. (2008). Crime and Criminals: Contemporary and Classic Readings in Criminology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Surprisingly, there is a shortage of good general readers in criminology. Scarpitti and Nielson and Miller more than fill the gap with a fine selection of 41 readings that serves to complement texts in criminology, including this one. Sam Walker. (2010). Sense and Nonsense About Crime (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. In this short book, Sam Walker provides succinct and readable coverage of critical issues in criminology, using as an organizational gimmick the theme of myths in criminology. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Theory and Methodology The Research Enterprise of Criminology Objectivity Ethics in Criminological Research Crime File 2.1 Scientific Evil: The Guatemala Syphilis Study Who Is Criminal? Official Police Statistics—The Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Sources of Crime Statistics The Crime Indexes: Violent and Property Crime Issues and Cautions in Studying UCR Data Crime File 2.2 The Crime Dip Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies Experiments in Criminology Some Examples of Experiments in Criminology Evidence-Based Research Crime File 2.3 Research at the Office of Justice Programs Surveys Victim Surveys National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Crime File 2.4 Were You a Victim of Crime? Issues and Cautions in Studying Victim Data Self-Report Measures of Crime Crime File 2.5 Self-Reported Delinquency Items Participant Observation Participant Observation of Criminals Evaluation of the Method of Participant Observation Life History and Case Studies Crime File 2.6 Confessions of a Dying Thief Unobtrusive Measures Crime File 2.7 Useful Sources for Criminological Research Crime File 2.8 The Black Dahlia Murder Validity, Reliability, and Triangulation Crime File 2.9 The FBI Reading Room Summary Key Concepts Review Questions Web Sources Web Exercises Selected Readings 20 chapter 2 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Research Methods in Criminology We measure the extent of crime with elastic rulers whose units of measurement are not defined. —Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald Cressey, 1978, Principles of Criminology (p. 17) Theory and Methodology Two critical features of any discipline are its theory and its methodology. Theory, which will be the subject of Chapters 5–8, addresses the questions of why and how. Methodology (methods), on the other hand, is concerned with the what. Theories involve attempts to develop reasonable explanations of reality. They are efforts to structure, summarize, or explain the essential elements of the subject in question. What causes crime? Why do some individuals become criminals? Why are some nations or areas more criminogenic than others? Theories represent the intellectual leaps of faith that provide fundamental insights into how things operate; they attempt to illuminate or shed light upon the darkness of reality. Without the generation of useful theoretical explanations, a field is intellectually bankrupt; it becomes merely a collection of “war stories” and carefully documented encyclopedic accounts. It fails to explain, summarize, or capture the essential nature of its subject matter. Studying a field devoid of theory would be akin to a mystery novel in which the author told us neither “whodunit” nor how and why they did it. Methodology involves the collection and analysis of accurate data or facts. With respect to criminology, this would comprise information regarding the following: How much crime is there? Who commits crime? How do commissions of crime or definitions of crime vary? and the like. If the facts regarding crime are provided by defective models, they will be in error, and then theories or attempted explanations of this incorrectly described reality will most certainly be misdirected. In the social sciences, there at times exists a chasm between those who are primarily interested in theory or broad conceptual analysis, analogous to philosophy, and those who are methodologists. Theory devoid of method, explanation without accurate supportive data, is just as much a dead end as method devoid of interpretive theory. The former resembles armchair theorizing, the latter a fruitless bookkeeping operation. In reality, in order to realize mature development, criminology needs both incisive theory and sound, accurate methodology. The purpose of this chapter on methodology is to identify the research base on which the findings presented in this book rest, and to point out their relative strengths and shortcomings. Author Podcast 2.1 Listen to the author’s podcast for this chapter. 21 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 22 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY The Research Enterprise of Criminology Objectivity A basic tenet of scientific research is that researchers attempt to maintain objectivity. This requires that the investigators strive to be “value free” in their inquiry (Weber, 1949) and, in a sense, to permit the findings to speak for themselves. A researcher may occasionally find the attitudes, behavior, or beliefs of a group he or she is studying repugnant or immoral; however, the researcher is trained not to judge but rather to objectively record and to determine what meaning these findings have for the field of criminology and to the development of its knowledge base. Ethics in Criminological Research Handbook Article Link 2.1 Read an article about criminal justice ethics. Because it is part of the social sciences, the subject matter of criminology is different in kind from that of the physical sciences. While the latter concentrates on physical facts, criminology’s subject matter—crime, criminal behavior, victims, and the criminal justice system—is concerned with human behavior, attitudes, groups, and organizations. Like physical science investigations, criminological inquiry must be concerned with its potentially adverse impacts on human subjects. Ultimately, ethical conduct in research is an individual responsibility tied into deep moral judgments; a blind adherence to any checklist grossly oversimplifies a very complex decision. Until recently, the fields of criminology and criminal justice relied on the codes of ethics of parent fields such as sociology or psychology for guidance. Beginning in 1998, however, both the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences (ACJS) and the American Society of Criminology (ASC) began compiling a code of ethics. The ACJS adopted a code of ethics that year, while the ASC continues to explore the issue. Although space does not permit full discussion of each, the guidelines of both of these codes of ethics include the following (ACJS, 1998): Researchers should •• •• •• •• •• •• •• Strive for the highest technical standards in research. Acknowledge limitations of research. Fully report findings. Disclose financial support and other sponsorship. Honor commitments. Make data available to future researchers. Not misuse their positions as fraudulent pretext for gathering intelligence. In addition, •• Human subjects have the right to full disclosure of the purposes of the research. •• Subjects have the right to confidentiality. This requires the researcher to protect the identity of his or her subject(s). •• Research should not expose subjects to more than minimal risk. If risks are greater than the risks of everyday life, then informed consent must be obtained. •• Researchers should avoid privacy invasion and protect vulnerable populations. •• All research should meet with human subject protection requirements imposed by educational institutions and funding sources. •• Researchers should properly acknowledge the work of others. •• Criminologists have an obligation not to create social injustice such as discrimination, oppression, or harassment in their work. Video Link 2.1 View a video about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Ethical horror stories in criminology and the social sciences include both biomedical and social science examples (F. E. Hagan, 2013). During World War II, Nazi doctors tortured, maimed, and murdered innocent captive subjects in the name of research. In the famous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the U.S. Public Health Service withheld penicillin, a known cure for syphilis, from 425 uneducated black male sharecroppers who suffered from, and most eventually died of, untreated syphilis. In the past, in discussing the Tuskegee Syphilis Study with students, the author often had to correct their impression that the U.S. Public Health Service gave their subjects syphilis. I explained that what they did was bad enough, without actually giving the subjects the disease. In 2010, it was revealed that American scientists deliberately infected prisoners and patients in a mental hospital in Guatemala with syphilis in the 1940s (see Crime File 2.1). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 23 Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology Crime File 2.1 Scientific Evil: The Guatemala Syphilis Study In 2010, it was revealed that American public health researchers conducted experiments in Guatemala in which nearly 700 subjects were deliberately injected with syphilis. The subjects were prison inmates, mental patients, and soldiers. The National Institute of Health study, which ran from 1946 to 1948, was discovered by a Wellesley College medical historian. No informed consent of subjects was sought for the study. The study paid syphilis-infected prostitutes to have sexual relations with prisoners. Guatemala permits conjugal visitations. If infection did not take place, bacteria was poured into scrapes on their penis or elsewhere, or even injected by spinal puncture (Malkin, 2010). When finally discovered roughly 65 years later, U.S. officials including President Obama apologized for what they acknowledged as clearly unethical behavior. The purpose of the experiment was to test whether penicillin, at the time a relatively new medicine, could prevent sexually transmitted disease. One of the scientists in Guatemala was later involved with the Tuskegee study. The president of Guatemala called the study “hair-raising” (Malkin, 2010). Details of the study were hidden from Guatemalan officials at the time, and the study produced no useful information. Source: “U.S. Apologizes for Syphilis Tests in Guatemala,” by E. Malkin, New York Times (2010, October 10), A1. During the Cold War, U.S. intelligence agencies, with the cooperation of the scientific community, performed bizarre and dangerous experiments on subjects without their permission. While most of these examples were biomedical in nature, social and behavioral research can likewise put subjects at risk. The three most cited social science examples are Stanley Milgram’s Obedience to Authority (1974), Philip Zimbardo’s simulated prison study (1972, 1973, 1974), and Laud Humphreys’ Tearoom Trade (1970). In his Obedience to Authority study, Stanley Milgram (1974) wanted to discover how “normal” people come to commit monstrous acts. Volunteers were recruited and paid to act as “teachers” while “confederates” (fake subjects) acted as “learners.” The teachers were deceived into believing that each time they threw a lever on a shock apparatus, they were administering higher levels of shock to the pupils. The teachers were willing to administer what they believed were painful shocks despite cries to stop from the subjects, when assured by the presence of scientific authorities. Do experimenters have the ethical right to deceive and put subjects in a position of emotional stress in the name of science? In Zimbardo’s simulated prison study, male undergraduate, paid participants played the roles of guard or prisoner in a mock prison setting, set up in the basement of a Stanford University building. The experiment was cancelled after 6 days (of a planned 14) when participants became carried away with their roles. In The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, Zimbardo (2007a) coined the term “Lucifer effect” to describe a transformation of human character that may cause good people to commit evil actions. This could include sexual degradation and torture as occurred at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. One of Zimbardo’s associates, after observing a humiliating experiment called the “humping experiment,” in which the prisoners simulated sodomy, berated Zimbardo for contributing to the suffering of human beings. This snapped Zimbardo back to his senses and led him to cancel the experiment (Zimbardo, 2007b). Laud Humphreys’ Tearoom Trade (1970) involved studying secret male homosexual activities in public restrooms. Acting as a voyeur (or “watch queen”), Humphreys served as a lookout, but also without the permission of his subjects, as a hidden observer. He copied down their license plate numbers and traced the participants back to their homes, where he showed up under the guise of being a mental health researcher. All three of these Photo 2.1 Philip Zimbardo, best known for his 1971 prison experiment, gives his last lecture in 2007. Video Link 2.2 View a video about the Milgram experiment. Video Link 2.3 View a video of the Stanford prison experiment. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 24 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Photo 2.2 “Deep Throat” was the alias for W. Mark Felt, the anonymous source who leaked secrets about President Nixon’s Watergate cover-up to The Washington Post. examples raised highly controversial ethical questions and most likely would not be approved today by codes of research ethics or institutional review boards. In an incredibly insensitive experiment later dubbed “the Monster Study,” for 4 months during the Depression, researcher and graduate student Mary Tudor and her professor Wendell Johnson taught children at an orphanage in Iowa a “lesson they would never forget”—how to stutter (“Lessons Turn Orphans Into Outcasts,” 2001). While the experiment helped thousands of children overcome speech difficulties, this took place at the expense of some of the children unnecessarily being subjected to lives as outcasts and misfits. The children were divided into two groups of 11, one labeled normal speakers and given positive speech therapy and the other group taught to stutter. Eight members of the treatment group became permanent stutterers. While Tudor felt remorse and returned to the orphanage a number of times in attempts to reverse the damage, Johnson did nothing and became famous in the field of speech pathology due to the study. Tudor describes how during the experiment, trusting orphans greeted her, running to her car and carrying materials for the experiment. Thirteen of the subjects who were still alive learned of the experiment in 2001, when it was reported in the San Jose Mercury News. In 2007, the state of Iowa agreed to pay $925,000 to six subjects of the study who had been harmed by the University of Iowa researchers. The 1939 study became known as the “Monster Study” because of the methods used by the researchers. Mary Tudor was instrumental in breaking the story (Associated Press, 2007). In the name of research, criminologists should have no interest in behaving as “mad scientists” who inhumanely pursue science for its own sake. In most research, informed consent of participants based on knowledge of the experiment is essential. If some form of deception is necessary, it is even more incumbent on the researcher to prevent harm and, where possible, to debrief, reassure, and explain the purposes of the project afterward. Obviously, criminology cannot afford to limit its inquiry to volunteers. Reciprocity involves a system of mutual trust and obligation between the researcher and subject. Subjects are asked to share themselves in the belief that this baring of information will not be used in an inappropriate, harmful, or embarrassing manner. A basic tenet of any scholarly research is the dictum that the investigator maintain objectivity and professional integrity in both the performance and the reporting of research. The researcher, first and foremost, is an investigator and not a hustler, huckster, salesperson, or politician. Researchers should avoid purposely choosing and reporting only those techniques that tend to shed the best light on their data, or “lying with statistics” (D. Huff, 1966). Related to these issues is the fact that the researcher should take steps to protect the confidentiality and privacy of respondents. One procedure for attempting to protect the identity of subjects, organizations, or communities is the use of pseudonyms, aliases, or false names. Names such as “Doc,” “Chic,” “The Lupollo Family,” “Vince Swaggi,” “Deep Throat,” and “Wincanton,” to mention just a few, have become legend in criminology. In 2011, Boston College received a federal subpoena for oral history materials held in its library. Acting on behalf of the British government, the U.S. Department of Justice sought interviews from the “Belfast Project” of former paramilitary members who had fought in Northern Ireland’s “Troubles” (sectarian conflict). However, the interviewers had promised the subjects strict confidentiality until their death. Some of the sought tapes involved individuals who were still alive (Bray, 2011). Such government measures threaten the very research that the government seeks. Who Is Criminal? To illustrate the importance of methodological precision, let us examine the basic but deceptively complex questions, “Who is criminal?” and “How much crime is there?” While an initial response to these questions might be, “Why, of course, we know,” the answers are not as obvious as they seem. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 25 Taking what would appear to be the easiest question—“Who is criminal?”—most would agree that longterm recidivists who have repeatedly been found guilty are criminals. Yet some ideologues (those committed to a strict adherence to a distinctive political belief system) might even on this point maintain that some of these “career criminals” are in fact not criminals, but are, from the conflict perspective, political prisoners. They are viewed as victims of an unfair class system or of a politically oppressive system. In addition, not all apprehended individuals or persons accused of crime are guilty. And what about those who commit crimes but are not arrested? It becomes apparent that the manner in which the variable “criminal” is operationalized will have a major influence on the definition of the concept of criminal. A variable is a concept that has been operationalized or measured in a specific manner and that can vary or take on different values, usually of a quantitative nature. Operationalization involves the process of defining concepts by describing how they are being measured; the notion of operationalization can be practically explained by completing the statement “I measured it by ____________.” In Chapters 5–8, we will describe many theories that assume excess criminality among lower-class groups based on official statistics; however, what methodological problems and biases in addressing this issue are introduced by relying solely on one measure of crime? Official Police Statistics— The Uniform Crime Report (UCR) Internationally, until relatively recently the major source of information regarding crime statistics was official police statistics. Gathered for government administrative purposes with only secondary attention paid to their usefulness for social science research, these data tended to be uneven in quality and were not gathered or recorded in any systematic manner. Basically, criminologists had no efficient statistics to consult in order to answer even basic questions such as whether crime was increasing or decreasing. Since 1930, the U.S. Department of Justice has compiled national crime statistics, the Uniform Crime Report (UCR), with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) assuming responsibility as the clearinghouse and publisher. Although participation in the UCR program by local police departments is purely voluntary, the number of departments reporting and the comprehensiveness of the information have steadily improved over the years, with police departments from large metropolitan areas historically the most reliable participants. Handbook Article Link 2.2 Read an article on crime reports and statistics. Sources of Crime Statistics Returning to our question, “How much crime is there?” an examination of the UCR and its relationship to sources of data on crime and criminals is useful. Figure 2.1 illustrates the relationship between crime committed and the sources of crime statistics, including the UCR. It is unclear whether an accurate estimate of the amount of crime committed is possible, for several reasons. For one, not all crimes that are committed are discovered. In addition, some crimes may be known only to the perpetrators, in which case the victim is unaware of loss. Perhaps there is no identifiable victim, as in the case of a gambling violation. The further a source of statistics is from the “crimes committed” category, the less useful it is as a measure of the extent of crime. Not all crimes that are discovered are reported to the police; similarly, not all reported crimes are recorded by police (see Figure 2.1). In addition, some law enforcement agencies may purposely conceal recorded crimes; some offenses may be unfounded crimes or defined by investigating officers as not constituting a criminal matter. For instance, when a complainant reports an attempted burglary, investigating officers may conclude that there is not enough evidence to support that a crime took place. Despite this problematic relationship between crimes recorded and crimes committed, the UCR until recently represented the best statistics available on crime commission and, as will be discussed later in this chapter, still represents one of the best sources. Again, as shown in Figure 2.1, once we move beyond crimes recorded as a measure of crime commission, we are getting further removed from the accurate measurement of crime. Thus, arrest statistics, indictments, convictions, incarcerations, and other dispositions such as probation and parole are not as useful. Such statistics have much more to do with police efficiency or allocations to the criminal justice system and general societal policies toward crime control policy than they do with measuring the extent of the crime problem. Audio Link 2.1 Listen to a discussion of violent crime in major cities. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 26 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY FIGURE 2.1     Sources of Crime Statistics: The Flow of Offenders Through the Criminal Justice System Society Serious crimes committed Serious crimes committed reported to the police Police arrests for reported crimes Formal accusation and detention Guilty pleas Sentenced Probation Jail Prison Source: Adapted from the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice. The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1967), pp. 262–263. Most media accounts of changes in the crime rate are based on the annual summary presented in the UCR. While the UCR contains many qualifying remarks regarding the meaning of these statistics, in most instances the press tends to report these data uncritically and often in an alarmist manner. Obviously, the researcher who chooses to utilize UCR data must become as familiar as possible with any shortcomings or sources of bias in these statistics. The FBI receives its information for the UCR from local police departments. Considerable variation exists in state penal codes regarding criminal offenses and their definitions, although participating departments receive instruction in uniform crime recording in order to standardize their reports for use in compiling nationwide figures. In the majority of states, UCR systems require that all local departments report their statistics to the state. These data are then shared with the FBI. The Census Bureau estimates that about 97 percent of the total national population is covered by the report (FBI, 2011a). The Crime Indexes: Violent and Property Crime Historically, the UCR has been divided into two parts. Part I crimes consist of the index crimes, major felonies that are believed to be serious, to occur frequently, and to have a greater likelihood of being reported to the police. The index offenses are as follows: 1. Murder and non-negligent manslaughter 2. Forcible rape 3. Robbery FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 27 Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 4. Aggravated assault 5. Burglary 6. Larceny-theft 7. Motor vehicle theft Video Link 2.4 Watch a video on crime reporting. 8. Arson The original index and the one used for historical comparison consist of the first seven offenses. Arson was added as a result of a law passed by the U.S. Congress in October 1978. As we will see shortly, the crime rate is calculated with the index offenses. Figure 2.2 defines the various offenses in uniform crime reporting. In 2004, the FBI decided to stop reporting the crime index and to report a violent crime index and property crime index instead. An advisory board felt that the crime index had been distorted by including the category of larceny-theft. The violent crime index consists of 1. Murder and non-negligent manslaughter 2. Forcible rape 3. Robbery 4. Aggravated assault The property crime index consists of 1. Burglary 2. Larceny-theft 3. Motor vehicle theft 4. *Arson *Arson listed, but not calculated Part II crimes are non-index offenses and are not used in the calculation of the crime rate. These include the following: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Simple assault Forgery and counterfeiting Fraud Embezzlement Receiving stolen property Vandalism Illegal carrying of weapons Prostitution and related offenses Sex offenses (e.g., statutory rape) Drug law violations Liquor law violations Public drunkenness Disorderly conduct Vagrancy Curfew violations/loitering Runaways All other violations of state and local laws (except traffic violations) Photo 2.3 The use of technology by police has been credited in part for crime reduction in the 1990s. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 28 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY FIGURE 2.2     Offenses in Uniform Crime Reporting Offenses in Uniform Crime Reporting are divided into two groupings, Part I and Part II. Information on the volume of Part I offenses known to law enforcement, those cleared by arrest or exceptional means, and the number of persons arrested is reported monthly. Only arrest data are reported for Part II offenses. The Part I offenses are: Criminal homicide: Murder and non-negligent manslaughter: the willful (non-negligent) killing of one human being by another. Deaths caused by negligence, attempts to kill, assaults to kill, suicides, accidental deaths, and justifiable homicides are excluded. Justifiable homicides are limited to: (1) the killing of a felon by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty; (2) the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen; (3) manslaughter by negligence: the killing of another person through gross negligence. Traffic fatalities are excluded. While manslaughter by negligence is a Part I crime, it is not included in the Crime Index. Forcible rape: The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim. Robbery: The taking or attempt to take anything of value from the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear. Aggravated assault: An unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by a means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Simple assaults are excluded. Burglary/breaking or entering: The unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft. Attempted forcible entry is included. Larceny-theft (except motor vehicle theft): The unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another. Examples are thefts of bicycles or automobile accessories, shoplifting, pocket-picking, or the stealing of any property or article which is not taken by force and violence or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are included. Embezzlement, “con” games, forgery, worthless checks, etc., are excluded. Motor vehicle theft: The theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle. A motor vehicle is self-propelled and runs on the surface and not on rails. Specifically excluded from this category are motorboats, construction equipment, airplanes, and farming equipment. Arson: Any willful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another, etc. The Part II offenses are: Other assaults (simple): Assaults and attempted assaults where no weapon is used and which do not result in serious or aggravated injury to the victim. Forgery and counterfeiting: Making, altering, uttering, or possessing, with intent to defraud, anything false in the semblance of that which is true. Attempts are included. Fraud: Fraudulent conversion and obtaining money or property by false pretenses. Included are confidence games and bad checks, except forgeries and counterfeiting. Embezzlement: Misappropriation or misapplication of money or property entrusted to one’s care, custody, or control. Stolen property; buying, receiving, possessing: Buying, receiving, and possessing stolen property, including attempts. Vandalism: Willful or malicious destruction, injury, disfigurement, or defacement of any public or private property, real or personal, without consent of the owner or persons having custody or control. Weapons-carrying, possessing, etc.: All violations of regulations or statutes controlling the carrying, using, possessing, furnishing, and manufacturing of deadly weapons or silencers. Attempts are included. Prostitution and commercialized vice: Sex offenses of a commercialized nature, such as prostitution, keeping a bawdy house, procuring, or transporting women for immoral purposes. Attempts are included. Sex offenses (except forcible rape, prostitution, and commercialized vice): Statutory rape and offenses against chastity, common decency, morals, and the like. Attempts are included. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology Drug abuse violations: State and/or local offenses relating to the unlawful possession, sale, use, growing, and manufacturing of narcotic drugs. The following drug categories are specified: opium or cocaine and their derivatives (morphine, heroin, codeine); marijuana; synthetic narcotics—manufactured narcotics that can cause true addiction (Demerol, methadone); and dangerous non-narcotic drugs (barbiturates, benzedrine). Gambling: Promoting, permitting, or engaging in illegal gambling. Offenses against the family and children: Nonsupport, neglect, desertion, or abuse of family and children. Driving under the influence: Driving or operating any vehicle or common carrier while drunk or under the influence of liquor or narcotics. Liquor law violations: State and/or local liquor law violations, except drunkenness and driving under the influence. Federal violations are excluded. Drunkenness: Offenses relating to drunkenness or intoxication. Driving under the influence is not included. Disorderly conduct: Breaking of the peace. Vagrancy: Vagabondage, begging, loitering, etc. All other offenses: All violations of state and/or local laws, except those listed above and traffic offenses. Suspicion: No specific offense; suspect released without formal charges being placed. Curfew and loitering laws (persons under age 18): Offenses relating to violations of local curfew or loitering ordinances where such laws exist. Runaways (persons under age 18): Limited to juveniles taken into protective custody under provisions of local statutes. Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1995. Crime in the United States, 1994, Uniform Crime Reports. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, pp. 383–384. Web Research Project Visit and examine any of its latest reports on crime such as burglary or bank robbery. Issues and Cautions in Studying UCR Data An extensive literature has accumulated regarding shortcomings of UCR statistics. While the UCR has steadily improved and been refined since its inception in 1930, researchers utilizing these data should exercise caution and be aware of certain limitations. Some primary shortcomings of the UCR include the following: 1. The recorded statistics represent only a portion of the true crime rate of a community. Victim surveys suggest that there is possibly twice as much crime committed as appears in official statistics. 2. The big increase in the crime rate beginning in the mid-1960s may be explained in part by better communications, more professional and more efficient police departments, and better recording and reporting of crime. Larger, improved, and professionalized police departments appear to be positively related to rising crime rates. This was particularly the case in larger urban areas where more crimes were being detected. Photo 2.3 shows technology in the patrol car. 3. Increased citizen concern and awareness of crime, higher standards of expected public morality, and greater reporting of and response to ghetto crime may all have had impacts on increasing the recorded crime rate. 4. Most federal offenses, “victimless” crimes, and white-collar crimes do not appear in the UCR. 5. Changes in record-keeping procedures (such as computerization), transition in police administrations, and political shenanigans can have a major impact on crime recording. The FBI attempts to monitor and control abuses. In 1999, the Philadelphia Police Department’s Sex Crimes Unit was found to have dismissed as noncrimes several thousand reports of crime. In order to attract and host the 1996 Olympics, Atlanta was accused of undercounting crime by as much as 22,000 offenses. 29 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 30 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY 6. In interpreting UCR statistics, keep in mind what arrest statistics do and do not mean: a. Arrests do not equal crimes solved or suspects found guilty. b. Many reported crimes are declared unfounded by police. c. In the situation involving multiple offenses, only the most serious offense is recorded for UCR purposes. d. The majority of crimes committed are not index offenses. 7. The crime index is made up primarily of property crimes. 8. The crime index is unweighted; it is a simple summated scale in which a murder counts the same as a bicycle theft. Surprisingly, most bodily injury crimes are “nonindex” offenses (L. D. Savitz, 1978). 9. The existence of the crime index may encourage concentration by police agencies on these offenses at the expense of others. 10. The crime rate is calculated on the basis of decennial census population figures. Rapidly growing cities of the Southwest would, under this system, appear to have worse rates since, for example, 1979 crimes would be divided by a 1970 population base. 11. Demographic shifts may provide partial explanations for changing crime rates. Some criminologists had prophesied the crime dip (a decline in the crime rate trend) in the 1980s based on a general aging of the baby boom generation (children born in the post–World War II era, from 1946 through the mid1950s). This larger-than-normal population cohort overwhelmed hospital nursery wards, elementary and secondary schools, and later colleges. These establishments, such as schools and colleges, now have extra space. Similarly, the criminal justice system was overwhelmed by a larger-than-normal proportion in the maximal crime-committing ages (15–24), as the job market and housing industry inherit this now “middle-age boom.” The Crime Rate The crime rate is a calculation that expresses the total number of index crimes per 100,000 population: Index Crimes/Population × 100,000 = Crime Rate As previously indicated, in 2004 the FBI decided to drop the additional calculation of the crime index rate. The purpose of an index (like the Dow Jones Industrial Average or the Consumer Price Index) is to provide a composite measure, one that does not rely too heavily on any one factor. An index also allows controlling for population size, thus permitting fair comparisons of different-sized units. As noted earlier, it is this UCR crime rate that one reads about in the newspaper, with accounts of crime either rising or falling by a given percentage. A principal difficulty with the UCR crime rate as an index of crime in the United States is that it is an unweighted index. That is, each crime, whether murder or bicycle theft, is added into the total index with no weight given to the relative seriousness of the offense. Thus, no monetary or psychological value is assigned. For instance, a city with 100 burglaries per 100,000 population and one with 100 homicides per 100,000 population would have the same crime rate. One alternative that has been proposed is the calculation of a weighted index using crime seriousness scales (Rossi, Waite, Bose, & Berk, 1974; Sellin & Wolfgang, 1964). In a weighted crime index, criminal incidents are assigned weights on the basis of variables such as amount stolen, method of intimidation, degree of harm inflicted, and similar salient factors. Redesign of the UCR Program: NIBRS The redesigned UCR program is called the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). In 1982, in response to the criticisms and limitations of the UCR program, the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the FBI formed a joint task force and contracted with a private research firm (Abt Associates) to undertake revisions of the UCR program. This was the first in the program’s then more than 50 years of existence (Poggio, Kennedy, Chaiken, & Carlson, 1985; Rovetch, Poggio, & Rossman, 1984). On the basis of recommendations of a steering committee made up of police practitioners, academicians, and the media, the NIBRS suggestions for changes in the UCR included: •• A new two-level reporting system in which most agencies continue to report basic offense and arrest data much as they do at present (Level I), while a small sample of agencies report more extensive information (Level II). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology •• Conversion of the entire UCR system into unit-record reporting in which police agencies report on the characteristics of each criminal incident (for example, location, time, presence of weapon) and on the characteristics of each individual arrest. •• Distinguishing of attempted from completed offenses. •• Distinguishing of crimes against businesses, individuals, or households from crimes against other entities. •• Instituting ongoing audits of samples of participating UCR agencies to check for errors in the new program. •• Support for better user services, particularly in making databases more available to outside researchers. •• NIBRS collection of data on each single incident and arrest in 22 crime categories. It is believed that these revisions in the program, which are taking longer to implement than anticipated, will overcome a number of past criticisms as well as provide a database that will be more useful for both researchers and policy makers. Crime File 2.2 The Crime Dip From the first compilation of crime statistics by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the early 1930s until the early 1960s, the crime rate in the United States had been declining. Some experts had even unwisely predicted that, given existing trends and growing affluence, crime might become a rarity by the twenty-first century. By the mid-1960s, however, recorded crime made a reversal and rose to unprecedented levels, producing in its wake yet more predictions of unrepentant explosions in the crime rate. A brief leveling off in the early 1980s was followed by an epidemic of youth violence beginning in the mid-1980s with the advent of crack cocaine and widespread use of weapons to defend disputed drug trafficking turf. By the 1990s, an assumed inevitability of rising crime rates was greeted by unexpected declines, beginning in large cities such as New York. Between 1993 and 2000, index crimes had declined over 30 percent. The causes of this crime dip are a subject of dispute. Factors associated with the crime dip that began in the 1990s include the following: •• •• •• •• •• •• •• A healthy economy Crime prevention programs Decline in domestic violence An incarceration binge CompStat and community policing A decline in the crack cocaine epidemic Legalized abortion The most prosperous American economy in over 30 years, highlighted by low unemployment and low inflation, may be the major reason for falling crime rates. Such an explanation might not be the case, however. During the 1960s, crime rates rose sharply at a time of low unemployment. More recently, Sun Belt cities with low unemployment have had higher crime rates than older cities with high unemployment. New York City’s murder rate in the 1990s fell over 66 percent despite high unemployment (Witkin, 1998, p. 30). Crime prevention, which shows much promise for early prevention programs with high-risk juveniles, has shown only modest impacts on crime rates. Domestic murders (among intimates) demonstrated a 40 percent decline between 1976 and 1996. Part of the explanation for this was a decline in marriages among 20- to 24-year-olds, as well as greater opportunities for abused women to escape bad relationships. America’s incarceration binge has been phenomenal, increasing from 744,000 inmates in 1985 to approximately 1.8 million in 1998. This is the largest imprisoned population of any country in the world outside Russia. While locking up an extra million prisoners must have some impact, New York City showed the most dramatic drop in crime, while the state of New York (with 70 percent of its prison population from New York City) increased its prison population by only 8 percent between 1993 and 1996. Utah, on the other hand, raised its incarceration rate by 19 percent between 1993 and 1996, but its violent crime rate went up (Witkin, 1998, p. 31). By 2002, a total of 6.6 million Americans were behind bars or on probation or parole. This represented 1 of every 32 adults. (Continued) 31 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 32 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY (Continued) Another candidate for explanation has been better and more effective policing. “CompStat” (computer statistics) was used to computer map and identify “hot spots” (high-crime areas) by the New York City police to assign target patrols. Wilson and Kelling’s “Broken Windows” (1982) theory emphasized focusing on small, nuisance crimes under the assumption that, left unpunished, they breed more serious crimes. The fact that many cities that did not employ community policing strategies also experienced major declines in recorded crime—and some innovative departments experienced increases—leaves the more effective policing explanation in question. A rival explanation is that the police departments are manipulating statistics to show lower crime rates. While this may occur in individual cases, such a mass conspiracy by most departments seems unlikely. In 1998, the Philadelphia Police Department was accused of having systematically underreported crime for years. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported routine downgrading of the seriousness of crimes in which stabbings and beatings were redefined as “hospital cases” and burglaries became “lost property” (“Philadelphia Crime Statistics Questioned,” 1998). Blumstein and Rosenfeld (1998) point out that all of the increase in homicide in the late 1980s to early 1990s was among younger people (under 21), and this was primarily due to a crack cocaine epidemic in American cities beginning in 1986 that peaked in 1993. This epidemic was accompanied by a great increase in the carrying of firearms to settle turf wars. A final intriguing explanation in an article by Levitt and Donohue (1999) argues that legalized abortion is responsible for falling crime rates. They claim that half of the drop in crime since 1991 might reflect the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. Some unwanted, potential criminals were not born because their potential mothers had abortions. The decline in crime began in 1992 just when those youths who would have been born in the mid-1970s would have hit their peak crime years (18–24). Even Levitt and Donohue admit, however, that other factors may be more explanatory of the crime dip than abortion. Just as criminologists debated the causes of the rise in crime, there is no consensus regarding explanations for the decline in crime or even prognostications as to when crime might rise again. Sources: Broken Windows and Police Discretion, by J. Q. Wilson and G. A. Kelling (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 1999), NCJ 178259; Philadelphia Crime Statistics Questioned (Associated Press, November 2, 1998); Assessing the Recent Ups and Downs in U.S. Homicide Rates, by A. Blumstein and R. Rosenfeld, National Institute of Justice Journal, October 9–11, 1998; Legalized Abortion and Crime, by S. Levitt and J. Donohue, Chicago Tribune (August 8, 1999); The Crime Bust: What’s Behind the Dramatic Drug Bust? by G. Witkin, U.S. News and World Report (May 25, 1998), pp. 28–37. Web Research Project Using a Web browser, locate articles on the “crime dip.” What explanations do they provide? The nineteenth-century British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli has often been cited as having remarked, “There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.” Obviously, caution must be exercised in examining graphic devices and statistical reports (D. Huff, 1966; Zeisel, 1957). In the 1980s and early 1990s, rising juvenile violent crime led conservative commentators such as Robert Bennett and John DiIulio to make grim prophecies of exploding juvenile crime among violent criminal predators raised in mean minority ghettos and in maternal, single-parent households—a foreboding inevitability born of moral rot. In the 1990s, these “hopeless areas” showed the greatest decline in crime, one that few had predicted. Crime File 2.2 assesses this “Crime Dip.” In explaining the decline in crime in New York City from 1990 to 2010, Zimring (2006) indicates that crime in the city dropped twice as much as anywhere else in the United States, with burglary, auto theft, and robbery going down 30 percent more than in other cities. Crime came down more than 80 percent in New York City, with a virtual ending of open drug markets and killings. Emphasizing “harm reduction,” the war on drug violence achieved its ends without winning a war on drugs. As he explains it, the lesson learned is that up to 75 percent of the crime dip can be achieved with relatively superficial changes in the character of urban life (Zimring, 2006). The declines did not require major changes in the social or structural environments, but smaller shifts in policy. According to Zimring (2010), some lessons learned from the crime decline in New York City included the following: •• Street policing was successful in reducing crime. •• Effective crime control did not require mass incarceration. •• The war on drug violence could be won without winning the war on drugs. Zimring indicates that while street policing as a crime fighter was regarded as a myth in the social sciences 25 years ago, it has a greater impact on crime than believed. New York City had actually dropped its level of jailing FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 33 and incarceration by about 11,000 between 1990 and 2009. The New York Police Department (NYPD) had destroyed public drug markets during this period. Drug killings were down 90 percent without ending illegal drug use. Another interesting candidate for the decline in crime is attributed to local and federal efforts decades earlier to reduce exposure to lead poisoning. Fewer children growing up in lead-infested areas yields less brain damage and less crime. Retired NYPD captain John Eterno and John Jay College professor Eli Silverman in The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation (2012) maintain that it was an open secret that crime statistics in New York were being manipulated (Francescani, 2012). An NYPD whistle-blower was harassed for reporting that his precinct systematically underreported crime. He claimed that felonies were downgraded, crime reports never filed, and that victims were discouraged from filing reports. Eterno and Silverman interviewed 400 retired NYPD captains. Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies Official crime statistics published by national governments have their uses; however, criminologists would be remiss in their duty as scholars and scientists if they were to restrict their inquiries and sources of statistics to data gathered for administrative purposes by government bodies. In some totalitarian regimes, for instance, there would be nothing to study, since the official government ideology might simply hold that there is no crime in the people’s paradise. Even in open societies, official statistics seldom cover crimes of the elite. Fortunately, criminologists have at their disposal a veritable arsenal of techniques whose application is limited only by the researcher’s imagination and skill. Figure 2.3 offers a model or paradigm (schema) with which to consider and compare the alternative datagathering strategies that can be employed in criminal justice and criminological research. As an illustrative device, Figure 2.3 is an attempt to broadly describe the relative advantages and disadvantages of the different data-gathering strategies. The model suggests that, as we move up the list of techniques or vertical arrows to experiments, we tend to obtain quantitative measurement (which lends itself to sophisticated statistical treatment), greater control over other factors that may interfere with one’s findings, and increased internal validity (or accuracy in being certain that the variable[s] assumed to be responsible for one’s findings are indeed the causal agent[s])—but the result is artificiality. The latter point suggests that, as a result of controlling for error, the researcher may have created an antiseptic or atypical group or situation that no longer resembles the “real world” that one is attempting to describe. Generally, as one proceeds down the vertical arrows or list of techniques, the methodology employed becomes more qualitative. Qualitative techniques involve less commitment to quantitative measurement on the part of the researcher, more engagement with field and observational strategies, and less direct means of obtaining information. Generally, as one moves down the list, one has less control over manipulating the research setting and rival causal factors. Such procedures, however, increase external validity (the ability to generalize to larger populations) as well as present the opportunity to study subjects in more natural settings. Criminologists, like other researchers, tend to favor their own particular methods of data gathering; this is to FIGURE 2.3     Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies Quantitative Greater Control Internal Validity Artificial Experiments Social Surveys Participant Observation Case Studies/Life History Methods Unobtrusive Measures Qualitative Less Control External Validity Natural Source: Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology, 3rd ed., by F. E. Hagan (New York: Macmillan, 1993) p. 101. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 34 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY be expected. At times, however, academic battles break out among those who claim that their preferred method contains some inherent superiority over other procedures. Such methodological narcissism (or methodologism) is a fanatical adherence to a particular research method, often at the expense of a concern for substance (Bayley, 1978; Martinson, 1979; “Martinson Attacks His Own Earlier Work,” 1978, p. 4). This “methods for methods’ sake” orientation ignores the fact that methodology is not an end in itself but a means to an end—the development of criminological knowledge. It is more useful to permit the subject to dictate the proper methodology than to assert that, unless a subject lends itself to deployment of one’s favorite method, it is not worthy of study. Experiments in Criminology The experiment is the lodestone or benchmark for comparison with all other research methods. It is the most effective means of controlling for error or rival factors before the fact through the very design of the study (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). While there are myriad variations of the experiment, the point of departure or prototype is the classic experimental design. The classic experimental design contains three key elements: 1. Equivalence 2. Pretests and posttests 3. Experimental and control groups Basically, equivalence means the assignment of subjects to experimental and control groups in such a manner that they are assumed to be alike in all major respects. This can be done either through random assignment (where each subject has an equal probability of appearing in either group) or through matching (a procedure in which subjects with similar age, sex, and other characteristics exhibited by the experimental group are recruited for the control group). The experimental group is to receive the treatment (X), while the control group will receive no treatment but will be observed in order to compare it with the experimental group. Both groups are given pretests (pre-observations in order to note conditions that exist prior to treatment) designated as 01, or observation time 1, and posttests, or observations after the experimental treatment (X) has taken place. The logic of the experiment assumes that, since both groups were equivalent in the pretest period, any differences in the posttest observation must be due to the fact that one group received a particular treatment and the other did not. Increasingly, such experiments are being utilized in order to inform public policy decision making. Some Examples of Experiments in Criminology Candid Camera Video Link 2.5 Watch a video on Scared Straight programs. Before the era of having video cameras in nearly every business, an experiment with cameras showed great promise. In an attempt to increase both the apprehension and the conviction rates of robbers of commercial establishments, the Seattle Police Department created a field experiment using high-risk establishments, some of which were designated as the experimental group, others as the control group. The treatment for the experimental group involved installation of special hidden cameras that could be triggered during a holdup by a clerk pulling a “trip” bill from the cash drawer; prints of the photograph of the robber would be made available immediately. A posttest of the two types of sites found 55 percent of robberies in the experimental group cleared by arrest compared to 25 percent for control locations. (Clearance indicates that suspects have been arrested, charged, and turned over to the court for prosecution or that the police consider further investigation unnecessary.) While 48 percent of the robbers at camera sites were convicted, only 19 percent of the control group brigands were found guilty (“Hidden Cameras Project,” 1978). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 35 Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology Scared Straight Much fanfare was raised in the United States in the late 1970s over a novel program intended to deter wayward juveniles from progression to more serious criminal activity by means of blunt, “heart-to-heart” talks in prison with specially selected inmates (see Photo 2.4). Portrayed in a film, Scared Straight, the initial Rahway, New Jersey, prison project was intended to counteract the glamorized image associated with criminal life. Although many jurisdictions rushed to imitate what appeared to be the latest panacea in corrections, further research suggested that this optimism was premature. An evaluation of the JOLT (Juvenile Offenders Learn Truth) program at the Jackson State Prison, Michigan, randomly assigned youths to experimental and control groups. Delinquency rates were measured 3 and 6 months afterward and found no significant differences between those who had attended the JOLT sessions (experimentals) and those who had not (controls; “Scared Straight Found Ineffective Again,” 1979). Evidence-Based Research Those who are impatient with or question the need for research in criminology or criminal justice often raise the questions of “So what?” or “Of what practical use are all of these research projects?” Perhaps in answer to such questions, in 1996 the U.S. Congress required the attorney general to provide a “comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness” of over $3 billion spent annually in Department of Justice grants that had been designed to assist state and local law enforcement and communities in preventing crime (see Figure 2.4). FIGURE 2.4     Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising In 1996 Congress required that the Attorney General and the National Institute of Justice evaluate the effectiveness of 500 funded programs in a manner that would be “independent in nature” and “employ rigorous and scientifically recognized standards and methodologies.” The Institute on Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland was contacted to undertake this task and to serve as a clearinghouse. It issued its report titled “Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising.” These evaluations are regularly updated; full reports or research in brief summaries can be downloaded from They can also be obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics Web site ( A few of the programs included in the list are the following: What Doesn’t Work: •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• Gun “buyback “ programs Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) Arrest of unemployed suspects for domestic assault Storefront police offices Correctional boot camps using traditional military basic training “Scared Straight” programs whereby minor juvenile offenders visit adult prisons Shock probation, shock parole Home detention with electronic monitoring Intensive supervision on parole or probation Residential programs for juvenile offenders using challenging experiences in rural settings What Works: •• For infants—frequent home visits by nurses and other professionals •• For delinquents and at-risk preadolescents—family therapy and parent training •• For schools: ¡ organizational development for innovation ¡ communication and reinforcement of consistent norms (Continued) Photo 2.4 “Scared Straight” programs were designed to expose delinquents to “heart-to-heart” talks with inmates with the aim of literally scaring them into becoming straight, or nondelinquent. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 36 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY (Continued) teaching of social competency skills coaching in “thinking skills” for high-risk youth For older male ex-offenders—vocational training Extra police patrols for high-crime “hot spots” For high-risk offenders: ¡ monitoring by specialized police units ¡ incarceration For employed, domestic abusers—arrest For convicted offenders—rehabilitation programs with risk-focused treatments For drug-using offenders in prison—therapeutic community treatment programs ¡ ¡ •• •• •• •• •• •• What’s Promising: •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• Proactive drunk-driving arrests with breath testing Police showing greater respect to arrested offenders (may reduce repeat offending) Higher number of police officers in cities (may reduce crime generally) Gang monitoring by community workers and probation and police officers Community monitoring by Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America (may prevent drug abuse) Community-based after-school recreation programs Battered women’s shelters Job Corps residential training for at-risk youth Prison-based vocational education programs Two clerks on duty in already robbed convenience stores Metal detectors Proactive arrest for carrying concealed weapons (may reduce gun crime) Drug courts Drug treatment in jails followed by urine testing Intensive supervision and aftercare of juvenile offenders None of these evaluations as “working” or “not working” is final; constant replication (repeated experiments) and reevaluation is required, but a persistent, independent, scientific program of evaluation will go a long way in replacing what we think works or what doesn’t with what actually does work. Sources: Irvin Waller and Brandon Welsh (1998). Reducing Crime in Harnessing International Best Practice. NIJ Journal, October, pp. 26–32; and Lawrence Sherman et al. (1998). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising? NIJ Research in Brief, July. See also: Anthony J. Petrosino et al. (2003, June). Toward Evidence-Based Criminology and Criminal Justice: Systematic Reviews and the Campbell Collaboration, and the Crime and Justice Group. International Journal of Comparative Criminology, 3, 142–161; and Sharon Mihalic et al. (2004). Blueprints for Violence Prevention Report. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. NCJ 204274, July. Web Sources: National Institute of Justice:; Justice Information Center:; University of Maryland preventing crime project:; International data on what works: Web Research Project Using one of the titles of the programs described above (e.g., boot camps or drug courts) find an article that describes one of these programs and whether the program worked or not. Visit and examine a specific program. Does this program work, show promise of working, or not work? Audio Link 2.2 Listen to a discussion about the allure of crime. Evidence-based research is an attempt to base knowledge and practice on well-researched evidence. The “what works” in criminology and criminal justice approach utilized by the Department of Justice is based on the assumption that it makes little sense to continue to invest in programs that do not work. Why not find out which programs do work or are promising and put our scarce funding into those programs? This evidencebased research employs a problem-solving approach using local, national, and international evidence on what works ( FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology The most ambitious effort in this regard is the Campbell Collaboration (C2). Named in honor of the late Donald Campbell, a pioneer in research design, the purpose of the organization is to facilitate the preparation, maintenance, and accessibility of systematic program reviews. In support of this, the group keeps a register of systematic studies. C2 was based on the highly successful Cochrane Collaboration in health care that attempted to address the lack of evidence guiding medical and health care practices. Chaired by David Farrington at Cambridge University, during one year C2 solicited program reviews in 25 areas including boot camps, street lighting, restorative justice, child skills training, and hot spots policing. The Campbell Collaboration intends to produce the best evidence on what works to inform decision makers, researchers, and the general public. “Best evidence” means systematic reviews that are rigorous, updated in light of new studies and criticisms, relevant and accessible to end users, cover studies published worldwide, and are open to criticism and comment (Petrosino, Boruch, Farrington, Sherman, & Weisburd, 2003). Another example of a comprehensive effort to evaluate successful programs is the “Blueprints for Violence Prevention” program at the University of Colorado (Mihalic, Fagan, Irwin, Ballard, & Elliott, 2004). Crime File 2.3 gives an account of, which represents the latest effort in the progression of attempting to keep track of “what works.” 37 Audio Link 2.3 Listen to a discussion about crime scene investigations. Crime File 2.3 Research at the Office of Justice Programs In 2010, the Office of Justice Programs established as a central clearinghouse to update what works in criminal justice, juvenile justice and crime, and victim services. Programs are rated as follows: •• Effective •• Promising •• No effects Effective or successful programs are described as “evidence-based,” “smart on crime” approaches. Included in this type of approach is an attempt to have a broad examination of the evidence. The attempt is to summarize the findings and ultimately integrate them into practice. All approved Lead Researchers and Study Reviewers are certified, have undergone training, and have extensive experience with the subject matter as well as research methodology experience. Sources: Author created;, Office of Justice Programs, Surveys Most readers are familiar with the use of surveys in public opinion polls, voting-prediction studies, and marketing research. Surveys are also used in criminology, particularly in analyzing victimization, self-reported crime, public ratings of crime seriousness, measurements of fear of crime, and attitudes toward the police and the criminal justice system. The principal methods employed in gathering data for surveys are variations of questionnaires, interviews, or telephone surveys. Just as experiments control for error and rival causal factors before the fact by the very design of the study, survey researchers attempt to control for these factors after the fact through the use of statistical procedures. Victim Surveys One of the major shortcomings of such official police statistics as the UCR is that they fail to account for undiscovered or unreported crime; the “dark figure of crime” is the phrase early European criminologists used to refer to offenses that escape official notice. The assumption was that for every crime that came to the attention of authorities, there were an unspecified number of undiscovered crimes—“the dark figure.” FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 38 Video Link 2.6 View a video about the dark figure of crime. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Victim surveys are specifically designed to record an estimate of claimed victimizations by a representative sample of the population. One major finding, beginning with the U.S. surveys of the late 1960s, was that overall about twice as much crime was reported to interviewers as appeared in official police records. National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) Beginning in 1972, the National Crime Surveys were conducted. The NCS (now called the National Crime Victimization Survey [NCVS]) consisted of the Central City Surveys and the National Crime Panel Surveys. The Central City Surveys were essentially cross-sectional studies of households and commercial establishments in selected cities. Initially, probability samples of approximately 10,000 households and 1,000 to 5,000 commercial establishments were surveyed in 26 central cities. The great expense of such surveys in each city led to their discontinuance. The National Crime Panels employed a sophisticated probability sample of housing units and businesses throughout the United States. In contrast to the Central City Surveys, which were cross-sectional or studies of one time only, the panels were longitudinal in nature, that is, studies over time of a particular group. This enabled bounding of victim reports or the use of pretests in order to have a reference point for the survey reporting period. The initial interview acted as a boundary or time period benchmark with which to compare future reported victimizations. Consisting of about 50,000 households to be interviewed every 6 months and 15,000 (later upped to 50,000) businesses, the national panels repeated the interviews twice a year in order to achieve the bounding feature previously described. Each housing unit remained in the sample for 3 years, while every 6 months a subsample of 10,000 was rotated out of the sample and replaced by a new group. While the initial findings were heralded at the time as the first accurate statistics on crime, further analysis suggests that this conclusion may have been prematurely optimistic. Just as the UCR was found to have shortcomings, so any measure of crime, including victim surveys, can be found wanting in some respects. Crime File 2.4 provides examples of the types of questions asked in the NCVS. Crime File 2.4 Were You a Victim of Crime? Household Screen Questions 38. Now I’d like to ask some questions about crime. They refer only to the last 6 months: between ____, 20____ and ____, 20 ____. During the last 6 months, did anyone break into or somehow illegally get into your (apartment/home), garage, or another building on your property? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No 39. Other than the incident(s) just mentioned, did you find a door jimmied, a lock forced, or any other signs of an ATTEMPTED break-in? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No 40. Was anything at all stolen that is kept outside your home or happened to be left out, such as a bicycle, a garden hose, or lawn furniture (other than any incidents already mentioned)? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No 41. Did anyone take something belonging to you or to any member of this household, from a place where you or they were temporarily staying, such as a friend’s or relative’s home, a hotel or motel, or a vacation home? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 42. How many DIFFERENT motor vehicles (cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc.) were owned by you or any other member of this household during the last 6 months? None: Skip to 45 1 2 3 4 or more 43. Did anyone steal, TRY to steal, or use (it/any of them) without permission? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No Did anyone steal or TRY to steal parts attached to (it/any of them), such as a battery, hubcaps, tape-deck, etc.? Yes: How many times? _____________________________ No Source: National Crime Victimization Survey screening instrument (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1987). Web Research Project Using a Web browser, search the term “victims.” What issues exist in the current literature regarding victims of crime? Issues and Cautions in Studying Victim Data Some possible problems in victim surveys include, but are not limited to, the expense of compiling large samples, false or mistaken reports, memory failure or decay, telescoping of events, sampling bias, over- or underreporting, interviewer effects, and coding and mechanical errors. 1. While large-scale public opinion polls such as those by Gallup or Roper can be conducted with sample sizes of less than 1,000, the rarity of some types of victimization, such as rape, requires large samples in order to turn up a few victims. Hundreds may need to be surveyed in order to find one victim. 2. A parallel could be drawn with attempting to survey lottery winners on the basis of a sample of the general population. Many would have to be canvassed before turning up only a few winners. If the chances of winning the lottery were 1 in a million, in order to discover one winner by chance, the researcher would have to interview 1 million players. 3. False or mistaken reports can result in error. Levine (1976), for example, found inaccuracies in respondent reports regarding their voting behavior, finances, academic performance, business practices, and even sexual activity. Should we assume greater precision in victim reports? 4. Memory failure or decay tends to increase with the distance between the actual time of the event and the interview concerning the event (Panel for the Evaluation of Crime Surveys, 1976, p. 21). 5. Telescoping of events, a type of memory misfire, involves the moving of events that took place in a different time period (for example, before the reference period) into the time studied. A victimization of 2 years ago is mistakenly assumed to have occurred this past year. Subjects may even unconsciously telescope events in order to please interviewers (Biderman et al., 1967). Such demand characteristics or over-agreeability on the part of respondents can certainly bias victim studies. 6. Sampling bias may produce an under-numeration of the young, males, and minorities. These very groups that tend to be undercounted by the U.S. Census are also more heavily victimized. 7. Overreporting in victim surveys generally involves subjects reporting incidents to interviewers that they normally would view as too trivial or unimportant to call for police involvement. Much of the dark figure of crime consists of minor property crime, much of which could be considered unfounded by police. 39 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 40 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Controlling for Error in Victim Surveys Some ways of controlling for error in victim surveys include, but are not limited to, the use of panels and bounding of target groups, evaluations of coding and other sources of human or mechanical error in data processing, reverse record checks of known groups, reinterviews of the same group, and interviews with significant others. Panels (longitudinal studies of the same group) were discussed previously as a means of bounding (establishing the time period during which events were recalled as having taken place), thus controlling for forward telescoping (the tendency to move prior incidents into the time frame being studied). Reinterviews of the same group in the National Crime Panel enable a tracking of reported crime incidents and the checking of responses with significant others (those who know the respondent well). The primary benefit of victim surveys is that they provide us with another independent measure of crime, separate from official statistics. Neither official statistics nor victim surveys begin to tap the extent of occupational, corporate, and public order crime; in that regard, both measures seriously underestimate the extent of crime. Redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey Criticisms of the NCVS, particularly its inability to gather accurate information regarding sexual assaults and domestic violence, prompted development of improved methodology that enhanced the ability of respondents to recall events. The survey changes increased the number of rapes and aggravated and simple assaults reported. The redesigned instrument also gathered information on other victimizations, such as non-rape sexual assault and unwanted or coerced sexual contact, for the first time. Improvements in technology and survey methodology were incorporated into the new design (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994). An analysis of available data indicates that we have only a limited idea of the proportion of crime that is committed by any category of individuals or groups in a particular society. This is certainly the case if we rely entirely on official statistics for our discussions. Self-Report Measures of Crime Journal Article Link 2.1 Read an article regarding self-reported copycat crime. As with victim surveys, self-report measures attempt to provide an alternative to official statistics in measuring the extent of crime in a society (Menard, 1987). Criminologists ask individuals, as in the illustration in Crime File 2.5, whether they have committed various crimes or delinquent acts. This may be achieved through anonymous questionnaires or surveys in which the respondent is identifiable that can be validated by later interviews or police records. In addition, signed instruments that can be checked against official records, validation through later interviews or threats of a polygraph (lie detector) test, and interviews alone, as well as interviews that are then checked against official records, may be used (Nettler, 1978, pp. 97–113). Crime File 2.5 Self-Reported Delinquency Items Please indicate if you have ever done the following: 1. Stolen items of little value (less than $50). 2. Stolen items of great value ($50 or more). 3. Destroyed the property of others. 4. Used someone’s vehicle without his or her permission. 5. Hit or physically attacked someone. 6. Been truant from school. 7. Consumed alcoholic beverages. 8. Used illegal drugs such as marijuana, heroin, or cocaine. 9. Indecently sexually exposed yourself in public. 10. Been paid for having sexual relations. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 41 Most self-report surveys conducted in the United States have been of “captive audiences,” such as school or college populations (Glaser, 1978, p. 72; Hood & Sparks, 1971, p. 19). Few studies have been done of the adult population. One of the earliest, by Wallerstein and Wyle (1947), found that 99 percent of their adult sample had committed at least one offense. Some of the percentages of admission for males and females, respectively, were as follows: larceny—89 and 83 percent; indecency—77 and 74 percent; assault—49 and 5 percent; grand larceny (except auto)—13 and 11 percent; and tax evasion—57 and 40 percent. These figures suggest a remarkable level of criminality on the part of an assumed noncriminal population. Controlling for Error in Self-Report Surveys Reliance on self-reported data as a measure of crime commission poses a major question with respect to the relationship between claimed behavior and actual behavior. Nettler states (1978) that “asking people questions about their behavior is a poor way of observing it” (p. 107). If people are inaccurate in reporting other aspects of their behavior, such as voting, medical treatment, and the like, it may be questionable to assume any greater accuracy in admitting deviant behavior. Some problems with self-report studies include possibly inaccurate reports, the use of poor or inconsistent instruments, deficient research design, and poor choice of subjects. While mistaken or inaccurate reports may impinge on such surveys, Hood and Sparks (1971) question the number of trivial offenses that are labeled delinquent in the United States and are included in such studies. They point out that in Europe, delinquency is a synonym for crime committed by the young. While small and unrepresentative samples are problematic, self-report surveys are also affected by possible lying, poor memory, and telescoping. A particularly innovative program for checking self-reports was ADAM (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring program), formerly the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice. Groups of arrestees are asked questions regarding their drug-use behavior and then are asked to voluntarily provide urine specimens that can be tested for drug use. Besides providing an ingenious way of estimating drug use among criminal populations, the program provided a barometer for the impact of various policies on drug usage. ADAM provided state and local drug policy makers, courts, law enforcement agencies, treatment providers, and prevention specialists with information that can be used to conduct local research and evaluation and to inform local policy decisions (National Institute of Justice [NIJ], 2003). In 1998, NIJ launched International ADAM, which involved a partnership among criminal justice agencies in many countries, providing a global assessment of drug use. In conclusion, while self-report surveys have certain problems, they—like victim studies—gave us an independent measure of crime commission. Unfortunately, the program was discontinued by the George W. Bush administration due to budget cuts in 2004. Participant Observation Participant observation involves a variety of strategies in which the researcher studies or observes a group through varying degrees of participation in the activities of that group. Ned Polsky’s classic Hustlers, Beats, and Others (1967) presents both a moving statement on the need for deployment of this strategy and sound advice in this regard. Participant Observation of Criminals Contrary to the advice given at one time in most criminology textbooks (Sutherland & Cressey, 1960), uncaught criminals can be studied in the field. Biologists have long noted that gorillas in a zoo act differently from gorillas in their natural habitat. It is imperative that criminologists break their habit of only studying the confined, slower, less intelligent, lower-class criminal. Polsky (1967), in advocating field studies of criminals, states, Until the criminologist learns to suspend his personal distaste for the values and lifestyles of the untamed savages, until he goes out in the field to the cannibals and headhunters and observes them without trying either to civilize them or turn them over to colonial officials, he will be only a veranda anthropologist. That is, he will be only a jailhouse or courthouse sociologist, unable to produce anything like a genuinely scientific picture of crime. (p. 147) One of the reasons often given for discouraging such research is the belief that the researcher must pretend to be part of the criminal world. In fact, such a strategy would be highly inadvisable, not to mention unworkable FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 42 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY and dangerous. Polsky suggests that the distance between criminal and conventional types is not as wide as many would suggest and that the difficulty in gaining access to such subjects is highly exaggerated. There are, of course, problems in studying criminals au naturel. The researcher must realize that he or she is more of an intruder than would be the case in a prison setting. Unincarcerated criminals have more to lose than those already in jail do. And on their own turf, criminals are freer to put the researcher down or to refuse to be observed. Having successfully employed participant observation in studying uncaught pool hustlers, organized criminals, and drug addicts, Polsky (1967) offers some sage advice regarding procedures to employ in studying criminals in the field: •• Avoid using gadgets such as tape recorders, questionnaires, and the like. Construct field notes later, after leaving the scene for the day. •• Keep your eyes and ears open, but keep your mouth shut. •• Learn the argot, the specialized language or jargon of a group, but don’t overuse it. •• You can often gain entry into the setting through common recreational interests, for example, card games, the track, or poolrooms. •• Do not pretend to be one of them. As soon as practicable, make them aware of your purposes. (pp. 117–149) Finally, Polsky (1967) raises a number of related issues to be considered in field studies of criminals. In some ways, researchers may be breaking the law or be considered accessories to the fact. Honoring reciprocity with respondents, observers must be prepared to be “stand-up guys” under police questioning. Although their actual legal status is unclear, social researchers in many cases have no guaranteed right to confidentiality or privileged information and are vulnerable to subpoena. Evaluation of the Method of Participant Observation Journal Article Link 2.2 Read an article about participant observation. Participant observation is an excellent procedure for studying little-understood groups. Some examples of participant observation studies with criminological ramifications have been Whyte’s Street Corner Society (1943/1955); Polsky’s Hustlers, Beats, and Others (1967); Yablonsky’s Synanon (1965) and The Violent Gang (1962); Ianni’s A Family Business (1972); Albini’s (1986) study of the Guardian Angels; and Humphreys’ Tearoom Trade (1970). In addition, Eleanor Miller (1986) did field research interviewing 64 prostitutes in Milwaukee; Marquart (1986) worked as a prison guard; Hopper (1991) studied outlaw motorcycle gangs; and Sanchez-Jankowski (1991) spent 10 years living with and studying street gangs in Los Angeles, Boston, and New York. The usefulness of such field studies in exploring settings that would not readily lend themselves to quantitative analysis is illustrated by some studies. Philipe Bourgois, author of In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio (1995), spent the 5 years from 1985 to 1990 in East Harlem studying young Puerto Rican men on street corners and in crack houses, bars, and homes. Elijah Anderson’s A Place on the Corner (1981) took place in the 1970s and reported on Chicago ghetto life from Jelly’s, a bar and liquor store that he studied for over 3 years. Anderson’s Streetwise (1990) describes two other Philadelphia neighborhoods. Mark Hamm’s American Skinheads (1993) reports on his field study of neo-Nazi hate groups, which included communications with skinheads via the WAR (White Aryan Resistance) website. Jim Aho in This Thing of Darkness (1994) conducted a participant observation study of Idaho Christian Patriots until he defined such involvement as increasingly too dangerous. J. M. Miller and Tewksbury in Extreme Methods: Innovative Approaches to Social Science Research (2000) and Ferrell, Hamm, and Adler in Ethnography at the Edge: Crime, Deviance, and Field Research (1998) provide very interesting collections of articles on difficult-to-access deviant groups that require more innovative, and sometimes controversial, means of investigation. The major advantages of participant observation relate to the qualitative detail that it can produce. Using this sensitizing or verstehen (from the German meaning “to understand”) strategy, the researcher is less influenced by prejudgments. The technique is very flexible and less artificial, and enables the investigator to observe subjects in their natural environment. Such ethnographic methods provide insider accounts and acquaint students with the perspectives of the subjects (Cromwell, 1996). This technique has produced some of the most exciting and enthralling literature in the field, rivaling even some of the best of modern fiction. Examples from this genre will be presented in subsequent chapters. Some potential disadvantages of participant observation include the extremely time-consuming nature of the technique; it may exact high demands on the personal life of the observer (J. T. Carey, 1972). The observer faces the dual dangers of over-identification with, or aversion FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 43 to, the group being studied, often testing to the limits the researcher’s commitment to objectivity. In addition to possible observer bias and the challenge of making sense of a mass of nonquantitative data, participant observation can pose major ethical dilemmas. Life History and Case Studies A classic illustration of the use of case study and life history in criminology was Edwin Sutherland’s The Professional Thief (1937), based on his interviews with an incarcerated professional thief given the pseudonym “Chic” Conwell. Like participant observation, case studies/life histories represent an interest in an in-depth close-up of only one or a few subjects in order to obtain a greater understanding or verstehen (Weber, 1949) that a more aggregate analysis might obscure. This method may employ diaries, letters, biographies, and autobiographies in order to attempt to capture a detailed view of either a unique or a representative subject. Some examples of the life history approach have been Chambliss’s Box Man (1975a), Klockars’ The Professional Fence (1974), Steffensmeier’s The Fence (1986), C. R. Shaw’s The Jack-Roller (1930), and Snodgrass’s The Jack-Roller at Seventy (1982). Darrell Steffensmeier and Jeffrey Ulmer (2006) updated Steffensmeier’s classic The Fence: In the Shadow of Two Worlds (1986) by presenting three decades in the life of Sam Goodman (pseudonym), a professional thief and fence. Their work was titled Confessions of a Dying Thief: Understanding Criminal Careers and Illegal Enterprises. The close relationship that developed between Steffensmeier and a dying Sam Goodman underlines the fact that research subjects and researchers become more than just observers and subjects. Crime File 2.6 Confessions of a Dying Thief Confessions of a Dying Thief: Understanding Criminal Careers and Illegal Enterprises, by Darrell Steffensmeier and Jeffrey Ulmer (2006), is in part a 20-year follow-up to Steffensmeier’s The Fence: In the Shadow of Two Worlds (1986), but it is more than this. It uses Sam Goodman’s ethnography to address important methodological and theoretical ideas. Goodman (a pseudonym) was a professional thief, and the authors attempt to use his life as a way of examining important issues in criminology. His life illustrates a subculture that is often ignored by contemporary criminologists and sociologists. Persistent criminals are not devi­ant in all aspects of their lives. Goodman’s biography does not support the life course/developmental theory of crime that does not account for the rewards and motives of criminal entrepreneurship. Goodman’s life challenges simplistic views of criminal opportunity. Confessions provides an in-depth life history and picture of the criminal underworld, as well as a look at criminal entrepreneurship more generally. The book is more than a case study, but a theory and methods book illustrated by a longitudinal case study. Sam’s story was constantly checked against theory and methods. It is reminiscent of earlier longitudinal, qualitative case studies such as Snodgrass’s The Jack-Roller at Seventy (1982), a follow-up to C. R. Shaw’s The Jack-Roller (1930), a study of Stanley (a mugger); and Gans’s The Urban Villagers (1962), a follow-up to Whyte’s Street Corner Society (1943/1955). Steffensmeier and Ullmer (2006) attempt to correct for the fact that the prison samples used in most existing studies fail to represent successful offenders for whom crime is very rewarding. They feel that the field of criminology has become dominated by theories on petty criminals and that the “life course” perspective is not only not a new perspective, but is one that ignores a portion of chronic serious offending. They criticize writers such as Moffitt (1999), who they claim inaccurately sees the cause of persistent criminality as biological inferiority and inherited differences. The relationship between Steffensmeier and Goodman obviously was far more than one of researcher and subject and provides a vivid picture of the world of professional crime. Sources: Much of this crime file is drawn from Frank Hagan’s remarks at “The Author Meets the Critics” session of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences meetings in Los Angeles, March 2006, on the occasion of Confessions of a Dying Thief receiving the Hindelang Award for Best Book of the Year; The Fence: In the Shadow of Two Worlds, by D. Steffensmeier (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1986); Confessions of a Dying Thief, by D. Steffensmeier and J. Ulmer (Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007); The Jackroller at Seventy: A Fifty Year Follow-up, by J. Snodgrass (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1982); The Jackroller, by C. Shaw (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1930); The Urban Villagers, by H. Gans (New York: The Free Press, 1962); Street Corner Society, W. F. Whyte, Jr. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943/1955); “Adolescent Limited and Life Course Persistent Anti-Social Behavior: A Developmental Theory,” by T. E. Moffitt, in Crime and Criminality, edited by Frank Scarpitti and Anne Nielsen (Los Angeles: Roxbury, 1999, pp. 206–231). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 44 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Unobtrusive Measures Unobtrusive measures are clandestine, secretive, or nonreactive methods of gathering data (Webb, Campbell, & Schwartz, 1981). Such techniques attempt to avoid reactivity, the tendency of subjects to behave differently when they are aware that they are being studied. This certainly has been a problem in much prison research, where the question might be asked whether research volunteers are indeed volunteers. Major types of unobtrusive methods include physical trace analysis; the use of existing records such as archives, available data, and autobiographies; and simple and disguised observation, as well as simulation. Physical trace analysis involves studying deposits, accretion of matter, and other remains of human activity, while archival and existing records contain information that may be useful in providing historical overviews of criminological issues. Crime File 2.7 Useful Sources for Criminological Research Selected Journals American Journal of Criminal Justice American Journal of Sociology American Sociological Review Crime and Delinquency Criminal Justice Policy Review Criminal Justice Review Criminology Federal Probation Journal of Criminal Justice Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency Justice Quarterly Law and Society Review NIJ Reports Social Forces Social Problems Sociology and Social Research Victimology Abstracts/Indexes Crime and Delinquency Abstracts C J Abstracts (online) EbscoSelect College Edition (online) National Criminal Justice Reference Service New York Times Index Police Science Abstracts Psychological Abstracts Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature Social Science Index Sociological Abstracts This is only a small selection of available sources. Check the periodicals and reference sections of your college library for more. Web Research Project Using one of the abstract services above (hint: some are online), search for an article under the title “crime research.” What methods were used and what were some of the findings of this article? The uses of available data include procedures such as content analysis and secondary analysis. Content analysis refers to the systematic classification and study of the content of mass media, for example, newspapers, magazines, and the like. Secondary analysis consists of the reanalysis of data that were previously gathered for other purposes. The use of any of these types of data-gathering procedures is an excellent, cost-effective means of obtaining data, particularly in a period of growing respondent hostility to studies. In an interesting example of the imaginative use of existing data, criminologist John Laub discovered more than 60 boxes of dusty files in the subbasement of the Harvard Law School Library (Associated Press, 1994). These turned out to be the research files of Eleanor and Sheldon Glueck, who had been at Harvard from the 1920s to the 1970s. They had conducted one of the first longitudinal studies in criminology in which male juveniles were followed from age 14 until age 32, attempting to predict the cause of criminal behavior. In an example of secondary analysis, Laub computerized their data and analyzed it. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology In 2006, the author was attending a criminology conference in Los Angeles and staying at the Millennium Hotel. This storied facility once hosted the Academy Awards in the 1930s. Someone made the mistake of telling me that the place was haunted and that there was no second floor to the hotel because of a murder that took place there at one time. As an exercise in what could be called “paranormal criminology,” my curiosity was aroused. I pushed the second-floor button on the elevators and they proceeded to bypass the floor. Another tip indicated that a staircase behind the piano in the bar area could get you to that floor and sure enough I found it, but the second floor was sealed off with many warning signs indicating “Danger and High Voltage.” I mentioned this to a hotel employee, and he indicated that the hotel was the last place that the “Black Dahlia” was seen alive. Crime File 2.8 describes the Black Dahlia investigation using the files from the vault of the FBI Reading Room. Crime File 2.8 The Black Dahlia Murder Interested in the infamous unsolved murder of Elizabeth Short, a.k.a. the “Black Dahlia,” the 22-year-old Hollywood starlet who was brutally murdered in Los Angeles 60 years ago this January? Then we invite you to take a look at the case files posted on the FBI’s Freedom of Information Act website. If you don’t know the story, Short—dubbed “Black Dahlia” by the press for her rumored penchant for sheer black clothes and for a movie at that time—was found sliced clean in half at the waist by a mother walking her child in an L.A. neighborhood just before 11 a.m. on January 15, 1947. The body was just a few feet from the sidewalk and posed in the grass in such a way that the woman reportedly thought it was a mannequin at first. Despite the extensive mutilation and cuts on the body, there wasn’t a drop of blood at the scene, indicating Short had been killed elsewhere. An extensive manhunt followed, but the killer has never been identified. The FBI files don’t provide a comprehensive review of the ensuing investigation, of course, since the L.A. Police Department had jurisdiction. But you can find some interesting information, including insights into the FBI’s supporting role in the case. For example: You’ll learn how the FBI identified the victim as Elizabeth Short in Washington just 56 minutes after getting her blurred fingerprints via “Soundphoto” (a primitive fax machine used by news services) from Los Angeles. Short’s prints actually appeared twice in the FBI’s massive collection (104 million at the time)—first, because she had applied for a job as a clerk at the commissary of the Army’s Camp Cooke in California in January 1943; second, because she had been arrested by the Santa Barbara police for underage drinking seven months later. The FBI also had her “mug shot” in their files . . . and provided it to the press. They did not have a photo from her Army application as some accounts have claimed. What else you will find in the FBI’s online records: A variety of news clippings from the early days of the case; Copies of Short’s birth and death certificates (see Section 4); Various physical descriptions of Short at her death, including one that describes her as “white, female, twentytwo (sic), five ft. six, one eighteen lbs., hair light brown, died (sic) black, green eyes, bad teeth.” Results of records checks on potential subjects and interviews across the nation (although names are often blacked out); A request to search for a match to fingerprints found on an anonymous letter that may have been sent to authorities by the killer (in a tantalizing near-miss break in the case, the prints weren’t in FBI records); References to the extensive interference of the press in the case (they had arrived at the scene and taken pictures even before the police), including a comment by our Special Agent in Charge that “it is not possible for the investigators to have a confidential telephone conversation or even read mail without some news reporter looking it over to see if it relates to this case.” Based on early suspicions that the murderer may have had skills in dissection because the body was so cleanly cut and mutilated, a memo asking the FBI to check out a group of students at the University of Southern California Medical School; Letters received from private citizens claiming to know the culprit, including one who fingered a “Spanish fellow” with a tattoo and ended his missive with the confident “A word to the wise . . .” Source: Web Research Project Using a Web browser, search for an article under the title “crime research.” What methods were used, and what were some of the findings of this article? 45 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 46 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Photo 2.5 Researchers may set up simulated juries such as this to investigate the decision-making process. Observation requires the researcher to keep participation with subjects to a minimum while carefully recording their activities; in disguised observation, the investigator secretly studies groups by temporarily deceiving them as to his or her real purpose. For example, in order to study difficult subjects in the field, researchers have posed as “thieves and victims” (J. E. Stewart & Cannon, 1977), a “watch queen” (Humphreys, 1970), a “mental patient” (Caudill, 1958), “Black Panther supporters” (Heussenstamm, 1971), “a naive international tourist” (Feldman, 1968), and “a caretaker” (Sherif & Sherif, 1966), among other roles. Simulation entails research strategies that attempt to mimic or imitate a more complex social reality. For example, since actual research into jury deliberations is prohibited, researchers may set up simulated juries by reenacting actual trial conditions in order to investigate the decision-making process (see Photo 2.5). While the obvious advantage of unobtrusive measures is that they are nonreactive—that is, they prevent subject awareness of being observed and ideally escape reactivity—such techniques also have the strength of being more natural and of evading the overreliance upon attitudinal data. By making use of data that have already been gathered, researchers are able to exercise great economies of time and expense. Too many researchers assume that doing a study must necessarily involve the expense and time of gathering new data when, in fact, vast storehouses of potential information exist right under their noses, as close as the nearest library and scattered throughout the records of public and private organizations. On the debit side of the ledger, unobtrusive methods raise potential problems of privacy invasion. Does a researcher have the right to observe the private behavior of individuals without their permission? Compounding this ethical issue is that criminological researchers have no state-recognized right to confidentiality or claim to privileged communication comparable to that in a doctor–patient relationship. In addition, nonreactive measures may yield atypical subjects, be time consuming, and be prone to observer bias. Crime File 2.9 describes the FBI Reading Room, where one may electronically peruse a variety of files made available through the Freedom of Information Act. Validity, Reliability, and Triangulation In the past, a number of researchers have been critical of the accuracy of much criminological research. Bailey (1966/1971), in a review of 100 correctional research studies, pointed out that much of the research was invalid, unreliable, and based on poor research design. In an analysis of the quality of publications in criminology, Wolfgang, Figlio, and Thornberry (1978) judged that the methodological sophistication was very poor and that a greater display of concern was needed for adequate research design and execution. Although later modifying his view and admitting to methodological narcissism, Martinson (1974; “Martinson,” 1978) blasted correctional research, claiming that in his review of the evidence of programs in corrections and their impact on recidivism, he found that “nothing works.” As mentioned earlier in this chapter, methodological narcissism refers to the belief that one’s favorite method is the only way to do research and all other methods are inferior. What is to be said of this sad state of affairs? If the data regarding “what is” with respect to crime are defective, then what might we expect of the theories that are based upon these data? Fortunately, criminologists have plenty of methodological company from economists, psychiatrists, and meteorologists, to mention just a few. The problem of imprecise measurement is not unique to the field of criminology and, furthermore, is not an insoluble one. Validity concerns accuracy of measurement. It asks the question, “Does my measuring instrument in fact measure what it claims to measure?” or “Is it a true and accurate measure of the subject in question?” Reliability, on the other hand, involves the consistency or stability of measurement. If repeated measures were FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology Crime File 2.9 The FBI Reading Room What do Jackie Kennedy, the Beatles, Albert Einstein, Gracie Allen, Thurgood Marshall, and Walter Winchell have in common? Give up? They are all part of historical FBI records, though for a variety of reasons. One had a background investigation for government service. One received extortion threats. One had open communist affiliations. One needed security for a family trip abroad. One actively helped FBI investigations. One tried to smuggle jewelry into the United States. And not necessarily in that order. Interested in all the details? Just go to the Electronic Reading Room at the FBI’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) website. These files include some of the 50+ new additions to the site, posted there for researchers interested in federal records on everything from Alcoholics Anonymous to UFOs. Why are we releasing all these records? It’s the law. Following passage of the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, and some amendments to them, the FBI (along with every other federal agency) began disclosing its records, upon written request, on a case-by-case basis, only blacking out information cited in the laws’ nine exemptions and three exclusions, which are largely designed to protect national and economic security and to protect the privacy of persons who appear in FBI records. How many requests are we talking about? Hundreds of thousands—and still counting. How many pages of records are we talking about? Don’t be shocked: millions—and still counting. After all, information is the business of law enforcement—writing down all those interviews and recording all that crime scene evidence. Why a Reading Room? It turned out that so many people were interested in the same files that it just made sense to put them in a physical library at Headquarters for researchers to visit and use freely. But it was tough on researchers, who had to travel all the way to Washington and compete with others for the few chairs in what was generally regarded as pretty cramped space. When the Web evolved, we couldn’t wait to begin digitizing documents to create the current Virtual Reading Room, for all the world to access. Good thing, too, as that also became law. Now we continue to expand it as resources allow. So pull up a chair, and decide where you want to start. Spies? Celebrities? Gangsters? Violent criminals? Historical figures, issues, and events? Or “Unusual phenomena”? We recently posted FBI records online in our Virtual Reading Room that concern 66 different people and organizations—an incredible assortment that paints a vivid picture of American history. Some were helping with investigations, some were under investigation, and some were just interested citizens writing in for one reason or another. There’s a one-page letter to J. Edgar Hoover about the Lizzie Borden murder case, there are 492 pages of documents on President Carter’s brother, Billy, and everything in between. Just in case you’re interested, here’s the lineup: Edward Abbey Bud Abbott Jane Addams Spiro T. Agnew Joseph Aiuppa Alcoholics Anonymous All American Anti-Imperialist League Gracie Allen Lillie Belle Allen Louis Allen Steve Allen American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) American Committee of Jewish Writers, Artists and Scientists American Deserters Committee Marian Anderson Elizabeth Arden Louis Armstrong Desi Arnaz Aryan Circle Aryan Nations Arthur Ashe Vincent Astor Gene Autry Arthur Barker Fred Barker Herman Barker Lloyd Barker “Ma” Barker Bernard Baruch The Beatles Melvin Belli Jack Benny Black September Sonny Bono Lizzie Borden Werner von Braun 47 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 48 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY William J. Brennan, Jr. “Pat” Brown Lennie Bruce “Lepke” Buchalter Pearl S. Buck George Burns James Cagney Taylor Caldwell Cab Calloway Eddie Cantor Frank Capone Truman Capote Stokely Carmichael Rudolph Carnap Rachel Carson Billy Carter Center for Constitutional Rights Wilt Chamberlain John Chancellor Chappaquiddick (Mary Jo Kopechne) Caryl Chessman American GI Forum American Nazi Party American Negro Labor Congress Albert Anastasia Jane Anderson George Jackson Brigade Chinese Workers Mutual Aid Association Christian Crusade Christian Identity Movement Source: Web Research Project Search the FBI “Freedom of Information Act” (FOIA) files, and locate a group or individual that was the subject of investigation. What do you conclude as a result of your perusal of these files? made of the same entity, would stable and uniform measures ensue? Obviously, validity is a more crucial issue than reliability; if a measurement is inaccurate, the consistency of inaccuracy becomes a moot question. The problem of inadequate methods in criminology arises not because of the inherent shortcomings of any particular method, but because a given method is used alone. It is foolhardy to concentrate on the insufficiencies, the reliability, or the validity of any one concept, measured at one time using one measure. Triangulation involves the use of multiple methods in measuring the same entity. It is similar to the notion of corroborating evidence in law; if different measures of the same concept produce convergence or similar results, then we have greater confidence in the validity of an observation or finding. Sanders in The Sociologist as Detective (1976) makes clever use of Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional sleuth Sherlock Holmes as a means of illustrating the notion of triangulation. Holmes, in attempting to answer the question, “Whodunit?” employed multiple methods (triangulation) like those a social scientist might employ. In attempting to discover “who killed the lord of the manor,” Holmes observed carefully, attempted reenactment of the crime (simulation), questioned suspects and witnesses, and carefully collected and evaluated the physical evidence at the crime scene. He collected some data through direct questioning, other data through astute observation. “Did the family dog bark the evening of the suspected murder?” If not, perhaps the murderer was a family member or friend. “Did any of the questioned suspects develop a nervous tic?” “Were there footprints or clues?” By combining these various methods, Holmes was able to make a reasonable guess as to which hypotheses to reject or accept (see also Truzzi, 1976). This chapter has exposed the reader to a variety of methods that criminologists use in obtaining information on the nature of crime and criminals. The outcomes or findings that result from the application of these methods will be presented in forthcoming chapters. It is hoped that the reader has been alerted to viewing this material with a critical methodological eye, carefully weighing the sources of evidence for the materials presented. For more detail on research methods, see Hagan (2013). Summary Theory and methodology are the two critical features of any discipline, including criminology. Theory is an attempt to provide plausible explanations of reality and addresses the question why. Method (methodology) FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology involves procedures for the collection and analysis of accurate data or facts and is concerned with the issue of what is. The research enterprise of criminology involves certain basic procedures. Objectivity, a commitment to a “value-free,” nonbiased approach to the subject matter, is an essential tenet of research. Despite conflicting roles, the criminologist’s primary role is that of scientist. Some general principles of ethical conduct in criminology include that the researcher should avoid harmful procedures, honor commitments and reciprocity, exercise objectivity and integrity, and protect the privacy of subjects, as well as maintain confidentiality. The process of methodological thinking was illustrated by means of the research question “Who is criminal?” Until recently, the primary source of information regarding crime statistics has been official police statistics, which represent crimes recorded by police. The Uniform Crime Report (UCR) presents such statistics for the United States. However, such statistics fail to account for unrecorded crime, the “dark figure of crime.” The UCR “crime index” from which the crime rate is calculated consists of Part I crimes: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Researchers should be cognizant of shortcomings of official data such as the UCR. The redesigned UCR (NIBRS, National Incident-Based Reporting System) is an attempt to improve the system. Other alternative measures of crime and criminal activity include crime seriousness measures, which attempt to provide a weighted index of crime. Alternative data-gathering strategies include experiments, social surveys, participant observation, case studies/life history methods, and unobtrusive methods. Each possesses relative strengths and weaknesses vis-à-vis the others with respect to quantitative/qualitative control, internal/ external validity, and degrees of artificiality/naturalness. A key point is that, contrary to methodological narcissism (fanatical adherence to one’s favorite method), no one method has any inherent superiority over any other. Methodology is a tool and not an end in itself. For each method, the text provides descriptions as well as examples of the method’s application in criminological research. For instance, victim surveys are a critical alternative measure of criminality. Similarly, self-report surveys are a useful means of tapping hidden criminality. The basic strategy of participant observation (field studies), life histories, and case studies in criminology is delineated. A particularly moving pitch for the need for such studies emerges from Ned Polsky’s research. Unobtrusive (nonreactive) methods are a cost-effective and neglected means of obtaining data. These include techniques such as physical trace analysis, use of archives/ existing data (including content and secondary analysis), and autobiographies. Other procedures include simple and disguised observation and simulation. Much of the criticism of criminological research centers on the validity (accuracy) and reliability (consistency/ stability) of the methodology that has been employed. Triangulation (the use of multiple methods) is proposed as the logical path to resolve this issue. Criminology on the Web Log on to the Web-based student study site at author-created podcasts, eFlashcards, quizzes, and more. KEY CONCEPTS Campbell Collaboration Case Study Classic Experimental Design Code of Ethics (for Research) Confidentiality Crime Index Crime Rate Dark Figure of Crime Ethical Conduct in Research Evidence-Based Research Experiments Index Crimes Life History Methodological Narcissism Methodology (Methods) National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) National Incident-Based Recording System (NIBRS) Objectivity Operationalization Part I Crimes Part II Crimes Participant Observation Reciprocity Reliability Self-Reports Measures Simulation Sources of Crime Statistics Surveys Theory Triangulation Unfounded Crimes Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) Unobtrusive Measures Validity Variable Victim Surveys 49 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 50 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. Reviewing Crime File 2.2, The Crime Dip, which factor(s) do you find to be most plausible in explaining the crime dip? Using these same factors, do you predict that crime will continue to decrease, or do you foresee an increase in the near future? Explain your reasoning. 2. Examining the codes of ethics of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences and the American Society of Criminology, what stipulations do you regard as most important, and which are of least importance? Are you familiar with any additional studies that have raised ethical concerns? Search the Web, C J Abstracts, and NCJRS under titles such as “research ethics” or “codes of ethics” and see if you can turn up any recent controversies. 3. What are some sources of information used by criminologists to examine the extent of crime in the United States? 4. Compare the UCR with the NCVS. Which of these is the better measure of crime? 5. How does the FBI compile and calculate the crime rate? What types of crime does this include? 6. What are some problems or shortcomings of the UCR? 7. What are some other ways of gathering data in criminology besides reliance on official police statistics? Give an example of each. 8. What is ADAM and what does it measure? Is there any way of checking its accuracy? WEB SOURCES Bureau of Justice Statistics Library of Congress Central Intelligence Agency National Criminal Justice Reference Service Department of Justice Career Opportunities Federal Bureau of Investigation General Accounting Office Justinfo Online National Institute of Justice U.S. Department of Justice This is only a small selection of available sources. Check the periodicals and reference sections of your college library for more. WEB EXERCISES Using this chapter’s recommended websites, examine the various sources available in research methods. 3. What types of studies are available on the General Accounting Office site? 1. What can be learned by examining Department of Justice sites such as the National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Criminal Justice Reference Service, and Justinfo Online? 4. Were you impressed by the Library of Congress site? Explain. 2. Specifically, what types of careers are listed on the Department of Justice Career Opportunities site? 5. Using your Web browser, search the terms “Uniform Crime Reports” and “National Crime Victimization Survey” for recent crime statistics. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 2. Research Methods in Criminology 51 SELECTED READINGS Jim Aho. (1994). This Thing of Darkness: The Sociology of the Enemy. Seattle: University of Washington Press. The author conducts a participant observational study of rightwing Christian Patriot groups in Idaho. Bruce Berg. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods in the Social Sciences (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. This is a text devoted exclusively to qualitative methods in the social sciences, a subject that is sometimes neglected in standard methods texts. Paul Cromwell, editor. (2005). In Their Own Words: Field Research on Crime and Criminals—An Anthology (4th ed.) New York: Oxford University Press. This is an excellent anthology of articles involving field research of uncaught criminals on their own turf. Jeffery Ferrell and Mark S. Hamm, editors. (1998). Ethnography at the Edge: Crime and Deviance in Field Research. Boston: Northeastern University Press. The authors describe their articles as unorthodox invitations to heresy. Research among uncaught criminals often put researchers in compromising positions on the edge of illegality. Frank E. Hagan. (2013). Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. This is the author’s own text on criminological and criminal justice research and features detailed coverage of issues only introduced in our account in this chapter. John M. Hagedorn. (2009). A World of Gangs: Armed Young Men and Gangsta Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. An expert researcher on field studies of gangs shares his insights. Mark S. Hamm. (1993). American Skinheads: The Criminology and Control of Hate Crime. Westport, CT: Praeger. Author Mark Hamm uses imaginative, triangulated methods in order to study skinheads. Martin Sanchez-Jankowski. (1991). Islands in the Streets: Gangs and American Urban Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. Forty-four youth gangs are studied in the field over a 10-year period by Sanchez-Jankowski. Pamela Tontodonato and Frank E. Hagan, editors. (1998). The Language of Research in Criminal Justice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Thirty-four articles are featured, illustrating research in criminology and criminal justice. These are articles that are often cited in texts. Richard T. Wright and Scott Decker. (1996). Burglars on the Job: Street Life and Residential Break-Ins. Boston: Northeastern University Press. The authors interview uncaught burglars in the field, asking questions such as how they choose targets and avoid being arrested.
FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Caution in Interpreting Crime Data International Variations in Crime The Prevalence of Crime Trends in Crime Crime File 3.1 American Crime Problems From a Global Perspective Age and Crime Crime File 3.2 Meeting the Challenge of Transnational Crime Crime File 3.3 What Is the Relationship Between Age and Crime? Gender Differences in Criminality Social Class and Crime Race and Crime Crime File 3.4 Racial Profiling Crime File 3.5 Native Americans and Crime Regional Variation in Crime Urban/Rural Differences in Crime Institutions and Crime The Family and Crime Education and Crime Religion and Crime War and Crime Economy and Crime Mass Media and Crime Summary Key Concepts Review Questions Web Sources Web Exercises Selected Readings 52 chapter 3 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals This is our basic conclusion: Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal. . . . White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II. Author Podcast 3.1 Listen to the author’s podcast for this chapter. —U.S. Riot Commission Report (Kerner, 1968, pp. 1, 10) Caution in Interpreting Crime Data In Chapter 1, we discussed at length the necessity of carefully examining the database or other sources of criminological research findings and conclusions. This advice is especially applicable to the material presented in this chapter. Descriptions of characteristics of crime and criminals can vary immensely, depending on the sources of information—for example, official statistics, victim surveys, self-reports—as well as on the type of crime or criminality that is being addressed, whether traditional crime or crime by the elite. The particular method chosen for analysis provides data that flavor the types of theories developed; likewise, the theoretical framework for analysis may subjectively influence the methods of analysis. While the process of inquiry is seldom entirely value-free, triangulation assists in providing multiple assessments of the subject matter. As previously indicated, statistics regarding crime and delinquency are not easily measured. Realizing the limitations of these statistics, I will attempt to avoid misleading and incorrect inferences. Video Link 3.1 Watch a video about crime tracking and analysis. 53 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 54 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY International Variations in Crime International or cross-cultural comparisons of crime statistics are hazardous given the different definitions of criminal activity, the quality of data, ideological considerations, and the sheer logistical problems of compilation (see Dammer & Fairchild, 2006; Nordstrom, 2007; Rounds, 2000; Terrill, 2007; Van Dijk, 2008). Analysis of cross-cultural crime rates can produce some interesting conclusions. For instance, the inexorable rise in crime in the United States and other industrialized countries in the sixties was contradicted by a declining crime rate in Japan, which discredited the assumption that modernization inevitably produces increased criminality. Freda Adler’s Nations Not Obsessed by Crime (1983) and Marshall B. Clinard’s Cities With Little Crime (1978) also indicate that crime is not a major concern in such countries as Switzerland. In a contrary view, others indicate that the Swiss police omit crime statistics and the media ignore criminality, not to mention that Switzerland is a haven for white-collar crime (Balrig, 1988; Gerber, 1991). The low crime rate in Japan is achieved by a strong Gemeinschaft (communal) orientation and group conformity, a high level of unchallenged police power, and a tendency to ignore violations of human and individual rights that would be found unacceptable in the Western democracies (J. Williams, 1991). Utilizing data from the International Police Organization (Interpol) and the World Health Organization (WHO), Brantingham and Brantingham (1984) point out, Journal Article Link 3.1 Examine literature on crime in Switzerland. At the world level of resolution, clearly different patterns emerge for crimes of violence against the person and for crimes against property. The highest overall crime rates were experienced by the nations of the Caribbean region during the mid-1970s, followed by the nations of Western Europe, North America, and Oceania. The highest levels of violent crimes against the person were experienced in the Caribbean, in North Africa and the Middle East, in sub-Saharan Africa, and in Latin America. Property crimes were highest in Western Europe, North America, and Oceania. Crime patterns appear to be closely associated with high economic development and with income inequality; and high levels of violent crimes against the person are associated with lack of economic development and with high income inequality. Modernization and urbanization are both associated with higher levels of property crime and lower levels of violent crime. (p. 295) Similar patterns with respect to the impact of income inequality and the lack of economic development and high crime rates have been noted by others (e.g., Clinard & Abbott, 1973; Krahn, Hartnagel, & Gartrell, 1986). At the beginning of the twenty-first century, we find that the breakdown of political order, lack of police training, and growing urbanization—particularly in developing countries—produce higher global crime. The Overseas Security Advisory Council of the U.S. State Department issues timely travel advisories to tourists warning of special dangers. Nonviolent theft and pickpocketing are the most common crimes that business travelers endure. In 1999, attacks in unregulated taxicabs in Mexico City were of concern, while pickpockets and thieves were more prevalent in Eastern Europe. Particularly dangerous were capital cities of West and East Africa, where the breakdown of tribal authority and poor police training cultivated high crime. The former Soviet Union in general had experienced high levels of violence, organized crime, and corruption (Nicolova, 1999). In Thailand, a favorite tourist destination, economic collapse and an increase in drug-related crime had increased violence against foreigners, and weak law enforcement had attracted foreign criminal gangs (Cheesman, 1999). Particularly interesting is concern among Americans about being potential victims in some foreign lands, when in fact the murder and rape rates in general are higher in the United States than in other developed countries. By the year 2000, however, 7 years of declining official crime rates in the United States indicated that for assault, burglary, robbery, and motor vehicle thefts, the U.S. rates were actually lower than rising rates in some other developed countries such as England and Wales (Langan & Farrington, 1998). Cross-national crime statistics have steadily improved over the years with Interpol, the United Nations, and WHO publishing such data. In addition, the United Nations has sponsored the International Crime Victimization Survey, as well as the United Nations Surveys on Crime Trends and Operations and International ADAM (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring), a self-report survey of arrests modeled after the U.S. ADAM (see Chapter 2). Van Dijk and Kangaspunta (2000) indicate the following difficulties in analyzing crime data across countries: FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 55 Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals •• Varying definitions—legal codes define crimes in different ways. •• Recording practices—different police departments record things differently (e.g., bicycle thefts are vehicle thefts in some countries). •• Operating practices—in some countries, only crimes reaching court are recorded. •• Factual inequalities—hidden factors may affect crime rates, such as age, urbanism, and the like. •• Problems especially associated with recorded crime—governments may regard such statistics as indicators of criminal justice system workloads rather than accurate indicators of crime prevalence. In his book The World of Crime: Breaking the Silence on Problems of Security, Justice and Development Across the World, Van Dijk (2008) discusses and defends Interpol’s decision to remove all official (police) crime statistics from its websites after 50 years of publication. Van Dijk argues, Statistics of police-recorded crimes reflect the performance of the police rather than the levels of crime. Where police are corrupt or incompetent, fewer victims report crimes and recorded crime rates will consequently be low. Where police forces are more effective, levels of reporting are higher and rates of recorded crime go up. (p. xii) The International Crime Victim Survey (ICVS) was first carried out in 1988 and has been repeated once or more in 78 countries. For some countries, comparable victim surveys are available from five ICVS reports, the latest being 2005. In addition to traditional criminal activity, the multinational nature of organized, white-collar, and more sophisticated crimes is a growing phenomenon. In November 1995, a 138-nation United Nations–sponsored conference on international crime was held in Naples, Italy. The end of the Cold War has opened borders and provided an opportunity for collaboration among organized crime groups. Transnational crime poisons business climates, corrupts political leaders, undermines banking and finance, and represents a global challenge of immense proportions. As an illustration of ideological impacts on crime statistics, one need only look at Russia in the late eighties and the influence of Gorbachev’s glasnost (openness). In the first publication of crime statistics in more than half a century, the Soviet Interior Ministry reported a sharp rise in crime of 18 percent for 1988 over 1987 (“Soviet Crime Rate Up,” 1989) and 32 percent in 1989 (Bogert, 1990). In 1991, the number of robberies, muggings, burglaries, and thefts had jumped by 90 percent over 1990 (M. Shapiro, 1992). Instrumental in this increase was the collapse of an authoritarian regime (whose police were omnipresent) combined with declining economic conditions and general political confusion. Organized crime groups often filled the power void. Having previously controlled the black market, such groups were well trained for the new, legal capitalism. Such increased levels of crime have also been experienced throughout former Soviet satellite countries and throughout the world—in the Baltic states, the People’s Republic of China, South Africa, and even Vietnam (Larimer, 1996, p. A7). There have been a number of International Crime Victimization Surveys sponsored by the United Nations, with studies begun in 1989, 1992, 1996, and 2000. The 2000 study involved 92 surveys in 56 countries and was expanding to over more than surveys, involving cities as well as countries. The last survey found that the United States, Canada, and the Czech Republic rank among the highest for burglary, motor vehicle theft, and petty crime. Other countries with higher levels of these crimes were Bulgaria, Estonia, and Slovakia. Low property crime victimization rates were found in Belarus, Norway, Switzerland, and Macedonia. High violence rates were found in countries of the former Soviet Union such as Estonia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. The Video Link 3.2 Watch a video concerning Enron. Photo 3.1 Former Enron chairman Kenneth Lay is accompanied by his wife on his way to stand trial for fraud and conspiracy in May 2006. Lay would die of a heart attack before the completion of the trial. Media coverage of such trials increased public awareness of white-collar crime. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 56 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY United States has high violence scores compared to levels in Canada and Western European nations. Particularly low violence levels were found in Western European nations such as France, Germany, Holland, Hungary, and Macedonia (Van Dijk & Kangaspunta, 2000, p. 39). For more information on international crime and crime surveys, see G. Newman (1999). The reader is reminded that, due to unreliability of such statistics, international comparisons are risky; however, R. R. Bennett and Lynch (1990) found similar results when they compared four widely used data sets. The Prevalence of Crime Estimates of the extent of crime commission depend upon how far or wide one wishes to cast the net. As one moves from official statistics (UCR) to victim surveys (NCVS) to self-report surveys, the rates increase. Inclusion of other forms of nontraditional criminality, such as corporate crime or tax avoidance, would make crime seem even more pervasive. TABLE 3.1     Crime in the United States, 2010 (Rate per 100,000) Population 308,745,538 Offense Number Violent Crime 1,246,248 403.6 Property Crime 9,082,887 2941.6 Murder 14,748 4.8 Forcible Rape 84,767 27.8 Robbery 367,832 119.1 Aggravated Assault 778,901 252.3 Burglary 2,159,878 699.5 Larceny-Theft 6,185,867 2,003.5 737,142 238.8 Vehicle Theft Rate per 100,000 Arson* *Sufficient data are not available to estimate the offense. Source: http:// Audio Link 3.1 Listen to a discussion of violent crime surges. Table 3.1 presents the 2010 UCR index of serious crime in the United States, sometimes referred to as Part I Offenses. In June 2004, the Criminal Justice Information System Committee (CJIS) of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Advisory Policy Board (APB), functioning in an advisory capacity concerning the UCR, decided to discontinue the use of the crime index in the UCR program. They directed the FBI to instead publish a violent crime total and a property crime total until a new index could be developed. They felt that the index was inflated by including larceny-theft, which was the category that had the highest crime rate. Table 3.2 reports the crimes that most frequently result in arrest. These data refer to persons arrested and not simply, as in the case of the index offenses, crimes known to police. Examination of these primarily Part II offenses indicates the extent to which policing is occupied with offenses related to drunk driving, drunkenness, and disorderly conduct. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 57 TABLE 3.2     Estimated Number of Arrests, 2010 Rank Crime Number 1 Drug Abuse Violations 1,638,846 2 DUI 1,412,223 3 Other Assaults 1,292,449 4 *Larceny-Theft 1,271,410 5 Disorderly Conduct 615,172 6 Drunkenness 560,718 7 Liquor Laws 512,790 8 *Aggravated Assault 408,488 9 *Burglary 289,769 10 Vandalism 252,753 *denotes an index crime Source: Crime in the United States, 2010, FBI Uniform Crime Reports (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2011). Trends in Crime As discussed in the previous chapter, official crime statistics represented by the UCR have risen dramatically since the first study in the early 1930s. Although, as we learned in Chapter 1, caution should be exercised in interpreting these statistics. Despite this rise in official rates, victim surveys since the seventies reported relatively stable or falling rates, perhaps reinforcing the point that better recording and reporting may have in part accounted for some of the rise in official statistics. The public alarm concerning the rapid rise in UCR crime statistics beginning in the mid-sixties was abetted by the fact that the decades of the 1940s and 1950s with their postwar prosperity demonstrated relative stability in many categories of crime. The new “crime wave” appeared particularly out of place. Historians of crime and violence in the United States remind us of our myopia in this regard and that waves of crime and violence, however difficult to measure, were characteristic of this land since colonial times, particularly in the post–Civil War era. (This subject will be given greater scope in Chapter 8.) In 1968, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (1967) addressed the issue of the American crime problem from a global perspective: There has always been too much crime. Virtually every generation since the founding of the Nation and before has felt itself threatened by the specter of rising crime and violence. A hundred years ago contemporary accounts of San Francisco told of extensive areas where “no decent man was in safety to walk the street after dark, while at all hours, both night and day, his property was jeopardized by incendiarism and burglary.” Teenage gangs gave rise to the word “hoodlum,” while in one central New York City area, near Broadway, the police entered “only in pairs, and never unarmed.” A noted chronicler of the period declared that “municipal law is a failure . . . [and] we must soon fall back on the law of self-preservation.” And in 1910 one author declared that “crime, especially its more violent forms, and among the young is increasing steadily and is threatening to bankrupt the Nation.” (p. 101) Video Link 3.3 View a video of police tracking crime trends. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 58 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 3.1 American Crime Problems From a Global Perspective Transnational crime (i.e., crime that violates the laws of several international sovereignties or impacts another sovereignty) has grown incrementally over the past two decades, at a rate roughly corresponding to both the increase in international trade import-export figures and the developments in transportation and communications. Several events demonstrate the stark reality of transnational crimes, but none more than the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. U.S. law enforcement authorities responded vigorously, but with limited overall success. Our system has been developed to deal with criminality at the city/county level and, in some cases, at the national level. With respect to global crime, however, we lack readiness—in terms of education, research sponsorship, interagency cooperation (between the Departments of Justice and State), and a full commitment to a centralized and coordinated international effort. Crime is not a strictly local or even national problem; although its impact is felt at the local level, much crime is internationally conditioned and coordinated. For instance, the connection between street crime and the importation and dissemination of drugs is well established. Similarly, an increase in fraud is commensurate with growth in the operational reach of commercial transactions. Profits from the international drug trade, “laundered” overseas and reinvested in American real estate, commercial, or entertainment enterprises, significantly affect U.S. citizens, who must pick up the burden for uncollected taxes on these transactions. In addition, the impact of ethnic gang criminality on our “local” crime scene is readily apparent—for example, the wholesale trade in cocaine, controlled by illegal immigrants from Colombia; the importation of Chinese slave labor into the United States and exploitation of Chinese American businesses by Chinese gangs (triad-based); trade in arms and drugs by Jamaican gangs; burglaries by Albanian gangs; and involvement in the fuel distribution market and the international trade of weapons and nuclear materials by Russian gangs. These new ethnic gangs maintain intra-ethnic contacts, as well as relations with their countries of origin, and local law enforcement professionals are powerless to stop or control them. Source: American Society of Criminology Task Force Report to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, The Criminologist (Special Issue), 20(6), November/December 1995. Task force members were Gerhard O. W. Mueller (Chair), Paul Friday, Robert McCormack, Graeme Newman, and Richard H. Ward. Web Research Project Examine the issue of international crime. What is an additional, emergent crime problem not mentioned in Crime File 3.1? What strategies are needed for coping with this? However violent crime may be in large cities today, both urban and rural areas of Sweden, Holland, and England were more violent during the Middle Ages (E. A. Johnson & Monkkonen, 1996). In Hooligans, Pearson (1982) remarks on the historical myth of a crime-free past in England and attributes it to the abundance as well as sophistication of modern statistics, nostalgia for the past, and cultural amnesia. The relationship of crime to the early history of many countries can be illustrated by Australia, a country that was settled as a penal colony for England. Gangs of “bushrangers” (horse rustlers) achieved notoriety, particularly the group led by Ned Kelly, whose reputation reached mythic proportions. This Robin Hood–like figure received support in opposing authority from small farmers who were nicknamed “cockatoos” or “cockys” because, like the bird, they scratched out a living from the ground. The cocky spirit was one of independence and defiance of authority as exemplified by Ned Kelly himself, who was obstinate to the end and was hanged at age 25. This spirit is expressed in Australia’s most beloved song, “Waltzing Matilda,” about a vagabond who steals a sheep and commits suicide rather than be caught (Levathes, 1985, p. 261): Up jumped the swagman And sprang into the billabong “You’ll never catch me alive,” said he. And his ghost may be heard As you pass by that billabong “You’ll come a-waltzing Matilda with me.” FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 59 Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals In considering crimes, it is important to realize that, if we were to consider the full range of economic crimes such as the impact of corporate price fixing, then in fact every household has been touched by crime. Casting a wider net, were we to consider self-report data, particularly of minor offenses, we would conclude that criminality is pervasive. Despite problems in instruments used and in samples drawn, self-report studies provide much-needed evidence of the extensiveness of hidden criminality and law violation. One may control misunderstanding or overgeneralizations in referring to “criminals” by using operational definitions such as “those arrested” or “those identified by victims” or “those admitting to certain offenses.” Crime File 3.2 discusses “Meeting the Challenge of Transnational Crime,” a topic that will be covered further in Chapter 13. Age and Crime Most of those arrested are young. Crime File 3.3 presents data on ages of those arrested for particular crimes. The peak arrest age for property crime is 16, while age 18 is the peak age for violent crime. Overall, crime commission declines with age. Particularly glaring is the involvement of younger groups in serious property crimes. It is important to note that, while most persons arrested and convicted as adult criminals were first arrested as juveniles, most juvenile delinquents do not become adult criminals. Youthful offenders in urban areas are probably overrepresented in arrest statistics. Such areas have more efficient, formalized policing, while youth generally have less power than their elders to shield themselves from arrest. Juveniles also commit the types of crimes on which municipal police departments tend to concentrate. Excluding common youth offenses, such as curfew and runaway violations, and assuming juvenile offenders are often handled and TABLE 3.3     Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2010 Number in Millions Rate per 1,000* All Crimes 18.7 Violent Crime 3.8 13.9 Simple Assault 2.4 9.5 Aggravated Assault .7 2.8 Robbery .4 1.9 Rape/Sexual Assault .2 .7 Property Crime 13.8 120.2 Property Thefts 11.12 91.5 Household Burglary .3 23.8 Motor Vehicle Theft .6 3.9 Source: From Criminal Victimization 2010: National Crime Victimization Survey, Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2011). Photo 3.2 Ned Kelly, an Australian outlaw, was the subject of that nation’s beloved ballad “Waltzing Matilda.” Here he wears his armored suit beaten out of plowshares (circa 1870). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 60 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 3.2 Meeting the Challenge of Transnational Crime Just as many aspects of our lives have become part of a global village—transportation, communications, economic affairs—so, too, has crime taken on a global dimension. The same political and economic changes and technological advances that support easy international travel, communication, and business transactions also facilitate a criminal’s ability to commit crimes that transcend borders. And because the United States is the world’s richest country, it represents the most opportune target for transnational crime, which is defined by the United Nations as “offenses whose inception, prevention, and/or direct or indirect effects involve more than one country.” For most of its history, NIJ [National Institute of Justice] could serve its primary constituents—State and local policymakers and practitioners—quite well by focusing on research and development within the borders of the United States. But criminal justice officials today are increasingly being asked to deal with offenses and offenders whose origins and connections lie outside the country. Drugs and drug offenders are the most obvious of these, but by no means the only ones. Transnational crimes include trafficked prostitutes from Southeast Asia or the former Soviet Union; migrant workers being exploited in sweatshops or farm fields; an array of credit card and banking frauds; automobiles stolen for shipment overseas; guns smuggled in an effort to evade regulation; and children trafficked through Canada and Mexico for use by child pornography rings. And the list could go on. The escalating threat associated with the new forms of crime was highlighted by a crime bill called the International Crime Control Act (ICCA) of 1998, which was introduced exactly 30 years after the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 created NIJ. This bill did not become law, but its goals are suggestive of problem areas needing attention on the international stage: denying safe haven to international fugitives, streamlining the investigation and prosecution of international crime in U.S. courts, promoting global cooperation among law enforcement, and responding to emerging international crime problems. Factors That Make Transnational Crime Possible In a recent report of a workshop commissioned by NIJ, the National Research Council said that transnational crime was being affected by three related factors: · Globalization of the economy. · Increased numbers and heterogeneity of immigrants. · Improved communications technology. These factors do not “cause” transnational crime. Rather, they facilitate crime, or in some cases, they are criminal opportunities in themselves. For example, immigration does not cause crime. The desire to immigrate, however, may cause people to violate immigration quotas and regulations and may lead to illegal immigration, which in turn is exploited by criminals. Most of the causes of transnational crime are not new; they are, in fact, quite similar to factors that drive crime in general: disparate socioeconomic conditions, which stimulate migration and its antecedent trafficking in persons; the desire for illegal goods and services, which moves crime into the transnational realm when the suppliers are in one country and the consumers are in another; and the universal greed for money and power. The Unique Challenges of Transnational Crime The challenges in preventing and controlling transnational crime stem from several sources. For example, some crimes arise out of particular cultural or societal conditions and experiences that differ from one country to another. Behavior that is acceptable in one country may be illegal in another. Crimes that arise out of electronic communications, such as money laundering, are not bound by national borders. The whole panoply of so-called cybercrimes are almost by definition transnational crimes, since cyberspace is not constrained within these borders. The traditional desire to hide crime and elude law enforcement is met more fully by the increasing ease of global travel and communication. The challenges in dealing with transnational crime arise from the national orientations of laws and law enforcement. Every country has its own laws and law enforcement system to deal with crime. But what about crime and criminals that cross national borders? Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mark M. Richard has noted that “the international community is not well positioned to respond to such issues [as foreign nationals committing a crime in the United States and escaping to their home country], [because] extradition and other procedures are archaic, based upon 19th century standards, and of limited use today.” Ignoring the transnationalization of crime would be akin to adopting a “head in the sand” strategy. American police, prosecutors, judges, and corrections officials, as well as regulatory agencies—the customers for cutting edge research knowledge to help them understand and combat crime—would be shortchanged by such an outdated strategy. Both criminal justice practitioners and researchers would be forced to do their jobs with only partial and very limited information. It was the recognition of this changing reality and of the ensuing need that led NIJ to create a new International Center in 1997. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 61 NIJ’s International Center’s Challenge The International Center’s mission is to stimulate and facilitate research and evaluation on transnational and comparative crime and justice issues and to disseminate the knowledge gained throughout the national and international criminal justice communities. Stimulate and Facilitate Research and Evaluation. To accomplish this aspect of its mission, the International Center motivates researchers (principally from the academic community, but not exclusively so) to study transnational crime and justice issues and to conduct comparative research (i.e., parallel studies conducted in more than one country about a topic that does not necessarily have transnational aspects). Comparative international research brings unique challenges (see “Challenges Inherent in Comparative International Research”), and the International Center has adopted an educational role in working with researchers whose approaches and methodologies may be foreign to each other. In 1997, NIJ announced the International Challenge Grants to encourage American researchers to seek counterparts in other countries to conduct joint comparative studies. Of the first three projects funded under this program, two are transnational studies and one is comparative. The two transnational studies are examining human trafficking from China to the United States and trafficking of children through Canada and Mexico to the United States. The comparative study is examining juvenile justice processing in Denver, Colorado, and Bremen, Germany. Both comparative and transnational studies can make unique contributions to our understanding of crime and justice issues, and study findings will have implications for criminal justice policy. An example of how the International Center can stimulate evaluation comes from a request NIJ received from the U.S. Department of State. The United States funds several prison-based drug treatment programs in the Philippines and Thailand. Both countries are experimenting with therapeutic communities as their predominant drug treatment modality and as part of the U.S. drug demand reduction strategy. The State Department asked NIJ to visit the sites, assess the programs, and determine if their circumstances would permit a rigorous evaluation of the programs’ effectiveness. After the International Center submitted its report, the State Department contacted American, Philippine, and Thai researchers who might conduct the evaluations. The Center’s International Visiting Fellowships are an example of how NIJ can facilitate research on transnational and comparative crime and justice issues. Three International Fellows have studied (1) transnational organized crime emanating from the former Soviet Union; (2) the organization of black markets, corruption, and crime in selected countries of the Newly Independent States (from Eastern Europe and the former USSR); and (3) restoration of civilian policing in countries that have undergone peacekeeping operations, such as Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo. See “Special Initiatives,” page 6, for activities that are making a significant contribution to our understanding of transnational crime. Disseminate Knowledge. The International Center serves as an export-import bank of information through the exchange of ideas and knowledge among law enforcement agencies, academic institutions, and others in the criminal justice community, both here and abroad. The means for this dissemination include reports, articles, books, and other materials in both paper and electronic formats. Helping to link the International Center to the rest of the globe is the World Justice Information Network (WJIN) and the Internet Studio, operated by the Rule of Law Foundation under a cooperative agreement with NIJ. WJIN is an Internet-based community of some 6,000 criminal justice scholars and practitioners from more than 100 countries who share information through a global virtual library and an online forum. Source: Quoted directly from “Meeting the Challenge of Transnational Crime,” by J. O. Finckenauer, Crime & Justice International, 17(48), January 2001. Available at recorded differently depending on police jurisdictions, the median age for arrested robbers, burglars, thieves, auto thieves, arsonists, and vandals is under 20 in all categories. Estimates of the average age of embezzlers, price-fixers, bribers, and the like considerably alter this age profile, however, since these crimes are committed by older criminals. The “graying of America,” with a large proportion of the population becoming elderly, has led to forecasts of an increase in the number of older criminals (Wilbanks & Kim, 1984). Criminologists had incorrectly predicted a possible demographic time bomb as the number of people in the maximum crime-committing ages of 15–24 expanded at the end of the last century. From 1996 to 2000, there were 500,000 more males in this age group than there were a decade earlier—about a 20 percent increase. The homicide rate among 15- to 19-year-olds increased 154 percent between 1985 and 1991. This increase began with the advent of crack cocaine in the mid-1980s, along with a proliferation of guns to protect crack markets (Blumstein, 1995). The rate decreased beginning in 1992, in part due to the ending of this “crack epidemic.” Journal Article Link 3.2 Examine literature regarding young people and crime. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 62 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 3.3 What Is the Relationship Between Age and Crime? Participation in crime declines with age. Arrest data show that the intensity of criminal behavior slackens after the teens, and it continues to decline with age. Arrests, however, are only a general indicator of criminal activity. The greater likelihood of arrests for young people may result partly from their lack of experience in offending and also from their involvement in the types of crimes for which apprehension is more likely (for example, purse snatching vs. fraud). Moreover, because youths often commit crime in groups, the resolution of a single crime may lead to several arrests. The decline in crime participation with age may also result from the incapacitation of many offenders. When repeat offenders are apprehended, they serve increasingly longer sentences, thus incapacitating them for long periods as they grow older. The success of habitual offenders in avoiding apprehension declines as their criminal careers progress. Even though offense rates declined over time, the probabilities of arrest, conviction, and incarceration per offense all tended to increase. Recidivism data also show that the rates of return to prison tend to be lower for older than for younger prisoners. Older prisoners who do return do so after a longer period of freedom than younger prisoners. Different age groups are arrested and incarcerated for different types of crime. •• Juveniles under age 18 have a higher likelihood of being arrested for robbery and UCR index property crimes than do members of any other age group. •• Persons between ages 18 and 34 are the most likely to be arrested for violent crimes. •• Among jail and prison inmates, property crimes, particularly burglary and public order crimes, are more common among younger inmates. •• Violent crimes were more prevalent among older inmates admitted to prison in 1982 but showed little variation among jail inmates of different ages. •• Drug crimes were more prevalent among inmates ages 25 to 44 in both prisons and jails. Percentage of Arrestees Under 18 Years of Age, by Type of Crime Most Serious Offense Charged Total Violent Crime Index Murder and non-negligent manslaughter Forcible rape Robbery Aggravated assault Property Crime Index Burglary Larceny-theft Motor vehicle theft Arson Other assaults Forgery and counterfeiting Fraud Embezzlement Stolen property (buying, receiving, possessing) Vandalism Weapons (carrying, possessing, etc.) Juvenile Arrests as a Percentage of Total Arrests 16% 15 9 16 24 14 29 29 28 29 51 19 4 3 7 19 39 23 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals Most Serious Offense Charged Prostitution and commercialized vice Sex offenses (except forcible rape and prostitution) Drug abuse violations Gambling Offenses against family and children Driving under the influence Liquor laws Drunkenness Disorderly conduct Vagrancy All other offenses (except traffic) Juvenile Arrests as a Percentage of Total Arrests 2 20 12 16 5 1 22 3 30 8 10 Source: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2005 National Report, by H. Snyder and M. Sickmund (Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2006), p. 26. Web Research Project Visit the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention website ( and note any trends or changes in crime by age. Age-Crime Debate An intramural academic war of sorts has broken out in criminology. It could be described as the age-crime debate. On one side of the debate are Gottfredson and Hirschi (1986, 1987), who view as a constant the “maturing out of” crime or desistance from crime as individuals age. They indicate the following: Further, this distribution is characteristic of the age-crime relation regardless of sex, race, country, time or offense. Indeed, the persistence of this relation across time and culture is phenomenal. As long as records have been kept, in all societies in which such records are available, it appears that crime is an activity highly concentrated among the young. (1986, p. 219) They question the emphasis on career criminal research, incapacitation, and the recent “fetish” for longitudinal research that justifies a search for groups of offenders (career criminals) whose criminality does not decline with age (Blumstein, Cohen, & Farrington, 1988a, 1988b; L. E. Cohen & Land, 1987; Farrington, 1986). Blumstein and Cohen (1987), in a longitudinal study of those arrested for more serious crimes in the District of Columbia and Detroit in 1973, found that those who remained active in their twenties did not age out in their thirties, but only after age 45. Farrington suggests that offenses of different types peak at different times and that this represents “crime switching rather than replacement of one group of offenders by another” (p. 189). Steffensmeier (1989a) finds variation by age-specific type over time with the offenders becoming younger and younger, and also finds that some crimes such as embezzlement or fraud are less likely to decline with age. The outcome of this age-crime controversy is claimed by the disputants to have important consequences for career criminal research (Tittle, 1988). Why do most criminals “mature out of” crime? Farrington (1986) suggests factors such as the influence of wives or girlfriends, the decline of gang or peer group support, and increased penalties, as well as increased legitimate opportunities as individuals reach their twenties. The decline in crime involvement is not explained by the physiology of aging since substantial decline in fitness does not occur until the late fifties or older. Social changes are more important than physiological changes in explaining this decrease. Steffensmeier and Allan (1990) identify a number of social changes that encourage conformity, including more legitimate access to material goods and excitement, changes in age-graded norms and anticipatory socialization, changes in lifestyle and peer groups, stronger social bonds, higher legal 63 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 64 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY and social costs, and fewer illegitimate opportunities. Discussion of developmental theories in Chapter 7 will address this issue in depth. Perhaps one of the best-kept secrets in criminology is the existence of the “bible of juvenile justice research”—Juvenile Offenders and Victims, an annual report by Howard Snyder and Melissa Sickmund (2005), produced by the National Center for Juvenile Justice in Pittsburgh. This document, with tables and figures, reports the latest trends in juvenile justice. Gender Differences in Criminality Handbook Article Link 3.1 Read an article on gender and crime. Journal Article Link 3.3 Examine literature regarding female offenders. Table 3.4 presents some statistics on “women offenders” in the United States (Greenfield & Snell, 1999). Of all demographic variables, gender is the best predictor of criminality; most persons arrested are males. In the United States at the turn of the century, males represented about 83 percent of those arrested and, with the exception of primarily female offenses such as prostitution (in which “Johns,” or customers, are seldom arrested), this difference holds for all criminal offenses. The male crime rate exceeds that of females universally, in all nations, in all communities, among all age groups, and in all periods of history for which statistics are available. Whereas in some more traditional countries the crime–gender arrest ratio may range from 200-to-1 to 1,000-to-1, in modernized societies the gap in gender variation in crime has been closing. Why such variation? Gender per se is not as important a variable as a particular culture’s conception of gender. The female crime rate appears to be closer to the male level in countries in which females enjoy more equality and freedom and thus an increased opportunity to commit crime. TABLE 3.4     Characteristics of Female Offenders Female Offenders Number as a Percentage of Each Category Violent Offenders All Arrestees Convicted Felony Defendants Correctional Populations 2,135,000 3,171,000 160,500 951,900 14% 22% 16% 16% •• Based on the self-reports of victims of violence, women account for about 14 percent of violent offenders—an annual average of about 2.1 million violent offenders. •• Male offending equals about 1 violent offender for every 9 males age 10 or older, a per capita rate 6 times that of women. •• Three out of four violent female offenders committed simple assault. •• An estimated 28 percent of violent female offenders are juveniles. •• Three out of 4 victims had a prior relationship with the female offender. •• An estimated 4 in 10 females committing violence were perceived by the victim as being under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the crime. Source: “Women Offenders,” by L. A. Greenfield and T. L. Snell, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, December 1999, NCJ175688. Journal Article Link 3.4 Examine literature regarding women as criminals. This universality of disproportionate male criminality can best be explained by the differential treatment of males and females. Traditionally, males are socialized to be dominant, active, and aggressive. In fact, chivalry and the law often require that the male take responsibility for what occurs. In many traditional societies, it is the husband who is punished for his wife’s transgressions. Similarly, customary gender role socialization of females emphasizes passivity and subordination. In explaining some of the social, psychological, and physical reasons for these differences, Steffensmeier (quoted in Blaum, 1991) notes that “there is no female equivalent to the ‘romanticized’ rogue male” (p. 1). For some males, crime is considered macho and enhances status, while female crime is usually stigmatizing. Despite social change, social expectations of women still center on nurturing, beauty, virtue, and stereotypes of femininity that are incompatible with qualities valued in the criminal underworld. Steffensmeier (quoted in Blaum) also sees female criminals as more likely to be drug-dependent or to come from deprived family backgrounds. They are more likely to engage in crime because of intimate or romantic relationships and are FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 65 Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals often introduced to crime by a significant other. Male physical strength and agility also favor males’ greater participation in certain crimes such as robbery and burglary. The threat of potential sexual victimization also limits females’ mobility and access to criminal haunts. Females tend to concentrate on less rewarding types of crime, such as shoplifting and employee theft, rather than on more lucrative, organized activities, such as burglary rings, drug cartels, and fencing networks. Even prostitution is usually controlled by males. Racketeering and corporate fraud are almost overwhelmingly male-dominated (Blaum, 1991). Girls exposed to a variety of familial risk factors are found to be far less likely to deviate than boys raised in similar circumstances (Dornfeld & Kruttschnitt, 1991). The traditional handmaiden of sexism has been paternalism, a sort of sexual noblesse oblige in which males felt that they were responsible for protecting the dependent female. This policy is reflected in the law and its administration, since females generally receive much lighter sentences for the same offense, are viewed more favorably by judges and juries, and seldom receive the death penalty. Literature on the subject of gender and crime notes the androcentric (male-centered) bias in many delinquency and crime theories (Chesney-Lind, 1989). Burnett (1986) also notes that women have been left out of criminological scholarship and that a new era began with publications such as F. Adler’s Sisters in Crime (1975), R. J. Simon’s Women and Crime (1975), and F. Adler and Simon’s The Criminology of Deviant Women (1979). Using UCR data, R. J. Simon (1990) notes increases in female crime, particularly in property offenses, especially white-collar offenses involving small-to-medium amounts of money. While writers such as F. Adler (1975) were arguing that a gender convergence or closing of the gap between male and female crime rates was taking place, others such as Steffensmeier (1978) and Steffensmeier and Allan (1988) found no such change in the crime–gender ratio. The National Institute of Justice has noted a rise in the number of female offenders at the turn of the twentyfirst century (National Criminal Justice Reference Service [NCJRS], 2003). The NCVS for 2001 showed the percentage of estimated female perpetrators as increasing from 14 to 19 percent for violent crime. From 1990 to 1998, the number of women in prison grew 48 percent compared to 27 percent for men. Between 1988 and 1997, female delinquency cases increased 83 percent. A major literature is developing regarding gender and crime. One example is a “power-control theory” of delinquency and gender (J. Hagan, Gillis, & Simpson, 1985, 1987), which proposes that male and female children react differently to parental power sharing. The authors hypothesized that balanced family structure (shared power by spouses) lessens the differences in delinquency between genders and that unbalanced family structures increase those differences. However, both Singer and Levine (1988) and Morash and Chesney-Lind (1991) found little support for this theory. Social Class and Crime Social class is not a category included in the UCR, yet the vast majority of those arrested or labeled as criminal are from lower social classes. Criminality for traditional crimes is higher among lower-class individuals, totally apart from bias in statistics or the administration of justice. Part of the excessively high rate is likely to be due to their lack of power and sophistication in shielding themselves from formal litigation proceedings. Traditional explanations of crime and social class view the relationship as an inverse one; that is, as social class becomes higher, the volume of crime commission decreases proportionately. Figure 3.1 attempts to depict this relationship schematically. Reckless (1967) proposes a bimodal theory of the distribution of crime commission in which the criminality curve has two modes (most frequently appearing cases) among the lower class and the upper class, though crimes of the latter are seldom reflected in national crime statistics. Photo 3.3 Maricopa County prison inmates participate in what is believed to be the nation’s first female chain gang. Video Link 3.4 View a video concerning female crime. Journal Article Link 3.5 Examine literature regarding qualitative research on women in prison. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 66 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY FIGURE 3.1     Models of the Relationship Between Social Class and Criminality (a) (b) High Crime Crime High Low High Low Social Class Low Low High Social Class Note: (a) indicates relationship between social class and crime using official data. (b) reflects the bimodal theory of the relationship between crime and social class. Sources: From “Criminal Victimization 2007: National Crime Victimization Survey” Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, 2008, Washington, D.C. The relationship between social class and criminality remains a subject of debate. The early self-report surveys (Nye, Short, & Olson, 1958; Short & Nye, 1958) found no relationship other than that lower-class offenders were more likely to be officially processed. Tittle, Villemez, and Smith (1978), in a literature review of major self-report studies, found no relationship between class and criminality. More recent research and reviews of self-report surveys suggest that much of this lack of difference by class may have been due to the measuring instruments, which tended to concentrate on rather trivial offenses. Lower-class youth were found to commit more serious crimes more often; and their offense profile was found to more closely follow that presented by official statistics (Elliott & Ageton, 1980; Hardt & Hardt, 1977; Hindelang, Hirschi, & Weis, 1979). Examining calls to police, Warner and Pierce (1991) found that the poverty of an area consistently increased the rate of assault, robbery, and burglary, although in examining delinquency, Larzelere and Patterson (1990) found that parental monitoring and discipline were more predictive than social class. It is important to caution, however, that official statistics undercount the typical crimes of higher socioeconomic groups, so even though the lower class has higher official crime rates, this does not indicate that individuals in this class are necessarily more criminal. Race and Crime Handbook Article Link 3.2 Read an article on ethnicity and crime. Just as an androcentric bias was identified earlier, a Eurocentric bias may also exist in criminology, in part because African American criminologists in particular, but other ethnic minorities as well, have not played a significant role in the field (Young & Sulton, 1991). Eurocentric bias refers to the fact that the field of criminology is dominated by views reflecting those of European (white) descent, and such a bias may tend not to fully appreciate the interactions among racism, inequality, and the experiences of African Americans and other minorities in the criminal justice system. Race is a relatively arbitrary, socially defined status. For example, in an early study, Herskovits estimated that of the total number of black persons classified as “Negro” at that time in the United States, 15 percent were more “white” than black, 25 percent were equally “white” and black, and 22 percent were unmixed black (p. 177). Thus, the concept of “race” is more a socially defined category than a taxonomically simple biological classification. As Sutherland and Cressey (1974) point out, “There is no avoiding the fact that at least 80 percent of the offenders contributing to the ‘black’ crime rate are part ‘white’” (p. 132). Given the increasing ethnic diversity of the United States, a racial and ethnic classification system that pigeonholes entire segments of the population obfuscates true understanding. Scientists have proven there is no biological basis for such traditional racial classifications. Students need to be aware of the inherent problems in this currently accepted system. The validity of this shorthand method of identifying different groups in an increasingly diverse society needs to be questioned by more criminologists (Mellow, 1996, p. 7). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals The foregoing facts become important in light of cryptoracist theories that were rediscovered and treated by some as respectable in the 1970s. These were regenerated, long-discredited hereditary theories of racial inferiority to explain why African Americans, despite social changes in the 1960s, had failed to succeed (Skolnick & Currie, 1988, p. 12). Such theories obviously ignore the black experience in a nation that until relatively recently practiced institutionalized racism against African Americans. To paraphrase one writer (Dr. Charles King), we have a society that crippled a people—then blamed them for limping (cited in L. A. Ross & McMurray, 1996, p. 3). The long legacy of slavery, followed by “Jim Crow” laws (legalized or de jure segregation and discrimination) and succeeded by de facto (in practice) discrimination, placed a generational burden on black Americans that far exceeded the milder forms endured temporarily by other ethnic groups. Much of the discrepancy between black and white crime rates can perhaps be explained by the fact that African Americans until relatively recently have been locked disproportionately into the lower class through a pseudo–caste system. At the turn of this century, roughly 27 percent of those arrested in the United States were black, while blacks made up only about 12 percent of the population. In the early nineties, roughly 1 in 4 young black males in the United States was behind bars, on parole, or on probation. This was more than the number of black men enrolled in college. While 23 percent of black men in their twenties were under supervision, only 10 percent of Latinos and about 6 percent of whites were being similarly sanctioned. In Washington, D.C., estimates have been made that 70 percent of all black men have been arrested and served time in jail before the age of 35 (J. Marshall, 1992). Nationally, the disparity of rates between blacks and nonblacks was much greater for offenses of violence than for property offenses. This difference in arrest rates is generally taken to indicate equally disproportionate rates of crime commission. Most studies indicate that these differences are not a result of police discrimination. In a book titled The Myth of a Racist Criminal Justice System, Wilbanks (1987) claims that although the criminal justice system was racist in the past, there is little racism or systematic discrimination in the criminal justice system today. One of his primary themes is that any disproportion in black arrest and incarceration rates reflects actual higher offense rates among blacks. In critiquing this, C. M. Mann (1989, 1993) argues that racism in criminal justice is institutionalized in the same way that it is in other institutions in the United States such as education, politics, religion, and the economic structure. If our society is racist, do we not expect the criminal justice system to reflect this? Mann claims that Wilbanks ignores the informal aspects of the criminal justice system, or what Georges-Abeyie (1989) calls “petit apartheid realities,” namely, stop-and-question and stop-and-frisk police practices that cause the police to be viewed by blacks as rude, insulting, and sometimes brutal. Claims of a nonracist system would have to be justified or supplemented with qualitative, observational research and actual accounts of minority experience. Crime File 3.4, “Racial Profiling,” describes a discriminatory practice by some police departments of stopping and searching a disproportionate number of blacks and minorities, particularly in traffic stops. Spohn and Cederblom’s (1991) study found support for Kalven and Zeisel’s (1966) “liberation hypothesis,” which holds that racial discrimination in sentencing is significant primarily in less serious cases. While race was found to play no role in judicial decision making in Pennsylvania (Steffensmeier & Kramer, 1990), black murders of whites were found more likely to result in the death penalty in Kentucky (Keil & Vito, 1989). In the 1990s, federal drug laws featured more severe penalties for possession or sale of crack cocaine (favored by black dealers) than for powder cocaine (favored by whites). As a result, a disproportionate number of those given longer prison sentences were black. Crime has in the past been primarily intraracial in nature; that is, in most cases, whites victimize whites and blacks victimize blacks. According to UCR arrest data, blacks represent 62 percent of robbers and exhibit particularly disproportionate rates for murder, rape, and assault (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1988, p. 47). All of these crimes are relatively unsophisticated and command a great deal of police attention. Statistics on crime by race are subject to countervailing pressures that may on the one hand overestimate and on the other underestimate the actual black crime rate. Blacks are more likely than whites to be arrested, indicted, convicted, and imprisoned. If convicted, they are less likely to receive probation, parole, or pardon. These factors may tend to exaggerate the black crime rate. In the past especially, many crimes by blacks against other blacks were ignored by the criminal justice system. A certain proportion of the rising crime rate beginning in the sixties reflected a greater willingness on the part of the police to respond to ghetto crime, which had previously been overlooked (see Gabbidon & Greene, 2005; Walker, Spohn, & DeLone, 1995). Despite these offsetting crime trends, the crime rate of blacks is disturbingly disproportionate to that of the general population. Wolfgang’s (1958) analysis of homicide in Philadelphia found the crime rate for nonwhite, 20- to 24-year-old males to be about 25 times the Caucasian rate for the same age group (see also Wolfgang, 1987). The few early self-report surveys suggested no significant differences by race with respect to admitted 67 Journal Article Link 3.6 Examine literature regarding race and crime. Journal Article Link 3.7 Examine literature on African American violence. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 68 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Crime File 3.4 Racial Profiling Handbook Article Link 3.3 Read an article on racial profiling. Audio Link 3.2 Listen to a discussion of a costbenefit analysis of racial profiling. Audio Link 3.3 Listen to a discussion about racial profiling. Crime profiling refers to attempts to construct typical characteristics of types of criminals (R. M. Holmes, 1989). It has been particularly useful in programs such as the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit and its tracking down of serial killers. However, it has been highly controversial when applied to traffic stops of those fitting the general profile. Phrases such as DWB (driving while black) or BWB (breathing while black) have been coined by black citizens who feel that they have been unfairly singled out for police attention simply for fitting the suspicious profile of being black. Charges of racial bias in the criminal justice system are certainly given support in cases such as the New York City Police Department’s incidents involving Abner Louima and Amadou Diallo. Louima was sodomized and brutalized while in police detention, while Diallo was killed by many volleys from police revolvers when reaching for his identification. David Cole in his book No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System (1999) indicates that, between 1995 and 1997, a total of 70 percent of those stopped on Interstate 95 in New Jersey and Maryland were blacks and Hispanics, even though they constituted only 17.5 percent of speeders. Similar findings were noted by Cole for Illinois. While blacks make up only 12 percent of the population of the United States, they represent over one half of the nation’s prison population. In fact, 1 out of every 3 black men in his twenties is either in prison, in jail, on probation, or on parole. Much of this disparity is due to the “war on drugs.” While the U.S. Public Health Service estimates that blacks represent 14 percent of U.S. illegal drug users, they are 35 percent of those arrested, 55 percent of those convicted, and 74 percent of those sentenced to prison for drug possession— a rate that is 6 times their representation in the population. Racial profiling has what sociologists call a “self-fulfilling prophecy” quality about it. According to the developer of the concept, W. I. Thomas (Thomas & Swaine, 1928), “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.” Blacks are perceived by nonblacks as more criminal. They are arrested and incarcerated more than other groups. Studies of incarcerated populations show that a disproportionate number of prisoners are black; therefore, when authorities are profiling or looking for criminals, they concentrate on blacks. David Cole (1999) concludes by stating, Finally, and fundamentally, we need to think beyond policing. It sometimes appears that the only public resources that the majority is eager to supply to the inner cities are more (and more aggressive) police officers. But if similar levels of crime were occurring in white neighborhoods, and large numbers of white children were under criminal-justice supervision, isn’t it likely that we would be hearing calls for different kinds of social investments, such as better schools, more job training, better aftercare programs, and drug treatment? To restore legitimacy, the majority needs to show that it is willing to invest in something other than the strong arm of the law. (n.p.) Web Research Project What are some later developments in the issue of crime (racial) profiling? Have there been any new public policies for dealing with this issue? offenses (L. C. Gould, 1969; Hirschi, 1969; Voss, 1963). However, other research (Elliott & Ageton, 1980) again points to the tendency of many early measurement instruments to concentrate on trivial offenses. For more serious offenses, such as assault, robbery, and the like, black youths were significantly more persistent offenders, their rates in self-report surveys being similar to those in official studies. A report by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency titled And Justice for Some (2000) found that black and Hispanic youth were treated more severely than white teenagers at each step of the juvenile justice system. Minorities were more likely than their white counterparts to be arrested, referred to juvenile court, detained prior to trial, formally processed by juvenile courts, found guilty in juvenile court, waived to adult criminal court, placed in juvenile prisons, and admitted to adult state prisons. The same report found that blacks charged with drug offenses are 48 times more likely than whites to be sentenced to juvenile probation. On a final note, it should be pointed out that the African American crime rate for insider trading, price fixing, defense procurement rip-offs, and other white-collar crimes is very low. In 2010, President Barack Obama signed a law targeting violence on Native American reservations. He described as “unconscionable” the fact that crimes against Native Americans were more than twice the national FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals average and as much as 20 times the national average when committed on reservations. One in 3 Indian women will be raped in her lifetime (“Obama,” 2010). Crime File 3.5 further describes “Native Americans and Crime.” Minority Groups and Crime Race per se is not as crucial an explanatory variable in traditional crime commission as social class. Until recently, a large percentage of blacks was concentrated in lower-socioeconomic-class ghettos that have traditionally exhibited high rates of breakdown. African Americans are disproportionately represented in the very largest cities. Early research by the “Chicago School” of sociology, most notably that of C. R. Shaw and H. D. McKay (1942) and their utilization of E. W. Burgess’s (1925) “concentric zone theory,” serves as an illustration of this relationship, which will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. Crime File 3.5 Native Americans and Crime The indigenous peoples in the United States are members of about 550 federally recognized tribes including Cherokee (16.4 percent), Navajo (11.7 percent), Chippewa (5.5 percent), Sioux (5.5 percent), Choctaw (3.4 percent), Pueblo (2.8 percent), Apache (2.7 percent), and all others (51 percent; Greenfield & Smith, 1999, p. 1). The rate of victimization for American Indians has been greater than that of all other races for rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault. In 1999, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) issued a special report titled American Indians and Crime (Greenfield & Smith, 1999). The data were based on over 5 years of National Crime Victimization Survey data and reported that the rate of violent victimization among the nation’s 2.3 million Native Americans is well above that of other American racial and ethnic groups and twice as high as the national average. Astoundingly, the rate of violent crime experienced by Native American women was nearly 50 percent higher than that reported by black males. (This report was updated by Perry in 2004.) American Indians were more likely to be victims of assault and rape/sexual assault committed by a stranger or acquaintance rather than an intimate partner or family member. The BJS study indicated that the rate of Native American victimization was 124 violent crimes per 1,000 Native Americans, which was more than twice the rate of the nation as a whole (50 per 1,000). The average for whites was 49, for blacks 61, and for Asians 29 per 1,000. Native Americans, unlike other racial/ethnic groups, are more likely to be victims of interracial violence (that is, between races). Sixty percent of those committing crimes against Native Americans were whites; most of these offenses were attributed to racism and alcohol. The rate of murders committed by Native Americans (as of 1996) was 4 per 100,000, well below the then national average of 7.9 and the white rate of 3.9. Native Americans are, however, twice as likely as blacks and 3 times more likely than whites to be victims of rape or aggravated assault. Native Americans are one of the smallest minority groups, yet they represent one of the largest percentages of prison inmates. There are 555 recognized Native American tribes in the United States and, despite the well-publicized success of gambling facilities on some reservations, a third of the country’s 2 million Native Americans live below the poverty line. This figure is higher than for all other minority groups (Blackman & Simmons, 1995). In 800 or more treaties over the years, native tribes were guaranteed a reasonable level of education, health, and resources. However, such promises by the federal government were not honored and, instead, these people—who experienced near cultural and physical genocide—have also experienced high levels of unemployment, social disorganization, alienation, alcoholism, and crime. Native American youth are the largest category of youth incarcerated under federal jurisdiction, about 65 percent (75) of the 124 confined in 1994 (Greenfield & Smith, 1999, p. 30). Similar to indigenous peoples in other colonized countries, Native Americans were marginalized from the dominant society (Nielson, Fulton, & Tsosie, 2000, p. 5). Nielson (1998) states, Native Americans have endured a century and more of government policies that ranged from genocidal to assimilative to supportive of limited sovereignty. The assimilative policies in general were, and still are (to the extent that they can still be found in American Indian law), important contributors to the development of social and economic conditions conductive [sic] to the development of Native American gangs. (p. 143) Web Research Project Visit the website and find the 2004 report by Steven Perry on American Indians and Crime. What are some additional facts of interest regarding Native Americans and crime? 69 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 70 Journal Article Link 3.8 Examine literature regarding race crime and ethnicity crime. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY In examining certain areas for delinquency, C. R. Shaw and McKay (1942) report similar rates of delinquency in the same area of transition (zone II) despite changeover in racial and nationality groups. The concentric zone theory assumes that city growth occurs in a series of rings. Zone I is the central business district, while zone II is the oldest and highest residential crime area. This will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7. Despite this assumption, Nettler (1982, Vol. 2, p. 58) points out that Dutch, German, and Scandinavian settlers in the United States have had low crime rates in general, particularly for violent crimes. In addition, the low rates for Jews and Asians challenge the assumption that racial visibility, prejudice, and discrimination are sufficient explanations of criminality. It should be pointed out, however, that many of these groups were not lower-class immigrants, but instead had migrated during a period in which their craft, mercantile, and other skills were economically in demand (Flowers, 1988). The excessive violent crime rate for blacks in the United States stands in contrast to that of Latinos who are generally poorer, less educated, and have more menial jobs, but who also have lower rates of violent crime. Silberman (1978), in analyzing New York City crime rates, found the rate of black violent crime to be 3 times higher than the Latino rate—twice as high for homicide. Since other minority groups that at one time were discriminated against were able to overcome difficulties and “rise from the ashes,” so to speak, many ask the question, “Why haven’t blacks been able to achieve the same success?” In 1968, in the aftermath of the worst series of urban riots in modern U.S. history, the Kerner Commission, the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, addressed this issue by suggesting four reasons for differences between the immigrant and black experiences: 1. The Maturing Economy: When the European immigrants arrived, they gained an economic foothold by providing the unskilled labor needed by industry. Unlike the immigrant, the Negro migrant found little opportunity in the city. The economy, by then matured, had little use for the unskilled labor he had to offer. 2. The Disability of Race: The structure of discrimination has stringently narrowed opportunities for the Negro and restricted his prospects. European immigrants suffered from discrimination, but never so pervasively. 3. Entry Into the Political System: The immigrants usually settled in rapidly growing cities with powerful and expanding political machines, which traded economic advantages for political support. Wardlevel grievance machinery, as well as personal representation, enabled the immigrant to make his voice heard and his power felt. By the time the Negroes arrived, these political machines were no longer so powerful or so well equipped to provide jobs or other favors, and in many cases were unwilling to share their influence with Negroes. 4. Cultural Factors: Coming from societies with a low standard of living and at a time when job aspirations were low, the immigrants sensed little deprivation in being forced to take the less desirable and poorer-paying jobs. Their large and cohesive families contributed to the total income. Their vision of the future—one that led to life outside the ghetto—provided the incentive necessary to endure the present. Although Negro men worked as hard as the immigrants, they were unable to support their families. The entrepreneurial opportunities had vanished. As a result of slavery and long periods of unemployment, the Negro family structure had become matriarchal; the males played a secondary and marginal family role—one which offered little compensation for their hard and unrewarding labor. Above all, segregation denied Negroes access to good jobs and the opportunity to leave the ghetto. For them, the future seemed to lead only to a dead end. (Kerner, 1968, p. 15) William Julius Wilson in The Truly Disadvantaged (1987) points out how the deindustrialization (loss of blue-collar factory jobs) of the inner cities combined with racism, segregation, and poverty to condemn the black, inner-city poor to chronic unemployment and hopelessness. In 1989, an astonishing 35 percent of black males between the ages of 16 and 35 had been arrested at some point, and much of this was because of an aggressive nationwide crackdown on drugs that affected blacks much more than whites. Even though blacks represent about 12 percent of users, their visibility and greater involvement in trafficking in targeted urban areas has had a devastating effect. As noted earlier in this chapter, particularly problematic was the fact that much heavier FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 71 sentences were levied against those using crack (a form of rock cocaine generally preferred by blacks) than against those abusing the same amount of powder cocaine (preferred by whites). In 2009, President Obama passed legislation that reduced, but did not eliminate, this discrepancy. Decreasing job prospects in such poor, inner-city areas has created a vicious cycle in which •• Discrimination holds blacks back in the job market. •• The loss of blue-collar jobs, erosion of real wages for low-skilled work, and weakened unions make unskilled work less available and attractive. •• Drug dealing becomes a fairly lucrative alternative employment option. •• Once they are caught and have served time, dismal job prospects for ex-cons make them less desirable marriage partners. •• This creates more female-headed households, a major cause of poverty (J. Marshall, 1992). Does minority group status itself produce higher crime rates? In general, the answer to this question is no. Much depends upon the particular minority group and its specific values and cultural traditions. In the United States, for instance, the crime rate among Japanese Americans and Asians in general is lower than that of the general population. Many newer immigrant groups in the United States such as Cambodians, Koreans, and Vietnamese have low crime rates in part because of close extended family ties, a strong work ethic, and merchant skills (Launer & Palenski, 1988; Light & Bonacich, 1988). On the other hand, the crime rates for Algerians in France or Finns in Sweden or Latinos in the United States are higher than those of the general population. Most immigrants to the United States have come from close-knit peasant societies, and the crime rate for this first-generational group is usually lower, with the exception of crimes peculiar to the area from which they emigrated. For instance, for the first-generation Italian immigrant, crime rates were lower, with the exception of murders and assaults. In the 1800s, the areas of southern Italy and Sicily from which they came were experiencing a wave of vendettas and violence, and this pattern was carried over into the New World. Similarly, Irish immigrants experienced higher rates for alcohol-related offenses; in the nineteenth century, Ireland reputedly had the highest alcoholism rate in the Western world. It is not the parental group of immigrants that exhibits excess criminality; for many groups, it is the second generation that shows a marked upsurge in crime. Living in a strange new land and often being the victims of discrimination, the first generation tends to cling to old values. Moreover, this group may fear deportation. Wishing to be Americanized, the second generation often rejects many of these ways and attempts to assimilate the general values of U.S. culture. Unfortunately, in the area in which these individuals live (zone II, for instance, according to concentric zone theory), they also assimilate the criminal values of a high-crime area. Not being placed in such environments or possessing a higher parental social class may explain the relative success of Vietnamese immigrants in the United States. Nettler (1982, Vol. 2, pp. 48–62), in a four-volume work, Criminal Careers, does an excellent job of summarizing much of the international research on ethnic migrants and crime. Care must be exercised in examining these data, since many of the studies refer to Gastarbeiter (guest workers), who are not immigrants as such, but rather temporary workers in the host community. Studies in Switzerland found the crime rate higher for foreigners than natives, particularly for violent crime. Ferracuti (1968) claimed that the crime rate of foreign workers increased as their numbers increased, although many of their crimes went unreported. Nettler (pp. 48–49) cites similar findings that suggest higher rates among Hungarians and Yugoslavs in Sweden; for Turks, Italians, Africans, and Mediterraneans in West Germany and Belgium; for Algerians in France; and for Irish, Asians, and West Indians in England. However, one chief problem in many of these studies is their failure to control for age and sex differentials, since many immigrant groups consist of a heavier population of young, single males, a group with a higher crime commission potential. Regional Variation in Crime Not only do crime rates, however difficult to measure, vary between nations, but they also vary by region within a country (see Brantingham & Brantingham, 1984). Table 3.5 shows that in 2010 the rates for murder, robbery, aggravated assault, larceny, and burglary were highest in the U.S. South, which also had the highest overall crime rate. The Northeast had the lowest overall crime rate. The rates for aggravated rape were highest in the Midwest, while vehicle theft was highest in the West. Journal Article Link 3.9 Examine literature regarding crime in midsized Rust Belt cities. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 72 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Urban/Rural Differences in Crime State Rankings Link 3.1 Crimes in urban areas. Internationally, urban recorded crime rates are generally higher than rural crime rates, and, with few exceptions, this difference appears to have been the case since cities first appeared. Although crime rates tend to increase with the size of the community, there are some important exceptions. UCR statistics in general show a positive relationship in which, as the size of community increases, the crime rate also increases. TABLE 3.5     Crime Rates by Size of Community UCR Index Crime Rates per 100,000 Population Violent Crime Property Crime Metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs)—urbanized areas that include at least one city with 50,000 or more inhabitants, or a Census Bureau–defined urbanized area of at least 50,000 inhabitants and a total population of at least 100,000 428.3 3,046 Non-MSA cities—these do not qualify as MSA central cities and are not otherwise included in an MSA. 349.7 3,602.3 1.195.1 1,605.8 Rural areas Source: Crime in the United States, 2010, FBI Uniform Crime Reports (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2011). State Rankings Link 3.2 Crimes in rural areas. This same relationship with size of community also holds in the NCVS. Even if one assumes less reporting and recording of rural crime, the difference between rural and urban rates persists. In the 2004 data, however, the rates for property crime were actually higher for smaller than for larger cities, yet rural and suburban crime rates have actually been increasing faster than those of central cities since the sixties. Urbanism and its “way of life” are no longer confined to cities. The advent of modern communications and transportation has effectively erased many of the distinctions between rural and urban lifestyles, creating a truly urban society. The relatively high rates of violent crime in rural areas may be explained by certain criminalistic traditions in some areas that are much closer to frontier values and by a possible “subculture of violence” (to be explored in Chapter 4), which may explain high rural rates in the South as well as southern Appalachia. Ferdinand (1991), in what he calls the “theft/violence ratio,” notes that historical studies show a relationship between social structure and levels of property or violent crime. Theft was more prevalent in older, established cities with a preindustrial history, whereas violent crime was more common in rural, agricultural regions and in rapidly and newly industrializing cities. Institutions and Crime Sociologists define social institutions as relatively stable social patterns that serve a broad range of crucial functions in society; examples are the economy, family, church, state, and education. In contrast, associations are special-purpose organizations that serve a narrow range of interests; examples are corporations, unions, and professional societies. The Family and Crime The family is the primary or most important agent of socialization, particularly during childhood. The family has exclusive contact with the child during the period of greatest dependency and plasticity. Despite considerable popular literature on the subject, there is little, if any, scientific evidence on the subject of child rearing. Advocates of permissive or restrictive socialization to the contrary, the key appears to be firm but consistent discipline that is reinforced as well as understood by the child. The most important variables correlated with delinquency are probably poor home discipline, neglect, and indifference (Rosenbaum, 1989a). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals Many U.S. studies of delinquency include under that label a significant number of activities, such as truancy, incorrigibility, and the like, that would not be criminal had they been committed by an adult. In a review of family factors associated with delinquency, Sutherland and Cressey (1974, pp. 203–218) as well as Hirschi (1983, pp. 53–68) point to moderate-to-high correlations between delinquency and immorality or criminality or alcoholism of parents, absence of one or both parents, a lack of parental control, unhappy home life, subcultural differences in the home, and economic pressures. The general process of family influence relates to the fact that the parental social class determines the residence, school, and associates of its offspring. Parental transmission of criminogenic attitudes or failure to train the child may influence delinquency. Similarly, a poor home environment may force the youth into the streets seeking peer primary group support. Statistics on broken homes, ordinal positions (birth order) of siblings, and number of siblings, and their influence on crime and delinquency appear inconclusive (L. Rosen & Neilson, 1978; Sutherland & Cressey, 1974, pp. 216–217). It would appear that the quality of family interaction is more important than the family structure per se. More sophisticated family studies of delinquents appear in early research by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck (1950), who examined 500 delinquents and 500 nondelinquents and found that roughly 50 percent of the delinquents were from broken homes compared with about 29 percent of nondelinquents. Delinquents were more likely to have families characterized by physical illness, mental retardation, mental disturbance, alcoholism, and parental criminality. Such parents employed poor child-rearing practices, being either overly strict or overly permissive and exercising discipline inconsistently. Thus, defective family relations were perceived as a key causal variable in delinquency (F. E. Hagan & Sussman, 1988). Cathy Spatz Widom (1992) found that childhood abuse increased the odds of delinquency and future adult criminality by about 40 percent. Neglect alone, not just physical abuse, was significantly related to later violent behavior. In the longest longitudinal study of delinquents—the “Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study”—begun in 1935, William and Joan McCord (1958) found delinquents to be products of poor or weak parental discipline as well as a quarrelsome home environment. Family structure, that is, whether the home was broken or intact, was less salient than the nature of family interaction. All of the boys from quarrelsome environments had been convicted of crime (J. Q. Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985, p. 232). D. J. West and Farrington’s (1977) longitudinal study of London working-class boys found the following associated with delinquency: low IQ, poor childrearing practices, criminality of father, large family size, and low family income. Similar findings with respect to defective parental supervision and socialization have been suggested by Baumrind (1978); Hirschi (1969); Patterson (1982); Van Voorhis, Cullen, Mathers, and Garner (1988); and K. N. Wright and Wright (1995). Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber (1986), in an exhaustive analysis of the literature, summarize the relationship between family and delinquency as exhibiting (a) the most powerful predictors—lack of parental supervision, parental rejection, and lack of parent–child involvement; (b) medium predictors—background variables such as parents’ marital relations and parental criminality; and (c) weaker predictors—lack of parental discipline, parental health, and parental absence. Research by other scholars confirms these findings (Farrington, Ohlin, & Wilson, 1986; Laub & Sampson, 1988). The proportion of children in American households living with both parents has declined since 1970. In that year, 90 percent of white children lived in intact households; in 1997, only 74 percent did so. For black children, the figures were 64 percent (1970) and 35 percent (1997) (Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Farnworth, & Jang, 1991). An estimated 40 percent of white children and 75 percent of African American children will experience parental separation or divorce by age 16, many of them multiple family transitions. Longitudinal studies of youth in Rochester, Denver, and Pittsburgh found substantial changes in family transition: Rochester—63.5 percent, Denver—49 percent, and Pittsburgh—30 percent. They found a consistent relationship between higher numbers of family transitions and higher delinquency (Thornberry, Smith, Rivera, Huizinga, & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1999). Conservative writers who have more recently dominated the literature, such as Hirschi (1983) and J. Q. Wilson and Herrnstein (1985), seem to view material disadvantage and quality of family life as mutually exclusive explanations. Currie (1985) calls this belief, that what goes on in the family is somehow separate from outside social forces that affect the family, the “fallacy of autonomy” (p. 185). Those who commit this fallacy fail to view the family in a larger social context; have an obsessive concern with control rather than supportive social policies; and lend the impression of intractability of family problems, unresponsive to enlightened social policy. Two influential works that challenge our criminological conception of family and crime are Daniel Moynihan’s Family and Nation (1986) and Elliott Currie’s Confronting Crime (1985). Moynihan reiterates his theme of the disintegration and siege of the American family, an issue that he claims should have concerned us in the sixties. He indicates that the individual has been the center of public policy in the United States rather than families: “This was a pattern almost uniquely American. Most of the industrial democracies of the world had adopted a wide range of social programs designed specifically to support the stability and viability of 73 Video Link 3.5 View a video about family feuds. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 74 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Photo 3.4 A mother and her children spend the night in a shelter after being evicted from their home in Texas. Twenty-four percent of schoolage children live in poverty, which has been correlated with the rise of female-headed households and the feminization of poverty. Journal Article Link 3.10 Read an article about risk factors related to juvenile delinquency. the family” (p. 5). While growth in federal entitlement programs since the sixties led to a major achievement—the virtual elimination of poverty among the elderly—by the 1980s the United States had achieved another unique distinction: It had become the first society in history in which people are more likely to be poor if they are young than if they are old. The age bias of poverty is pronounced, affecting 24 percent of school-age children. The principal correlate has been a change in family structure—the rise of female-headed households and the feminization of poverty. In 1984, nearly half of the poor in the United States lived in female-headed households (Moynihan, 1986, p. 96). The percentage of such households nearly doubled from 10 percent of all families in 1960. A flattening of the tax system and federal reduction in income maintenance programs constituted a federal family policy in reverse. While three fourths of median family income in 1948 was exempt from federal tax (a powerful national family policy), by 1983 less than one third of such income was exempt. Of particular concern in fueling single parenthood has been the rising illegitimacy rates in the United States. While broken homes per se are an uncertain predictor of delinquency and crime, the stresses and lack of support systems that result in changed family functioning for the more impoverished and growing numbers of single mothers and children are of concern. Currie (1985) states, The real issue is whether we regard the evidence on the persistence of family problems and the continuity of troubling behavior from childhood to adult life as indicative of predispositions that are largely unrelated to their social context and that we are virtually powerless to alter. (p. 219) Education and Crime The relationship between education (formal schools/schooling) and crime and delinquency is at least twofold. First, for adolescents in modern societies, schools—particularly high schools—represent a major factor in their self-esteem at a very important stage in their lives. Second, there is an inverse (negative) relationship between the amount of formal schooling individuals possess and arrest rates for traditional crimes. The fact that traditional crime commission decreases with the amount of formal education simply reflects the fact that legitimate opportunities increase with formal education, as do occupational and corporate criminal opportunities, which are less likely to be criminally stigmatizing. It is not formal education per se that causes or prevents crime; rather, educational status reflects one’s social class, location of residence, and exposure to criminal or delinquent opportunity. Research on crime and delinquency has come to focus most heavily on family and education as critical variables (J. D. Hawkins & Lishner, 1987; J. Q. Wilson & Lowry, 1987). Moynihan (1986, p. 92) cites a study commissioned by the National Association of Elementary School Principals (1980) titled The Most Significant Minority: One-Parent Children in the Schools, which found that one-parent kids were twice as likely to drop out and showed significantly lower achievement in school. Fagan, Piper, and Moore (1986) note that violent delinquents in inner cities differ from nondelinquents in their attachment to school, their peers, and weak maternal authority, among other variables. They indicate, Complex social, economic and political factors are contributing to the creation of a vast new class of poor persons who are younger, more poorly educated and more likely to give birth sooner. One of the predictable consequences of this phenomenon is the continuing isolation of inner-city communities and a hardening of the processes observed among these samples. . . . These findings suggest that FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 75 Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals delinquency policy should be linked with economic development policy. The infusion of material and social resources into inner-city neighborhoods may strengthen social institutions including schools and families and alter the familiar correlates of serious delinquency by providing for the natural controls which characterize lower-crime neighborhoods. (p. 463) Strong school bonding decreases the likelihood of delinquency. Denno (1985) indicates that a major predictor of delinquency is misconduct in school. An example of a highly successful program is Head Start, which targets preschool enrichment. Schweinhart and Weikart (1980), in evaluating such a program for disadvantaged black children, found better later elementary school performance, higher rates of graduation from high school, increased employment, and less crime and delinquency. F. Adler (1983), in a previously cited study of low-crime nations, analyzed 47 variables and found the only factor common to all low-crime countries was strong social controls outside the formal system of justice. This well illustrates the fact that crime and justice matters are not to be treated in isolation from general societal conditions. Religion and Crime Lee Ellis (1996), in a review of criminology texts, found that only 2 of 18 even mentioned religion as a variable in crime causation, despite the fact that a significant one third of the public believes it plays a significant role. Of major religious groups in the United States, Jews have the lowest official crime rate, followed by Protestants; Catholics have the highest rates. Why? There is a hidden variable: social class. Catholics in the United States include a significant proportion of low-income minorities, particularly in the Southwest. Of Protestant denominations, Presbyterians and Episcopalians have lower crime rates, while Baptists have the highest. Again, social class rather than denominational affiliation is the explanation. L. Ellis (1985) reviewed over 60 studies in the research literature on this religion–crime connection. The majority of the studies confirm, as might be expected, that attendance at religious services reduced crime commission. This is a stronger relationship than that between religious denomination and crime. Religion may be the “forgotten” factor in criminological theory (B. R. Johnson & Jang, 2010). In a review of 270 reports on religion and crime since the late 1960s, they found that only two of the articles reported any negative effects of religion on crime (Akers, 2010). War and Crime War has an impact upon crime. Although it is an example of institutionalized violence, elements of war itself may be considered violations of international law. Social conflict theorists such as Simmel (1955) and Coser (1956) tell us that conflict with an outside group tends to increase the internal solidarity within groups; that is, as conflict with outside enemies increases, conflict within groups decreases. During major wars, the domestic crime rate as a whole tends to decline. This probably reflects increased social solidarity, group cohesion against an outside enemy, and high employment. Juvenile delinquency tends to increase during such periods because of displacement of families and increased mobility. As noted earlier, female crime rates increase because of increased opportunity. A major form of crime that tends to increase during wartime is “white-collar crime” such as black-marketeering, profiteering, wartime trade violations, violations of wage-price freezes, and the like (Sutherland & Cressey, 1974, pp. 240–241). Photo 3.5 Programs such as Head Start have been found to improve elementary school performance and contribute to higher rates of graduation from high school, employment, and less crime and delinquency. Video Link 3.6 View a video about sexual abuse in the church. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 76 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Archer and Gartner (1984, pp. 79–81), using their “Comparative Crime Data File,” found that nations participating in World Wars I and II were more likely to experience postwar increases in homicide than control nations (those who had not participated). The differences are similar, but less pronounced, after smaller wars. They found data supporting a “legitimation of violence model” (p. 92) in which wars tend to legitimate the general use of violence in domestic society. Economy and Crime In summarizing the diverse literature on the relationship between trends in the economy and crime, Sutherland and Cressey (1974) draw the following conclusions: •• Serious crimes have a slight and inconsistent tendency to rise in periods of economic depression and to fall in periods of prosperity. •• The general crime rate does not increase significantly in periods of economic depression. •• Property crimes involving violence tend to increase in periods of depression, but property crimes involving no violence, such as larceny, show only a slight and inconsistent tendency to increase in depression periods. •• Juvenile delinquency tends to increase in periods of prosperity and to decrease during periods of depression (pp. 225–226). Video Link 3.7 View a video about the impact the economy has on crime. Using data from the United States, Canada, England, Scotland, and Wales, Brenner (1978) examined historical data for all major crimes since 1900 and their relationship to employment/unemployment, per capita income, inflation, and other economic indices. He found in all five political areas that the rate of unemployment showed strong and significant relationships to increases in all major categories of crime (p. 562). There is a significant difference in these statistics before and after World War II. There has been a speeded up or a quicker reaction to unemployment since World War II, particularly an increase in violent crimes. The United States especially demonstrated inverse (negative) correlations between employment and incarceration rates (see also Cantor & Land, 1985). Currie (Skolnick & Currie, 1988) argues that conservative criminologists tend to underemphasize the impact of economic forces on crime. He points out that, while little crime increase took place during the Depression, crime rose during the more prosperous sixties. Currie feels there is a strong, although subtle, relationship and that those who underemphasize the economy ignore three factors: First, subgroups with high crime rates—such as young black men—do have high unemployment rates, even when overall unemployment is low. Second, unemployment has a different impact when it portends a lifetime of diminished opportunity. And finally, unemployment statistics do not reflect the quality of available work. (p. 471) In examining the relationship between the economy and crime, it is important to note that there have been many changes in the economy since 1960. Women have joined the workforce in large numbers. Unions have decreased their size and influence, while much manufacturing has moved overseas and computers and the Internet have altered the nature of the economy. Most affected by all of this is a shift away from dependence on less educated male workers. This is especially pronounced for young, black males (Bushway, 2010). Mass Media and Crime Handbook Article Link 3.4 Read an article on mass media and crime. A subject of continual heated debate is the role of the mass media in encouraging crime, particularly crimes of violence. Do comic books, violent video games, music, newspapers, magazines, movies, or television cause an increase in crime? This protracted debate is periodically fueled by crimes, especially brutal ones, that appear to have some link with the media coverage or fictionalization of criminal events. Charles Manson was obsessed with the Beatles, while Mark Chapman, the assassin of John Lennon, carried a copy of The Catcher in the Rye. In the aftermath of the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, yet another culprit was added to the witch hunt or moral panic regarding the media and crime (Ferguson, 2007). It was alleged that video games such as Counter-Strike or Streetfighter II may have inspired the shooter, Seung-Hui Cho. Two FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals meta-analyses of video games by Sherry and another by Ferguson found no relationship between video games and aggressive behavior (cited in Ferguson, 2007). In contrast, more than two decades of research on video games includes the American Psychological Association’s Resolution on Violence in Video Games and Interactive Media, passed in 2005, which concluded that exposure to violent media increases aggression in children and youth (cited in Carll, 2007). For a subgroup of disturbed youth, such media predisposes them to violence by exposing them to violent video games that rehearse recipes for action. Such interactive games may be more potent than other media. Two rival hypotheses exist with respect to media and violence: the catharsis hypothesis and the precipitation hypothesis. The former claims that exposure to media violence enables a vicarious letting-off-of-steam and thus has a calming effect. This notion comes to us from the Greek tragedies, in which it was assumed that audiences, as a result of identification with the terrible travail and violent experiences of the characters, would feel an emotional purging of their own frustration, anger, or desire. In contrast, the precipitation hypothesis assumes that exposure to media coverage of violence, fact or fiction, will produce greater propensities to aggression and violence. In an early report titled Television and Behavior, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1982) concluded on the basis of a review of the research literature that there is an association between the viewing of television violence and aggression. One finding that seems continually to present itself concerns the image of society that television creates. In an American Broadcasting Company (ABC, 1983b) poll of viewers, 51 percent of respondents thought television news (a) gives too much coverage to crime and violence and that this distorts the public view of what is really going on in the streets; (b) leads to the perception that crime is more rampant and a person more likely to be victimized than is in fact the case; and (c) brainwashes us into fear, suspicion, and feelings of vulnerability. The National Institute of Mental Health, in its review of the literature, concluded that violence on television was one factor in children’s aggressiveness, although not necessarily in their violent behavior (cited in ABC, 1983b). In support of the precipitation hypothesis, Glaser (1978) states, “The $30 billion spent annually in the United States on advertising—about $5 billion of it on television—suggests that many people have faith in the impact of mass communication on conduct” (p. 235). A contrary view is presented by a 14-nation international study of television violence, which found that Japan has the most violent programming and is relatively free of violent crime (“Japanese TV,” 1992). This low crime rate appears unaffected by graphically violent comic books, tabloids, videos, and a thriving market in pornography. Copycat Crimes The issue of differential impacts of the media on different subgroups can be illustrated by means of the notion of “copycat crimes.” The term copycat is a slang expression for imitation; thus, copycat crimes are fads in crime and are often stimulated by media coverage or portrayals. In the early days of television, there was tremendous concern about children imitating Superman by jumping from the tops of buildings. In the 1990s, when a 5-year-old girl in Norway was stoned and kicked by playmates and left to freeze to death in the snow, the Scandinavian network TV-3 dropped the American live-action series Mighty Morphin Power Rangers from its broadcasts in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (Mellgren, 1994). The 1976 film Taxi Driver, in which a character played by Robert DeNiro attempts to kill the president, inspired Reagan’s attempted assassin, John Hinckley, Jr. The film The Program inspired two teenagers to copy a scene in which drunken football players play “chicken” by lying in the middle of a highway. The boys were killed. The film Natural Born Killers was banned in Great Britain and Ireland because of copycat murders in the United States and France (Murr & Rogers, 1995, p. 47). The film Child’s Play and its sequels featured a demonic, animated character called Chucky, and may have inspired two boys from Liverpool to lure a 2-year-old boy from a local shopping mall and subsequently to murder him (Kolbert, 1994, p. A13). The horrible dragging death of a black man, James Byrd, Jr., behind a pickup truck in Jasper, Texas, in 1998, perpetrated by three white men and widely publicized in the news media, was followed by two similar crimes in Illinois and Louisiana. Similar patterns with copycat school shootings and workplace violence have also been noted. Much like the tobacco industry, the purveyors of such violent themes claim no direct causal relationship between their product and harmful outcomes. However, the scientific studies are overwhelming in predicting harmful effects, even though in any particular case not all individuals are adversely affected. 77 Journal Article Link 3.11 Examine literature regarding kids, crime, and local television news. Journal Article Link 3.12 Examine literature regarding children and crime on television. Audio Link 3.4 Listen to a discussion of school shootings and copycat crimes. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 78 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY On July 26, 2000, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry issued a joint declaration stating the following: Viewing violence may lead to real-life violence. . . . Children exposed to violent programming at a young age have a higher tendency for violent and aggressive behavior later in life than children who are not so exposed. (quoted in American Academy of Pediatrics, 2000, n.p.) Summary In reviewing descriptions and statistical accounts of crime and criminals, it is important to examine the database or other sources of findings and conclusions. Official statistics, victim surveys, self-reports, and other sources all provide different pictures. Similarly, the various types of criminal activity being addressed, whether traditional or elite, will provide different findings. Although they differ slightly in definitions of crime, concentrating on incidents in the UCR and on victims in the NCVS, the two measures are viewed as converging, with each providing certain information that the other lacks. Estimates of the prevalence of crime depend on the measure used, with the extent of crime increasing as we move from UCR to NCVS to self-reports to estimates of corporate crime and other forms of criminality. The bulk of UCR Part I or index crimes consists of property crimes; the most frequent arrests among Part II crimes are for service functions. Trends in crime as measured by the UCR demonstrate a major crime wave in the United States since the mid-sixties. Comparison of trends using the NCVS since the early seventies shows only a small increase, if not a stable pattern in criminal victimization. Despite the lack of good, representative selfreport surveys of the general population, existing studies certainly suggest that crime is even more pervasive than is reported in the UCR and NCVS. Official statistics on crime indicate that most of those arrested are young (15 to 19 years of age). This is particularly the case with serious property crimes. Age profiles obviously would be altered upward were we to have accurate estimates for corporate and “upperworld” violators. Of all demographic variables, gender is the best universal predictor of criminality; with the exception of prostitution, the male crime rate exceeds the female rate for all crimes, although the gap has been closing, particularly in developed societies. This difference in criminality by gender can best be explained by cultural and socialization differences rather than by innate genetic ones. While some self-report studies demonstrate less of a gap, others indicate patterns like those in official data. Official statistics show an inverse relationship between social class and criminality (as measured by arrests); that is, as social class rises, criminality decreases. This relationship remains a subject of debate. Most recent selfreport surveys indicate that patterns of lower-class admissions of criminality match those of official statistics. Such findings belie the possibility of high upper-class criminality, since the most typical upper-class offenses are not tapped by such sources. In examining race and crime, the reader was informed of the precariousness of the scientific concept of race and that a goodly proportion of the black population in the United States might better be described as being of mixed race. UCR arrest statistics indicate a black crime rate, particularly for violent crimes, that greatly exceeds their proportion of the U.S. population. Despite countervailing biases in these statistics, it would appear that they are accurate descriptions of excessive commission of these offenses. Most crime is intraracial in nature; that is, most whites victimize whites and most blacks victimize blacks. While self-report surveys show mixed results, more recent studies confirm higher rates among blacks for serious offenses. Minority group status itself does not result in higher crime rates. Early research demonstrated high rates in the area of transition (zone II) despite turnover in the minority in residence. Some groups—Dutch and Japanese, for example—never appear to have had higher crime rates. The first generation of immigrants generally has lower crime rates than the native population. It is their offspring, becoming Americanized into the lower class, who experience higher rates. Blacks have had higher rates than other minorities in part because of a maturing economy, the disability of race, late entry into the political system, and cultural factors. Crime patterns of European immigrants are similar to general U.S. patterns, although many “immigrants” are really temporary guest workers. Official U.S. crime rates vary by region, with the South highest for murder, rape, and burglary; the West highest for assault, vehicle theft, and larceny; and the Northeast highest for robbery. International variations are difficult to determine because of inadequacies in crime statistics. Urban crime rates are generally higher FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 3. General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 79 than suburban and rural ones, particularly for property crimes. Recently, suburban and rural rates have been increasing more rapidly than urban rates. While much has been written regarding the impact of the family on crime, with variables such as poor home discipline, neglect, indifference, parental criminality, and others identified as correlates, the key appears to be the quality of the family interaction rather than its structure as such. The impact of education on crime is highly correlated with social class. Major external conflicts (wars) appear to decrease internal conflicts (crime), with the exceptions of female crime, juvenile delinquency, and certain white-collar crimes. Studies of economic trends and crime show inconsistent results; however, since the end of World War II there has been a quicker crime increase, particularly in violent crimes, corresponding with dips in the economy. The nature of the impact of media upon crime is unresolved. While some propose a catharsis hypothesis (media violence as a vicarious, tension-relieving function), others support a precipitation hypothesis (media violence as an encouragement of the acting out of fictional themes). Television portrayals of violence appear to create increased feelings of potential vulnerability on the part of the public. Surveys of the literature by the Department of Health and Human Services, the Surgeon General’s Committee, and the National Institute of Mental Health all concluded that violence on television tends to increase aggressiveness in children. Media violence appears to have particular, albeit unpredictable, impacts on certain subpopulations of viewers. This point was illustrated by the occurrence of copycat crimes, imitation crimes based on media portrayals. Criminology on the Web Log on to the Web-based student study site at for author-created podcasts, eFlashcards, quizzes, and more. KEY CONCEPTS Age-Crime Debate Androcentric Bias Catharsis Hypothesis Copycat Crimes Crime Trends Fallacy of Autonomy Feminization of Poverty Gender Institutions Precipitation Hypothesis Social Class Urban/Rural Differences in Crime REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. How does crime vary internationally? Where does the United States stand with respect to crime compared with other countries of the world? 2. What is the androcentric bias in criminology, and what trends are taking place in the field to counteract it? 3. What is the issue of racial profiling? What impact has this had on rates of arrest and incarceration, and what is being done to remedy the problem? 4. How are Native Americans affected by crime, both as perpetrators and as victims? What explanations are there for this? 5. What is William Julius Wilson’s major point in The Truly Disadvantaged? What are some steps that have been proposed to remedy this problem? 6. What is the impact of the media on crime? What are some proposals for controlling media precipitation of crime? 7. What is the importance of crime typologies? How would you begin to answer the following question: “What causes crime?” 8. What role does age play in explaining crime rates? 9. What is transnational crime? What are some policy recommendations for dealing with this phenomenon? 10. What are some problems/limitations in using and interpreting international measures of crime? FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 80 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY WEB SOURCES American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry National Institute of Justice Atlantic Monthly’s Criminology Collection Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Florida State University’s Criminal Justice Site Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics Megalinks in Criminal Justice TruTV’s Crime Library National Criminal Justice Reference Service Uniform Crime Reports WEB EXERCISES Using this chapter’s recommended websites, explore variations in crime. 3. What types of information are available on The Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics? 1. What types of information are provided on the Atlantic Monthly site on crime? 4. Perform an online search for “international crime,” “inter­ national crime statistics,” and “transnational crime.” Can you draw any preliminary broad conclusions from this search? 2. Examine Tom O’Connor’s Megalinks in Criminal Justice and find some sources on international variations in crime. SELECTED READINGS Joanne Belknap. (1996). The Invisible Woman: Gender, Crime and Justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. This book provides an excellent review and assessment of critical issues related to the issue of gender in criminology and criminal justice. David Cole. (1999). No Equal Justice: Race and Class in the American Criminal Justice System. New York: New Press. Cole makes a strong case that inequality exists in the American criminal justice system primarily due to uneven enforcement as part of the war on drugs. Alida Merlo and Peter Benekos, editors. (2000). What’s Wrong With the Criminal Justice System: Ideology, Politics and the Media. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson. This book reviews what is “wrong” with the criminal justice system and what can be done to make it “less wrong.” It reviews three themes: the impact of ideology, the role of the media, and the politicization of crime and criminal justice. Kathryn K. Russell. (1999). The Color of Crime. New York: New York University Press. Russell examines the role of race in the operations of the American criminal justice system. Howard Snyder and Melissa Sickmund. (2006). Juvenile Offenders and Victims, 1999 National Report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. This annual report on the state of the U.S. juvenile justice system might better be titled “Everything you always wanted to know about the American juvenile justice system, but were afraid to ask.” This bible of juvenile justice features excellent, multicolored graphics and is also available in a CD-ROM version. Contact the Office of Juvenile Justice for a copy. Richard Terrill. (2009). World Criminal Justice Systems: A Survey (4th ed.). Cincinnati: Anderson. Terrill provides an incisive review of criminal justice systems in countries throughout the world, including updates on China and Russia. William Julius Wilson. (2012). The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass and Public Policy (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. In what has become a modern-day sociological classic, Wilson describes the “deindustrialization” and abandonment of areas of our inner cities and the accompanying social disorganization and crime. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. The Nature of Victimization The Typical Victimization and Victim The Costs of Victimization Economic Costs System Costs Crime File 4.1 The Story of James Mental Health Consequences and Costs Fear of Crime Recurring Victimization Theories of Victimization The Role of the Victim in Crime Crime File 4.2 When Offender Becomes Victim Routine Activities and Lifestyles Theory Structural Causes of Victimization Caring for the Victim Victims’ Rights Victim Remedies and Services Summary Key Concepts Review Questions Web Sources Web Exercises Selected Readings 82 chapter 4 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. What Is Victimology? Leah Daigle Georgia State University One of the most neglected subjects in the study of crime is its victims. —The President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (1967) T he term victimology is not new. In fact, Benjamin Mendelsohn first used it in 1947 to describe the scientific study of crime victims. Oftentimes considered a subfield of criminology, the two fields do share much in common. Just as criminology is the study of criminals—what they do, why they do it, and how the criminal justice system responds to them—victimology is the study of victims. Victimology, then, includes the study of the etiology (or causes) of victimization, of its consequences, of how the criminal justice system accommodates and assists victims, and of how other elements of society such as the media deal with crime victims. Victimology is a science; victimologists use the scientific method to answer questions about victims. For example, instead of simply wondering or hypothesizing about why younger people are more likely to be victims than older people, victimologists conduct research to attempt to identify the reasons why younger people appear to be more vulnerable. Author Podcast 4.1 Listen to the author’s podcast for this chapter. The Nature of Victimization We can learn about the extent to which persons are victimized by examining official data sources such as the Uniform Crime Report and surveys such as the National Crime Victimization Survey. Recall from Chapter 2 that the UCR is an official data source that shows the amount of crimes known to police each year. According to the UCR, in 2008, the police became aware of 1,382,012 violent crimes and 9,767,915 property crimes. The most common offense was larceny-theft. Aggravated assaults were the most common violent crime, although they were outnumbered by larceny-thefts. Each year, the BJS publishes Criminal Victimization in the United States, which is a report about crime victimization as measured by the NCVS. In Chapter 2, you also learned that the NCVS is a victimization survey in which persons are asked about their victimization experiences in the previous 6 months. From this report, we can see what the most typical victimizations are and who is most likely to be victimized. In 2010, a total of 18.7 million victimizations were experienced by the nation’s households (Rand, 2009). Property crimes were much more likely to be experienced as compared to violent crimes. Although 3.8 million violent crime victimizations were experienced, 14.8 million property crime victimizations occurred. The most common type of property crime experienced was theft, while simple assault was most commonly reported. As can be seen in Figure 4.1, the property crime victimization rate has been declining over the long term. A similar pattern is seen in Figure 4.2, which displays the violent crime victimization rate since 1993. 83 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 84 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY FIGURE 4.1     Property Crime Victimization Rate in the United States, 1993–2010 Rate per 1,000 households 350 300 250 200 Property victimization 150 100 50 0 1993 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 2000 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06* ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 *Due to methodological changes, use caution when comparing 2006 NCVS criminal victimization estimates to other years. Source: : Criminal Victimization, 2010, by J. Truman (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2011). Available at FIGURE 4.2     Violent Crime Victimization Rate in the United States, 1993–2010 Rate per 1,000 persons age 12 or older 100 75 50 25 Total violent victimization Serious violent victimization 0 1993 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 2000 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06* ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 *Due to methodological changes, use caution when comparing 2006 NCVS criminal victimization estimates to other years. Source: : Criminal Victimization, 2010, by J. Truman (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2011). Available at FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 85 Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? The Typical Victimization and Victim The typical crime victimization can also be identified from the NCVS. Less than half of all victimizations experienced by individuals in the NCVS are reported to the police. This may be in part related to the fact that most victims of violent crime knew their offender. Most often, victims identified their attacker as a friend or acquaintance. Strangers only accounted for about one third of violent victimizations in the NCVS. In only 1 in 5 incidents did the offender have a weapon. This may be one of the reasons why most victimizations do not result in physical injury—about one fourth of assaults do, while 35 percent of robbery victims suffer a physical injury (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006a). Certain characteristics of victims are also evident. We can tell from the NCVS what gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and households are most likely to be victimized. Gender Historically, the NCVS has shown that for all violent victimizations except for rape and sexual assaults, males are more likely to be victimized than females. In 2010, however, this gender gap in violent victimization was less evident—males and females had similar rates of violent victimization, although females remained at an increased risk of experiencing rape and sexual assault compared to males (Truman, 2011). One difference between male and female victims is who offends against them. Females are more likely than males to be victimized by an intimate partner. In 2010, a total of 22 percent of violent victimization incidents against females were perpetrated by an intimate partner compared to 5 percent of incidents involving male victims (Truman, 2011). Race and Ethnicity The NCVS also indicates that persons of certain races/ethnic groups are at higher risks of experiencing violent victimizations than others. Persons who are black have higher victimization rates than those who are white or Hispanic (20.8 per 1,000 persons compared to 13.6 per 1,000 and 15.6 per 1,000, respectively). Those who reported being of two or more races (52.6 per 1,000) or who are American Indian or Alaska Natives (42.2 per 1000), however, had the highest rates of violent victimization in 2010 (Truman, 2011). Age Age is also a risk factor for victimization. Persons who are young face the greatest risk of becoming a victim of violent crime. Individuals between the ages of 18 and 20 years have the highest violent victimization rate, followed by 21- to 24-year-olds. Persons aged 12 to 14 years are more likely to be violently victimized than persons 50 and older (Truman, 2011). Household Characteristics Characteristics of the household also play a role in victimization risk. Households in which the total income is low are more likely to experience property victimization than other households. But how low of a total income places a household at risk? Households in the lowest income categories—those earning less than $7,500 or Photo 4.1 Strangers only account for about one-third of violent victimizations in the NCVS. Audio Link 4.1 Listen to a discussion about stalking. Video Link 4.1 Watch a video about age and victimization. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 86 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY between $7,500 and $14,999 annually—faced the greatest risk of burglary and theft. Households earning less than $7,500 had a burglary victimization rate that was twice the rate of households whose income was $75,000 per year or higher. The size of the household also matters. The greater the number of people in the household, the greater the property victimization rate. In fact, households with six or more people in them had a property crime victimization rate that was almost 2.5 times higher than single-headed households (Truman, 2011). The Costs of Victimization Handbook Article Link 4.1 Read an article about the economic costs of victimization. Victimologists are not only concerned with who becomes a crime victim, but also the varied costs associated with being a victim of crime. These costs can be economic, but victimization can also take a toll on a victim’s mental health and ability to work. Economic Costs Economic costs of victimization include those experienced by the victim and those the public incurs. In this sense, victimization is a public health issue. Economic costs can result from property losses; monies associated with medical care; time lost from work, school, and housework; pain, suffering, and reduced quality of life; and legal fees. In 2008, the total economic loss from crimes was estimated to be $17,397 billion by the National Crime Victimization Survey (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009). The NCVS also shows that the median dollar amount of loss attributed to crime when there was a loss was $200. Although this number may appear to be low, it largely represents the fact that the typical property crime is a simple larceny-theft. Direct Property Losses Photo 4.2 Although often less visible than property or physical damage, struggles with mental health and productivity losses must also be taken into account when considering the cost of victimization. Crime victims often experience tangible losses in terms of having their property damaged or taken. Generally, when determining property losses, the value of property that is damaged or taken and not recovered as well as insurance claims administration costs are considered. According to the NCVS, in 2008, a total of 94 percent of property crimes resulted in economic losses (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009). In one of the most comprehensive reports sponsored by the National Institute of Justice on the costs of victimizations, Ted Miller, Mark Cohen, and Brian Wiersema (1996) estimated the property loss or damage experienced per crime victimization event. They found that arson victimizations resulted in an estimated $15,500 per episode. Motor vehicle theft cost approximately $3,300 for each incident. Personal crime victimizations typically do not result in as much direct property losses. For example, only 18 percent of personal crime victimizations resulted in economic loss. Rape and sexual assaults typically result in $100 of property loss or damage. It is very rare for a victim of a violent or property offense to recover some of his or her losses. In only about 1 in 10 instances do victims recover all or some property (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009). Medical Care To be sure, many victims would gladly suffer property loss if it meant they did not experience any physical injury. After all, items can be replaced and damage repaired. Physical injury, on the other hand, may lead to victims having to seek medical attention, which for some may be the first step in accumulating costs associated with their victimization. Medical care costs encompass costs of transporting victims to the hospital, care by a doctor, prescription drugs, allied health services, medical devices, coroner costs, insurance claims processing costs, and premature funeral expenses (Miller et al., 1996). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? Results from the NCVS indicate that in 2008, a total of 542,280 violent crime victims received some type of medical care (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009). Of those victims, about 33 percent received care at a hospital emergency room or an emergency clinic and 9 percent were hospitalized. Receiving medical care often results in victims incurring medical expenses. Almost 8 percent of victims of violence report having medical expenses as a result of being victimized (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2007). About 65 percent of injured victims had health insurance or were eligible for public medical services. Costs vary across types of victimization. For example, the annual cost of hospitalizations for victims of child abuse is estimated to be $6.2 billion (Prevent Child Abuse America, 2000). Medical treatment for battered women is estimated to be $1.8 billion annually (Wisner, Gilmer, Saltman, & Zink, 1999). Per-criminal victimization medical care costs have also been estimated. Assaults in which there were injuries cost $1,470 per incident. Drunk driving victims who were injured incurred $6,400 apiece in medical care costs (Miller et al., 1996). Gun violence is associated with substantial medical costs for victims. Although most crime victims do not require hospitalization, even if they are treated in the emergency room, a report on gun violence published by the Office for Victims of Crime showed that gunshot victims make up one third of those who require hospitalization (cited in Bonderman, 2001). Persons who are shot and admitted to the hospital are likely to face numerous re-hospitalizations and incur medical costs across their lifetime. In 1994, for all victims of firearm injuries, the lifetime medical costs totaled $1.7 billion (P. J. Cook, Lawrence, Ludwig, & Miller, 1999, cited in Bonderman). Spinal cord injuries are particularly expensive, with average totals for first-year medical costs alone reaching over $217,000. The average cost per victim of spinal cord injury related to violence is over $600,000 (DeVito, 1997, cited in Bonderman). 87 Journal Article Link 4.1 Read an article about the health care consequences of victimization. Mental Health Care Costs When victims seek out mental health care, this also adds to their total losses. It is estimated that between 10 and 20 percent of total mental health care costs in the United States is related to crime (Miller et al., 1996). Most of this cost is a result of crime victims seeking treatment to deal with the effects of their victimization. Between one quarter and one half of rape and child sexual abuse victims receive mental health care. As a result, sexual victimizations, of both adults and children, result in some of the largest mental health care costs for victims. The average mental health care cost per rape and sexual assault is $2,200; for child abuse, it is $5,800. Victims of arson who are injured incur about $10,000 per victimization in mental health care expenditures. Victimization may also take a toll on other persons. The average murder results in between 1.5 and 2.5 people receiving mental health counseling (Miller et al., 1996). Losses in Productivity Persons who are victimized may experience an inability to work at their place of employment, complete housework, or attend school. Not being able to do these things contributes to the total lost productivity that crime victims experience. In 2008, about 7 percent of persons who said they had been violently victimized in the NCVS lost some time from work. About the same percentage of victims of property offenses lost time from work. Some victims are more prone to miss work than others. Almost one fourth of motor vehicle theft victims miss at least 1 day of work (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009). Data from the NCVS show that 18 percent of rape and sexual assault victims missed more than 10 days from work (NCVS, 2006), while victims of intimate partner violence lose almost 8 million paid days from work annually (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2003). Employers also bear some costs when their employees are victimized; the victimized employees may be less productive, the employers may incur costs associated with hiring replacements, and they may experience costs dealing with the emotional responses of their employees. Parents also may incur costs when their children are victimized and they are unable to meet all of their job responsibilities as a result of doing things like taking the child to the doctor or staying home with the child (Miller et al., 1996). Pain, Suffering, and Lost Quality of Life The most difficult cost to quantify is the pain, suffering, and loss of quality of life that crime victims experience. When these elements are added to the costs associated with medical care, lost earnings, and programs associated with victim assistance, the cost to crime victims increases fourfold. In other words, this is the largest cost that crime victims sustain. For example, one study estimated the cost to rape victims in terms of out-of-pocket expenses to be slightly less than $5,100. The crime of rape, however, on average, costs $87,000 when its impact on quality of life is considered (Miller et al., 1996). Video Link 4.2 Watch a video about the effects of bullying. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 88 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Another cost that crime victims may experience is a change in their routines and lifestyle. Many victims report that after being victimized, they changed their behavior. To illustrate, victims of stalking may change their phone number, move, or change their normal routine. Others may stop going out alone or start carrying a weapon when they do so. Although these changes may reduce the risk of being victimized again, for victims to bear the cost of crime seems somewhat unfair. System Costs The victim is not the only entity that is impacted economically as a result of crime. The United States in general spends an incredible amount of money on criminal justice. When including costs for law enforcement, the courts, and corrections, the direct expenditures of the criminal justice system are over $214 billion annually (BJS, 2006a). The criminal justice system employs over 2.4 million persons, whose payroll tops $9 billion. Obviously, crime is big business in the United States! Insurance companies pay approximately $45 billion annually due to crime. The federal government also pays $8 billion annually for restorative and emergency services to crime victims. There are other costs that society must absorb as a result of crime. For example, it costs Americans when individuals who are not insured or who are on public assistance are victimized and receive medical care. The U.S. government covers about one fourth of health insurance payouts to crime victims. Gunshot victims alone cost taxpayers over $4.5 billion dollars annually (Headden, 1996). These costs are not distributed equally across society. Some communities have been hit particularly hard by violence, gun violence in particular. Some 96 percent of hospital expenses associated with gun violence at King/Drew Medical Center in Los Angeles are paid for with public funds (Bonderman, 2001). See Crime File 4.1 to better understand the costs of gun violence. Crime File 4.1 The Story of James James, 45, was shot in the knee on Sept. 9 as he sat in a car with another man, who died of his wounds at the scene. James’ injuries, which also included a hole in the arm and fragments in the eye, were not near vital organs. His knee looked bad when he came into Froedtert’s trauma center, but that turned out to be just the beginning. The next day, he aspirated as a breathing tube was being inserted during surgery, and contents from his stomach got into his lungs. “It is kind of like a chemical burn,” trauma surgeon James Feeney said. James had to stay in intensive care on a ventilator and heavily sedated for almost two weeks, while his hospital charges ballooned. For about a week, he was on drugs that essentially paralyzed most of his muscles. When he began to regain consciousness, he suffered another setback, called ICU psychosis. The maddening disorder is believed to be caused by a variety of factors in intensive care, including breathing tubes, lights, beeping noises, a lack of sleep and sensory deprivation or overload. It can make patients temporarily insane. “His agitation was so severe every time we tried to take him off (the ventilator), he would get crazy and wild,” Feeney said. James eventually got out of intensive care and has improved dramatically. Doctors say they think they have saved his leg, although they don’t know how functional it will be. They also don’t know how much vision he lost. He is likely to need more surgeries on both the knee and the eye, Feeney said. He also will need extensive physical therapy. “The truth is, a lot of these guys would have died 20 years ago before we had an organized system of trauma care,” Feeney said. After a call that started off as a man shot in the leg, he spent nearly six weeks in Froedtert. When he was discharged Oct. 20, the hospital charges—which will be billed to Medicare—topped $277,000. Medicare caps reimbursement for shooting cases at $36,000, said Blaine O’Connell, Froedtert’s chief financial officer. Medicaid and Milwaukee County’s General Assistance Medical Program also pay only a fraction of the hospital’s charges. And for many uninsured patients, the hospital may collect even less, he said. Ultimately, the losses on all those cases are factored into the rates the hospital must charge private insurers. Source: From “Gunshot Costs Echo Through Economy: From Hospitals to Jails, Price of Violence Adds up Quickly,” by John Diedrich and John Fauber, Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel Online, FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? 89 Mental Health Consequences and Costs It was first recognized in the late 1800s that people differentially respond to trauma, including victimization. Some people may cope by internalizing their feelings and emotions, while others may experience externalizing responses. It is likely that the way people deal with victimization is tied to their biological makeup, their interactional style, their coping style and resources, their equilibrium, and the context in which the incident occurs and in which they operate thereafter. Some of the responses can be quite serious and long-term, while others may be more transitory. Three affective responses that are common among crime victims are depression, reductions in self-esteem, and anxiety. The way in which depression manifests itself varies greatly across individuals. It can include having sleep disturbances, changes in eating habits, feelings of guilt and worthlessness, and irritability. Generally, depressed persons will have a general decline in interest in activities they once enjoyed, a depressed mood, or both. Depression is a common outcome for youth who are victimized by their peers, such as in being bullied (Sweeting, Young, West, & Der, 2006). With the advent of technology and the widespread use of the Internet, recent research has explored online victimization and its effects. Online victimization will often trigger a depressive response in victims (Tynes & Giang, 2009). Victimization may be powerful enough to alter the way in which a crime victim views himself- or herself. Self-esteem and self-worth have both been found to be reduced in some crime victims, particularly female victims. In one study of youth in Virginia, Amie Grills and Thomas Ollendick (2002) found that for girls, being victimized by peers was associated with a reduction in global self-worth, and their self-worth was related to elevated levels of anxiety. There may also be a difference in crime’s impact on self-appraisals based on the type of victimization experienced. For example, victims of child sexual abuse are likely to suffer long-term negative impacts to their self-esteem (Cutler & Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991). Sexual victimization has also been linked to reductions in self-esteem (Turner, Finkelhor, & Ormrod, 2010). Anxiety is another consequence that is linked to victimization, as mentioned above. Persons who suffer from anxiety are likely to experience a range of emotional and physical symptoms. Much like depression, however, anxiety affects people in different ways. Most notably, anxiety often manifests as an irrational and excessive fear and worry, which may be coupled with tension and restlessness, vigilance, irritability, and difficulty concentrating. In addition, because anxiety is a product of the body’s fight-or-flight response, it also has physical symptoms. These include a racing and pounding heart, sweating, stomach upset, headaches, difficulty sleeping and breathing, tremors, and muscle tension (Dryden-Edwards, 2007). Although anxiety that crime victims experience may not escalate to a point where they are diagnosed with an anxiety disorder by a mental health clinician, victimization does appear to be linked to anxiety symptoms. For example, adolescents who experience victimization by their peers experience anxiety at higher levels than non-victimized adolescents (Storch, Brassard, & Masia-Warner, 2003). The relationship between anxiety and victimization is complex in that victimization can lead to anxiety, but anxiety and distress are also precursors to victimization (Siegel, La Greca, & Harrison, 2009). Some victims do experience mental health consequences tied to anxiety that lead to mental health diagnoses. State Rankings Link 4.1 Victims of child abuse. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder One of the recognized disorders associated with a patterned response to trauma, such as victimization, is posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Commonly associated with individuals returning from war and combat, PTSD is a psychiatric condition that recently has been recognized as a possible consequence of other traumatic events, such as criminal victimization. Currently classified by the American Psychiatric Association in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edition, text revision, known as DSM-IV-TR) as an anxiety disorder, PTSD is diagnosed based on several criteria. A person must have experienced or witnessed a traumatic event that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury to the self or others, or threat to the physical integrity of the self or others. The person must experience fear, helplessness, or horror in response to the event, and the trauma is then reexperienced by the person over time via flashbacks, nightmares, images, or reliving the event. The person must avoid stimuli associated with the traumatic event and experience numbness of response, such as lack of affect and reduced interest in activities. Finally, PTSD is characterized by hyperarousal. In order for PTSD to be diagnosed, symptoms must be experienced for more than 1 month and must cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other functional areas (American Psychological Association [APA], 2000). As you might imagine, PTSD can be debilitating, and can impact a victim’s ability to heal, move on, and thrive after being victimized. Although it is difficult to know how common PTSD is for all crime victims, some studies suggest that PTSD is a real problem. Estimates of PTSD for persons who have been victimized are around 25 percent. Lifetime Video Link 4.3 Watch a video about PTSD and police. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 90 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY incidence of PTSD for persons who have not experienced a victimization are 9 percent. Depression also commonly co-occurs in victims who suffer PTSD (Kilpatrick & Acierno, 2003). Research has shown that victims of sexual assault or aggravated assault and persons whose family members were homicide victims were more likely than other crime victims to develop PTSD (Kilpatrick & Tidwell, 1989). In support of this link, the occurrence of PTSD in rape victims has been estimated to be almost 1 in 3 (Kilpatrick, Edmunds, & Seymour, 1992). Self-Blame and Learned Helplessness After people are victimized, they may blame themselves for their victimization. One form of this is characterological self-blame, which occurs when a person ascribes blame to a non-modifiable source such as one’s character. In this way, characterological self-blame involves believing that victimization is deserved. Another type is behavioral self-blame, which occurs when a person ascribes blame to a modifiable source— behavior (Janoff-Bulman, 1979). When a person turns to behavioral self-blame, a future victimization can be avoided, so long as behavior is changed. In addition to self-blame, others may experience learned helplessness following a victimization, which is a learned response to victimization. Victims learn that responding is futile, and they become passive and numb (Seligman, 1975). In this way, victims may not activate in the face of danger and, instead, may be at risk of subsequent victimization experiences. Fear of Crime Another cost associated with victimization is fear. Fear is an emotional response to a perceived threat (Ferraro & LaGrange, 1987). Persons do not have to be victims of crime to be fearful. In fact, research shows that some groups who are actually less likely to be victimized have higher levels of fear of crime than others. For example, females (Ferraro, 1995, 1996; Haynie, 1998; May, Rader, & Goodrum, 2010; Rountree, 1998) and older persons (Ferraro, 1995) have higher levels of fear of crime than males and younger people. For females, this elevated fear of crime has been attributed to their overarching fear of sexual assault. Known as the “shadow hypothesis,” this fear of sexual assault actually serves to increase females’ fears of other types of crimes (Ferraro, 1995, 1996; Warr, 1985). Being fearful may be good if it leads people to protect themselves while still enjoying their life. Research on fear of crime shows that people, in response to fear, may engage in avoidance behaviors. Avoidance behaviors are restrictions that people place on their behavior to protect themselves from harm, such as staying home at night. Others may engage in defensive or protective behaviors to guard themselves from victimization, such as purchasing a gun or installing security lights (Ferraro & LaGrange, 1987). Although having some level of fear is likely good, as it serves to properly activate people in the face of danger and to caution people to engage in protective behaviors, exaggerated levels of fear can be problematic. People may effectively sever themselves from the outside world and not engage in activities they find enjoyable—in short, fear may paralyze some people. Recurring Victimization Audio Link 4.2 Listen to a discussion about sex offender policies. Another feature of victimization, which is often not discussed or known, is the real possibility that a person who is victimized once will be victimized again. In fact, persons who have been victimized are more likely than others who have not experienced any victimization to be victimized. At first, this reality probably does not make sense. After all, if you were victimized, you probably would be very likely to implement crime-reduction strategies. For example, if you had your car broken into because you had valuables in plain view, would you keep items in your car again? You probably are shaking your head no. So, why are some people prone to being victimized not once, but again, and sometimes again and again and again? Before we can address that question, let us first find out the extent to which people are victimized more than once. Extent of Recurring Victimization To know the extent to which people experience more than one victimization, let us first identify what we mean. Recurring victimization occurs when a person or place is victimized more than once by any type of victimization. Repeat victimization occurs when a person or place is victimized more than once by the same type of victimization. Revictimization is commonly referred to when a person is victimized more than once by any type of victimization, but across a relatively wide span of time—like from childhood to adulthood. Revictimization has been most widely studied in terms of childhood sexual abuse and sexual assault in adulthood. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? 91 Now that we know what the terms mean, let’s find out how often people and places are victimized more than once. Although most people and households in a given year are not victimized at all, some experience more than one victimization. The British Crime Survey (BCS), a victimization survey similar to the NCVS, revealed that 14 percent of burglary victims experienced two or more incidents during the same year (Nicholas, Povey, Walker, & Kershaw, 2005). Victims of personal crimes are also at a heightened risk of experiencing more than one incident. Research shows that victims of intimate partner violence, rape, and assault are all at risk of experiencing a subsequent incident following their initial victimization. These recurring victims also experience a disproportionate share of all victimization events. For example, 6 percent of the respondents in the BCS over 10 years experienced 68 percent of all the thefts that occurred. Research on sexual victimization has produced similar results. Daigle, Fisher, and Cullen (2008) found that 7 percent of college women had experienced two different sexual victimization incidents during the previous academic year, and these women experienced almost three fourths of all the sexual victimizations. Characteristics of Recurring Victimization Also interesting about recurring victimization is that it is likely to happen quickly. Researchers have found that often, little time transpires between incidents. For college women’s sexual victimization, one study found that most subsequent incidents happen within the same month or 1 month after the initial incident. What this means is that victims are at an increased risk of being victimized again in the time immediately following an initial incident. Over time, the risk of experiencing another victimization wanes. What type of victimization are victims likely to experience if they are victimized more than once? Most likely, when a person is victimized a subsequent time, he or she is likely to experience the exact same type of victimization. For example, a theft victim is likely to experience another theft if he or she is victimized a second time. Theoretical Explanations of Recurring Victimization We know, then, that recurring victimization is a reality that many victims face, that it is likely to happen rather quickly if it does, and that the same type of victimization is likely to occur. While we have painted a picture of what recurring victimization “looks” like, it does not address why some people are victimized a single time and others find themselves victimized again. There are two theoretical explanations that have been proffered to explain recurring victimization. The first is called risk heterogeneity. This explanation focuses on qualities or characteristics of the victim. Those qualities or characteristics that place someone at risk of being a victim initially will keep the victim at risk of experiencing a subsequent victimization if they are unchanged. For example, if a home is burglarized because it does not have an alarm, it is at risk for recurring victimization if, after the burglary, the homeowners do not install a burglar alarm. In contrast to the risk heterogeneity argument, the second theoretical explanation of recurring victimization is known as state dependence. According to the theory of state dependence, it is not the qualities or characteristics of a victim that are important for recurring victimization so much as what happens during and after the victimization. How the victim and the offender act and react to the victimization event will predict the risk of recurring victimization. In this way, the victim and offender are learning key information that will impact the likelihood of subsequent victimization. For example, a victim of rape or other sexual victimizations who resists or uses self-protective action is less likely than those who do not to be victimized again (Fisher, Daigle, & Cullen, 2010b). This reduction in risk is likely due to the victim learning that she has agency and control over her life. Protecting herself may even serve to be empowering so that in the future she is able to identify and avoid risk. Likewise, the offender is likely learning that she is not an “easy” target and that victimizing her will not pay off in the future. In both scenarios, the victim is less likely to find herself the target of an offender. To be clear, neither of these explanations should be used to blame the victim for the victimization. The offender is responsible for his or her actions, and blame should rest there. These explanations are, however, tools to help understand why some people are targeted over and over again. Theories of Victimization You just read about why recurring victimization happens, but why does a person become a victim at all? This question has plagued researchers for years. In fact, the first investigations into the study of victims were centered on understanding, as you will read about below, why people became victims. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 92 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY The Role of the Victim in Crime Handbook Article Link 4.2 Read an article about the different theories of victimization. Although the field of victimology has largely moved away from simply investigating how much a victim contributes to his or her own victimization, the first forays into the study of crime victims were centered on such investigations. In this way, the first studies of crime victims did not illuminate victims as being innocents who were wronged at the hands of an offender. Rather, concepts such as victim precipitation, victim facilitation, and victim provocation were developed from these investigations. Victim precipitation is defined as the extent to which a victim is responsible for his or her own victimization. The concept of victim precipitation is rooted in the notion that, although some victims are not responsible at all for their victimization, other victims are in fact responsible for being victimized. In this way, victim precipitation acknowledges that victimization involves at least two people—an offender and a victim—and that both parties are acting and oftentimes reacting before, during, and after the incident. Identifying victim precipitation does not necessarily lead to negative outcomes. It is problematic, however, when it is used to blame the victim while ignoring the offender’s role. Similar to victim precipitation is the concept of victim facilitation. Victim facilitation occurs when a victim unintentionally makes it easier for an offender to commit a crime. A victim may, in this way, be a catalyst for victimization. A woman who accidentally leaves her purse in plain view in her office while she goes to the restroom and has it stolen would be a victim who facilitated her own victimization. This woman is not blameworthy—the offender should not steal regardless of whether a purse is in plain view and easy to steal— but the victim’s actions certainly made her a likely target and made it easy for the offender to steal her purse. Unlike precipitation, facilitation helps us understand why one person may be victimized over another, but the term does not connote blame and responsibility. In contrast, victim provocation occurs when a person actually does something that incites another person to commit an illegal act. Provocation suggests that without the victim, the crime would actually not have occurred. Provocation, then, most certainly connotes blame. In fact, the offender is not at all responsible. An example of a victim provocation is found in Crime File 4.2. The offender in this scenario ultimately is a victim, but he would not have been shot if not for attempting to break into a home. The distinctions among victim precipitation, facilitation, and provocation, as you probably are noticing, are not always clear-cut. But these terms were developed, described, studied, and used in somewhat different ways in the mid-1900s by several scholars. Crime File 4.2 When Offender Becomes Victim An 87-year-old Army veteran and retired postal worker, Jack Goodwin, had the rear window of his house broken when he was in bed listening to a Lakers’ basketball game. Goodwin got out of bed with his gun to investigate. He saw people at his window, raised the gun, and fired. Goodwin said, “When I saw them breaking the glass, I was, man. I got kinda—it was either me or them, then. I knew one thing—they were gonna deal with me. Cause if you’ve got enough nerve to break in somebody’s house and they’re home, they’ve got enough nerve to kill you see. There’s no if or ands about it.” One of the intruders was hospitalized in critical condition after being shot, while another escaped. Police did not plan to file charges against Goodwin, who indicated he would probably do the same thing again if in the same situation. Source: “Burglar Shot After Trying to Break Into Army Veteran’s Home,” CBS Los Angeles, February 1, 2012. Available at http:// Hans von Hentig In his book The Criminal and His Victim: Studies in the Sociobiology of Crime, Hans von Hentig (1948) recognized the importance of investigating what factors underpinned why certain people are victims just as criminology attempts to identify those factors that produce criminality. He determined that some of the same characteristics that produce crime also produce victimization. In studying victimization, von Hentig (1948) looked at the criminal–victim dyad, thus recognizing the importance of considering the victim and the criminal not in isolation, but together. He attempted to identify the characteristics of a victim that may effectively serve to influence victimization risk. He considered that victims may provoke victimization—being agent provocateurs—based on their characteristics. He argued FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? that crime victims could be placed into 1 of 13 categories based on their propensity for victimization. These categories are (1) young; (2) female; (3) old; (4) immigrants; (5) depressed; (6) mentally defective/deranged; (7) the acquisitive; (8) dull normals; (9) minorities; (10) wanton; (11) the lonesome and heartbroken; (12) tormentor; and (13) the blocked, exempted, and fighting. Each of these victims is targeted and contributes to his or her own victimization because of these characteristics. For example, the young, the old, and females may be victimized because of their ignorance or risk taking, or may be taken advantage of, such as women being sexually assaulted. Immigrants, minorities, and dull normals are likely victimized due to their social status and inability to activate assistance in the community. The mentally defective or deranged victims may be victimized because they do not recognize or appropriately respond to threats in their environment. Those who are depressed, acquisitive, wanton, lonesome, and heartbroken may place themselves in situations in which they do not recognize danger because of their mental state, their upset over a lost relationship, their desire for companionship, or their greed. The tormentor is a person who provokes her own victimization via violence and aggression toward others. Finally, the blocked, exempted, and fighting victim is one who is enmeshed in poor decisions and is unable to defend himself or seek assistance if victimized. An example of such a victim is a person who is blackmailed because of his behavior and would be placed in a precarious situation if he was to report the blackmail to the police (Dupont-Morales, 2009). Benjamin Mendelsohn Known as “the father of victimology,” Benjamin Mendelsohn (1947) coined the term “victimology” in the mid-1940s. An attorney, he became interested in the relationship between the victim and the criminal as he conducted interviews with victims and witnesses and realized that victims and offenders often knew each other and had some kind of existing relationship. He then created a classification of victims based on their culpability, or the degree of the victim’s blame. His classification entailed the following: 1. Completely innocent victim: victim who bears no responsibility at all for victimization; victim simply because of his or her nature such as being a child 2. Victim with minor guilt: a victim who is victimized due to ignorance; a victim who inadvertently places himself in harm’s way 3. Victim as guilty as offender/voluntary victim: a victim who bears as much responsibility as the offender; a person who, for example, enters into a suicide pact 4. Victim more guilty than offender: a victim who instigates or provokes own victimization 5. Most guilty victim: a victim who is victimized during the perpetration of a crime or as a result of crime 6. Simulating or imaginary victim: a victim who actually was not victimized at all but instead fabricates a victimization event Mendelsohn’s classification emphasized degrees of culpability, recognizing that some victims bore no responsibility for their victimization, while others, based on their behaviors or actions, did. Stephen Schafer One of the earliest victimologists, Stephen Schafer (1968) wrote The Victim and His Criminal: A Study in Functional Responsibility. Much like von Hentig and Mendelsohn, Schafer also proposed a victim typology. His located victims in groups based on how responsible they are for their own victimization, using both social characteristics and behaviors. In this way, his typology includes facets of von Hentig’s typology based on personal characteristics and Mendelsohn’s typology rooted in behavior. He argued that victims have a functional responsibility to not provoke others into victimizing or harming them and that they also should actively attempt to prevent that from occurring. He identified seven categories and labeled their level of responsibility as follows: 1. Unrelated victims—no responsibility 2. Provocative victims—share responsibility 3. Precipitative victims—some degree of victim responsibility 4. Biologically weak victims—no responsibility 5. Socially weak victims—no responsibility 93 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 94 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY 6. Self-victimizing—total responsibility 7. Political victims—no responsibility Marvin Wolfgang The first person to empirically investigate victim precipitation was Marvin Wolfgang (1957) in his classic study of homicides that occurred in Philadelphia from 1948 to 1952. He examined some 558 cases to see to what extent victims precipitated their own homicide. In those instances in which the victim was the direct, positive precipitator in the homicide, Wolfgang labeled the incident as “victim precipitated.” For example, the victim would be the first to brandish or use a weapon, the first to strike a blow, and the first to initiate physical violence. He found that 26 percent of all homicides in Philadelphia during this time period were victim precipitated. Beyond simply identifying the extent to which homicides were victim precipitated, he also identified those factors that were common to victim-precipitated homicides. He determined that often in victim-precipitated homicides, the victim and the offender knew each other. He also found that most victim-precipitated homicides involved male offenders and male victims, and that the victim was likely to have a history of violent offending himself. Alcohol was also likely to play a role in victim-precipitated homicides, which makes sense, especially considering that Wolfgang (1957) determined that the homicide often started as a minor altercation and escalated to murder. Since Wolfgang’s study of victim-precipitated homicide, others have expanded his definition to include felony-related homicides and subintentional homicide. Subintentional homicide occurs when the victim facilitates her or his own demise by using poor judgment, placing himself or herself at risk, living a risky lifestyle, or using alcohol or drugs. Perhaps not surprising, a study of subintentional homicide found that as many as three fourths of victims were subintentional victims (N. H. Allen, 1980). Menachem Amir The crime of rape is not immune from victim blaming today, and it certainly has not been historically either. Menachem Amir (1971), a student of Wolfgang’s, conducted an empirical investigation into rape incidents that were reported to the police. Like Wolfgang, he conducted his study using data from Philadelphia, although he examined rapes that occurred from 1958 to 1960. He examined the extent to which victims precipitated their own rapes and also identified commonalities to this type of rape. Almost 1 in 5 rapes was labeled as victim precipitated by Amir. He found that these rapes were likely to involve alcohol, the victim was likely to have engaged in seductive behavior, she was likely to have worn revealing clothing, she was likely to have used risqué language, and she likely had a bad reputation. Amir also determined that it was the offender’s interpretation of actions that is important rather than what the victim actually does. The offender may view the victim—her actions, words, and clothing—as going against what he considers to be appropriate female behavior. In this way, the victim may be viewed as being “bad” in terms of how women should behave. He may then choose to rape her because of his misguided view of how women should act, because he thinks the woman deserved it. Amir’s study was quite controversial—it was attacked for blaming victims, namely women, for their own victimization. Routine Activities and Lifestyles Theory In the 1970s, two theoretical perspectives—routine activities and lifestyles theories—were put forth that both linked crime victimization risk to the fact that victims had to come into contact with a potential offender. Before discussing these theories in detail, first it is important to understand what a victimization theory is. A victimization theory is generally a set of testable propositions that are designed to explain why a person is victimized. Both routine activities and lifestyles theory proposed that a person’s victimization risk can best be understood by the extent to which the victim’s routine activities or lifestyle creates opportunities for a motivated offender to commit crime. In developing routine activities theory, Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson (1979) argued that a person’s routine activities, or daily routine patterns, impacted his or her risk of being a crime victim. In so much as a person’s routine activities brings him or her into contact with motivated offenders crime victimization risk abounds. Cohen and Felson thought that motivated offenders were plentiful and that their motivation to offend did not need to be explained. Rather, their selection of particular victims was more interesting. Cohen FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? and Felson noted that there must be something about particular targets, both individuals and places, that encouraged selection by these motivated offenders. In fact, those that were deemed to be suitable targets based on their attractiveness would be chosen by offenders. Attractiveness relates to qualities about the target such as ease of transport, which is why a burglar may break into a home and leave with an iPod or laptop computer rather than a couch. Attractiveness is further evident when the target does not have capable guardianship. Capable guardianship is conceived as the means by which a person or target can be effectively guarded so that a victimization is prevented from occurring. Guardianship is typically considered to be social when the presence of another person makes the person less attractive as a target. Guardianship can also be provided through physical means, such as a home that has a burglar alarm or a person who carries a weapon for self-protection. A home with a burglar alarm and a person who carries a weapon are certainly less attractive crime targets! When these three elements—motivated offenders, suitable targets, and lack of capable guardianship—coalesce in time and space, victimization is likely to occur. When Cohen and Felson (1979) originally developed their theory, they focused on predatory crimes—those that required a target and offender to have contact. They originally were interested in explaining changes in rates of these types of crime over time. In doing so, they argued that people’s routines had shifted since World War II, taking them away from home and making their homes attractive targets. At the same time, people began spending more time outside of the home, in leisure activities and going to and from work and school. As people spent more time interacting with others, they were more likely to come into contact with motivated offenders. Capable guardianship was unlikely to be present; thus, the risk of criminal victimization increased. They also linked the increase in crime to the production of durable goods. Electronics began to be produced in sizes that were portable, making them easier to steal. Similarly, cars and other expensive items that could be stolen, reused, and resold became targets. As Cohen and Felson saw it, prosperity of a society could produce an increase in criminal victimization rather than a decline! Also important, they linked victimization to everyday activities rather than social ills, such as poverty. Michael Hindelang, Michael Gottfredson, and James Garofalo’s lifestyles theory (1978) is a close relative of routine activities theory. They posited that certain lifestyles or behaviors place people in situations in which victimization is likely to occur. Your lifestyle, such as going to bars or working late at night in relative seclusion, places you at more of a risk of being a crime victim. Although the authors of lifestyles theory did not specify how opportunity connects to risk as clearly as did the authors of routine activities theory, at its heart, the theory closely resembles it and its propositions. As a person comes into contact—via lifestyle and behavior—with potential offenders, he or she is likely creating opportunities for crime victimization to occur. The lifestyle factors identified by Hindelang and his colleagues that create opportunities for victimization are people with whom one associates, working outside of the home, and engaging in leisure activities. In this way, a person who associates with criminals; who works outside of the home; and who participates in activities, particularly at night, away from home and with nonfamily members, is a more likely target for personal victimization than others. Hindelang et al. further delineated why victimization risk is higher for some people than others using the principle of homogamy. According to this principle, the more frequently a person comes into contact with those in demographic groups with likely offenders, the more likely it is the person will be victimized. This frequency may be a function of demographics or lifestyle. For example, males are more likely to be criminal offenders than females. Males, then, are at greater risk for victimization if they spend more time with other males. Today, researchers largely treat routine activities theory and lifestyles theory interchangeably, and often refer to them as the routine activities and lifestyle theory perspectives. One of the reasons that routine activities and lifestyles theory have been the prevailing theories of victimization for over 30 years is because of the wide empirical support researchers have found when testing them. It has been shown that a person’s routine activities and lifestyle impact the risk of being sexually victimized (Cass, 2007; Fisher et al., 2010b; Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999, 2007; M. D. Schwartz & Pitts, 1995). This perspective has also been used to explain auto theft (Rice & Smith, 2002), stalking (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999), cybercrime victimization (T. J. Holt & Bossler, 2009), adolescent violent victimization (Lauritsen, Laub, & Sampson, 1992), theft (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1998), victimization at work (D. R. Lynch, 1997), and street robbery (Groff, 2007). Structural Causes of Victimization We have already discussed how certain individuals are more at risk of becoming a victim of crime than others. So far, we have tied this risk to factors related to the person. Where that person lives and spends time, however, may also place him or her at risk of victimization. Indeed, you are probably not surprised to learn that certain 95 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 96 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Photo 4.3 Such places are often described as “no go” zones or good places to avoid. areas have higher rates of victimization than others. Some areas are so crime-prone that they are considered to be “hot spots” for crime. First identified by Lawrence and associates (Sherman, Gartin, & Buerger, 1989), hot spots are areas that have a concentrated amount of crime. He found through examining police call data in Minneapolis that only 3 percent of all locations made up most calls to the police. If a person lived in or frequented a hot spot, he would be putting himself in danger. The features of these hot spots and other highrisk areas may create opportunities for victimization that, independent of a person’s lifestyle or demographic characteristics, enhance one’s chances of being victimized. What is it about certain areas that make them prone to victimization? A body of recent research has identified many features, particularly of neighborhoods (notice we are not discussing hot spots specifically). One factor that is related to victimization is family structure. Robert Sampson (1985a) in his seminal piece on neighborhoods and crime found that neighborhoods that have a large percentage of female-headed households have higher rates of theft and violent victimization. He also found that structural density, as measured by the percentage of units in structures of 5 or more units, is positively related to victimization. Residential mobility, or the percentage of persons 5 and older living in a different house from 5 years before, also predicted victimization. Beyond finding that the structure of a neighborhood influences victimization rates for that area, it has also been shown that neighborhood features inf luence personal risk. In this way, living in a neighborhood that is disadvantaged places individuals at risk of being victimized, even if they do not have risky lifestyles or other characteristics related to victimization (S. Browning & Erickson, 2009). For example, neighborhood disadvantage and neighborhood residential instability are related to experiencing violent victimization at the hands of an intimate partner (Benson, Fox, DeMaris, & Van Wyk, 2003). Using the notions of collective efficacy, it makes sense that neighborhoods that are disadvantaged are less able to mobilize effective sources of informal social control (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997). Informal social controls are often used as mechanisms to maintain order, stability, and safety in neighborhoods. When communities do not have strong informal mechanisms in place, violence and other deviancy is likely to abound. Such communities are less safe; hence, its residents are more likely to be victimized than residents of more socially organized areas. Caring for the Victim Thus far we have discussed the extent to which persons are victimized, the costs they incur, and the possible reasons for their victimization. Another important consideration is the rights and remedies that are available to victims. Victims’ Rights Audio Link 4.3 Listen to a discussion about victims and families. Once essentially ignored by the criminal justice system and the law, victims are now granted a range of rights. These rights have been given to victims through legislation and, in 32 states, through victims’ rights amendments to state constitutions (National Center for Victims of Crime, 2009). The first such law that guaranteed victims’ rights and protections was passed in Wisconsin in 1979; now, every U.S. state has at least some form of victims’ rights legislation (R. C. Davis & Mulford, 2008). Despite each state having laws that afford victims’ rights, the states differ according to whom the law applies to, when the rights begin, what rights victims have, and how the rights can be enforced. What they have in common, however, is the goal of victims’ rights—to enhance victim privacy, protection, and participation (Garvin, 2010). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? Slightly less than half of states give all victims rights (Howley & Dorris, 2007). In all states, the right to compensation, notification of rights, notification of court appearances, and ability to submit victim impact statements before sentencing is granted to at least some classes of victims (Dees, 1999). Other common rights given to victims in the majority of states are the right to restitution, to be treated with dignity and respect, to attend court and sentencing hearings, and to consult with court personnel before plea bargains are offered or defendants released from custody (Davis & Mulford, 2008). Other rights extended to victims are the right to protection and the right to a speedy trial. Importantly, some states explicitly protect victims’ jobs while they exercise the rights they have to attend and participate in the criminal justice system. These protections may include having the prosecutor intervene on behalf of the victim with the employer or prohibiting employers from penalizing or firing a victim from taking time off from work to participate (National Center for Victims of Crime, 2009). See Table 4.1 for a description of common rights provided to crime victims. Victim Remedies and Services In addition to these common rights, victims are also provided a range of services to help them recover financially and psychologically and to navigate the criminal justice system. Victim Compensation One way that victims can receive financial compensation for their economic losses is through state-run victim compensation programs. First begun in 1965 in California, victim compensation programs now TABLE 4.1     Common Victims’ Rights Right Provided to Victim Compensation Victims of violent crime who experience financial loss associated with their victimization can apply to have these costs reimbursed through the state. Common costs that may be reimbursed include medical bills, counseling, crime scene cleanup, funeral expenses, and lost wages. Notification Victims have the right to be notified about critical events involving their case. Victims may have the right to be notified of court proceedings, arrest of the offender, release of the offender from jail, and parole hearings. Victim Impact Statements Oral or written statements made by crime victims that detail the pain caused by the offender. These statements often include the victim’s desire for sentencing. Victim impact statements may be used for sentencing or in making decisions about plea bargaining or parole. Restitution Restitution is money or service paid by an offender to a victim. Expenses that may be recovered through restitution include medical and dental bills, counseling, transportation, lost wages, and costs to cover stolen or damaged property. Dignity and Respect Crime victims have the right to be treated fairly in a way that preserves their dignity and respect. Consultation Crime victims have the right to be consulted before criminal justice officials make decisions about bond, plea bargains, sentencing, or parole. Protection Crime victims have the right to be protected from harm that may arise from cooperating with the criminal justice process. This right to protection often means that they should have separate waiting areas in court proceedings. Victims also have the right to be free from intimidation and harm from the defendant. This means they may seek orders of protection. Victims also have the right to be protected from losing their jobs as a result of participating in the criminal justice process. Some states are protecting victims by not requiring their information to be in court or law enforcement records or by not forcing them to include their place of employment in testimony. Speedy Trial The impact on the victim is often considered when judges decide to delay trials. Source: “Victim Rights and New Remedies: Finally Getting Victims Their Due,” by R. C. Davis and C. Mulford, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24(2), 2008, pp. 198–208. 97 Video Link 4.4 Watch a video about victim’s rights. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 98 Journal Article Link 4.2 Read an article discussing victim rights and compensation. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY operate in every state. Money for compensation comes from a variety of sources. A large portion of funding comes from criminals themselves—fees and fines are charged to people who are convicted of criminal offenses. These fees are attached to the normal court fees that offenders are expected to pay. In addition, the Victim of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) authorized funding for state compensation and assistance programs. Today, the VOCA Crime Victims Fund provides over $700 million annually to states to assist victims, and constitutes about one third of each program’s funding (National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards, 2009). Not only did VOCA increase funding for state programs, but it also required states to cover all U.S. citizens victimized within the state’s borders, regardless of the victim’s residency. In addition, it required that states provide mental health counseling and that victims of domestic violence as well as drunk driving be covered. Not all victims, however, are eligible for compensation from the crime victims’ fund. Only victims of rape, assault, child sexual abuse, drunk driving, domestic violence, and homicide are eligible, since these crimes are known to create an undue hardship on victims (L. Klein, 2010). In addition to the type of victimization, in order to be eligible, victims •• Must report the victimization promptly to law enforcement; usually within 72 hours of the victimization unless “good cause” can be shown, such as being a child or incarcerated or otherwise incapacitated. •• Must cooperate with law enforcement and prosecutors in the investigation and prosecution of the case. •• Must submit application for compensation within a specified time, generally 1 year from the date of the crime, that includes evidence of expenses. •• Must show that costs have not been compensated from other sources such as insurance or other programs. •• Must not have participated in criminal conduct or significant misconduct that caused or contributed to the victimization. Victims can be compensated for a wide variety of expenses including medical care costs, mental health treatment costs, funeral costs, and lost wages. Some programs have expanded coverage to also include crime scene cleanup, transportation costs to receive treatment, moving expenses, housekeeping costs, and child care costs (L. Klein, 2010). Other expenses for which victims might be compensated include the replacement or repair of eyeglasses or corrective lenses, dental care, prosthetic devices, and forensic sexual assault exams. Note that property damage and loss are not compensable expenses (Office for Victims of Crime, 2010), and only three states currently pay for pain and suffering (L. Klein, 2010). States have caps in place that limit the amount of money that a crime victim may receive from the crime victims’ fund, generally ranging from $10,000 to $25,000 per incident. Although compensation can clearly provide a benefit for victims, there are some problems with current compensation programs. One problem is that only a small portion of victims who are eligible for compensation actually apply for monies from these funds. The programs also do not seem to encourage participation in the criminal justice system. Moreover, there is little evidence that persons who receive compensation are any more satisfied than others (Elias, 1986), or that they are more likely to participate in the criminal justice process (L. Klein, 2010). Victim Impact Statements As previously discussed, the criminal trial involves two parties in an adversarial system that reflects that a crime is a harm against the state. As such, victims have seldom played more than the role of witness in a criminal trial. Not until the 1970s were victims granted rights that guaranteed them at least some voice in the criminal trial process. One of these rights was first adopted in 1976 in Fresno, California, and it gave the victim an opportunity to address the court through a victim impact statement (VIS). The VIS can be submitted by direct victims and by those who are indirectly impacted by crime, such as family members. The VIS is either submitted in writing or presented orally (victim allocution). In the VIS, the harm that was caused is typically detailed, with psychological, economic, social, as well as physical effects being discussed. Depending on the jurisdiction, the victim or others presenting a VIS may also provide a recommendation as to what the sentence should be for the offender. Not only may the victim be allowed to enter a VIS at sentencing, but most states also allow for the victim to make a VIS at parole hearings. In some cases, the original VIS is included in the offender’s file and will be considered during the parole process. In others, the victim is allowed to update the original VIS and to include additional information that may be pertinent to the parole board. Less common, the victim may be allowed to make a VIS during bail FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 99 Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? hearings, pretrial release hearings, and plea bargaining hearings (National Center for Victims of Crime, 1999). Importantly, regardless of the victim’s wishes, the VIS is used as information and may or may not impact the court’s decision. As noted by the Minnesota Court of Appeals in State v. Johnson (1993), although the victim’s wishes are important, they are not the only consideration or determinant in the prosecutor’s decision of whether to bring a case to trial. Victim/Witness Assistance Programs Victim/Witness Assistance Programs (VWAPs) provide victims with assistance as they navigate the criminal justice system. These programs are designed to ensure that victims know their rights and have the resources necessary to exercise those rights. At its heart, however, is a goal to increase victim and witness participation in the criminal justice process, particularly by being witnesses, with the notion that victims who have criminal justice personnel assisting them will be more likely to willingly participate in and be satisfied with their experience. These programs first began in the 1970s, with the first program being established in St. Louis, Missouri, by Carol Vittert (Davies, 2010). Although this was not a government-sponsored program, Vittert and her friends would visit victims and give them support. Two years later, the first government victim assistance programs were developed in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Brooklyn, New York. Not long after, in 1982, President Reagan’s Task Force on Victims of Crime recommended that prosecutors better serve victims. Specifically, the task force noted that prosecutors should work more closely with crime victims and receive their input as their case is processed. It also asserted that victims need protection and that their contribution should be valued— prosecutors should honor scheduled case appearances and return personal property as soon as possible. To this end, VWAPs have been developed, most commonly administrated through prosecutors’ offices, but some also run through law enforcement agencies. At the federal level, each U.S. Attorney’s Office has a victim witness coordinator to help victims of federal crimes. Today, these programs most commonly provide victims with background information regarding the court procedure and their basic rights as crime victims. Notification about court dates and changes to those dates is also made. They also provide information regarding victim compensation and aid victims in applying for compensation if eligible. A victim who wishes to make a victim impact statement can also receive assistance from the VWAP in doing so. Another service offered by a VWAP is that of making sure the victims and witnesses have separate waiting areas in the courthouse so that they have privacy. In some instances, VWAP personnel will attend court proceedings and the trial with the victim and his or her family. Despite the efforts of VWAPs, research shows that some of these early programs did little to improve victim participation. The Vera Institute of Justice’s Victim/Witness Assistance Project, which ran in the 1970s, provided victims with a wide range of services—day care for children while parents went to court, counseling for victims, assistance with victim compensation, notification of all court dates, and a program that allowed victims to stay at work rather than come to court if their testimony was not needed—with little “success” (S. Herman, 2004). An evaluation of the project showed that victims were no more likely to show up at court. It was not until the Vera Institute developed a new program that used victim advocates to go to court with victims that positive outcomes emerged. This program did in fact have a positive influence on attendance in court (S. Herman, 2004). Few of the programs provide services that have been identified as most critical in the research literature. Instead, VWAPs are largely oriented toward ensuring that witnesses cooperate and participate in court proceedings rather than ensuring that crime victims receive needed services (Jerin, Moriarty, & Gibson, 1996). Photo 4.4 A victim delivers her victim impact statement in court during sentencing. Video Link 4.5 Watch a video about victim and witness programs. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 100 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Family Justice Centers Family Justice Centers have recently begun opening throughout the United States to better serve crime victims. Because crime victims often need a variety of services, Family Justice Centers are designed to provide many services in “one stop.” These centers often provide counseling, advocacy, legal services, health care, financial services, housing assistance, employment referrals, and other services in one place (National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence, 2011). The advantages of doing so are many—victims can receive a plethora of services without having to navigate the maze of health and social service agencies in their jurisdiction. Instead, these services are all offered in one place. Victim–Offender Mediation Programs Video Link 4.6 Watch a video about victim and offender mediation. Some victims may not wish to sit in the background and only interact on the periphery of the criminal justice system. Instead, they may wish to have face-to-face meetings with their offender. As a way to allow such a dialogue between victims and offenders, victim–offender mediation programs have sprouted up throughout the United States, with more than 300 such programs in operation today. With the American Bar Association endorsing such programs and what appears to be widespread public support, victim–offender mediation is likely to become commonplace in court in the United States. Victim–offender mediation is already widely used in other countries, with more than 700 programs in operation in Europe (Umbreit & Greenwood, 2000). Mediation in criminal justice cases most commonly occurs as a diversion from prosecution. This means that if an offender and victim agree and complete mediation, and if the offender completes any requirements set forth in the mediation agreement, then the offender will not be formally prosecuted in the criminal justice system. In this way, offenders receive a clear benefit if they agree to and successfully complete mediation. Mediation can also take place as a condition of probation. For some offenders, if they formally admit guilt and are adjudicated, they may be placed on probation by the judge with the condition that they participate in mediation. In all instances, it is up to the victim to decide whether to participate in victim–offender mediation programs. Most victims who are given the opportunity to participate choose to do so (Umbreit & Greenwood, 2000). Victim–offender mediation programs are designed to provide victims—usually those of property and minor assaults—a chance to meet with their offenders in a structured environment. The session is led by a third-party mediator whose job it is to facilitate a dialogue through which victims are able to directly address their offender and tell him or her how the crime impacted their lives. The victim may also ask questions of the offender. To achieve the objectives of restorative justice, mediation programs in criminal justice use humanistic mediation, which is dialogue driven rather than settlement driven (Umbreit, 2000). The mediator is there to be impartial and to provide unconditional positive concern and regard for both parties, with minimal interruption. As noted by Umbreit, humanistic mediation emphasizes healing and peacemaking over problem solving and resolution. The telling and hearing of each other’s stories about the conflict, the opportunity for maximum direct communication with each other, and the importance of honoring silence and the innate wisdom and strength of the participants are all central to humanistic mediation practice. (p. 5) One tangible product that is often but not always created from victim–offender mediation is a restitution plan for the offender that the victim plays a central role in developing. This agreement becomes enforceable by the court in that, when an offender does not meet its requirements, he or she is held accountable. What happens after an offender and victim meet? Do offenders and victims both receive a benefit? What about the community? It is important to evaluate programs in terms of effectiveness in meeting their objectives, and victim–offender mediation programs have been assessed in this way. Collectively, this body of research shows that there are many benefits to such programs. For one, participation in victim–offender mediation has been shown to reduce fear and anxiety among crime victims (Umbreit, Coates, & Kalanj, 1994), including PTSD symptoms (Angel, 2005) and desire to seek revenge against or harm offenders (Sherman et al., 2005; Strang, 2004). In addition, both offenders and victims report high levels of satisfaction with the victim–offender mediation process (McCold & Wachtel, 1998; McGarrell, Olivares, Crawford, & Kroovand, 2000; see Umbreit & Greenwood, 2000). Victims who meet with their offenders report higher levels of satisfaction than victims of similar crimes who have their cases formally processed in the criminal justice system (Umbreit, 1994a). In addition to satisfaction, research shows that offenders are more likely to complete restitution required through victim–offender mediation (Umbreit et al., 1994). More than 90 percent of restitution agreements from victim–offender mediation programs are completed within 1 year (Victim–Offender Reconciliation Program Information and Resource Center, 2006). Reduction in recidivism rates for offenders has also been found (Nugent & Paddock, 1995; Umbreit, 1994b). FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? 101 Summary The field of victimology emerged during the mid-1900s. Similar to criminology, victimology is the study of the causes and consequences of victimization and of how the criminal justice system and other social service agencies respond to crime victims. We know from official data sources and victimization surveys that the victimization rate has been steadily declining since 1993. We also know who faces the greatest risk of being a crime victim. Young, black males have the highest violent victimization rates. We also know that households that are low income and that have a greater number of people living in them are more likely to experience a property victimization than other households. Once a person is victimized, he or she often experiences a range of consequences. For some victims, there are economic costs associated with the victimization. These economic costs can result from property losses; from money spent on necessary medical or mental health care; from costs associated with losses in productivity or time lost from work, school, or housework; from pain and suffering; from reduced quality of life; and from legal costs. In 2008, the total economic loss from crimes was estimated to be $17,297 billion. Victimization also impacts other entities. In the United States, direct expenditures of the criminal justice system are over $214 billion annually. Insurance companies also pay claims associated with crime—annually these costs top $45 billion (Headden, 1996). When uninsured individuals are injured from crime and seek medical attention, society must absorb these costs. Economic costs are not the only ones incurred by crime victims. Many victims experience affective (emotional) responses to victimization. The most common are depression, reductions in self-esteem, and anxiety. More recently, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been recognized as a possible outcome of severe trauma, including victimization. PTSD can occur after a person has experienced or witnessed a traumatic event. It is characterized by feelings of fear, helplessness, or horror in response to the event; reexperiences of the trauma over time via flashbacks, nightmares, images, or reliving the event; avoidance of stimuli associated with the traumatic event; numbness of responses; and hyperarousal. Many victims may blame themselves for their own victimization or experience learned helplessness, whereby they learn that responding to victimization is futile and instead become passive and numb. Another potential cost of victimization is fear. Even persons who have not been victimized may experience fear that it may happen. For example, women and elderly persons generally have higher levels of fear than men and young persons, although their actual victimization risks are low. Victims also face the real risk of being victimized again after their initial incident. Although most persons who are victimized will not experience another victimization, there is a sizable portion of victims who do, and they are most at risk in the time period immediately following their initial incident. Two competing explanations have been offered to explain this phenomenon: risk heterogeneity and state dependence. According to the risk heterogeneity perspective, characteristics that place an individual at risk, if left unchanged, will continue to keep a victim at risk for subsequent incidents. State dependence, on the other hand, argues that what the victim and offender do and learn during and after an incident is what shapes future risk. Early explorations in the field of victimology were centered on determining how much a victim contributes to his or her own victimization. In this way, early researchers were interested in victim precipitation—the extent to which victims are responsible for their own victimization. They also studied victim facilitation, which occurs when victims make it easier for an offender to commit a crime. Finally, victim provocation, which occurs when a person incites another person to commit a crime against him, was also examined. Early publications by von Hentig, Mendelsohn, and Shafer involved developing victim typologies based on the degree to which the victim was responsible for his or her own victimization. Empirical studies of victim precipitation were conducted by Wolfgang, who found that 26 percent of all homicides in Philadelphia between 1958 and 1952 were victim precipitated, and Amir, who found that almost 1 in 5 rapes was victim precipitated. The most widely used theories to explain victimization are routine activities and lifestyles theory. According to routine activities theory, when a person’s daily routine activities bring him or her into contact with motivated offenders, without capable guardianship, victimization risk is high. Cohen and Felson argued that it is the coalescence of time and space of motivated offenders, suitable targets, and no capable guardianship that predicts victimization. Hindelang, Gottfredson, and Garofalo’s lifestyles theory is closely related to routine activities theory. According to this theory, it is a person’s lifestyle that shapes victimization risk. Lifestyles that involve spending time outside of the home, especially at night away from the family, are risky in that they put people in contact with potential offenders. They further argued that the more you come into contact with persons in demographic groups of likely offenders, the more chances you have of becoming victimized. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 102 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY Others have offered that the characteristics of places make certain areas ripe for victimization. Some areas, known as “hot spots,” are particularly crime prone. To understand why some areas have high rates of victimization while others do not, researchers have examined their features. Specifically, Sampson argued that certain features of neighborhoods impact their risk: family structure, structural density, and residential mobility. Given the interest in crime victims by researchers and practitioners, it is probably not a surprise to learn that victims now have many rights. Commonly, victims have the right to compensation, the right to be notified, the right to attend court hearings, and the right to submit a victim impact statement (VIS). Some states also provide victims with the right to restitution, the right to be treated with dignity and respect, the right to consult with court personnel before bond hearings and plea bargaining decisions, the right to be protected, and the right to a speedy trial (R. C. Davis & Mulford, 2008). Victim compensation is financial payment to victims administered through the state. Often, these funds are paid through charges attached to court fees along with Victim of Crime Act funding from the federal government. To be eligible for compensation, in many states victims must report the incident to the police in a timely fashion, must cooperate with criminal justice personnel in the investigation and prosecution process, must submit an application within a specified time, must document actual costs and show that these costs have not been paid from other sources, and must not have participated in criminal conduct that contributed to the victimization. As noted above, victims (and those indirectly impacted by the crime) may also have the right to make a victim impact statement, which is written or given orally. The VIS details the effects of being victimized and often includes the victim’s recommendation for sentence or release. Many of the rights that victims have are exercised through their work with victim-witness assistance programs (VWAPs). VWAPs are designed to assist victims in knowing their rights and making sure they have the ability to exercise these rights. Often administered through prosecutor’s offices, VWAPs most commonly provide victims with information about court processes and their basic rights as crime victims. Newer programs where victims can receive a range of services in one place have also developed. These Family Justice Centers provide counseling, advocacy, legal services, health care, financial services, housing assistance, employment referrals, and other services in one place. Some programs provided to victims allow them to play a more direct role in the criminal justice process. Victim–offender mediation programs are one such service. These programs involve face-to-face meetings between the victim and offender with a neutral, third-party mediator. During the mediation session, the victim is allowed to tell the offender how the victimization impacted his or her life and to ask the offender questions. Similarly, the offender is provided an opportunity to apologize and to explain his or her behavior. Sometimes mediation results in agreed-upon outcomes for the offender, such as restitution to be paid to the victim, that are enforceable by the court. Criminology on the Web Log on to the Web-based student study site at for author-created podcasts, eFlashcards, quizzes, and more. KEY CONCEPTS Avoidance Behaviors Behavioral Self-Blame Capable Guardianship Characterological Self-Blame Defensive Behaviors Defensive or Protective Behaviors Diversion Economic Costs Family Justice Centers Family Structure Hot Spots Learned Helplessness Motivated Offenders Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Principle of Homogamy Protective Behaviors Recurring Victimization Repeat Victimization Residential Mobility Restorative Justice Revictimization Risk Heterogeneity State Dependence Structural Density Suitable Targets Victim Compensation Victim Facilitation Victim Impact Statement (VIS) Victim of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) Victim Precipitation Victim Provocation Victimization Theory Victim-Offender Mediation Program Victim–Witness Assistance Programs (VWAPS) FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Chapter 4. What Is Victimology? 103 REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. Who is the “typical” crime victim? Given the characteristics of the typical crime victim, why do you think these persons are more at risk than others of being victimized? take to avoid victimization? What don’t you do, but could? Why do you not do these things? Is it fair to ask victims to change their habits and behavior to reduce victimization? Why or why not? 2. Have you been the victim of a crime? Has anyone you know been a victim of a crime? If so, think about the costs associated with the victimization. Had you considered all of these costs before? How did you or the person deal with the costs of being victimized? How should the criminal justice system deal with victim costs? 5. What other factors besides routine activities and lifestyles do you think increase victimization risk? Why would these factors increase victimization? 3. Given what you know about the UCR and the NCVS, which do you think is a more accurate measure of crime victimization? Why? 4. Using routine activities and lifestyles theory, evaluate your own risk of becoming a crime victim. What measures do you already 6. What do you think is the most important right given to crime victims? Why? 7. Investigate the rights given to crime victims in your home state. Is it clear what rights are given to victims? Who is responsible for notifying victims of their rights? What remedy do victims have in your home state if their rights are not being met? WEB SOURCES British Crime Survey crime/crime-statistics/british-crime-survey/ Bureau of Justice Statistics National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards The National Center for Victims of Crime Office for Victims of Crime Victim Law Victim Offender Mediation Association WEB EXERCISES 1. Compare and contrast the “typical” victim and victimization incident according to findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey and the British Crime Survey. What can account for the similarities? What can account for the differences? 3. What is restorative justice? How does victim–offender mediation fit within the notions of restorative justice? Do other victim services fit the goals of restoration? Which ones? Why? 2. Do an Internet search for, and use this book to determine, the right that you think is most important for crime victims to have. What recent case law has dealt with victims attempting to exercise this right? What challenges do you think victims face in trying to exercise this right? What resources are available to them? 4. Pick a specific type of crime victimization and identify the following: (1) what extent of this type of victimization occurs, (2) who is the “typical” victim, (3) what resources are available for these types of victims, (4) what is unique about the victim experience for this type of victimization. SELECTED READINGS Anthony E. Bottoms and Andrew Costello. (2010). Understanding repeat victimization: A longitudinal study. In The International Handbook of Criminology, S. G. Shoham, P. Knepper, and M. Kett, editors (pp. 649–680). New York: CRC Press. In this chapter, the authors provide a nice overview of repeat victimization. They cover the extent to which people are repeatedly victimized, the main theoretical explanations, and the implications for crime prevention. They also provide results from their own empirical investigation. Clarke, R. V. G. (1980). “Situational” crime prevention: Theory and practice. British Journal of Criminology, 20(2), 136–147. In this article, Clarke posits that crime prevention can be effective through target hardening and by paying attention to features of the environment. Leah E. Daigle. (2012). Victimology: A Text/Reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. This text includes concise chapters that cover the theories relevant to victimization, the measurement of victimization, victim rights, FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. 104 INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY and a variety of types of victimization including terrorism, human trafficking, sexual victimization, and school victimization. It also includes edited articles that highlight important research connected to concepts in each chapter. Robert C. Davis, Arthur J. Lurigio, and Susan Herman, editors. (2007). Victims of Crime (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. This edited volume features 19 readings covering a variety of types of victimizations as well as the responses that victims receive from the criminal justice system and others. Kenneth F. Ferarro. (1995). Fear of Crime: Interpreting Victimization Risk. Albany: SUNY Press. In this book, Ferraro discusses definitional and measurement issues within the fear of crime literature. Also covered is perceived risk and how females and elderly persons are more fearful than their risk levels indicate they should be. Patrick M. Gerkin. (2009). Participation in victim–offender mediation: Lessons learned from observations. Criminal Justice Review, 34, 226–247. Gerkin investigates whether victim–offender mediation programs are truly restorative, given the roles that each party plays. He addresses the barriers to successful programs through observing victim–offender mediations and examining agreements reached. Christopher J. Schreck. (1999). Criminal victimization and low selfcontrol: An extension and test of a general theory of crime. Justice Quarterly, 16(3), 633–654. Given the overlap of victims and offenders, Schreck uses the general theory of crime to explain why some people face elevated risks of victimization. He provides a justification for the theoretical application and an empirical test. Alice Sebold. (2002). Lucky: A Memoir. Boston: Back Bay/Little, Brown & Co. Sebold’s memoir discusses her rape that she experienced as a college student and how she coped in the immediate aftermath as she navigated the criminal justice system. She also discusses the short- and long-term impacts of her victimization. Peggy M. Tobolowsky, Mario T. Gaboury, Arrick L. Jackson, and Ashley G. Blackburn. (2010). Crime Victim Rights and Remedies (2nd ed.). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. With a special focus on the legal system, the authors investigate the rights that crime victims have and remedies available to them. This book is an excellent resource for legislation and court cases to understand how victim rights have been granted and how the judiciary has interpreted these rights. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Titles of Related Interest Introduction to Criminology: A Text/Reader, 2nd Edition, by Anthony Walsh and Craig Hemmens Criminology: The Essentials, by Anthony Walsh Criminological Theory, 5th Edition, by Robert Lilly, Frank Cullen, and Richard Ball Criminological Theory: A Text/Reader, by Stephen Tibbetts and Craig Hemmens Criminological Theory: The Essentials, by Stephen Tibbetts Criminals in the Making, by John Wright, Stephen Tibbetts, and Leah Daigle Crime and Everyday Life, 4th Edition, by Marcus Felson and Rachel Boba Key Ideas in Criminology and Criminal Justice, by Travis Pratt, Jacinta Gau, and Travis Franklin Crime Types and Criminals, by Frank Hagan The Female Offender, 4th Edition, by Meda Chesney-Lind and Lisa Pasko Women and Crime: A Text/Reader, by Stacy Mallicoat White Collar Crime: A Text/Reader, by Brian Payne White Collar Crime: The Essentials, by Brian Payne Profiling Violent Crimes, 4th Edition, by Ronald Holmes and Stephen Holmes Criminal and Behavioral Profiling, by Curt and Anne Bartol Deviance and Social Control, by Michele Inderbitzen, Kristin Bates, and Randy Gainey Criminal Justice Ethics, 3rd Edition, by Cynthia Banks Victimology: A Text/Reader, by Leah Daigle Victimology: The Essentials, by Leah Daigle Corrections: A Text/Reader, 2nd Edition, by Mary Stohr, Anthony Walsh, and Craig Hemmens Corrections: The Essentials, by Mary Stohr and Anthony Walsh Community Corrections, by Robert Hanser Correctional Theory, by Frank Cullen and Cheryl Jonson Race and Crime, 3rd Edition, by Shaun Gabbidon and Helen Greene Crime Analysis With Crime Mapping, 3rd Edition, by Rachel Boba Administration and Management in Criminal Justice, by Jennifer Allen and Rajeev Sawhney Juvenile Justice, 7th Edition, by Steven Cox, Jennifer Allen, Robert Hanser, and John Conrad Gangs in American Communities, by Buddy Howell The Practice of Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice, 4th Edition, by Ronet Bachman and Russell Schutt Fundamentals of Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2nd Edition, by Ronet Bachman and Russell Schutt Statistics for Criminology and Criminal Justice, by Jacinta Gau Understanding Terrorism, 4th Edition, by Gus Martin Essentials of Terrorism, 2nd Edition, by Gus Martin Terrorism in Perspective, 3rd Edition, by Susan Mahan and Pamela Griset Introduction to Policing, by Gene Scaramella, Steven Cox, and William McCamey Policing: A Text/Reader, by Carol Archbold FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Frank E. Hagan Mercyhurst College FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. FOR INFORMATION: Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. SAGE Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. 2455 Teller Road Thousand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: SAGE Publications Ltd. 1 Oliver’s Yard 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United Kingdom Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd. B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area Hagan, Frank E. Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044 India Introduction to criminology : theories, methods, and criminal behavior / Frank E. Hagan. — 8th ed. SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 3 Church Street #10-04 Samsung Hub Singapore 049483 ISBN 978-1-4522-4234-7 (pbk.) 1. Criminology. 2. Criminology—United States. I. Title. HV6025.H26 2013 364—dc23     2012020477 Acquisitions Editor: Jerry Westby Associate Editor: Megan Krattli Publishing Associate: MaryAnn Vail This book is printed on acid-free paper. Assistant Editor: Rachael Leblond Production Editor: Brittany Bauhaus Copy Editor: Teresa Herlinger Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd. Proofreader: Theresa Kay Indexer: Diggs Publication Services, Inc. Cover Designer: Janet Kiesel Marketing Manager: Terra Schultz Permissions Editor: Karen Ehrmann 12 13 14 15 16 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Brief Contents Preface xvii 1 Introduction 1 2 Research Methods in Criminology 21 3 General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 53 4 What Is Victimology? 83 5 Early and Classical Criminological Theories 107 6 Biological and Psychological Theories 129 7 Sociological Mainstream Theories 157 8 Sociological Critical Theories and Integrated Theories 183 9 Violent Crime 211 10 Property Crime: Occasional, Conventional, and Professional 241 11 White-Collar Crime: Occupational and Corporate 281 12 Political Crime and Terrorism 325 13 Organized Crime 361 14 Public Order Crime 405 15 Computer Crime 429 16 Epilogue 445 Glossary 451 References 461 Photo Credits 505 Index 507 About the Author 527 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Detailed Contents Preface xvii Acknowledgments xvii 1 Introduction 1 Criminology 1 Fads and Fashions in Crime 2 The Emergence of Criminology Crime and Deviance 3 Sumner’s Types of Norms 3   Crime File 1.1 The FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives 4 Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita Social Change and the Emergence of Law 8 Consensus Versus Conflict Versus Interactionist Model of Law 9   Crime File 1.2 Crimes of the Twentieth Century 10 Crime and Criminal Law 11 Who Defines Crime? Criminological Definitions   Crime File 1.3 What Is Crime? The Crime Problem 14 The Cost of Crime 15 Summary 16   Key Concepts 17   Review Questions 17   Web Sources 17   Web Exercises 17   Selected Readings 18 2 7 12 13 2 Research Methods in Criminology 21 Theory and Methodology 21 The Research Enterprise of Criminology 22 Objectivity 22 Ethics in Criminological Research 22   Crime File 2.1 Scientific Evil: The Guatemala Syphilis Study 23 Who Is Criminal? 24 Official Police Statistics—The Uniform Crime Report (UCR) 25 Sources of Crime Statistics 25 The Crime Indexes: Violent and Property Crime 26 Issues and Cautions in Studying UCR Data 29   Crime File 2.2 The Crime Dip 31 Alternative Data-Gathering Strategies 33 Experiments in Criminology 34 Some Examples of Experiments in Criminology 34 Evidence-Based Research 35   Crime File 2.3 Research at the Office of Justice Programs 37 Surveys 37 Victim Surveys 37 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) 38   Crime File 2.4 Were You a Victim of Crime? 38 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Issues and Cautions in Studying Victim Data 39 Self-Report Measures of Crime 40   Crime File 2.5 Self-Reported Delinquency Items 40 Participant Observation 41 Participant Observation of Criminals 41 Evaluation of the Method of Participant Observation 42 Life History and Case Studies 43   Crime File 2.6 Confessions of a Dying Thief 43 Unobtrusive Measures 44   Crime File 2.7 Useful Sources for Criminological Research 44   Crime File 2.8 The Black Dahlia Murder 45 Validity, Reliability, and Triangulation 46   Crime File 2.9 The FBI Reading Room 47 Summary 48   Key Concepts 49   Review Questions 50   Web Sources 50   Web Exercises 50   Selected Readings 51   Crime File 3.4 Racial Profiling 68   Crime File 3.5 Native Americans and Crime 69 Regional Variation in Crime 71 Urban/Rural Differences in Crime 72 Institutions and Crime 72 The Family and Crime 72 Education and Crime 74 Religion and Crime 75 War and Crime 75 Economy and Crime 76 Mass Media and Crime 76 Summary 78   Key Concepts 79   Review Questions 79   Web Sources 80   Web Exercises 80   Selected Readings 80 4 What Is Victimology? 83 Leah Daigle, Georgia State University 83 3 General Characteristics of Crime and Criminals 53 Caution in Interpreting Crime Data 53 International Variations in Crime 54 The Prevalence of Crime 56 Trends in Crime 57   Crime File 3.1 American Crime Problems From a Global Perspective 58 Age and Crime 59   Crime File 3.2 Meeting the Challenge of Transnational Crime 60   Crime File 3.3 What Is the Relationship Between Age and Crime? 62 Gender Differences in Criminality 64 Social Class and Crime 65 Race and Crime 66 The Nature of Victimization 83 The Typical Victimization and Victim 85 The Costs of Victimization 86 Economic Costs 86 System Costs 88   Crime File 4.1 The Story of James 88 Mental Health Consequences and Costs 89 Fear of Crime 90 Recurring Victimization 90 Theories of Victimization 91 The Role of the Victim in Crime 92   Crime File 4.2 When Offender Becomes Victim 92 Routine Activities and Lifestyles Theory 94 Structural Causes of Victimization 95 Caring for the Victim 96 Victims’ Rights 96 Victim Remedies and Services 97 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Summary 101   Key Concepts 102   Review Questions 103   Web Sources 103   Web Exercises 103   Selected Readings 103 6 Biological and Psychological Theories 129 5 Early and Classical Criminological Theories 107 Theory 108   Crime File 5.1 The Nacirema Undergraduate as Criminal: A Criminological “Why do it?” 108 Major Theoretical Approaches 111 Demonological Theory 111 Classical Theory 112 Neoclassical Theory 116   Crime File 5.2 “Designing Out” Gang Homicides and Street Assaults: Situational Crime Prevention 117   Crime File 5.3 Justifications for Punishment 118 Ecological Theory 119 Forerunners of Modern Criminological Thought 123 Economic Theory 123 The Theory–Policy Connection 124 Summary 125   Key Concepts 126   Review Questions 126   Web Sources 127   Web Exercises 127   Selected Readings 127 Positivist Theory 129 Precursors of Positivism 130 Biological Theories 130 Cesare Lombroso 130 Charles Goring 132 The Jukes and Kallikaks 133 Earnest Hooton 133 Body Types 134 A Critique of Early Biological Theories 135 More Recent Biological Theories 136 Brain Disorders 136 Twin Studies 137 Adoption Studies 137 Problems With Twin/Adoption Studies 137 XYY Syndrome 138 Other Biological Factors 138 A Critique of Neobiological Theories 141 Psychological Theories 142 Freudian Theory 142 Psychometry 143 Hans Eysenck 144   Crime File 6.1 Crime Profiling 144 B. F. Skinner 145 Albert Bandura 145 Samuel Yochelson and Stanton Samenow 145 Intelligence and Crime 146   Crime File 6.2 The Insanity Defense 147   Crime File 6.3 The Flynn Effect: Sex, Race, and IQ 151 The Theory–Policy Connection 151 Summary 152 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.   Key Concepts 154   Review Questions 154   Web Sources 154   Web Exercises 154   Selected Readings 155 The Theory–Policy Connection 177 Summary 178   Key Concepts 179   Review Questions 179   Web Sources 180   Web Exercises 180   Selected Readings 180 7 Sociological Mainstream Theories 157 Major Sociological Theoretical Approaches in Criminology 158 Anomie Theories 158 Émile Durkheim and Anomie 158 Merton’s Theory of Anomie 159 Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory (GST) 161 Subcultural Theories 162 Cohen’s Lower-Class Reaction Theory 162 Cloward and Ohlin’s Differential Opportunity Theory 163 Social Process Theories 164 The Chicago School 164 Shaw and McKay’s Social Disorganization Theory 165 Sutherland’s Theory of Differential Association 167   Crime File 7.1 Designing Out Crime 168 Miller’s Focal Concerns Theory 170 Matza’s Delinquency and Drift Theory 171 Social Control Theories 173 Reckless’s Containment Theory 173 Hirschi’s Social Bond Theory 174 Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime 174 John Hagan’s Power-Control Theory 175 Developmental and Life Course (DLC) Theories 175 Farrington’s Antisocial Potential (AP) Theory 176 Sampson and Laub’s Life Course Criminality 177 8 Sociological Critical Theories and Integrated Theories 183 Mainstream Versus Critical Criminology 183 Critical Criminology 184 Labeling Theory 184 Lemert’s “Secondary Deviance” 186 A Critique of Labeling Theory 186 John Braithwaite’s Shaming Theory 187 Conflict Criminology 188 Austin Turk 188 William Chambliss and Richard Quinney—Conflict Theory 189 W. E. B. Du Bois 189 Jeffrey Reiman 190 Feminist Criminology 190 New Critical Criminology 191 Left Realism 191 Peacemaking 192   Crime File 8.1 Incorporating Restorative and Community Justice Into American Sentencing and Corrections 192 Postmodernism 196 Radical “Marxist” Criminology 196 Richard Quinney—Radical Criminology 196 William Chambliss 197 Conflict Versus Marxist Criminology 198 Critiques of Conflict and Radical Criminology 198 Klockars’ Critique 198 Integrated Theories of Crime 199 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Delbert Elliott’s Integrative Theory 199 Terence Thornberry’s Interactional Theory 200 Criminal Typologies 201 A Critique of Typologies 202 A Defense of Typologies 202 Criminal Behavior Systems 202   Crime File 8.2 Some Sociological Typologies of Criminal Behavior 203 Theoretical Range and Criminological Explanation 204 The Global Fallacy 204 The Theory–Policy Connection 205 Summary 208   Key Concepts 208   Review Questions 209   Web Sources 209   Web Exercises 209   Selected Readings 209 9 Violent Crime   Crime File 9.6 The Problem of Acquaintance Rape of College Students 228 Robbery 229 Conklin’s Typology of Robbers 230 Domestic Violence 231 Child Abuse 231 Spouse Abuse 232 Elder Abuse 234 Kidnapping 234 Criminal Careers of Violent Offenders 234 Culture of Violence 234 Subculture of Violence 235 Career Criminals/Violent Offenders 236 Societal Reaction 236 Theory and Crime 237 Summary 237   Key Concepts 238   Review Questions 239   Web Sources 239   Web Exercises 239   Selected Readings 239 211 History of Violence in the United States 211 Murder and Mayhem 212 Types of Multiple Murder: Multicide 213   Crime File 9.1 International Violent Crime 214   Crime File 9.2 The Virginia Tech Massacre 216   Crime File 9.3 The D.C. Snipers, the BTK Killer, and the Red Lake Massacre 217 Victim Precipitation 218 Typology of Violent Offenders 219 Legal Aspects 219 Homicide and Assault Statistics 219 Patterns and Trends in Violent Crime 221 Workplace Violence 222   Crime File 9.4 Workplace Violence: Issues in Response 222 School Violence 223 Guns 224   Crime File 9.5 Deadly Lessons: The Secret Service Study of School Shooters 225 Sexual Assault 226 Acquaintance Rape 227 Rape as a Violent Act 227 10 Property Crime: Occasional, Conventional, and Professional 241 Occasional Property Crimes 242 Shoplifting 242 Vandalism 244   Crime File 10.1 Graffiti 245 Motor Vehicle Theft 245 Check Forgery 246 Conventional Property Crimes 246 Burglary 247 Fencing Operations 248 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Stings 248 Larceny-Theft 248 Arson: A Special-Category Offense 249 Criminal Careers of Occasional and Conventional Property Criminals 250 Societal Reaction 251 Professional Crime 252 The Concept of Professional Crime 252 Characteristics of Professional Crime 253 Argot 253 A Model of Professional Crime 254 Edelhertz’s Typology 254 Scams 255 Big Cons 257 Maurer’s The Big Con 257 Identity Theft 258 Ponzi Schemes 258   Crime File 10.2 Identity Theft 258 Pyramid Schemes 260   Crime File 10.3 The Bernie Madoff Affair: “One Big Lie” 261 Religious Cons 262 The PTL Scandal 262   Crime File 10.4 Emerging Patterns of Professional Crime 263   Crime File 10.5 Nigerian Letter Scams 264 Boosters 264 Cannons 265   Crime File 10.6 Shoplifting 265 Professional Burglars 267 The Box Man 267 The Professional Fence 268 Paper Hangers 268   Crime File 10.7 Busting the Biggest Band of Cable Pirates in U.S. History 269 Professional Robbers 270 Professional Arsonists 271 Professional Auto Theft Rings 271 Professional Killers 272 Criminal Careers of Professionals 272   Crime File 10.8 Car Cloning: A New Twist on an Old Crime 273   Crime File 10.9 House of Cards: Casino Cheating Ring Dismantled 274 Societal Reaction 275 Theory and Crime 276 Summary 276   Key Concepts 278   Review Questions 278   Web Sources 279   Web Exercises 279   Selected Readings 279 11 White-Collar Crime: Occupational and Corporate 281 White-Collar Crime—The Classic Statement 281 Related Concepts 282 The Measurement and Cost of Occupational and Corporate Crime 282 The History of Corporate, Organizational, and Occupational Crime 284 Legal Regulation 286 Occupations and the Law 286 Organizations and the Law 288 Occupational Crime 290 Crimes by Employees 290 Crimes by Employees Against Individuals (the Public) 290 Crimes by Employees Against Employees 295 Crimes by Employees Against Organizations 295 Crimes by Individuals (or Members of Occupations) 297   Crime File 11.1 Investigating Insurance Fraud 299 Corporate Crime 301 Crimes by Organizations/Corporations Against Individuals (the Public) 302   Crime File 11.2 Financial Crimes: FBI Releases Annual Report to the Public 304   Crime File 11.3 The Great Savings and Loan Scandal: The Biggest White-Collar Crime in U.S. History 306   Crime File 11.4 The Donora Fluoride Death Fog: A Secret History of America’s Worst Air Pollution Disaster 310 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Crimes by Organizations Against Employees 312 Crimes by Organizations (Corporations) Against Organizations 314   Crime File 11.5 Pirates of the Internet: Criminal Warez Groups 316 Criminal Careers of Occupational and Organizational Offenders 317 Corporate Environment and Crime 317 Corporate Concentration 317 Rationalizations 317 Societal Reaction 318 Why the Leniency in Punishment? 318 Theory and Crime 319 Summary 320   Key Concepts 321   Review Questions 321   Web Sources 322   Web Exercises 322   Selected Readings 322 Secret Police 329 Human Rights Violations 330 Patriarchal Crime 331 Genocide 332 Crimes by Police 333 Illegal Surveillance, Disruption, and Experiments 335 Scandal 335   Crime File 12.2 White House Crime and Scandal: From Washington to George W. Bush 336 Crimes Against Government 337 Protest and Dissent 337 Social Movements 338 Assassination 339 Espionage 341   Crime File 12.3 The Robert Hanssen Spy Case 343 Political “Whistle-Blowing” 344 Terrorism 345   Crime File 12.4 Narco-Terrorism: Drugs and Terrorism a Dangerous Mixture, DEA Official Tells Senate Judiciary Committee 349   Crime File 12.5 The Turner Diaries, ZOG, and the Silent Brotherhood—The Order 351   Crime File 12.6 State Department Strategic Assessment of International Terrorism 353 Crime Careers of Political Criminals 354 The Doctrine of Raison d’Etat 355 Terrorism and Social Policy 355 Societal Reaction 355 Theory and Crime 356 Summary 356   Key Concepts 358   Review Questions 358   Web Sources 358   Web Exercises 358   Selected Readings 359 12 Political Crime and Terrorism 325 Ideology 325 Political Crime: A Definition 326 Legal Aspects 326   Crime File 12.1 September 11, 2001 327 The Nuremberg Principle 328 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 329 International Law 329 Crimes by Government 329 13 Organized Crime Organized Crime: A Problematic Definition 361 361 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Sources of Information on Organized Crime 362 Types of Organized Crime (Generic Definitions) 362 The Organized Crime Continuum 364 Street Gangs 365 International Organized Crime 367 Yakuza 367 Chinese Triad Societies 368 Russian Organized Crime 369 The Nature of Organized Crime 371 Ethnicity and Organized Crime 371   Crime File 13.1 Kill the Irishman: The Danny Greene Mob and the Death of the Cleveland Mafia 372 Money Laundering 374 Drug Trafficking 375 Colombian Cartels 375 The Underground Empire 376 Mexico’s Drug War 376 Theories of the Nature of Syndicate Crime in the United States 376 The Cosa Nostra Theory (The Cressey Model) 376   Crime File 13.2 The Origin of the Mafia 377 The Patron Theory (The Albini Model) 378 The Italian American Syndicate (IAS) 378 The Classic Pattern of Organized Crime 380 Strategic and Tactical Crimes 380 Illegal Businesses and Activities 381   Crime File 13.3 “Snakeheads” and Software Mobsters 382   Crime File 13.4 Mobsters, Unions, and the Feds 383   Crime File 13.5 Human Traffickers Indicted 385 Big Business and Government 386 A Brief History of Organized Crime in the United States 387 Before 1930 387   Crime File 13.6 The Evolution of Transnational Organized Crime 388 The Luciano Period 390 The Genovese Period 391 The Apalachin Meetings 391 The Gambino Period 391 The Commission Trials 392   Crime File 13.7 Mafia Takedown 394 Crime Careers of Organized Criminals 396 Public and Legal Reaction 396 Drug Control Strategies 396 Investigative Procedures 397 Laws and Organized Crime 397 Theory and Crime 399 Summary 399   Key Concepts 401   Review Questions 401   Web Sources 401   Web Exercises 401   Selected Readings 402 14 Public Order Crime 405 Broken Windows 406 Prostitution 406 Types of Prostitution 407 Massage Parlors 408 Johns 409 Underage Prostitutes 409 Homosexual Behavior 410   Crime File 14.1 Laud Humphreys’ Tearoom Trade 411 Sexual Offenses 412 Paraphilia 412 Non-Victimless Sexual Offenses 413 Sexual Predators 413   Crime File 14.2 Child Sexual Abuse by Catholic Priests 414 Incest 415 Characteristics of Sex Offenders 416 Drug Abuse 416 Drugs and History 416   Crime File 14.3 Moral Panics and the Strange Career of Captain Richmond Hobson—Moral Entrepreneur 417 Drug Use in the United States: The Drug Dip? 418 Drug Abuse and Crime 419 Drunkenness 419 Special Populations 420 Societal Reaction 421 Overcriminalization 421 Decriminalization 422 Theory and Crime 423 Summary 423 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Summary 441   Key Concepts 442   Review Questions 442   Web Sources 442   Web Exercises 442   Selected Readings 442   Key Concepts 425   Review Questions 425   Web Sources 425   Web Exercises 425   Selected Readings 426 15 Computer Crime 429 Types of Computer Crime 430   Crime File 15.1 Operation Ghost Click: International Cyber Ring That Infected Millions of Computers Dismantled 431 Types of Attacks on Computer Systems 432 Argot of Computer Crime 433   Crime File 15.2 Operation Bot Roast: Bot-Herders Charged as Part of Initiative 434   Crime File 15.3 Cracking Down on Sexual Predators on the Internet 435 Online Predators 436   Crime File 15.4 The Bogeyman: Online Sexual Predators 436   Crime File 15.5 Protecting Children in Cyberspace: The ICAC Task Force Program 437 Cyberterrorism 438 Public and Legal Reaction 439 Theory and Crime 439   Crime File 15.6 Cyberspace Security: Breaking Ground in the New Frontier 439   Crime File 15.7 A Fine Point: Mapping Intel Sources 440 16 Epilogue 445 The Future of Crime 445 Predicting the Future of Crime: Methods 445 Other Crime Predictions 446 Crimewarps 446 The Future of Digital Crime 447 Other Predictions 447 British Home Office Predictions 447   Crime File 16.1 Hot Products: Understanding, Anticipating, and Reducing Demand for Stolen Goods 448 Summary 449   Key Concepts 450   Review Questions 450   Web Sources 450   Web Exercises 450   Selected Readings 450 Glossary 451 References 461 Photo Credits 505 Index 507 About the Author 527 FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. Preface T he eighth edition maintains the purpose of the original text: to serve the needs of instructors in criminology who wish to avoid the excessively legal and crime-control orientation of many recent textbooks. Certainly, some familiarity with the legal and crime-control orientation is both necessary and desirable, but in emphasizing these elements, some introductory texts give short shrift to the real and vital core of criminology—theory, method, and criminal behavior. To overstress detailed analyses of social-control agencies while neglecting to provide adequate descriptions of criminal activity produces a text that would more accurately be called an introduction to criminal justice systems. An introduction to criminology, by contrast, should offer thorough descriptions and explanations of criminal behavior, because that is the basis on which effective social policy and social agencies must be developed. Many recent texts have also become increasingly encyclopedic, attempting to cover everything ever written in the field in one introductory class. This text views itself as an introductory one that will hopefully whet students’ appetite for the field without overwhelming them. This book is intended for the introductory criminology class typically offered in the sophomore or junior year. It is written for both the college/university as well as community college markets. Professors are welcome to alter the order in which they present the chapters in their classes. Chapter 1 offers a general introduction to the field, while Chapter 2 examines the area of research methods. General patterns and variations in crime are the focus of Chapter 3, while Chapter 4 features a new chapter on victims and victimology by Dr. Leah Daigle of Georgia State University. Chapters 5–8 explore the subject of theory beginning with early and classical theories (Chapter 5), progressing to biological and psychological theories (Chapter 6) and sociological mainstream theories (Chapter 7), and ending with critical and integrated theories (Chapter 8). Chapters 9–14 examine specific types of criminal behavior. Violent crime in Chapter 9 is followed by property crime in Chapter 10. Chapter 11 details the world of white-collar crime, Chapter 12 undertakes to explain the world of political crime, and organized crime is analyzed in Chapter 13. Chapter 14 discusses public order crime. A chapter on computer crime is featured in Chapter 15, while the future of crime is discussed in the Chapter 16 Epilogue. Some enhancements and additions to this edition include discussion of, the latest addition to the “what works” in criminal justice movement. Also discussed are the Guatemala Syphilis Study and the Belfast Project that have raised major questions in the area of ethics in research. The crime dip controversy was informed by recent research that raised questions regarding the systematic underreporting of crime. A new chapter authored by Leah Daigle on victims and victimology has been added to this edition. Also, as far as possible, all statistics, tables, and figures have been updated, as have the photographs, supplements, and audio and video packages. Other new items include discussions of the Flynn effect and IQ, David Kennedy’s “Don’t Shoot” program, casino cheating, insurance fraud, transnational organized crime, and the Danny Greene mob. A password-protected instructor teaching site is available to qualified instructors at haganintrocrim8e. Materials on the site include an extensive test bank, PowerPoint presentations, class activities, lecture notes, sample syllabi web exercises, and teaching tips as well as links to the audio, video, reference and journal article resources noted in the margins of this text. An open-access companion student study site is also available with the text at haganintrocrim8e. The site features resources such as eFlashcards, chapter quizzes, SAGE journal articles, author-created podcasts, and much more. Video Link Watch a video of the author introducing this text. Acknowledgments Eight editions of a book require much help along the way. I would like to thank the many people who assisted in this endeavor. Along with all those who helped with the previous editions, I wish to thank the reviewers for the current edition. They are Kim Macinnis (Bridgewater State University), Robert Keeteo (University of Tennessee), Melissa Mauck (Sam Houston State University), Susann Kimmelman (St. Joseph’s University), David Montague (University of Arkansas), Arina Gertseva (Washington State University), Alan Thompson xvii FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc. xviii INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINOLOGY (University of Southern Mississippi), Jaso Leiker (Utah State University), Robert Lombardo (Loyola University, Chicago), Robert Wonser (Pierce College), and Todd Krohn (University of Georgia). I would also like to acknowledge my debt to my first criminology professor, the late Dan Koenig (University of Victoria). My appreciation is also extended to the SAGE Publications team led by Senior Editor Jerry Westby. Others included Megan Krattli, Associate Editor; MaryAnn Vail, Publisher Associate; Terra Schultz, Senior Marketing Manager; and Rachael Leblond, Assistant Editor. I also acknowledge the assistance of Production Editor Brittany Bauhaus and the very hard work and patience of Copy Editor Teresa Herlinger. I would like to express a special thanks to Joe Caruso of Hudson Valley Community College. The battle for academic freedom I would like to dedicate this book to my granddaughter, Lily Alise Glennon. Finally, I would like to thank my wife MaryAnn Hagan for her support. FOR THE USE OF STRAYER STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY. NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING. ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Copyright © 2013 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Studypool Tutor
School: Purdue University
Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students
flag Report DMCA
Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors