STUDY UNIT 4
WHITE COLLAR CRIME
INTRODUCTION:
A narrow view of crime would dictate that it is something that low-
income or working-class people do; they steal, behave violently,
drink to excess or take drugs.
However, the scale and the scope of crimes committed by powerful
companies and high-income professionals are staggering, as are the
consequences for large numbers of people affected by white-collar
crime.
For years, researchers neglected crimes committed by more affluent
people because factors such as poverty, subculture norms and social
disorganisation were regarded as the roots of crime.
In 1939, Edwin Sutherland gave prominence to white-collar crime
Since then corporate criminology, that is, criminology relating to
both organisations and individuals employed by organisations, has
received the attention of both researchers and policy makers.
White-collar crime is attributed to a decline in business ethics, the
temptation to steal money and other assets for self-enrichment
purposes, and the resourcefulness of offenders.
DEFINITION OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME:
The main problem with a definition is lack of consensus on
whether this category of crime should be defined in terms of the
offender’s characteristics or according to the contravention itself.
Sutherland became interested in white-collar crime because he was
convinced that crimes were also committed by more affluent people.
He believed crime is not closely related with poverty or with the
conditions associated with poverty.
Sutherland identified white-collar crime as a research subject and
defined it as
“crimes committed by highly placed persons in the process of
practising their professions”.
He wanted to draw the public’s attention to the fact that the
activities of white-collar offenders were just as criminal as those of
conventional offenders such as robbers and rapists.
He also noted that white-collar crime was regarded as less serious
than street crime (or ‘conventional crime’) because people in the
higher socioeconomic classes had the power to influence the
administration of justice.
, The three most important shortcomings of Sutherland’s definition
are that
o most white-collar offenders do not come from a high-status
group and that the requirement of high or respectable social
status restricted the array of offences that could be examined.
o crimes are not only committed by people in high and low-status
groups but also by middle-class people (i.e. by people from all
social classes or status groups)
o it does not distinguish between crimes committed by
individuals for personal gain and crimes committed for the
employer, aided and abetted by that employer
The limitations of Sutherland’s offender-based definition led to
the development of an
offence-based definition by Edelhertz who defined white-collar crime
as “an illegal act or series of illegal acts committed by
nonphysical means and by concealment or guile to obtain money
or property, to avoid the payment or loss of money or property,
or to obtain business or personal advantage”.
This definition was criticised as being too broad and therefore
losing sight of the very population that Sutherland wished to
emphasise.
An important criterion in distinguishing between white-collar crime
and other crimes (or street crime) is the fact that white-collar
crime requires planning and organisation as well as
deception - premeditation and fraudulent activity of some kind is
an inherent requirement for the commission of white-collar crime.
In the Sage dictionary of criminology, Tombs and Whyte (2010:319–
320) define white-collar crime as follows: A heterogeneous group of
offences committed by people of relatively high status or
enjoying relatively high levels of trust, and made possible by
their legitimate employment.
The commission of conventional crimes such as robbery and assault
are typically characterised by behaviour involving the use of force
and stealth.
White-collar crime is characterised by planning and deception.
Opportunities for crime are frequently offered by a person’s
occupation or working conditions.
The obvious need for preparations of some kind in order to commit
this kind of crime is the reason why white-collar crimes are
described as rational crimes.
, To rape a person or steal a car does not necessarily require prior
planning.
The preparation that is an inherent requirement of white-collar crime
indicates the material intention of the perpetrator to commit such
crime.
CATEGORIES OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME:
Sutherland’s definition only dealt with individual criminal acts
without considering the fact that corporations or organisations can
commit offences as entities.
A dichotomy was consequently created:
o Crimes against organisations are those that take place in
major companies, usually at the behest of a lone individual
or a small number of people.
o Crimes for organisations involve collective intent to engage
in illegal activity by a significant number of players, including
high-ranking executives, as a matter of policy and calculation.
Individual exploitation of institutional position
Individual exploitation of institutional position refers to situations
in which exploiters force victims to pay for services to which
they have a clear right.
In this instance think of water and electricity to which people have a
constitutional right but the municipality and Eskom keep hiking the
prices beyond the affordability of the poor and unemployed.
Influence peddling and bribery
The influence peddlers take bribes in order to grant favours to
which their co-conspirators are not entitled. For example,
influence peddling in government involves government workers and
office-bearers engaging in official corruption.
Stings and swindles
A swing or sting happens when a white-collar criminal
commits a crime in which people use their institutional or
business position to trick others out of their money
For example, think of the churches that have sprung up all over
South Africa since 1994 with promises of healing people from
incurable diseases such as HIV and AIDS while asking the sick to
contribute money.
Swindlers often target the elderly, sick and infirm
Chiselling
WHITE COLLAR CRIME
INTRODUCTION:
A narrow view of crime would dictate that it is something that low-
income or working-class people do; they steal, behave violently,
drink to excess or take drugs.
However, the scale and the scope of crimes committed by powerful
companies and high-income professionals are staggering, as are the
consequences for large numbers of people affected by white-collar
crime.
For years, researchers neglected crimes committed by more affluent
people because factors such as poverty, subculture norms and social
disorganisation were regarded as the roots of crime.
In 1939, Edwin Sutherland gave prominence to white-collar crime
Since then corporate criminology, that is, criminology relating to
both organisations and individuals employed by organisations, has
received the attention of both researchers and policy makers.
White-collar crime is attributed to a decline in business ethics, the
temptation to steal money and other assets for self-enrichment
purposes, and the resourcefulness of offenders.
DEFINITION OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME:
The main problem with a definition is lack of consensus on
whether this category of crime should be defined in terms of the
offender’s characteristics or according to the contravention itself.
Sutherland became interested in white-collar crime because he was
convinced that crimes were also committed by more affluent people.
He believed crime is not closely related with poverty or with the
conditions associated with poverty.
Sutherland identified white-collar crime as a research subject and
defined it as
“crimes committed by highly placed persons in the process of
practising their professions”.
He wanted to draw the public’s attention to the fact that the
activities of white-collar offenders were just as criminal as those of
conventional offenders such as robbers and rapists.
He also noted that white-collar crime was regarded as less serious
than street crime (or ‘conventional crime’) because people in the
higher socioeconomic classes had the power to influence the
administration of justice.
, The three most important shortcomings of Sutherland’s definition
are that
o most white-collar offenders do not come from a high-status
group and that the requirement of high or respectable social
status restricted the array of offences that could be examined.
o crimes are not only committed by people in high and low-status
groups but also by middle-class people (i.e. by people from all
social classes or status groups)
o it does not distinguish between crimes committed by
individuals for personal gain and crimes committed for the
employer, aided and abetted by that employer
The limitations of Sutherland’s offender-based definition led to
the development of an
offence-based definition by Edelhertz who defined white-collar crime
as “an illegal act or series of illegal acts committed by
nonphysical means and by concealment or guile to obtain money
or property, to avoid the payment or loss of money or property,
or to obtain business or personal advantage”.
This definition was criticised as being too broad and therefore
losing sight of the very population that Sutherland wished to
emphasise.
An important criterion in distinguishing between white-collar crime
and other crimes (or street crime) is the fact that white-collar
crime requires planning and organisation as well as
deception - premeditation and fraudulent activity of some kind is
an inherent requirement for the commission of white-collar crime.
In the Sage dictionary of criminology, Tombs and Whyte (2010:319–
320) define white-collar crime as follows: A heterogeneous group of
offences committed by people of relatively high status or
enjoying relatively high levels of trust, and made possible by
their legitimate employment.
The commission of conventional crimes such as robbery and assault
are typically characterised by behaviour involving the use of force
and stealth.
White-collar crime is characterised by planning and deception.
Opportunities for crime are frequently offered by a person’s
occupation or working conditions.
The obvious need for preparations of some kind in order to commit
this kind of crime is the reason why white-collar crimes are
described as rational crimes.
, To rape a person or steal a car does not necessarily require prior
planning.
The preparation that is an inherent requirement of white-collar crime
indicates the material intention of the perpetrator to commit such
crime.
CATEGORIES OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME:
Sutherland’s definition only dealt with individual criminal acts
without considering the fact that corporations or organisations can
commit offences as entities.
A dichotomy was consequently created:
o Crimes against organisations are those that take place in
major companies, usually at the behest of a lone individual
or a small number of people.
o Crimes for organisations involve collective intent to engage
in illegal activity by a significant number of players, including
high-ranking executives, as a matter of policy and calculation.
Individual exploitation of institutional position
Individual exploitation of institutional position refers to situations
in which exploiters force victims to pay for services to which
they have a clear right.
In this instance think of water and electricity to which people have a
constitutional right but the municipality and Eskom keep hiking the
prices beyond the affordability of the poor and unemployed.
Influence peddling and bribery
The influence peddlers take bribes in order to grant favours to
which their co-conspirators are not entitled. For example,
influence peddling in government involves government workers and
office-bearers engaging in official corruption.
Stings and swindles
A swing or sting happens when a white-collar criminal
commits a crime in which people use their institutional or
business position to trick others out of their money
For example, think of the churches that have sprung up all over
South Africa since 1994 with promises of healing people from
incurable diseases such as HIV and AIDS while asking the sick to
contribute money.
Swindlers often target the elderly, sick and infirm
Chiselling
